&w=3840&q=100)
South Korea's foreign policy: Navigating relations with the US, China, and North Korea
South Koreans will head to the polls in the first week of June to elect a new president, but analysts caution that the incoming leader will quickly face significant international challenges, from both allies and adversaries read more
South Korean soldiers wait in a line to cast their early vote for the upcoming presidential election at a polling station in Seoul, South Korea. Reuters
South Koreans are scheduled to choose a new president during the first week of June, but experts caution that the winner will be confronted with obstacles in the international arena right away, from both allies and adversaries.
The US administration of President Donald Trump, Seoul's most significant partner against the North Korean government, is already exerting pressure on Seoul on trade and security matters.
At the same time, South Korea wants to keep vital trading relations with China, a rival of the United States.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
With 49.2% of the vote, Democratic Party (DP) candidate Lee Jae-Myung is far ahead of his People Power Party (PPP) opponent Kim Moon Soo, who is only 36.8%, according to the most recent surveys.
President Yoon Suk Yeol, who was impeached and is currently on trial for his December attempt to declare martial law, has damaged the PPP party's reputation.
However, Kim has been closing the deficit, and the conservative New Reform Party, a third party, now has 10.3% of the vote, potentially giving it influence over the composition of the next administration.
Although it is unclear if all tariffs would be removed, Seoul and Washington are now engaged in trade negotiations, and there have been indications that a compromise may be possible.
In recent weeks, there have been indications that the Pentagon is considering removing almost 4,000 of the 28,000 US troops now stationed in South Korea, making the issue even more sensitive.
Although Trump has frequently threatened to withdraw troops unless Seoul paid more for their presence, the US has downplayed the reports.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Kim Jong Un has now cut off all connection with the South and built further defences on the already heavily fortified border, supported by the alliance with Moscow.
Pyongyang has amassed a larger missile arsenal, and taken the historic step of officially rejecting eventual unification with the South, labelling Seoul a main enemy.
Even though China is South Korea's largest commercial partner, relations with Beijing are sometimes contentious. China brought in almost $133 billion worth of South Korean goods last year, which accounted for 19.5% of South Korea's total exports. The US came in second with $128.4 billion and 18.8%.
China claims the facility is part of a fishing project, which is permitted under an existing bilateral agreement. But South Korea fears it is being used to encroach further into the disputed waters and enforce Beijing's claims to more sea territory.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
19 minutes ago
- First Post
Lavrov dials Rubio after Ukraine's Operation Spider's Web sees Russian airfields rattle
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov held a phone call with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio after Ukraine's Operation Spider's Web rattled its five airfields and 40 bombers read more US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, Russian President Vladimir Putin's foreign policy advisor Yuri Ushakov and members of the delegations attend talks at Diriyah Palace in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Reuters As the Russia-Ukraine war continues to escalate, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov spoke late June 1, regarding the prospects of peace talks in Turkey . According to the statement released by the US State Department, the call was conducted at Lavorv's request soon after the tensions between Moscow and Kyiv escalated. 'Secretary of State Marco Rubio spoke today with Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov, at Russia's request. Secretary Rubio reiterated President (Donald ) Trump's call for continued direct talks between Russia and Ukraine to achieve a lasting peace,' US Department of State spokesperson Tammy Bruce said in a statement. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Meanwhile, the Russian foreign ministry issued a separate statement in which they mentioned that 'the situation linked to the Ukraine crisis was discussed'. 'SV Lavrov and M Rubio also exchanged views on various initiatives concerning a settlement of the Ukraine crisis, including plans to resume direct Russian-Ukrainian talks in Istanbul on June 2,' the ministry statement reads. The ministry also noted that during the conversation, Rubio expressed condolences over the deaths that occurred when two bridges collapsed in two separate regions in Russia, bordering Ukraine. Russian officials noted that at least seven people were killed and 69 were injured when the two bridges were blown up on Saturday. The escalation The talks between the two diplomats came after Ukraine staged a dramatic series of strikes across Russia, deploying drones hidden in trucks deep inside the country to hit strategic airfields far away in eastern Siberia. Meanwhile, Moscow launched one of its longest drone and missile attacks against Kyiv. The tensions between the two nations have been escalating ahead of crucial peace talks between Russia and Ukraine this week. Multiple reports suggested that over 40 Russian aircraft, including the Tu-95 and Tu-22 M3 long-range bombers capable of deploying conventional and nuclear weapons, as well as the A-50, have been damaged in the operation on Sunday. The preparation took over a year and a half. Planning, organisation, every detail was perfectly executed. It can be said with confidence that this was an absolutely unique operation. — Volodymyr Zelenskyy / Володимир Зеленський (@ZelenskyyUa) June 1, 2025 STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD In a series of posts on X, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy hailed the operations and revealed that the plan took a year and a half to prepare. 'Today, a brilliant operation was carried out — on enemy territory, targeting only military objectives, specifically the equipment used to strike Ukraine. Russia suffered significant losses, entirely justified and deserved,' Zelenskyy wrote in the post. 'The preparation took over a year and a half. Planning, organisation, and every detail were perfectly executed. It can be said with confidence that this was a unique operation,' he added. With inputs from agencies.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Trump tariff hike threatens to impact $5 billion engineering goods exports: EEPC India
