[Yang Nak-gyu's Defence Club] Is It Now an Alliance with Japan?

Trilateral Summit of Korea, US, and Japan: Political Commitment to 'Joint Threat Cooperation'
Mutual Defense Treaties Like the Korea-US Alliance Exclude the US
Military Alliance Among Korea, US, and Japan Impossible Due to Korea-Japan Conflict

South Korea, the United States, and Japan have agreed to strengthen cooperation against the North Korean nuclear and missile threats. While some analyses suggest that the trilateral relationship is effectively being elevated to a 'quasi-alliance,' from a purely military perspective, this is not quite the case.

[Image source=Yonhap News]

On the 18th (local time), the leaders of South Korea, the U.S., and Japan adopted the 'Commitment to Consult' outlining cooperation measures against common threats. Accordingly, if security threats or crises arise in the Indo-Pacific region, including North Korea's nuclear and missile threats, the three countries are expected to consult and strengthen cooperation in devising response measures.

However, this commitment does not infringe upon the existing commitments of the South Korea-U.S. alliance or the U.S.-Japan alliance, nor does it create new rights or obligations under international or domestic law. It is merely a political promise.

Notably, the trilateral commitment lacks the core elements of an alliance, such as a mutual defense treaty. The South Korea-U.S. alliance has lasted 70 years based on the 'Mutual Defense Treaty between the United States and the Republic of Korea' signed in 1953, while the U.S.-Japan alliance is grounded in the 'Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the United States and Japan' signed in 1951. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Charter Article 5, a key element of NATO, is a multilateral mutual defense treaty stipulating that an attack on one member is considered an attack on all, prompting collective response.

The 'Commitment to Consult' also differs from an alliance in that it includes the condition 'when provocations are perceived to directly affect each party's interests.' A presidential office official explained this commitment as follows: "If specific provocations occur inside or outside the region, and each of the three countries believes it directly affects their interests, they will exchange information, coordinate messages, and jointly discuss response measures."

Some argue that unless historical conflicts between South Korea and Japan are resolved, a South Korea-U.S.-Japan alliance is practically impossible. The government also holds a skeptical view about whether the current cooperative relationship with Japan can evolve into an alliance. Alliances require sharing operational plans and conducting joint exercises within each other's sovereign spaces, but considering the historical issues and public sentiment between South Korea and Japan, such a level of military cooperation seems unlikely.

Additionally, concerns arise that South Korea could become unintentionally entangled if Japan engages in territorial disputes with China over the Senkaku Islands (known as Diaoyu Dao in Chinese). Furthermore, in the event of a contingency on the Korean Peninsula, the possibility of Japan Self-Defense Forces' involvement raises numerous complex issues that need to be carefully considered.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.