Korea-U.S. FTA

Fighting the FTA in the National Assembly

2008-11-13T21:40:19-09:00

Lawmakers from several National Assembly opposition parties have formed an emergency committee to oppose the trade agreement: Opposition lawmakers fight FTA ratification:

Opposition members of the National Assembly formed what they are calling the “Emergency Congress of National Assembly Members Opposed to a Hasty Ratification of the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement” November 13....

The 37-member group is composed of 24 members of the Democratic Party -- including Chun Jung-bae, Park Jie-won and Park Joo-sun -- all six members of the Liberty Forward Party and all five members of the Democratic Labor Party, in addition to two Independent members. Members of the Creative Korea Party say they will decide whether to join the group after determining what their party’s policy is going to be....

"...We are going to go beyond our own parties to block a hasty ratification” vote.

Have these legislators taken this step - cooperating outside the structures of their parties - because they don't trust their party leaderships on this issue?

The story lays out some of the steps they plan to take, including "Look for ways to work with the American Democratic Party, which is negative about the U.S.-Korea FTA, by visiting the United States."

Pressure the U.S. by signing with the E.U.

2008-11-13T06:58:45-09:00

Suh Jin-kyo, Director of trade and investment policy at the Korea Institute for International Economic Policy, says Korea should complete its trade agreement negotiations with the E.U. to put pressure on the U.S. (Proposal Made to Implement FTA With EU Ahead of US):

Seoul should complete a free trade agreement with the European Union as soon as it can to pressure the U.S. Congress to ratify the KORUS FTA as it is, an expert said Wednesday.

``If EU automakers are entitled to have preferential access to the Korean car market as a result of the accord, the United States would feel pressure,'' said Suh Jin-kyo, director of trade and investment policy at the Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP).

Suh made the remarks at a hearing on the KORUS FTA and its impact on major industries hosted by the National Assembly Foreign Affairs and Trade Committee chaired by Rep. Park Jin of the governing Grand National Party (GNP).

And there's other ways to apply the pressure:

In addition to the Korea-EU FTA, Suh singled out several other policy options that could possibly motivate the U.S. Congress to pass the trade accord while its key issues remain intact.

Suh said the government should announce its plan to commence a FTA with Northeast Asian countries.

``The U.S. government sees the KORUS FTA as a vehicle that can help preserve and expand its so-called strategic interests in the Northeast Asian region,'' he said.

Suh said the Korean government's seeking a trade deal with its neighboring countries, therefore, would alert the U.S. government and Congress as their interests are likely to be affected.

Compromise in Korea?

2008-11-13T06:50:20-09:00

Korean President Lee Myung-bak is still hoping to see the trade agreement ratified this year: Lee Firm on Ratification of U.S. FTA This Year. But he's looking for ways to address some opposition party concerns:

Hong [Hong Joon-pyo, majority Grand National Party floor leader in the National Assembly - - Ben] handed over Wednesday a package of plans to help farmers and fishermen, who are likely to be victims of the KORUS FTA, to leaders of the Democratic Party (DP), the largest opposition group.

``We are going to listen to what DP leaders say about the measures and include their suggestions. And then we will set up a meeting with government officials to review the new draft to see if it is acceptable,'' Hong said.

DP lawmakers have argued that the National Assembly should complete the policy package for the possible victims before ratification.

The story says that opposition party leaders are also sounding a little more conciliatory in response to the GNP outreach: Opposition Backs Off From Hard-Line on FTA Bill. So far this sounds like a softer stance with respect to parliamentary procedure rather than on the substance of the legislation.

The GNP's efforts at conciliation are attributed to (a) a desire to avoid disrupting the fall's work of the National Assembly with acrimonious disputes over the trade agreement, and (b) a desire to present as much of a united front to the U.S. as possible in order to minimize the chances of demands for renegotiation:

The ruling party retreated from its tough stance to prevent political wrangling over the matter from affecting other parliamentary agenda, such as pending reform bills and setting the budget for next year.

“With a pile of bills to deal with, the National Assembly will suffer further setbacks if we press ahead with the ratification,” Hong said.

Also behind the turnabout is the judgment that unilateral passage will have adverse effects on Korea’s future movements. To effectively counter the U.S. demand for renegotiation, Korea must approve the agreement with the consensus of opposition parties.

Sounds like the GNP is backing off

2008-11-12T07:43:10-09:00

Yonhap: S Korean Ruling Party Backtracks Over Early US Fta Ratification

Early passage of a free trade pact with the United States looked increasingly unlikely here Wednesday as the ruling party slackened its push in the face of a chorus of opposition from rival parties.

Timing of the legislature's approval of the long-delayed Korea-U.S. free trade agreement (FTA) has been turning into a source of intense political dispute here, with opposition parties strident in their objection to early ratification....

"We have never said we will make unilateral push for approval," said Hong Joon-pyo, floor leader of the ruling Grand National Party (GNP). "The last thing we want is for this issue to turn into a source of confrontation with opposition parties."

Hong's remarks indicate a change in the party's initial plan to pass the deal before November 17 when a group of lawmakers will visit Washington to meet with Obama aides. ...

Boycotting Wednesday's public forum on FTA, prepared by the parliamentary foreign affairs committee, opposition parties pressed the ruling party to scrap its plan completely.

"The ruling party might be coming to its senses finally. We must take all the time we need to first prepare sufficient countermeasures for the agriculture sector which may face massive loses once the pact takes effect," said Chung Sye-kyun, chairman of the main opposition Democratic Party.

Roh comes out in favor of renegotiation

2008-11-12T07:39:04-09:00

The trade agreement was negotiated by Former South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun. Roh has just published an article calling for renegotiation: Roh comes out in support of FTA renegotiation; Roh shifts stance on Korea-U.S. FTA; Roh should keep out of the FTA debate.

As President, Roh was at the the head of the Uri party. This party has since lost the Presidential and National Assembly elections, and now, as the Democratic Party, is the leading opposition in the National Assembly.

According to the Korea Times (Roh shifts stance...):

In the article, Roh insisted the government prepare for possible renegotiations, instead of seeking ratification of the bill.

``The U.S. Congress will never feel pressure even though the Korean legislature passes the accord. Even if the government is not going to cooperate with the U.S. government in case it demands renegotiations, the U.S. Congress will not approve the old pact,'' he said.

If this takes place, Roh predicted the KORUS FTA would go nowhere.

As for the shift in stance on the trade accord in which he sent the go-ahead sign then chief negotiator, Roh made the excuse that the situation has changed.

