A hostile, nuclear-armed neighbor with heavy artillery aimed at their capital. Cronyism in government. Corruption in business.
These issues and more are weighing on South Koreans as they head to a presidential election on Tuesday, but much of the campaign has revolved around a wild card, one the candidates are fighting to prove they are uniquely equipped to handle: US President Donald Trump.
In his first months in office, Trump’s contradictory statements about the Korean Peninsula have shattered South Koreans’ image of the US leader as a symbol of stability in their 60-year alliance with Washington.
Trump has threatened to end what he called a “horrible” free-trade agreement with South Korea.
He has said the nation should pay for an advanced US missile defense system, contradicting an earlier commitment from Washington.
He has warned of a “major, major conflict” with North Korea, while also saying he would be “honored” to meet with the North’s leader, Kim Jong-un, under the right circumstances.
How to manage “the Trump risk,” as local news media put it, has become a major campaign issue. The candidates are falling over themselves to show they would be the best at handling him, either by drawing him closer or by being tougher.
“National security has become a dominant election issue this year thanks largely to Trump,” said Koh Yu-hwan, a professor of North Korean studies at Dongguk University in Seoul. “Whether he intended it or not, Trump ended up intervening in the South Korean election.”
At the least, many South Koreans fear a rift in the close relationship with Washington. At worst, some fear Trump could do something impulsive, like ordering a military attack on North Korea, with little regard for the devastation it would cause here in the South.
The leading conservative candidate, Hong Joon-pyo, sought to calm jitters by swearing that if he is elected, he will hold a summit meeting with Trump aboard the USS Carl Vinson, the aircraft carrier Trump recently dispatched to Korean waters in a show of force against the North.
Ahn Cheol-soo, a centrist, has pushed what he sees as his advantage over other candidates: He and Trump both went to the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania.
He says that connection will help him build rapport with Trump.
Moon Jae-in, the Democratic Party candidate, who surveys project will be the winner, has also vowed to meet Trump in one of his first acts as president.
However, he indicated that he would be more confrontational.
He has said that instead of avoiding friction with Washington, South Korea should “learn to say no.”
He and many South Korean voters have been outraged by Trump’s recent suggestion that their nation pay US$1 billion for a missile-defense battery the US installed last week.
Moon asked a cheering crowd at a campaign rally this week: “Which candidate can do a proud diplomacy, saying what we need to say to the Americans?”
Moon represents liberal political forces in South Korea who say that under its conservative and pro-US leaders, the nation’s alliance has become too “hierarchical” and too “tilted” in Washington’s favor.
Liberals have also called for dialogue with North Korea, saying that Trump was wasting his time if he was waiting for China to enforce UN sanctions forcefully enough to stop the North’s nuclear program.
Moon seeks to bring back a version of the “Sunshine Policy,” under which South Korea promoted dialogue and economic exchanges with the North from 1998 to 2008 to help build trust and lessen Chinese influence on the northern half of the divided peninsula.
Those on the left view the Trump administration’s talk of a “military option” against the North as dangerous. They also do not want their nation dragged into a hegemonic struggle between the US and China, South Korea’s biggest trade partner.
Trump’s rough diplomacy could shake a delicate balance in Northeast Asia, prompting South Korea to redefine its alliance with Washington and move closer to China, analysts say.
“Washington has grown used to conservative governments in Seoul that back a hardline approach to the North, so it could be an awkward and painful period of adjustment in getting used to liberals’ very different philosophy of inter-Korean relations,” said John Delury, a professor at the Graduate School of International Studies at Yonsei University in Seoul.
South Korea’s alliance with the US has gone through some rough patches, as when former US presidents Richard Nixon and Jimmy Carter threatened to pull out US troops and when violent anti-American protests rocked college campuses in the 1980s and beyond.
However, South Koreans have never dealt with a US president like Trump, who appears to question the relationship. How well their leader gets along with Washington tends to affect their sense of security.
“Trump is unpredictable like a rugby ball, and that’s adding uncertainty to the alliance,” said Lee Byong-chul, a senior fellow at the Institute for Peace and Cooperation in Seoul.
Delury said that for South Koreans, who were “used to the US playing a stabilizing and benevolent role,” the Trump presidency was “uncharted territory.”
“The combination of Donald Trump as the American president and a progressive as South Korea’s president may be toxic.” said David Straub, a former US diplomat and the author of the book Anti-Americanism in Democratizing South Korea.
During his campaign, Trump irked South Koreans by repeatedly accusing them of getting a free ride in their national defense and not paying enough for the US military presence here.
After his election, he sent top aides, including US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, to reaffirm that he was with the South Koreans “100 percent.”
Yet he also hurt their national pride by saying Korea used to be “a part of China.”
Some accused Trump of ignoring their nation when he discussed North Korea with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe on April 24, but called no one in Seoul.
Last month, Trump’s administration stepped on a hot-button election issue in South Korea by pushing ahead with the deployment of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD).
Conservative candidates like Hong called for an early deployment to guard against North Korean missiles, even though China threatened retaliation against South Korea if it allowed the powerful US radar on its doorstep.
Moon repeatedly warned that Washington should postpone the deployment to give the next South Korean government time to review it, as his liberal supporters accused the US of foisting the system on them.
Last week, not only did the US push ahead with the deployment, but Trump also said South Korea should pay for THAAD, contradicting an earlier agreement that Washington would pay for the system and Seoul would provide the land and basic infrastructure.
On Sunday, the White House national security adviser, Lieutenant General Herbert McMaster, called his South Korean counterpart, Kim Kwan-jin, and “the two reconfirmed what has already been agreed” about the system’s costs, Kim’s office said in a statement.
Trump’s THAAD comment was also a huge letdown for conservative South Koreans who supported the deployment, even arguing that a boycott of South Korean goods and other retaliations from China were a price South Korea should pay willingly to protect the alliance with the US.
“Our fear that Trump treats everything as a money deal and in terms of gain and loss has become a reality,” the leading conservative daily, Chosun Ilbo, said in an editorial over the weekend, reporting the “shock, betrayal and anger many South Koreans have felt.”
In a news conference this week, Song Young-gil, Moon’s main campaign adviser, was more blunt: “Because of our obsequious diplomacy over THAAD, the Chinese are retaliating against us and the Americans have stabbed us in the back.”
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
On Monday, the day before Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) departed on her visit to China, the party released a promotional video titled “Only with peace can we ‘lie flat’” to highlight its desire to have peace across the Taiwan Strait. However, its use of the expression “lie flat” (tang ping, 躺平) drew sarcastic comments, with critics saying it sounded as if the party was “bowing down” to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Amid the controversy over the opposition parties blocking proposed defense budgets, Cheng departed for China after receiving an invitation from the CCP, with a meeting with
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) is leading a delegation to China through Sunday. She is expected to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing tomorrow. That date coincides with the anniversary of the signing of the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), which marked a cornerstone of Taiwan-US relations. Staging their meeting on this date makes it clear that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) intends to challenge the US and demonstrate its “authority” over Taiwan. Since the US severed official diplomatic relations with Taiwan in 1979, it has relied on the TRA as a legal basis for all
The two major opposition parties, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), jointly announced on Tuesday last week that former TPP lawmaker Chang Chi-kai (張啟楷) would be their joint candidate for Chiayi mayor, following polling conducted earlier this month. It is the first case of blue-white (KMT-TPP) cooperation in selecting a joint candidate under an agreement signed by their chairpersons last month. KMT and TPP supporters have blamed their 2024 presidential election loss on failing to decide on a joint candidate, which ended in a dramatic breakdown with participants pointing fingers, calling polls unfair, sobbing and walking
RSS