Enlarging an image


It was like watching the American version of business diplomacy.

President Biden's first visit to Korea was a Samsung semiconductor factory, and his meeting with Hyundai Motor Group Chairman Chung Eui-sun on the last day of his visit also made us guess where the US was focusing on this visit to Korea.



President Biden's face looked brighter than ever when he met the heads of Samsung and Hyundai Motor Group, which made large investments in the United States.

The part where he mentioned the specific number of jobs in the US as a result of investment in Korean companies along with the appreciation for the investment was a speech in Korea, but it was made clear that the counterpart of the speech was an American citizen.

Biden needed results to win the November midterm elections, which would re-elect all members of the House of Representatives and a third of the Senate.



That's why.

President Biden's use of the word 'cooperation between Korea and the United States' was positive in itself, but it contained an offensive message towards South Korea.

It was pressure from Korean companies and the Korean government to “invest a lot in the US” and “invest in the US, not China.”

Moreover, it was also a pressure for the South Korean government to participate in China's check and pressure, which has become the US's top diplomatic task.


Biden Pan's Business Diplomacy Proves Changes in U.S.-Korea Relations

As an extension of this view, the United States obtained tangible results of investment by Korean companies in the United States through this visit and summit, but the Korean government has nothing in its hands right now other than declarative investigations of 'economic cooperation' and 'economic security'. There are also criticisms that

Although the ROK and the United States specified the scope of cooperation and expansion of the alliance at this summit, the transition to a comprehensive alliance that encompasses advanced technologies is not something that happened at the summit a year ago.



There are also objections.

President Biden's message can be interpreted as pressure to invest in Korean companies in the US, but if you think about it in another way, it is not that it proves that Korea (corporation) has become a necessary existence in the United States.

Lee Shin-hwa, a professor of political science and diplomacy at Korea University, evaluated that the summit was "confirmed that the ROK-U.S. alliance is transitioning from the asymmetric alliance of the past to an alliance between equal partners

. "

This is an evaluation that shows that the ROK-US alliance is changing from a one-sided relationship led by the United States to an equal relationship.



However, there is a possibility that this diplomatic leverage held by Korea will work against the Korean people in the future.

Although it cannot be said that Korean companies' domestic investment and US investment are necessarily in conflict, it is difficult to say that they are completely unrelated.

If the competitiveness of Korean companies, which have become the diplomatic weapon of the Korean government, is actively demonstrated, that is, if Korean companies' investment in the US expands and the weight of the Korea-US relationship is relatively added to the Korean side, the result may be a reduction in domestic investment by Korean companies. There is this.



Of course, whether a company invests in Korea or in the US is essentially a matter of the company's own judgment.

However, the US-ROK initiative to expand the alliance into a technology alliance can be an incentive for companies to steer investment in a certain direction.

Biden's US version of business diplomacy is the task left to the Korean government to induce domestic investment by US companies to create jobs for the Korean people so that the results of incentives do not focus solely on US investment.


Korea-US summit emphasizing 'liberal democracy' and 'human rights'

Enlarging an image


At this summit, the two countries emphasized the values ​​of 'liberal democracy' and 'human rights' more than ever before.

I wondered if the summit would be a place to confirm that the leaders of the two countries had the same mind (like-minded).

Summit diplomacy can be evaluated positively in that the key to building trust between the leaders is that it will serve as the basis for establishing relations between countries in the future and resolving problems in case of emergencies.



The problem is the result when empathy for values ​​is emphasized.

Through this summit, South Korea has actively approached the United States, which shares its values.

A representative example is participation in the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF), which is said to be being pursued by the United States to contain China.

It means that it has officially announced that it will solve the economy from the US side, away from the 'Ahn Mi-gyeong-jung' that states that the security will be solved through the US and the economy through China.

It was a declaration of the abolition of the so-called 'balanced diplomacy', a tightrope walking between the US and China.

