File
|
Trump 2.0: 7 Questions & Answers on Upcoming Foreign Policy and Security Challenges |
| November 11, 2024
|
-
Beom-cheol ShinSenior Research Fellow, Sejong Institute | bcshin@sejong.org
- On November 5, Trump won the US presidential election. During his first term, conflicts arose between South Korea and the US over several issues, including the cost-sharing for American troops stationed in South Korea, North Korea’s nuclear program, relations with China, and trade. As a result, his re-election increased many uncertainties, including fluctuations in the foreign exchange market. To address these concerns, it is necessary to reduce uncertainty and enhance predictability by examining the foreign policy and national security challenges expected to be faced during his second term and how to respond accordingly. This article analyzes the characteristics of President-elect Trump’s foreign and security policy, then identifies 7 pending issues and suggests direction on how to address them.
-
President-elect Trump is known for being an ego-driven politician. At the same time, he considers himself a master dealmaker and acts to advance America’s foreign policy and national security interests. Key characteristics of Trump-led diplomacy include: Maximizing uncertainty to secure favorable deals. Trump often gains the upper hand in negotiations by being unpredictable. For example, he threatens ‘fire and fury’ against North Korea while simultaneously seeking dialogue with Kim Jong-un, whom he has referred to as a good friend. This unpredictable approach is likely to persist in his second term.
Second, give-and-take deals. Trump tends to ask for what he wants and then rewards or pressures the other party accordingly. A notable example is his demand for NATO members to increase their defense spending to 2% of GDP. He developed good relationships with those who complied while creating tensions with those who did not. This has resulted in unique relationships, where he has publicly praised some leaders while ignoring others.
Third, obsession with trade balance. The US has maintained its stature as a superpower by making the dollar the world’s reserve currency and America the largest market in the world. This has been achieved through a weak dollar policy and trade deficits. Trump, however, hates trade deficits and strives for balance. To this end, he has used tariffs to pressure countries with trade surpluses, and this trend is likely to continue during his second term.
Fourth, pragmatic decisions. While President-elect Trump’s foreign policy may initially appear hardline or pressure-oriented, he has actually sought appropriate compromises. His talks with Kim Jong-un began with a call for complete, verifiable, and irreversible denuclearization (CVID). Ultimately, these discussions led to a deal that eased certain sanctions in exchange for the disclosure and freezing of enriched uranium facilities outside Yongbyon. In addition, he demanded billions of dollars to share the cost of keeping US forces in South Korea but was unable to finalize an agreement during his first term. Although Trump may often seem wild and extreme, he makes pragmatic decisions, a factor that should be considered as the second term of his administration is approaching.
Finally, an individualistic approach. Trump tends to differentiate and discriminate between leaders he likes and those he does not. The frustrations experienced during the first ROK-US summit under the Trump administration may have been influenced by these personal traits. Therefore, the timing, format, agenda, and manner of interaction with Trump will be critical. It is essential not to avoid pressing issues through public disagreement or ambiguity. If Korea has disagreement with him, addressing it in a transactional manner that offers alternatives is advisable. Being honest about difficult issues is preferable to sidestepping them. With these characteristics in mind, here are 10 outstanding issues between South Korea and the US that will be addressed during Trump’s second term. -
The US and South Korea have recently agreed on a new Special Measures Agreement (SMA). However, Trump is likely to demand new negotiations. To strengthen the position, South Korea must faithfully implement the current agreement until Trump calls for new terms. Specifically, the National Assembly will need to approve any new SMA negotiation plan. The US does not require a congressional consent process for SMA negotiations, allowing the executive branch to implement it independently. In contrast, South Korea must follow internal procedures to ensure proper preparations are made.
