Virtually, both in u. S. And abroad i would assume. Its a real pleasure to be back at csis. Ive seen more of victor in the last 12 months than at any other time in our 30 odd your friendship, which is good, which is good, which is good. And i am particularly delighted to cheer this session on the future of the u. S. Korea japan relations for a number of reasons. My late father was a diplomat told me, among many lessons that he told me, number one, if you choose your friends but not your neighbors. Well, i guess if you have tons of money you can choose your friends and your neighbors as well. But you cant choose her neighbors. Number two, he said, one of the things that he wanted to leave as a personal absolute professional legacy is that he did not want any of his children, myself and my two sisters, to have a legacy of faith on japan. He said we want you to remember history, to be proud that you are koreans, but you should not have any hatred in your heart. Because thats what happened on your generation. I think i passed it onto my daughter since i lived in japan twice as an adult that or e to do today, we have till 12 05, let me briefly introduce to you the panelists were all known to you. I will begin with professor jaemin lee, a professor at Kongju National university and well known in the beltway. Professor eunjung lim for economic and security at Seoul National university. He probably knows more about trade law than any other korean who is alive. And, of course, Chris Johnstone was a Senior Advisor in japan chair at csis. Last but not least, my dear friend victor cha. My first question to all of you is give me your take on why the breakthrough, seemingly, in the trilateral relationship is so important from your Vantage Point so let me begin with victor. Well, thank you. First thanks for cheering the panel, are distinct guess. Surely a pleasure. To answer your question i would say that its significant, its significant in two ways. The first is it provides important benefits to each of the alliance partners. So usjapankorea trilateral cooperation things were laid out at camp david by important private benefits if you will for the parties to the alliance. But not just that, not only do they provide important private benefits when we talk about Cooperation Among the three countries in everything from Missile Defense tracking to Climate Change to emerging technologies, that is providing public goods for the world. So there is a lot more to this relationship than what they share among each other that is beneficial to the world. Great. Professor lee, i mean, you focus a lot on trade, on economic issues. And from your Vantage Point what is the highlight of the seemingly close relationship between our three countries . Well, i sacred issues are becoming traditions. So the combination of the two come to look at the issue from a new perspective. Everything starts from scratch so we are now trying to find an answer to many, many new challenges. No korea and the United States are cooperating. That is fundamental strategy and importance of summit in april and now finally the trilateral summit at camp david including japan, korea, japan and the United States a look at this issue from an angle and trying to converge security, trade, economy and technology. So this is very important develop it and new era of trilateral partnership. Chris, as a de facto japanese on the panel, could you please tell us your view from tokyo . Yeah, sure. So great to be here, thank you, title represent more than just the japanese but i guess i see three big things that are significant about the outcomes at camp david. One is in this commitment to consult, the implicit message that the security the three countries is linked. In some ways is that the sf blindingly obvious that is that a statement the governments have made together before. And its the foundation for Everything Else that follows. Thats an important point to make. The second is the package the things that were announced on the defense side, which really collectively take the trilateral defense relationship to a a nw level. Without trilateral exercises before in particular this named annual multidomain exercise is new. It will prove to be more complex and will bring our militaries together in ways that have not been true before. And in the third to build on what victor said, this set of initiatives related to the indopacific, whether its the relevant finance cooperation, Cooperation Among our vse, since the message that this relationship is not much more than security on the korean peninsula, that we have a much broader agenda for us i think thats really important. Professor lim, what are your thoughts . I again thank you very much for having me to this wonderful forum. And i share much of what mr. Johnstone, because first and foremost deadly north korean issue. We have another separate panel i dont want to speak about too much detail about the north korea related, but absolutely rages on much more diverse and not only missiles and drones come with cyber definitely because if you think about the trip to currency, last year only, last year only almost like more than 40 of stolen crypto currency is done by north, which means definitely cyber and space. Space. These things are interconnected closely and deathly more and more trilateral approach to deter those Cyber Attacks or even their ambition to the space era. This should be check and balance multinational. In that sense i do of course my own personal background, education and professional backgrounds, i personally do welcome this progress. I think everybody in this room has a consensus, and ensure the consensus is strongest from the Korea Foundation and csis. In fact, when i was talking to the ambassador on the way from seoul to new york and then to d. C. , he felt that this was one of the most important breakthroughs in modern korean diplomacy. Doctrine in the november, the new president. And so, if someone with the initials dte, renters in the white house, i think that there will be lots of angst, the released in seoul and in tokyo as other our political drivers, theyre going to have a huge impact on where this relationship goes forward, my second quick question and then will carry on, for the panelist is where the roadblocks to sustainability on the try lateral relationships and let me begin with you professor. [inaudible]. As i mentioned, i do welcome this progress when you have emergent and emerging issues and professor you mentioned the conventional in a risk of international and korean we created emerging enemies gains they used to be there, however, through the certain progress, you said it does create multiple will for example, the