hankyoreh

Screen capture of a YouTube “short” that the presidential office posted, in which Yoon called his plan a “decision for the future.”

On Thursday and Friday, South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol is scheduled to meet with Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida on a working visit to Japan.

The history of shuttle diplomacy between South Korea and Japan’s leaders dates back to 2004, when then-President Roh Moo-hyun and Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi each began visiting the other country once a year.

That approach ended after a December 2011 visit to Japan by then-President Lee Myung-bak while Yoshihiko Noda was prime minister. Relations between Seoul and Tokyo ended up souring in the wake of Lee’s visit to the Dokdo islets in August 2012.

Lee was pilloried at the time for trying to use diplomacy to score domestic political gains and pull up his own approval ratings, which were in a steep decline toward the end of his term. In his administration memoir, he insisted that he had “intended to visit Dokdo during my term since before I took office.”

Relations with Japan have always been a stiff test for South Korean presidents. There are two reasons for this.

The first lies with Japan itself. Diplomacy involves interaction with another party. It isn’t something that works itself out when only one side does a good job.

Kim Dae-jung certainly played a part in the South Korea-Japan Joint Declaration of 1998, but so did then- Prime Minister Keizo Obuchi of Japan.

Assessing the reason for the souring of ties with Tokyo during his term, Lee Myung-bak said, “Amid the growing need for the US to beef up its alliance with Japan in the face of China’s rise, there has been a shift to the right in Japan that is reaching dangerous levels.” This was a sensible analysis.

The second reason has to do with the South Korean public’s sentiments.

When it comes to Japan, the thoughts and feelings of South Koreans are complex and nuanced. This is true even today, with most South Koreans sharing the view that relations should be improved.

But in terms of the “solution” that the administration announced on March 6 for the compensation of forced labor mobilization survivors, even more South Koreans agree that the decision was a mistake. A majority of them oppose improving relations without a change in attitude from Tokyo.

As if to show he recognized the seriousness of the situation, Yoon posted two short videos on the matter on the presidential office’s website. But it remains to be seen whether his efforts to improve relations will bear any fruit. There are two main obstacles in the way.

The first of them is the opposition’s strong opposition and the souring of public opinion.

Democratic Party leader Lee Jae-myung denounced the agreement as an “all-time diplomatic humiliation and disgrace on par with the Samjeondo incident,” referring to the submission of the Joseon Dynasty to China’s Qing Dynasty. Lawmakers in his party held a press conference in front of the presidential office in Seoul’s Yongsan neighborhood Wednesday morning to call for an “end to the Yoon Suk-yeol administration’s diplomatic capitulations to Japan.”

Second, it is unclear whether Japan will even welcome the development. Kishida is in a position where he is obliged to take cues from Japan’s intensely anti-Korean far right. He is already sending clear signals that he intends to pass the whole thing off vaguely as some kind of empty courtesy.

Members of the far right have also been openly expressing skepticism, with some asking whether this agreement will not just end up being overturned if South Korea elects a Democratic Party president four years from now.

It’s a messy situation, and Yoon is fully to blame. It’s possible that he went about things this way with the best of intentions, recognizing the need to improve relations with Tokyo. But diplomacy requires more than just a leader’s good intentions to succeed.

To produce real results, they need to convince Japan that the administration’s entire policy approach to it will not change even if a different party comes to power in four years’ time. And doing that means winning the Democratic Party over first. They need a political pledge that the agreement will still be upheld if another party wins the presidency.

Yoon has stated his aim of carrying on the joint declaration reached by Kim Dae-jung and Obuchi in 1998. This declaration was not easily achieved.

In his autobiography, Kim wrote, “History will show what was achieved with the ‘South Korea-Japan Partnership Declaration.’ I will only say that I worked very ‘delicately’ to achieve the optimal outcome.”

He continued, “I see the results that my Japan visit achieved as reflecting the power of the democratic transfer of government in South Korea. What persuaded the Japanese public, the media, and the ruling and opposition parties was the power of the horizontal transfer of power.”

The quotes that Kim put around the word “delicately” really stand out. When it came to diplomacy, he was a politician unrivaled in his discernment. But even he had to work very “delicately” to improve relations with Japan.

He worked to win the support of the media and the political opposition. Meanwhile, what has Yoon Suk-yeol done?

It’s already late in the game, but hopefully he will at least begin to sincerely try to persuade the media and opposition.

That’s the only hope for success in improving South Korea-Japan relations. The bulldozer approach isn’t a solution to everything.

Please direct questions or comments to [english@hani.co.kr]