``I am saying that we need to be strategic. Policymakers are supposed to review existing policies to check if they are still fitting in with the new policy setting and if there has been a major change,'' he said.

Roh called the stance ``pragmatism and foreign policy that serves the national interests.''

The Chosun Ilbo story (Roh should keep out...) says that...

Roh’s last foreign minister Song Min-soon, now a lawmaker with the Democratic Party, on Tuesday called for leaving room for an approach that reflects mutual dissatisfaction in the form of either renegotiation or additional negotiation. It's odd that the former chief executive and former minister in charge who studied, commanded and concluded the Korea-U.S. FTA should now say that renegotiation is acceptable. The two, who advocated an early ratification of the agreement until this February, cited the election of Barack Obama, who is negative to the FTA, as U.S. president and the changed situation in the wake of the global financial crisis as reasons for their U-turn.

On the other hand, the man who actually conducted the negotiations remains in the government and opposes renegotiation: South Korea: No renegotiation of the FTA with US.

"I repeat that there will be no renegotiation, whether it's automobiles or any other issue," said Trade Minister Kim Jong-hoon, according to a transcript of an interview with local radio network KBS. "We will respond by sticking to such a stance."

Kim's comments came one day after his deputy Lee Hye-min told reporters that reconsidering the already signed agreement would be like opening a "Pandora's box" and "could damage the balance reached when the deal was concluded." Kim served as South Korea's chief negotiator for the U.S. agreement before becoming trade minister....

Frank Jannuzi, an Obama foreign policy adviser, was quoted by South Korea's Yonhap news agency in a dispatch from Washington on Tuesday as saying that Obama favors ratification of the FTA, though on conditions including "strengthening of the access of American automobile exports to Korea."

Kim, Seoul's trade minister, said in the radio interview that the U.S. auto industry's difficulties are of its own making.

"The solution to the problems in the U.S. auto industry isn't to be found with us," Kim said, adding that Detroit should strengthen its competitiveness.

Is National Assembly FTA action imminent? Or not?

2008-11-11T20:14:18-09:00

On Monday: National Assembly to Mull Korea-U.S. FTA:

The ruling Grand National Party on Monday decided to submit a motion for ratification of the Korea-U.S. free trade agreement to the National Assembly Foreign Affairs, Trade and Unification Committee as soon as the committee finishes a public hearing on the FTA deal on Wednesday. The two sides of the house are therefore expected to clash, as the main opposition Democratic Party has already said it will block the motion.

The Grand National Party (GNP) has 172 of the 299 seats in the unicameral national legislature).

But on Tuesday: GNP Rules out railroading FTA ratification:

The governing Grand National Party (GNP) stepped back Tuesday from its plan to pass the Korea-U.S. free trade agreement (KORUS FTA) unilaterally, vowing to make further efforts in drawing bipartisan consensus for the ratification.

Back to Monday (National Assembly to Mull Korea-U.S. FTA)...

But in a workshop the same day, the DP [Democratic Party - Ben] confirmed it will oppose it. "The deal has never been discussed during the current 18th National Assembly, despite the rapidly changing situation including the economic crisis and the U.S. presidential election,” DP floor leader Won Hye-young said. “We are not going to approve the ruling party's unilateral submission of the motion."

DP spokesman Cho Jung-sik hinted his party could make trouble over the budget if the GNP persists, saying, "Relations may become tense if the ruling party unilaterally submits or passes the ratification motion."

The Democratic Party is the second largest in the Assembly (83 seats). And the Liberty Forward Party (18 seats)...

In a meeting of his party's senior members that day, Liberty Forward Party chairman Lee Hoi-chang welcomed the public hearing but added ratification should be postponed until the government “takes definite measures to make up for the losses the country could suffer from the deal."

The Koreans are trying to sort out a number of issues: Should legislation for transitional assistance to farmers or fishermen come before ratification? Will ratification before the U.S. put pressure on Congress to ratify and head off calls for renegotiation, or not? Should Korea herself plan for a renegotiation that gets her issues on the table? Michael Ha discusses some of this: FTA Debate Strains Korea-U.S. Ties. The Hankyoreh does as well: Lawmakers make and break alliances over FTA ratification. The Chosun Ilbo: Is this the right time to ratify the FTA?

I personally wouldn't count on Congress responding to Korean ratification. It won't put noticable pressure on Congress to ratify, and won't deter the Obama Administration or the Democratic Congress from seeking renegotiation.

The Korea-U.S. FTA Task Force

2008-11-03T06:28:06-09:00

The government and the ruling Grand National Party (GNP) have followed up on their decision Friday to push forward with the FTA, and created a "Korea-U.S. FTA Task Force."

The purpose appears to be to coordinate efforts for ratification in the National Assembly in November, and to lobby for ratification this year in the U.S.: GNP Pushes for Korea-U.S. FTA Ratification Within This Year:

The government and ruling Grand National Party embarked on a serious project to have the Korea-U.S. FTA ratified in the National Assembly this year. The two bodies formed the Korea-U.S. FTA Taskforce on Sunday, with lawmaker Hwang Jin-ha as head, and said they would exert utmost efforts on PR and minimizing losses in sectors expected to be hit hard by the FTA.

GNP lawmakers Lee Dal-gon and Cho Yoon-sun, Vice Culture Minister Shin Jae-min and Vice Agriculture Minister Chung Hak-soo were chosen as vice chairpersons. Cho Won-dong, director of state affairs at the Prime Minister’s Office, Yim Jong-soon, director general of the FTA strategic planning office, Chung Sung, director general of food industry at the Ministry for Food, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, chief FTA regulator Lee Hye-min and Lee Sung-bok, public relations secretary at Cheong Wa Dae are also members of the taskforce.

“We will dispatch a group of lawmakers to the U.S. after passing the agenda in parliament sometime this month, and aim to have the FTA ratified this year at the plenary session.

“The opposition parties continue to insist that we devise complementary measures before passing the FTA, but these have already been made by the previous Roh Moo-hyun Administration, and are still underway,” said Hwang.

Why don't U.S. cars sell well in Korea?

2008-11-01T19:50:21-08:00

Ford Taurus in a Korean Ad. Source: TheCarBlogger

Because their seen as clunky, with low gas mileage, says the head of Chrysler Korea: S. Koreans Shun U.S. Cars on Gas-Guzzling Image:

American cars aren't selling well in South Korea due to consumer perception of U.S. vehicles as clunky and having poor gas mileage, the head of Chrysler LLC's local unit said Tuesday.

