Box 1. A guide to the Camp David agreement of August 2023
Strong commitment by the former heads of state of the US, Japan and South Korea – Biden, Kishida and Yoon – coupled with an alignment of perceptions regarding the threat posed by China and North Korea, culminated in the historic summit of Camp David on 18 August 2023. At that summit, the three leaders vowed to deepen their partnership on security and defence, broaden cooperation in economic security and technology, and position the trilateral grouping as a provider of public goods for the stability of the Korean peninsula, the Indo-Pacific region and beyond.
The document that emerged from the summit, titled ‘the Spirit of Camp David’, featured four priority areas of cooperation. Those areas, and the key elements of each, are detailed below.
1. Convergence of threat perceptions and a ‘commitment to consult’
The convergence of threat perceptions in the Biden–Yoon–Kishida era allowed for one of the most remarkable outputs at Camp David: a formal commitment to consult (CtC), under which the three countries committed ‘to coordinate responses to regional challenges, provocations, and threats affecting collective interests and security’. While falling short of a full military alliance, the CtC was a recognition of intertwined security of the countries, with the hope, at least from the US side, that one day there would be full convergence. In many ways, the CtC has laid the foundation for a ‘quasi-alliance’ between the three.
2. Connecting the bureaucracies to institutionalize trilateral partnership
The Camp David agreement mandated annual convenings of the heads of state and ministers of the three countries in a range of formats. Since then, leaders, ministers and bureaucrats from the three countries have met at least 80 times through more than 20 different channels, spanning multiple layers of government and military (see Table 1).
These discussions focused on coordinating responses to regional security issues, enhancing ties in economic and technological security and delivering public goods in the region. This approach marked a significant shift in the nature of trilateral cooperation, moving it away from single-issue talks, towards a broader agenda to be delivered from a ‘whole-of-government’ approach.
3. Deepening partnership in defence and security
At Camp David, the three countries took unprecedented steps to deepen partnership in defence and security. The US’s alliances with Japan and South Korea still operate independently of one another for the most part. However, the three countries have come to recognize the interconnectivity of common threats and acknowledge that those threats may necessitate joint responses or, at the very least, some coordination. Even though a formal common defence pact is unlikely anytime soon, the three countries have established mechanisms that can form a basis for deeper security ties in future.
First, the countries created a trilateral real-time missile warning data-sharing mechanism, which became operational in January 2024 and has continued since. This system allows information on detections of missile launches around the Korean peninsula to pass through a common platform at the US INDOPACOM headquarters in Hawaii in real time.
Second, the three countries committed to holding an annual, named multi-domain trilateral military exercise called ‘Freedom Edge’. This exercise has taken place twice to date. This trilateral exercise represents a step forward in military collaboration, as it allows for trilateral interoperability. Other exercises are trilateral in name, but in essence involve the US conducting exercises bilaterally with its allies separately in the same space at the same time.
Third, the three countries affirmed the importance of increasing information sharing through the setting up of a three-way communication system. There was also an effort to set up a crisis hotline among the three foreign ministries or the national security agencies that could help communicate in real-time. However, it could not be implemented due to lack of adequate funding and delays in the bureaucratic processes. One such line exists between the defence ministries, but is not enough to coordinate a joint response in case of a crisis.
Fourth, the three countries created the Trilateral Maritime Security and Law Enforcement Cooperation Framework, a framework to provide joint capacity-building assistance to partners in the Indo-Pacific. They wanted to streamline the delivery of capacity-building assets to allow for interoperable systems and to deconflict the delivery of similar assets in order to build deterrence by resilience among the countries. They also conducted their first-ever trilateral coastguard drill under this mechanism.
Fifth, the military leaders of the three countries began to meet more regularly, meeting at least three times in 2023, after a hiatus of four years. The meetings were institutionalized under the Trilateral Security Cooperation Framework that sought to enhance policy consultations, information-sharing, trilateral exercises and defence exchange and cooperation among the three.
Finally, the three countries have held multiple table-top exercises, some of which involved discussions on how to ‘deter and respond, based on various threats on the Korean peninsula and in the Indo-Pacific region’. The inclusion of the Indo-Pacific region here indicates sensitivity over other conflicts in the region, notably in the Taiwan Strait, that had been avoided in the past. Previous table-top exercises concerning North Korea have involved discussion of other regional scenarios, including in the Taiwan Strait, signalling a big shift from the past. However, these exercises featured no joint contingency planning.
4. Broadening partnership to economic security and technology
The US, Japan and South Korea agreed to build ‘robust cooperation in the economic security and technology spheres, leveraging the unique capabilities that each of our countries brings to bear’.
To that end, first, they created specific avenues for the convening of ministers and officials working on finance and trade issues. The intention of these mechanisms was to align export controls, private-sector partnerships, international standards development, critical and emerging technologies and critical minerals. The commerce and industry ministers and finance ministers of the three countries have met at least once, at separate instances. The Trilateral Economic Security Dialogue, which brought together national security officials from all three countries, has met at least four times to promote engagement in critical and emerging technologies, supply-chain resilience and responses to economic coercion. The three countries also held a Trilateral Export Control Dialogue. (See Table 1.) These platforms allowed the countries to align policies on export controls, discuss pathways of collaboration and share best practices. This in turn helped to increase the breadth of cooperation to other sectors such as biotechnology, quantum, artificial intelligence and space. Some reports even indicated South Korea’s desire to establish a 2+2+2 ministerial-level dialogue on economic security, although this has yet to happen.
Second, they launched several initiatives such as the Minerals Security Partnership, the Resilient and Inclusive Supply-Chain Enhancement Partnership, the Disruptive Technology Protection Network and a supply-chain early warning system. These initiatives were intended as ways to build resilient supply chains by sharing data on disruption early, diversifying supply chains for critical minerals and semiconductors, helping emerging markets to develop greater supply-chain resilience, discussing ways to maintain access to critical supplies in emergencies. Some of these initiatives worked in tandem with one another. The Indo-Pacific Economic Framework, a multilateral effort to promote secure, resilient and green supply chains, tried to create a central node to coordinate activity. But it is unclear what specific steps the three countries took under the initiatives to advance their economic security beyond consultations.
Third, the three countries explored joint opportunities for research and innovation in critical and emerging technologies. At Camp David, the three leaders pledged funds to strengthen trilateral scientific collaboration and innovation in fields such as advanced computing, AI, materials research and climate and earthquake modelling. The leaders also encouraged businesses in their countries to invest in critical facilities in the other countries.
Finally, the countries committed to jointly shaping global norms and standards on the adoption of certain technologies and economic practices. For instance, in the field of AI governance, the trilateral partners agreed to promote AI rules that emphasize safety, trust, innovation and inclusivity following the May 2024 AI Summit in Seoul. They agreed to set technical standards for new industries like 6G telecommunications, autonomous systems and green technologies to ensure that they reflect open and transparent standards of democratic models.
