Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-r6qrq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T13:34:12.807Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Pattern of Cooperation and Conflict between Korea and Japan: Theoretical Expectations and Empirical Realities

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 October 2009

CHEOL HEE PARK
CHEOL HEE PARK*
Affiliation:
Graduate School of International Studies (GSIS), Seoul National Universitychpark82@snu.ac.kr.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Over the past few decades, cooperation between Korea and Japan has increased and deepened, but frictions continue to persist. Which direction is the relationship between Korea and Japan heading? This is the question that this article attempts to address.

From an analytical standpoint, this article applies contemporary international relations theories – realism, liberalism, and constructivism – to the pattern of cooperation and conflict in Korea–Japan relations. After reviewing both optimistic and pessimistic positions drawn from diverse perspectives, the author makes a synthesis, where he suggests the case for cautious optimism.

What we find in reality is long-term progress in an upward movement, interrupted by recurring frictions in the short term. Empirical evidence supports the case that Korea–Japan relations are making steady progress towards deeper, heightened, and multilayered cooperation. However, such issues as historical controversy and territorial disputes are the hurdles that both nations need to overcome. Whether Korea and Japan can maximize the effects of optimism, while they effectively minimize the impacts of pessimism will determine the nature of the ties between the two countries.

Cooperation between the two countries is not necessarily guaranteed, but we find irreversible trends of improved cooperation over time. However, lingering suspicions, submerged nationalist sentiments, and sporadic surges of extremism remain. They should be carefully managed by the leaders of the two countries.

