[Initial Insight] The Hidden Side of 'Omurice Diplomacy'

On the 16th, President Yoon Suk-yeol (left) and Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida (right) are having a dinner gathering at Rengatei, a long-established restaurant on Ginza Street in Tokyo, Japan. Tokyo=Yonhap News Agency

Following President Yoon Suk-yeol's visit to Japan, the phrase "Omurice diplomacy fiasco" has become popular both inside and outside Korea. Various interpretations have also emerged surrounding the 128-year-old "Rengatei (煉瓦亭)" restaurant.

Some say that deliberately choosing Rengatei, which opened in 1895?the year of the Eulmi Incident?as the venue for the dinner was humiliating. There are even speculations that Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida made unreasonable demands on sensitive issues such as the Dokdo dispute and the release of contaminated water from the Fukushima nuclear plant during this meeting.

At first glance, the interpretation linking Omurice, Rengatei, and the Eulmi Incident seems plausible, but considering the current situations of the Korean and Japanese governments, the likelihood is low. Rather, from the perspective of the Kishida Cabinet, with the April local elections and the upcoming by-elections for the House of Representatives and House of Councillors looming, this meeting?which significantly goes against the "anti-Korean (嫌韓)" sentiment that easily rallies conservative right-wing votes?was politically burdensome.

In fact, the U.S. government and media have expressed considerable surprise at the meeting between the two leaders. They are focusing on the fact that South Korea and Japan, which have rarely cooperated due to rising anti-Japanese and anti-Korean sentiments, met and opened a channel for dialogue without U.S. intervention or pressure.

The Washington Post (WP) pointed out, "The reason why the leaders of South Korea and Japan are risking political danger to bring about a change in bilateral relations is that they recognize the need to respond to China's increasingly aggressive regional expansion and share the awareness that security postures must be reconsidered," adding, "The U.S. must listen more closely to the demands of its Asian allies who seek to deter China's aggression and maintain peace."

The rapidly changing security situation surrounding the Taiwan Strait also makes it difficult to interpret the Omurice diplomacy simply as a fiasco. At the end of this month, Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen will visit the U.S., and former Taiwanese President Ma Ying-jeou will head to China. With the Taiwanese presidential election scheduled for January next year, the proxy conflict between the U.S. and China is bound to intensify.

Missile bases are being established on the Okinawa archipelago facing Taiwan, and the Japanese government is revising laws to allow military use of Okinawa's civilian aviation and port facilities. Japan's medium-term defense budget for the next five years has also more than doubled.

All of this indicates that military deterrence against China is more urgent than ever. The Xi Jinping regime in China emphasizes that it cannot accept Taiwan's separation and maintains a stance willing to engage in any armed conflict. Inside and outside the U.S., there are forecasts that the possibility of armed conflict will significantly increase from 2027, when China completes its military modernization.

This is because the failure of NATO and the European Union (EU) to deter Russia's expansion, which has resulted in the prolonged and brutal war in Ukraine, could potentially be repeated in Taiwan.

Thus, the difficult background of Omurice diplomacy reveals that this issue is a matter of fate for Northeast Asia. We hope that within our political circles, instead of shallow criticism relying on anti-Japanese sentiment with Taegeukgi flags stuck on laptops, more comprehensive and constructive criticism of overall diplomatic policy will emerge.