Tuesday July 30, 2019 15ASIANREVIEW
Can the US mediate successfully in Japan-South Korea trade dispute?
By Ling Shengli
The trade row is raging be-
tween Japan and South Korea,
two major US allies in North-
east Asia.
Foreign Policy magazine
reported July 1 that “Japan an-
nounced that it would restrict
the export to South Korea of
three chemicals that are used
to make semiconductors and
fl at screens – key compo-
nents of smartphones and
other advanced technology,”
which seriously aff ected South
Korea’s economic security. For
this reason, South Korea had to
seek mediation from the US,
hoping to ease the bitter spat
with Japan. However, given
the complex historical issues
and realistic interests between
these two countries, it is
uncertain whether the US will
successfully mediate the trade
friction between them. Worse,
the deteriorating Tokyo-Seoul
relationship will weaken the
cohesion of the US alliance in
the Asia-Pacifi c region and af-
fect the implementation of any
US regional strategy.
Tension between Japan and
South Korea has been linger-
ing for some time. Leaders of
these two countries even failed
to resolve their confl ict during
the G20 Summit in Osaka in
June. After the summit, Japan
escalated the tension through
carrying out sanctions against
South Korea. From July 10 to
14, Kim Hyun-chong, deputy
director of the National Secu-
rity Offi ce of the Blue House
and former minister of the
Ministry of Trade, Industry
and Energy of South Korea,
visited the US for support. At
the request of South Korea, US
President Donald Trump said
he was ready to help. From
July 20 to 24, US National
Security Adviser John Bolton
visited Japan and South Korea
amid rising tension to medi-
ate trade disputes between the
two. From July 23 to 27, South
Korean Trade Minister Yoo
Myung-hee paid a visit to the
US to further seek “Washing-
ton’s support and mediation
in Seoul’s fi ght against export
controls by Japan,” reported
The Korea Herald.
Although Japan-South Korea
trade friction has little impact
on US economic interests, the
impact on the US Asia-Pacifi c
strategy should not be under-
estimated. The US is more
worried about the cohesion of
its alliance in the region, which
will be impacted by deteriorat-
ing Japan-South Korea rela-
tions. Especially in Northeast
Asia, the discord between these
two countries will weaken the
US presence in this region and
infl uence the implementation
of US strategies.
Whether Washington can
successfully ease tensions in
the economic dispute between
two of its biggest allies in Asiais actually an important test of
its ability to manage alliances.
If the US succeeds, it shows
that Washington’s prestige re-
mains unchanged. Otherwise,
the prestige among its allies
will be in crisis. In the Asia-
Pacifi c region, it is believed
that a so-called dual leadership
structure has been emerg-
ing in recent years – regional
countries have been depending
on China economically while
on the US when it comes to
security. The situation also ap-
plies to some US allies in the
region. It led to the weakening
of US management of its al-
lies, especially in the economic
fi eld. For instance, US allies,
including South Korea and
Australia, have joined the
Asian Infrastructure Invest-ment Bank regardless of US
dissuasion.
That being said, it will be
diffi cult for the US to medi-
ate the trade dispute between
Japan and South Korea this
time. It will mainly depend
on whether Japan and South
Korea take the US seriously
enough. Otherwise, the US
will fi nd it lack strong means
to force both sides to make
concessions.
Trade frictions involve the
interests of industries and
people in the countries and the
Japan and South Korea’s gov-
ernments face pressures from
public opinion on both sides.
Even when it comes to the US’
own trade frictions with Japan
and South Korea, negotiations
can take a long time beforeagreements are reached.
South Korea and Japan are
close neighbors and allies of
the US, but relations between
them have been volatile for a
long time. Historical grievanc-
es, island disputes and trade
frictions have led to insuf-
fi cient mutual political trust
between the two sides. The
South Korean government is
often forced to adjust its policy
toward Japan in response to
anti-Japanese sentiment at
home. This trade dispute be-
tween Japan and South Korea
is actually triggered by histori-
cal problems and it is diffi cult
to rule out whether those
problems will be reemphasized
in the future.
South Korea has pinned
hope on US mediation, but
it’s unclear whether Japan will
show due respect for the US.