U.S. automakers such as Chrysler and General Motors Corp. are lagging far behind Japanese and German rivals in sales in the nation's booming market for imported vehicles.

Sales of imported cars in South Korea are expected to grow more than 20 per cent from a year earlier to 60,000 units this year, but no U.S. models have taken the top-10 sales ranking here.

South Korean consumers have "negative perceptions that U.S. cars are sizable, but have poor fuel-economy," said Ahn Young-seok, the country manager of Chrysler Korea, at a press conference to launch sales of a mid-size sedan Sebring.

To boost sales in South Korea, "The most urgent task is to change those perceptions, but it's difficult to resolve the issue in the short term," Ahn said.

Koreans to move on trade agreement with U.S.

2008-11-01T18:59:03-08:00

On Friday the Korean government and the governing party are going to move forward to ratify the trade agreement in order to make renegotiation harder: FTA ratification back on table.

The administration and ruling party decided October 31 that they are going to move towards an early ratification of the free trade agreement with the United States, meaning many will be watching to see whether a ratification bill passes the current National Assembly session.

The decision came at a high-level government-ruling party policy coordination meeting held at the prime minister’s office that was attended, among others, by Grand National Party Chairman Park Hee-tae, Prime Minister Han Seung-soo, and President Lee Myung-bak’s chief-of-staff, Chung Chung-kil.

“The government and ruling party have decided to have the FTA with the U.S. passed as quickly as possible under agreement with the ruling and opposition parties,” said GNP spokesman Yoon Sang-hyun. “It was decided that a government-ruling party task force would be formed to respond to the matter swiftly and in a systematic fashion in a working-level situation.”

I don't know what the expression "agreement with the ruling and opposition parties" means. Does it refer to a procedural agreement to bring the bill up for a vote, that both parties are agreed that the bill needs to be passed?

This short story focuses on the reasons for moving forward (Gov't, GNP seek to Ratify FTA This Year):

If Democratic Senator Barack Obama wins the race for the White House on Tuesday, Washington could ask to renegotiate the agreement, a scenario which concerns Seoul.

The government believes a swift ratification of the current deal could help to block any changes the next U.S. administration might try to propose.

Earlier in the week a representative of the Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade had urged the National Assembly to ratify the agreement to put pressure on the U.S. (Foreign Ministry Calls for Speedy Ratification of Korea-U.S. FTA ):

...Deputy Trade Minister Ahn Ho-young stressed the need for swift ratification of the FTA in order to encourage the U.S. to follow suit.

Back to the first of these stories (FTA ratification back on table): The story goes on to suggest that there is general agreement on the need for the trade agreement, but disagreement on preconditions for passage:

GNP members who are less than enthusiastic about passing a ratification bill within the next two months are not considered party heavyweights, however, and their voices are not expected to influence the agreement arrived at by the administration and the GNP.

The Democratic Party agrees in principle on the need to ratify the Korea-U.S. FTA, but wants the agreement approached in stages, with preparations made for an open market with the United States before the trade pact is ratified. It wants to see the government first do something for those who will suffer as a result of the deal -- people like farmers. Democrats say it would not be too late to ratify the pact after seeing which way the U.S. presidential election turns, and look over what the advantages and disadvantages of the FTA would be at that point.

The ruling and opposition parties do generally agree on the need to pass the FTA. But major differences about what to do about those who would be affected, and with the National Assembly’s plate already full as it is with the 2009 national budget and the GNP proposing many bills that would “turn the clock back to the past,” it does not look like navigating the discussion is going to go smoothly.

I'm surprised by the assertion that both the ruling and opposition parties tend to support the agreement. That sort of unanimity has been missing in the past and this editorial from The Korean Times suggests there are still different points of view Impatient Free Traders.

Revised November 2, 2008.

Obama would submit the Korea-U.S. FTA to Congress next year?

2008-10-27T06:48:19-08:00

Yonhap News Agency reports that an aide to the Obama campaign said Saturday that a President Obama would submit the trade agreement with South Korea to Congress early next year, assuming certain preconditions are met: Obama to Submit Korean Free Trade Pact for Ratification in 2009.

U.S. Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama will submit a free trade agreement (FTA) between South Korea and the U.S. for ratification early next year if he is elected on Nov. 4, his foreign policy adviser said Saturday.

The adviser, Frank Jannuzi, set several preconditions, however, including the "strengthening of the access of American automobile exports to Korea, taking steps to make sure workers who might lose their jobs will get job training and unemployment and health insurance, and solving the beef issue"....

"I will tell you honestly that Senator Obama opposes the Korea-U.S. free trade agreement as it is drafted because he felt it failed to address some key things that need to be addressed," Jannuzi said in a speech to a gathering of Korean-Americans in Annandale, Virginia.

The aide, however, said the Illinois senator's opposition is "not forever," adding Obama supports free trade and that "as president, he will do the things necessary to see its ratification is possible."

Jannuzi singled out the beef issue, saying that it "has mostly been solved but we've got still a little bit more to do. But, if these issues are addressed, I am confident Senator Obama will submit the Korea-U.S. agreement successfully to Congress for its approval and I hope it will happen early next year."

This is a big surprise to me if it's true. Jannuzi is described in the Council of Foreign Relations biographical sketch at the link as the chief East Asian advisor to Democrats on the Foreign Relations committee, reporting in that capacity to Sen Biden.

GNP would like to ratify the trade agreement this year

2008-10-20T06:49:14-08:00

National Assembly. Source: BBC.

South Korea's governing Grand National Party (GNP) would like to ratify the trade agreement with the United States this year, and is only waiting until the National Assembly's Foreign Affairs, Trade, and Unification Committee completes an audit of the Foreign and Trade Ministry, says Committee Chair Park Jin: GNP Hope Korea-U.S. FTA Will Be Ratified Soon. The story implies that ratification could take place before the U.S. Presidential election.

...The FTA bill was laid before the committee in February, during the final days of the 17th National Assembly, but it lapsed automatically when it was not ratified before the deadline. The government submitted the bill again to the 18th National Assembly.

“Due to the recent economic slowdown, the U.S. is beginning to favor protectionist policies and the FTA is being pushed from the priority list. Especially, when the Democratic candidate Senator Barack Obama gets elected as the next U.S. president, the U.S. is likely to push for renegotiation in automobile trade and introduction of the Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) Program,” said Park....

The world financial crisis reaches Korea

2008-10-19T20:09:52-08:00

Emmanuel Yujuico at the International Political Economy Zone: Did South Korea Not Learn Its Lesson?.

