As China and South Korea keep in step with each other in their persistent efforts to criticize Japan, it is at least possible to understand the Chinese motives. Obviously, the primary objective of the Communist Party is to increase its power by making Japan look like the adversary that all Chinese must detest, thereby lessening criticism against the party itself.

　　　Much harder to understand is the motives behind South Korean President Park Geun-hye’s criticism of Japan. At a time when the military threat from the North is more real than ever, it is difficult to comprehend what merits there may be in Seoul’s efforts to align itself more closely with China, which supports the North and has steadily been making efforts to put the entire Korean Peninsula under its sphere of influence. In point of fact, Seoul must understand that it has only two reliable allies to turn to—Washington and Tokyo—in case of a conflict.

　　　I recently had a chance to discuss President Park’s confrontational foreign policy towards Japan with Mr. Hong Hyong—formerly a minister for the South Korean Embassy in Tokyo and now chief editorial writer for One Korea Daily News, a Japanese-language daily published by pro-Seoul Koreans in Japan. He was recently a guest on a weekly internet TV show I host, entitled “Your Small Step Will Change Japan’s Tomorrow.”

　　　In analyzing Park’s policies, Hong believes the South Korean president has her hands full just trying to manage current affairs, hoping that things don’t worsen, and is in no position to look after the longer term interests of her country. He feels, however, that Park alone should not be blamed for the nation’s mounting problems, describing it as the negative legacy left behind by three successive “leftwing” presidents—Kim Young-sam, Kim Dae-jung, and Roh Moo-hyung.

　　　Their reconciliatory policies towards the North have emboldened Pyongyang to feel very confident in the event of an armed conflict with the South, explains Hong, stating:

　　　“I feel that Kim Jong-un has completed preparations for a war against the South, having absolute confidence in his military and feeling that the North would be overwhelmingly victorious in any such conflict.”

　　　Why is it that the North, whose shabby policies have reduced it to a desperately deprived nation, can feel so confident about any potential conflict with the South? On this, Hong has this to say:

　　　“It is obvious that in conventional warfare the North would have no chance against South Korea or the US, which have all of the latest state-of-the art weaponry and equipment. However, I think the North believes it would be able to win by forestalling South Korea and the US in an ‘asymmetric’ war aimed at pinpointing the weak or blind points of its adversaries.

“1 against 2,351” Struggle

　　　An asymmetric war is not conventional warfare, implying the use of terrorist tactics and guerilla fighting. The North would likely resort to such measures as preemptive strikes using chemical or nuclear weapons, or cyber warfare. The North could also be expected to turn the whole of the southern half of the Korean Peninsula into a hard-fought battlefield. Between March and April this year, three North Korean surveillance drones crashed in South Korean territory, with one of them having infiltrated Seoul City, flying barely 300 meters above the Cheongwadae presidential residence (the Blue House) to take a total of 193 photos.

　　　Had the drones carried chemical weapons and dropped them from the air, South Korea would have undoubtedly been thrown into total chaos. Hong further points out:

　　　“Although it is a fact that the South had failed to enforce territorial air defense measures as it had not expected the North to use the drones, the fortunate thing is that those drones were small and of limited capacity. But then, the North has an overwhelming advantage over the South when it comes to cyber warfare. Cyber attacks on the South are a daily affair, more than 3,000 computers at the Agency for Defense Development (ADD) having been hacked just last month.

　　　“ADD is the central organization for South Korea’s military research and development, including new weaponry. Naturally, its computers are not connected to the Internet, despite which a massive amount of military secrets have been stolen. And yet the South is unable to retaliate for the theft, because the North is far from a computer-controlled society.”

　　　According to Hong, the US-South Korean military alliance will be seen only as a “paper tiger” so long as the North regards asymmetric warfare as its key strategy. There is yet another factor that gives the North a reason for its confidence—the presence of pro-Pyongyang forces that haunt the hub of the South Korean government.

　　　It has been widely pointed out that sympathizers of Pyongyang have become ominously entrenched in the inner core of the South’s three branches of government. For instance, 61 of its total of 300 legislators have been found guilty at least once of crimes such as treason. This means that 20 percent of South Korea’s National Assembly members have been found guilty of plotting to ruin their mother country.

　　　One of them—Lee Seok-ki of the Unified Progressive Party—was found to have attended clandestine meetings to discuss which government offices should be occupied and which arms depots should be attacked to procure weapons in case of a popular uprising. But the National Assembly has yet to deal with Lee, despite the fact that he was convicted of this serious crime against his mother country. Today, Lee still holds his seat

　　　“Pro-Pyongyang forces have penetrated deep into the legislature,” warns Hong. “The situation is the same with the judiciary and the executive branch. The North has three objectives—abolition of the national security law, disbanding of the National Intelligence Agency, and forced withdrawal of US forces from Korea.”

　　　If and when these three goals are attained, South Korea will turn into a paradise for North Korean spies and operatives in which to operate at will. This, I am sure, the people of South Korea understand. But I seriously wonder why they do not counter this disastrous direction that South Korean politics is taking. “That boils down to a ‘struggle of ‘1 against 2,351,’” asserts Hong.

“The President Is Not Everything”

　　　There are at present a total of 2,352 high schools in the South, with eight different types of government-authorized history textbooks available. Seven of these textbooks treat communism and socialism in laudatory terms, and all high schools except one across the South have chosen from among the seven for their students. Comments Hong:

　　　“Only one high school in the South has chosen the one textbook remaining that contains an accurate recounting of Korean history. The seven other textbooks refer to former President Syngman Rhee (1985-1965) as a “dictator” while positioning Kim Il-sung and Kim Jong-il as great leaders. While denouncing the South’s free economy, they refrain from criticizing the dilapidated economy of the North. Disdaining the South as a colony of the US, they never criticize how the leadership manages the North’s state affairs. “

　　　One would assume that, by objectively observing the realities of both Koreas, it could easily be understood that the South is far more normal and successful than the North. And yet, due to the dreadful effects that biased education can have on students, what is understood generally as the truth becomes extremely difficult to comprehend.

　　　As noted above, President Park has her hands full just trying to manage her nation’s current affairs and can do little to look to the future of the nation. However, conservative elements in the South, such as Hong, believe that as circumstances change a future administration will be forced to render the critical decisions that need to be made.

　　　“When the moment comes,” warns Hong, “the leader at the time will have to make some major decisions. The occasion may be when the North deploys nuclear missiles, or next year when the combined US-South Korea Forces Command will be dissolved, or when a civil war instigated by pro-Pyongyang elements erupts in the South. In any event, we are talking not about the distant future, but the near future. When this time comes, the president in office will be forced to make these major decisions—even if it is President Park.”

　　　Hong further adds: “Today, President Obama is criticized as being weak-kneed in his foreign policy. However, Obama is not everything that the US stands for. By the same token, Park isn’t everything South Korea stands for.

　　　“In the same way that Europe took several decades to overcome the Cold War, I am convinced that we must by all means have the determination to surmount what remains of the Cold War here in Asia as well as other on-going confrontations in the region. Such an awareness is what I believe all of us in Asia must share today.”

　　　President Park’s stance against Japan is not easy to accept, but I feel we must also be very mindful of the fact that making serious efforts to influence South Korea to move away from her anti-Japan rhetoric will also be in our own national interest.

(Translated from “Renaissance Japan” column no. 604 in the April 24, 2014 issue of The Weekly Shincho)