Beijing, of course, will still be looming large on the background.
How will the relationship with China really shape the conversations at the
summit? Well, Shery, as you know, these two
alliances have largely been focused on North Korea or on the Korean Peninsula.
But today, you can't live in this world, but you certainly can't live in the
Indo-Pacific region without thinking about China and its future role.
Both Japan and South Korea have deep economic ties with China, but they also
have concerns about how the Chinese military has been operating in the
region. Our relations between Japan and South
Korea on more solid ground. And in order to be able to push back
against this influence from China, not to mention the threats from North Korea.
Yes. As you noted, the Japan Korea
relationship, of course, has had its ups and downs largely because of historical
legacy issues dealing from the colonial period in World War Two.
But I think President Yoon and Prime Minister Ishida have made a concerted
effort to try to cope with some of the immediate questions that both the public
and the in both countries have about that relationship and move it beyond to
think strategically about their ability to cooperate in the region.
I do think we should always know that South Korea and Japan will have slightly
different takes on the challenges of coping with China.
And that's only natural. But I think the trilateral framing,
including the United States, brings us into a more Indo-Pacific framing.
What can the three countries together do to emphasize their common interests and
common security concerns in the region? In terms of domestic politics, how hard
has it been for the leaders of Japan and South Korea to sell this close to these
closer ties to their own people? And is there a risk that this moment
could pass? Yeah, I think it's been quite difficult,
especially for President Yoon in South Korea.
You know, there was a poll taken, a joint poll taken in 2020, and only 20%
of South Koreans thought that Japan was a good partner.
Today, that's up almost 25 points. I think that we always have to keep in
mind that this is a difficult relationship for both countries.
But yet you see Koreans and Japanese working together in the private sector.
You see students and others willingly travel into each other's countries.
But we have to take seriously the diplomatic challenges of the legacy
issues. That being said, of course, everybody is
looking forward to a region where the rules based order may no longer prevail,
and that's in the security area, as I noted, But also in the economic growth
of South Koreans and Japanese have been the focus of Beijing's economic
coercion. And so the public there also understands
that we're in a rather tricky period. Well, this is the first time, of course,
these three leaders have met for a trilateral get together that isn't on
the sidelines of some other event. And at the end of it, we're going to get
a statement, the Camp David principles. Now, as Sherri mentioned there, China
unlikely to be mentioned, but what is likely to be the content of that
statement? I would I would be looking for three
different things. One, of course, is always North Korea,
and that will be that will certainly be as part of those principles.
I think the second will be, as I noted earlier, the places where these three
countries there feel they have shared goals in the Indo-Pacific.
So I think you're seeing South Korea now enter into the Indo-Pacific strategic
cooperation with the United States and Japan.
And then finally, we are in a time where the rules based order is being
challenged. All three of these leaders, President
Biden, President Putin and Prime Minister Kishida, have made a very
emphatic statement that they support and want to work together to sustain the
rules based order. This will, of course, influence their
cooperation, the Russian invasion of Ukraine, but also in the maritime domain
where today in the Indo-Pacific, you see China and the Philippines again at
loggerheads over the ruling that was made by the U.N.
Law of the Sea Arbitration panel. So there's this idea of a rules based
order has extra practical significance here.
When you can look at the way in which countries of the region and countries
around the globe are beginning to challenge some of our basic norms, that
peaceful dispute resolution should be the primary way of solving our problems.
And, Sheila, to that point, we are seeing more and more groupings these
days, including the quad where you have Japan and the United States, but not
South Korea. You have Australia and India, for
example. So how would this security
grouping compare to, say, the trilateral ties between Japan, South Korea and the
U.S.? So it's interesting and it's nice that
you mentioned this with the quad, which seems like a relatively new grouping in
the Indo-Pacific in Australia, India, the United States and Japan have gone a
long way to identifying working groups, problem solving in exercises, capacities
that they can bring together. The most obvious country left out is
South Korea. But South Korea and Japan have been the
United States, the longest allies in the post-war period, going all the way back
to the 1950s. So these bilateral relationships with
the United States are really critical for Northeast Asian stability and
security. What will be now, I think, built in, as
I noted to the Camp David principles will be the Indo-Pacific dimension,
where you'll hear resonance of some of the ideas you've heard in the quad
statements, some of the ideas even you've heard at the NATO summit.
So you're starting to hear, I think, a kind of overlay of broader strategic
goals. And the trilateral will be focused now
beyond the Korean Peninsula into this broader global effort between the United
States and its allies. Sheila, how concrete is it at this
point, the Indo-Pacific economic framework?
Well, you know, as we know, as we look ahead, we're looking at the APEC meeting
is going to be hosted by the United States later this year.
I think the IMF, as you noted, is one of the United States's strongest efforts or
the Biden administration's strongest efforts to identify an economic agenda
for the United States and its partners in the region.
South Korea and Japan entered into that very quickly.
So they were one of the original 14 countries that signed on when it was
announced in Tokyo by President Biden. I do think that there's a lot of
negotiating to be done with the Southeast Asian countries.
And so we'll wait to see what comes to fruition between now and the APEC
meeting later this year in November. IPF is very important to President you
and it's very important to Prime Minister Kishida, largely because it
connects the United States to the economic aspirations of the region.
She learned the traditions of wolf warrior diplomacy.
Do you anticipate some sort of statement coming out of China after the summit
concludes and what might be the content of that?
Yeah, we've already heard the Chinese government say that this trilateral
meeting is just another instance of Cold War thinking that this is, again, that
they like to use the word containment of China.
I think this is something that the Chinese look at with some concern.
They don't want to see the countries surrounding them come together in this
way. However, I think it's also important
that the Chinese people understand that the region is worried about their
behavior and their country's military in particular, but also the question of
economic coercion, using economic interdependence to achieve strategic
aims. So I suspect, yes, we will hear fairly
firm statements coming out of China, especially if, for example, the three
leaders start talking about the South China Sea or they may mention again,
Taiwan areas, of course, which are very central to Chinese interests.
I do expect not behavior bureau response, but certainly an effort to
point out that this trilateral relationship is aimed at China and that
China doesn't appreciate it.