By Ahn Ho-young
The Federation of Korean Industries (FKI) and the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington, D.C. jointly hosted a webinar on April 1 on a topic we will have to face in not too distant future: "How Korea and the Korean business community must prepare for the Korea-U.S. Summit." As I sat through the seminar as a panelist, many thoughts crossed my mind. I wish to share some of them.
First, good preparation must start with a good study of President Biden and his team. What impresses me most about the team is the consistency of its focus on both domestic and foreign issues. On domestic issues, Biden has been consistently focused on the pandemic, jobs, climate change and racial harmony, often declaring that the government can make changes to all these issues and lead the U.S. through his "Build Back Better" agenda.
Biden has been equally consistent on foreign policy, declaring the return of the U.S. to the global leadership role, emphasizing the importance of allies and building coalitions with fellow democracies. Such consistency of focus is garnering much praise from Washington commentators: George Will's "Trumanesque foreign policy", and E.J. Dionne's "paradigm shifter," among them. More importantly, it offers a stable basis for further strengthening the Korea-U.S. alliance.
Second, four weeks ago in this column, I suggested three issues for the 2+2 meeting that was held on March 17. They are key issues that should be addressed through the summit meeting as well. One issue the presidents must address is restoring trust in the alliance, which has been critically damaged in the past several years.
Trust cannot be built without common perception of threats and a shared sense of priorities in the efforts to be made to address those. After the release of the joint statement from the 2+2 meeting in Seoul, the Korean press took note of the conspicuous absence of the two allies' resolve to achieve North Korean denuclearization, in particular, in comparison to its salient coverage in the joint statements of the two preceding meetings, namely, the Quad summit meeting and the 2+2 meeting in Tokyo. Apart from the real significance of that absence, such a perception does not help to restore trust.
As for U.S.-China relations, Korea's position should be based on "strategic clarity" for the reasons I shared four weeks ago. After the 2+2 meeting in Seoul, the national security advisors of Korea, the U.S. and Japan met in Annapolis, near Washington, D.C. on April 3. On that same day, the foreign ministers of Korea and China met in Xiamen, Fujian province.
Again, apart from the real importance of the timing and the venue, these meetings added to the concern that Korea keeps straddling the fence between the U.S. and China. At the FKI-CSIS webinar, CSIS' Victor Cha characterized Korea's position as "hedging," and argued that the hedging space is being significantly narrowed, which must be taken into consideration.
In the webinar, Cha also addressed an issue I addressed four weeks ago: the perception of Korea turning increasingly inward-looking and becoming isolated. Such a perception of Korea, if left unaddressed, can be a self-fulfilling prophecy, with impacts on our growth as a nation and the psyche of our citizens, especially of the young. This perception of Korea being too inward-looking is one key issue that must be addressed through the summit meeting.
Third, there was an impressive unanimity among all the webinar panelists that the Korea-U.S. alliance must move forward and collectively address the new issues and challenges of the 21st century: the pandemic, climate change, clean energy, critical technology, cyber-security and space.
As for clean energy, CSIS' Matthew Goodman gave a lengthy explanation on the central place the climate change issue assumes for the Biden team. He then suggested further strengthening Korea-U.S. cooperation on fuel cell and other clean energy technology. The Korean Chamber of Commerce's Woo Tae-hee welcomed the suggestion, and suggested joint R&D to develop the next generation of battery technology.
Batteries, of course, are one of the four vital products included in Biden's Feb. 24 Executive Order on the supply chain. Lee & Ko's Choi Seok-young explained the Korean business community's keen interest in the new U.S. administration's actions regarding the supply chain issue, and suggested that the U.S. engage Korean business more in implementing the Executive Order. Incidentally, the White House invited Samsung to the semiconductor meeting to be hosted by National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan on April 12.
With respect to trade issues, Goodman said that they are so far not a priority of the Biden. administration. He thus wondered how soon the U.S. could move on the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) front, and suggested that Korea should best move first to join it. Choi countered with a view that many key trade issues, especially World Trade Organization (WTO) reform and Korea's accession to the CPTPP, would need more proactive engagement by the U.S.