cyber and it does have like a nexus with the National Security, or even like many other outcomes which was not that much expected as of these kinds of things fluid situation, we need more collaboration however and the thing is were all in this room, i think that we will agree the causation of economy and even though i do welcome the progress, how confident these two are an this is the remaining and that is why i do think that having at this core the trilateral core needs to definitely expand two important areas like central asia probably including like mongolia or australia definitely and so this should not probably be the end of the story. You know see the roadblocks are impediments. Well you know, defense on how closely willing to Work Together for this institutionalizing all of these things and how tangible outcomes that we can create yes. You know chris, in japan, because they been in power for so long, regardless of the leadership change, is ahead of the party you really dont see much of a change in Foreign Policy although koreas probably an exception in certain cases and so as a depend chair and i well i guess longtime analyst on the japanese teas in a japanese Foreign Policy, how much of the japanese domestic policy and politics do you think will affect the future of the trilateral relationships. Yes, certainly think about the politics really in any of our countries are probably the biggest uncertainty, Going Forward. I look i think that in japans case, i think its fair to say theres some hesitance that first that the president began his outreach and for my point of view, probably took longer than it should have her japan to embrace the initiative from the korean side. There is mineral change in tokyo in japan and recognition of this opportunity a sense that there really is a chance to chart different course here the concern about political change in korea and the impact that might have but you are less of it than you did before. And so i think that is positive and i think the issue for my perspective is uniting actually, from a domestic political standpoint on the u. S. Presents the biggest question in the near term, and i think about president yoon and the primary should have more runway than perhaps the United States does. But beyond that, i think that the political will among all three to look beyond the inevitable setbacks, and keep things on course because this is not part of the pun, nothing of history and the japans south korea relationship there will be another will buy it japanese cabinet member and there will be a textbook issue in the maybe new developments in the court case. In the political will look beyond that, and can stay focused on the opportunity. I think thats the opportunity but also i think thats the uncertainty that we have to keep focused on. Professor lee, only talk about the trilateral is him between korea japan and the u. S. Especially on trade and economics and technology issues, it is not just the public and the government, but also the importance of corporations and companies in the market. So how do you think the Korean Companies for example, where the japanese are americans, really struggling trilateral Security Cooperation and will that result in closer economic ties between korea and japan. I dont really believe so so is important not just for the governments, the three governments critically from korea and japan but also for the corporations and japan and in korea, they havent been incorporated closely between the two countries and so now, they have encountered a lot of difficulties because of between japan and korea for the past ten years is just as mentioned also new academic security and Global Supply chains insecurities and these are raising new questions with the Korean Companies as well is the Japanese Counterparts nl, theyre cooperating closely, now that the ready to cooperate deeper because now, they know what to do, where to go in japan again and kim david and joint statement in the trilateral cooperation efforts but thats important for the cooperations now for the corporations now. But as u. S. And china relations the friction between the beijing and washington, there are concerns in tokyo and the companies are going to suffer. If the relations become worse between the americans and the chinese but you believe the Korean Companies major conglomerate, both in japan and in korea, how they managed are turbulent geopolitical waters. Welcome of that is very tip in a difficult question and an important question and i think that one of the porting benefits from the trilateral summit is now, the commodification of reformulation of supply chain. And we know what types of supply chains will be reformulated three areas, intelligence, computing and the advanced semi conductors. And for other areas, now is been cleared, this area of cavitation continuing cooperations doing Korean Companies and chinese companies, and critical areas and noncritical technologies and so i can see the operation of the supply chains for different types of products. You weve lived through Turbulent Times in the u. S. Lock relations in the 2000s, and even before that. And every time there impediments or roadblocks, somehow the alliance managed to move on and more positive way. But i think if you look at the experiences of the changes in government, both in korea, and in the u. S. , 30 fluctuations politically, they do have, critical cause. So looking in the next five or ten years horizon, and youll imagine in your head, a worstcase scenario, politically, between korea and japan and the u. S. , is this trilateral relationship still possible. Hunters going question and, i mean, i certainly think so and i think a part of it goes to how we thing about what caused camp david to happen. So clearly part of the answer to that is leadership by the president own and others. Whose idea was it. To do the trilaterals. Yes it camp david it. Oh at camp david and wilhelmina have i will chris and i have are guesses about when the u. S. Government mightve proposed it. Because it is such a historic play is and theres no denying particular for the president will like he served in everybody in washington can acknowledge this, that he deserves a lot of credit for only very start in from the beginning of this transition they made clear, but i would also argue, that was not the only thing right. And lorne europe has had a Ripple Effect everywhere, and change the way every leader thinks about this is great so that certainly has something to do with it in china, and a growing in the region, certainly has something to do with it and obviously, they had something to do with it as well as Economic Security has my chains. I know all of