
Lee Jae-myung: South Korea's new president has a Trump-shaped crisis to avert
South Korea's new president, Lee Jae-myung, has secured a storming victory, but his honeymoon will barely last the day.The former opposition leader is not getting to enjoy the two-month transition period usually afforded to new leaders, so they can build their team and nail down their vision for the country. Instead he is entering office immediately, to fill the hole left by the impeachment of the former president, Yoon Suk Yeol, who last December tried and failed to bring the country under martial law.In electing Lee, with almost 50% of the vote , South Koreans have vehemently rejected the military dictatorship that was almost forced upon them. Lee campaigned on the promise that he would strengthen South Korea's democracy and unite the country, after a divisive and tumultuous six months.But that will have to wait. First, he has a Donald Trump shaped crisis to avert.
In the coming months, Trump has the power to destabilise South Korea's economy, its security, and its volatile relationship with North Korea.South Koreans were dismayed when Trump slapped 25% tariffs on all Korean imports in April, after already hitting the country with aggressive tariffs on its core industries – steel and cars. They had assumed that being longstanding military allies from the days of the Korean War, and having a free-trade agreement with the US, would spare them.If these tariffs take effect "they could trigger an economic crisis", a seasoned advisor to Lee's Democratic Party, Moon Chung-in, said. Before Trump's announcements, South Korea's economy was already slowing down. The martial law chaos constricted it further. Then, in the first quarter of this year, it contracted. Fixing this has been voters' number one demand, even above fixing their beleaguered democracy.
But without a president, talks with Trump have been on hold. They cannot be put off any longer.And there is much more than South Korea's economy at stake in these negotiations.The US currently guarantees South Korea's security, by promising to come to its defence with both conventional and nuclear weapons, were it to be attacked by its nuclear-armed neighbour, North Korea. As part of this deal there are 28,500 US troops stationed in the country.Yet Trump has made clear he does not plan to differentiate between trade and security when negotiating with South Korea, signalling that Seoul is not pulling its weight in either area.In a post on his Truth Social platform in April, Trump said that during initial tariff talks with South Korea he had "discussed payment for the big time military protection we provide", calling it "beautiful and efficient one-stop shopping".This approach makes Seoul uniquely vulnerable. Evans Revere, a former senior US diplomat based in Seoul, fears a crisis is coming. "For the first time in our lifetime we have a US president who does not feel a moral and strategic obligation towards Korea".In his first term as president, Trump questioned the value of having US forces stationed in Korea and threatened to withdraw them unless Seoul paid more to have them. It seems likely he will demand more money this time around.Seoul may not want to pay more, but it can afford to. A bigger problem is that Trump's calculations, and that of his defence department, seem to have changed. This is no longer just about the money. Washington's top priority now in Asia is not just stopping North Korea attacking the South, it is also to contain China's military ambitions in the region and against Taiwan.
Last year, a now senior US defence official, Elbridge Colby, said that South Korea was going to have to take "overwhelming responsibility for its own self-defence against North Korea", so the US could be ready to fight China.One option is that the troops stationed here would switch their focus to constraining China. Another, touted by a couple of US defence officials last month, is that thousands of soldiers would be removed from the peninsula altogether and redeployed, and that Seoul's military would also have to play a role in deterring Beijing.Not only could this put South Korea in a dangerous military predicament, but it would also create a diplomatically difficult one.President Lee, who historically has been sceptical of Korea's alliance with the US, wants to use his presidency to improve relations with China, South Korea's powerful neighbour and trading partner. He has stated several times that South Korea should stay out of a conflict between China and Taiwan."We must keep our distance from a China-Taiwan contingency. We can get along with both", he said during a televised debate last month.
