U.S. Pressure on Trade and ROK-U.S. Security Alliance: From the U.S. Public’s View

 

No. 2018-17 (March 9, 2018)

Park Jee Kwang (Research Fellow, the Sejong Institute)

jkpark@sejong.org

 

Raising the banner of trade protectionism high since its inauguration, the Trump administration imposed a safeguard against Korean washing machines and a 25-percent import duties on Korean steel goods. Against such fiery American trade pressure, President Moon Jae-in said that the administration should respond boldly and resolutely against unfair protectionist measures such as filing a complaint to the WTO and reviewing the violation of the terms of KORUS FTA at the meeting with his chief advisors. These words from President Moon could be construed that although the U.S. is South Korea’s security ally, South Korea is willing to engage in a dispute with the U.S. over trade issues, decoupling security and trade.

             Meanwhile, some raise concern on this administration’s stance of delinking security and trade. They insist that South Korea should sacrifice trade for the alliance as the situation surrounding the Korean Peninsula is crucial. Kim Jong-hoon, former minister of trade, elaborated that because the trade environment hinges on diplomatic and security issues, trade cannot be viewed separately from security. He added that ROK-U.S. alliance could remain cordial only when the trade dispute is solved as soon as possible.[1]

             Another frequent argument related to the ROK-U.S. trade dispute is that because South Korea is a U.S. ally, the U.S. should provide preferential treatment to South Korea. The Federation of Korean Industries’ letter - requesting South Korea to be exempt from the Section 232 Proclamation that imposes 25-percent import tariff on Korean steel - highlights that South Korea and the U.S. maintain a bloodshed alliance.

This argument is built on the premise that the U.S. could sacrifice trade for its security.

             Then, what is the U.S. position on the link between security and trade? To answer this question, I requested a U.S. survey agency to ask 1,000 U.S. citizens last December on whether the U.S. should ‘press hard’ or ‘go easy’ on South Korea if South Korea refuses to renegotiate the KORUS FTA, reminding first the fact that North Korea has developed missiles and nuclear weapons. Thirty-one percent of respondents replied that the U.S. should ‘go easy’ with South Korea, being U.S. ally and twenty-five percent of them responded to ‘press hard.’ The remaining 44 percent replied ‘don’t know.’

 

	‘Go Easy’	‘Press Hard’	‘Do not Know’
“Security-first”	20%	32%	48%
“Welfare-first”	39%	19%	42%
Others	29%	27%	44%

 

 

             Also, the survey posed questions on the priority of U.S. budget to the respondents, categorizing them into “security-first,” “welfare-first,” and “others.” And the survey delved into the each group’s attitude to trade pressure related to KORUS FTA.

 

	Voted for Trump	Voted for Hillary	Others
“Security-first”	73%	20%	7%
“Welfare-first”	19%	76%	5 %

 

             As the table above shows, those prioritizing security rather supported the idea of pressing hard on South Korea. To analyze this seemingly unfathomable result, the survey asked whom these people voted for in the presidential elections in 2016. Most of them voted for Donald Trump as expected.

 

	‘Go Easy’	‘Press Hard’	‘Do not Know’
Trump Voters	22%	40%	38%
Hillary Voters	40%	17%	43%

            

And the constituents who voted for Donald Trump in the 2016 elections championed the idea of trade pressure on South Korea.

 

Therefore, the ‘security-first’ in U.S. seems to give the impression that they are more of ‘America first’ prioritizing U.S. security and welfare in the global issues such as security and trade rather than the guardians of liberal democratic order. This is why they strongly supported Donald Trump who proclaimed ‘America first’ in the elections.

             In conclusion, the survey demonstrates that the idea that security and trade are separate issues does not pertain to President Trump only. And it also indicates that Americans who voice ‘security first’ does not sympathize with South Korea on trade matters. Therefore, the South Korean government will not yield positive results by adhering to the existing logic of aligning alliance with the trade negotiations with the U.S.