Blaine Harden of the Washington Post: South Korea to Give Banks $100 Billion In Loan Guarantees. Move Aims to Boost Market, Currency. Kyung Bok Cho and Saeromi Shin report that South Korea's Won Gains on Financial Rescue; Bank Stocks Rise .

U.S. Approves Visa Waiver for Korea!

2008-10-19T14:35:55-08:00

On Friday the Bush Administration announced that visa waivers would be extended to seven more countries, including South Korea: Bush: South Korea, six others, get visa waivers:

US President George W. Bush announced Friday that citizens of South Korea and six other US allies would enjoy visa-free travel to the United States beginning about one month from now....

The Dong-A Ilbo editorial writer thinks its about time ([Opinion] U.S. Visa Waiver Program ):

The inequality in travel visas between Korea and the United States will be removed soon. U.S. President George W. Bush has announced Korea’s inclusion in the U.S. visa waiver program, allowing Koreans to travel to the United States for up to 90 days visa-free from January at the latest. Since 1981, Korea has allowed Americans to visit Korea with no visa for 15 days and extended the period to 30 days in 1999. Thus the inclusion of Korea in the U.S. visa waiver program is a welcome measure that properly reflects the longstanding Korea-U.S. alliance.

The U.S. visa policy toward Korea has been somewhat offensive. Washington has long included Japan and Singapore among 27 countries in the visa waiver program, while excluding Korea for its high rate of visa rejection. No matter what the criteria are, Koreans suffered discriminatory visa treatment. Whenever long lines for visa applications formed at the U.S. Embassy in Seoul, the favorable impression of the United States in the eyes of Koreans eroded. It is also a matter of national status and pride in that visa exemption status means Koreans are considered eligible tourists with no danger of illegal stay....

WTO's Korean Trade Policy Review

2008-10-16T21:48:17-08:00

The WTO examines member country trade policies periodically, and reports the results in trade policy reviews. It released its 2008 Korean Trade Policy Review last week: Trade Policy Review: Republic of Korea.

The International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD) reported on the review: Korea TPR: Sound Fundamentals, but Further Reform Needed to Sustain Growth.

Trade Agreement Submitted to National Assembly

2008-10-10T23:15:39-08:00

From KBS World Radio(KORUS FTA Bill Submitted to Assembly):

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade said Wednesday that it submitted a bill on a free trade agreement (FTA) with the United States to the National Assembly for approval....

Foreign Minister Yu Myung-hwan told lawmakers on Tuesday that Korea should ratify the FTA first in case the U.S. calls for renegotiations....

BSE and U.S. Beef Exports

2008-10-09T22:04:05-08:00

Beef display in Korean store. Source: Jung Yeon-je via Boston Globe

In 2003 the U.S. was the largest beef exporter in the world. In 2004, after bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) was found in a Washington State dairy cow of Canadian origin in late 2003, she wasn't. Here's what happened:

Source: Amber Waves.

Once BSE was found, many countries stopped importing U.S. beef. Through 2007, these restrictions cost the U.S. beef industry $1.5 to $2.7 billion a year. The greatest losses to the U.S. beef industry are due to import restrictions imposed by Japan and Korea.

The U.S. International Trade Commission has studied the whole episode, and reports in Global Beef Trade: Effects of Animal Health, Sanitary, Food Safety, and Other Measures on U.S. Beef Exports. The report was requested by the Senate Finance Committee, whose Chairman, Democratic Senator Max Baucus of Montana, has a special interest in beef... and a great deal of influence over the fate of the trade deal with Korea.

Here's the executive summary of the section on Korea:

Model simulation results indicate that losses of U.S. beef exports to Korea due to BSE measures totaled $3.7 billion during 2004–07, primarily in fresh, chilled, or frozen boneless beef; frozen bone-in beef; and frozen edible offal (other than tongues and livers). Removal of Korean tariffs on beef imports from the United States over the same period would have increased U.S. exports to Korea by $1.3 billion. Thus, Korea is a highly protected market based on tariffs alone. BSE restrictions on U.S. beef exports, however, have an adverse trade impact nearly 200 percent greater than the existing tariff protection.
From December 2003 until September 2006, the government of Korea effectively banned imports of U.S. beef. When Korea began importing U.S. beef again, only boneless beef cuts from cattle no more than 30 months of age (UTM) were eligible for import. Restrictions on bone-in cuts eliminated a significant portion of U.S. beef trade with Korea that existed in 2003. Under an agreement between Korea and the United States, signed in April 2008, a new set of quarantine inspection procedures was put in place for imports of U.S. beef, but a transitional measure continued to prohibit beef from cattle over 30 months of age (OTM).
Other trade barriers to U.S. beef exports to Korea include high tariffs (18–72 percent); significant government support for the domestic beef industry; administrative restrictions at customs, including unusual labeling requirements for U.S. beef and strict documentation audits of USDA health certificates; and country-of-origin labeling requirements for consumers at all Korean restaurants.

The US Department of Agriculture magazine, Amber Waves, looked at this in February 2007: Livestock and Beef Trade: A Look at the Effects of BSE. U.S. exports to Korea were large in 2003, but Korea had not been a traditionally a large market:

Source: Amber Waves.

Ratify now, or wait?

2008-10-03T06:55:23-08:00

Korean National Assembly building in Seoul. Source: Wikipedia

The Hankyoreh reports on a debate within the ruling Grand National Party (GNP) leadership about when to ratify the trade agreement. Some what to do it before the U.S. election, others want to wait:: GNP stands divided on free trade agreement. The article suggest a difference between the national party leadership, and the party's leadership within the National Assembly.

The national party leaders want to wait until after the U.S. election in order to provide more time to develop a transitional plan for Korean farmers and fishermen who may be hurt by lifting the trade restrictions, and to avoid ratifying a deal the U.S. might abandon if Obama wins the election.

Party leaders from the National Assembly want to move now to lock in the agreement and make it harder for the U.S. to seek changes in its automobile provisions.

No Action in Congress This Year

2008-10-02T20:41:27-08:00

Troy Stangarone of the Korea Economic Institute in Washington D.C. doesn't think Congress will act on the trade agreement this year: KORUS FTA Lost in Financial Crisis Shuffle:

As Congress struggled to pass a bailout measure for the U.S. financial industry, the fast-fading hopes for the passage of the KORUS FTA this year were lost in the shuffle of the deepening economic crisis in the United States. As Insight went to press, it was unclear if Congress would be able to pass the president’s financial bailout plan or what the prospects were for the U.S. economy in the near term future.

