There are growing concerns that the transactional diplomacy of a potential second Trump administration is placing an unreasonable burden on South Korea. While being passive in communications to implement agreements between the U.S. and South Korean leaders, the U.S. is raising issues that potentially infringe on South Korea’s judicial sovereignty.
U.S. Directly Requests Lifting of Travel Ban on HYBE Chairman Bang Si-hyuk… Diplomatic Faux Pas Controversy
It has been confirmed that the U.S. recently requested a temporary lift of the travel ban on HYBE Chairman Bang Si-hyuk, who is currently under investigation. Bang is being investigated for alleged fraudulent transactions.
It is understood that the U.S. conveyed this request directly to the Korean National Police Agency through the U.S. Embassy in Seoul earlier this month. While the Ministry of Foreign Affairs maintains that related communications are ongoing between the U.S. and South Korea, there are concerns that the U.S. side’s direct request to the police through diplomatic channels is both a diplomatic faux pas and an attempt to interfere with criminal justice procedures.
After the U.S. request was made public on April 19, the police effectively signaled their ‘refusal’ by applying for an arrest warrant for Bang on charges of violating the Capital Markets Act on Tuesday. The U.S. response to this has not yet been clearly confirmed.
Following the Bang’s case, reports that the U.S. had also requested limitations on South Korea’s investigative authority regarding Coupang Chairman Kim Bom-suk caused further ripples. It was reported that during diplomatic discussions on U.S.-Korea issues, the U.S. demanded legal and personal safety guarantees, such as not arresting Kim if he visits Korea.
Notably, there are reports suggesting that the U.S. indicated that if the demands regarding Chairman Kim were not met, it would be difficult to initiate discussions on South Korea’s nuclear-powered submarines and the revision of the U.S.-Korea nuclear energy agreement. Experts view this as an attempt by the U.S. to bring South Korea’s judicial procedures, which the U.S. cannot intervene in, into the realm of diplomatic negotiation. If these U.S. demands are true, they are expected to become a major challenge in future U.S.-Korea negotiations.
Experts also see these two cases as reflecting the American characteristic of viewing lobbying as a political tool. However, they diagnose that the side effects are particularly pronounced due to the Donald Trump administration’s tendency to engage in harsh diplomacy even with allies.
Professor Lee Jun-han of Incheon National University’s Department of Political Science and Diplomacy pointed out that the combination of the lobby-centric structure of American politics and Trump-style transactionalism is resulting in a situation where both corporate and government interests are simultaneously operating in diplomacy. However, he noted that mentioning another country’s judicial procedures is an exceptional act that deviates from diplomatic principles.
Pressure Intensifies, Agreement Implementation Delayed… Transactional Diplomacy Failing to Give and Take
The U.S. has been intensifying its high-pressure tactics even before the Bang and Kim cases this year. Early this year, it pressured for swift implementation of the government’s investment promises to the U.S. agreed upon last year, threatening to raise already agreed-upon tariffs. After the outbreak of war in the Middle East, it even demanded South Korea’s troop deployment.
Notably, President Trump, during the process of pressuring for U.S. investment, criticized the slow pace of legislation in the Korean National Assembly, stating that Korea’s National Assembly is not keeping its agreements. Regarding the Strait of Hormuz issue, he said that they’ve been protecting them for decades, but when it really needs them, they don’t join the U.S., drawing criticism for interfering in internal affairs.
On the other hand, the U.S. has not engaged in discussions for supporting the construction of nuclear-powered submarines and revising the nuclear energy agreement, which are also agreements between the U.S. and South Korean leaders. Both countries agreed to form government-wide delegations and initiate the first consultation in January, but the U.S. side has been postponing related schedules due to issues such as U.S. investment and the Middle East situation.
In diplomatic circles, there are observations that if consultations are not held in May, normal discussions may be difficult, given that the atmosphere for the upcoming U.S. congressional elections (midterms) in November seems unfavorable for Republican victories.
Experts suggest that as policy coordination functions within the Trump administration have weakened, departmental interests and political competition are intertwining, solidifying a structure that pressures for additional concessions rather than implementing agreements. They advise that the government needs to respond calmly to the situation while also actively engaging in unofficial communications with the U.S., as boundaries even in judicial and security areas are breaking down in this process.
Professor Kim Jung of the University Graduate School of North Korean Studies said that the Trump administration is showing a chaotic situation where individual departments are moving separately without a strong center to integrate and coordinate policies. He added that as extracting concessions acts as a political achievement ahead of the midterm elections, the pressure stance is likely to continue for the time being.