SEOUL, South Korea — It was a high-stakes question even for a high-profile interview in a widely read medium.
In a rare exchange, Hong Seok-hyun, chairman of the Joongang Ilbo, South Korea’s second-largest newspaper, waited until the end of an exclusive interview before posing it to Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, host of the three-day Group of Seven industrial nations summit that kicks off formally in Hiroshima on Friday.
“In Korea, there is a view that the United States agrees with [South Korean] membership in the G7, and the effective creation of a new G8, but that this is opposed by Japan,” the Korean magnate said to the Japanese premier. “What can you say about this perception?”
“The G7 has never discussed membership expansion,” Mr. Kishida responded. “It is not true that the United States is in favor of Korea joining or that Japan opposes it.”
The G7 — the U.S., Canada, France, Britain, Germany, Italy and Japan — is widely considered one of the world’s more exclusive political clubs. The prospect of South Korea getting a seat at the table is stirring urgent but hushed debate in Seoul coffee shops and beyond.
Supporters say there are compelling arguments for Seoul’s inclusion, which would be the first change in the G7 lineup since Russia was expelled from the Group of Eight after it annexed Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula in 2014. In terms of its democratic stability, economic clout, technological acumen, superb infrastructure and well-educated citizenry, South Korea ticks every box.
Moreover, South Korea, which its foreign minister dubs a “global pivotal state,” or GPS, is central to global supply chains in advanced semiconductors, computer displays, devices, auto parts and, increasingly, NATO-standard weaponry.
South Korean soil gives American GIs a foothold on continental Asia and a forward defense bulwark for Japan, U.S. Pacific territories and continental America.
It is also a diplomatic “GPS.” Former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau visited Seoul this week. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen will visit after the summit concludes.
Seeking balance
Increased Asian presence for the G7 looks desirable as democracies on Eurasia’s western and eastern flanks seek to present a united front against continental powers China and Russia.
Today’s G7 is Atlantic-heavy, Indo-Pacific-light and optically old-school. Its only non-Western, non-Christian-majority member is Japan.
Competing blocs look more inclusive than the G7. The BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (which includes Pakistan, China, Russia and various Central Asian states, plus observer nations, including Iran) offer far more racial and religious diversity.
The G7, founded in 1973, has no headquarters, secretariat or formal mission. Since expelling Russia in 2014, it has become a grouping of prosperous, liberal democracies.
South Korea was invited to observe the last G7 summit in Cornwall, England, in 2021, and it will be in Hiroshima. South Korea is already a member of a slew of official global bodies and groupings, including the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the World Health Organization and the Word Trade Organization.
On the principle that one waits to be asked to join the most exclusive clubs, Seoul officialdom keeps mum.
“We are not actively pushing this agenda officially, but many in government think Korea is ready if it is called by the members,” said Park Cheol-hee, chancellor of the Korean Diplomatic Academy. “We are not promoting the idea, just supporting the idea.”
“I have been in discussions with some government people with reasonably informed thoughts, and it is really, really sensitive,” said Mason Richey, who teaches international relations at Seoul’s Hankuk University of Foreign Studies. “In the lead-up to the summit, they are extremely cautious.”
Some nonofficial proponents have not been shy in the run-up to Hiroshima.
Jongsoo Lee, a Pacific Forum fellow, penned a piece in The National Interest in February titled “The Case for South Korean membership in the G7.” He argued that Seoul is “the logical new G8 member from the Indo-Pacific because, next to Japan, it is the largest and wealthiest free-market democracy in Asia.”
On March 13, Voice of America’s Korean-language service canvassed former U.S. ambassadors to South Korea. All were in favor.
Questioning expansion
Although South Koreans, Korean Americans and Korea-friendly diplomats are banging the gong, independent analysts say there are drawbacks to South Korea’s application. Ironically, the G7’s only Asian member — Japan — may be disinclined to welcome a fellow Asian.
As the Joongang interview laid bare, it is widely alleged in South Korean media that Tokyo wants to keep Seoul at bay, given the dire relations that prevailed between conservative Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and liberal South Korean President Moon Jae-in.
Conservative President Yoon Suk Yeol succeeded Mr. Moon in 2022 and has bent over backward to rebuild ties with Tokyo. Still, some believe Japan remains cautious given how sharply bilateral relations have fluctuated under different Seoul administrations.
“Japan won’t squander this. Kishida has spoken out on a new era for bilateral relations,” said Haruko Satoh, an international relations expert at Osaka University. “But I think he is apprehensive. I think the Japanese want to wait it out a bit.”
Welcoming South Korea with G7 membership makes more sense for Washington, analysts say. It would empower Mr. Yoon, who has courted local unpopularity to boost ties with old enemy Japan and breathe new energy into South Korea-Japan-U.S. trilateral cooperation.
“It would be nice to give some clap back to the Yoon administration,” said Robert Kelly, a political scientist at Pusan National University. “I’ve heard that Biden’s people think the Japanese have not really come round.”
Mr. Richey agrees.
“If you wrap Yoon’s personal courage into the larger bow of Korea being an important country with growing economic and military weight, this potential can be harnessed by giving it a bigger platform,” he said. “That would be a legacy-making move, and I think that would instantly turn around [South Korean] public opinion on the Japan deal.”
It is widely understood that the more the G7 expands, the more unwieldy it gets. “If you let in every Tom, Dick and Harry, you dilute some of your prestige and it becomes hard to make decisions,” said Mr. Richey. “That is just a fact of geopolitics.”
Mr. Kelly notes that the number of permanent, veto-wielding members of the U.N. Security Council has remained at five more than seven decades after the world body was founded.
“It has always been frozen because once you open that door, you get all kinds of claimants with all kinds of compelling arguments,” he said.
Other nations with potential G7 claims include Australia, Brazil, India and Indonesia, analysts say. Regardless, any talk about expansion will be behind closed doors.
“It is not an open discussion or a recruiting decision,” Mr. Park said. “They will have to have an internal debate.”
• Andrew Salmon can be reached at asalmon@washingtontimes.com.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.