However, at the end of September, the Congress did pass a continuing resolution (CR) to fund the federal government until March of next year. With Congress’s budgetary responsibilities fulfilled until the next administration, there is no strong reason for Congress to remain in session after the November elections, barring an increasing deterioration in the U.S. economy and financial markets.

Despite the majority of current U.S. economic growth being attributable to increased exports, it is politically unlikely that Congress would take up any trade agreement during a time of continuing economic deterioration. Of note for the agreement’s long-term prospects, continued skepticism was expressed on Capitol Hill about the potential for the KORUS FTA to address the concerns of the automobile industry at a September hearing on the imbalance in U.S.-Korea automobile trade. However, the recently passed CR did include funding for up to $25 billion in low interest loans to help the automobile industry upgrade plants and move towards more fuel efficient vehicles. Measures helping to improve the U.S. automobile industry’s position could help to alleviate concerns within the industry regarding the agreement.

New Korean National Assembly Begins Session

2008-09-02T01:00:23-08:00

The new Korean National Assembly has begun its regular session, and the majority party has indicated its plans to get the Korea-U.S. FTA passed: SKorea's ruling party vows to ratify FTA with US:

Hong Joon-pyo, floor leader of the conservative Grand National Party, said passing the deal will be his party's top priority in a 100-day parliamentary session that opened Monday....

Kim Hyun, a spokeswoman for the main opposition Democratic Party, urged the GNP to scrap its plan to push forward with the deal, saying more studies were needed to determine its possible impact.

The GNP controls 172 seats in the new 299-member National Assembly and can push through bills it wants despite opposition.

However, the GNP is unlikely to take such a drastic measure anytime soon because it could prompt a strong public backlash at a time when President Lee Myung-bak is struggling to revive government approval ratings hit hard by weeks of rallies against his decision to resume imports of U.S. beef.

Also, some GNP members from rural areas remain opposed to the deal, which critics say threatens the livelihood of farmers.

Meanwhile, Oh Young-jin of The Korea Times says the government has given up on U.S. ratifiction before the November elections: Seoul Shelves KORUS FTA.

During an interview with The Korea Times, Lee Hye-min, Korea's deputy minister for trade and chief FTA negotiator, said, ``It is certain that the U.S. will not be able to ratify the agreement until the presidential election.

``That contingency is also being considered,'' said Lee, who was a key member of the Korean negotiating team in the lead-up to the settlement of the so-called KORUS FTA last year, confirming the difficulty Korea could face in getting the FTA ratified by the parliaments of the two countries, in the event that Barack Obama, the U.S. democratic presidential candidate, wins the November election.

Arguably, it was the first time that a senior Seoul government official has definitely expressed Seoul's position that it has forsaken its hope for FTA ratification.

McCain and Obama on KORUS FTA

2008-08-20T21:23:20-08:00

I've been asked in comments for my opinion about the approaches of McCain and Obama to the Korea-U.S. FTA.

McCain has endorsed the FTA with Korea. He has a pro-trade voting record in Congress and has expressed his strong support for liberal trading rules. (McCain on Trade)

However, he will have a challenge getting the Korea agreement through a Democratic Congress in which many members don't like the agreement and have little incentive to cooperate with him and give him a success. The Democrats are likely to continue to control Congress after the elections.

Obama has repeatedly said that he is opposed to the agreement in its current form (Clinton and Obama Follow Edwards on Trade; Obama's Opposition to the FTA With Korea; Obama Says "No" to KORUS FTA, Again). His statements in the Democratic primary campaign were often skeptical of past trade agreements.

He has pointed to several general concerns with the Korea-U.S. FTA: (a) the auto provisions, (b) inadequate labor and environmental provisions, (c) Korean failure to liberalize rice; (d) In February he was concerned about beef. The beef agreement from this spring may have addressed this concern. He has also expressed concern over inadequate domestic legislation to protect people who lose their jobs or can only find lower paying jobs because of trade.

Obama has made a number of general statements in favor of freer trade and people I respect think that the rhetoric he used when he was fighting Clinton for the Democratic nomination in the U.S. mid-West may not reflect his ultimate stance (Obama on Trade: An In-depth look; Obama, The Optimist on Trade).

I hope they're right, but I'm still agnostic. It's too easy to make statements in favor of something in general, but to find reasons to oppose specific instances of it. His record in Congress is short and I don't think it is very encouraging (How Have Clinton, McCain, and Obama Been Voting on Trade Issues?; Cato Institute Report on Obama's Trade and Subsidy Votes). As President he will represent a much wider range of interests than he did as Senator from Illinois; this does mean the Congressional voting record may have limitations as a tool for predicting Presidential actions.

I don't expect much progress on the Korea-U.S. FTA for at least a year after he takes office. If Obama were to push the Korean agreement he might be in a better position to get progress from a Democratic Congress than McCain would be.

However, he has made very specific and high profile statements against the agreement in its current form. He may want to renegotiate elements of the agreement before taking it to Congress. If so, he may want to get some sort of trade promotion authority ("Fast Track") negotiating authority from Congress first.

Alternatively, if he was interested, he might be able to get Korean agreement to joint letters "clarifying" labor and environmental understandings in the actual agreement, and complement the agreement with domestic legislation giving Detroit things it would like. That might make it possible to get passage without renegotiation.

But this seems unlikely to me. Even if he had a strong interest in the agreement, Obama may have other priorities - potentially health reform and climate change legislation. I also suspect he has more interest in domestic reform than in international agreements and issues. Finally, my guess is that the initial Democratic trade focus will be on: (a) legislation to create more benefits for persons displaced by trade, and (b) passage of new fast track legislation revamped to build in Democratic interests in labor, environmental, and investment provisions. Here, by the way, is a draft of the Democratic party's trade platform.

The Beef Agreement

2008-07-02T20:38:00-08:00

Troy Stangarone of Washington's Korea Economic Institute provides a nice overview of the beef agreement in the July Korea Insight: Fourth of July BBQ or More Fireworks in Seoul?
He also looks at some of the other impacts of the protests.

Income Inequality and the Beef Protests

2008-07-02T20:21:51-08:00

Evan Ramstad and Sungha Park explore deeper issues underlying the Korean beef protests: South Korean Protests Show Depth of Anger, Challenge President (Wall Street Journal, July 3). They argue that, although ostensibly about beef, the demonstrations reflected deep popular frustration with rising income inequality and poverty, and competitive pressures in the labor market, and competitive foreign pressure in agricultural markets:

"Democratization has been a disappointment," says Yoon Geum-soon, who runs a small fruit farm and is active in a women's rights group staging protests. "All the wealth goes to a few people, while others work hard for too little."

