South Korean Politics and Elections

Experts Discuss Pushing Forward FTA with U.S.

Donga Iblo, March 31, 2008

The Dong-A Ilbo recently interviewed three experts on the free trade agreement between Korea and the United States. Here are the highlights of what they said.

▽ Karan Bhatia, former deputy U.S. Trade Representative: The conclusion of the free trade agreement between Korea and the United States last year was significant progress for both countries. Unfortunately, the agreement has yet to be ratified by the parliament of either country. There are many issues obstructing ratification, but the biggest of all for the United States is import restrictions on U.S. beef by Korea.

▽ Thomas Hubbard, former U.S. ambassador to Seoul: I agree that the first step for the two countries to take toward ratification of the agreement is resolution of the beef issue. Only when this issue is addressed can we could put cars or other areas on the table and see the reactions of the legislatures.

▽ Kim Seok-han, lawyer: The beef issue is essentially not an agenda for the agreement, but now the situation calls for a resolution to move forward. Former Korean President Roh Moo-hyun wanted to settle the affair before leaving office, but to no avail.

▽ Lee Gi-hong, Dong-A Ilbo Washington correspondent: Do you believe the resolution of the beef issue will be enough for the deal to pass through Congress? Last year, Charles Rangel, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee which approves all free trade deals, pledged against approving the Korea-U.S. agreement without a renegotiation on the car sector in an interview with The Dong-A Ilbo.

▽ Bhatia: The substantial benefits the agreement will bring to the United States are not widely understood yet. They are not real or tangible. If the beef issue is resolved, which will signal that Korea is opening up its market on par with international standards, it will change U.S. congressional sentiment toward the deal more favorably.

▽ Kim: I disagree. This is a presidential election year in the United States and the Democratic Party has yet to decide its candidate. Trade will remain a thorny and emotional issue. Against this backdrop, Congress is unlikely to ratify the agreement even with the resolution of the beef issue. It is more likely that some congressmen will keep raising issues with certain areas of U.S. interest, including cars as well as beef.

▽ Lee: Korea has agreed to certain demands for renegotiation. Seoul has firmly ruled out a renegotiation on the automotive sector.

▽ Kim: Unfortunately, the fundamental issue is not Korea or trade. U.S. domestic politics is the source of the deadlock. The deal is a good agreement that makes a lot of sense for both countries. Its ratification, however, depends on U.S. political issues. The two countries need to do something to address U.S. concerns over the automotive sector. This is all because of the political conditions in the United States.

▽ Hubbard: Settlement of the beef issue will make a dramatic change in the ambience and create an opportunity for ratification, but the auto sector will remain a serious political issue. I am all for the U.S. Trade Representative’s position of no more revision. Still, some concerns of the U.S. auto industry could require answers from joint efforts of the two countries aside from revision of the deal.

▽ Lee: Let’s assume that the beef issue is resolved. Then do we have enough time to ratify the deal by the end of this year? What strategies the Korean government should adopt?

▽ Bhatia: If Korea wants the deal passed by Congress in the near future, say before this fall, there is not much time left to conduct a campaign to win bipartisan support. The deadline is not far away, if not today or tomorrow.

▽ Hubbard: I agree. There is a good chance that the deal will stall throughout this year, but I am sure whomever the next [U.S.] president might be, the agreement will be eventually ratified. There is no fixed deadline in that sense. But this year is the right time. If the deal is presented before the end of May, there will be enough time.

▽ Kim: We can make ratification happen if we have the will, as far as time is concerned. But the political situation, as well as the beef and automobile issues, will make it difficult. The U.S. economy is worsening, and free trade is becoming less and less popular. The Democratic Party is expected to gain more seats in both the Senate and the House. Its leading presidential candidates, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, both oppose the deal. Rice will be the next source of controversy after beef and automobiles. Obama has already raised the rice issue. It is best for Korea to close the issues as soon as possible. I don’t think the situation will be any better in 2009.

