□

CIIS Co-hosts International Conference on China-Japan-South Korea Security Cooperation

□Song Junying

On April 27-28, 2015, China Institute of International Studies (CIIS) and China Foundation for International Strategic Studies (CFISS) jointly hosted the “International Conference on China-Japan-South Korea Security Cooperation” in Beijing. Ruan Zongze, vice-president of CIIS, delivered the welcome remarks and Kong Xuanyou, director general of the Department of Asian Affairs at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of China, gave a keynote speech. Over 50 officials and scholars from China, Japan and the Republic of Korea attended the conference and engaged in heated discussions.

Security Situation in Northeast Asia

The participants agreed that the security situation in Northeast Asia remains complicated and sensitive. This region features a legacy of the Cold War, major power rivalry, historical discord, territorial disputes and rising nationalism. In contrast to most Chinese scholars who showed deep concern over the role of United States, and the alliance system it leads, most Japanese and Korean participants were worried about the possible risks stemming from China’s rise as a major power in the region.

Yoshinobu Yamamoto, professor of Niigata University of Japan raised three scenarios for a shift in power between China and the US in East Asia, namely semi-war, a peaceful shift and peaceful coexistence. From the perspective of Japan, he wanted China and the US to coexist without conflict, which would be conducive to regional stability and prosperity. Chang Jekuk, president of Dongseo University in Korea mentioned that China, Japan and the ROK are all striving to change the post-World War II order and during this transitory period the threecountries are susceptible to troubles and frictions.

Most participants admitted it is necessary to build a collective security mechanism across the region. As to the proposal of Chinese scholars to adopt the common, comprehensive, cooperative and sustainable security advocated by the New Asian Security Concept as the guiding principles for such a mechanism, most Japanese and Korean participants agreed with this, so long as the US is not excluded. To some extent they emphasized the positive aspects of the US-Japan alliance and US-ROK alliance. They also hoped China can give more detailed explanation of the New Asian Security Concept and in practice behave more constructively in accordance with its spirit.

Respective Defense Policies of the Three Countries

The participants introduced the de-fense policies of their respective countries.

Zhang Tuosheng, a senior strategic researcher from the CFISS pointed out that China’s defense policy can be termed as “active defense” in the context of a more general national strategy of peaceful development. Some other Chinese scholars also mentioned that China’s military modernization is for the purpose of peace and the protection of China’s lawful interests overseas. They pointed out that the increase in China’s defense budget is commensurate with its economic growth and has become more and more transparent, and that it has neither the capability nor intention of challenging the US’ role in the Asian Pacific, nor of changing the status quo in the East and South China seas. China attaches great importance to regional and international cooperation in both traditional and nontraditional security fields, and as a responsible stakeholder in regional and international affairs, China is ready to provide more and more public goods in security fields.

The Japanese participants contended that Japan’s defense policy has been peace-oriented since the end of WWII, and its peace orientation has never changed even though the Shinzo Abe government will lift the ban on exercising the right to collective selfdefense by reinterpreting the Japan’s Constitution, since the reinterpretation is justified by the great changes in both the internal and external environment of Japan. Abe is now pushing forward his security and foreign policy in the name of “Proactive Pacifism based on the Principle of International Cooperation”. Japanese participants made a high appraisal of the US-Japanalliance and deemed it a stabilizer and cornerstone of peace in the Asian Pacific. Some Japanese scholars added that during the current session of Diet, some security related laws will be amended and passed as a followup to regaining the right to collective self defense. The US and Japan will revise the guidelines for their defense cooperation to make this alliance more seamless and effective.

The Korean participants expressed worries about the developments in the North Korea nuclear issue and the rightist trend in Japanese politics. They said that geographically South Korea is situated at the buffer zone between major land powers and sea powers and is now faced with the threat from North Korea. This renders it necessary to maintain the US-ROK alliance as the priority of the ROK’s security policy.