When she joined a similar protest movement that brought democracy to South Korea in 1987, the 48-year-old Mrs. Yoon says she expected that not only would the public elect its own government but also that all Koreans would get wealthier together. Instead, her business is failing as cheaper imported fruit reduces prices, and she fears she won't be able to send her teenage twins to college next year....

Mrs. Yoon, the farmer, is annoyed that things are still so tough for her children. When South Korea joined the World Trade Organization and opened its fruit market in January 1995, the government lent Mrs. Yoon 15 million won (about $15,000) at a 3% interest rate, and her family built greenhouses that year.

But she says that imported oranges from California proved to be too much competition for her Korean yellow melons. Then, energy prices rose and forced her to shut the greenhouses in 1996. Despite 14-hour working days, she was left with debts that she's coping with today.

"My twins are now in the third grade of high school," she says, which means they face college-entrance exams in November. "If they don't get into college, it's a worry for their future. But if they do, that's a worry too, as I have no idea how I would be able to pay the tuition."

Resolution of the Beef Controversy?

2008-06-24T22:08:23-08:00

Negotiations

On Friday the 13th the Korean Trade Minister, Kim Jong-Hoon, arrived in Washington for negotiations with Susan Schwab, the US Trade Representative. The initial negotiations took place on Friday and Saturday. Twice Kim threatened to walkout and return to Korea. However, the negotiations stretched out for almost a week, finally ending on the 19th. Here's a combination of a profile of Kim with a discussion of the negotiations: Man of Adroit Brinkmanship (Jane Han, The Korea Times, June 22)

The result, according to the US Trade Representative (USTR Confirms Korea’s Announcement on U.S. Beef, press release, June 21):

The June 13-19 discussions in Washington, led by Ambassador Schwab and Trade Minister Kim, focused on ways to facilitate the commercial, private-sector agreement between Korean importers and U.S. exporters to ship U.S. beef from animals less than 30-months for a transitional period until consumer confidence in South Korea improves. To support these voluntary commitments, the U.S. Department of Agriculture will establish, once the import protocol is in force, the “Less than 30 Month Age-Verification Quality System Assessment (QSA) Program for Korea” administered by the U.S. government under the Agricultural Marketing Act. This program will verify that all beef shipped to Korea under the program is from cattle less than 30 months of age.

In addition, both sides have agreed that certain products (brains, skulls, eyes and spinal cords), which are not specified risk materials in cattle less than 30 months of age, have not been traded between the two countries in the past. Once the import protocol is in effect, both sides will confirm their expectation that until there is market demand in Korea for such products, such commercial practice will continue.

The two governments will also clarify, once the import protocol is in effect, that Korea can take certain actions under the protocol if it finds serious non-compliance during its audits of U.S. beef processing plants, as well as actions it could take at the border upon detection of food safety hazards. All of these actions will be limited to the product or plant in question.

Finally, Korea confirmed that it will publish its import health requirements for U.S. beef and beef products, putting the April 18 protocol into effect shortly.

The April 18 protocol defines conditions for importation of U.S. beef to South Korea and provides for a full reopening of the market. It is fully consistent with OIE guidelines and will permit all U.S. beef and beef products from cattle of all ages to be exported to Korea, with appropriate Specified Risk Materials (SRMs), as defined by the OIE, removed, while guaranteeing commercial viability for U.S. industry. Both Korean importers and U.S. exporters reaffirmed the safety of all U.S. beef, regardless of age, in their statement and letter on June 20.

Key U.S. Senator Max Baucus of Montana, Chairman of the crucial Senate Finance Committee, was unimpressed: U.S. Senators Say Additional Beef Talks Violate April Deal (Chosun Ilbo, June 24).

On Wednesday, the 25th, the government indicated that beef imports could resume on the 26th: S.Korea to allow restart of US beef imports Thursday (The Guardian, June 25).

Demonstrations and Strikes

Demonstrations continued (SKorean clashes despite new deal on US beef, AFP, June 21). The government began to talk about cracking down on violent demonstrations (South Korea: Tougher Line on Protests , Choe Sang-Hun, New York Times, June 25).

The trucker strike continued into the new week: S.Korean strike halts trade worth almost $5 billion (AFP, June 17). But by the end of the week the strike was winding down after employer concessions: More truckers are ending strikes in South Korea (AP)

On Monday construction workers went on strike: Construction Workers Strike in South Korea (AP, June 17). On Tuesday, the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU) said that its members had approved a general strike to oppose Lee Administration policies, including the beef agreement, for July 2: SKorea unions may strike over beef imports, more talks set (AFP, JUne 16). See also South Korea union federation to strike (KWANG-TAE KIM, AP, June 17) Carworkers strike: S Korea Carmakers' Unions Vote To Strike Vs Government Policies (Dow Jones via CNNNews, June 16) The Chosun Ilbo editorial writers argued that the KCTU vote was technically illegal: When No Means Yes (Chosun Ilbo, editorial).

Lee's Speech

President Lee discussed recent events in a press conference on Thursday. Key points:

He apologized again for the way the beef decision had been made and implemented in April.
He said that in a conversation on June 7 he told President Bush that Korea would not allow imports until the U.S. found a way to prevent the export of beef from cows older than 30 months.
He said, however, that Korea could not renegotiate the deal without hurting its reputation with other trading partners.
He endorsed the trade agreement with the U.S.
He noted that he would reorganize his cabinet in line with the reopening of the National Assembly (see the discussion below about "Lee's Reorganization" for the significance of the reference to the reopening of the Assembly).
He denied rumors about government privatization plans and offered to back off on the cross-Korea canal.

Here's a summary: Pres. Lee Vows to Disallow Imports of Old U.S. Beef (Dong-A Ilbo, June 19). Here's another summary: South Korea's Lee Vows Changes After Flap Over U.S. Beef (Evan Ramstad and Sungha Park, Wall Street Journal, June 20). Donald Kirk dissected the speech: Presidential apology falls short (Asia Times, June 20). Kirk's story is a nice recapitulation of the remarks, but the title is misleading - this isn't a story about the failure of the apology.