Type
Research Article
Information
Japanese Journal of Political Science , Volume 10 , Issue 3 , December 2009 , pp. 247 - 265
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arase, David (2007), ‘Japan, the Active State? Security Policy after 9/11’, Asian Survey, 47 (4) (July/August): 560–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berger, Thomas (2003), ‘Power and Purpose in Pacific East Asia: A Constructivist Interpretation’, in Ikenberry, G. John and Mastanduno, Michael (eds.), International Relations Theory and the Asia-Pacific, New York: Columbia University Press, pp. 387–420.Google Scholar
Berger, Thomas (2007), ‘The Politics of Memory in Japanese Foreign Relations’, in Berger, ThomasMochizuki, Mike, and Tsuchiyama, Jitsuo (eds.), Japan in International Politics, London: Lynne Rienner Publisher. pp. 179–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cha, Victor (1999), Alignment Despite Antagonism, Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Copeland, David (1996), ‘Economic Interdependence and War’, International Security, 20 (4) (Spring): 5–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedberg, Aaron (1993), ‘Ripe for Rivalry: Prospects for Peace in a Multipolar Asia’, International Security, 18 (3) (Winter): 5–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedberg, Aaron (2005), ‘The Future of US–China Relations’, International Security, 30 (2) (Fall): 7–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilpin, Robert (1981), War and Change in World Politics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, Michael (2007), ‘Japan Is Back’, Foreign Affairs, 86 (2) (March/April): 142–7.Google Scholar
Haggard, Stephan (1990), Pathways from the Periphery, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Hughes, Llewelyn (2007), ‘Why Japan Will Not Go Nuclear (Ye)’, International Security, 31 (4) (Spring): 67–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inoguchi, Takashi and Bacon, Paul (2008), ‘Rethinking Japan as an Ordinary Country’, in Ikenberry, John and Moon, Chung In (eds.), The United States and Northeast Asia, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield, pp. 79–98.Google Scholar
Jervis, Robert (1976), Perceptions and Misperceptions in International Politics, Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Jervis, Robert (1988), ‘Realism, Game Theory, and Cooperation’, World Politics (April): 317–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, David and Smith, Michael (2007), ‘Making Process, not Progress’, International Security, 32 (1) (Summer): 148–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katzenstein, Peter and Sil, Rudra (2004), ‘Rethinking Asian Security: A Case for Analytical Eclecticism’, in Suh, J.J.Katzenstein, Perter, and Carlson, Allen (eds.), Rethinking Asian Security in East Asia, Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Keohane, Robert (1984), After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy, Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Keohane, Robert (1993), ‘Institutional Theory and the Realist Challenge after the Cold War’, in Baldwin, David (ed.), Neorelaism and Neoliberalism: The Contemporary Debate, New York: Columbia University.Google Scholar
Keohane, Robert and Nye, Joseph (1977), Power and Interdependence, Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
Kim, Yewon (2008), ‘Cooperation Despite Antagonism’, MA thesis at GSIS at Seoul National University, August.Google Scholar
Kimiya, Tadashi (2006), ‘Dynamics and Prospects of the Korea–Japan Relations’, in Kim, Young Jak and Lee, Won Duk (eds.), Ilbon eun Hankook ege Muossinga (What is Japan for Korea), Seoul: Hanul Academy.Google Scholar
Lind, Jennifer (2004), ‘Pacifism or Passing the Buck? Testing Theories of Japanese Security Policy’, International Security, 29 (1) (Summer).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, Lisa and Simmons, Beth (1998), ‘Theories and Empirical Studies of International Institutions’, International Organization, 52 (4) (Autumn): 729–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade of Korea (2007), Ilbon Kaehwang 2008 (Japan Overview 2008), Seoul: Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade.Google Scholar
Nye, Joseph (1988), ‘Neorealism and Neoliberalism’, World Politics, 40 (January): 235–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Okonogi, Masao (2007), ‘Cheje Machal eseo Euisik Gongyu ro’ (From Frictions over Regime to Shared Consciousness), in Korean Association of Contemporary Japanese Studies (ed.), Segi Hanil Kwangye wa Dongbuk Asia eui Saeroun Bijon (Searching for New Visions for Korea–Japan Relations and Northeast Asian Cooperation), Seoul: Hanul.Google Scholar
Otake, Hideo (2006), Koizumi Junichiro Popyurizumu Kenkyu (Study on Koizumi's Populism), Tokyo: Toyo Keizai.Google Scholar
Park, Cheol Hee (2008a), ‘Hanil Kaldeung eui Baneungjok Chokbal kwa Wonronchok Daeeung eui Kujo’ (The Development of Korea–Japan Conflicts as Korea's Principled Responses to the Japanese Provocation), Hankook Jongchi OikyosaNonchong (Journal of Korean Political and Diplomatic History), 29 (2): 5–30.Google Scholar
Park, Cheol Hee (2008b), ‘Historical Memory and the Resurgence of Nationalism: A Korean Perspective’, in Hasegawa, Tsuyoshi and Togo, Kazuhiko (eds.), East Asia's Haunted Present, New York: Praeger Security International, pp. 190–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Park, Cheol Hee (2008c), ‘Cooperation Coupled with Conflicts: Korea–Japan Relations in the Post Cold War Context’, Asia-Pacific Review (November): 13–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pempel, T.J (2008), ‘Beyond Bilateral Approaches: Regionalizing Japan–Korea Tensions’, A paper presented at the 19th US–Korea Academic Symposium organized by KEI and New York University in New York, 16–18 September.Google Scholar
Powell, Robert (1993), ‘Absolute and Relative Gains in International Relations Theory’, in Baldwin, David (ed.), Neorelaism and Neoliberalism: The Contemporary Debate, New York: Columbia University.Google Scholar
Russet, Bruce (1993), Grasping the Democratic Peace, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Samuels, Richard (2007), Securing Japan: Tokyo's Grand Strategy and the Future of East Asia, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Soeya, Yoshihide (2005), Nihhon no Midoru Pawa Gaiko (Japan's Middle Power Diplomacy), Tokyo: Chikuma Shinsho.Google Scholar
Suh, J.J (2007), ‘War-like history or diplomatic history? Contentions over the past and regional orders in Northeast Asia’, Australian Journal of International Affairs, 61 (3) (September): 382–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wakamiya, Yoshibumi (1995), Sengo Hoshu no Aziakan (Asian Perspectives of the Postwar Japanese Sonservatives), Tokyo: Asahi Shensho.Google Scholar
Waltz, Kenneth (1993), ‘The Emerging Structure of International Politics’, International Security, 18 (2) (Fall): 44–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wendt, Alexander (1992), ‘Anachy is What States make of It’, International Organization, 46 (2) (Spring).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woo, Seung Ji (2003), ‘Naengjunki Hankook Ilbon Hyopryok eui Puzul’ (Puzzle of Korea–Japan Cooperation in the Cold War), Hankook Jongchi Hakkwoibo (Korean Journal of Political Science), 37 (3) (Fall): 129–50.Google Scholar
Yomiuri, Shimbun Seijibu (2006), Gaiko wo Genka ni shita Otoko (A Man Who Made Diplomacy a Quarrel), Tokyo: Yomiurishimbun.Google Scholar
Yoon, Tae Ryong (2006), ‘Fragile Cooperation: Net Threat Theory and Japan–Korea–US Relations’, Ph.D. dissertation at Columbia University.Google Scholar
Yoon, Tae Ryong (2007), ‘Searching for a New Paradigm for Korea–Japan Relations’, Kukje Kyankye Yonku (IRI Review), 12 (2) (Fall): 169–205.Google Scholar