[EAI Midterm Evaluation of the Moon Jae-in Administration] ③ Issue Briefing - Midterm Evaluation of the Moon Jae-in Administration's Foreign and Security Policy Based on Public Opinion: A Complex Strategy is Needed to Respond to Multi-faceted Threats

Editor's Note

This issue briefing is a report primarily authored by Son Yeol, Director of EAI and Professor at Yonsei University, based on the results of an EAI survey on the midterm evaluation of the Moon Jae-in administration and discussions from a policy forum. According to the survey, the public gave low ratings to the Moon administration's foreign policy, mostly between 4.5-4.6 points (out of 10), while the policy towards Japan received a score of 5.0, indicating a relatively more positive evaluation of the Korean government's response to recent unjust actions by the Japanese government. Furthermore, the author analyzes that the threat perception of Koreans today stems not only from the traditional conflict between North and South Korea but also from multi-faceted dimensions including trade/technology friction between neighboring countries, military competition and conflict among them, and transboundary environmental issues. The author emphasizes that the remaining task for the Moon Jae-in administration should focus on a complex response to alleviate the public's multi-dimensional security anxieties.

※ The following is an excerpt from this issue briefing.

Evaluation of the Moon Jae-in Administration's Foreign Policy: 4.5 points for Overall Governance, 4.6 points for Foreign and Security Policy (out of 10)

According to the results of the EAI survey on the midterm evaluation of the Moon Jae-in administration conducted in October, the evaluation of the Moon Jae-in administration's response and attitude towards each policy received low ratings without significant differences between overall governance (4.5 points) and foreign and security policy (4.6 points). For reference, this can be assessed as similar to the government approval ratings of 45% in the Korea Gallup survey and 44.2% in the Realmeter survey conducted in the first week of November. Furthermore, when looking at foreign policy towards individual countries, the evaluations for North Korea policy (4.5 points), US policy (4.6 points), and China policy (4.6 points) were largely similar, with Japan policy (5.0 points) showing a slightly higher evaluation.

<Figure 1> Midterm Evaluation of the Moon Jae-in Administration (out of 10 points)

[…]

Threat Perception of Koreans: Economic Threats Become More Significant Than Military Security Threats

In light of the recent US-China trade friction and Korea-Japan economic conflict, the Korean public showed a high sense of crisis regarding economic issues. As shown in <Figure 2>, Koreans cited trade/technology friction between neighboring countries (54.3%) as the biggest threat factor they are currently facing, more so than unstable inter-Korean relations (49.8%) and military competition and conflict among neighboring countries (48.0%). Additionally, the perception of threats from transboundary environmental issues such as fine dust and radioactive contamination (35.4%) was also notable; particularly among those in their 20s, more than half (52.5%) identified the fine dust issue as a major threat factor. This indicates that, unlike in the past when threat perception among Koreans originated from the conflict in inter-Korean relations, today's threat perception is recognized across multi-dimensional levels.

[…]

Relatively High Evaluation of Japan Policy

While most foreign policy evaluations received scores of 4.5-4.6 points, the Moon Jae-in administration's Japan policy received a relatively high score of 5.0 points. In terms of evaluating the response and attitude towards specific issues within Japan policy, the response to the comfort women issue received 5.3 points, the response to the Supreme Court ruling on forced labor victims received 5.3 points, the response to the Japanese government's export restrictions received 5.6 points, and the decision to terminate GSOMIA received 5.8 points, all scoring above average. (Figure 22)

<Figure 22> Moon Jae-in Administration's Response and Attitude Towards Japan Policy (out of 10 points)

The relatively high evaluation of Japan policy appears to stem from the perception that the Moon administration took legitimate measures against the recent unjust actions by the Japanese government. Regarding the Korean government's decision to terminate GSOMIA, 60.3% of respondents answered 'support' and 18.9% answered 'do not support,' indicating that a majority of the public gave a positive evaluation of the Korean government's response. Among those who answered 'support,' 79.8% stated they supported the termination of GSOMIA because it was a 'just response to the Japanese government's unjust actions' (Figure 23). The reason for supporting the boycott movement was also highest for 'because the Japanese export restrictions were unjust' (72.9%), suggesting that many viewed it as a countermeasure against Japan's injustice (Figure 24). It can be inferred that both Japan and South Korea need to consider domestic public opinion and political factors to reverse the hardline measures of excluding each other from the "white list" and terminating GSOMIA.

[…]

Future Tasks: The Importance of National Consensus

The tasks for South Korea to cope with external threats include the balanced development of ROK-US and ROK-China relations, the strengthening of the ROK-US alliance, the enhancement of inter-Korean exchange and cooperation, and efforts to unify a divided national consensus. This public opinion survey clearly showed that differing perceptions exist on foreign policy issues across generations, regions, and ideologies. It is evident that effective responses to external challenges are impossible when there is internal strife. Politics that achieves domestic consensus is extremely important. Only when politics that listens to public opinion and gathers expert views to reach a national consensus is in place can a stable foundation for South Korea's foreign policy be established and a mid-to-long-term vision for relations with neighboring countries be formulated.

■ Co-author/Lead Author: Son Yeol_ Director of EAI and Professor at the Graduate School of International Studies, Yonsei University. He holds a Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of Chicago. He has served as Dean of the Graduate School of International Studies at Yonsei University, Dean of Underwood International College, and President of the Association for Japanese Studies in Korea, and currently serves as President of the Korean Political Science Association. His main research areas include international political economy, Japanese foreign policy, and East Asian international relations. His recent publications include Japan and Asia's Contested Order (2018, with T.J. Pempel), South Korea's Middle Power Diplomacy(2017, co-edited with Kim Sang-bae and Lee Seung-ju), Understanding Public Diplomacy in East Asia(2016, with Jan Melissen).

■ Responsible for and Edited by: Lee Young-hyun, EAI Research Fellow

Inquiries: 02 2277 1683 (ext. 207) I ylee@eai.or.kr

[EAI Issue Briefing] is a series planned to provide a forum for discourse where experts from various fields can present in-depth analyses and policy recommendations on major domestic and international issues. Please cite the source when quoting. EAI is an independent research institution independent of any partisan interests. The claims and opinions expressed in reports, journals, and books published by EAI are not affiliated with EAI and solely represent the views of the individual author.

Attachment: Issue Briefing_Midterm Evaluation of Moon Jae-in Administration's Foreign and Security Policy Based on Public Opinion (Son Yeol).pdf