Lee's Reorganization

Mid-week, Lee accepted the resignations of six of his seven key aides. There was no word on what he would do with the resignations submitted by his cabinet. Columnist Shim Jae Hoon points out that with the opposition boycotting the National Assembly, Lee can't really accept resignations at this time, because the Assembly has to approve his choices: US Compromise on Beef Fails to Dent Korean Protest (Asian Sentinal, June 23):

In truth, however, Lee lacks leverage to reist the opposition campaign, as he stands essentially incapable of firing or hiring his cabinet officials under the current parliamentary boycott. All cabinet appointments require parliamentary approval, so any new cabinet reshuffle that Lee submits must be approved by the new National Assembly, which is in a vegetative state, however. To break out of the parliamentary gridlock, Lee needs as much opposition support as he possibly can muster. Against this backdrop, the question of how long he can keep Han onboard appears largely academic. With public support for Han so negative (the country's biggest civic organization, the Coalition of Participatory Democracy, vows to unseat him at all cost), whatever action taken against the prime minister will in the end determine the future stability of his young administration, analysts say. Lee’s dependence on the UDP for the smooth operation of his government brings more uncertainty to his flagging leadership at this time of global economic downturns.

The government's communications office was reorganized: Presidential Office Overhauled to Improve Communications (Chosun Ilbo, June 25).

Obama Says "No" To KORUS FTA, Again

2008-06-19T07:28:35-08:00

Obama spoke out against the Korea-U.S. trade agreement again on Monday (June 16) in a speech in Flint Michigan. Unemployment is high in Michigan (8.5% in May, and Flint is an auto town): Obama Renews Attack on Korea-U.S. FTA (Chosun Ilbo, June 19).

Obama's speech dealt with American competitiveness. He focused on increased funding for education and educational reform, energy security, and increased investment in research and infrastructure. But these measures also have to be supplemented with "smart" trade policies. Trade was not the focus of the speech - it only got a couple of paragraphs towards the end.

Here's the full text of the speech: Remarks of Senator Barack Obama: Renewing American Competitiveness. On the agreement with Korea:

But even as we welcome competition, we need to remember that our economic policies must be supported by strong and smart trade policies. I have said before, and will say again – I believe in free trade. It can save money for our consumers, generate business for U.S. exporters, and expand global wealth. But unlike George Bush and John McCain, I do not think that any trade agreement is a good trade agreement. I don't think an agreement that allows South Korea to import hundreds of thousands of cars into the U.S., but continues to restrict U.S. car exports into South Korea to a few thousand, is a smart deal. I don't think that trade agreements without labor or environmental agreements are in our long term interests.

He had a few more remarks about trade in general:

If we continue to let our trade policy be dictated by special interests, then American workers will continue to be undermined, and public support for robust trade will continue to erode. That might make sense to the Washington lobbyists who run Senator McCain's campaign, but it won't help our nation compete. Allowing subsidized and unfairly traded products to flood our markets is not free trade and it's not fair to the people of Michigan. We cannot stand by while countries manipulate currencies to promote exports, creating huge imbalances in the global economy. We cannot let foreign regulatory policies exclude American products. We cannot let enforcement of existing trade agreements take a backseat to the negotiation of new ones. Put simply, we need tougher negotiators on our side of the table – to strike bargains that are good not just for Wall Street, but also for Main Street. And when I am President, that's what we will do.

The Perils of President Lee

2008-06-15T21:30:07-08:00

President Lee has faced more perils than Pauline in recent weeks. The photo was taken in happier days, well before the beef agreement. This week he had to work through a cabinet restructuring, negotiations with Washington, the biggest in the string of beef demonstrations, and a truckers' strike.

Two delegations of Korean lawmakers and administrators were in Washington early in the week, meeting with their U.S. counterparts: Beef Delegations Ask U.S. Officials for Cooperation (Chosun Ilbo, June 11); SKorean delegates head to US to discuss beef deal (AFP, June 8) . The delegations reach a resolution of the issue: Legislators: U.S. negative on beef renegotiation with S Korea (China View, June 15).

Neither did Trade Minister Kim Jong-hoon when he went to the U.S. at the end of the week to meet with Susan Schwab, the United States Trade Representative, "to press for additional safeguards against the supposed dangers of mad cow disease." (SKorea minister heads for US beef talks, more protests planned, AFP, June 13; U.S. to host S.Korean trade minister in beef row, Reuters, June 13). Before he became Trade Minister, Kim was the chief Korean negotiator of the trade agreement. He was to meet Schwab Friday night in Washington, and the meetings were expected to go into the weekend. The Bush Administration has been refusing to renegotiate the beef agreement, but Kim is looking for some sort of voluntary limits on U.S. exports of older beef (thought to present a greater risk of mad-cow disease). At a news conference before he left, Kim explained some of the issues that needed to be worked through (Korea, U.S. Puzzling Out Beef Deal Formalities ):

“Our aim is to restore the trust of consumers, and a government guarantee of some form is needed in the process,” Kim said. “Too much government intervention could cause international trade disputes, so the best way would be to generate a similar effect without undermining the credibility of the Korean government,” said Kim. The Korean and U.S. governments have reportedly reached a consensus that if exporters and importers agree voluntarily to forgo shipments of American beef from cattle older than 30 months, the two governments will guarantee the deal. The two sides are still working to find a way to do this without violating World Trade Organization regulations.

Kim said a written guarantee to back an agreement made between private parties creates problems. If the two governments do decide to guarantee the agreement by official diplomatic document, it might violate WTO rules by directly interfering with independence of the private sector. A verbal guarantee is an option, but that might not win the trust of Koreans, so the two governments are thinking of a written guarantee in a form other than an official diplomatic document that will not carry the signatures of government authorities. The two sides judge that an indirect expression such as, “the U.S. government confirms and respects voluntary restriction in the private sector” would not breach the WTO regulations.

A unilateral statement by the U.S. government, or a joint statement by both the Korean and the U.S. governments are also being considered as an option. If the U.S. government adheres to its original position that it is difficult to announce the guarantee, the Korean government is pondering making a unilateral announcement after receiving a written or verbal guarantee from the U.S.

News reports on Sunday night (Monday in Korea) say that Kim and Schwab failed to reach an agreement: US, South Korean officials end beef talks (FOSTER KLUG, AP, June 15).

