The EconomistJuly 20th 2019 Asia 332
Banyan Chemical corrosion
T
hey aretwo full-blown democracies,
a rarity in their part of the world. In
terms of history and culture, they have
dollops in common. Above all, in a
fraught region, they are crucial allies of
the United States. Yet Japan and South
Korea have been acting more like foes
than friends.
This month Japan slapped export
controls on chemicals critical to South
Korea’s semiconductor and smartphone
industries—a big escalation in the two
sides’ mutual antagonisms. Although
South Korea only imports a relatively
paltry $400m or so of these chemicals
each year, alternative supplies are scarce,
so the impact on global supply chains
could be huge.
South Koreans have reacted with
rancour. Celebrities show off cancelled
plane tickets to Japan on their Instagram
accounts. Japanese-made cars have been
deliberately scratched. Shopowners have
launched a boycott of Japanese goods.
Politicians say Japanese brands should
be labelled “made by war criminals”.
At issue, as ever, are painful, messy
questions of history. In first half of the
20th century Japan was Korea’s colonial
overlord. Imperial Japan brought not
only economic modernisation, but also
brutal dominion, especially during the
years of total war in the Pacific between
1937 and 1945. South Korea’s left-leaning
president, Moon Jae-in, has sought to
define his presidency in part by how he
views the past. He has removed statues of
Koreans deemed collaborators during
Japanese rule and renamed streets dedi-
cated to them. Last year he in effect repu-
diated an agreement between his conser-
vative predecessor, Park Geun-hye, and
Japan’s prime minister, Shinzo Abe, that
aimed to resolve once and for all the
matter of wartime “comfort women”:tens of thousands of Koreans, a handful
still alive today, who were forced to have
sex in Japanese army brothels. Under the
deal Japan offered an apology and ¥1bn
($9.3m) to the victims, South Korea agreed
to cease using the issue as a diplomatic
wedge and to remove the statue of a com-
fort woman outside the Japanese embassy.
The statue remains. But the cause of
greatest annoyance to Japan are rulings
last autumn by South Korea’s Supreme
Court against two Japanese industrial
giants that conscripted Koreans during the
war. The court ordered the companies to
pay compensation to surviving victims.
Japan insists that the 1965 friendship treaty
establishing relations between the two
countries settled forced-labour claims
(though not those of comfort women). It
shrugs at those who point out that South
Korea was a dictatorship at the time, and
that the victims whose claims were sup-
posedly settled were neither consulted
about the settlement nor given any of the
money Japan paid in compensation.
The court has since seized assets be-
longing to Mitsubishi Heavy Industriesand may sell them. To Japanese officials,
this is an act of economic war. South
Korean counterparts claim the same for
the export controls on hydrogen fluoride
and two other chemicals on which South
Korean electronics giants rely. Following
a disastrous meeting between lower-
level officials late last week, Mr Moon
suggested that South Korea would have
to learn not only to get along without
Japanese supplies of the chemicals, but
even without Japan.
In Tokyo this week officials are at
pains to stress that Japan’s move is not an
export ban, rather the reimposition of
controls on sensitive materials that had
grown lax. Follow the procedures, they
say, and the worst South Korean firms
will experience is a bigger lag between
requesting chemicals and receiving
them. They clearly want to defend Mr
Abe’s reputation as a global champion of
open markets, but admit that claims that
the controls have nothing to do with the
court case are unconvincing.
The crisis plays right into the hands of
China and North Korea. Japanese offi-
cials insist that when it comes to de-
fence, security and intelligence-sharing,
relations with South Korea remain cor-
dial and effective. But it is hard to believe
that there is no impact. America might be
able to knock heads and get the two sides
to back down, but has so far avoided
getting involved.
Mr Moon has been weakened at
home, not least because he has little to
show for his attempts at détente with
North Korea. The row has made him
more popular. And with upper-house
elections due this month, Mr Abe must
not look weak. Both leaders face citi-
zenries whose misgivings about the
other country are hardening. There is no
easy route to a climbdown.Relations between Japan and South Korea are fraying alarminglycrowd was unarmed. Two mps who support
the ptmand were at the scene, Mohsin Da-
war and Ali Wazir, are being held under
anti-terrorism laws. The army accuses the
ptmof anti-state activities, backed by India
and Afghanistan. Journalists have been or-
dered not to cover the group.
The crackdown shows that power still
lies with the army, despite the democratic
promise of the approaching elections. In
Waziristan a ban on rallies and political
meetings was in place until two weeks be-
fore the contest. Opposition politicians say
the reason given—to ensure security—is apretext to constrain them and so help the
Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (pti) party, which
is in government at both the provincial and
national level.
Whoever wins the privilege of repre-
senting the region will have their work cut
out. Large investments are needed in
schools, hospitals, roads and water sup-
plies to bring services in the area to a level
similar to the rest of Pakistan. But prom-
ised money has yet to arrive. Adopting a
proper judicial system is another head-
ache. The borderlands have no courts and
tribal police flail in the face of paperworkand investigations. Lawyers in interim
courts say cases suffer when caught be-
tween the old and new systems.
Despite growing disaffection with the
slow pace of reforms and the pain of aus-
terity measures imposed by the national
government, the ptiis expected to do well
at the polls. Ameer Muhammad Khan, a
candidate for the party, says he meets
scores of enthusiastic party workers at his
campaign office each day. The vote will
prove “historic in the life of every tribal
person”, he says. It will also test the limits
of the army’s forbearance. 7