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.
Martial law fractured South Korea. Can this election heal the nation?
North and South Korea are in an underground war - Kim Jong Un might now be winning
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.
Lee Jae-myung: How political chaos forged South Korea's new president
South Korean opposition wins presidency after months of political chaos
Hashtags

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


Bloomberg
10 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Musk's Empire at Risk After Trump Feud Opens Multi-Front Fight
What began as Elon Musk's embrace of right-wing populism has become a defining — and potentially harmful — chapter in his business career. By endorsing Donald Trump's MAGA movement and far-right parties in Europe, Musk alienated a big portion of his original customer base, eroding Tesla's brand, sales and market share around the globe. Then came this week's rupture: a personal and public breakup with Trump that prompted threats of retaliation from a man with control over the world's most powerful government.
Yahoo
10 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Yeah... So... Here's How Fox News Is (Bizarrely) Talking About Donald Trump And Elon Musk's Breakup
If you somehow missed it, President Donald Trump and his former advisor (and bestie) Elon Musk got into a back-and-forth spat on social media yesterday. A lot was said. Trump accused Elon of backing down on his support for the president's championed "One, Big Beautiful Bill" because "he found out we're gonna have to cut the EV mandate." And Elon called said Trump was showing "such ingratitude" considering, "without me, Trump would have lost the election, Dems would control the House and the Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate." Not one to be upstaged, Trump threatened to "terminate Elon's Governmental Subsidies and Contracts." And Elon volleyed back by accusing Trump of being "in the Epstein files," despite Trump denying connections to Jeffrey Epstein. Obviously, the sitting president and the world's richest man getting into a very public feud was widely covered by news outlets, including Fox News — a conservative outlet Trump has openly admired... and also one that appears to go light on the president. Related: This Senator's Clap Back Fully Gagged An MSNBC Anchor, And The Clip Is Going Viral So here's how they covered the quarrell: Fox News host Sean Hannity shared footage of Trump handing Elon a ceremonial, gold-colored key during Elon's government send-off last week. "That was less than a week ago," Hannity said. "These are two very talented individuals. Frankly, they don't need each other to be successful, but I do hope they work it out and set an example for the rest of the country." Related: This Republican Lawmaker's Embarrassing Lack Of Knowledge Of The Term "Intersex" Went Viral After He Proposed An Amendment To Cut LGBTQ+ Funding Host of her own Fox show, Laura Ingraham ran a segment on the pair called "When Friendship Gets DOGE'd," where she praised Elon while suggesting Trump should "simply disengage." "Musk is his own person," Ingraham said. "The government contracts that he has stand on their own merit. They shouldn't be called into question. Threatening to pull them, that's not wise, when five minutes ago you were hailing Musks work in helping rescue the stranded Americans in space. Elon Musk is like the Thomas Edison of our time. He sacrificed for America personally and professionally, and he wanted to make the Trump presidency happen, and it did." Fox News / Twitter: @Acyn And finally, we have Jesse Watters, who insisted that, "Sometimes when you're angry, you say things you don't mean." As an odd and hopefully tongue-in-cheek example, Watters pointed to peer Greg Gutfeld, saying, "Greg mocked my hair last week, and I said he's on the Epstein list." Continuing, Watters said, "Now, I didn't mean that. I made it up." "Sometimes guys fight," Watters pressed on. "Guys will sometimes punch you in the face, and the next night you're having a beer. Sleep with your girlfriend, and you patch things up. Not your wife, your girlfriend!" "These guys are like roommates. They were living in close quarters for like, the first six months of the year. They're just blowing off steam." Well! There you have it. What are your thoughts on the coverage? Let us know in the comments. Also in In the News: People Can't Believe This "Disgusting" Donald Trump Jr. Post About Joe Biden's Cancer Diagnosis Is Real Also in In the News: Republicans Are Calling Tim Walz "Tampon Tim," And The Backlash From Women Is Too Good Not To Share Also in In the News: "We Don't Import Food": 31 Americans Who Are Just So, So Confused About Tariffs And US Trade


Politico
11 minutes ago
- Politico
Trump asks Supreme Court to green light Education Department firings
The Trump administration asked the Supreme Court to give the go-ahead to carry out a plan to fire almost 40 percent of the Education Department's workforce. In an emergency appeal filed Friday morning, Solicitor General John Sauer asked the high court to lift a preliminary injunction a federal judge in Boston issued last month after determining that such sweeping staffing cuts would cripple the agency's ability to carry out functions assigned to it by Congress. While Trump has vowed to eliminate the Education Department, Sauer insisted that the proposed, wide-ranging reductions in force target 'inefficiency' and are not an attempt to kneecap the agency as the president advocates for its demise. Sauer said Boston-based U.S. District Judge Myong Joun's order was part of a pattern of federal judges overstepping their proper role and second-guessing executive branch decisions. The Constitution 'does not empower district courts to presume that all 1,400 employees must be reinstated to their previous jobs and functions based on anecdotal speculation about impairment of some of the Department's services,' Sauer wrote, adding: 'The Department remains committed to implementing its statutorily mandated functions.' Joun issued the injunction May 22 in connection with lawsuits brought by Democratic-led states, the Somerville, Massachusetts, public school system and several labor unions. Noting that Trump has repeatedly vowed to shutter the Education Department 'immediately,' the Biden appointee concluded that the layoffs amounted to 'an attempt … to shut down the Department without Congressional approval.' The 1st Circuit Court of Appeals refused to block Joun's order, although the administration's appeal remains pending. In April, the Supreme Court stepped in at the administration's request to block an order Joun issued in a separate lawsuit involving the Education Department. That directive required the agency to keep funding certain teaching-related grants that Trump appointees had sought to terminate. Four of the high court's nine justices dissented from the stay blocking Joun's order in that case. In an emergency appeal already pending at the Supreme Court, the Trump administration is trying to lift a block a federal judge in San Francisco issued on tens of thousands of layoffs at all major federal agencies except for the Education Department.