Ministry of Foreign Affairs Targets Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy: "Distorting US Position to Maintain Trade Functions"

[Asia Economy Reporter Yoo In-ho] The Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated on the 29th that the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy distorted even the position of the U.S. administration to maintain trade functions in the new government's organizational restructuring.

Amid the Presidential Transition Committee's review on whether to keep the trade negotiation authority within the existing Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy or transfer it to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the two ministries are showing signs of escalating from a rivalry to a fierce struggle.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs emphasized in a message distributed to reporters around 11:10 p.m. the previous night, “We deeply regret the behavior of a domestic ministry that distorts facts as the so-called position of a foreign government without any consideration for our national interest and dignity, and attempts to use it as a rationale in the domestic government organizational restructuring debate.”

It continued, “Showing behavior that tries to win the domestic government organizational restructuring discussion by relying on foreign countries, we cannot help but question whether we can conduct negotiations based on our national interest with foreign countries in a dignified manner in the future.”

Although no specific ministry was mentioned, it was aimed at the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy. This stance was issued as a rebuttal to an economic newspaper article dated the 29th.

The media reported that a senior U.S. government official conveyed a negative stance to the Korean government in mid-month regarding the transfer of trade functions held by the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

The article cited a government senior official saying, “A senior U.S. diplomat responsible for Korea verbally expressed concerns about the transfer of Korea’s trade negotiation functions to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.”

It reported that the reason the U.S. opposes the transfer to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is because it judged that it would cause setbacks to the launch plan of the anti-China economic security alliance, the “Indo-Pacific Economic Framework” (IPEF).

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated, “Upon confirmation, the U.S. side clearly conveyed that matters related to Korea’s government organization are purely internal affairs to be decided by Korea, and that they have no preference regarding which ministry oversees trade functions.”

It emphasized, “The Ministry of Foreign Affairs maintains close communication and cooperative relations with the U.S. government in all areas of foreign policy including diplomacy, security, and economic trade.”

It added, “We hope that content suggesting that our government’s organizational form ‘could seriously hinder the U.S. strategy to pressure China’ or that could negatively affect our diplomacy with the U.S. and China will not be indiscriminately used for domestic political purposes.”

There has been no response yet from the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy.

However, before the Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ statement, the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy issued explanatory materials regarding such reports, clarifying that “the article is not true.”

The Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy stated, “When a Korean government and National Assembly delegation visited Washington DC on March 15 to mark the 10th anniversary of the Korea-U.S. FTA, U.S. government officials did not convey any opinions about our new government’s trade organization to our government officials.”