The ROK government has advocated the “Northeast Asian Peace and Cooperation Initiative” since President Park Geun-hye came into office. This initiative is not only helpful for developing good relations with North Korea but also suggestive for building a regional security architecture. Recently, China-ROK cooperation has witnessed rapid pro-gress but it cannot be expected to reach the level of an alliance or semi-alliance. In order not to hurt relations with China, the ROK is hesitating to accept the THAAD system which the US is pressuring it to deploy. Relations between the ROK and Japan have been hurt by historical issues, but they have room for further cooperation on the North Korean nuclear program and other issues.

Challenges and Opportunities for CJK Security Cooperation

Almost all the participants admitted that the lack of mutual trust among the three countries is the main cause for the dearth of security cooperation. This lack of trust is both the cause and result of many other thorny problems such as historical issues, territorial disputes, rising nationalism, and worsening national sentiments. Many Chinese scholars stressed that the presence of the US and its alliance system is the main factor responsible for the lack of trilateral security cooperation. In contrast many Korean and Japanese participants argued that the US’ role is not necessarily a negative one. They believed that there is a way to enhance the security cooperation between the three countries without excluding the US.

Some Korean and Japanese scholars also pointed out that “China Threat” theory is very popular in the two countries and has a negative effect on trilateral cooperation. In response, Ruan Zongze, vice-president of the CIIS, suggested that three countries should abandon the mentality of“regarding each other as an enemy”and build a win-win relationship by making strategic reassurances. Some Korean scholars emphasized the importance of historical reconciliation between Japan and its neighboring countries. Cha Jae-bok, a researcher with the Northeast Asian History Foundation of South Korea, stressed that without national reconciliation between Japan and China and between Japan and South Korea, any kind of security cooperation among the three countries will be impossible.

The majority of the participants shared the opinion that even though there are many obstacles in the way of trilateral security cooperation, the three countries still have many opportunities. Kong Xuanyou, the director of the Department of Asian Affairs said that in the aftermath of the Foreign Ministers Meeting in March, trilateral cooperation has been put on the right track and should witness further progress especially this year, the 70th anniversary of the end of WWII. He also gave some suggestions for enhancing tri-lateral security cooperation, such as embracing the four principles of the New Asian Security Concept (namely common, comprehensive, cooperative, and sustainable security), properly dealing with the sensitive hot spot issues, jointly responding to non-traditional security challenges and pushing theconstruction of a regional security mechanism. Most Japanese and Korean participants appreciated what Kong suggested and were generally willing to accept the four principles of the New Asian Security Concept as the guiding principles for trilateral and even regional security cooperation. They responded positively to the proposed cooperation in non-traditional security, such as humanitarian assistance and disaster relief efforts, nuclear safety, counterterrorism, cyber security, navigational safety, maritime search and rescue, and UN peacekeeping missions. Many participants thought that cooperation in non-traditional security fields would be easier to achieve as it would be less sensitive, and the buildup of mutual trust through the process of cooperation in these areas would have spill-over effects on cooperation in traditional security fields.

As the starting point, many of the participants agreed that the three countries should begin consultations on building a crisis management mechanism. The Air Defense Identification Zones of the three countries overlap with one another and the activities of the aircraft and ships thus present the possibility of an incident. The three countries should work together to establish a code of conduct to prevent possible conflict. Japanese participants appreciated the progress in this direction between China and Japan to build such a mechanism and also proposed the multilateral Code for Unplanned Encounters at Sea (CUES), which was endorsed at the West Pacific Navy Symposium in Qingdao last year, can serve as reference. Some Korean scholars suggested that security dialogues be carried out regularly, and not only between government defense departments but also between defense universities and military research institutes. Some participants proposed a security dialogue can be attached to the three countries’ Leaders’ Summit or held independently or on the sidelines of other multilateral regimes such as the Shangri-la Dialogue or Xiangshan Forum.

Shigeo Iwatani, the secretarygeneral of China-Japan-ROK Trilateral Cooperation Secretariat expressed optimism about the prospects for security cooperation among the three countries. He proposed that Asian countries should learn from experience of European countries and create a collective security regime similar to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). If three countries make the first moves then an OSCE-like security regime can be created in a “CJK plus” manner.