these country been victims of chinese economic origins of my point is, that even though the politics changed become a it was not just is not just leadership the caused this to happen. Their external factors that are pushing the country together. Yes and i would imagine, that even with changes in leadership, those same impulses, will create similar sources of the responses maybe not with the same enthusiasm, are the same flourish, but i think that the path has been laid. In the earlier panel, we talked about investor liberty another stark about the growing connection between the indo pacific and europe and there are some naysayers who argue that yes, that the europeans are much more interested in what is happening in asia on Security Technology and vice a versa and others say well, you know the relationship is there but is not going to mature into something really crucial like the third inch, and my question to the panel, and again kemal begin here as korea and japan and the u. S. Certainly is a superpower, there undertaking global issues and these global issues actually means that you have to really have local global muscle and the will, to basically do certain things like caught countries on human rights abuses. And taking stances on very unpopular issues and convincing your public this the right thing to do despite perhaps because ns korea and japan and the u. S. Go global in all of these issues were familiar with how are we going to basically pan out the countries but particular, from where you stand. As of the first observation based on your questions that i do think that the International Environment and the way that we think about Global Governance is changing in ways that highlight roles the countries like korea and japan, and play and so as i think somebody mentioned it this morning that korea will be a member nonpermanent member the un security counseling to be frank, that organizations in trouble in the Un Security Council can really do much given china and russias today which means increasingly, i think that the institution and Global Governance are going to moved organizations were in place an Important Role with create like the g7 hosted in and korea was there and of course the nato and plus ap for leaders which i think it leads from the u. S. Administrations perspective, they see the this as for the first 200 for seville in the foreseeable future and i think that increases the platforms or opens up the platforms for korea and japan to play that role if it wants and president own appears to want to play this role in the one thing where i think that is your question suggests, and i dont have an answer to this, is how in this case green government do better job in terms of translating things are doing on the global stage with domestic audiences right and thats the course of the problems for the u. S. President s and evelyn Prime Minister as well and in the korean case i think especially from a given the elections coming up and given the fact that he appears to get the small bumps from these big events and of the big ones like when needs to be done to communicate that better soon just briefly, you know, victor, do you think that the korean Opposition Party today, the foreseeable future, regardless of the politics do you believe it that they are more in tune with these deep global issues or will they stick to their you know simple simon you know domestic politics, the anti japan, this bash big business and his be a little bit more from china and what you think. Well, the risk of hang a big bullseye on my head,. [laughter] and i certainly hope not right because the demonization of japan will remain. But is something weaker close it makes no sense in todays apartment wanting to build toward shyam in china continues to hold her careers had the threat of economic origin whether its you know you continuing to withhold group tourisms and things like this and is that really, you know the neighborhood you want to will the neighborhood you want to get close to it just does not seem to make a lot of sense to me and i think it was said in the previous panel, husky said it, you know that when chinese is now the fifth of the sixth studied language in the universities and korea has were going in the United States the only language that is seen an increase in undergraduate enrollment in american universities miscreants. There is only language vesta nears that every other leg which is flat because of kapok. [laughter] and kapok. [laughter] [laughter] okay, presently, all of a androgenic i realize that korea is an exporting nation and so i dont what percent of the gdp on the exports but without the exports the korean economy basically does not function. So close relations understandable close up under globalization and i think that the government understands globalization word in the public, kind of understands globalization. The Opposition Party, i just dont think they are there yet right my question to you is, is korea do think korea will be able to sustain this global agenda especially when the lines on Technology Resilience and supply chains are going to become even much more i guess firmer and more clear in the years ahead. I think korea is now heading in the direction because of young generations. How you do you define the young generations. So basically, not anybody on this panel. [laughter] [laughter] okay, the more active. Will they are here in the back yes. More active and fully working in a think more independently i think net effect of the koreans reacted to issues of global concern. In summary now, korea political and diplomatically and economically issues going we will encounter the issues over and over again but over time, i think korea is now heading into the direction of more globalization and thats globalization and now, now produce painting global concern. So that is i think one of the changes of the korean society. You think it is a positive trend. Yes, and intakes time and may not be affected directly by the changes in the political camp, through the elections over time, i think the course of it will be sustained. Okay great chris, youve bee have a very robust global agenda. I do and for all of japans problems the democrats entered graphic challenges are significant to the economy. Will koreans averse. Oh yes its true japans is further along in the age curve. And the challenges of Economic Performance and someone japan remains the Third Largest economy in the world and a vibrant hightech sector in critical player in issues like semiconductors. So japan and will continue to have for some time, and what is interesting to me, as a global and contributor sometimes would not really in the Security State by virtue of