The confusing beef negotiation in Washington, whether it's part of bargaining tactics or not, shows the talks face rough going.
Few thought it would be easy, anyway ― reopening what has been wrapped up supposedly for good. It was the new Korean government after all that bungled the original negotiation in its haste to give some big present to Seoul's biggest ally. Now, however, it seems to be Washington's turn to give something back from a deal that it might have once thought too good to be real.
Reports say the two sides are haggling over the technicality, called export verification, or EV, concerning how the U.S. government will guarantee private firms' voluntary export restraints of older cattle. If so, however, it appears that the final outcome of the ``additional talks'' will hardly be able to satisfy the Korean public.
U.S. officials would of course think they have all the grounds to refute what has been going on in Seoul for the past month and a half, ranging from the scientifically proven safety of their meat products to the virtually zero-percent chance of the human version of mad cow disease occurring by consuming them in Korea or anywhere else.
The problem is, the situation here has long past the stage to discuss actual probability with specific figures. Most Koreans seem to want one thing; revise the deal to at least the levels of other Asian nations, namely Japan and Taiwan. They just refuse to accept why their rights to health and safety should be regarded lighter than their neighbors, as far as this specific issue is concerned. Right or wrong, more than a few Koreans may interpret Washington's adherence to multilateral or bilateral trade rules as turning a deaf ear to these calls.
According to Agweb, a U.S. agricultural site, the U.S. beef exporters originally called for a gradual approach to the Korean market by starting with the shipment of beef from younger cattle and expanding to older ones. It was the U.S. Trade Representative office's ``all-or-nothing'' brinkmanship, however, that brought Washington what seemed to be a great trade victory at first but has turned into the biggest bone of contention now.
So it seems symbolically important enough that the two government's top trade negotiators who signed the bilateral free trade agreement have to untangle the beef issue, one of the preconditions for the trade pact. They must find a compromise, or the two countries could lose too much, not just economically but in other areas as well.
The U.S. government and business officials also need to think in more practical terms, such as a possible boycott here or their effects on negotiations with other Asian countries. After all, the revenue from the exports of beef from cattle 30 months or older plus the so-called special risk materials of intestines and spines account for just 5 percent of the total at most.
As Sen. Barack Obama has repeatedly shown in his attacks on the trade pact, it will not be easy in this election year not to watch the faces of Congress and the ``beef belt'' states.
Still the two sides should not leave a bad precedent of playing a lose-lose game over this trifling issue.