(EDITORIAL from the Korea Herald on April 24) - Benefit of doubt

Chances are high that the Korean National Assembly will ratify the Korean-U.S. free trade agreement in June, if not during its current sitting.

The main opposition Democratic Party, whose lawmakers abstained from a vote on the accord during a committee session, is not expected to attempt to block its ratification in a plenary session by force.
It goes without saying that the U.S. Senate should ratify the bilateral trade
accord in its entirety, instead of demanding changes here and there. It would be
better for the Senate to ditch the pact than to demand renegotiations, which the
Korean government has said are realistically out of the question.
U.S. calls for modifications would no doubt elicit reciprocity from Korea, making
it extremely difficult to conclude the ensuing renegotiations in a short period
of time. It might take less time to negotiate a new accord from scratch.
The free trade agreement is a product of hard bargaining. It had taken more than
two years before the accord was signed in April 2007. The Korean and U.S.
negotiators had many rounds of talks, not just in Seoul and Washington, D.C., but
in smaller cities. They even met in Paris and Geneva as well.
But the Korean motion to ratify the pact suffered a setback when Barack Obama
voiced opposition to it during his presidential campaign. He said it was
seriously flawed, citing a huge imbalance in auto trade in favor of Korea. His
view was shared by the Democratic Party, which has the U.S. Congress under its
control. Both Obama and the Democratic Party demanded changes to the free trade
deal.
The blighted prospects for the trade accord in the United States were good reason
for the Korean opposition forces to demand a delay for a vote in the National
Assembly. But President Lee Myung-bak's administration demanded a prompt vote,
claiming that ratification in Korea would put pressure on the Obama
administration to drop its demand for changes to the accord and submit it in its
original form to the Senate for approval.
The Korean administration's rationale was not convincing, and all the more so,
given the remarks by Obama's pick of Ron Kirk as the U.S. trade representative.
During his confirmation hearing, Kirk said the Obama administration was ready to
step away from the free trade deal if what it regarded as serious problems were
unaddressed.
Then came the Lee-Obama talks, which were held on the sidelines of the G20 summit
in London early this month. It would not have been possible for them to go into
detail, with trade being only one of several main agenda items at the 30-minute
sessions.
Nonetheless, Lee's spokesman said in a post-summit briefing, "The two presidents
agreed that the Korea-U.S. FTA will be mutually beneficial, and they pledged to
move the agreement forward." News reports quoted a senior U.S. official as making
remarks to that effect.
The official briefing did not say much when it came to the issue of whether or
not to renegotiate the accord. But some Korean officials insisted, without
elaborating, that there was a notable change in the Obama administration's
attitude toward the free trade agreement. It looked worthwhile to give the
benefit of the doubt to the officials, who were privy to confidential
information.
Lee and Obama will have an opportunity to review the accord and make a final
decision on it when they meet in Washington, D.C., in June. As the ruling party's
floor leader promised after the motion for ratification cleared the Foreign
Affairs and Trade Committee on Tuesday, the party will do well to put it to a
final vote in the National Assembly after the June summit talks, not during the
current extra session.
(END)