Problem
In 2008, Japan tried to re-establish diplomatic relations with North Korea. Diplomatic relations had not existed between the two countries since the Korean Peninsula. Japan promised to provide North Korea with economic and financial instruments to boost its economy while North Korea agreed to investigate the case of the abduction of Japanese citizens by the North Korean government in the 1970s and 1980s (Smith, 2013). Japan also made a commitment that in the event that North Korea fulfilled its part of the negotiated promises, it was going to lift economic sanctions that were imposed in 2006. Despite sitting at the table, none of the parties fulfilled its part of the agreement. North Korea reneged on the investigation of the abduction of Japanese citizens and it did not hand over Japanese terrorists who had hijacked an airline. On its own part, Japan did not remove economic sanctions leveled against North Korea.
The problem posed by the lack of diplomatic relations due to the fall out on Japanese citizens was not insurmountable as the Nuclear threat posed by North Korea in the region. Following the nuclear test of 2006, Japan banned imports from North Korea (Hughes, 2009). Japan was left with one way to get North Korea to the table and negotiate the limited test and use of nuclear weapons. This one way is the promise of economic engagement. Between 2006 and 2008, Japan made an effort to engage North Korea (Smith, 2013). This engagement did not bode well with Japan’s citizens who thought that the Japanese government was playing nice to a government that had abducted and humiliated Japanese citizens. The problem faced by Japan is managing to engage North Korea and at the same time not looking like it is appeasing a state that is viewed as disrespectful to Japanese people.
Background
Japan’s political and economic interests in relation to North Korea have been historically shaped by its alliance with the South Korea and the United States. For the past two decades, Japan has tried to negotiate peace between North Korea and South Korea with little success. The direct negotiations have not limited North Korea’s perchance for launching missiles and testing nuclear weapons (Michishita, 1999). Sanctions have also had a limited influence on North Korea’s nuclear ambitions. Japan’s foreign policy towards North Korea has mainly been composed by a concerted effort towards limiting Pyongyang’s nuclear capabilities. The lukewarm reception to Japan’s negotiating hand by North Korea has forced Japan to maintain a standing military that is prepared to deal with the fragile North Korean situation.
Nuclear Policy
Denuclearization continues to be Japan’s main policy goal towards North Korea. This is a policy that has been pursued for decades and was illuminated in 2006 when North Korea made failed nuclear tests. The reaction to Pyongyang’s failed tests was to economic sanctions which helped constraint North Korea’s economy but also removed the capacity for direct leverage (Ministry of Defense, 2013). When Japan banned imports from North Korea and placed restrictions on North Koreans in Japan’s ability to send money back to North Korea, Pyongyang removed Japan from the list of countries it was able to directly negotiate with on issues that relates to the development of nuclear weapons. The effort to denuclearize North Korea has also been constrained by North Korea’s constant subjugation of Japan’s efforts as evidenced by the abduction of Japanese citizens in the 1970s and 1980s (Sachio, 2008).
Abductions
Together with denuclearization policy, abductions have also shaped Japan’s foreign policy towards Pyongyang. The issue of abductions goes back to the 1970s when North Korea is said to have abducted Japanese students and forced them to work as Japanese language instructors who were responsible for teaching Japanese to individuals to North Korea's secret service. Japanese president Koizumi travelling to North Korea in 2002 and 2004 where he helped with the release of some of the abductees but some remained which outraged Japanese people. The release of the abductees has limited Japan’s capacity for negotiation in the denuclearization efforts that involve the United Nations Security Council. Because of the abductions, Japan’s ability for compromise has been dented (Smith, 2016).
Military Exercises
The failure of diplomatic talks between North Korea and Japan has amped North Korea’s belligerence and evidenced by the Taepondong missile test. North Korea went on to provoke Japan by constantly entering Japanese waters. Japan was prompted to since a North Korean ship in 2001 as a way of defending its territories and limiting North Korea’s military activities close to Japanese land(Smith, 2013). The entering of Japanese water is less worrisome for Japan than the missile proliferation. Japan is argued to have spent more than $12 billion in the development of ballistic missile capability (Smith, 2012). The money is designed to aid with the response to the threat posed by North Korea. The latest missile test by North Korea conducted in 2016 forced Japan’s Minister of Defense to request funding for a new missile defense later known as the Thermal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD (Smith, 2013). .