The political advisor Mr Moon, who once served as national security advisor, reiterated Lee's concerns. "We are worried about America abandoning us, but at the same time we are worried about being entrapped in American strategy to contain and encircle China", he said. "If the US threatens us, we can let [the forces] go", he said.For Mr Revere, the former US diplomat, this combination of Lee, Trump and China threatens to create "the perfect storm". "The two leaders may find themselves on very different pages and that could be a recipe for a problematic relationship. If this plays out, it would undermine peace and stability in North East Asia".In Pyongyang, Kim Jong Un will no doubt be watching closely, keen to exploit the shifting ground. His nuclear weapons programme is more dangerous than ever, and nothing or no-one has been able to convince him to wind it down - including Donald Trump who, during his first term, was the first US president to ever meet a North Korean leader.Since returning to office Trump has indicated he would like to resume talks with Kim, which ended without agreement in 2019. In Seoul, there is real concern that this time the pair could strike a deal that is very bad for South Korea.The fear is that Trump would take an "America first" approach, and ask Kim to stop producing his intercontinental ballistic missiles that threaten the US mainland, without addressing the multiple short-range nuclear weapons pointed at Seoul. And in return, Kim could demand a high price.
Kim has far more leverage than he did in 2019. He has more nuclear warheads, his weapons are more advanced, and the sanctions that were supposed to put pressure on his regime have all but collapsed, thanks largely to Vladimir Putin. The Russian leader is providing Kim with economic and military support in return for North Korea's help fighting the war in Ukraine.This therefore gives Kim the cover to make more audacious requests of the US. He could ask Trump to accept North Korea as a nuclear weapons state, and agree to a deal that would reduce Pyongyang's weapons count rather than get rid of them altogether. Another of his requests could likely be for the US to remove some the security it provides South Korea, including the troops."North Korea is in the driver's seat now. The only curveball is how much risk President Trump will take", said Sydney Seiler, who was involved in the 2019 negotiations on the US side. "The idea there might be some sort of troop withdrawal [included in a deal] is really not that far-fetched".Mr Seiler stressed that the US would "not leave South Korea in the dust," but advised South Korea's new president to "establish a relationship with Trump early on", and be clear they expect to be part of any process, if talks materialise.The new president must move quickly on all fronts, added Mr Revere, arguing that Lee's first homework assignment should be to come up with a list of 10 reasons why South Korea is an indispensable partner and why American dollars are being well spent; reasons that can convince a sceptical and transactional Trump.
One Ace card South Korea is hoping to play is its shipbuilding prowess. It builds more vessels than any other country bar China, which is now the world's dominant ship builder and home to the largest naval fleet. This is a frightening prospect for the US whose own industry and navy are in decline.Last month I visited South Korea's flagship shipyard in Ulsan on the south coast - the largest in the world – where Hyundai Heavy Industries builds 40-50 new ships a year, including naval destroyers. Sturdy cranes slotted together sheets of metal, creating vessels the size of small villages.Seoul is hoping it can use this expertise to build, repair and maintain warships for the US, and in the process convince Washington it is a valuable partner."US shipbuilding difficulties are affecting their national security", said Jeong Woo Maan, head of strategy for Hyundai's naval and ship unit. "This is one of the strongest cards we have to negotiate with".In his campaign for president, Lee Jae-myung declared he did not want to rush into any agreements with Trump. Now in office, he could quickly find himself without this luxury.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


NBC News
27 minutes ago
- NBC News
Transgender troops face a deadline and a difficult decision: Stay or go?
