By UPDATE: Robert Koehler also has a posting up that has a number of good points made by the commenters as well that are worth checking out.
__________________________________________________________
Once again another debate but no questions about anything Korea related, but South Korea did come up in a response by Senator Barack Obama in regards to free trade:
OBAMA: Now I just want to make one last point because Senator McCain mentioned NAFTA and the issue of trade and that actually bears on this issue. I believe in free trade. But I also believe that for far too long, certainly during the course of the Bush administration with the support of Senator McCain, the attitude has been that any trade agreement is a good trade agreement. And NAFTA doesn’t have — did not have enforceable labor agreements and environmental agreements.
And what I said was we should include those and make them enforceable. In the same way that we should enforce rules against China manipulating its currency to make our exports more expensive and their exports to us cheaper.
And when it comes to South Korea, we’ve got a trade agreement up right now, they are sending hundreds of thousands of South Korean cars into the United States. That’s all good. We can only get 4,000 to 5,000 into South Korea. That is not free trade. We’ve got to have a president who is going to be advocating on behalf of American businesses and American workers and I make no apology for that. [2008 3rd Presidential Debate Transcript]
First of all, is Senator Obama trying to imply there is a free trade agreement in place right now with South Korea and that the US can only get 4,000-5,000 cars into South Korea? If that isn’t what he meant, then what was he talking about because the FTA between Korea and the US would open the Korean car market more to American cars:
Under the 15-year US-Korea deal, signed at the last minute on Monday, Seoul will phase out its 40 per cent tariff on US beef over 15 years. The two countries also agreed to open up their markets more to each other’s car industries. But Korea did not budge on the politically sensitive area of rice imports. According to some estimates, the FTA could boost the $US70 billion ($A86 billion) trade between the two countries by $US20 billion. [The Age]
More than $1 billion worth of US farm exports to South Korea will become duty-free immediately. Most remaining tariffs and quotas will be phased out over the first 10 years the agreement is in force. KORUS FTA would remove tariffs on 95% of consumer and industrial products between the countries within three years. South Korean industrial tariffs average 6.5% – and many are 8% – making market access a very important issue for US industries.
In the highly competitive automotive industry, the FTA will abolish taxes in South Korea on large cars produced in the United States, which US auto makers have long called an impediment to market access in Korea. [Asia Times]
If Obama was talking about rice he would have a point, but he was not, he was talking about cars. If he is so concerned about the automobile trade imbalance then you would think he would be supporting the US-ROK FTA and not opposing it?
Secondly, Korean President Lee Myung-bak must be kicking himself because all the crap he took over the mad cow nonsense in South Korea in order to get an FTA with the US advanced. Everything Lee went through is probably going to all be for nothing considering the fact that the odds are that Senator Obama will win the election. This is of course unless Obama opposes the US-ROK FTA like he does NAFTA where he really doesn’t mean it.
1:40 am on October 16th, 2008 1
The United States Constitution
Article.II. – The Executive Branch
The president negotiates but 2/3 of the Senate must ratify. As a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, I think Senator Obama is familiar with the current state of the KORUS FTA. I didn’t read Senator Obama’s statement as one of opposition, not even dissatisfaction, but more of non-satisfaction. He is skeptical.
The UAW is also skeptical:
I am not a trade expert, but while the state of the currently negotiated agreement does seem to explicitly address auto trade tariff barriers, there appears to be enough ambiguity to allow the possibility for non-tariff restrictions.
We have learned from experience with previous free trade agreements that there are always loopholes to be exploited.
In the end, I am sure there will be a KORUS FTA. But, as in any negotiation, it is always a good idea to insist on more than you expect to get. Mr. Obama is signaling that before this agreement is ratifiable, you can expect to see many more teeth added to it.
Reply
7:27 am on October 16th, 2008 2
“Everything Lee went through is probably going to all be for nothing considering the fact that the odds are that Senator Obama will win the election.”
GI Korea — I know the polls give Obama an 8 point lead, but it ain’t over until the fat lady sings. The debates are over and most people has made up their minds. It’s now just waiting for the final vote count.
But either way the KORUS FTA is in deep trouble.
If Obama is elected, he and the Democratic Congress have already stated that the KORUS FTA is in deep trouble. Obama is on record as opposing the KORUS FTA as “badly flawed,” claiming it wouldn’t do enough to increase U.S. auto sales and reflects the views of the auto labor unions. Obama has several general concerns with the KORUS FTA: (a) the auto provisions, (b) inadequate labor and environmental provisions, and (c) Korean failure to liberalize rice.
If McCain wins the ROKUS FTA still has a rough row to hoe. Though McCain has endorsed the FTA with Korea and has a strong pro-trade voting record in Congress, he will be facing a Democratically controlled Congress. Though McCain has expressed his strong support for liberal trading rules, many members in Congress don’t like the agreement and have little incentive to cooperate with him and give him a success.
Reply
10:13 am on October 16th, 2008 3
[...] in Korearedneck hickboy on The Depravity of George W. Lake: An Early American Businessman in KoreaSouth Korea & the Third US Presidential Debate on That’s Not Free Trade?tbonetylr on Great… Nobel [...]
5:52 pm on October 16th, 2008 4
This really hurts LMB due to his reliance on the Southeast manufacturing regions. Just as Korea is straightening out its relationship with the US, Obamondale drops a bomb right into LMB’s core support.
I was reading a transcript of a foreign policy debate between the candidates’ Asia advisers the other day, and Obama has all of his camp (somewhat unnaturally) parroting the same policy line. They talk at length about the need for (their) skill and flexibility in negotiating concessions to the North, then casually insist on pushing the FTA off of a cliff.
Reply
2:15 am on October 17th, 2008 5
the fact that anyone is praising McCain for his performance in the third debate proves that he and Palin have lowered people’s expectations down to nothing (don’t forget, the VP debates were a tie!)
Reply
12:13 pm on October 20th, 2008 6
[...] current imbalance and allow more balanced automotive trade. Maybe he just mixed up his words, but here is more on Korea in the debate. [...]