the posts were under the work policy thats whats interesting about the impact of war in ukraine, its hard to overstate the impact on japan of the conflict. Without the conflict, you would not see the National Security strategy thieves unveiled last summary noon would not see the plans to double the spinning we now see plans to acquire longrange weapons and human aussie in a program to provide military assistance. Develop next generation. Well you mightve seen that but the change wouldve been much more incremental. And so, i think what japan has sort of come to terms with over the last year, is that it has to learn to become a Global Player in security. And at this policy of exclusive supplements, is no longer sufficient. But what about pushback mystically of any of the successors, pursues the security agenda too far and cooler certainly that risk yes right, so you can go too far but what is really interesting, and the Public Opinion poll shows is very clearly, before the war started, sort of october of 2021, if you asked the public, there polls reflected this, to support increasing defense spending to the 2 percent of gdp to ultimately they wanted to do that, Something Like 30 percent support. Just 30 percent. 30 percent of october but after the war, that number spikes up to 65 percent. And i will the last, will see. But this matter of ukraine today, and it could be asia tomorrow in japan it needs to be engaged globally on Security Issues, i think that is here to stay although you may see adjusting to the to impact kores global agenda Going Forward. I grew up in soul to tokyo in new york and washington and then i went to another area for my job. And then it was my kind of eyeopening moments. Now in culture with the security but however, using the polarizations, when you see the others which is kind of a sad but settling korea and is more like kind of a global phenomenal which is more understandable in this urbanization is very high but having said that gained globalization, we absolutelys in korea from the globalization without reducing kind of a well and was a kinda black position however, we still do experience this real and a realignment and structure and having had this is a challenge i do think that even though the west alliance this is unnecessary because the way you think about the issues however, if we dont create tangible things, economic gains, from the alliance of the trilateral cooperation as i mentioned earlier, so that is really kind of a challenge otherwise, it would be hard in the ordinary people, who work on the ground every day. So we do see more wyden and winery guess between like you and people who you know yes please. Yes, i entirely agree with that point in going back to your first question earlier question, about how this lays out domestically and i think theres an understanding of it certainly on the u. S. Government side and besotted last april, they you know there is clearly an argument and that you made why this alliance is good for the United States and look at all the investment going into georgia right in cassie has Government Camp and her dinner new york. Is just amazing what is going on but its gotta be two ways right and so out of this is that they try to highlight not just inward but outward investment from the United States and korea, which is a very well very important if we want this to be sustainable and has to work both ways. Will i think we have time for questions and what i would like to do is do we have microphones. Okay, now i know that we mentioned the importance of a Younger Generation and nobody in this panel really belongs to the generation z, but im going to put people on the spot on the far end of the corner, and so can anybody be brave enough to raise her hand im going to ask you a question, do you believe it globalization is in the interest of your generation at what are you going to do about it and so either somebody from Korea Foundation kenny replete back. Or Georgetown University yes sure. Okay, victor best so is true so im going to put these students on the spot. Who amongst you will be brave enough to answer that question. I think you raise your hand and there you are yes okay so so many can they give her microphone and then we will continue rather than all of us talking about the Younger Generation. Please state your name image of adrian. Of course, can you hear me. I am doctor as you mentioned, one of his georgetown students with a masters Asian Studies program. As interest of the question, you are wondering if this Younger Generation sees globalization the interest and how are you going to play a role moving forward it braided i think its interesting to reflect on that one of had much time to consider in those terms but i think our generation largely benefited as mentioned earlier, from this increased conductivity as well as endured the consequences such a landscape. So one on hand, this increase that ive seen my own childhood has been a catalyst for my choosing career path read my colleague here and i very similar career paths and point of service and a lot of that interest at point of Service Diplomacy came from increased cultural relationships and connectivity that was my motivation for wanting to join this service and create diplomacy moving forward with her that was learning a foreign language, engaging with k pop or genres of music or cultural trends. And i see this is a benefit factor in this degree connectivity but also negative consequences pretty we have seen movie or just talking about the organization a few moments ago and was seen jobs get uprooted and planted all over the world. Because cutting costs or pursuing things there in the name of economic efficiencies as opposed to human value. And so these questions are one best guided by my own personal motorist Going Forward, and i really do want to say its going to net positive as opposed to a different but a positive with that degree of nuance one that have tried and tried carefully around for saying something might regret i hope that answers your your question. Thank you for much. I what i wanted to do and victor really mentioned, the impact of the ukrainian war and how that is shifted and you mentioned that the japanese perspective on security. So lets talk about the more harsh elements of this u. S. Japan korea cooperation enhancement for example to see today, for the first time in many years, i russian north korean china cooperation. I dont want to call this new axis of evil because the cells too much like well like pase. But it is some type of a coalition and how long it will last who knows. Theyll have unique or authoritarian structures much more north korea than any of the other states but as