KORUS: Good For South Korea, But Who Else?

Article first published as KORUS: Good for South Korea, but Who Else? on Blogcritics.

President Obama recently signed the KORUS FTA trade deal with South Korea. The advantages for S. Korea are obvious, but what impact will it have on the U.S. economy, and how will it affect relations with the rest of Asia?

The deal lowers trade barriers for both sides. President Obama boasts it will boost the domestic auto industry and support tens of thousands of American jobs, by lowering S. Korean tariffs on American cars. The other side of the story, however, is that in five years the 2.5% tariff on Korean cars sold in the U.S. will be lifted. The real effect on the economy hinges on how many autos American manufacturers can sell in S. Korea, compared to the potential hike in Korean models imported here. While the U.S. manufacturers generally favor the deal, some of the big unions fear that it will actually result in a loss of jobs in their plants.

American autos sold in S. Korea will still have to meet their safety requirements, something which has stood in the way in the past. Asians prefer reliable, very small, fuel-efficient cars (to the extent that the Honda Civic is considered too big and is being discontinued in Japan). Quality issues continue to plague domestic models, with The Big Three having 50% more reported serious problems than Asian models. American automakers have shown little love for developing this type of vehicle, which is the reason that there are so many Asian cars on our roads. In 2009 Asian imports were nearly 50% of all light vehicles sold here.

Other issues, including the high subsidies paid to farmers in S. Korea may make this deal’s passage through congress less than certain. Beef exports (Korea has been reluctant to accept American beef since the mad-cow scare) is a sticking point for meat producers in the mid-west states, and the tariffs on pork products won’t be dropped until 2016. S. Korea produces a surplus of rice, and would like to protect itself from foreign competition to keep prices up.

KORUS is already being seen by other Asian trading partners as giving an unfair advantage to S. Korea. The Taiwan Ministry of Economic Affairs has come out against the pact, feeling that Taiwanese exports to the U.S. will be squeezed out by similar products from S. Korea. Others, including China, will undoubtedly condemn this agreement, as failing to give all competitors a level playing-field.

While KORUS is a diplomatic way of supporting an ally, it also has the serious side-effect (by boosting trade with the south) of further isolating the north . While barriers are lowered for S. Korea, sanctions are increasingly strangling the economy in North Korea. In the volatile atmosphere of recent months, tipping the scales any more can only increase tensions. What seems a well-intentioned show of support, may actually push the two sides closer to war.

Barack Obama, of course, can’t lay claim to this accord, as it was originally negotiated by George W. Bush, but never signed due to unresolved issues. Mr. Obama’s recent visit to South Korea gave him the opportunity to iron-out some remaining problems, and now he is the one left with the job of getting it passed. KORUS, however, is far from a done-deal, as the President hasn’t done that well with his legislation in the past, and given the politics since the mid-terms, getting his bills passed into law will be tougher than before.

Even some of Barack Obama’s critics are giving grudging respect for this pact, even though it doesn’t deal with all outstanding issues, and its effect on our relations with other Asian countries is still unknown. What remains to be seen is whether it is good enough to convince those who get to decide its future.

Korea — Deja Vu All Over Again?

Article first published as Korea — Deja Vu All Over Again? on Blogcritics.

Once again the two sides of the divided Korea are close to all-out war. This land is split into democratic South Korea, and communist North Korea. The United States claims the south as an ally, while China is the only real ally of the north. Does any of this sound familiar?

The war in Vietnam lasted for more than twenty years (US combat troops arriving in 1965), and claimed more than 3,000,000 lives, 58,000 of them American. It divided the nation as no other event in modern times has succeeded in doing. The outcome was a unified Vietnam, but as a communist state.

The war in Iraq is over as far as American combat operations go, but the conflict is far from done. The US death toll here was more than 4,000, and somewhere between 100,000 and 1,000,000 civilians, depending on the source. We “liberated” the country from Saddam Hussein, but left it virtually leaderless, a shattered ruin, and in a constant state of near civil war. Not a single weapon of mass destruction was found, and we certainly didn’t gain Iraq as a new ally.

The American presence in Afghanistan just officially surpassed the nine years and fifty-five days that the Russians wasted there. No one seems entirely clear what the goals are, let alone the accomplishments to date. The Afghanis are becoming increasingly disenchanted with the coalition’s presence, often expressing the sentiment that the Americans are no better than the Russians. In fact, the latest bizarre twist in this tragic tale, is the Russians now joining the fray as allies of the West. So far 1295 Americans have died, and there is no end in sight.

The first Korean conflict claimed almost 45,000 American lives, and more than 3,000,000 all told. There was no decisive outcome, only a truce that left the country divided, and in a constant state of tension along the border. Most Koreans, both North and South, want re-unification, but are far apart on what form the united Korea would take.

Have we learned anything since 1953? It seems unlikely, as once again the key players are rushing to establish their positions. In a perfect world the Koreans would be left to settle their own affairs. Unfortunately, the superpowers are like high school jocks, never willing to back down, and unable to pass-up an opportunity to show off their muscles. Pushing the two sides towards all-out war will result in a loss of life far greater than the first time around.

The unthinkable, a long-range war, fought with missiles and possibly nuclear weapons, would result in wide-scale destruction and massive loss of life. A conventional ground battle favors the home team, as it becomes a war of attrition (like Vietnam). Those who see themselves as defending their homeland are in it for the long haul, and are highly motivated. The invaders (that’s us) see it as a job that will be over in six months. The United Nations is having difficulty keeping up troop strengths for its current commitments, and it is unlikely enough new forces could be found for a protracted fight on the Korean Peninsula.

The United Nations urged China, the only country with any influence in North Korea, to bring diplomatic pressure to bear on the belligerent and erratic Kim Jong Il. The US promptly sent an aircraft carrier group into waters claimed by China as territorial. So much for diplomacy! As a newly emerging force to be reckoned with, the Chinese are very sensitive about their image as a world power, and this leads to tricky politics.

Showing support for our allies is one thing, but getting into a pissing contest with China is a fool’s game. A second Korean war will have disastrous consequences, not only for Korea, but for the world. As hopeless as diplomacy appears at times, it is the only real option.