Gov’t needs to open up about free trade deal
The Hankyoreh, Korea
Gov’t needs to open up about free trade deal
Editorial
6 September 2006
South Korea and the United States will launch the third round of free trade negotiations in Seattle beginning September 6. Unlike the first and second rounds, both are expected to draw up detailed measures on market opening. South Korea’s chief negotiator Kim Jong-hoon recently said, "For the past two rounds, we spent time making our position known. From the third round, we will take real action." Indeed, a real battle is likely to start in the upcoming talks.
However, South Korean negotiators are facing an uphill battle. The United States is pressing its demands very hard in talks on the free trade agreement (FTA) in almost every area, placing South Korea on the defensive. Washington has called for Seoul to open such sectors as the automobile, pharmaceutical, finance, and public service industries. It also demands the removal of tariffs on agriculture within 10 years. The agricultural sector is one of the most sensitive areas being discussed between the two nations.
South Korea’s demands are confined to only some areas, including textiles. It calls for the U.S. to ease anti-dumping barriers and include products from the joint Korean-operated Kaesong (Gaeseong) Industrial Complex in the North as South Korean made. Facing strong opposition from Washington, chances seem to be slim that the demands could be accepted. Worse yet, the Kaesong issue is feared to be excluded from the upcoming negotiations. South Korea has much to lose and little to gain. Unfortunately, the upcoming talks will likely serve as further proof that economic power and negotiating capacity will dominate the outcome.
The only hope at this moment is that South Korean negotiators do their best to not be swayed by their U.S. counterparts. The outcome of the talks should also be disclosed fully to the people after the negotiators return home. Last month, President Roh Moo-hyun promised he would disclose all outcomes, save for any "high-level negotiation strategies." This promise should be kept, and outcomes involving sensitive issues involving people’s livelihood and the nation’s future should not be concealed in the name of "protecting negotiating strategies." We can say that the government is to blame for causing divisions in the nation over the FTA. Without knowing what is truly going on, how can people find common ground? To be honest with the people is the way to prevent further division and conflict.