we see this wall with very different political agendas, and growing power especially by china. Will the u. S. Korea japan relationship be able to kinda manage this kind of this cope with it what you think victor. When they want have a choice. In particular i think the relationship between in russia although withers a mutual convenience is has brought them together, i think that is something that is going to deepen in the china piece of it, we can talk about i thank you so much more complicated for china never russia, theres a lot there that both of them need from each other. And how to the three allies deal with it, is difficult said, and that the normal response and all of us here are familiar with it, we go to the Un Security Council, but thats really not around anymore so can certainly coordinate sanctions among other countries. The g7 nato leaders and the source of things. But its not really clear of what we can do beyond that heard and that is i think perplexing for all of our Foreign Ministry state Department Officials about what else we can do aside and am not trying to belittle from listing more entities more individuals and more companies, then secondary sanctioning, what else can we do. Make sure victor that the u. S. And the koreans and the japanese will continue to invest more on defense, right . Absolutely. If you add the ai factor theres going to be in my personal view a new arms race that will be fueled by this eurasian giant. I think thats right. Its a battlefield or domain that we are not fully comfortable with yet. We dont know what strategic interaction looks like in that domain either. And on the defense side yes, absolutely. Chris can give you a long list of things youd like to see happen in terms of trilateral in response to dprk russia. But again as your question to suggest i dont this is something thats going away. Just when we thought it couldnt get any worse, either russia or dprk, it has gotten worse. Professor lee, as we know from the previous panel, korea depends critically on exports to china, and we depend 100 on imported oil and natural gas, right . So from our Vantage Point Economic Resilience and security is crucial. But if the political relationship between russia, north korea and china hardens and they become even more antiwest and more antijapan, at the the south korea, and the u. S. , how is a going impact koreas Economic Strategy . Well, again, i think those challenges, future challenges perhaps stemming from the ukrainian war or the russiachina dprk Cooperation Network is one of Economic Security for tree because we are raising the issues an economic perspective. And that is also one of the challenges that korea must confront Going Forward and that is where the trilateral network, trilateral operation with japan and the United States still important. And more important considering that those issues, right. One clear statement from the camp david is that three countries will confront and overcome economic coercion from any country, from any Cooperation Network against three countries, and korea. So that is one of the underpinnings that korea can rely upon Going Forward regarding was happening in europe and northeast asia. Chris, from your Vantage Point, whether it is a u. S. Japan alliance for the trilateral relationship, is this going to become do think at some ways a new acheson allies . Will this be like the new frontier that will address both Economic Security and political issues . I sorely think it has the potential to be an alliance in the factor terms if not formal terms. What the camp david agreements really do is create the strategic level architecture that will bind us together, right . The commitment to annual leaders meeting, defense ministers and secretaries, foreign minister said sequiturs, National Security advisers. What we need to think about now is how we build the operational connectivity, particularly on the defense side. What i mean by that is thinking about can would begin to think about trilateral Contingency Planning . Can we begin to think about trilateral operation of a coronation . We think about whats likely to be the expanding space of japans security policy, we are going to need new structures to integrate what our two alliances are doing together. So taking this very important strategic agreement down to the operational i think is an important task. The other point i would make, it continues to be essential all of a signal our interest and desire to build constructive and stable relations with china, that were not forming a block. It can be of law in opposition to china if china chooses to proceed down the path that it is, appears to be on but it need not be. What does relationship does enable all of us to engage beijing from a position of strength. We in the United States should be very supportive of, for example, the prospect of a trilateral leaders meeting among japan, south korea and china. So signaling that openness even as we develop the capability for a much more integrated trilateral relationship. But from beijings perspective dont you think they feel they are being encircled in some ways . Im sure that there are those who argue that but its also, the way i look at this, right, the trilateral come together if you will is that the result of magic diplomacy on the part of the Biden Administration or solely a function of the leadership of president yoon and the Prime Minister. Its also response to structural forces. Thats the reality here, even if some in china prefer not to acknowledge that. Professor lee, watch a recap, happened your expertise as expert on International Relations in this region. And i want to talk about history in the sense. The koreans and the japanese especially the koreans have had this centuries long relations with china. And not so with russia but especially with china. And regardless of whos in power in beijing or so or tokyo, there is something called end quote that kind of woes the socalled confusions of civilizations, right . So they believe that that civilizational poll is Strong Enough to maintain stability in the region, or is that becoming much weaker as we talk because of the geopolitical, economic and Technology Forces that are so strong . Interesting. I do see a generational transition absolutely for probably older generation those kind of confucianism commonality might be more how you say small kind of skin familiar even with japan. However for the Younger Generation even though im not one of them, but as far as i know speediest but you teach Younger Generations. Yes, that is what they feel, i can indicate with them. They are more confident with our regime. Thats a a very big change in clear nationalism i do