South Korea Excluded from Discussion of Nuclear Issues
“As a first step, the United States should call for a high-level meeting between Washington, Tokyo, and Beijing…. A U.S.-Sino-Japan strategic summit could go a long way toward promoting a co-operative, constructive China, rather than a challenging one.”
The above is a passage from a report written last year by Kurt Campbell, who was confirmed as the Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs on June 26. He submitted this report, "The Power of Balance: America in Asia," to the Center for New American Security (CNAS), of which he is the CEO.
Campbell served as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Asia and the Pacific during the Clinton Administration, became the vice president of the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), founded CNAS in 2007 and acted as an advisor on Asian policy for Hilary Clinton during her campaign for the presidency. Following the Democratic primaries, he joined the Obama camp and is now a key figure in American foreign and security policy. In particular, CNAS has received a great deal of attention and has even been called the font of the Obama administration’s foreign policy.
Authors of Two Reports by the CNAS Now at Core of Obama's Foreign Policy Team
This report was written by Campbell and two of his colleagues to lay out a foreign and security policy direction the next president should pursue and took into consideration the likelihood that the Democratic Party would take the White House.
He argued that the U.S. needs to expand its strategy in Asia through trilateral (U.S.-China-Japan) cooperation. To do so, he proposed a "U.S.-Sino-Japan Strategic Summit" of high level representatives from each of the three parties. The meeting, he hoped, would solidify China's role as a “constructive partner” rather than a “challenger.” This strategy would bring together three countries that, together, account for 40 percent of the world's GDP.
What Does the Report Prescribe for Relations with South Korea and Other East Asian Countries?
The answer can be found in the report entitled “Strategic Leadership: Framework for a 21st Century National Security Strategy,” released in July 2008 by the CNAS. Written by Campbell, current Assistant Secretary of State James Steinberg, Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice and Director of Policy at the State Department Anne-Marie Slaughter, this report also made foreign and security policy suggestions for the next U.S. president. Its authors are now the core members of the Obama administration’s foreign and security policy team.
The report divides East Asian relations into three frameworks and emphasizes U.S. cooperation with each. The frameworks are trilateral (the U.S., Japan and China), sub-regional (Northeast Asian cooperation building off of the six party framework), and regional (ASEAN Regional Forum and East Asia Summit).
Although the report does not explicitly order the frameworks in a hierarchical manner, it effectively establishes the trilateral framework as the primary framework and the six party talks as a subordinate structure.
Now, one year later, their plans are being realized. Nihon Keisai Shinbun, a major Japanese newspaper, reported on 28 June that the U.S., China and Japan would launch a framework of regular talks for policy discussions. The paper also reported that the three countries will begin talks at the director level and then elevate to the vice-ministerial level. It states that the reasons for launching a framework for regular talks include not only the alliance between the U.S. and Japan, but also China's critical role in maintaining stability in the Asia-Pacific region. In addition, China seeks to check India and Russia by strengthening its channels of cooperation with the U.S. and Japan.
In the trilateral discussions, the known participants are Anne-Marie Slaughter for the U.S., Director of Policy at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Le Yucheng for China; and General Foreign Policy Director at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Bessho Goro for Japan. As a co-author of the report, Slaughter is setting out in person to realize her goals.
On June 7, Japan’s Kyodo News reported a similar story, forecasting that the new framework for talks between the U.S., China and Japan will develop into the major multilateral forum in East Asia. It reported that, by removing the issue of North Korea from the agenda of the trilateral talks "as a matter of principle," President Obama is seeking South Korea’s approval.
Similar Movement in 2007 Hindered by South Korean Opposition
The idea of trilateral talks is not new. According to Song Min-soon, a Democratic Party National Assembly member who served as the Blue House policy director and the foreign minister under the Roh Moo-hyun administration, there was a movement in 2006 and 2007 to establish a formal method for cooperation among the U.S., China and Japan. Fearing marginalization in the six party talks, this suggestion came from Japan, supported by those in the U.S. who were sympathetic to Japan. However, the movement was torpedoed due to strong objections from the South Korean government, which feared being excluded from potential discussions of issues related to Korea.
