Japan → South Korea
This score represents Japan's relationship toward South Korea. The reverse direction is calculated separately and shown alongside it.
SIX-COMPONENT MODEL
Current component scores
Component values run from −100 to +100 and are combined with the published weights.
2 documented factors produce the +15 security assessment.
Why this score?
- +10Shuttle diplomacy and structured cooperation resumeActive event · 2023
The leaders restore frequent visits and restart bilateral security, strategic and economic-security dialogues.
- +5Camp David institutionalises trilateral coordinationActive event · 2023
Japan, Korea and the United States establish enduring consultation and cooperation across security, economic resilience and people-to-people ties.
Coverage gap: The reviewed 2015 record documented security coordination, but no bilateral mutual-defence treaty or exceptional integrated command under the frozen rubric.
5 documented factors produce the +40 diplomacy assessment.
Why this score?
- +20The first bilateral leaders' summit of the administration addressed cooperation and outstanding issuesBaseline rule · 2015
The first bilateral leaders' summit of the administration addressed cooperation and outstanding issues.
- +10Summit, ministerial and director-general channels produced sustained bilateral consultationsBaseline rule · 2015
Summit, ministerial and director-general channels produced sustained bilateral consultations.
- -15Historical and claims issues remained serious constraints on bilateral relationsBaseline rule · 2015
Historical and claims issues remained serious constraints on bilateral relations.
- +20Shuttle diplomacy and structured cooperation resumeActive event · 2023
The leaders restore frequent visits and restart bilateral security, strategic and economic-security dialogues.
- +5Camp David institutionalises trilateral coordinationActive event · 2023
Japan, Korea and the United States establish enduring consultation and cooperation across security, economic resilience and people-to-people ties.
2 documented factors produce the +35 economic assessment.
Why this score?
- +20Bilateral trade thresholdBaseline rule · 2015
Reported trade activates the absolute methodology route using the latest observation available for this year.
- +15Shuttle diplomacy and structured cooperation resumeActive event · 2023
The leaders restore frequent visits and restart bilateral security, strategic and economic-security dialogues.
Coverage gap: Trade crossed the material threshold, but the reviewed record did not justify a separate institutional-economic rule.
4 documented factors produce the +60 alignment assessment.
Why this score?
- +10The governments coordinated on North Korea and regional securityBaseline rule · 2015
The governments coordinated on North Korea and regional security.
- +30United Nations voting alignmentBaseline rule · 2015
A rolling three-year comparison of UN General Assembly votes activates the alignment threshold.
- +15Shuttle diplomacy and structured cooperation resumeActive event · 2023
The leaders restore frequent visits and restart bilateral security, strategic and economic-security dialogues.
- +5Camp David institutionalises trilateral coordinationActive event · 2023
Japan, Korea and the United States establish enduring consultation and cooperation across security, economic resilience and people-to-people ties.
2 documented factors produce the -35 disputes assessment.
Why this score?
- -50The source government maintained an official sovereignty position opposed by the other stateBaseline rule · 2015
The source government maintained an official sovereignty position opposed by the other state.
- +15The 2015 agreement and continuing consultations created formal mechanisms for managing historical disputesBaseline rule · 2015
The 2015 agreement and continuing consultations created formal mechanisms for managing historical disputes.
2 documented factors produce the +30 societal assessment.
Why this score?
- +20Hundreds of official arts, academic, youth and sports exchange projects operatedBaseline rule · 2015
Hundreds of official arts, academic, youth and sports exchange projects operated.
- +10Shuttle diplomacy and structured cooperation resumeActive event · 2023
The leaders restore frequent visits and restart bilateral security, strategic and economic-security dialogues.
+8 in 2015 → +23 in 2026
The change is generated from sourced events and frozen scoring rules, not retrospective editorial adjustment.
0 points
Japan → South Korea and South Korea → Japan remain independent assessments.
View the reverse direction →ACTIVE EVIDENCE
Events affecting the current score
Shuttle diplomacy and structured cooperation resume
The leaders restore frequent visits and restart bilateral security, strategic and economic-security dialogues.
Camp David institutionalises trilateral coordination
Japan, Korea and the United States establish enduring consultation and cooperation across security, economic resilience and people-to-people ties.
This analytical score is not an objective fact, endorsement or prediction. Confidence reflects evidence coverage, while incomplete or unavailable observations remain explicit. Differences below 5 points are treated as practical ties rather than a meaningful ranking.
Explore the full timeline and sources in the atlas →