think. The older generation maybe have the bonding, emotional bonding even with north korea or even you have course meeting koreans in china, or rush as well. However, again the young generation they are more familiar with this kind of rule or values we talk about. Who know, they might be more familiar with japan as long as we share similar regime or similar values and so on. I definitely do see a kind of generational transition which can be a a good thing and at e same time another child. If i can ask one more question. Unfortunately, china under xi jinping, and russia under putin, and kim jongun under the kim dynasty, heavily to emphasize their own warped version of hyper nationalism, right . I will continue as long as these regimes are in power. So were facing these three countries that are super, super ventilating nationalistic i guess aggressions, and do think that the Younger Generations in our three countries will be able to basically deal with that . Thats another like interesting question. Well, usually people who live in labor democracy its hard to be, how you say, hard to be that much kind of aggressive. Right. That kind of democracies dont fight was with each other as we know. Its not like that. Probably our Younger Generation, even though they dont like that kind of authoritarian way, but at the same time it doesnt necessarily mean lets fight against whatever the regime. So again its kind of subtle. That is why i keep emphasizing in all this more light games, economic benefits, can be a persuasion to the next generation. But there are red lines, victor, right . Of course the biggest red line is what will kim jongun do with all his Nuclear Weapons . Especially if he has tactical, for example, some relaunch Ballistic Missiles as with big he does. For example, more Cyber Capabilities as was mentioned. Of course we are concerned more about the big bang which is what might or might not happen in taiwan. So if you look at future contingencies, victor, and lets take taiwan as a case, right . Do you think the trilateral relationship will have a more robust response, or will there be more i guess wariness on the part of japan and korea to be involved in a major crises or even a mini war . So i think again i think the answer to the question is whether the what to or not they wont have to. They will have to manage this. I get with the war in ukraine i think is really change the way people think about scenarios in asia. These things should be thought of sort of remote on paper, molecular thought there would be a war and the type of what were seeing in europe, like no one thought that would happen again. Nobody did. Anything is possible. Csis has been part of these conversations. Theres lots of conversations now taking place, track two, track 1. 5 looking at how the u. S. Korea and japan are going to do with the potential for not just one but possibly two contingencies in asia. Whether its taiwan first and then korea, or it is korea first and then taiwan here if one starts how do you deter the other . Its not the conversation isnt that lets all rally around together and figure out how we fight two wars at once. Its really how do we deter in peacetime . How do we deter in peacetime should something happen one of these places that it doesnt happen in another place . That is a conversation that requires certainly from a u. S. Perspective and also from seoul and tokyos perspectives how the three militaries can Work Together in terms of coordinating peacetime deterrence. Including other ideas like taiwan is a contingency that definitely involves the United States and japan, but korea as a contingency that involves not just the United States but theres United Nations speediest so unc, and so president yoon i think certainly for the first time in august 15 speech, rig, made reference to unc rear bases. Tremendously important statement. The first of a korean president said that. Yeah. I mean come on the occasion of the august 15 speech, a timidly significant statement. As i think just again as a said the environment has quit all these impulses for the three countries to Work Together in a way that they have not had to contemplate before. We being the United States may have wanted them to think about these things but now there is really a reason to do this. So we do have this opportunity to press forward on these things. Yes, i mean theres very important election in korea coming in april and we dont know how is it going to turn out. But even if they dont turn out in favor of the ruling party, it is still important to continue work on these issues. Professor lee, i talked to not a lot of korean businessman but some of their very concerned what might are what might not happen in taiwan. So they are saying if there is a taiwan crisis, gosh, what should korea do . And from the perspective we should do nothing. But if we did nothing i think there would be a huge cost in repercussions. So from your Vantage Point as someone who studies and practices Economic Security, if there is a a Major Political crisis, i. E. , taiwan, what would be the economic measures that the three parties can take to make sure that with a more robust and resilient response . Well, its difficult to predict the future and how Korean Companies and government will respond to those contingencies. But i expect you to because you are a professor of the Seoul National university. I think there are many issues that will stem from the contingencies in taiwan, and one of which as victor just mentioned is the legal issue about the involvement of u. S. Forces stationed in korea and how they will be utilized, or in what way where korea can cooperate in that regard. Thats critical issue being discussed extensively i believe. From the perspective of economic sector, well, i think korea has learned a hard lesson for the past, say six or seven years, dealing with china and japan and to some extent the United States, here that includes deployment and continuing retaliation and export restriction from japan and many difficult issues with the United States on battery ira. Everything, semiconductors. So to those hardearned lessons korea is now i think ready to respond to those contingencies again through close cooperation and coordination with the United States of course and japan, and other allies based upon the underscored rule of law and International Law and global order. I think that is the Guiding Light for korea, whatever happens in taiwan. Thats actually quite sobering and to because you mentioned earlier the importance of ai biotechnology, caught in computing et cetera. Are all crucial technologies that were the u. S. And the japanese and koreans are leaders in. So that is a net