South Korea and Japan Shift Focus to Economic and Cultural Cooperation

In May 2026, Andong was more than just a provincial city; it became a new symbol in Northeast Asian diplomacy. Under the river breeze and the lights of the Seonyujul Fire Festival in Hahoe Village, President Lee Jae-myung and Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi sent a message to the world that the South Korea-Japan relationship is moving beyond a history defined by past wounds and conflicts to a strategic partnership focused on mutual survival and prosperity.
 
The summit centered on five key areas: institutionalizing supply chain and energy security cooperation, fully establishing shuttle diplomacy, expanding cooperation in AI and advanced technologies, exploring the potential for a civilian-centered cultural and tourism community, and reaching a realistic consensus on moving towards future-oriented cooperation while managing historical issues.
 
This summit was particularly significant given the backdrop of the Middle East crisis, risks in the Strait of Hormuz, U.S.-China strategic competition, and the close ties among North Korea, China, and Russia. The two countries have entered an era where they can no longer conduct diplomacy solely based on past emotions. We are now in a time of hyper-complex crises where energy, supply chains, AI, security, finance, and technology are interconnected.
 
President Lee emphasized a "peaceful Korean Peninsula without the need for conflict," while Prime Minister Takaichi spoke about the importance of "free and safe navigation in the Strait of Hormuz." These statements were not mere diplomatic rhetoric; they reflected a recognition of the instability in the current Northeast Asian and Indo-Pacific order.
 
The world is entering three major wars: the first is military, with the Ukraine conflict and Middle Eastern wars entering a prolonged phase; the second is a technological war, as U.S.-China competition over AI, semiconductors, quantum computing, and space industries resembles a new Cold War; and the third is a supply chain war, where competition for securing LNG, crude oil, rare earths, food, and battery minerals has become a matter of national security.
 
In this context, South Korea and Japan have an economic structure that is too intertwined to afford conflict. South Korea excels in memory semiconductors, batteries, shipbuilding, and advanced manufacturing, while Japan is strong in materials, components, precision machinery, basic science, and financial systems. The two nations are competitors yet mutually dependent; instability in one would severely impact the other.
 
A notable aspect of the summit was the discussion on 'oil and LNG swaps.' This is not just an energy transaction but can be seen as an initial model for a South Korea-Japan energy security community. Japan possesses world-class LNG storage capacity and strategic reserve systems, while South Korea has top-tier refining, petrochemical, and shipbuilding infrastructure. If the two countries institutionalize a joint energy reserve system and emergency swap framework, they could significantly mitigate shocks from the Middle East.
 
In fact, this summit demonstrated the potential for a new Asian supply chain order beyond mere bilateral diplomacy. Prime Minister Takaichi's proposal for "resource supply chain cooperation with other Asian countries" is highly strategic, hinting at a new economic security network connecting South Korea, Japan, ASEAN, India, and Australia.

 
 U.S. leadership has weakened compared to the past. The Trump administration operated on a strict America First basis. China is expanding both its economic and military power, while Russia is strengthening its strategic alliance with China, and North Korea is enhancing its nuclear and missile capabilities. In this situation, turning away from each other would be a burden for both South Korea and Japan.
 
In this sense, the summit was akin to 'diplomacy for survival.' While past South Korea-Japan summits oscillated between historical issues and emotional conflicts, this meeting approached the realities of supply chains, energy, AI, and security.
 
Another noteworthy aspect is 'regional diplomacy.' The expansion of diplomacy from Seoul and Tokyo to Gyeongbuk and Andong is not just a simple event; it signifies a shift from capital-centered diplomacy to regional, cultural, and lifestyle diplomacy. In fact, annual people-to-people exchanges between the two countries have already reached around 13 million. The younger generation no longer views the other country solely as an adversary but as a space for travel, content, employment, entrepreneurship, culture, and tourism.
 
K-pop and Japanese anime, Korean dramas, and Japanese hot spring culture have more potential for fusion than conflict. The South Korea-Japan relationship must evolve beyond government-centered diplomacy to a civilian-centered economic, cultural, and tourism community.
 
For instance, a Northeast Asia tourism belt connecting Busan, Fukuoka, Osaka, and Jeju, a joint fund for AI startups, youth exchange entrepreneurship programs, a joint graduate school for semiconductors, and collaborative space development projects are all feasible agendas. Just as Europe moved beyond its history of war to create the EU, Northeast Asia can also start with small economic and cultural communities.
 
President Lee's emphasis on AI cooperation during the summit is also significant. AI is not merely an industry; it is a core technology that will determine national competitiveness and the future of civilization. The U.S. dominates platforms and capital, while China controls market size and manufacturing bases. South Korea and Japan must create a new Northeast Asian AI model that combines technology, culture, precision manufacturing, and content.
 