At a joint press conference after the summit,



President Yoon said,

"Challenges (such as pandemic crises and supply chain restructuring) can only be overcome through solidarity between countries that share the universal values ​​of liberal democracy and human rights. The ROK-U.S. alliance is an example of such solidarity. He explained the reason for

'

tilting toward the United States (American gradient theory)'.

Regarding 'IPEF' participation, "

Korea and the US will work together to establish an order in the Intai region based on 'norms'"

explained.

In this description, 'norms' directly refer to regulations on trade and taxation, but ultimately can be replaced with 'universal values ​​of liberal democracy and human rights'.


IPEF participation that became a hot potato

What this means is that the future diplomatic tasks of the Korean government will be looked at later, and let's take a closer look at why the Korean government participated in the IPEF.

IPEF is different from existing free trade agreements.

It is not in the form of a specific agreement, and it is difficult to estimate exactly what it will look like.

(Reference: IPEF in 'Misty'…Is it an opportunity or a challenge for Korea?) The Presidential Office Security Office cited the fact that IPEF is an evolving economic initiative and that it is still in an early stage where discussions have not started in earnest.

At a press briefing after the Korea-US summit,



National Security Office Director Kim Seong-han

explained the reason for participating in the IPEF

by saying, "We need to participate in the IPEF in the early stages and make an effort so that the rules and regulations that work in the IPEF can be established in a form favorable to Korea."

explained.

If a regional cooperative in which various countries in the Indo-Pacific region participate is being formed anyway, the intention is that it will be more beneficial to the national interest if we actively participate and make rules in a direction favorable to our country.



However, more explanations are needed to understand why Korea participated in the IPEF despite China's opposition to the IPEF as a means of checking against itself.

Kim Hyun-wook, a professor at the National Diplomatic Academy, may be helpful.


“It is almost impossible to strike a balance between the US and China as in the past.”

Professor Kim said,

"With the United States and its allies intensifying pressure on China, it is now almost impossible to strike a balance between the United States and China as in the past

. "

Such a change in the situation had already appeared in the summit meeting between former President Moon Jae-in and US President Biden in May of last year.

Academia evaluates that the Korea-US summit in May last year was significantly closer to the US side than the previous attitude of the Moon Jae-in administration, which was sometimes viewed as a 'US-China balance' or 'China bias'.



Professor Hyunwook Kim explains that, along with these changes in the international situation, the idea of ​​the US IPEF can also be a reason for Korea's participation in the IPEF.

He said, "The United States is pushing IPEF with the logic that countries entering the global supply chain it wants to build through IPEF will benefit, but countries that do not participate will be sanctioned as a result

. "

Unlike other agreements or initiatives in the past, there is no reason for Korea not to participate in the IPEF in a situation where the benefits of participating and the harm of non-participation are visible.



Enlarging an image


The change in the international economic situation is also the reason.

Not a few countries, including South Korea, have looked to China in the name of balanced diplomacy, in order to capture the fruits of China's rapidly growing economy, but now the situation has changed.

After the corona pandemic, the weight of the global economy has returned to the United States.

Professor Kim said,

"After the global financial crisis in 2008, the US economy began to decline, and as China's rise accelerated, the power of so-called 'China money' has fascinated many countries, but now the situation is different

. "


Korea's participation in IPEF, strengthening relations with the United States, and China

Of course, choice always comes with opportunity cost.

The immediate task is how to resolve the relationship with China, its largest trading partner, which is currently accepting the IPEF as a check and objection to its own country.

It is for this reason that

government officials are sending messages day after day saying, "IPEF

does not exclude China" and

"IPEF is also open to China ."

The intentional emphasis on the principle of 'inclusivity' in the joint declaration of the leaders of the Republic of Korea and the United States, and the absence of direct mention of 'China' in the joint declaration can also be seen as a result of efforts to minimize irritation to China, unlike the United States.