positive. Chris, the same question to you, which is if a taiwan crisis, or if you look with the chinese are doing in the south china seas, there was a huge article in New York Times i think was yesterday that they really tried to take it over, right, from their own perspective. How is that going to impact trilateral Security Cooperation, and will that be a new beginning regardless of domestic politics . Yeah, its a great question. I think the first point to make is, its really impossible to overstate how the prospect of a taiwan conflict has become front and center in japans National Security debate. Ten years ago when i first started as a midlevel official working on the u. S. Japan alliance you couldnt talk about taiwan. Because they were even into classified setting. They were not ready, we were not ready. It was not an issue you can attach. Now it is, it is the driving force behind their defense planning and a major source of alliance discussion. In july i participate in a tabletop exercise in tokyo with a group of 15 members told open to the press about responses to a taiwan contingency and role japan booklet and role of government. Where the opposition members of sulzberger there was not which is unfortunate but as a Mainstream Group of officials could one post out the new defense minister. So much more sort of front and center and can openly be discussed. This is an example of an area with you as japan and south korea need to have a candid discussion about contingency response. The perspective in tokyo is not one that theres an expectation that the rok would play the Critical Role in the contingency but there is a desire to have a conversation about how do we sustain deterrence on the peninsula, avoid opportunistic aggression while we defeat, while we deal with it, with the china challenge. I think the sense in tokyo is theres a desire for dialogue with the rok side about that and an expectation that the rok cyber play a significant role in reinforcing deterrence and the context. Thats exactly the kind of conversation we need to begin to think about having. Professor lee, i wanted to touch upon the fact that theoretically all of this is good, right . We are cooperating because of Political Leadership in seoul and tokyo and washington. The corporations are on board. There is i guess a wealth of public support for improved ties. If you look at the number of koreans traveling to japan, its really skyrocketed. And vice versa, right . So my question to you is, if there is a major crisis in taiwan, for example, or in the south china sea, how do you see degree in public responding to a more i guess not robust but at least standing with our American Allies and japanese partners . Actually, i really i was interested in mr. Johnstone swimmer, [inaudible] but a small kind of opposite in korea probably because i taiws such a sensitive issue nowadays in korea. However, we cant think of taiwan issue crossstrait issue in two ways. One is more security is a lifeline, im sorry how im doing energy stuff, so petroleum, natural gas come all those things are shipped across the hormuz strait, south and East China Sea so something happened along the sale we are going to be really starting. So definitely more issue, collaboration with japan, not only just japan why not all kennedys . Uk, British Parliament commanded actually why not . Again korea and japan to join aukus . Definitely more Security Issues and number two is this is the tricky part. Koreans something will happen in that area. So what if north korea like another parochial or local development. We need to think about all this contingency scenario. I personally would like to actually suggest you guys to think about little bit wide unilateralism for security or for contingencies scenario. We have about 15 15 minutt but i do want to ask questions to the floor. I would like to take this opportunity if you have questions to one or more panelists, please state your questions directly. So, yes. Craig sanders. Its been an excellent panel. I had one question, secretary blinken has indicated his you and the administrations view of the larger economic the case has shifted. How do you see u. S. Japan and korea either moving towards possible wga reform or indopacific or economic form, economic arrangement moves . Or would you think our interests are different enough the ways the order evolves, we might have separate issue for pushing forward . Thank you. We will take a couple more questions either on the side or that side. Said, he always have interesting questions. Can you please give a microphone to sit . For those of you dont know, he has watched north grip at the dni like what, 30 odd years . Too long. Welcome to retirement. Give us your question or your comment. I can only think that the taiwan discussion is in its very nascent stages because, for one, or is no taiwan scenario. Theres multiple scenarios, and theres scenarios of u. S. Involvement. The scenarios of u. S. Involvement that do not require use of a least airbases if not forces from usf j and usf k. Theres no sooner i can think of that immediately upon some type of u. S. Chinese confrontation over taiwan that either japan or south korea is safe. Theres no choices about whether they get involved or not. I guess on the one hand, the fact that as chris described, the topic can be tabled but it obviously needs to be expanded in terms of its a discussion and the reality that would have to face that our allies in japan and republic of korea they are in the game and most of the scenarios that a least i can imagine. I was wondering what your thoughts are. Ill take one more question. I know there are members of the media. Scott, did you have a question . Yes, sir, please. Scott started from the council of foreign relations. Thank you. The question that have for the panel is really about, as we institutionalize this trilateralism, it comes at a potential cost to autonomy in each country. It comes with a sense of potential entrapment. And im wondering if the panel thinks that there are concerns that at this point because we have a strong threat perception that is cohesive, that may not be a problem, but is there a concern that that could become an issue in any of the three countries involved. Was a great question, i do, scott. Take one more question. Yes, maam. I am agenda for late on the asia group i had one question. Ive been following the koreajapan situation are sometime since a bit controlling of effing. Yes trilateral agenda matters, and we do understand that there needs to be some institutionalization of this trilateral cooperation but at the same time like if you look from opposition parties abuse and the general public, there are