The Lee Myung-bak administration maintains a similar line. In response to a question about the agenda of the trilateral talks and the topic of South Korea during a regular media briefing on July 2, Foreign Minister Yoo Myung-hwan replied, “it is known that there have been such discussions in academia and government for the purposes of policy planning. While not finalized, we have clearly expressed our position.” That is, our government is paying close attention.
Minister Yoo added, “the trilateral talks should not be a place where issues of the Korean Peninsula are discussed, but we expressed our position that we must definitely participate in a discussion on the Korean Peninsula. As far as I know, the items to be discussed [during trilateral talks] are global issues devoid of regional politics, such as climate change, environmental issues and energy security.”
One foreign and security policy expert said, “as President Obama seems to consider even strategic talks between the U.S., China and Japan, we must be wary. At the moment, with our country actively opposing and if China checks the rise of Japan, the talks will not easily be raised to the summit level. However, if the talks are raised to the ministerial level, visibility will increase greatly.”
If the U.S., China and Japan Meet, Won’t They Discuss Issues Related to the Korean Peninsula?
At a meeting of the three major powers whose interests are intertwined with North Korea, particularly with regards to the nuclear issue, can the topic really be avoided at the discussion table? If the North Korean nuclear issue is discussed, can South Korea stop it?
After the Lee Myung-bak administration came to power, it declared itself “all for” collaboration between the U.S. and South Korea. For example, the "Joint Vision for the Alliance Between the U.S. and the Republic of Korea" put the ‘nuclear umbrella’ in writing. Not only did independent leverage with North Korea disappear, but room for cooperating with China also shrank dramatically. Moreover, South Korea seems to be following the trend of pushing a hard-line stance onto the U.S. rather than trying to design an independent solution to the North Korean nuclear issue.
That is why, as Assembly member Song Min-soon pointed out, “we should know that the U.S. and Japan might think South Korea will follow whatever they say, and therefore not try to consider South Korea’s own position.”
The above is a passage from a report written last year by Kurt Campbell, who was confirmed as the Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs on June 26. He submitted this report, "The Power of Balance: America in Asia," to the Center for New American Security (CNAS), of which he is the CEO.
Campbell served as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Asia and the Pacific during the Clinton Administration, became the vice president of the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), founded CNAS in 2007 and acted as an advisor on Asian policy for Hilary Clinton during her campaign for the presidency. Following the Democratic primaries, he joined the Obama camp and is now a key figure in American foreign and security policy. In particular, CNAS has received a great deal of attention and has even been called the font of the Obama administration’s foreign policy.
Authors of Two Reports by the CNAS Now at Core of Obama's Foreign Policy Team
This report was written by Campbell and two of his colleagues to lay out a foreign and security policy direction the next president should pursue and took into consideration the likelihood that the Democratic Party would take the White House.
He argued that the U.S. needs to expand its strategy in Asia through trilateral (U.S.-China-Japan) cooperation. To do so, he proposed a "U.S.-Sino-Japan Strategic Summit" of high level representatives from each of the three parties. The meeting, he hoped, would solidify China's role as a “constructive partner” rather than a “challenger.” This strategy would bring together three countries that, together, account for 40 percent of the world's GDP.
What Does the Report Prescribe for Relations with South Korea and Other East Asian Countries?
The answer can be found in the report entitled “Strategic Leadership: Framework for a 21st Century National Security Strategy,” released in July 2008 by the CNAS. Written by Campbell, current Assistant Secretary of State James Steinberg, Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice and Director of Policy at the State Department Anne-Marie Slaughter, this report also made foreign and security policy suggestions for the next U.S. president. Its authors are now the core members of the Obama administration’s foreign and security policy team.