If Trump seeks a new deal, South Korea should remain open to it but aim to delay reaching an agreement for as long as possible. Future developments in ROK-US relations or the Indo-Pacific region could affect negotiations, and South Korea may have to make several policy choices that assist the US. Given that Trump will pursue diplomacy from a transactional perspective, negotiations that involve give-and-take on a larger scale are necessary. The SMA can be part of this framework, and South Korea should be assertive enough to say that if we receive no new benefits, we can postpone a new SMA agreement during Trump’s second term. -
President-elect Trump has repeatedly expressed his negative views on US troops stationed overseas, indicating he may reduce or withdraw them if adequate cost-sharing is not achieved. The US Forces Korea (USFK) is no exception and could be a pressing agenda during Trump’s second term. Although the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) requires the US government to maintain 28,500 US troops in South Korea, with the Republicans in control of both houses of Congress, the possibility of a reduction cannot be ruled out if Trump and key Republican leaders reach a consensus.
However, reducing USFK would conflict with Trump’s fundamental position of deterring China. The USFK plays an essential role in military deterrence against China in East Asia. Notably, the only US ground forces in the region are already modularized and ready for deployment elsewhere. While the primary focus remains on countering North Korean military threats, these forces can also fulfill various other roles. Thus, the current, partially-funded, deployment structure is beneficial to the US. There is no reason to be alarmed even if President-elect Trump discusses reducing or withdrawing US troops from South Korea in the context of increasing defense cost-sharing. Such remarks are likely diplomatic rhetoric aimed at negotiating a favorable deal. Instead, negotiations with the US should prioritize cooperation between both countries to enhance our independent deterrence against North Korea. -
The Trump administration’s pressure on China is expected to take many forms. The Biden administration’s Indo-Pacific strategy has been in place since Trump’s first term, and his initial defense strategy included multi-domain operations (MDO) to achieve military superiority over China. Trump will likely prefer a bilateral approach and deal directly with China, leading to less reliance on mobilizing allies and friends compared to the Biden administration. However, looking back at the first Trump administration, there is a perception that South Korea was too passive in addressing issues surrounding freedom of navigation in the South China Sea and human rights in China.
In light of the strategic competition between the US and China in Trump’s second term, as well as the economic cooperation and competition between South Korea and China, a forward-looking perception is crucial. Although President-elect Trump does not emphasize a liberal international order, South Korea’s diplomacy should be based on the values it embraces to pursue both legitimacy and practical benefits. On matters pertaining to freedom of navigation, the rule of law, and the protection of human rights, South Korea should move beyond strategic ambiguity and clearly demonstrate its commitment to these values to broaden the basis for cooperation with the US. At the same time, South Korea must mitigate unnecessary conflicts by conveying that its adherence to these principles is not directed against China. Consistent diplomatic practice is essential to this end, and through this process, it should gradually enhance the strategic clarity of the values-based diplomacy. -
President-elect Trump favors direct dialogue with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un. He did so in his first term and mentioned it throughout his presidential campaign. However, North Korea ranks low on the Trump administration’s foreign and security agenda, especially when compared to more pressing issues such as Ukraine, the Middle East, and the challenge of containing China’s rise. Moreover, North Korea’s situation has changed since 2018, when it faced military pressure and harsh sanctions from the US amid diplomatic isolation, mainly due to improved relations with China and Russia. As a result, a summit with Kim Jong-un is unlikely in the near future, despite Trump’s comments suggesting otherwise.
Nevertheless, Trump will pursue talks with Kim at some point during his administration, which could lead to a freeze deal or nuclear disarmament negotiations. The important thing is that there is nothing to gain by opposing these negotiations outright. Trump will do what he wants, even if it means conflict between the US and South Korea. Therefore, instead of opposing US-North Korea talks, South Korea should focus on clarifying the terms of the dialogue and ensure that the security interests are not compromised throughout the process. If a summit does take place, South Korea should effectively communicate its security concerns about North Korea’s growing nuclear threat and encourage a deal-oriented Trump to provide suitable security concessions in exchange for its cooperation. -
It is common to believe that inter-Korean dialogue should take precedence over US-North Korea engagement or that these dialogues are entirely separate. This is a misguided perspective. The ROK-US alliance should facilitate the coordination of both inter-Korean and US-North Korea dialogues so that negotiations with North Korea can proceed effectively. If the US and South Korea adopt differing positions, North Korea will exploit this division, engaging with the US while maintaining a hostile stance toward South Korea. Therefore, it is crucial to clarify the dialogue aspect of ‘bold initiative’ to the Trump administration and stress the importance of unified action between the two countries in North Korea negotiations.
