How to establish a smart strategy for South Korea in Washington

Lee Soo-hyuck, left, South Korea's ambassador to the United States / Korea Times file

By Art Estopinan

The arrival of the new Korean Ambassador Lee Soo-hycuk in Washington D.C. will be an invaluable opportunity for Seoul to upgrade its game in diplomacy and in lobbying and to sharpen its message so that lawmakers understand the vital importance of South Korea.

The stakes are high, not only because of the confusion among lawmakers about where Seoul is going regarding North Korea, but also because of the downturn in Korea-Japan relations that has made cooperation between those countries on common concerns, including alliance issues, difficult or impossible in DC.

And many DC insiders assume that geopolitical realities will force South Korea into the Chinese corner over time, but they do so without any particular evidence. The problem is that they have not been presented with any evidence from Korea that suggests that such a shift in Korean thinking is not taking place.

We cannot underestimate the implications of impressions. Yet mistaken assumptions based on impressions can only be resolved if Seoul presents a vision for Korea and for Northeast Asia that makes sense to Americans in the U.S.

Sadly, such a Korean vision has been missing the last few years and the U.S.-Korea relationship is afloat. Although it is essential that a broad swath of Americans be engaged, and educated, about the importance of South Korea, that engagement is not happening.

For all the money spent by Seoul on lobbying on the Hill, on expensive, high-profile events, very few in the Congress, or the White House, have an understanding of why the Korean Peninsula is so central of Washington. South Korea has often become an ancillary issue related to China policy, or to alliance issues globally.

Part of the problem is that the Korea Caucus has been reduced to a zombie state over the past two years. Korea as a topic (other than North Korean nuclear weapons) is languishing. We see nothing of the excitement surrounding the Korea Caucus in the buildup to the KORUS free trade agreement, nor the enthusiasm we saw surrounding the rally for the "Comfort Women" resolution 121 that drew the support of Japanese American congressman Mike Honda a decade ago.

We can see the results of this lack of advocacy and education everywhere. Pundits express a distrust of South Korea as compared with Japan. That is odd because there are so many Koreans living in the United States, serving in the military and active in American politics. Korea has a strong Christian community and has shown a commitment on many fronts that is unmatched by most allies.

The problem is not that Seoul's position on North Korea is different from that of the United States. Americans have differing perspectives on North Korea, even in the military. There are plenty of Americans, liberal or conservative, who can be brought on board to work with Seoul.

But they will not do so on their own. Korea must make a commitment to working with people across the United States, not just a small handful of Korea experts known to Korean bureaucrats.

The first step is for Seoul to commit itself to educating Congress about Korea, and to offer up concrete opportunities for the American economy. That message must be customized to specific regions.

North Korea policy is a place where sophisticated advocacy is sadly lacking. When President Trump suggested that a dialogue with North Korea, and that the United States could benefit from such a geopolitical shift, you would expect that liberal Democrats would have supported this move, and taken sides with Trump, against more conventional voices.

But the opposite happened. Democrats respond to President Trump by clinging to the same hostility and distrust we have seen for the last 50 years. No breakthrough was possible because of this classic knee-jerk response.

That did not have to be the case. Seoul could have formulated a message for Americans about the value of dialogue that addresses the concerns of lawmakers of both parties, thereby creating a space wherein they could support Trump on North Korea, even if they disagreed with him on everything else.

That work would not be easy, but I have seen in my work on the Hill how educating lawmakers and their staff, together with the presentation of an innovative approach that is inspiring to Americans, can be a game changer.

Seoul has focused on Korean War veterans in its efforts. But as veterans grow older, Seoul will need to develop new audiences, new constituencies. Increasingly, we must look at Americans who have taught English in Korea, Americans who are interested in Korean popular culture, or Americans in the IT sector with ties to Korea.

The critical audience for Seoul in the United States is the Korean American community. Korean Americans will be a critical part of Seoul's efforts in Washington DC in the years to come. But the next generation of Korean Americans has different concerns, different interests, and even different approaches to networking than do the elderly heads of Korean American associations. We need to make sure we are focused on these shifts and identify emerging constituencies.

Equally importantly, there are critical states like Montana, or Wyoming, or Idaho, that have literally no Korean population even though they are home to some extremely influential lawmakers. However, there are Korean adoptees spread across these states, some of whom have significant influence. Yet Seoul has not systematically advocated for adoptees or addressed them as an important audience in a political sense.

The arrival of the new ambassador in Washington DC at a moment of profound geopolitical shift should be an opportunity for a fundamental upgrade in Korea's diplomatic and political efforts in the capital that will assure that Seoul is punching its weight in a fiercely competitive arena.

Art Estopinan served for 27 years as chief of staff (and spokesperson) for Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the US House of Representatives, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (Republican), the critical committee for international issues. He has extensive experience working with Congress, the Executive and a broad range of players in business and government on policy.