Policy Options
Japan’s foreign policy towards North Korea has been defined by the evolving nuclear capabilities of North Korea, the sentiments of its local citizens and the reduced reliability of the United States engagement in the region. According to Smith (2013), North Korea’s nuclear proliferation and China’s growing military might in the region has made it difficult for Japan to continue relying on the United States’ deterrence capabilities. Policies geared towards dealing with North Korea have to take into considering the new role that China plays in the region (Sachio, 2008). China is North Korea’s only single reliable ally in the region and China’s military exercises in the South China Sea pose as much a threat as North Korea’s encroachment into Japanese waters.
Japan’s constitution is relatively pacifist and the activities of North Korea and China demands a more active military role. It is imperative that reliance on the United States and Western Europe alone will not be able to aid Japan in its dealing with North Korea. Measures like the Thermal High Altitude Area Defense is a step in the right direction in terms of maintain and reinforcing Japan’s military might. Japan’s citizens are also no longer comfortable with North Korea’s missile tests as well as China’s increased belligerence in the South China Sea.
Because it has become apparent that North Korea intends not to change its military exercises in the future, Japan needs to solidify its alliance with the United States. There are episodes in Japanese-US relations where interests did not align. A good example is in 2002 when American branded North Korea, “the axil of evil”. At this time, Japan tried to engage North Korea. While the United States was trying to punish North Korea for its uranium enrichment program, Japan tried to warm diplomatic engagement with Kim Jong-il with had disastrous effects since North Korea failed to release all Japanese abductees and make no changes to its nuclear program.
Recommendations
Japan has for decades tried to engage with North Korea to soften relations between the two countries. Driven by its pacifist agenda, Japan has historically failed to make North Korea act less belligerent. What Japan is left with is adopting policies that strengthen its alliance with the United States and impose sanctions on North Korea to reduce its economic capacity to produce dangerous missiles.
Military preparedness is important or Japan since it is evident that North Korea even with the change of leadership in 2002, is determined to be more provocative than ever before. Military preparedness is not geared toward dealing with North Korea alone but China. The Chinese mission to the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands which are under the administration of Japan shows that military preparedness is needed to deal with unprovoked encroachment.
Japan also has to use the United Nations Security Council as a place to address its concerns regarding the issue of North Korea. The North Korean problem is part of a larger regional problem that involves China and other small states. Japan’s effort to engage North Korea in the early 2000s infuriated South Korea which has always been under threat of a nuclear attack from North Korea. The pursuance of self-interest in the region is a recipe for a political and military disaster. Japan should not be pushing for regime change in a volatile state that have nuclear weapons. A diplomatic solution to the North Korean problem demands the involvement of all parties in the region rather than a one to one negotiation which has evidently failed.
References
Hughes, C. (2009). “Super-Sizing” the DPRK threat: Japan’s evolving military posture and North
Korea. Asian Survey 49, 2, 291-311.
Michishita, N. (1999). Alliances after peace in Korea. Survival 41, 3, 68-83.
Ministry of Defense, Japan. (2013). Korean Peninsula. Defense of Japan 2013.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Japan. (2002). Japan-DPRK Pyongyang Declaration. Retrieved from
http://www.kantei.go.jp/jp/tyokan/aso/2009/0410seimei.html.
Sachio, N. (2008). South Korea’s Paradigm Shift in North Korean Policy and Trilateral
Cooperation among the U.S., Japan and Korea. International Journal of Korean Unification Studies 17, 1, 41-61.
Smith, S. A. (2012) Japan and the East China Sea Dispute. Orbis 57, 3.
Smith, S. A. (2013). North Korea in Japan’s Strategic Thinking. Council on Foreign Relations 1,
2. Retrieved from http://www.cfr.org/japan/north-korea-japans-strategic-thinking/p31569
