July 10, 2025
SEOUL – The world is bracing for another tariff storm from US President Donald Trump. Delayed initially to take effect on July 9, the new tariff regime has now been postponed again until August 1, giving countries a few more weeks to negotiate. The delay was not a gesture of goodwill but a tactical maneuver. Trump’s initial negotiation timeline was unrealistically short, virtually guaranteeing failure. Yet after the bruising experience of the first round, almost no country can claim to be caught off guard this time. Twenty days may be short by regular standards, but qualitatively, they offer a meaningful amount of time for strategic action. South Korea must now engage in full-scale diplomatic mobilization, just as other major economies are doing.
Fortunately, the timing of South Korea’s recent presidential transition provided a fresh opportunity to reframe the country’s negotiating stance. National Security Adviser Wi Sung-lac’s recent visit to Washington for talks with Marco Rubio — now both national security advisor and secretary of state — was a critical move. It surely contributed to securing the extension of the negotiation window until the end of July.
The centerpiece of this three-week diplomatic blitz will undoubtedly be a summit between President Lee Jae Myung and President Trump. The summit will likely follow intensive behind-the-scenes negotiations, and its success will hinge on the outcome of those working-level discussions. The fundamental determinant will be the performance of both countries’ negotiation teams, tasked with hammering out an agreement by the end of the month. This round of negotiation is not just about tariffs. The outcome of the talks could fundamentally reshape the future of the South Korea-US alliance. A successful negotiation based on mutual sincerity and good faith could elevate the alliance to a higher level, both qualitatively and quantitatively. Conversely, failure could inflict substantial damage. To achieve a favorable outcome, South Korea should refer to core diplomatic principles. What should these guiding principles be?
First, South Korea must remain calm and rational in the face of the coercive diplomacy of hegemonic power. In April, President Trump shocked the world by announcing exorbitant tariffs and then offering a 90-day grace period during which he launched simultaneous trade talks with dozens of countries. His approach is one of coercive bargaining — imposing 25 percent tariffs as a threat and offering reductions only if the other side makes concessions. This method, made possible by America’s hegemonic status, is less a fair negotiation and more akin to a high-stakes con game. It may yield short-term results, but ultimately it undermines US soft power and damages its long-term strategic assets. In such a context, a middle power like South Korea must carefully assess what concessions to make while maximizing its national interest.
If this were a soccer match, responding to Trump’s pressure would be defense, while pushing for our strategic gains would be offense. If the US focuses solely on heavy-handed pressure, it has no choice but to leave some vulnerable space on its ground — opportunities South Korea must exploit. The South Korean delegation must consider how to capitalize on this tactical gap to reap tangible benefits, such as enhanced access to advanced technologies, expanded national networks in key industries and joint financial initiatives.
Second, we must not treat this as a bilateral negotiation alone. Trump’s tariff regime is not targeted solely at South Korea — it is a global strategy aimed at disrupting the existing trade order. Therefore, while formal talks with the US will proceed on a bilateral basis, South Korea should prioritize building strategic coalitions with like-minded countries, especially those similarly affected, such as Germany, the UK, France, Japan, Canada and Australia. Naturally, our diplomatic efforts must go beyond solidarity with the advanced economies and include developing nations that are also under pressure from Washington. By exploring the possibility of coordinated responses with other trade partners, South Korea can both increase its leverage and limit Washington’s room for unilateral action.
Third, we must minimize the political disruptions from within. South Korea’s domestic politics are highly polarized, often turning foreign policy into a partisan battlefield. Regardless of the pros and cons of a government policy, the ruling party tends to support it unconditionally, while the opposition launches blanket attacks. In this case, the main opposition People Power Party has tried to color this newly launched administration as anti-American, accusing National Intelligence Service Director Lee Jong-seok of being too sympathetic to North Korea and labeling Prime Minister Kim Min-seok as anti-American. These attacks aim not at critiquing policy but at branding the entire administration as anti-American. Moreover, some media outlets, effectively acting as mouthpieces of the opposition party, have amplified this framing. Even though Trump’s postponement of the tariff implementation — along with Korea’s inclusion in the delayed schedule — was a positive sign, some newspapers twisted the narrative, claiming that Korea was the first to be struck by Trump’s tariff club.
It is not unusual for the media to shape public discourse through framing, but when such coverage strays far from the facts, it ceases to be framing and becomes sheer political sabotage. This must be called out clearly. Still, in a democracy, aggressive opposition and critical media are expected and common. Therefore, the government and the ruling party share responsibility for managing this political reality. The administration should maintain transparency with both ruling and opposition parties, ensuring regular briefings and sharing information on the status of negotiations. Likewise, efforts must be made to engage with the press, clearly explaining the difficult conditions under which these negotiations are taking place and how misleading reporting can mess up critical diplomatic efforts.
President Trump’s tariff threats pose a severe diplomatic burden. If South Korea remains composed and adheres to diplomatic principles, the situation could turn into an opportunity. This could become a classic “win-win” moment — mutually beneficial not just for South Korea, but also for the United States. That is the beauty of diplomacy.
Wang Son-taek is an adjunct professor at Sogang University. He is a former diplomatic correspondent at YTN and a former research associate at Yeosijae. The views expressed here are the writer’s own. — Ed.