WASHINGTON — As transgender service members face a deadline to leave the U.S. military, hundreds are taking the financial bonus to depart voluntarily. But others say they will stay and fight. For many, it is a wrenching decision to end a career they love, and leave units they have led or worked with for years. And they are angry they are being forced out by the Trump administration's renewed ban on transgender troops. Active duty service members had until Friday to identify themselves and begin to leave the military voluntarily, while the National Guard and Reserve have until July 7. Then the military will begin involuntary separations. Friday's deadline comes during Pride Month and as the Trump administration targets diversity, equity and inclusion efforts, saying it's aiming to scrub the military of "wokeness" and reestablishing a "warrior ethos." "They're tired of the rollercoaster. They just want to go," said one transgender service member, who plans to retire. "It's exhausting." For others, it's a call to arms. "I'm choosing to stay in and fight," a noncommissioned officer in the Air Force said. "My service is based on merit, and I've earned that merit." The troops, who mainly spoke on condition of anonymity because they fear reprisals, said being forced to decide is frustrating. They say it's a personal choice based on individual and family situations, including whether they would get an infusion of cash or possibly wind up owing the government money. "I'm very disappointed," a transgender Marine said. "I've outperformed, I have a spotless record. I'm at the top of every fitness report. I'm being pushed out while I know others are barely scraping by." Some transgender troops decide to leave based on finances Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has said this is President Donald Trump's directive and what America voted for. The Pentagon, he said, is "leaving wokeness & weakness behind" and that includes "no more dudes in dresses." Sen. Tammy Duckworth of Illinois, a veteran, and 22 other Democratic senators have written to Hegseth urging him to allow transgender troops to keep serving honorably. Already, more than 1,000 service members have voluntarily identified themselves as transgender and are slated to begin leaving, according to rough Defense Department estimates. Defense officials say there are about 4,240 active duty transgender troops but acknowledge the numbers are fuzzy. For many, the decision is financial. Those who voluntarily leave will get double the amount of separation pay they would normally receive and won't have to return bonuses or tuition costs. Those who refuse to go could be forced to repay reenlistment or other bonuses as high as $50,000. That was the tipping point for Roni Ferrell, an Army specialist at Joint Base Lewis-McChord near Tacoma, Washington. Ferrell, 28, lives on base with her wife and two children and had planned to stay in the Army for at least another decade. But she said she felt "backed into a corner" to sign the voluntary separation agreement, fearing she would have to repay an $18,500 reenlistment bonus. "My commander basically said it was my only option in order to make sure my kids are taken care of," Ferrell said. The Marine, who has served for more than 25 years, said she had planned to stay and fight, but changed her mind. Lawyers, she said, told her an involuntary separation would put a code in her record saying she was forced to leave "in the interests of national security." That designation, she said, could mean those involuntarily separated could lose their security clearances, hurting future job prospects. In a statement Friday, a defense official said the code "is not intended" to trigger clearance revocations and that gender dysphoria is not a security reporting requirement, according to the director of national intelligence. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. Cynthia Cheng-Wun Weaver, senior director of litigation for Human Rights Campaign, said it's important for troops to talk with judge advocates general in their services to ensure they understand the different procedures being implemented. Other transgender troops plan to stay despite the ban The Air Force service member and a transgender officer in the Army National Guard both said they plan to stay and fight. Lawsuits over the ban continue and could change or block the policy. For troops involved in the court battles as plaintiffs, leaving voluntarily now would likely hurt their standing in the case. For others, it's simply dedication to their career. "I've really embraced military culture, and it's embraced me," the Air Force member said. "It's not about money. It's the career that I love." The Guard soldier echoed that sentiment, saying he will stay on "because it is important to me to serve. Frankly, I'm good at it, I'm well trained so I want to continue." Others without bonuses to repay or who have been in the military only a short while and won't get much in separation bonus pay may opt to stay and see what happens. National Guard troops face a particular problem National Guard members who are heading to their monthly drill weekend or annual two-week drill in June could be required to go but serve as the gender they were assigned at birth. That means they would have to wear uniforms and haircuts of that gender, use that bathroom and be referred to as "sir" or "ma'am" based on that gender. For many, that could be close to impossible and create uncomfortable situations. "If I were to show up to drill this weekend, I'd be expected to use all female facilities, I would be expected to wear a woman's uniform," said the Army Guard officer, who transitioned to male about five years ago and says others in his unit know him as a man. "I don't look like a woman. I don't feel like a woman. It would be disruptive to good order and discipline for me to show up and to tell my soldiers, you have to call me 'ma'am' now." It's not clear if Guard units are handling it all the same way, and it could be up to individual states or commanders. Some may allow troops to postpone the drill or go on administrative leave. What happens next for transgender troops? The service members interviewed by The Associated Press said they don't know what will happen once the deadline passes to leave voluntarily. Some believe that unit commanders will quickly single people out and start involuntary separations. Others say the process is vague, may involve medical review boards and could take months. The defense official said Friday that as the Pentagon takes these steps, it "will treat our service members with dignity and respect." Under Hegseth's directive, military commanders will be told to identify troops with gender dysphoria — when a person's biological sex does not match their gender identity — and send them to get medical checks to force them out of the service, defense officials have said. The order relies on routine annual health checks — so it could be months before that evaluation is scheduled. "My real big sticking point is that this administration's whole push is to reform this country based around merit, and that gender, race, etc., should have no factor in hiring," the Air Force service member said. "If that's true, I'm solely being removed for my gender, and merit is no longer a factor."


