Remarks by H.E. Cho Tae-yul
Vice Foreign Minister of the Republic of Korea
at the Roundtable on
‘Trustpolitik and the Korean Peninsula’
Jeju Forum 2014

1. Introduction

• The year 2014 is a special year from the perspective of the world history, as it marks the 100th anniversary of the outbreak of the First World War and the 25th anniversary of German unification. Next year will mark the 70th year of the division of the Korean Peninsula, and yet distrust, conflict and tensions run high between the two Koreas. At this critical juncture, I believe it is a meaningful exercise to review the major changes in the security environment surrounding the Korean Peninsula today and the challenges these changes pose to Korea’s foreign policy.

2. Security Environment surrounding the Korean Peninsula

(Major Changes and Challenges)

• Henry Kissinger once said, “Each success only buys an admission ticket to a more difficult problem.” I don’t think there was a time in the past that these words sunk in as much as they did during the past one year. Indeed, Korea’s foreign policy is faced with an extremely difficult and complex environment; we have been struggling day and night to resolve a variety of problems rushing towards us simultaneously from across the globe.

• Today, Korea’s diplomacy is being undertaken in the most serious and complex external security environment since the end of the Cold War. During the Cold War period, all foreign policy issues were addressed without much difficulty as we had only to follow the camp logic. But today, not a single issue can be resolved with a simple equation. Rather, the majority of the problems require a multi-dimensional solution as well as strategic thinking.

• The Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) incident that occurred in the East China Sea late last year is a case in point. It was a very sensitive and complicate problem as the security and strategic interests of China -- which had unilaterally announced the ADIZ -- and those of Korea, Japan and the US were intertwined. Therefore, it was never easy for Korea to secure its national interests, while not undermining the cooperative relations with the countries involved. Under such a difficult circumstance, however, Korea was able to catch two rabbits at the same time. Perhaps it may indicate that Korea is no longer ‘a shrimp whose back breaks when the whales fight’, and its diplomacy has become more articulate and skillful, if I may say so.

• The ADIZ issue is only one example that symbolizes the challenges of our foreign policy. We are facing different challenges every day, and we will continue to run into many more in the future. The important thing is to turn these challenges into opportunities with a wise and principled diplomacy.

• The major changes in the external security environment that pose both challenges and opportunities to Korea’s foreign policy today can be epitomized into four: first, the rise of China, second, the historical revisionism in Japan, third, the return of assertive Russia, and fourth, an anachronistic North Korea with its nuclear ambitions.

(The Rise of China)

• The rise of China is the most important factor in dealing with not only Northeast Asia but also the international order in the 21st century, and it is at the heart of international discourse on realigning the global governance. In 2010, China became the number two economy in the world. According to a recent report, China’s GDP surpassed that of the United States in terms of purchasing power parity. Based on this economic confidence, China is actively pursuing its foreign policy. The policy of the so-called ‘Tao Guang Yang Hui’ that had been in place from the Deng Xiaoping to Hu Jintao era seems to be transitioning to a policy that goes beyond ‘You Sou Zou Wei’, which means China is moving away from its discreet attitude of 'waiting for the right time while building strength’ to one that is more proactive and assertive by 'flexing its muscles, if and when it is necessary’

• Like the term ‘butterfly effect’, when China takes a certain position on a major international issue, the impact can be felt immediately across the globe. This development will inevitably bring about some type of change in its relations with the US, which has been exercising absolute influence in the Asia Pacific region.

• The US has been pursuing the policy of ‘Rebalancing to Asia’ from the start of the first Obama administration. This can be seen as a strategic response to defend and promote the US security and foreign policy interests in the Asia Pacific where China is rising rapidly. And the so-called ‘New Type of Great Power Relationship’ that President Xi Jinping presented last year as the vision of the US-China relationship appears to be China’s response to the US policy toward the Asia Pacific.  China’s new initiative taken at the 4th CICA Summit held in Shanghai last week to build a new Asia security order and develop CICA into a platform for security dialogue and cooperation for Asia can also be understood in this context.

• China is also being engaged in active diplomacy to strengthen its relations with its neighbors. President Xi Jinping visited Russia as his first foreign trip, and demonstrated the solidarity between China and Russia by holding a summit meeting with President Putin at the margin of the CICA Summit. They even went further to carry out a large-scale joint military exercise in the East China Sea. China also appears to be taking bold steps to strengthen its position in Southeast Asia. As you know, China is now in a standoff with Vietnam over a Chinese oil rig in the water off the Paracel Island.

