|
A Korea-Japan summit in Seoul in the wake of the Chuseok holidays seems a foregone conclusion. It will be the first chance for the two heads of state to sit down together after a long chill in relations, an opportunity provided by the election of Japan¡¯s new Prime Minister Shinzo Abe last week.
Seoul-Tokyo relations have hit rock-bottom. The responsibility lies first of all with the Japanese government. During his tenure, Abe¡¯s predecessor Junichiro Koizumi kept visiting the militarist Yasukuni Shrine, and his administration distorted history in textbooks and claimed territorial rights to Korea¡¯s Dokdo islets, thereby causing incessant conflict with Korea and China. At the summit, Abe should make it clear that he wants to see the Korea-Japan relations and the Asian diplomacy ruined by his predecessor restored. He should put an end to provocations like visits to Yasukuni shrine that deny Japan's responsibility for its past.
But we too should take the opportunity to re-establish a consistent policy toward Japan based on realistic international politics. President Roh Moo-hyun, during the initial period of his tenure, sent "unconditional trust" out to Japan, saying, "Prime Minister Koizumi and I have many things in common. If his popularity rises, I, too, feel fine," and vowing not to rake over the coals of history during his tenure. But when Shimane Prefecture last year instituted a ¡°Takeshima Day,¡± after the Japanese name for the Dokdo islets, Roh threatened a ¡°diplomatic war¡± with Japan, and vowed not to let the matter rest. In April, when Japan was about to survey Dokdo waters, Roh went as far as to say Korea will not retreat whatever the cost and sacrifice. When "unconditional trust" didn¡¯t move his counterpart, in short, he instantly reverted to "unconditional hatred."
Alas, international relations are not that simple. Unexpected situations can develop from the complex entanglement of variables at home and abroad. To survive in the reality of cold-blooded international politics, you have to acknowledge the scope wherein the other party may change and think hard until what point you can advance and retreat. The heads of both countries facing the summit will do well to bear that in mind.
|