Ishiba could be challenging counterpart For Korea

During the past decade or so, when the hardline conservative factions of Japan's Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) were competing to incite anti-Korean sentiment, Shigeru Ishiba, Japan's next prime minister, was one of the few politicians who sought to understand Korea. In a past lecture, Ishiba reportedly said, "What if Japan were occupied by another country and from today, you were told, 'Your name is now Smith'?" This distinguishes him from former Prime Minister Abe, who said in his 2015 statement, "Let's not impose the burden of apology on future generations," effectively brushing off Japan's responsibility as the aggressor.

However, he spoke his mind without worrying about others' opinions and declared that his first act after taking office was establishing an "Asian version of NATO." Although he did not previously participate in the "Korea bashing," he now appears unconcerned with breaking past taboos. He is determined to speak his mind, regardless of U.S. caution about getting overly involved in East Asia or China’s pressure to expand its maritime presence. By openly advocating for the introduction of nuclear weapons, he seems poised to abandon Japan’s 60-year-old "three non-nuclear principles" — not to produce, possess, or allow nuclear weapons into the country.

The "master of diplomacy," Prime Minister Kishida, who served as foreign minister for four years and seven months, is different from Shigeru Ishiba, a "defense expert" who has held key defense-related positions three times. For Korea, Ishiba could be a more challenging counterpart. What if the upcoming Ishiba administration takes a bold, forward-looking stance on historical issues while simultaneously proposing participation in a collective defense system? Could Korea selectively cooperate on historical reconciliation while stepping back from the "Asian NATO"? Would the U.S., which stations its forces in Korea, be willing to accept such a move?

Korea now faces a challenge of an entirely different magnitude. Japan has elected a leader who, while the U.S. struggles with two fronts—Ukraine and the Middle East—seeks to leverage this situation and propose establishing an Asian collective security system centered around the U.S.-Japan alliance. Meanwhile, Korea is left with limited options: a current government with an overly naive understanding of Japan, and an opposition party that simplistically suggests “just saying thank you to both China and Taiwan.” One wonders if Korean politicians are even aware that many citizens, watching a political scene that seems oblivious to the gravity of the situation, are breaking out in a cold sweat.