However, the economic circles are concerned about the possibility of China's economic retaliation.

This is because of the experience of South Korea-China relations, which has not improved despite the South Korean government after the deployment of THAAD in 2016 and the Moon Jae-in administration's conciliatory gestures toward China.

Park Won-gon, a professor of

North Korean studies at Ewha Womans University,

said ,

"Compared to last year's Korea-US summit, the contents of this summit have been materialized in terms of practical checks on China .

" There is,”

he says.



There is also the view that past experiences can be a medicine in regards to the possibility of China's economic retaliation.

Professor Shinhwa Lee said, "

says

The Moon Jae-in administration has chosen strategic ambiguity to prevent deterioration of relations with China, but economic relations with China have not improved significantly.

Rather, it means that the past experience of not being able to improve relations with China and receiving no support from the United States with an indecisive attitude in the midst of economic pressure from China will become a teacher of contrasts.

Professor Lee predicted,

"Since this summit can be seen as stronger cooperation with the US, it is unlikely that the THAAD deployment will be as unilateral as in the past

. "



This may mean that the task has been put in place so that strengthening cooperation with the US can become a means of coping with China's economic retaliation in case of any possible economic retaliation, and furthermore, to become a mechanism to prevent China's economic retaliation itself.

Blocking economic pressure on South Korea in advance by strengthening strategic communication with China is also a diplomatic task

.


The possible side effects of 'solidarity of the liberal democracy'

Let's go back to the point that President Yoon Seok-yeol and President Biden shared the values ​​of liberal democracy and human rights.

This summit may be recorded in the future as a decisive starting point that showed the future diplomatic strategy of the Yun Seok-yeol administration.

It is a formalization of so-called 'value diplomacy'.

Regarding the IPEF in which Korea participated, a high-ranking government official said,

"It can be seen as a coalition between countries that believe in so-called liberal internationalism

. "

There is room to view the purpose of IPEF participation as a blockade with the free camp, including the United States.



'Value diplomacy' may be a structural result of the forced competition between the US and China and the international situation moving towards a new Cold War.

However, since 'value diplomacy' means 'let's get to know each other narrowly and deeply', there is a possibility of narrowing the horizon of Korean diplomacy

.

In particular, the problem is that there are many resource-rich countries among the countries with the same mind.

If the emphasis on values ​​becomes a constraint on establishing relations with resource-rich countries, it could be a serious blow to Korea.



Professor Shinhwa Lee said,

"Value alliance can be 'diplomacy of subtraction' because it excludes countries that do not share values

,

"

he advised.

therefore

"In bilateral relations, it is necessary to keep in mind that the relatively strong countries have a wide range of strategic autonomy, but the relatively weak countries do not,"

he added.



The US, which has recently emphasized its value, is considering easing sanctions on Venezuela, an oil-rich country that it is difficult to see a consensus on values.

In order to understand one's own country, it means that they are escaping the framework of 'a consensus of values'.

Such autonomy may be possible because it is the United States, but Professor Lee's advice is that Korea should also strengthen solidarity with countries that share values, but also strengthen relations with countries that do not.

It means that the Korean government is faced with a diplomatic task that may be at odds with the changing world situation, which is changing into a complex system.


The Yun Seok-yeol government faced with contradictory tasks

President Yoon Seok-yeol said, "

It is not necessary to see it as a zero-sum. We just need to develop good relations with China

. "

Officials from the presidential office also

said, "We must be wary of a binary approach such as that China will object to participation in the IPEF, and participation such as the CPTTP will not

. "

It seems to be an expression of the will to continue the relationship with China while strengthening ties with the United States.

However, China's opposition continues, and the US is making clearer its intentions to contain China through the summit with Japan.

The closer we get to the United States, the further away we are from China, and although we cannot help approaching the United States, we also have to hold on to China.

The Yoon Seok-yeol government was given a task to make hot iced Americano.



(Photo = Yonhap News)