If the US fails this time, it will
lose trust from its allies. Its
own prestige will be largely
weakened. Washington’s
strategic implementation in
Northeast Asia and the Asia-
Pacifi c region is likely to be
greatly compromised.The author is secretary-general of
the international security study
center at China Foreign Aff airs
University. opinion@globaltimes.
com.cnPage Editor:
liaixin@
globaltimes.com.cnBy Chen Yu
C
hina’s State Council Information
Offi ce Wednesday issued China’s
National Defense in the New Era, a
white paper on national defense.
For the fi rst time, the white paper de-
scribed “building a new-model security
partnership featuring equality, mutual
trust, and win-win cooperation.” It fo-
cused on the global security as Western
countries use unilateralism and hard
power to resolve problems. Such meth-
ods run counter to China’s goal of build-
ing a community with a shared future
for mankind.
The security partnership in the white
paper off ers a new explanation of the
Asian security concept raised in 2014
by Chinese President Xi Jinping. This
partnership counteracts rising unilater-
alism and hegemony in the world. As
global security faces new challenges,
China proposed the new-model security
partnership, which shows the country’s
responsibility as a major power.
When describing military relation-
ships between major countries, accord-
ing to the white paper, the one between
China and Russia “continues to develop
at a high level, enriching the China-Rus-
sia comprehensive strategic partnership
of coordination for a new era and playing
a signifi cant role in maintaining global
strategic stability.” The relationship has
become a leading example of how major
powers can work together.
During the Cold War, there were
disputes between China and the Soviet
Union. But today, many previous con-
fl icts, including border disputes, have
been resolved. China and Russia share
a long border yet are not hostile toward
each other.
Both countries have jointly partici-
pated in a series of military cooperation
and have continuously developed their
military ties.
The two countries have dialogue
mechanisms. They participate in joint
military exercises, computer-simulated
anti-missile exercises, and both conduct
peacekeeping operations worldwide. To
say that Beijing and Moscow’s military
relationship “continues to develop at a
high level” is in accordance with reality.
Before the paper was released, Chi-
na’s People’s Liberation Army Air Force
and the Russian Air Force for the fi rst
time conducted strategic bomber patrol
drills in Northeast Asia. Western ana-
lysts said the action was aimed at chal-
lenging the US as well as Washington’s
alliance system in the Asia-Pacifi c re-gion. The opinion is misleading.
China has stressed repeatedly that the
development of China-Russia relations,
including military ties, is not aimed at
any third-party countries. The joint mili-
tary exercises in the Asia-Pacifi c region
between the US and its allies far exceed
that of China and Russia in scale and
frequency. The bomber patrol drills car-
ried out by Beijing and Moscow were
aimed at maintaining international se-
curity and strengthening coordination
between the two armies.
Japan and South Korea reacted
strongly to the bomber drills. The US
“strongly supports” the two’s responses
to “air space incursions by Chinese and
Russian aircraft,” said Pentagon spokes-
man Lieutenant Colonel Dave Eastburn.
The three countries tend to regard the
development of China-Russia relations
as a threat and some Western observers
said how the three countries may jointly
counteract will be the focus in Northeast
Asia.
Yet given the ongoing internal dis-
putes among the US, Japan and South
Korea, such as the recent trade row be-
tween Tokyo and Seoul, Japan and South
Korea might not want to place all of its
hope on the US.
China and Russia have upgradedrelations to a comprehensive strategic
partnership of coordination for a new
era, while their military relationship has
also entered a new phase.
Take the Afghanistan issue. The sta-
bility of Afghanistan directly concerns
the security and stability of Central Asia,
a region where Beijing and Moscow
share great strategic interests. China and
Russia can safeguard Central Asia stabil-
ity under the framework of the Shanghai
Cooperation Organization (SCO).
The US withdrew from the Interme-
diate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty with
Russia and the New Strategic Arms Re-
duction Treaty between Russia and the
US will expire in 2021. The stability and
balance of the global nuclear situation
may thus be challenged. As China and
Russia share common interests in the
nuclear arena, the two countries should
coordinate their position and protect
international peace and security. China
and Russia should consider expanding
the scale of their joint military exercises
while voicing their opinions on global is-
sues.The author is an assistant research fellow
at the Institute of Eurasian Studies of China
Institutes of Contemporary International
Relations. [email protected]China-Russia ties safeguard global security
Illustration: Liu Rui/GT