Meanwhile, the first cabinet of Trump’s first administration has often expressed its disappointment with ‘the South Korean government’s prioritization of inter-Korean relations and its attempts to persuade the US over North Korea. South Korea must now move away from this approach and instead, first build trust between US, demonstrating that inter-Korean dialogue can enhance US-North Korea engagement. Only then will the US be able to persuade North Korea to engage in dialogue with South Korea. Therefore, it is needed to support Trump’s approach to North Korea during the ROK-US summit and emphasize the importance of collaboration in this effort. -
Trump has criticized President Biden’s economic policies, labeling them a failure. One of his main objectives is to reduce the US trade deficit through the active use of tariffs. This poses uncertainties for the future of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), under which South Korean companies have significantly invested in the US. If the subsidy benefits associated with the IRA are eliminated, South Korean companies could face substantial losses. Should Trump impose tariffs of around 10% on imports from South Korea, US exports to South Korea are expected to decline. Additionally, South Korea’s annual trade surplus with the US, which exceeds USD 40 billion, may be adversely affected by the Trump administration’s policies.
Economic cooperation with the US is as crucial as security cooperation, so various alternatives must be sought. First, it is necessary to pursue collaboration in the shipbuilding sector, which was discussed during a phone call between President Yoon and President-elect Trump. During the conversation, Trump reportedly emphasized the importance of supporting the maintenance, repair, and overhaul (MRO) of US military vessels. South Korea’s defense capabilities can also be an asset to our ally, the US, so it should expand cooperation in defense and economic security. South Korea should also consider increasing imports of American crude oil to help mitigate the US trade surplus. Trump aims to revitalize the energy industry, including shale gas, and this is where it should seek opportunities. If Trump can identify a successful project to highlight as an achievement, it may enable us to encourage favorable policies from the US. This opportunity should be leveraged to advocate for reduced tariffs on South Korean goods and collaborate with the US Congress to protect South Korean companies involved in the IRA. -
There is some expectation within South Korean society that Trump might agree to South Korea’s pursuit of independent nuclear armament, especially because some of his advisers have mentioned it. However, this scenario is unrealistic, given America’s commitment to the nonproliferation regime and Trump’s dislike of losing deals. It is hard to imagine what the US would need from South Korea in exchange for allowing its nuclear buildup.
Nonetheless, given Trump’s unpredictability, nothing can be completely ruled out. If US-North Korea talks resume and nuclear freeze negotiations are pursued, the topic of independent nuclear armament could be raised as a potential derivative of America’s broader strategy to contain China, although the likelihood remains low. Such discussions would depend on Trump viewing South Korea as a reliable partner in advancing his foreign policy and security objectives. Therefore, South Korea should not rush to pursue independent nuclear armament. Israel’s nuclear program could serve as a model if it is approached in a cooperative manner with the Trump administration, particularly in the context of addressing South Korea’s legitimate security concerns.
| Characteristics of Trump’s Foreign and Security Policy
| 1. Cost-sharing for US Troops in South Korea? Stay Calm and Prepare for a New Agreement
| 2. Reducing or Withdrawing US Troops? Not Anytime Soon Because of the Need to Strengthen Deterrence
| 3. Pressure on China? Gradually Clarify Strategic Ambiguities, But Emphasize Principles Over China
| 4. North Korea? Be Open to Dialogue While Focusing on Addressing Security Concerns
| 5. Inter-Korean Dialogue? Seek Opportunities to Implement ‘Bold Initiative’ Alongside US-North Korea Dialogue
| 6. ROK-US Economic Security? Uphold the IRA, Cut Tariffs, and Invest in American Energy
| 7. Independent Nuclear Armament? Unlikely, But When the Time Comes
※ The contents published on 'Sejong Focus' are personal opinions of the author and do not represent the official views of Sejong Institue
