US designates South Korea a ‘sensitive' country over mishandling of lab data
The designation, which relegated the US ally to the lowest tier of a list that includes China, Iran, Israel, Russia, Taiwan, and North Korea, sparked controversy and debate in Seoul, which said it had not been notified by Washington.
'South Korea was put on this list because there was some mishandling of sensitive information,' Yun said in remarks to the American Chamber of Commerce in Korea.
He did not elaborate on the issue, but said more than 2,000 South Korean students, researchers, and government officials visited US labs last year.
The designation was limited to the department's facilities, Yun added, and did not have wider implications for cooperation between the allies.
'It is not a big deal,' he added. 'There were some incidents because there were so many South Koreans going there.'
This week the US energy department confirmed it had designated South Korea a 'sensitive' country in January, but did not explain why.
Vice ministers in Seoul were set on Tuesday to brief acting President Choi Sang-mok on their response, while Industry Minister Ahn Duk-geun is expected to ask for South Korea to be dropped from the list when he visits the United States this week, government sources have said.
In a report last year, the US energy department said it had fired a contractor who tried to board a flight to South Korea with 'proprietary nuclear reactor design software' owned by the Idaho National Laboratory.
That individual, who was being investigated by US law enforcement, had been in contact with an unnamed foreign government, the report said, without identifying the country.
It was not immediately clear if that case contributed to the designation. Officials in the energy department and state department were not immediately available for comment.
The US decision to add South Korea to the list was taken by the previous Biden administration, a spokesperson for the US Department of Energy (DOE) has said.
It came as South Korean officials increasingly raised the prospect of some day pursuing their own nuclear weapons, and in the aftermath of a shock martial law declaration in December that threw the country's leadership into crisis.
On Monday, however, Seoul's foreign ministry said the DOE decision was understood to have stemmed from 'security-related matters' linked to a research center, and not South Korea's foreign policy.
The DOE spokesperson said the designation, due to take effect in April, set no new restrictions but mandates internal reviews before cooperation or visits to listed countries.
Meanwhile, Yun called on South Korea to help reduce the US trade deficit with Seoul, which has more than doubled since the first Trump administration. 'To the new administration in Washington, that is troubling,' he said.
South Korea needs to scrap barriers in the agriculture, digital and service sectors, he added.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
2 hours ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
95-year-old former North Korean soldier in South campaigns to be sent to the North
SEOUL, South Korea (AP) — A 95-year-old former North Korean soldier who spent decades imprisoned in the South will continue his campaign to return to the North, an activist said Thursday, after South Korean troops stopped his symbolic border march this week. Flanked by activists and holding a North Korean flag, Ahn Hak-sop walked toward an inter-Korean bridge in the border town of Paju on Wednesday, demanding that South Korean authorities arrange his repatriation to the North, when soldiers stopped him at a checkpoint. Ahn, who complained of knee pain during the incident, was taken to a hospital and is now recovering at his home in Gimpo, near the capital city of Seoul, activist Cha Eun-jeong said. Cha said she expects Ahn to join a weekend protest in Seoul calling for his return to North Korea. 'He said it felt good to have an opportunity to speak his mind in front of journalists,' even though he was turned back by the soldiers, Cha said. Ahn was born in what is now South Korea's border island of Ganghwa in 1930, when the Korean Peninsula was under Japanese colonial rule. Japan's defeat in World War II liberated Korea, but the peninsula was then divided into a U.S.-backed, capitalist South and a Soviet-supported, socialist North — a separation cemented by the devastating 1950–53 Korean War. Ahn volunteered to fight for the North Korean army in 1952 but was captured by South Korean soldiers in April 1953, months before the fighting stopped with the armistice. He was imprisoned for 42 years before receiving a special presidential pardon in 1995. He had a chance to go to North Korea in 2000, when former South Korean President Kim Dae-jung, who pursued engagement with Pyongyang, repatriated 63 long-term unconverted prisoners following a historic summit with then-North Korean leader Kim Jong Il. Ahn then chose to stay, vowing to campaign until U.S. troops are withdrawn from the South. Ahn expressed a desire to go to North Korea in July, a decision that was influenced by his fragile health and concern that his time is running out, Cha said. South Korea's government said this month it has no immediate plans to push for the repatriation of the few remaining prisoners who desire to be sent to North Korea, and it's unclear whether the North would accept them. Relations between the Koreas have deteriorated in recent years, with North Korea virtually suspending all diplomacy and cooperation with the South after the collapse of its broader nuclear talks with Washington in 2019.
