Flurry of Diplomacy at G7: Analysis
APLN member Eunjung Lim shared her insights and observations on the G7 Hiroshima Summit, addressing the following key questions. Watch here.
1. The South Korea, U.S., Japan three-way meeting came on the heels of two Korea-Japan summits –one in Tokyo and the other in Seoul–and one South Korea-U.S. summit in Washington over the past two months. Even though the meeting was short, do you see this as a culmination of the recent trilateral collaboration?
2. Last time, when they met in Cambodia six months ago they agreed on real-time information sharing on North Korea’s missiles. How do you assess what we learned from the trilateral meeting today in dealing with North Korea’s missile and nuclear threats?
3. Earlier this morning, President Yoon and Japanese PM Kishida and their wives visited a memorial park in Hiroshima and honored Korean victims of the atomic bombs in 1945. It was a rare moment. And they had their second bilateral meeting in two weeks. What does this mean for the Seoul-Tokyo relationship?
4. Ukrainian President Zelenskyy dominated this year’s G7 summit. He also met President Yoon, in what was their first meeting, thanking Korea for sending aid to Ukraine. President Yoon pledged more support for Ukraine. What do you read from President Yoon’s busy diplomatic schedule in terms of his “value-based diplomacy”?
5. In a joint statement, the Group of Seven “strongly condemned” North Korea’s ballistic missile launches, calling them unprecedentedly frequent. How do you assess this?
6. The G7 reaffirmed the importance of peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait in the joint communique and criticized any “unilateral attempts” to change the status quo by force in the East and South China Seas. But at the same time, they say they will stand prepared to build “constructive” relations with China. What does this mean?
7. What message do you read from this group in terms of the rules-based international order with the Russian invasion of Ukraine in mind?