Mending trilateral cooperation amid differences: Japan-ROK-China
Mending trilateral cooperation amid differences: Japan-ROK-China
WRITTEN BY DARIA KURUSHINA
18 July 2024
The Asia-Pacific region has emerged as the centre of gravity for international politics, exemplifying global geostrategic competition, economic development, and technological innovation. Three major economies, China, the Republic of Korea (ROK), and Japan, play a vital role in shaping regional dynamism. Entangled in a number of economic, military, and strategic controversies, these three countries attempted to reconcile the sharp edges of historical mistrust by revitalising the Japan-ROK-China Trilateral Summit in May 2024 after a nearly five-year-long hiatus in annual convenings. Avoiding the thorny security issues and greater cooperation needs, the three-way talks promise a mutually beneficial remedy in trilateral partnership, at least in the near future.
On the surface, the summit reinforced the commitment to institutionalise regular trilateral meetings, reinvigorate security and economic ties, and address economic decoupling. However, political instability and prolonged diplomatic stagnation undermined a significant breakthrough in the negotiations, defined by China’s unease vis-à-vis the US alliance system in the Asia-Pacific, the Taiwan Strait crisis, and the insolubility of the North Korean military threat. Resumed trilateral cooperation offers an opportunity to mend the bilateral ties, particularly between Japan and its Northeast Asian counterparts, strained by the long-standing historic grievances that are highlighted in the ongoing wastewater release from the wrecked Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant.
Economic vitality and bilateral trade dependencies were always among the major factors bringing these countries to the negotiating table. In 2008, the global financial crisis sparked the first Trilateral Summit due to the immediate need for Northeast Asian major economies to initiate a substantial response. More than a decade later, in 2024, these three nations, accounting for almost a quarter of global GDP, convened to speed up negotiations on a free, fair, comprehensive, high-quality, and mutually beneficial Free Trade Agreement (FTA). The negotiations on trilateral FTA began in 2012 but were halted after 16 rounds in 2019 following the drift between Japan and the ROK over wartime forced labour compensation and lack of political will among the three neighbours to resume cooperation. Now, the summit comes at a time of shared economic volatility, where Beijing seeks to prevent Tokyo and Seoul from redirecting their supply chains away from China to assuage concerns of the U.S. and manage China’s economic coercion and overcapacity.
Bilateral relations in a trilateral setting
Beyond revitalising trade channels and economic ties on the sidelines of the Trilateral Summit, China and South Korea agreed to advance their bilateral FTA, which was established in 2015, including trade in services such as culture and tourism. Further, two of the countries’ leaders, South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol and Chinese Premier Li Qiang, decided to establish the “Korea-China 2+2 Diplomatic and Security Dialogue” and the “Korea-China Export Control Dialogue”. Deeper cooperation is mutually beneficial for both countries pursuing different geopolitical gains.
Whether the driver is counterbalancing China’s influence in the region, addressing economic unfairness and trade barriers, criticising the expansion of the US trilateral alliance systems in the region, or improving diplomatic ties, the three countries have too much in common to neglect their interdependence.
For China, it is an attempt to drive a diplomatic wedge between parties to the historic 2023 Camp David summit — South Korea, the US, and Japan. Without a second iteration of this trilateral dialogue, China can leverage uncertainty surrounding the US presidential elections to tip East Asian partners to its side. Amid the soaring tariffs on the Chinese EV, solar panels, and battery industries in Western markets, China plans to expand its cheap exports to Asia-Pacific markets, undermining South Korean and Japanese manufacturing capacity. Setting standards within trilateral and bilateral FTAs will prevent coercive actions against each other and promote guidelines on non-discriminatory regional trade.
For South Korea, closer bilateral ties with China will give more opportunities to promote peace and prosperity on the Korean Peninsula. The South Korean president urged China, as a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, to “play the role of a bastion of peace” in light of North Korea’s increasing nuclear ambition. North Korea responded by attempting to launch a second spy satellite hours after the Trilateral Summit, and later signing a new Russia-North Korea partnership pact. Beijing’s influence on Moscow and Pyongyang could serve as a stabilising factor on the Korean Peninsula, although that influence appears to be waning despite China’s interests. China’s international reputation and security considerations seem to be driving Beijing to carefully balance closer ties with the US allies while refusing to openly condemn North Korea’s destabilising activities.
In contrast to increased bilateral coordination with South Korea, China refused to lift the blanket ban on all Japanese seafood products despite resumed negotiations of a trilateral FTA and economic cooperation. The criticism of Japan’s decision to release nuclear-contaminated water into the ocean starting from August 2023 remains a major barrier to cooperation. Surprisingly, South Korea is also reluctant to resume seafood imports from Fukushima and surrounding prefectures, revealing strains in the bilateral thaw. The Fukushima wastewater controversy between maritime neighbours not only demonstrates the strained channels of trilateral diplomacy, it also jeopardises the future of the free trade negotiations, with Japan refusing to resume economic cooperation unless the basic preconditions — immediate lift of these import bans — are met.
Focusing on similarities — not differences
The countries signed a joint declaration on six major areas of enhanced cooperation, including people-to-people exchange, public health, and managing an ageing society — a particularly high-urgency area for these three countries as seemingly harmless family planning processes for population control at the end of the 20th century have led to a low fertility trap. Despite geopolitical issues and strategic rivalry, including in economics and trade, they share the same existential threat of population halving by 2100. China, Japan, and South Korea are experiencing unprecedented demographic shifts, worsening every year despite billions of investments in childcare support, parental leave, and the healthcare sector. President Yoon Suk Yeol just recently declared a demographic national emergency, prioritising this issue over countering North Korean missile and nuclear threats by increasing defence spending. Instead, the government plans to establish the Ministry of Population Strategy Planning and further increase spending on cash incentives and healthcare. Japan and China also seek measures to avoid the irreversible decline in the labour force and the increasing dependency ratio of the elderly. Just last year, Japan announced a “New Dimension” policy for reversing stagnant fertility rates and measures for the elderly to re-enter the workforce. China promises to refine parental leave and childcare policies, falling behind its counterparts in a proactive approach. By focusing on the collective issue of demographic challenge, the three countries should proceed to share best practices and policy recommendations through the trilateral mechanism.
The Japan-ROK-China Trilateral Summit comes at a point of heightened tension between China and the US, undermining more ambitious outcomes. However, even without a breakthrough, an official convening constitutes a change in the prolonged stalemate, presenting new and reviving previous pledges. Whether the driver is counterbalancing China’s influence in the region, addressing economic unfairness and trade barriers, criticising the expansion of the US trilateral alliance systems in the region, or improving diplomatic ties, the three countries have too much in common to neglect their interdependence. Consultations on common priority areas, with depopulation and ageing leading these issues, offer an olive branch to three regional neighbours despite fundamental disagreements on wastewater release, the North Korean threat, and overcapacity issues. Looking toward the US election, these three countries should continue their diplomatic engagements to strike a balance between geostrategic competition and increasing technology, cultural, and economic cooperation.
DISCLAIMER: All views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily represent that of the 9DASHLINE.com platform.
Author biography
Daria Kurushina is a Schwarzman Fellow at the Asia Society Policy Institute in New York. Originally from the Russian Far East, she is deeply interested in issues related to environmental, economic, and foreign policies in China and Asia broadly. Image credit: Flickr/Republic of Korea.