Time Magazine
2 hours ago
- Time Magazine
Only Trump Can Break the Deadlock on North Korea
When South Korean President Lee Jae-myung delivered an Independence Day speech earlier this month, he paid much attention to North Korea. He announced his intention to restore a 2018 era military agreement and reminded his nation that he has taken a number of steps to reduce tensions with the North, like halting anti-North propaganda balloon launches and loudspeaker broadcasts across the demilitarized border zone. Kim Jong Un responded this week with a pledge to rapidly build up his country's nuclear forces. His sister Kim Yo Jong, who is also Pyongyang's spokesperson-in-chief, then delivered a statement once again rejecting South Korean overtures, come as they did alongside Lee's efforts to maintain the U.S.-South Korea alliance. The siblings also condemned the South for continuing with annual joint military exercises that began on Monday. Lee comes from the 'progressive' camp, which has historically been more willing to offer Pyongyang concessions and aid. Yet his more conciliatory approach has so far elicited scorn or silence. Alas, that is likely to remain the case. Read More: The Meaning of Lee Jae-myung's Election Triumph The reasons are straightforward: for the time being, the North Korean side has nothing to gain from warmer ties. For decades, Pyongyang regarded South Korea primarily as a source of billions of dollars in economic support. To put it bluntly, North Korea treated the South as a state-sized ATM—especially when progressive administrations were in power. But North Korea has been subjected to a very strict U.N. sanctions regime since 2017. This U.S.-led effort is aimed at preventing North Korea from financing its nuclear program, and has made large-scale economic cooperation between Seoul and Pyongyang virtually impossible. Judging from the North's perspective, therefore, improving ties with Seoul serves little purpose: the old ATM is broken. It is true that U.N. sanctions did not ban humanitarian assistance or some cultural activities, but this is not what North Korean leaders want. They see cultural or other non-economic exchanges as harmful to the hermit kingdom, given the 30-fold gap in per capita GDP between the two Korean states. Awareness of South Korea's prosperity and freedoms inevitably raises questions about whether the North Korean system is truly superior and whether their leaders are as wise as they claim. Moreover, Pyongyang is not as desperate for South Korean aid as it once was. Arms sales worth an estimated $20 billion and steady economic support from China have helped cushion its troubles—at least for the time being. Pyongyang would also prefer to not look weak by accepting humanitarian aid it can now do without. What the North wants is money and material assistance, without strings attached and presented as tribute not aid. No doubt, the Lee administration is quite happy to provide such assistance, be it joint industrial or tourist projects like the Kaesong Industrial Zone pursued in the past. But South Korea is not going to openly violate the U.N. sanctions regime. That is why any serious shift in inter-Korean relations requires the lifting—or at least the meaningful relaxation—of U.N. sanctions. This is a step only the U.S. could engineer, and in practice only Donald Trump might attempt. During his first term, Trump came quite close to forging such a deal with Pyongyang. At the February 2019 U.S.-North Korea summit in Hanoi, the two sides discussed a formula under which North Korea would agree to dismantle its major nuclear facilities. In return, the U.S. was expected to back a revision of U.N. sanctions policy—a move that other members of the Security Council would have been unlikely to oppose once Washington gave its consent. But in the end, the two sides failed to agree on the details, and the Hanoi summit collapsed. It is possible, however, that negotiations will resume shortly; some U.S. officials have recently dropped hints about the prospects of renewed engagement with Pyongyang, and even Trump himself said a couple of months ago that he had a 'good relationship' with Kim Jong Un and hoped to 'solve the conflict' with North Korea. If negotiations do begin, there remains a genuine, but limited, chance of success. North Korea will not, under any circumstances, relinquish its nuclear arsenal. Yet from Pyongyang's perspective, there is a certain logic in pursuing a nuclear arms control agreement (if it comes with the right perks). Such a deal could offer the regime a means of easing its heavy reliance on China and Russia, the only two countries that are willing to ignore the U.N. sanctions regime when dealing with North Korea. The North Korean leadership regards such dependence as burdensome, especially regarding China. In any case, progress in inter-Korean relations ultimately hinges on direct U.S.–North Korea talks. Only if those negotiations succeed will Seoul and Pyongyang be able to move forward. And that remains, at best, a very big if.
