Thirty-two lawmakers from four liberal parties Thursday called for across-the-board renegotiation of the Korea-U.S. free trade agreement (KORUS FTA). No legislators from the two conservative parties, including the second-largest opposition Liberty Forward Party, joined it. Which prompts the question: Until when should even foreign trade be an ideological issue in this country?
We don’t know whether the overall revisit of the KORUS FTA would do more good or harm for Korea compared with the original accord made in July 2007. What we do know is not many Koreans ― even most of the representatives of the people ― seem to be rather unfamiliar with the details of the agreement. It was the case three years ago, and it still is today. The reason: Most of the negotiations were done in closed rooms under the pretext of bargaining efficiency, after which the government demanded its swift approval after only a brief, cursory briefing.
The two governments are now supposed to be conducting additional negotiations now for completion by November, when Presidents Lee and Obama hold a summit on the sidelines of the G20 summit here. Again, however, Koreans know nothing about the details of the proceedings. Officials are saying they there have been neither official meetings nor formal demands on specific issues from Washington. Yet media outlets in both countries keep reporting additional U.S. demands, which began with the auto industry and spread to beef and the textile trade.
Little wonder an increasing number of people are concerned about the possibility of belatedly realizing the Lee administration made major concessions, just before the summit ― as they did two and a half years ago.
Candlelit vigils may have been sparked by an unproved fear of mad cow disease but what escalated it was popular outrage about the procedure of one-sided, closed-room bargaining. We don’t think this government will be as stupid as to repeat the same mistake twice.
All this points to the need for Korea to work out a trade negotiation procedural law, which obliges the government to either conduct trade negotiations in close consultation with the National Assembly and seek the parliament’s approval in a fast-track process, or to conclude bargaining at its own discretion but have it undergo parliamentary scrutiny afterwards, or preferably both. Tearing down all tariff and most non-tariff barriers has such enormous ― and irrevocable ― effects on a country’s foreign trade that haste or efficiency should be the last things to bear in mind.
U.S. lawmakers, regardless of whether they are in governing or opposition camps, are doing their best to increase the benefits of their constituents. Many of their Korean counterparts, however, seem to be more engaged in partisan calculations instead of thinking about their voters, much less the future of the domestic industry.
We cannot accept irrational U.S. demands, which violate not just international but even their own domestic rules, and just accept the ways the U.S. politicians work. Unfortunately, the Korean bureaucrats and politicians are ready to accept the U.S. demands but are not ready to learn their U.S. counterparts way of work.