(News Focus) - Obama unlikely to bring dramatic change to Korea policy amid economic crisis

By Hwang Doo-hyong
WASHINGTON, Jan. 20 (Yonhap) -- Incoming U.S. President Barack Obama will not
likely bring a dramatic change to his country's decades-old alliance with South
Korea amid worsening economic woes that force him to be pragmatic in dealing with
North Korea's nuclear disarmament and the ratification of a free trade deal with
South Korea.
"Regarding Korea policy, the main difference between the Obama and Bush
administrations will be that President Obama will take a more pragmatic
approach," said David Straub, associate director of Korean Studies at the
Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center at Stanford University. "U.S. strategic
aims regarding North Korea and the U.S.-ROK alliance will not change."
Marcus Noland, senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International
Economics, echoed Straub's theme, saying, "I do not expect Obama to have a
particularly ideological presidency. His foreign policy views are pragmatic, and
he appears to value cooperation with allies."
The scholar was referring to the difficulty that presidents Roh Moo-hyun and
George W. Bush had in coordinating their North Korea policy and realigning their
decades-old alliance due to their conflicting philosophies.
Liberal Roh sought active engagement with a nuclear-armed North Korea and more
independence from the U.S., while conservative Bush designated North Korea as
part of an axis of evil and disliked Roh's idea of dependence on the U.S.
Since the inauguration of the conservative South Korean President Lee Myung-bak
in February last year, like-minded Bush has enjoyed an amicable relationship with
Lee, inviting him to Camp David in the first such case for any South Korean
president, and bringing him to the G20 economic summit in Washington in November.
The situation changed again with the advent of the liberal Obama administration,
giving birth to concerns that the new combination might be a reverse version of
the awkward relationship of Roh and Bush.
Some fear an aggressive approach to North Korea by Obama would collide with Lee's
pledge not to seek inter-Korean reconciliation unless the North abandons its
nuclear weapons programs.
Noland dismissed such a concern. "I think that we can look forward to a good
relationship between the U.S. and South Korea," he said. "While there was
considerable ideological divergence between the governments of Roh Moo-hyun and
George W. Bush, I think the administrations of Lee Myung-bak and Barack Obama
will be more in tune with one another."
Straub warned against making inaccurate comparisons in ideology between U.S.
politicians and their South Korean counterparts.
"There is a tendency in South Korea to equate U.S. Democrats with South Korean
progressives, and U.S. Republicans with South Korean conservatives," said the
former head of the Korea Desk at the State Department. "The American and South
Korean political cultures are quite different, however, so such comparisons can
be very misleading."
Noting the warm telephone conversation between Lee and Obama soon after Obama's
election in November, Evans Revere, president of the Korea Society, said, "I
sense that the chemistry between them will be excellent."
"There is every reason to believe that shared goals, a shared commitment to
stronger bilateral ties, and a clear determination on the part of the United
States to enhance its ties with Korea and other Asian allies and partners bodes
well for bilateral relations," he said.
Barry Bosworth, a researcher at the Brookings Institution, expects the Obama
administration will "continue the six-party talks, and would be willing to begin
a process that could lead to bilateral discussions at some future time." However,
he added, "At this point there is not a large difference on policy on North Korea
between the old and new administrations."
Obama has pledged to meet with North Korean leader Kim Jong-il or any other
leaders of rogue states without preconditions, saying, "the Bush administration
has come to recognize that it hasn't worked, this notion that we are simply
silent when it comes to our enemies."
Obama once said North Korea made eight nuclear bombs and spread its nuclear
technology to Syria while the Bush administration neglected to directly engage
the North for the first six years of its eight-year tenure.
Obama's choice for the top U.S. diplomat, Hillary Clinton, also said in a Senate
confirmation hearing last week that she will engage the North directly, as well
as via the six-party talks, which stalled last month when Pyongyang refused to
agree to a verification regime on its nuclear facilities.
Straub, however, predicted that Clinton will not visit Pyongyang soon.
"She will only visit there if she has good reason to believe that North Korea
will respond quite positively on the nuclear issue," he said. "A visit by
President Obama to North Korea will only happen to cement a firm nuclear deal."
Noland, meanwhile, expected the incoming President "will not want to get
embroiled in disputes with the Republicans over North Korea, which could be a
distraction from dealing with issues such as the economy or the actual shooting
wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which will be higher priorities."
Bosworth agrees that Lee and Obama "will have a good relationship because they
have compatible views on North Korea and other major issues in Northeast Asia."
The pending FTA, however, should be the only exception, he said. "The new
administration will not want to bring it up for a vote because it will lose, and
it runs the risk of initiating protectionist actions in the Congress."
Noland talked about the bad timing of Obama's inauguration amid the worst
economic crisis in decades and the U.S. auto industry on verge of collapse,
advising Koreans to be patient until possibly 2010, when the economic situation
might be somewhat stabilized.
"The KORUS FTA won't pass unless it is renegotiated in some way," he said. "Some
changes might be incorporated in side agreements. The situation in the automobile
sector in the U.S. is simply too dire."
Noland was refering to the serious credit crunch facing the Big Three automakers
due to nose-diving sales, which led to a bailout package worth tens of billions
of dollars last month.
"It is unlikely that Obama will abandon his opposition to the FTA at a time when
U.S. auto manufacturers are facing a dismal future," said Bruce Klingner, senior
research fellow at the Heritage Foundation. "Nor would a Democratic-controlled
Congress be willing to approve an FTA that is perceived as risking greater
exposure to competition when U.S. auto companies are losing domestic market share
to foreign firms."
"In order for Obama to support the KORUS FTA, significant changes would be
necessary to alter the disparity in U.S.-South Korean auto trade," Klingner said.
Obama has said he opposes the FTA as it is, citing an imbalance in auto trade at
the ratio of 700,000 to 5,000, which is contested by South Korea. Seoul says the
figures include 250,000 autos produced at Hyundai's Alabama factory and excludes
GM Daewoo's 125,000 units made and sold in Korea.
Clinton proposed renegotiation of the free trade deal last week, especially on
the auto and beef trade, saying, "If the South Koreans are willing to reengage
negotiations on these vital provisions of the agreement, we will work with them
to get to resolution."
Revere of the Korea Society recommended that South Korea come up with a "creative
mechanism" addressing U.S. concern about the auto industry.
The former deputy head of the U.S. mission in Seoul said that "the new U.S.
administration is sensitive to the importance of the FTA to the overall bilateral
relationship, and I think that Korea will find the new administration willing to
work on this issue in a businesslike and friendly way that befits the friendship
between our two countries."
hdh@yna.co.kr
(END)