• Without a doubt, the rise of China has a great impact on Korea’s foreign policy, the backbone of which has been the Korea-US alliance. The Korea-US alliance, which celebrated its 60th anniversary last year, is stronger than ever. It not only became the linchpin for the peace and security in the Korean Peninsula, Northeast Asia and the Asia Pacific, but it has also developed into a comprehensive strategic partnership with the entry into force of the Korea-US FTA in 2012.

• Marking the 20th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic ties two years ago, the Korea-China relationship has never been better. As Korea’s number one export market and investment destination, China has become Korea’s single most important economic partner. The strategic cooperative partnership between Korea and China will make another leap forward when the ongoing bilateral FTA negotiations are completed.

• After taking office, President Park Geun-hye, by actively pursuing summit diplomacy during the past year, has built a deep personal trust with both President Obama and President Xi Jinping, and based on this, Korea’s relations with the US and China have been deepening and broadening. However, it won’t be an easy task to further strengthen the robust Korea-US alliance, while upgrading the strategic partnership with China in a balanced and harmonious way. This would demand of us a creative and strategic thinking as well as prudent policy judgments and decisions. It is indeed the most important yet difficult challenge facing Korea’s foreign policy today.

• By the same token, whether the strategic interests of the US and China in Northeast Asia collide or maintain harmony is probably the most important factor that will define the external environment of Korea’s foreign policy. If the relations between China and the US get more difficult, maneuvering room for Korea’s diplomacy will grow smaller. However, if Korea is able to address this challenge wisely by building trust both with the US and China, then room for Korea’s diplomacy will expand, which, in turn, will provide new opportunities for Korea to play a constructive role in the region. This is why I believe that the North Korean issue, including the nuclear problem, poses both challenges and opportunities to Korea’s foreign policy.

(Historical Revisionism in Japan)

• The historical revisionism that is emerging in Japan with the slogans of ‘Normalization of the Country’ and ‘Proactive Contribution to Peace’ under the Abe administration is deepening the tensions with neighboring countries, including China and Korea. It is making the political landscape of Northeast Asia more complex.

• This movement, which stems from the wrong perception of history and misguided nationalism of some politicians, is a problem not only for Northeast Asia but also for the international community as a whole. It is all the more so because behind this movement lies the intention of rewriting history and changing the post-war international order. I believe the leading media in the US, Europe and Southeast Asia are strongly criticizing Japan’s historical revisionism because they share these concerns. Washington Post even used the term ‘historical denialism’.

• A recent New York Times op-ed by a German journalist titled ‘What Germany Can Teach Japan’ hit the nail on the head concerning the problems of Japan under the Abe administration. The author said, “Normalcy is not something that is granted; it must be sought out and earned.” Japan will become a normal country only when it follows Germany’s example of earning trust by showing genuine remorse for its past mistakes and seeking forgiveness in earnest. On the issue of exercising the right to collective self-defense, too, the Abe government should first make efforts to earn the trust of the neighboring countries prior to pursuing substantive discussions. And the discussions should be conducted in a transparent and prudent manner given the concerns of the neighboring countries over historical issues.

• Currently, the US is facing a serious dilemma due to the tension between Korea and Japan. Since Korea and Japan are the strongest allies of the US in this region, the deteriorating relations between the two are undermining US strategic interests in this region. The relationship between the Korea-US alliance and the Japan-US alliance is one of shared growth, not one of zero-sum. Therefore, it would be inconceivable for the US to sacrifice one for the other. From the US perspective, the trilateral security cooperation among Korea, Japan and the US is strategically important, especially in dealing with a rising China and increasingly unstable North Korea with its nuclear program. This is why President Obama made efforts to realize a Korea-US-Japan trilateral summit on the sidelines of the Nuclear Security Summit held in The Hague last March, and to improve the relations between Seoul and Tokyo during his visit to the two countries in April.

• We had hoped to see a new momentum to improve the Korea-Japan relations since the trilateral summit in The Hague. Unfortunately, however, we have yet to see the light at the end of the tunnel. The future prospects are not all that promising either. As the main architect of the post-war regional order, I hope and expect that the US will play a more active role in preventing the resurrection of historical revisionism that can potentially undermine the stability in the region. Realistically speaking, it is only the US that holds the key to change Japan.