The report divides East Asian relations into three frameworks and emphasizes U.S. cooperation with each. The frameworks are trilateral (the U.S., Japan and China), sub-regional (Northeast Asian cooperation building off of the six party framework), and regional (ASEAN Regional Forum and East Asia Summit).
Although the report does not explicitly order the frameworks in a hierarchical manner, it effectively establishes the trilateral framework as the primary framework and the six party talks as a subordinate structure.
Now, one year later, their plans are being realized. Nihon Keisai Shinbun, a major Japanese newspaper, reported on 28 June that the U.S., China and Japan would launch a framework of regular talks for policy discussions. The paper also reported that the three countries will begin talks at the director level and then elevate to the vice-ministerial level. It states that the reasons for launching a framework for regular talks include not only the alliance between the U.S. and Japan, but also China's critical role in maintaining stability in the Asia-Pacific region. In addition, China seeks to check India and Russia by strengthening its channels of cooperation with the U.S. and Japan.
In the trilateral discussions, the known participants are Anne-Marie Slaughter for the U.S., Director of Policy at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Le Yucheng for China; and General Foreign Policy Director at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Bessho Goro for Japan. As a co-author of the report, Slaughter is setting out in person to realize her goals.
On June 7, Japan’s Kyodo News reported a similar story, forecasting that the new framework for talks between the U.S., China and Japan will develop into the major multilateral forum in East Asia. It reported that, by removing the issue of North Korea from the agenda of the trilateral talks "as a matter of principle," President Obama is seeking South Korea’s approval.
Similar Movement in 2007 Hindered by South Korean Opposition
The idea of trilateral talks is not new. According to Song Min-soon, a Democratic Party National Assembly member who served as the Blue House policy director and the foreign minister under the Roh Moo-hyun administration, there was a movement in 2006 and 2007 to establish a formal method for cooperation among the U.S., China and Japan. Fearing marginalization in the six party talks, this suggestion came from Japan, supported by those in the U.S. who were sympathetic to Japan. However, the movement was torpedoed due to strong objections from the South Korean government, which feared being excluded from potential discussions of issues related to Korea.
The Lee Myung-bak administration maintains a similar line. In response to a question about the agenda of the trilateral talks and the topic of South Korea during a regular media briefing on July 2, Foreign Minister Yoo Myung-hwan replied, “it is known that there have been such discussions in academia and government for the purposes of policy planning. While not finalized, we have clearly expressed our position.” That is, our government is paying close attention.
Minister Yoo added, “the trilateral talks should not be a place where issues of the Korean Peninsula are discussed, but we expressed our position that we must definitely participate in a discussion on the Korean Peninsula. As far as I know, the items to be discussed [during trilateral talks] are global issues devoid of regional politics, such as climate change, environmental issues and energy security.”
One foreign and security policy expert said, “as President Obama seems to consider even strategic talks between the U.S., China and Japan, we must be wary. At the moment, with our country actively opposing and if China checks the rise of Japan, the talks will not easily be raised to the summit level. However, if the talks are raised to the ministerial level, visibility will increase greatly.”
If the U.S., China and Japan Meet, Won’t They Discuss Issues Related to the Korean Peninsula?
At a meeting of the three major powers whose interests are intertwined with North Korea, particularly with regards to the nuclear issue, can the topic really be avoided at the discussion table? If the North Korean nuclear issue is discussed, can South Korea stop it?
After the Lee Myung-bak administration came to power, it declared itself “all for” collaboration between the U.S. and South Korea. For example, the "Joint Vision for the Alliance Between the U.S. and the Republic of Korea" put the ‘nuclear umbrella’ in writing. Not only did independent leverage with North Korea disappear, but room for cooperating with China also shrank dramatically. Moreover, South Korea seems to be following the trend of pushing a hard-line stance onto the U.S. rather than trying to design an independent solution to the North Korean nuclear issue.
That is why, as Assembly member Song Min-soon pointed out, “we should know that the U.S. and Japan might think South Korea will follow whatever they say, and therefore not try to consider South Korea’s own position.”