The idea of a Japan-Korea undersea tunnel connecting Kyushu and the Korean Peninsula has been proposed since the Japan-Korea Annexation in 1910, but a century has passed and it has yet to be realized. It has remained a phantom plan, but South Korea's conservative opposition party has raised its voice in arguing that it will consider building it ahead of the mayoral by-election in April. With Japan-Korea relations deteriorating, the government is opposed to the idea, but is it really just a pipe dream? (Seoul, Aisaka Jo)
"We are actively considering a Korea-Japan undersea tunnel. We can expect an economic effect of 54 trillion won (approximately 5 trillion yen) and the creation of 450,000 jobs," said a top official of South Korea's main opposition party, the People Power Party, during a tour of Busan in early February ahead of a mayoral by-election. His mention of the tunnel plan, along with a proposal to build a new airport nearby, sparked new controversy.
A spokesman for the ruling Democratic Party of Korea criticized the move, saying, "The Korea-Japan tunnel is a pro-Japanese issue that will benefit Japan even more. It is irresponsible to suddenly bring up an immature issue that Japan has not even proposed before, just before the mayoral election." The party's policy committee chairman also sarcastically said, "The only benefit we will get from the tunnel is being able to travel to Japan by car."
Japanese and Korean researchers who have been promoting the undersea tunnel for many years are looking at this exchange between South Korea's ruling and opposition parties with mixed feelings.
A former president of Busan University of Foreign Studies in South Korea said, "The tunnel should be promoted as a long-term project between countries. It is undesirable for the ruling party to use it as a way to attack the opposition party by labeling them as pro-Japan." Professor Emeritus Nagano Shinichiro of Daito Bunka University also argued, "This is a project that should be carried out as national policy. If they are serious about it, it should be a campaign promise for the presidential election, not just the mayoral by-election." He explained the background to the idea, the proposed route (see CG), and the issues involved.
Nagano believes the optimal route is Plan A, which would run from Karatsu City in Saga Prefecture, via the remote islands of Iki and Tsushima in Nagasaki Prefecture, and then through Geoje Island in South Korea, before reaching Busan. The total length would be approximately 250 kilometers, with an estimated 150 kilometers of undersea section, as the line would cross land at Iki and Tsushima. There is also Plan B, which would go directly to Busan without passing through Geoje. Both plans are far longer than the Channel Tunnel, which opened in 1994 (50 kilometers, with a 38-kilometer undersea section). The maximum water depth would be around 200 meters, and the ground would be soft, making construction difficult.
The total construction cost is estimated to be about 100 trillion won. The plan calls for Japan to cover the cost from Dangjin to Tsushima, splitting the cost of the border between Tsushima and Geoje Island in half, and South Korea to cover the cost from the island to Busan, with Japan providing 70 to 80 trillion won and South Korea providing 20 to 30 trillion won, all from public funds.
Both Japan and South Korea are experiencing declining birth rates, and dramatic economic revival is unlikely. Conflict over historical perceptions is also deepening, and there are voices of opposition that the tunnel poses a security risk. Unless there are clear ripple effects, the people of both countries will not be convinced.
Nagano and others argue that if the tunnel were used for Shinkansen trains traveling at 300 kilometers per hour, it would take about an hour and 15 minutes to travel between Fukuoka and Busan, and about four and a half hours to travel between Osaka and Seoul.
Xu emphasized, "It will become a route that connects Japan by land not only to South Korea, but also to North Korea, Russia, and Europe. In the past, public sentiment between the UK and France was not good, but they built a cooperative relationship through the tunnel connection. In the process of increasing economic effects, it should also become a channel for peaceful dialogue with North Korea and other countries, as well as Japan and South Korea."
The tunnel plan was first proposed in the 1980s by the late founder of the Holy Spirit Association for the Unification of World Christianity (Unification Church), a Korean religious group known for its mass wedding ceremonies (now the Family Federation for World Peace and Unification), and related organizations conducted exploratory excavations.
Nagano said, "Rather than rejecting the idea just because a religious organization is involved, we should be selective. There are also enthusiastic people in politics, such as former Minister of Justice Nozawa Taizo. Ultimately, the Japanese and South Korean governments must reach an agreement and the project must be carried out primarily with government-led organizations."
For the full article, see the linked page