UPI
17 hours ago
- UPI
Korea at a crossroads: Two visions of liberation collide
South Korean President Lee Jae-Myung speaks after receiving letters of appointment during a "people's appointment ceremony," which is essentially the inauguration ceremony, at Gwanghwamun square in Seoul on Friday. Photo by Jeon Heon-kyun/Pool/EPA SEOUL, Aug. 20 (UPI) -- On the 80th anniversary of Korea's liberation from Japanese colonial rule, two voices offered radically different interpretations of what a vision for the peninsula should look like. One seeks accommodation with permanent division; the other proclaims unification as a historic calling. In his Liberation Day address, President Lee Jae Myung departed from the long tradition of framing the national destiny around reunification. He declared: "Liberation Day is not only a holiday for the South; it is also a day the North celebrates. ... We will recognize the North's system and will not interfere in its internal affairs." By effectively endorsing a "two-state" reality, Lee signaled that his administration would accept permanent division so long as Pyongyang demanded it. For critics, this was nothing less than an abdication of the historical mission of unification, one that independence fighters saw as inseparable from liberation itself. The dissonance deepened later that evening, when Lee presided over what was billed as a "people's inauguration" in Gwanghwamun. The spectacle was less a unifying celebration than a partisan rally, capped by his controversial pardons of political allies. The controversy over Lee's Liberation Day pardons was sharpened by the identities of those he chose to absolve. Cho Kuk, a former justice minister, was convicted of academic fraud and abuse of power stemming from efforts to secure elite university placements for his daughter. Yoon Mee-hyang, a former lawmaker and activist, was indicted on charges of embezzling funds from a civic group that supported surviving "comfort women" --Korean women forced into sexual slavery by the Japanese military during World War II. For many citizens, forgiving such figures on a day meant to honor national sacrifice and liberation struck a jarring note. A day earlier, on Thursday, another vision had been articulated before an international audience in Seoul. Hyun Jin Preston Moon, chairman of the Global Peace Foundation, framed Korea's division as a foreign construct that could -- and must -- be overcome. "Thus, the division of the peninsula was a 'foreign construct' that had nothing to do with the aspirations of the Korean people and their movement for independence and self-determination," he said. "Their dreams and aspirations were brushed aside like a sacrificial pawn on the global chessboard of great powers seeking to shape the future of Northeast Asia." Moon emphasized that North Korea itself already has abandoned unification as a national goal, underscoring the bankruptcy of the regime's vision. "The world should view the DPRK's efforts ... as a feeble effort to gain global legitimacy in pursuing a permanent two-state solution on the peninsula. The only real path to denuclearization is the peaceful unification of the two Koreas," he said. Rather than clinging to a Cold War framework, Moon called on Koreans to recover their ancient mandate of Hongik Ingan -- "to live for the benefit of humanity." He presented the Korean Dream as a unifying vision capable of renewing national identity, overcoming economic and demographic crises, and inspiring the world. "The vision for this new age is the Korean Dream. It will not only engender a rebirth of Korean culture and historical heritage, but reconnect all Koreans to the providential calling of our people rooted in our founding ideals," Moon said. The Korean Dream, he argued, transcends left-right ideological divides by grounding itself in Korea's history and in universal values. It offers a framework not only to heal the wounds of division, but also to address the internal crises facing both North and South -- from the South's demographic collapse and overreliance on export-driven conglomerates to the North's political repression, poverty and isolation. By providing a common vision that speaks to both sides of the 38th parallel, it holds the potential to overcome obstacles that ideology and power politics have failed to resolve. Concluding his address, Moon underscored the gravity of the moment: "We live at a historic crossroads in a time when the fate of the peninsula and our people lie in our hands. ... I believe that divine providence is guiding us to undo the mistakes of the past and lead our people to the promised land of unification centered upon the Korean Dream." A shifting global order Korea today stands at a decisive inflection point. The U.S.-led liberal order that shaped the post-Cold War era is being remade. Under President Donald Trump, Washington has reasserted economic nationalism, redrawing trade rules and demanding fairer burden-sharing from allies. For a nation like South Korea, where exports account for nearly half of gross domestic product, U.S. tariffs and global supply-chain realignments strike at the heart of its economic model. At the same time, China's slowdown and mounting confrontation with the United States leave Seoul with shrinking room to maneuver. Compounding these external pressures is an internal crisis: the world's lowest fertility rate, the erosion of the traditional family structure and an export-driven economy still dominated by a handful of conglomerates. Without a new animating vision, Korea risks demographic decline, economic stagnation and growing irrelevance in the face of global upheaval. Beyond old ideologies Against this backdrop, Lee's decision to legitimize permanent division appears out of step with the scale of the challenges. It reflects the lingering habits of South Korea's progressive camp -- approaching the North through a lens of coexistence while ignoring the deeper shifts transforming the international system. Yet, what Korea needs today is not an outdated ideological posture, but a forward-looking national purpose that can unite its people, rally allies and meet a rapidly changing world. The Korean Dream offers such a vision. It ties the nation's destiny not to resignation or division, but to renewal -- a chance to overcome historical wounds, restore national unity and provide a model of reconciliation for the world. Eighty years after liberation, the true vision for the Korean people remains contested. Whether Korea's future is defined by resignation to division or by a bold embrace of unification will determine not only its national destiny, but also its standing in the world.
