Weathering possible clouds in the future

Given the controversy apparently to be fueled after the actual discharge, the two countries must take a prudent approach.

After the Korea-Japan summit and their foreign ministers’ meeting, the two countries’ foreign relations are navigating relatively smooth. The most urgent issue was Japan’s plan to discharge the wastewater from the crippled Fukushima nuclear plant into the Pacific following their earlier discord over the wartime forced labor compensation. Both sides seem to be headed to a better future after the summit in Lithuania on Wednesday, between President Yoon Suk Yeol and Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida on the sidelines of the NATO summit and the meeting between the two foreign ministers in Jakarta, Indonesia.

The president and the prime minister discussed ways to invite Korean experts to check the release of the wastewater. Kishida also agreed to immediately stop the discharge if the treated water exceeds the safety standards — and find effective methods to share information on the levels in real-time. Tokyo is expected to start to release the wastewater in mid-August.

But the controversy over the contaminated water is not over yet. While some Japanese oppose the release, Korea’s opposition parties are bent on politicizing the issue. If Japan starts to discharge the water, some of the opponents could embark on a maritime protest.

That demands close communication — and a rapid response — from both governments to deal with any possible contingency. Above all, the Yoon administration must closely check if Tokyo really follows the safety standards to prevent an emergency.

As the release of the wastewater is a very volatile issue, given the two countries’ deep-seated discords over the past, both governments took a careful approach in each phase. They tried to prevent their relations from getting worse by taking a science-based approach through the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)’s proactive participation in inspecting the dilution process.

Despite internal and external attacks on the two leaders over the wastewater discharge, they managed to defend against them based on the mutual trust they have built so far. In their sixth meeting in Lithuania, Kishida heartily greeted Yoon in Korean.

Under such an amicable environment, both leaders denounced North Korea for its latest launch of an ICBM in one voice. The remarkable gathering of AP4 — or South Korea, Japan, Australia and New Zealand in Asia-Pacific — owed much to the restoration of trust between Yoon and Kishida. Given the controversy apparently to be fueled after the actual discharge, the two countries must take a prudent approach. We hope the two leaders will wisely weather any possible clouds ahead.