Trois Ono
On January 1, 2024, Japan was struck by the Noto earthquake, registering a shindo intensity of 7 and a magnitude of 7.6. The seismic activity triggered smaller earthquakes, a tsunami, and a wave of global sympathy. However, there are speculations about the sincerity of some nations. Among the nations extending their support, North Korea’s unexpected gesture raised eyebrows and fueled discussions on the potential diplomatic ramifications.
Kremlin.ru, CC BY 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons (modified)
Japan has historically maintained a cautious approach towards North Korea, given the latter’s nuclear ambitions and unpredictable behavior. Expectedly, speculation arose about Kim Jong Un’s motivations for sending condolences to Japan. Some analysts suggest that North Korea, under Kim’s leadership, may have intended to exploit the earthquake as a means to disrupt the cooperation between the United States, Japan, and South Korea.
North Korea’s acts stem from the historical tensions of the two nations. Imperial Japan’s colonial occupation of Korea from 1910 to 1945 left deep scars, with forced labor, exploitation, and the use of “comfort women” contributing to dissent. Even post-war, the abduction of Japanese citizens by North Korean agents remains a major source of contention and was the topic of a summit Prime Minister Fumio Kishida proposed (to which Kim rejected).
In light of North Korea’s recent message of condolences, questions about the possibility of renewed diplomatic relations and increased dialogue between Japan and North Korea have surfaced. Some experts see an opportunity for a thaw in the relations between the two countries. Zainichi journalist Mr. Hen Shinichi states that “[the message] could be seen as a precursor to the establishment of friendly relations between North Korea and Japan and the start of some kind of negotiation” (Friday Digital). If both countries approach the situation with sincerity and a willingness to engage in dialogue, the Noto earthquake could, instead, become a catalyst for improved relations.
In spite of all this, Kim’s sympathy did not last long and proved that the conciliatory message was “too good to be true.” Just a week after the message, North Korea’s actions took a sharp turn with the launch of its first ballistic missile of the year which confirmed the doubts of skeptics who took on X (previously known as Twitter) to exclaim “it would be of more help if [Kim Jong Un] stopped nuclear tests and missile launches instead of offering condolences.” (渡邉 拡庸, X). The missile launch was counterintuitive because all three nations have vowed to continue increasing the trilateral cooperation and have titled the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, their “primary foe and invariable principal enemy” (Nikkei Asia).
Diplomacy is a delicate dance, and any progress would need careful navigation of historical grievances, specifically on Japan’s part, security concerns, and international pressures.
Trois Ono