• With all these gloomy pictures, however, we have seen a narrow window of opportunity for moving forward. After many ups and downs, Korea and Japan agreed to hold bilateral meeting at the director-general level to address the so-called comfort women issue and two rounds of meeting have been held so far. I hope that Japan will address this important issue with sincerity at the forthcoming monthly meetings, so that it can pave the way for improving the Korea-Japan relations. By doing so, I hope that next year we can celebrate in good spirits the 50th anniversary of the normalization of our bilateral relations.

(Return of Russia)

• Korea and Russia agreed to establish a strategic cooperative partnership in 2008, but not much progress had been made in the following years. It was only when new leaders took office in both Korea and Russia that a new momentum was created. Since then, the Korea-Russia relations have been making significant progress, especially in the aftermath of two summit meetings.

• The Look East Policy of President Putin and the Eurasia Initiative of President Park have come together for projects such as the Najin-Hasan logistics cooperation project to become a reality.

• However, the Korea-Russia relations are now facing new challenges due to the outbreak of the Ukraine crisis early this year. Some people are going as far as to describe the conflict between Russia and the West following Russia’s takeover of the Crimean Peninsula as the ‘return of history’ or ‘return to the Cold War’. It is only natural that the Korea-Russia relationship will be affected by the development in Ukraine. We are also worried that the Ukraine crisis can send the wrong signal to Pyongyang when it comes to dealing with the North Korean nuclear issue.

• Since the worsening of the situation in Ukraine will only impose greater burden on the countries concerned, a cautious optimism is arising that the situation will soon calm down. We hope that will be the case. As Russia is an important partner for Korea not only to resolve the North Korean nuclear issue but also in our efforts to pursue Trustpolitik, it is critical to have an external security environment that is less-confrontational. In this context, we welcome the fact that the elections in Ukraine were held peacefully on May 25 according to schedule.

(Anachronistic North Korea)

• It goes without saying that the North Korean issue and its nuclear ambitions pose the biggest threat and challenge to the security on the Korean Peninsula. Notwithstanding the international community’s united message that North Korea should give up its nuclear weapons program and walk on a path towards reform and openness, Kim Jong-un conducted the third nuclear test in February last year and, a month later, publicly announced the simultaneous pursuit of nuclear armament and economic development. In particular, after the execution of Jang Sung-taek last December, the growing volatility and uncertainty in North Korea has become a greater threat to the security in the Korean Peninsula and Northeast Asia. Moreover, North Korea has continuously elevated the level of provocations by threatening to conduct an additional nuclear test and to launch ballistic missiles.

• It was against this backdrop that Foreign Minister Yun Byung-se visited New York earlier this month on the occasion of Korea’s presidency of the UN Security Council for this month and gave a serious warning that if North Korea conducts another nuclear test, the regime would pay the heaviest price. This will entail stronger sanctions not only from the UN Security Council but also from the individual countries.

• Looking back upon the past, we come to realize that historical opportunities for transformational change in inter-Korean relationship arrived in the Korean Peninsula almost every two decades. In the 1970s, thanks to the East-West détente, the inter-Korean relations experienced a brief thawing period; in the 1990s after the end of the Cold War, some progress was made in improving the relations, including the adoption of the Basic Agreement between North and South. But both failed to bring about a fundamental change in the inter-Korean relations. Rejecting the trend of the times, North Korea took a path towards a greater isolation especially after the death of Kim Il-sung. 20 years after the end of the Cold War, it appears that the Korean Peninsula is facing another historical era of transformation. In his recent speech, Foreign Minister Yun called this the third “tectonic shift.”

• Early this year, President Park Geun-hye compared reunification to winning the jackpot, and during her visit to Germany last month, she presented a vision of peaceful reunification in her Dresden speech. I believe this vision stems from her sense of historical mission as a leader standing at a critical time in history where we have to prepare for the future of the Peninsula. This vision did not come out of the blue. It is in line with the philosophy and vision of Trustpolitik that President Park has been advocating since even before she took office.

3. Trustpolitik and the New Korean Peninsula

(Philosophy and Vision of Trustpolitik)

• Lately, the rivalries and realignment in East Asia has been getting more complex and volatile. Last week's Financial Times editorial made the assessment that, in East Asia, nationalism is on the march, and there is a return to great power politics. The editorial also reminded us of the devastation caused by nationalism in Europe in the 19th century. Last February, Dr. Kissinger had also warned at the Munich Security Conference that military confrontation cannot be ruled out in the region by comparing the recent state of affairs in East Asia to Europe in the 19th century. In fact, experts are raising concerns that the Korean Peninsula, with the threat of an anachronistic North Korean regime, can become the most dangerous hotspot.