Powys County Times
39 minutes ago
- Powys County Times
US Supreme Court asked to pause order reinstating Education Department staff
The Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to pause a court order to reinstate Education Department employees who were fired in mass lay-offs as part of President Donald Trump's plan to dismantle the agency. The Justice Department's emergency appeal to the high court on Friday said US District Judge Myong Joun in Boston exceeded his authority last month when he issued a preliminary injunction reversing the lay-offs of nearly 1,400 people and putting the broader plan on hold. Mr Joun's order has blocked one of Mr Trump's biggest campaign promises and effectively stalled the effort to wind down the department. A federal appeals court refused to put the order on hold while the administration appealed. The judge wrote that the lay-offs 'will likely cripple the department'. But Solicitor General D. John Sauer wrote on Friday that Mr Joun was substituting his policy preferences for those of the Trump administration. The lay-offs help put in place the 'policy of streamlining the department and eliminating discretionary functions that, in the administration's view, are better left to the states', Mr Sauer wrote. He also pointed out that the Supreme Court in April voted 5-4 to block Mr Joun's earlier order seeking to keep in place Education Department teacher-training grants. The current case involves two consolidated lawsuits that said Mr Trump's plan amounted to an illegal closure of the Education Department. One suit was filed by the Somerville and Easthampton school districts in Massachusetts along with the American Federation of Teachers and other education groups. The other suit was filed by a coalition of 21 Democratic attorneys general. The suits argued that the lay-offs left the department unable to carry out responsibilities required by Congress, including duties to support special education, distribute financial aid and enforce civil rights laws. Mr Trump has made it a priority to shut down the Education Department, though he has acknowledged that only Congress has the authority to do that. In the meantime, Mr Trump issued a March order directing Education Secretary Linda McMahon to wind it down 'to the maximum extent appropriate and permitted by law'. Mr Trump later said the department's functions will be parcelled to other agencies, suggesting federal student loans should be managed by the Small Business Administration and programmes involving students with disabilities would be absorbed by the Department of Health and Human Services. Those changes have not yet happened. The president argues that the Education Department has been overtaken by liberals and has failed to spur improvements to the nation's lagging academic scores. He has promised to 'return education to the states'. Opponents note that K-12 education is already mostly overseen by states and cities. Democrats have blasted the Trump administration's Education Department budget, which seeks a 15% budget cut including a 4.5 billion dollar cut in K-12 funding as part of the agency's downsizing.


