Treat Korea just like Japan and Australia

Home > Opinion > Columns

Treat Korea just like Japan and Australia

Published: 03 Oct. 2023, 20:03

Ra Jong-yil
The author, a former ambassador to the UK, is a chair professor at Dongguk University.

When U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell visited Korea in February 2003 as a member of the congratulatory delegation for the inauguration of then-President Roh Moo-hyun, he spoke highly of Korea’s accomplishments in a private meeting. I responded that if anyone deserved to be praised, it was the U.S. soldiers in the country, who have been an integral part of our national security.

Over the past 70 years since the signing of the Korean War Armistice in July 1953, the path to industrialization and democratization would have been much more difficult without the Korea-U.S. alliance. This is not just a matter of security. A country that focuses on preparing for war is not only economically burdened, but is also prone to militarism in social and cultural terms. That alliance has relieved this burden. Thanks to the relative composure, Korea has been able to achieve rapid development in political, economic, social and cultural fields.

To Powell’s comment, I added some words at that time. “Korea’s development has had a profound impact on world history. In particular, the success of the 1988 Seoul Olympics sent a shock wave through the former Eastern Bloc,” I said. “Communist regimes around the world collapsed or reorganized quickly. I confirmed this through my meetings with high-ranking officials, influential scholars and ordinary people from the former Communist countries. In particular, Mikhail Gorbachev’s closest aides confessed that they could have the courage to say what they long wanted to say especially after the 1988 Seoul Olympic Games.”

But the past is not all about happy stories. In March 1950, the Korean government sent three lawmakers to the United States. National Assembly Speaker Shin Ik-hui and two legislators — Reps. Ra Yong-kyun and Lee Hoon-koo — were accompanied by National Assembly secretary general Lee Jong-sun. At the time, it was very difficult to send such a delegation to the U.S. Before their departure, President Syngman Rhee pleaded with them to deliver the following message to the U.S. officials. “The situation in South Korea is very tense. North Korea is well on its way to preparing for war, but we are far behind in training troops and getting equipment. Please do your best to get the United States to pay special attention and help us with our armaments.”

In fact, the security situation on the Korean Peninsula was very serious after the withdrawal of U.S. troops after the announcement of the Acheson line the year before. Disappointment and concern were growing over the complacent — and sometimes dismissive — attitude of the U.S. Military Advisory Group and U.S. Ambassador to Korea John Muccio toward Korea’s security. Under such circumstances, Korean lawmakers met with U.S. Secretary of State Dean Acheson and other officials during their visit to Washington to explain the situation on the Korean Peninsula and to request military assistance, but they received no response.

The Korean delegation explained that President Rhee was only calling for marching northward to reunify the two Koreas, in consideration of the morale of the people, and that the president actually had no intention of attacking the North, which was supported by China and the Soviet Union. But the Americans were not interested. Two months after their disappointing return home, the Korean War broke out on June 25, 1950. The South Korean and U.S. militaries sacrificed a lot in the early stages of the three-year war when they had to face the well-prepared North Korean troops. This is a good example of the real consequence of politicians’ misjudgments and also a significant warning for the future.

There is also a negative side of the success in national security over the past seven decades. The public’s insensitivity to national security, ironically, is a negative consequence of solid security. Recently, there have been serious disagreements about security, especially over North Korea. While disagreements have their own function, the country is nearly split over ideology to the point that it is impossible to have a rational discussion.

Despite repeated promises, mistrust and skepticism over U.S. security commitments remain. For instance, some say that U.S. security commitments are often not honored when the administration changes. Others say that the U.S. agreed to supply nuclear-powered submarines to Australia, but not to South Korea which has to confront the nuclear threats from North Korea. Some also say that the United States will not give South Korea the same level of agreement as Japan on nuclear issues, such as the enrichment and storage of nuclear materials.

Despite official statements from Seoul and Washington, such concerns are being shared by many security experts and the general public. In the end, it comes down to the question of whether the United States will treat Korea on the same level as its other allies. In the aftermath of the Korea-U.S. and Korea-U.S.-Japan summits, the most urgent issue is to convince Washington of the reality that the Korea-U.S. alliance is as important as the U.S.’s relations with Japan and Australia, and that Korea is no longer a peripheral country of the free world.

Translation by the Korea JoongAng Daily staff.