[Chodong Perspective] Tariff Negotiations: Respond to America's Anxieties

Listing Cards Such as Manufacturing Cooperation and Agricultural Opening
Lack of Vision to Address America's Structural Issues
Need for an Optimized, Tailored Strategy

"A successful negotiation involves placing all your cards in the basket and restructuring them in a way that the other party can accept."

When asked about a winning strategy for tariff negotiations, a former ambassador responded in this way. Diplomatic or trade negotiations are not settled on a single agenda. They require bundling various interests into a single framework and combining them in a manner that the counterpart can accept.

Currently, Korea has filled its basket with cards for negotiations with Trump, but has not yet arranged them in a way that the United States can accept. The U.S. has already imposed tariffs of up to 50% on Korean steel and aluminum, and 25% on automobiles and parts. Starting in August, an additional 25% reciprocal tariff is expected, increasing the pressure.

The Korean government has put forward a manufacturing-centered "Korea-U.S. Manufacturing Renaissance Partnership," led by semiconductors and batteries. Recently, it has also signaled a willingness to partially open the agricultural sector, thereby expanding the scope for negotiation. In particular, by indicating a readiness to respond to U.S. demands for greater access to Korea's politically sensitive agricultural and livestock markets, Korea has placed a new card on the negotiation table.

However, what is needed now is not simply listing cards, but presenting tailored cards that respond to the structural demands of the U.S., namely job creation and industrial base recovery. Korea has proposed various investment plans and supply chain cooperation, but has not structurally demonstrated how these align with America's survival interests.

It is not always necessary to give up a lot. If Korea can accurately identify America's pain points, even a single, well-targeted concession can change the course of negotiations. Trump does not listen to complicated explanations. He demands only one essential answer: "How does this benefit America?" Underlying this is a deep anxiety about the hollowing out of manufacturing, the competition for technological supremacy, and the expansion of China-centered supply chains.

Vietnam redesigned its negotiation strategy by precisely targeting America's anxieties. The U.S. had announced a 46% reciprocal tariff on Vietnam, but this was reduced by more than half to around 20%. Vietnam agreed to open its domestic market and apply a high 40% tariff on the issue of "origin laundering," where Chinese products are rerouted through Vietnam for export.

In addition, Vietnam has responded to America's strategy of reducing dependence on China by expanding rare earth exploration and strengthening its electric vehicle battery production capacity. Rather than making unilateral concessions, Vietnam presented a framework for joint security and industrial strategy. Vietnam's case demonstrates that addressing America's anxieties directly is an effective approach.

The U.S.'s tough demands may sometimes appear as overwhelming arrogance to negotiating countries, but at their core, they are closer to a struggle for survival. The U.S. is moving under a sense of crisis about the collapse of its own industries, the exodus of supply chains, and falling behind in the competition for technological supremacy. It is demanding that its negotiation partners design solutions that respond to these crises.

What matters in the current negotiations is not how much more is given. The key is to understand what the U.S. is anxious about and to present negotiation proposals that can structurally resolve those concerns. Even if the survival logic of the U.S. and Korea seems to diverge, ultimately, it is about finding the right combination of cards in the same mixing bowl. The crucial task is to identify the tailored card among what we hold that can address the other party's pain points. This not only narrows America's options but also provides the most practical path for Korean companies to find a breakthrough for survival.