South Korea's New Leadership in the Trump Era

The Diplomat

4 days ago

Trans-Pacific View author Mercy Kuo regularly engages subject-matter experts, policy practitioners and strategic thinkers across the globe for their diverse insights into U.S. Asia policy. This conversation with Dr. Soo Kim –former CIA analyst and geopolitical risk consultant – is the 469th in 'The Trans-Pacific View Insight Series.'
Identify the top geopolitical priorities facing South Korea's newly elected President Lee Jae-myung.
President Lee assumes office at a time of friction, both at home and abroad. His top geopolitical priorities likely will include stabilizing the Peninsula, recalibrating Seoul's alliance with the U.S., and securing Seoul's role and place amid several ongoing global contingencies, including the Russia-Ukraine War, tightening U.S.-China competition, and the Middle East crisis. Lee's challenge lies not only in balancing Seoul's international act, but calibrating this against the situation at home, where political divisions need to be resolved and economic challenges – including improving the livelihoods of the population – remain front and center.
Analyze Lee's likely approach to managing trade and security relations with the Trump administration.
We remember that during the snap presidential election campaign, Lee perpetuated the image of a pragmatic leader. Should that truly be the case, we would expect the South Korean president to handle relations with the U.S. – including the delicately intertwined issues on trade and security – because of Seoul's long-term interests. That Lee has branded himself as a pragmatic leader, if played well and judiciously, could translate into a relationship that is nuanced and preempts potential friction with the Trump administration. This may include affirming Seoul's defense contributions while resisting excessive, heavy-handed demands for cost-sharing. The South Korean public may perceive trade negotiations as having more immediate, palpable impact on their daily lives. Lee, cognizant of such domestic concerns, may push back against protectionist measures; however, he may frame such efforts as defending the Korean population rather than outright resistance to U.S. pressure.
Examine how Lee might balance the ROK's strategic position vis-à-vis the U.S.-China tech war and more broadly, U.S.-China strategic competition.
The challenge Lee, like his predecessors, faces as South Korea's president lies in preserving Seoul's economic relationship with China while avoiding strategic drift from the U.S. alliance. If Lee were sensitive to perceptions in both Washington and Beijing, he may be inclined to take a strategically ambiguous approach. For instance, perhaps he would resist overt alignment with U.S. export control regimes – unless Seoul's national security is directly in peril while discreetly complying and cooperating in areas that could jeopardize the interests of Korea's powerhouses, such as Samsung, SK Hynix, or other industries' access to Western markets. Lee may also look to emphasize regional cooperation and coalitions to soften any perceptions of leaning too 'skewed' towards either Washington or Beijing, enhancing supply chain coordination with other regional actors in Asia. The key for Lee – and South Korea – lies in preserving the country's maneuvering space without triggering a backlash from either side. This clearly requires diplomatic dexterity – akin to pragmatism.
Explain how Lee's administration might work with China in managing North Korea.
Lee has vowed to open communications with North Korea again and establish peace on the Korean Peninsula through talks and cooperation. Given his emphasis on reengagement and dialogue with Pyongyang, Lee may view China as a critical key in jump-starting inter-Korean relations. Rather than prioritizing the U.S. channel, Lee may consider diplomatic coordination with Beijing to nudge inter-Korean relations to rapprochement. His administration may consider reopening trilateral South Korea-China-North Korea channels in parallel with U.S.-centered efforts to diversify Seoul's approach to Pyongyang.
Assess the broader implications of Lee's leadership on Northeast Asian regional security risks and opportunities in the Trump era.
The region is far from being isolated from the geopolitical turmoil in Eastern Europe and the Middle East. As such, it's critical for like-minded countries to find points of convergence and cooperation with the view of protecting their common interests of stability and international order. The role of a regional balancer, if played judiciously, could be instrumental in recalibrating dynamics and preventing one power from holding disproportionate sway over the region. For instance, a skilled, truly nuanced dealing with Beijing could create a channel for de-escalation. At the same time, an 'autonomous' foreign policy stance may not only frustrate the U.S. and China, the major powers; it could also complicate and impede U.S.-Japan-Korea coordination, especially if Seoul hesitates support on critical issues, such as intelligence sharing or joint military drills.
In sum, a truly 'pragmatic' South Korean presidency could create an opportunity for regionally-driven stability initiatives. Success hinges largely upon Lee's ability to maintain Washington's trust while pursuing his independent overtures as well as communicating Seoul's strategic value to both the U.S. and China without tipping the balance – a mammoth order.