Coin Geek
43 minutes ago
- Coin Geek
Bitcoin mining trends in May 2025: Global surge amid innovation
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready... As of May 2025, Bitcoin mining is experiencing a transformative phase driven by technological advancements, regulatory shifts, and evolving economic dynamics. With BTC's price soaring past $110,000, the industry is witnessing a global 'digital gold rush' as nations and companies capitalize on the digital currency's bullish momentum. From Pakistan's bold energy allocation to cutting-edge hardware innovations and shifting profitability landscapes, recent news highlights a rapidly evolving sector navigating opportunities and headwinds. This article explores the key trends shaping Bitcoin mining in May 2025, reflecting a mix of strategic national policies, technological breakthroughs, and market challenges. One of the most significant developments is Pakistan's ambitious move to allocate 2,000 megawatts (MW) of surplus electricity to BTC mining and AI data centers, announced at the BTC Vegas 2025 conference. This initiative, led by the Pakistan Crypto Council and Finance Minister Muhammad Aurangzeb, aims to transform the country's underutilized energy capacity—particularly from coal-fired plants operating at 15% capacity—into a revenue-generating asset. Estimates suggest this could yield 17,000 BTC annually, worth approximately $1.8 billion at current prices. Pakistan's strategy includes creating a national BTC reserve and establishing the Pakistan Digital Assets Authority to regulate the sector, positioning the country as a potential hub for digital currency and high-tech industries. However, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) has raised concerns about this allocation amid Pakistan's energy shortages, highlighting the tension between economic innovation and domestic needs. Technological advancements are also reshaping the mining landscape. Bitmain unveiled the Antminer S23 Hydro at the World Digital Mining Summit, boasting an energy efficiency of 9.7 joules per terahash (J/TH), a significant leap from the 1,200 J/TH of 2013 models. Set for release in Q1 2026, this rig reflects a broader trend toward energy-efficient hardware as miners face tighter margins post the 2024 Bitcoin halving, which slashed block rewards. The focus on efficiency is critical, as rising network hash rates—up 6.7% in April 2025—have driven a 6.6% drop in mining profitability. Miners are increasingly replacing older rigs rather than expanding fleets, aiming to survive squeezed margins in a competitive market where hashprice remains below pre-halving levels of $100/PH/s. Regulatory tailwinds fuel optimism, particularly in the United States, which dominates global BTC mining with over 36% of the hash rate. Pro-crypto policies, including Texas's push for a state-run Bitcoin reserve, create a favorable environment. The U.S. has seen persistent demand for BTC through spot exchange-traded funds (ETFs), with $3.3 billion in net inflows in May alone. However, not all news is positive: BlackRock's spot Bitcoin ETF recorded its largest outflow day on May 30, with $430.8 million withdrawn, ending a 31-day inflow streak. This volatility underscores the market's sensitivity to macroeconomic factors, such as rising U.S. Treasury yields and trade tensions with China. Globally, other nations are joining the mining race. Ecuador hosted its first Bitcoin mining event in Guayaquil, signaling a growing interest in Latin America. Meanwhile, countries like Kazakhstan, Japan, Malaysia, and Bhutan continue to embrace legal mining to bolster their economies. The global hash rate is climbing, reflecting increased competition, but this also raises environmental concerns. A recent analysis suggests AI data centers could surpass Bitcoin mining in energy consumption by year-end, potentially consuming as much power as a country like the U.K. This has sparked debates about sustainability, with environmental advocates pushing for greener blockchain solutions. However, miners resist abandoning existing hardware investments. Home mining is also making a comeback, driven by falling energy prices in key U.S. states, cheaper ASICs, and regulatory clarity from frameworks like the EU's MiCA. Platforms like BCC Mining have launched mobile apps offering 'free cloud mining' for BTC, Litecoin, and Dogecoin, lowering barriers for retail miners. However, the profitability squeeze and high initial costs remain hurdles for small-scale operations. Market sentiment remains bullish, with analysts predicting BTC could reach $200,000 to $330,000 by year-end, driven by institutional adoption and post-halving scarcity. U.S. public companies now hold $349 billion in BTC, a 31% increase since January, while ETF inflows outpace mined coins (26,700 BTC bought vs. 7,200 mined in May). Yet, challenges persist: fraud attempts surged 200% in Q1 2025, and miners face delays and tighter margins. Smart miners are shifting to flexible, hosting-first strategies to adapt. As Bitcoin mining evolves, it balances innovation with economic and environmental challenges. Nations like Pakistan are betting on crypto to drive economic growth while technological advancements and regulatory shifts create new opportunities. However, rising hash rates, profitability pressures, and sustainability concerns highlight the need for strategic adaptation. The industry's trajectory in 2025 will depend on navigating these complexities while capitalizing on Bitcoin's unprecedented market momentum. Watch: Bitcoin mining in 2025: Is it still worth it? title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen="">