[Column] On the Precipice of Trade Frontlines, There Is No Party in Trade

How Will South Korea Respond to the U.S. During the 90-Day Grace Period?

On the 16th, the 1st Trade Policy Advisory Committee meeting to respond to U.S. tariff measures was held at the Korea Chamber of Commerce and Industry in Jung-gu, Seoul. Photo by Yonhap News

On the 16th, the 1st Trade Policy Advisory Committee meeting took place. It was the first official gathering where South Korea's trade experts met with government officials to collectively address the tariff war initiated by U.S. President Donald Trump.

Experts from various fields including energy, consumer affairs, law, technology, small and medium enterprises, and economic diplomacy attended the advisory committee. They form a practical think tank that comprehensively understands the entire trade front, from voices on the industrial ground to diplomatic strategies. Committee members met before and after the meeting and unanimously assessed that the trade environment South Korea faces amid the uncertainty of a regime change is more precarious than ever. They also emphasized that trade strategy must maintain a consistent goal of 'national interest' regardless of which administration takes office.

Such fundamental discussions among top experts are closely related to recent remarks from the political sphere. On the same day, Jin Sung-jun, Policy Committee Chair of the Democratic Party of Korea, criticized, saying, "It is not desirable for an acting government with limited authority and responsibility to take the lead in negotiations involving national interests." He argued that trade strategies should be refined through consultations with the National Assembly.

However, if trade strategies waver depending on political positions, negotiating power weakens, and the actual burden ultimately falls on companies and citizens. President Trump's tariff policy goes beyond mere political rhetoric. One goal is to secure tax revenue to cover the fiscal deficit, and another is to induce foreign investment to revive American manufacturing, already applying strong pressure. Of course, the reality caused by these policies is not resolving as easily as expected. After high tariffs, confidence in the dollar has been shaken, and U.S. Treasury yields have surged at the fastest rate in 24 years. Financial markets have already crossed the threshold of instability. President Trump's decision to grant a 90-day suspension on reciprocal tariffs is based on this background.

Experts say how the 90-day grace period is utilized is crucial. It is truly a golden time. However, during this period, there is a high possibility of a regime change in South Korea. The call for a firm yet consistent negotiation stance appears to take this political situation into account.

The argument to "stop negotiations now because the administration might change" has no place in diplomatic reality. Trade is a tool to protect long-term national interests, not the interests of short-term administrations. Postponing negotiations until a new administration takes office is not a strategy but could create a vacuum. Instead of the government, political circles, and companies acting separately, strategies must be aligned toward the single direction of national interest. Negotiations should not be swayed by political calculations or individual interests. In the face of national interest, all parties must look in the same direction. There is no left or right, no ruling or opposition in trade diplomacy for national interest. What is needed now is cooperation.