hankyoreh

Nam Ki-jeong, professor at the Institute for Japanese Studies at Seoul National University. (Hankyoreh archives)

“The victims of Japan’s compulsory mobilization are elderly and don’t have much time left. I think we could have an open-minded discussion about how to fund compensation as long as the defendant companies offer an apology,” said Nam Ki-jeong, a professor at the Institute for Japanese Studies at Seoul National University, during a telephone interview with the Hankyoreh on Aug. 12.

“We need to be discussing a specific plan that can satisfy historical justice, political reality, and judicial procedure,” Nam said when asked about the issue of compensating Koreans for forced labor during the Japanese colonial occupation, the biggest issue currently affecting South Korea-Japan relations.

“The Japanese government effectively admitted to UNESCO back in 2015 that forced labor had occurred and promised an international audience that it would take the issue seriously. I think that Japanese companies could apologize in line with that,” Nam said.

Nam is an expert in geopolitics and Japanese politics and foreign policy who studied under Haruki Wada, professor emeritus at Tokyo National University and one of Japan’s leading progressive intellectuals.

Hankyoreh (Hani): Nippon Steel immediately appealed a South Korean court order for its assets in Korea to be seized and liquidated. That’s the first action the company has taken after studiously ignoring the judicial process.

Nam Ki-jeong (Nam): It’s significant that Nippon Steel has gotten involved in South Korea’s judicial process, but it’s still going to take some time before the assets are actually liquidated. Japan appears to be hesitant about the retribution it would be forced to take if the assets are actually liquidated. So Japan means to drag out the process, which is frustrating for the elderly victims.

Hani: Looking back, this whole issue could have been avoided if the Japanese companies had just paid the compensation as ordered by the South Korean Supreme Court’s decision. The issue blew up when the Japanese government intervened because of its 1965 claims agreement with South Korea.

Nam: Japan’s superficial justification for protecting its companies is because compensation might unleash a flood of other lawsuits by victims of compulsory mobilization. But separately from that, I think Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s national strategy has also had an impact. Japan has grown even more dependent on its alliance with the US amid the military rise of China and the growing sophistication of North Korea’s nuclear arsenal. Japan’s fundamental strategy is to play the role of international leader alongside the US amid threats from China, North Korea, and Russia, and it wanted South Korea to play along.

But South Korea-Japan relations have been damaged by the comfort women issue and the Supreme Court’s ruling about compensation for forced labor victims. Furthermore, South Korean President Moon Jae-in’s active pursuit of inter-Korean reconciliation and cooperation seems to have convinced Japan that the US, South Korea and Japan can’t all go down the same path. I think this has led to a vicious cycle in which pushing away South Korea causes Japan to rely more heavily on its alliance with the US and bolstering that alliance causes it to push South Korea even further away.

Hani: If the assets are liquidated to implement the ruling on forced labor, even if that doesn’t happen right away, it’s likely to trap South Korea and Japan into a cycle of reprisals.

Nam: I think that Japan’s retaliation for liquidation will be limited. When Japan tightened export controls on South Korea last year, there were elements in place for an economic rebound, including the Tokyo Olympics. But since Japan is in a very difficult situation because of COVID-19, it’s not likely to impose economic measures against South Korea. Furthermore, blatant retaliation probably wouldn’t sit well with the international community.

Hani: To be honest, there are some doubts in South Korea about whether it really needs to repair relations with Japan.

Nam: As the US and China’s dispute intensifies amid the COVID-19 pandemic, the two powers aren’t playing their usual leadership role. The current chaos means that the US and China might become more aggressive in the future. But I think this is actually an opportunity for middle powers to create a new international order. Middle power diplomacy consists of like-minded countries coming together to set up agendas and networks to counterbalance superpowers. It would be very difficult for South Korea to set up a middle power network that doesn’t include Japan, which has played a leading role in setting up such networks.

Relations with Japan are also important for making real progress on dismantling sanctions on North Korea and inter-Korean economic cooperation. Japan still has considerable diplomatic clout in the international community. What that means is Japan could disrupt [the Korean Peninsula Peace Process] by mobilizing its traditional cooperative relationships not only with the Washington mainstream in the US but also with Germany, France, and the UK to toughen economic sanctions against the North.

Hani: Many people say we need to find a solution to the forced labor issue. But there doesn’t seem to be any option that would satisfy both South Korean victims and the Japanese government.

Nam: The victims of Japan’s compulsory mobilization are elderly and don’t have much time left. We have to find a way. In terms of historical justice, the defendant companies [such as Nippon Steel] need to apologize to the victims. In that regard, we need to look at the remarks the Japanese government made to UNESCO in 2015. When Hashima Island (also called Battleship Island) and other early modern industrial sites in Japan were registered as a UNESCO world heritage, the Japanese government acknowledged that Koreans and people of other ethnicities were “brought against their will” and “forced to work” and promised an international audience that it would take the issue seriously.

Based on that understanding, the Japanese government needs to open the door for defendant companies to apologize to the victims. I think we could have an open-minded discussion about how to fund compensation as long as the defendant companies offer an apology. For instance, one approach that could be considered is having a foundation raise funds to compensate the victims at the final stage of a judicial process of plaintiff-defendant reconciliation and allowing the defendant companies to voluntarily donate funds as part of that reconciliation.

By Kim So-youn, staff reporter

Please direct comments or questions to [english@hani.co.kr]