November 29, 2023 - 1:00pm
After a four-year hiatus, the leaders of Japan, South Korea and China look set to meet in a summit, to be held “at the earliest possible time”. This has been seen by some as a possible sign of a thaw in the relationship and a welcome piece of positive geopolitical news.
Japan and South Korea are united in their desire to prod China, North Korea’s chief sponsor, do more to rein in its unpredictable ward. Following the recent satellite launch by the North Koreans, South Korea suspended a military agreement and Japan urged China to enforce UN resolutions against North Korea, citing recent compliance issues.
For China’s part, the motivation is probably the slowdown in its economy and a consequent desire for greater trade cooperation. China may also be hoping to drive a wedge between South Korea/Japan and the US, with a long-term view towards a possible second Trump presidency and the potential resumption of a trade war.
But while China won’t relish that, it may not be too unhappy if Trump picks up where he left off with his dealings with Pyongyang. Although his “blunderbuss” diplomacy may have appeared comical at times (he dubbed Kim Jong Un “little rocket man”) it could be argued that it was relatively effective — North Korea was markedly quieter during the Trump years. China would also be happy to see an end to the war in Ukraine with a compromise outcome that would be seen as favourable for Russia, as appears to be Trump’s plan — even if his “24-hour” pledge seems unlikely to be fulfilled.
As for Japan and South Korea, both countries will be monitoring the US election in 2024 closely and wondering what the outcome could mean for their security, thus doing what they can now to improve relations with China at a time of uncertainty makes sense. Japan, under Shinzo Abe, had a close relations with Trump (Republican presidents are always favoured in Tokyo) and the two seemed to have a rapport.
That’s unlikely to be replicated under the more Left-leaning technocratic Fumio Kishida but relations are likely (should Trump win) to be cordial because Trump loves Japan. His relationship with South Korea was more fractious, with wrangles over the cost of US bases, but his negotiations with the North Korean leader in 2018 boosted his popularity.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeThe prevailing western approach to diplomacy can best be summarised as: ‘if we’re nice to them they’ll be nice to us’. They won’t. Trump understands that.
The Western elite is incredibly stupid due to its arrogance. They seriously can’t believe that those with whom they deal may be driven by completely different motives. This fact (the difference in motives) is quite understandable to the average Westerner, since he learned it from his own, often sad, experience, but it is completely inaccessible to almost any Ivy League graduate, brought up on the theory of rational choice, but at the same time not seeing point-blank that his own behavior is determined by completely different factors
As a fully paid up member of the Western elite I can confirm my stupidity and arrogance.
What you going to do about it?
As in his withdrawal deal with the Taliban which his administration signed? Or the footsie he played with Putin whilst doing zilch to ready Ukraine for what was coming? And how much did he do to arm Taiwan and deter potential invasion? In fact almost the opposite might be argued with his more isolationist rhetoric.
The Totalitarians all rooting for Trump in 24.
Rather a weak response I think.
The problem wasn’t the deal but the way it was ultimately implemented by the Biden administration.
It wasn’t ‘coming’ until Biden told the Russians that a ‘small incursion’ wouldn’t be a problem.
Trump actually strengthened the US policy of ‘strategic ambivalence’ towards Taiwan in may ways, in particular by announcing that he didn’t recognise the ‘One China’ policy followed by his predecessors.
The Biden administration has completely weaponised the US state bureaucracy against its opponents and you think someone else is the totalitarian?
Factually incorrect HB.
Biden delayed the withdrawal. The intelligence was hugely faulty and had been developed under Trump admin. No getting away from fact he signed the deal with Taliban.
You’ve no basis whatsoever for contention Biden told Putin he could take some of Ukraine. Please highlight your source for that.
On Taiwan it is true Trump changed some of the China policy, but he did nothing to better arm Taiwan. And arming them is what will be a proper deterrent. Truth is he thought it didn’t matter. The Bi-partisan Congressional cmtee on China v critical of this failure. Biden’s not yet done enough either IMO.
This issue is not whether the US was going to withdraw, but how the withdrawal was executed – and that was Biden’s failure. As you well know.
Go to youTube and seach on ‘biden minor incursion’ FFS. It’s all there in technicolour. As you well know. If you must lie through your teeth, at least try to make your fictions plausible.
The last paragraph is the most desperate of all. Trump didn’t follow your policy on Tawan? Give us a break.
What Trump understood, which the Biden administration doesn’t, is the importance of deterrence. As Sun Tzu says the most successful war is the one that is never fought. Love him or hate him, his international relations were largely positive and, in some cases, prescient.
What Trump understood which the Biden administration doesn’t, is the importance of deterrance. As Sun Tzu tells us the most successful war is the one that is never fought.
Trump failed to arm Ukraine and Taiwan, and signed the deal to withdraw from Afghanistan. His cosying up to Putin sent all the wrong messages. And whilst his administration did strengthen the Western course-correction on the malign influence and intent of the CCP he didn’t sign through what was needed to ready Taiwan.
To be fair his administration did push harder at Iran. (Probably couldn’t see the potential for some Trump Towers anytime soon in downtown Tehran perhaps). But whilst Biden/Blinken had to remove some apologists for Tehran before fully engaging with the reality of the challenge, one out of three ain’t great.
Reshoring isn’t isolationist, and neither is imposing fiscal discipline (reducing spend on lots of things, including the military).
I believe Trump will push for the former. I believe the latter will be a side-effect, welcome, but not an objective.
Of course there will be any number of foreign powers that will believe that this will benefit them.
If I was at TSMC, I would be asking myself if I want to be Taiwanese, first, or if i want to be the rest of the acronym. If it’s the latter, then reducing risk means moving at least some operations away from Taiwan, and maybe doing it at a steep discount, if Trump will pay for it, to get a win.
Think TSMC is c$500billion operation. I think US now driving a £50b re-shoring strategy. But you can see from the numbers this ain’t going to transform reliance quickly.
Reducing risk means rapidly helping turn Taiwan into the proverbial porcupine and giving US defence contractors longer term order books
This would’ve been nice to have as a full article. Maybe it’s just me but I’m not seeing a convincing connection between the title and the article itself.
Xi, Putin & Kim Wrong-Un will all be delighted with a Trump Presidency. If that doesn’t tell us something fundamental nothing will.
Of course China would welcome a Trump presidency.
Why wouldn’t they want a moronic blowhard in charge of their greatest rival?