Is President Lee Jae Myung perceived as 'pro-China' by US?

President Lee Jae Myung and first lady Kim Hea Kyung, second from left, greet citizens after watching a film at a local theater in Seoul, Sunday. Joint Press Corps

Despite President Lee Jae Myung’s repeated efforts to present himself as a pragmatic centrist, concerns are mounting at home and abroad that he is perceived as leaning toward China.

The issue is drawing renewed attention as Seoul prepares for Lee’s first summit with U.S. President Donald Trump next week.

Political observers note that reshaping such a deeply entrenched image will be a formidable challenge as the U.S. intensifies its checks against China’s growing assertiveness.

U.S. congressional news outlet The Hill recently carried a column by Gordon Chang, a China expert influential among U.S. conservatives, with the headline “South Korea’s anti-American president is coming to Washington.” In it, Chang cited Lee’s past remarks describing U.S. Forces Korea as an “occupation army” and accusing Washington of helping Japan sustain its colonial rule over Korea.

Lee’s so-called “pro-China” image has been widely cited not only by foreign observers but also by many South Koreans. During the presidential campaign, rival politicians criticized him for what they described as an “excessively pro-China” stance. Their criticism centered on a controversial remark in which Lee used the Chinese phrase “xiexie,” meaning “thank you.”

Lee caused a stir in March 2024 and again in May this year for downplaying the Taiwan issue, saying: “Why meddle in China’s issue? Just say ‘xiexie.’ Say ‘xiexie’ to Taiwan too. What does it matter to us how things turn out between China and Taiwan?” Lee has not retracted or revised those comments.

Experts interviewed by The Korea Times say such moments have cemented Lee’s image as pro-China.

“A politician’s image doesn’t change easily, even if they feel unfairly treated. It takes time and consistent actions to reshape it,” Shin Yul, a political professor at Myongji University, said. “If images shifted quickly, politics wouldn’t be so difficult.”

Analysts further caution that, regardless of the administration’s actual policy direction, the perception of a pro-China president could weaken Seoul’s hand in key negotiations with the U.S.

They warn that issues such as U.S. troop numbers in Korea or revisions to the bilateral nuclear cooperation agreement may become more complicated, as Washington is likely to take a cautious stance toward a leader seen as having an “unsettling image.”

Lee Jae Myung, then-presidential candidate of the Democratic Party of Korea, delivers a speech at a campaign rally in Daegu, May 13. Korea Times photo by Koh Young-kwon

Lee Geun, professor at Seoul National University’s Graduate School of International Studies, also voiced similar concerns that the president’s perceived pro-China image could undermine South Korea’s leverage in security negotiations.

He stressed that when suspicions arise [in the U.S.] that a Korean leader is leaning toward China or North Korea, Seoul must make proactive efforts to dispel those doubts.

“While key Korean officials such as Foreign Minister Cho Hyun and National Security Adviser Wi Sung-lac have underscored that Seoul places its highest priority on the U.S. alliance, Washington seems to perceive greater influence around the president from progressive figures, including National Intelligence Service (NIS) chief Lee Jong-seok, Unification Minister Chung Dong-young and ruling Democratic Party leader Jung Chung-rae,” the professor said.

The NIS chief and Chung have been seen as prioritizing improved inter-Korean relations, in contrast to Cho and Wi, who have consistently stressed that South Korea’s foremost priority is its alliance with the United States.

“Even countries without a pro-China reputation can face suspicion if they fail to show clarity, let alone one already seen as leaning that way,” the professor said.

He explained that while Washington seeks to modernize the alliance on a strategic level, Seoul’s repeated emphasis on “balanced, pragmatic diplomacy” and reluctance to engage on the Taiwan issue creates ambiguity.

He also noted that South Korea appeared to be excluded from the recent “coalition of the willing” on Ukraine, which in American eyes only reinforces perceptions of Seoul’s uncertain strategic posture.

“In diplomatic circles, there’s a saying: Don’t listen to what is said, watch what is done. As [former U.S. President Ronald] Reagan put it, ‘trust, but verify’ — Americans need proof through actions, not just rhetoric,” the professor explained.

At the same time, he warned against giving too much weight to symbolic gestures in relations with Washington, arguing that South Korea need not undercut its own standing. He noted that Trump is a leader driven more by transactional, results-oriented negotiations than by ceremony.

The professor argued that Seoul should instead carefully prepare substantive give-and-take with the U.S. Yet, he stressed, those practical talks will go more smoothly if South Korea sheds its pro-China image.

“Especially on security matters, once Seoul is locked into a pro-China perception, its negotiating stance could be weakened before talks even begin,” he said. “And if things do not go Washington’s way, tariffs could be used as additional pressure.”

Meanwhile, Kim Hak-jo, public affairs minister at the South Korean embassy in Washington, published an article in The Hill on Wednesday titled “Korea’s democracy prospers and the Korea-U.S. alliance is intact.” In it, he sought to counter both Chang’s piece and the broader perception that President Lee leans toward China.

"Since his candidacy, Lee has consistently stated that the alliance is the cornerstone of Korea’s diplomacy and security. Since taking office, he has repeatedly reaffirmed this commitment," the contribution stated.

"Under Lee’s leadership, the Republic of Korea will continue to develop the alliance into a future-oriented comprehensive strategic alliance. Lee’s visit to Washington D.C. and his summit with Trump will be a defining milestone in charting the course of future cooperation."