concerns economic issues. Also i think there is a large group of people who think that theyre not getting enough from japan and from the United States. And im wondering yes, there has been, yes, there has been some movements to kind of resolve the forced labor issue but nothing has really gone away. And im wondering is there any intention from the japan side to do more on that front and kind of actually try to meet korea may be halfway of those historical grievances and whatnot . Chris . [laughing] what would i say about that . Obvious i dont want to try to speak for the japanese side on this. I think the point, maybe the way i would respond to the question is, i think its a very important point that we have this, we have this leader level alignment. We now this architecture but he think the grassroots able to people peace of this is still fragile. I think thats a very fair point. And so thats not going to take place quickly. I guess what i would say i think its going to be critical for leaders on both sides to show consideration, right, about te sensitivities of the other. This is easier said than done because political pressures will push each side to take positions on things that by definition alienate the other. But it think a real test of this and the ability to sort of push it out to the Grassroots Level will be for leaders to begin to show consideration, a conscious effort to avoid make, making political hay of steps that will alienate the other, whether its use of flags or visits to things or anniversary dates and so on. I dont think this is easy and i dont think its something that takes place overnight but i do think for all the reasons we talked about here theres a basis for closer ties that if we can avoid the hot buttons can make a difference over time. Professor lim, do you great . What can koreans do to make sure the trilateral relationship is sustainable despite lingering historical legacies and political issues . Well, definitely i think we have to work simultaneously and we dont need to mix up everything. So history issues remain important for many koreans. For example, Fukushima Nuclear waste war, i have been working on nuclear for many years. So i had, which is not that blessed opportunity, but i did have the opportunity to talk about the controversial Nuclear Waste water with the media, but this is not like an flashpoints we do not like many with but that does not messily l. Majority of koreans are against the future of bilateral cooperation. I think again we need to work simultaneously. This issue, this issue, that issue. Professor lee, there was a question from the floor on the future of trilateral Economic Cooperation between the three countries, not only amongst themselves but on the global stage. What are your thoughts . That is a very good question. I think one contribution, one Critical Condition the three countries can do, for the Global Community is to institutionalize new global norms for trade issues. Wto is working but as we discussed before, todays issues are too contentious and complex to be addressed at the wto forum. Ill put it that way. So we need a new forum, a new order for these complex issues, mainly Economic Security and Global Supply chain, or resilience. That does that fit with the wto norms of today necessarily and that is where the three countries can do and that is what they can contribute to the robust discussion for other countries as well. Interestingly, theres no mention of the wto agreement at the trilateral summit at all. I think which is very indicative a meaningful. Victor . I did want to pick up on this point by ambassador lee that, and solution ive been doing some work on this. The three countries, u. S. , japan and korea, if you include australia as well, have a lot of capable and leverage when it comes to talking about countering chinas economic coercion. It is a significant i think in both the g7 leader statements, the villain a statement by nato leaders in camp david, very explicit reference to coordinating and cooperating not just to defend against but to counter can i use the word counter chinas economic coercion. Usjapankorea australia, they all depend on the Chinese Market but the four of them together make up Something Like a quarter or third of chinas total trade. These are not insignificant numbers. On scotts question about entrapment, sure, naturally when you have closer or trilateral coordination, there was always concern of entrapment. But its like whiplash, right . After november 2020 for all of a set of these allies may be worried about abandonment. [laughing] not entrapment. So, i mean, from a policy perspective you just have to work with what you have at the moment, and right now there is consensus among the three leaders to continue pushing forward. I agree theres more that could be done on the domestic side to sell this, particularly in south korea. In that regard one thing i think is as we know there stings e the ira for example, a lot of benefit to the refund the ira, particularly in the ev battery market. Eventually in the ed Vehicle Market as well ed testbed for a period of time there those that were benefiting from it couldnt say must about it domestically because there was one element in the room that needed to be said. So i think theres more opportunity there as well to sort of sell these policies domestically. So that countries, so that domestic publics and governments dont have a fear of entrapment that really see the benefits of better come from trilateral cooperation. As we and the panel one of the hallmarks of a good moderator is to end on time, or before. I point make sure that i end on time. And to make sure that we had a fun discussion. But before i conclude let me not just think are great panelists at the discussion went also from the floor, but i but i woo really, really, really gave my special thanks to the staff of the Korea Foundation who have worked so hard from their office in seoul all the way here to their office in euros and our great staff. Csis. I dont know whether victor thinks georgia contribute to ensure the defend a very remote indirect way with their professor. But these people such as ambassador to kim and others play crucial roles. Secretary blinken Prime Minister park and others, but the footwork, the daily work that goes into these are just hugely enormous capital think we thank them enough. And so please join me not only in thanking our great panelists but our great staffs from the Korea Foundation and the csis, and with those remarks i will conclude this second session. Thank you. [applause] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]
vimarsana.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.