South Korea is currently in trade negotiations with the United States, and the two sides held their first round of contact last week, which immediately caught China's attention.

In an interview with South Korean media, Chinese Ambassador to South Korea Dai Bing specifically cited internal views within South Korea as a reminder for the South Korean side to "proceed cautiously," and then reiterated China's position. Given the differences in national conditions, if other countries engage in equal consultations with the United States to resolve economic and trade issues, China respects this; however, it opposes sacrificing China's interests in order to reach a deal with the United States.

[The first round of US-South Korea trade negotiations revealed South Korea's cards completely.]

This statement clearly targets South Korea. From another perspective, it also indicates that there is a high possibility that South Korea will unreservedly compromise with the United States.

The objective reality of US-South Korea relations means that South Korea does not have the ability to negotiate "on equal terms" with the United States.

Moreover, the ruling National Power Party has a clear tendency to lean towards the United States in foreign policy, which is already a public fact.

During President Yoon Suk-yeol's term, this characteristic was fully demonstrated. Even though he is now impeached and out of office, the acting government basically retained the previous diplomatic inertia, prioritizing the United States' opinion before major decisions.

As regional allies of the United States in the Asia-Pacific, Japan and South Korea responded differently to Trump's tariff policies.

Japan's tone was very firm. After negotiating with the U.S., they first said they were "not in a hurry to reach an agreement," and clearly stated that if the U.S. attempts to lure Japan into joining a "tariff alliance" against China, Japan would resist.

As for South Korea, its attitude toward the U.S. was relatively "submissive."

[Ambassador Dai Bing's remarks carry hidden messages.]

After all, the situations are different. A prolonged timeline benefits Japan more, as it increases Japan's bargaining power, making them less afraid of U.S. extreme pressure.

South Korea's political situation is unstable, and the acting government cannot fulfill complete administrative duties, being restricted at every turn in major decisions.

Previously, during the South Korean delegation's trip to the U.S. for negotiations, they met with U.S. Treasury Secretary Bessette and U.S. Trade Representative Grier, repeatedly emphasizing to the U.S. side that South Korea is a "reliable partner" of the U.S., willing to help rebuild the shipbuilding industry, in exchange for tariff exemptions from the Trump administration.

South Korea also requested the U.S. to "understand" its difficulties, such as the complexity of domestic political schedules and the need for South Korean parliamentary involvement in U.S.-South Korean negotiations.

Following this, the South Korean side concluded that both parties had formed a consensus on "conducting negotiations in a calm and orderly manner without rushing," and that this round of consultations "started smoothly."

[Ambassador Dai Bing mentioned US-South Korean economic and trade negotiations during the interview.]

Next, the U.S. and South Korea plan to establish working groups for specific issues to conduct in-depth consultations, aiming to reach an agreement before the 90-day tariff policy deferral expires.

However, the U.S. stance is quite different.

After the first round of negotiations, Bessette claimed that the progress of the U.S.-South Korean negotiations "exceeded expectations," and the two sides could reach a memorandum of understanding as early as next week. This statement is actually pressuring South Korea to follow the U.S.'s timetable for negotiations.

The South Korean public is extremely dissatisfied with its own performance. Strategic experts criticized that during the first round of U.S.-South Korean negotiations, South Korea voluntarily exposed its bottom line. It was perfectly fine to discuss tariff policies on a case-by-case basis, but instead, it unnecessarily expanded the scope to include economic security and exchange rate policies, seemingly eager to give the U.S. leverage.

What negotiation initiative can South Korea maintain after this?

[Han De-schoo preparing to resign to run for president]

Furthermore, the U.S. and South Korea set a time limit for reaching an agreement, and South Korea voluntarily proposed to achieve this by July, clearly catering to Trump's urgent demand. This completely disregards actual conditions and ignores various realities. Setting a deadline only brings unnecessary time pressure and is unlikely to serve as a driving force for negotiations, ultimately leading to failure.

In addition, given South Korea's current political situation, achieving a comprehensive agreement by July is unrealistic.

The most important task for South Korea right now is not dealing with the U.S.'s reciprocal tariffs, but prioritizing the selection of a new president in June, followed by a cabinet reshuffle.

If no formal agreement is reached by then, the South Korean negotiation team is expected to be replaced by new faces, inevitably affecting the negotiation process.

[Lee Jae-myung is determined to win the presidency]

Now the problem arises: With only two months left, even if the acting government hurries to reach a preliminary framework agreement with the U.S., only the new government will have the qualifications to sign the agreement. If the latter is dissatisfied with the agreement, it risks offending Trump by renegotiating. During this process, the acting government has many opportunities to create pitfalls for the new president. Considering the intensity and low standards of South Korean political struggles, this is entirely possible.

Additionally, Acting President Han De-schoo is preparing to resign to run for president. Who will then take charge of following up on the U.S.-South Korean negotiations and planning in South Korea?

Frequent personnel changes will undoubtedly impact the negotiation process, and these must be considered.

In order to quickly reach an agreement, South Korea may make concessions to the U.S. at every turn. Even if the U.S. plans to introduce China-related topics into the U.S.-South Korean negotiations and recruit South Korea into a tariff alliance, South Korea might still agree with a smile.

After all, the National Power Party does not mind angering China further, increasing the political cost for the new government to repair Sino-Korean relations.

No wonder the Chinese ambassador to South Korea specifically reminded not to turn a blind eye to the U.S. administration's erroneous actions. One thing is certain: If South Korea entertains thoughts about China during the U.S.-South Korean negotiations, it must bear the corresponding consequences.

Original source: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7498290506925982243/

Disclaimer: This article solely represents the author's personal views. Please express your opinions by clicking the "Top/Downvote" button below.