• The fundamental reason behind this crisis in the Korean Peninsula and Northeast Asia lies in the deficit of trust among the countries in the region. Confucius once said that, “without trust, there is no foundation for existence”. Trust is an asset for cooperation and an indispensable element for prosperity. It is also a social capital that will eliminate the cost of mistrust and promote efficiency. The Trustpolitik of the Park Geun-hye government aims to build the infrastructure of trust among the countries in the region, and then based on this infrastructure, promote a high-quality cooperation.

• We are already aware of many cases where by building trust, age-old conflicts were resolved or history changed its course of direction: just to name a few, the creation and development of the EU, the development of the US-China relations after establishing diplomatic ties, and the conclusion of the peace agreement between Egypt and Israel. For its part, Trustpolitik is based on a dispassionate assessment of the realities in the Korean Peninsula and Northeast Asia, as well as the unique historical experiences of Korea.

• The basic thrust of Trustpolitik is to establish sustainable peace and cooperation in the Korean Peninsula and Northeast Asia by starting to build trust from the lower level. And the two main pillars of Trustpolitik are the ‘Korean Peninsula Trust-building Process’ and ‘Northeast Asia Peace and Cooperation Initiative’.

• The former aims to make peace in the Korean Peninsula by exercising strong pressure and persuasion, while keeping peace with a robust deterrence. On the other hand, the latter seeks to resolve what is called the Asia paradox, a phenomenon of increased conflicts over historical and territorial issues, despite the deepening economic interdependence in the region. To this end, the initiative aims to build an infrastructure of trust in Northeast Asia by accumulating habits of cooperation and dialogue starting from soft issues.

• The Eurasia Initiative, the other pillar of Trustpolitik, is a grand vision to restore Eurasia into ‘One Continent’, which was divided in the Cold War period due to ideological barriers, and to create a ‘Continent of Creation’ and a ‘Continent of Peace’. More specifically, the initiative aspires to connect the Northern and Southern economies centering around the Korean Peninsula, by building a network of energy, transportation and logistics through, among others, strengthening the Korea-Russia relations, the trilateral cooperation among the two Koreas and Russia, as well as Korea’s relations with Eurasian countries.

(Dresden Initiative and Foreign Policy for Preparing Unification)

• No doubt, the ultimate goal of Trustpolitik is the reunification of the Korean Peninsula. Based on Trustpolitik, the Park Geun-hye government is committed to overcome the four major challenges I mentioned earlier, and proactively create an environment conducive to the eventual unification of the two Koreas. This commitment is well reflected in the vision for a unified Korea that President Park laid out in her speech in Dresden -- that is, unification that will proceed in harmony with the interest of our neighbors, with the blessing of the international community and will contribute to the cause of humanity. In this speech, she also presented three proposals that put the lives of the North Korean people first, and can be immediately implemented if North Korea responds with sincerity. The proposals are aimed specifically to resolve humanitarian problems in North Korea; to build infrastructure for the welfare of the people in the North; and to promote integration of the people on both sides.

• The Dresden Initiative is serious, not based on a rosy illusion about unification. We know that the road to reunification will be long and bumpy. This is why, working together with the neighboring countries and the international community, we should start making preparations, and create a platform and environment, for reunification. North Korea flatly rejected our genuine proposal denouncing it as an attempt for unification through absorption, and has vehemently responded by hurling insults to our leadership. But we will continue to seek ways to implement the proposals with patience and sincerity. For its own future, North Korea should make a strategic decision to give up its nuclear ambition and hold on to our hands.

• Benjamin Franklin left a famous saying that “By failing to prepare, you are preparing for failure”. Our generation is one that needs to live this era with the historical mission to prepare for the future of the Korean Peninsula. As an old saying goes, “opportunities cannot be caught from behind as they don’t have tails”. If we fail to cope with the challenges we are facing today with collective courage and wisdom, we may later remorse painfully for having lost the god-given opportunity for the future of the Korean Peninsula. I am a firm believer that opportunities only come when we make change, instead of waiting for change, and that only those who are prepared can grasp such opportunities. Thank you. /END/