A familiar name used to go after GNP seats

JoongAng Daily, March 28, 2008

When Kang Dong-hun, an independent making his first run for the National Assembly this year, introduces himself, the first thing he tells people is not his name, but that he is a “Pro-Park independent.”

“I am not well-known to voters yet,” Kang explained.

Being “Pro-Park,” in other words standing up for for former Grand National Party Chairwoman Park Geun-hye, has become a political label for many independents running for Assembly berths, particularly in the conservative southeastern region of the country where the woman ― and her dictator father before her ― are household names and very influential.

For Kang, Park’s name was just what he needed to identify himself in Busan, where his heroine outshines even President Lee Myung-bak. On his name card, his message is even clearer: “The independents will save Park Geun-hye.”

Kang is part of a coalition called the Solidarity for Pro-Park Independents, a group that Kim Moo-sung, a GNP lawmaker who walked out of the party after he was eliminated from the nomination list, founded in Busan. Kim claimed that he was removed from the party list only because he supported Park. He announced an independent Assembly bid under Park’s name along with a few rookie politicians. The idea caught on.

It puts the GNP in a peculiar position. One of the best-known GNP figures, Park, is being used as a campaign slogan by non-GNP candidates.


By Lee Ka-young, Namkoong Wook JoongAng Ilbo

GNP infighting rages over vote-buying scandal

JoongAng Daily, March 28, 2008

Another fight broke out within the Grand National Party as party members tried to decide whom to blame for nominating Kim Taek-kee, a lawmaker who lost his candidacy for an Assembly seat after allegedly trying to buy votes.

Some party members accused Lee Bang-ho, the general secretary of the party, for granting Kim candidacy despite protests by nominating committee members who took issue with the fact that he had previously been a member of the liberal Uri Party, a predecessor of the United Democratic Party. He’d only recently joined the GNP, and had been sentenced to a jail term for bribery.

“Former lawmaker Kim Taek-kee was not qualified to apply for candidacy in the first place,” said In Myung-jin, the head of the party’s ethics committee. “Someone broke a principle during the process. We are going to investigate who is at fault and ask that person to take the blame.” In himself blamed Lee, saying that he should have known the party rules better.

Other party members accused Kang Chang-hee, a nominating committee member who was responsible for recruiting Kim.

The bickering turned fierce yesterday as party members also accused Kim of being a Pro-Park Geun-hye lawmaker.

Kang is also known as pro-Park, while Lee Bang-ho is considered loyal to Lee Myung-bak.

“I thought Kim had the highest chance of winning in his district,” said Kang, explaining that Kim was popular in the Taebaek and Jeongseon electoral districts in Gangwon. “I don’t understand why people are asking me whether Park Geun-hye was somehow involved in his candidacy.”

Park showed a flash of anger to reporters who asked whether she was involved in Kim’s nomination.
“Since when does the nomination committee listen to what I have to say?” she said. “If they had [listened] there would never have been people who walked out of the party in the first place.”

By Lee Ka-young JoongAng Ilbo [mina@joongang.co.kr]

Role of Unification Minister Downgraded

Korea Times, March 9, 2007

By Jung Sung-ki
Staff Reporter

Cheong Wa Dae Saturday launched a new presidential coordination body on foreign and security affairs, replacing the previous National Security Council (NSC), officials of the presidential office said.

The new coordination body reflects a major shift in the Lee Myung-bak government's policy priority from inter-Korean relations to international cooperation, as it is headed by the foreign minister, said experts on foreign affairs and North Korea.

``The Cabinet-level foreign affairs and security council has been launched to replace the NSC, which was recently abolished following a revision NSC management law,'' a Cheong Wa Dae official said.

Members include the minister of foreign affairs and trade, minister of unification, minister of national defense, director of the National Intelligence Service and the top presidential secretary on foreign affairs and trade, he said.

President Lee has pledged that he will try to resolve North Korea's nuclear problem in close cooperation with the international community, instead of dealing with the issue as an inter-Korean matter.

The previous liberal governme