The top U.S. and South Korean trade envoys broke off talks Sunday without resolving a crisis over the resumption of American beef shipments that has shaken South Korea's pro-U.S. government.
South Korean Trade Minister Kim Jong-hoon, who flew into Washington on Friday for discussions, was returning home, U.S. Trade Representative spokeswoman Gretchen Hamel said.
Kim and Susan Schwab, the U.S. trade envoy, held "frank and candid discussions" Friday and Saturday, Hamel said, but, "in order to find a mutually acceptable solution, both sides need more time to look into technical issues."
She said officials from the countries will stay in contact.
The talks, which focused on the importation of U.S. beef from cattle below 30 months of age, came as thousands of people protested in Seoul, demanding that a beef import deal settled in April be renegotiated and urging South Korean President Lee Myung-bak to resign.
Lee has vowed not to allow the import of beef from cattle older than 30 months. Scientists think infection levels of mad cow disease increase with age.
The South Korean Foreign Ministry said in a statement that the "two sides agreed to cooperate to produce a solution that can satisfy each other." Seoul and Washington needed more time to work out effective measures for beef imports, the ministry said.
The Bush administration has said that it will not renegotiate an accord that was supposed to have settled a major irritant in ties between the allies. But Washington has said it supports beef packaging labels that would show the ages of slaughtered cows.
Lee said he has received a positive reply from the U.S. on measures under which the American beef industry would voluntarily not ship meat from cattle older than 30 months. Lee called the voluntary restraint the most rational measure to resolve the beef dispute.

In the U.S., Congressmen were divided on voluntary restraints. Max Baucus of Montana said a deal was a deal, but John Thune of South Dakota was willing to accept voluntary restrictions on beef over 30 months old as a temporary, confidence building device: U.S. Lawmakers Divided Over Voluntary Restraint (Dong-A Ilbo, June 13).

Jumping back to earlier in the week: on Tuesday morning Lee's cabinet offered to resign: South Korean cabinet offers to resign (Choe Sang-Hun, International Herald Tribune, June 10, 2008). As of Sunday, this was still up in the air, although the speculation was that Lee would take advantage of the resignations for a reshuffle. It's possible that Lee could turn to a rival GNP party leader, Park Geun-hye, daughter of the former dictator, as a prime minister: S.Korea's troubled president seeks rival as PM (Lee Suwan, Reuters, June 11).

Calling for her help now can be seen as a humbling admission that he needs her strong network of supporters and skill at managing political affairs to fix his government, analysts said....

Park, a former GNP chair and daughter of an assassinated dictator, is expected to bring a steadying hand to Lee's government, roundly criticised for bungling the U.S. beef import deal and being out of touch with public sentiment, analysts said.

Relations between Lee and experienced GNP insider Park have been frosty since the two battled it out last year for the party's presidential nomination....

The post of prime minister has mostly been ceremonial, but under previous president Roh Moo-hyun, the premier became the point person for pushing legislation through parliament.

(Lee Gwang-ho/Newsis, via Reuters)

Tuesday night there were large demonstrations in Seoul and other cities. Organizers had been looking for a one million person turnout and building the historical symbolism of the pro-democracy movement, which began on June 10, 1987. Here's an early story: Seoul protest threatens to topple government (Choe Sang-Hun, International Herald Tribune, June 10).

The rally had an almost festive mood, with antigovernment slogans reverberating through the city center well past midnight. Loudspeakers blared the songs South Koreans sang during their struggle against the military dictators of the 1970s and '80s. Large balloons carried banners that read "Judgement day for Lee Myung Bak" and "Renegotiate the beef deal." One widely distributed leaflet said: "Mad cow drives our people mad!"

South Korea banned American beef imports in December 2003 after a case was reported in the United States.

The police estimated the crowd at 100,000, while organizers claimed it amounted to 700,000.

The protesters appeared to encompass a broad spectrum of society: students, union members, Roman Catholic nuns, office workers in neckties, and mothers and fathers holding hands with small children.

Up to 21,000 police officers were present, barricading roads leading to the presidential Blue House with buses and shipping containers. Protesters spray-painted the barricades with anti-Lee slogans.

The agriculture minister, Chung Won Chun, visited the rally to offer an apology in a speech, but protesters quickly surrounded him chanting "traitor" and he quickly left.

Kim Jae-kyoung reports for the Korean Times on a meeting of economists Friday, under the auspices of the Korean International Economic Association: Economists Dissect MBnomics (Korea Times, June 13). These evidently critqued the Lee Administration for its weak won policy, promotion of free trade, and beef agreement. Both of the latter were picked up from the previous Roh Administration and I'm not clear how the Lee policy was different. The economists did criticize Lee for his approach:

The Lee administration has drummed up its efforts to form FTAs with multiple countries at the same time. But while pushing for these, it did not listen to the Korean people and follow proper procedure.

The government belittled the importance of public consensus and procedures, which triggered a strong backlash from the public. In particular, it did not secure transparency in proceeding with resumption of U.S. beef imports.

The U.S. beef import issue has broken up the nation into several factions, which has caused astronomical social costs for the economy. A key factor behind this mishap is the Lee administration's lack of communication and expectation management skills.

Economists participating in the seminar stressed that forming FTAs with multiple countries is not a panacea as it can instead cause the country to become beset by numerous regulations created by multiple international deals.

The actual comments at this seminar were probably more nuanced than this story from the Times suggests. This story provides quite a bit more detail; the title only refers to the comments of one of the three economists cited: 'US Is Not a Model for Korea', June 13).

On Friday the 13th, Korean truckers went on strike against high fuel prices and for higher wages. On Monday the 16th, the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions was also poised to announce a strike vote. : South Korea strike spreads; ports clogged (Reuters, June 16).

Lots of articles are placing the beef issue in a broader context, as a sort of trigger setting off expressions of public concern about a variety of issues. Evan Ramstad, for example: Beef Protests Put South Korea Cabinet Into Turmoil (Wall Street Journal, June 11):

Initially, the public was concerned about the safety of U.S. beef, amid sensational media allegations. Some made the false claim that Americans didn't eat the kind of beef being exported to South Korea. Soon opposition-party politicians and activist groups seized on the issue to fan dissent over many of Mr. Lee's policies.

Since taking office in late February, he pushed plans to downsize government offices, privatize several state-run companies and force schools to spend more time teaching English. In doing so, he alienated three powerful constituencies: bureaucrats, trade unions and teachers.

"All the complaints just exploded at once," said Choi Jin, director of the Institute of Presidential Leadership, a research center in Seoul. "If you try to understand [the outrage] with only the beef issue, you cannot understand it."

The Lee photo is from his web site, via Asia Portal (http://www.asiaportal.info/Newsroom/InFocus/INFOCUS2008/INFOCUS2008WEEK09/).