[Yang Nak-gyu's Defence Club] Korea-Japan Summit... Tense Anticipation Over GSOMIA Normalization

No Continuity in Information Sharing During 1-Year Agreement Period
Need to Increase Both Level and Scope of Information Sharing Between Korea and Japan

Attention is focused on whether the military information protection agreement (GSOMIA·Jisomia) issue will be resolved following President Yoon Suk-yeol's visit to the United States. Inside and outside the military, there are concerns that even if the Korea-Japan summit restores bilateral relations, many issues must be resolved to normalize GSOMIA. To normalize the currently terminated GSOMIA, it is necessary first to revoke the suspension of its effect and readjust the agreement period and the level of exchanged information.

A Ministry of National Defense official said on the 15th, "If Korea-Japan relations are restored, GSOMIA, whose effect has been suspended, must be re-concluded and the conditions readjusted," adding, "However, nothing has been decided yet." Earlier, the presidential office also stated, "If Korea-Japan relations improve, the GSOMIA issue is expected to be naturally resolved in a formal sense, and various discussions between Korea and Japan will be actively held in the context of trilateral security cooperation among Korea, the U.S., and Japan."

[Image source=Yonhap News]

GSOMIA is an agreement that allows the sharing of military information between countries. South Korea has signed government-level GSOMIA agreements with 21 countries, including Japan, and military information protection agreements with 14 countries, including Germany.

However, except for Japan, military information protection agreements or arrangements either do not specify a validity period or set it at five years. In contrast, Japan's agreement has a validity period of one year. If neither party notifies the other in writing of its intention to terminate the agreement 90 days before expiration, the agreement is automatically extended for one year. Therefore, if diplomatic issues arise, the Korea-Japan GSOMIA is not extended and is canceled. In fact, during the Moon Jae-in administration, Japan retaliated economically in response to the South Korean Supreme Court's ruling on forced labor compensation, and the Korean government responded by notifying the termination of the agreement, leading to its suspension.

Inside and outside the military, there are calls to extend the Korea-Japan GSOMIA period amid escalating nuclear and missile threats from North Korea. When North Korea launches missiles into the East Sea, South Korean radar can detect the missile's ascent phase, but monitoring the impact point is limited. However, Japan has weaker capabilities to collect information on the initial ascent phase of North Korean missiles but can detect the impact point. Therefore, if South Korea and Japan mutually exchange information on the ascent phase and impact point that each can detect, accuracy can be improved.

Moreover, since the Korea-Japan GSOMIA is considered more favorable to Japan, experts argue that the agreement's provisions should be readjusted. The Korea-Japan military information protection agreement is known to consist of 21 articles, covering procedures related to the transmission, storage, destruction, duplication, and disclosure of military information.

The information that Korea and Japan can exchange includes South Korea's military Secret (2nd level) and Confidential (3rd level) and Japan's Secret (極秘·特定秘密, Secret) and Confidential (秘, Confidential). All information except for the highest-level secrets of both countries is subject to exchange. Japan has provided information collected through surveillance and reconnaissance assets to South Korea, while South Korea has shared intelligence on North Korea collected through defectors, human intelligence (HUMINT) in the North Korea-China border area, and electronic surveillance near the military demarcation line with Japan. However, there have been criticisms that the difference in information classification levels between Korea and Japan puts South Korea at a disadvantage. Hong Hyun-ik, president of the Korea National Diplomatic Academy, argued in a 2019 report titled "The Decision to Terminate the Korea-Japan Information Protection Agreement and Korea's Foreign Strategy" published by the Sejong Institute, "During North Korea's missile provocations, we provided Japan with launch location, flight trajectory, and human intelligence at Japan's request, but what we received from Japan was only information on the impact point when the missile flew toward Japan."

Professor Park Won-gon of Ewha Womans University’s Department of North Korean Studies said, "Depending on the criteria for normalizing GSOMIA between Korea and Japan, continuity is important for sharing information, so it is necessary to extend the agreement period and broaden the scope of information beyond North Korean missiles."

Some argue that since the U.S. government is exploring the establishment of a new consultative body related to nuclear deterrence with both Korea and Japan, the need to expand GSOMIA is being downplayed. Currently, the U.S. has bilateral consultative bodies with South Korea and Japan regarding extended deterrence, and the plan is to create a new trilateral consultative body among the U.S., South Korea, and Japan to elevate the level of discussions and deepen talks on North Korean nuclear deterrence.