Reopened Free Trade Deal
Seoul Should Conduct Additional Bargaining More Squarely
Korea and the United States will hold more talks to supplement their free trade agreement beginning Thursday, ``news reports’’ said.
Yes, all media outlets have said the two countries would start additional negotiations for the ``KORUS FTA’’ later this week, but trade officials have yet to announce it. It is this timidity, passiveness and unnecessary secrecy that has given people the impression _ rightly or wrongly _ that Korea has been pushed into the free trade talks by its far stronger partner and Seoul’s utmost goal is to minimize losses from equal and free trade. The same can be said of the renewed, or additional, bargaining, whichever name one may prefer.
The additional talks looked inevitable ever since U.S. Democrats pushed through their ``new trade policy’’ with particular emphasis on labor and environmental concerns in trade. The officials may say their equivocation was tactical, but their track records throughout the 10-month negotiation and preceding preparatory period show that our concerns have enough grounding. It seems that Korean officials regard their own businesses and consumers as some kind of enemy or at least a subject to be persuaded, rather than supporters. This is in stark contrast with their U.S. counterparts, who act in close contact with their industries and lawmakers.
Seoul seemed to be heaving a sigh of relief, as Washington dropped most controversial areas, including the agriculture and automobile sectors, from the renegotiating agenda items. One might think this is because Korea got a good deal in these trade sectors, but most experts say the reality is the other way round. U.S. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, for instance, said she would veto the bilateral FTA, citing the U.S. industry’s losses in the auto trade. From the viewpoint of the Korean industry, however, Seoul has given up its taxation sovereignty in return for lowered tariffs, which will mean little, as most Korean cars sold in the United States are made there.
As to the two major U.S. demands in the labor and environment sectors, Seoul is even better positioned than Washington except for a few minor areas. However, it should take issue with Washington’s move to bring violators to the general dispute settlement procedure _ which allows complainants to slap trade retaliation and heavy penalties _ as to whether this conforms to international rules and practices. If a careful approach leads to a win-win settlement in these two areas, it could also sharply enhance the interests of workers and taxpayers in both countries.
The additional talks will likely proceed separately to the main deal, which will likely be signed by the end of this month by both governments. Korean negotiators need to more squarely deal with their U.S. counterparts and share the process and results with the public as much as possible.