The government of South Korea has decided that the future is more important than the past — and offered Japan a settlement of one of the long-standing disputes that poisons their relationship, wartime labor.

The administration of Prime Minister Fumio Kishida has applauded the proposal and appears ready to join President Yoon Suk-yeol and build a partnership that helps both countries.

The agreement is welcome. Unfortunately, there are reasons to fear that it could be short lived, given the pendulum-like swings of South Korean politics. That risk is real — making it Japan’s responsibility to do all it can to convince the people of South Korea that it too is committed to building a forward-looking relationship and will create the goodwill needed to insulate the deal from those domestic political pressures.

Yoon took office last year determined to improve his country’s relations with Japan, which have spiraled steadily down for several years. Only last week, he declared that Japan “has transformed from a militaristic aggressor of the past into a partner that shares the same universal values with us.”

Unfortunately, historical issues that stem from this country’s colonization of the Korean Peninsula from 1910-45 pose formidable obstacles to the realization of that objective. The immediate challenge was rulings by the South Korean Supreme Court in 2018 that ordered Nippon Steel and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries to pay damages to individuals forced to work for those companies during World War II and authorized the seizure of their assets to do so.

Japan insists that all disputes over historical issues — wartime labor is one of several — were settled by the 1965 normalization agreement between the two countries. Successive administrations in Tokyo have acknowledged that harm was done while demanding that the government in Seoul confirm that all questions related to its colonial rule were settled “completely and finally” under that deal.

This week, South Korean Foreign Minister Park Jin revealed a plan designed to outflank the court rulings: Private-sector Korean businesses would voluntarily contribute to a South Korean foundation that would use the monies to compensate 15 laborers that had been forced to work for those two companies. Japanese companies may make voluntary contributions to the fund; Foreign Minister Yoshimasa Hayashi stated that Japan would not object if they did so.

While there is no quid pro quo, Japan took steps of its own. Hayashi said that the Japanese government would “maintain the position taken by previous Japanese Cabinets on historical recognition as a whole, including the Japan-South Korea Joint Declaration issued in October 1998.” In that declaration, signed by then-Prime Minister Keizo Obuchi and South Korean President Kim Dae-jung, Obuchi expressed “his deep remorse and heartfelt apology” for the “tremendous damage and the suffering” that Japan caused to the Korean people throughout its colonial rule. Most importantly, it committed the two countries to a forward-oriented relationship.

Reportedly, Japan and South Korea tentatively agreed to create a “future youth fund” to sponsor scholarships for students as part of the broader wartime labor package deal. It would be jointly formed and funded by the Federation of Korean Industries and its Japanese counterpart, Keidanren. Nippon Steel and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries are anticipated to participate.

Hours after Park’s announcement, Japan said that it would commence talks with South Korea to ease measures imposed in 2019 that halted the export of chemicals vital to South Korea’s semiconductor industry. Japanese officials have insisted that the two issues — restrictions on exports and the forced labor controversy — were not linked then or now. Seoul responded by saying it would suspend a complaint against the action lodged at the World Trade Organization.

Japan is also reportedly considering inviting Yoon to the Group of Seven summit that Prime Minister Kishida will host in Hiroshima in May and the two countries are said to be considering the resumption of regular meetings between the two leaders, a practice that has been suspended since December 2011, another victim of historical legacies.

Driving the rapprochement is a renewed appreciation in Seoul of the dangers inherent in today’s security environment, in particular the intensified threat from North Korea. The war in Ukraine has made real the prospect of interstate war and reminded governments that major powers can pour gasoline on the flames rather than try to stamp them out. As Foreign Minister Park said when announcing the deal, “The government hopes to work with Japan, our closest neighbor, who shares the universal values of liberal democracies, market economies, rule of law and human rights amid the increasingly severe situation on the Korean Peninsula and amid the current grave international situation.”

All the while, the United States has been pressing Seoul and Tokyo to overcome their differences and put current and future security needs over the litigation of historical grievances. Washington applauded this week’s agreement — U.S. President Joe Biden called it “a groundbreaking new chapter of cooperation and partnership” — and, in what is surely no coincidence, Yoon has been invited to the White House for a state visit in late April.

Support for the deal from other capitals aims to boost Yoon’s ratings at home. South Korea remains deeply divided, and history is one of the key battlegrounds, with progressives using a readiness to deal with Japan to beat up conservatives. The announcement has triggered a backlash, with leading opposition politicians and supporters of the laborers criticizing the deal for failing to secure payments from Japanese companies and another apology from the Japanese government. A lawyer for the plaintiffs charged the Yoon administration with “trampling on the rights and dignity of the victims,” while the leader of the main opposition Democratic party called the plan “humiliating” and a choice “to betray historical justice.”

Experts fear that since the agreement is not an actual treaty, the next government in Seoul can just disavow it, as happened with the 2015 comfort women deal signed by Kishida, the then-foreign minister, and his conservative counterpart, Yun Byung-se. It was abandoned when Moon Jae-in, a progressive, became president of South Korea. He and his supporters criticized the deal for not reflecting the wishes of the survivors.

To prevent another disavowal, Japan must step up and show that it understands the stakes, has truly repented of the past and is a worthy partner, too. Kishida has said that he welcomes the “return to a healthy relationship between Japan and South Korea” and looks forward “to continuing to work closely” with President Yoon to develop the bilateral relationship.

Those words sound good but they are not enough. Japan has stood still while South Korea has met Tokyo’s conditions for progress. It is time to abandon the caution that has characterized Japanese behavior. The decision to invite Yoon to Tokyo next week is a good step. Japan should applaud in clear terms his bravery and resolution in moving forward.

Tokyo and Seoul should also move quickly to institutionalize this week’s gains. South Korean companies should be returned to the export white lists to facilitate trade. The two governments should begin the trilateral deterrence discussions to coordinate their approach to regional security.

Most importantly, efforts should be redoubled to build ties between the two publics to blunt the impact of appeals to historical grievances. Japanese companies should be generous in their contributions to the new foundation. Exchanges should be invigorated at all levels to create understanding and support. That is the essential foundation for enduring ties between Japan and South Korea.

The Japan Times Board