New Delhi: The proposed 50% tariff on all foreign steel and aluminium by US President Donald Trump could hurt India's engineering exports, as these metals and their derivatives account for nearly a quarter of the country's total engineering goods shipments to the US. The annual export of steel, aluminium and their derivatives to the US currently stand at around $5 billion. The 25% tariffs imposed by the US on steel imports (as per the proclamation order dated on 18th March 2025) have created a challenging environment for Indian steel exporters. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Elegant New Scooters For Seniors In 2024: The Prices May Surprise You Mobility Scooter | Search Ads Learn More Undo Although India's direct steel exports to the US are relatively low, the tariffs have led to increased global competition and price pressures. The tariffs have also resulted in a shift in trade flows. 'In case the US goes ahead with its plan and impose a 50% tariff on steel, aluminium and their derivatives, exports of these key items will become costlier leading to a likely dip in shipments," said Pankaj Chadha, Chairman, EEPC India, in a statement. Live Events Chadha highlighted that the UK through its trade deal with the US recently got exemptions from 25% tariff on steel and aluminium and suggested that India should also ask for the same kind of waiver during the ongoing bilateral trade agreement (BTA) negotiations with the US. "This is perhaps not the opportune time to introduce such unilateral tariff especially when BTA negotiations are going on. It can make the work of the negotiators tricky. The proposed tariff increase by the Trump administration is likely to impact the engineering exports which are about $5 billion under this head," the EEPC India Chairman said.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
an hour ago
- Business Standard
US remittance tax to revive hawala, hand cartels a financial lifeline
Hidden on page 1,054 of President Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' is a threat to impose a 3.5 per cent tax on all remittance transfers made by non-citizens to accounts outside the country. This is a dangerous, backward-looking provision, and will make Americans less safe without raising much revenue. It is easy to understand why a measure like this would appeal to the current administration. It makes migrants' lives harder, and that's enough for it to be worth passing into law. And it certainly will create difficulties for millions of legal and illegal immigrants in the US, as well as for their families outside. Mexico's president, Claudia Sheinbaum, has been a vocal opponent, saying — correctly — that this is unjustifiable double taxation. Her country, the largest destination for such transfers, has a lot to lose. But other countries are also worried. India is the third-largest destination for remittances from the US, receiving about $18 billion in 2024; the Philippines and China aren't far behind, at $14 billion each. According to Capital Economics, US-based remittances support 3 per cent of the Philippines' GDP. The impact on migration-dependent areas of the world will be severe. For some countries in Central America, national income might fall by almost 1 per cent if this proposal is implemented. Meanwhile, some estimates suggest that even a higher 5 per cent rate would only increase the US' takings by 0.1 per cent. For the remittance tax's backers, that's beside the point. Vice President JD Vance, when he was still a senator, introduced a similar bill. At that time, he said that 'this legislation is a common-sense solution to disincentivise illegal immigration and reduce the cartels' financial power.' That argument is exactly backward. What common sense actually tells you is that if less money is available in some of the poorest parts of Central America, it increases the incentives for people there to try and move to the US to join their family members already there. As for the impact on criminal networks — well, history suggests that they'll welcome this. The world has spent decades trying to make legal transfers cheap and efficient. An additional levy might increase the cost of transferring even small sums four fold. This would reverse all our efforts to force this trade above ground. If legal transfers are made too expensive, illegal and informal networks take their place. Some people have happily assumed that Bitcoin will fill the gap. But, more likely, there will be a renaissance in simpler, older mechanisms for international transfers. In South and West Asia, we call these methods 'hawala.' But other parts of the world derived equivalents independently. In China, for example, such mechanisms are called 'fei-ch'ien.' From a customer's point of view, they're simple to use. All you need to do is find a well-networked trader and give them the cash to be transferred. That person then calls somebody in their clan or village back home, who gives the same amount of cash to the chosen recipient. The two members of the hawala network settle accounts between each other once or twice a year, through smuggling or perhaps through false invoices and shell companies. Naturally, such informal mechanisms to transfer value can be used not just to evade the remittance excise, but taxes in general. Worse, they are frequently used as conduits for terrorism and drug financing — which is why governments have spent decades trying to stamp them out. This was hard because, if enough people use these systems, they can be more efficient and cheaper than formal finance. The exchange rates that hawala traders offer are often more attractive, and their fees take less of a bite out of small transactions than many banks do. In spite of the best efforts of regulators and cops, hawala networks only really shrank when other routes became more competitive. Informal currency traders need a large volume of transactions to be efficient and offer the best rates to their customers, so when their custom shrank, they became less attractive. It's this self-reinforcing loop that the remittance tax threatens to break. Suddenly, hawala networks — and their equivalents in South and Central America — will become appealing again. And when this method returns to its former prominence, it will become easier to pay those who smuggle opiates or people. And, of course, criminal syndicates of various types will once again step in to run these systems, and profit accordingly. The vice president is, not for the first time, wrong: His administration's remittance tax doesn't attack the cartels, it empowers them.