Ahn Ho-young (hyahn78@mofa.or.kr) is president of the University of North Korean Studies. He has served as Korean ambassador to the United States as well as first vice foreign minister.
 |
First, good preparation must start with a good study of President Biden and his team. What impresses me most about the team is the consistency of its focus on both domestic and foreign issues. On domestic issues, Biden has been consistently focused on the pandemic, jobs, climate change and racial harmony, often declaring that the government can make changes to all these issues and lead the U.S. through his "Build Back Better" agenda.
Biden has been equally consistent on foreign policy, declaring the return of the U.S. to the global leadership role, emphasizing the importance of allies and building coalitions with fellow democracies. Such consistency of focus is garnering much praise from Washington commentators: George Will's "Trumanesque foreign policy", and E.J. Dionne's "paradigm shifter," among them. More importantly, it offers a stable basis for further strengthening the Korea-U.S. alliance.
Second, four weeks ago in this column, I suggested three issues for the 2+2 meeting that was held on March 17. They are key issues that should be addressed through the summit meeting as well. One issue the presidents must address is restoring trust in the alliance, which has been critically damaged in the past several years.
Trust cannot be built without common perception of threats and a shared sense of priorities in the efforts to be made to address those. After the release of the joint statement from the 2+2 meeting in Seoul, the Korean press took note of the conspicuous absence of the two allies' resolve to achieve North Korean denuclearization, in particular, in comparison to its salient coverage in the joint statements of the two preceding meetings, namely, the Quad summit meeting and the 2+2 meeting in Tokyo. Apart from the real significance of that absence, such a perception does not help to restore trust.
As for U.S.-China relations, Korea's position should be based on "strategic clarity" for the reasons I shared four weeks ago. After the 2+2 meeting in Seoul, the national security advisors of Korea, the U.S. and Japan met in Annapolis, near Washington, D.C. on April 3. On that same day, the foreign ministers of Korea and China met in Xiamen, Fujian province.
Again, apart from the real importance of the timing and the venue, these meetings added to the concern that Korea keeps straddling the fence between the U.S. and China. At the FKI-CSIS webinar, CSIS' Victor Cha characterized Korea's position as "hedging," and argued that the hedging space is being significantly narrowed, which must be taken into consideration.
In the webinar, Cha also addressed an issue I addressed four weeks ago: the perception of Korea turning increasingly inward-looking and becoming isolated. Such a perception of Korea, if left unaddressed, can be a self-fulfilling prophecy, with impacts on our growth as a nation and the psyche of our citizens, especially of the young. This perception of Korea being too inward-looking is one key issue that must be addressed through the summit meeting.
Third, there was an impressive unanimity among all the webinar panelists that the Korea-U.S. alliance must move forward and collectively address the new issues and challenges of the 21st century: the pandemic, climate change, clean energy, critical technology, cyber-security and space.
As for clean energy, CSIS' Matthew Goodman gave a lengthy explanation on the central place the climate change issue assumes for the Biden team. He then suggested further strengthening Korea-U.S. cooperation on fuel cell and other clean energy technology. The Korean Chamber of Commerce's Woo Tae-hee welcomed the suggestion, and suggested joint R&D to develop the next generation of battery technology.
Batteries, of course, are one of the four vital products included in Biden's Feb. 24 Executive Order on the supply chain. Lee & Ko's Choi Seok-young explained the Korean business community's keen interest in the new U.S. administration's actions regarding the supply chain issue, and suggested that the U.S. engage Korean business more in implementing the Executive Order. Incidentally, the White House invited Samsung to the semiconductor meeting to be hosted by National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan on April 12.
With respect to trade issues, Goodman said that they are so far not a priority of the Biden. administration. He thus wondered how soon the U.S. could move on the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) front, and suggested that Korea should best move first to join it. Choi countered with a view that many key trade issues, especially World Trade Organization (WTO) reform and Korea's accession to the CPTPP, would need more proactive engagement by the U.S.
Ahn Ho-young (hyahn78@mofa.or.kr) is president of the University of North Korean Studies. He has served as Korean ambassador to the United States as well as first vice foreign minister.
![[INTERVIEW] Jung Woo-sung was initially hesitant to take on role in 'Hunt'](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/49e565c241d44d48b7795a3f430ab658.jpg/dims/resize/178/optimize)
