Assembly committee spars over FTA
The Hankyoreh, Seoul
Assembly committee spars over FTA
Divided along political, regional lines, some question meeting’s efficacy
7 April 2007
On April 6, a special committee of the National Assembly set up to monitor the Korea-U.S. free trade agreement (FTA), waged fierce debate over their evaluation of the deal as well as any needed countermeasures.
Political inclinations deeply divided the committee, and its efficacy as a means of evaluating the FTA was questioned.
Members of the main opposition Grand National Party (GNP) and pro-government Uri Party, both of which have approved of the FTA with the United States, were in general supportive of the negotiations. Rep. Kim Tae-nyeon of the Uri Party said, "In particular, it is important that signing the FTA was ahead of China or Japan doing so with the U.S." Rep. Shim Sang-jeong of the minor opposition Democratic Labor Party (DLP) and who has been opposed to the FTA, however, continued her criticism of the negotiations, saying, "There should be an official hearing or Parliamentary inspection of the trade deal."
Lawmakers who predict their regions will suffer economic damage due to the FTA voiced strong discontent. Uri Party’s Kang Chang-il, of Jeju Island, said, "Jeju’s mandarins are produced much more in March than in September, but the seasonal tariff on U.S. oranges was agreed at the FTA to be maintained only between September and February. The FTA was agreed at the cost of Jeju’s mandarin oranges. Shame on the Korean negotiators.’’
Members of the special committee repeatedly questioned the FTA negotiation process in areas such as goods produced in the joint Korean Gaeseong ( Kaesong) Industrial Complex, as well as beef quarantine. "After the negotiations, the U.S. said unless Korea completely opens its beef market, Washington would not ratify the FTA. Did Korea give the U.S. a separate promise?" asked Rep. Song Young-gil, backed up by Yoo Seung-hee of the Uri Party. The DLP’s Shim Sang-jeong showed her distrust in connection with the U.S. refusal to recognize goods produced at the Gaeseong Industrial Complex, located in the North, as made in South Korea , as all of the factories are South Korean-run. "Based on the U.S.’s announced position, it is hard to believe the government’s explanation that the products made at Gaeseong would be recognized as ’made in South Korea’ by the U.S.," she said.
Rep. Park Young-sun of the Uri Party noted, "If the government had initially said that it had opened the possibility of preferential tariffs for products made at the Gaeseong Industrial Complex, there would have been no controversy. However, the government announced as if the two nations reached agreement on it and such a situation has made the problem more serious.’’ In response, Trade Minister Kim Hyun-chong said, "There can be no behind agreement for the beef. I am assured that Gaeseong will be designated as an outward processing zone by May," a clause in the FTA under which products manufactured in designated zones outside of either country can be considered as having been produced ’in country.’
Some lawmakers called the special committee itself useless. Rep. Shim criticized its method of operation. "The special committee couldn’t exercise any power during the process of negotiations, and experts necessary for certain verifications have been completely excluded from the committee,’’ he said, adding, "The committee should be changed into a Parliamentary inspection committee or be dissolved.’’ Other legislators present at the committee meeting urged the government to prepare countermeasures for sectors of the economy about to suffer damages due to the FTA, as well as to clarify gaps in interpretation between Korea and the U.S. regarding certain of the trade pact’s clauses.