If South Korea's semiconductors combine with Japan's materials, equipment, and basic technologies, they could achieve global competitiveness. Particularly in the AI era, new joint norms regarding data privacy and digital ethics, as well as responses to transnational scam crimes, are becoming increasingly important. The discussion of cooperation between the police agencies of both countries to combat scam crimes was part of this trend.
 
However, significant obstacles remain. Historical issues are the most sensitive flashpoints. The comfort women issue, forced labor, and the Dokdo dispute can resurface at any time. The rise of historical revisionism among right-wing political forces in Japan remains serious. Additionally, there are recurring trends within South Korea to politically exploit anti-Japanese sentiments.
 
Yet, both countries must now shift from the politics of emotion to the politics of survival. This does not mean forgetting history; rather, to properly remember history, they must design a future together. The Confucian principle of empathy, thinking from the other's perspective, and the long-standing Chinese diplomatic principle of seeking common ground while reserving differences are needed.

 
 South Korea also needs to engage in sober self-reflection. Both progressives and conservatives have at times used the Japan issue as a tool in domestic politics. Conservatives have tried to overly suppress historical issues under the guise of security, while progressives have politicized historical issues excessively. A more mature sense of balance is now necessary.
 
First, historical issues should be addressed with principles but should not be allowed to devolve into emotional agitation. Second, economic, scientific, and technological cooperation should be approached from the perspective of survival for future generations. Third, youth exchanges should be expanded to the level of national strategy. Fourth, practical cooperation centered on local governments and private enterprises should be strengthened. Fifth, cooperation on joint norms and data privacy in the AI era should be institutionalized.
 
Most importantly, there needs to be a change in the perception of the citizens of both countries. The future of South Korea-Japan relations cannot be completed solely through summits between political leaders. A culture of understanding and respect must be built in the daily lives of the people. Tourism, food, arts, sports, youth exchanges, and academic cooperation will be the strongest foundations for long-term peace.
 
Additionally, the future of South Korea-Japan relations cannot be completed solely through economics and security. The deep spiritual culture and long history of dialogue between the two countries must also be considered.
 
Japan has a tradition of Shintoism. Unlike religions built around a single absolute scripture like the Bible or Buddhist texts, Shintoism has shaped the Japanese worldview and sense of community through texts like the "Kojiki" and "Nihon Shoki," as well as ritual texts called "Norito." The Shinto worldview, which values nature, ancestors, and local communities, forms a deep foundation of contemporary Japanese culture.
 
Korea has the spiritual world of the "Cheonbu-gyeong." The idea that heaven, earth, and humanity exist in harmony within a single order connects to the Korean view of life, sense of community, and the spirit of Hongik Ingan. While Shinto emphasizes harmony with nature and community, the Cheonbu-gyeong embodies the philosophy that humanity and the universe must coexist within a single order.
 
Though the spiritual cultures of the two countries differ, they share significant commonalities. Both ask how humans should live within nature and how to coexist harmoniously within a community, suggesting deep possibilities for dialogue.
 
In fact, South Korea and Japan have not only clashed throughout their long history. From the exchanges between Baekje and Wa, Buddhism and writing, architecture and crafts, ceramics and music, to industrial and cultural exchanges in modern times, the two nations have both inflicted wounds on each other and reflected each other as mirrors.

 
 What is now needed is not the oblivion of the past but mature dialogue that looks at the past correctly while opening the future together. History must not be forgotten, but neither should it be the sole focus. Japan needs to reinterpret the Shinto respect for nature and community spirit in contemporary language, while Korea should reinterpret the harmony and spirit of Hongik in today's terms.
 
On this foundation, the two countries should grow together in AI, semiconductors, energy, supply chains, culture, tourism, youth exchanges, and regional diplomacy. Thus, the Andong summit holds significance beyond a mere meeting of leaders. It poses a historical question of whether South Korea and Japan can move from past emotions to a future of civilization.
 
The Seonyujul Fire Festival in Hahoe Village scatters sparks over the river. The sparks may seem to scatter for a moment, but ultimately they reconnect on the water's surface. Perhaps this is a metaphor for the current state of South Korea-Japan relations. Despite numerous conflicts and wounds, geography, history, economy, and culture are ultimately bringing the two nations back together.
 
South Korea and Japan can no longer cling solely to memories of past hostilities, given the significant changes in the international order. In the era of U.S.-China competition, the AI revolution, energy crises, and supply chain wars, the two countries must choose: will they remain in the past, or will they jointly design the future?
 
The Andong summit has cautiously but clearly begun to provide answers to that question. Shuttle diplomacy must evolve from a mere diplomatic formality into a platform for shared prosperity in Northeast Asia. At its core should be the people, not politicians; the private sector, not governments; and future generations, not conflicts.
 
This will be the true starting point for a new era in South Korea-Japan relations.


※ This article was written using generative AI and has been reviewed by an editor.