By I would actually be more surprised if a fight didn’t break out in the Korean parliament in regards to the ratification of the US-ROK FTA:
Fears of a physical clash at the National Assembly are growing as rival political camps have yet to narrow their differences over ratifying the South Korea-U.S. free trade agreement.
The ruling Grand National Party will hold a meeting of all its members on Monday to coordinate opinions on the ratification of the trade deal. The ruling party is then expected to convene a general meeting of the Assembly Foreign Affairs and Trade Committee to attempt passing the deal. [KBS Global]
I wish these lawmakers would show this much passion when Chinese fishing boats are regularly violating the territorial waters of South Korea, ramming Coast Guard ships, and even murdering a Coast Guard officer.
4:49 am on October 31st, 2011 1
Why does it say opposition party(singular)?
They boycotted the Sunday scheduled investor-state dispute/debate because they are Duh…
http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_business/220185.html
6:18 am on October 31st, 2011 2
Passionate? Nah, they are putting on a show for the cameras.
6:59 am on October 31st, 2011 3
I hope they don’t pass this deal through. This is not the original FTA deal that was agreed upon in 2007. This is after the LMB gave away the house. There’s nothing in that agreement that benefits Korea in a significant way, there are only more pitfalls for Korea with its industries wide open but the US doesn’t open up as much as Korea does, nor does it address the non-tariff barriers that the US side has (for instance, using the price dumping charges to raise tariffs – a favorite tactics by US companies and US government alike).
8:01 am on October 31st, 2011 4
“I wish these lawmakers would show this much passion when Chinese fishing boats are regularly violating the territorial waters of South Korea, ramming Coast Guard ships, and even murdering a Coast Guard officer.”
This won’t happen because in that instance the lawmakers will be quite united in their opinion that the Chinese who did it are dipshiit mofos.
2:15 pm on October 31st, 2011 5
All we need is Bruce Buffer with a microphone.
“This is the main event of the evening!”
2:49 pm on October 31st, 2011 6
@3
Your delusions of grandeur always crack me up even more so when you are trying to be serious, and not just playing your troll games.
What great benefit does an FTA with Korea give to the U.S? A market with a land area the size of Indiana? Population slightly bigger than California?(only with a lot less purchasing power) Unlike you I have actually read the FTA, and to be honest it doesn’t really give any signifigant benefits to either country. The only thing of notice that I will take from it is the KORUS FTA makes it easier for the U.S to sell military technology, equipment, etc to ROK.
4:00 pm on October 31st, 2011 7
“U.S to sell military technology, equipment, etc to ROK.”
Well that’s even worse! More useless crap Korea is forced to buy every year after year.
5:21 pm on October 31st, 2011 8
7. Tell that to your generals. They seem very impressed and interested in acquiring US technology.
/first hand
7:48 pm on October 31st, 2011 9
This is the report filed by a Japanese, Tokyo University Professor on the Korea-US FTA which he warns, will be a disaster for Korea. Basically his summary is Korea is giving the farm away for little gain, while the US gets everything at the expense of Korean consumer rights. For example, US drug companies can now force South Korean drug firms to raise their prices drastically or face US trade sanctions. US also now have rights to suspend and stop websites located in South Korea, if the US finds offensive. US also have applied far lower emission and environmental standards to make their corporations advantageous at the expense of Korea. Korea will now be a third world dumping ground for US manufacturers. As I said all along, this is really bad for Korea. All these weren’t even included in the original FTA agreement which the US broke the contract on. The US renegotiated a second deal, and blamed South Korea in their media for not forthcoming promptly and giving up everything the US asked for. The deal with the EU was a fair one, this one isn’t. The US have applied all kinds of bad mouthing of South Korea in the US media and will blame South Korea as a scapegoat for any economic problems the US may run into in the future.
일본국민들에게 충분한 정보도 제공하지 않고 일본정부는 TPP 에 참가하려 한다. 그러나 이미 합의된 한미 FTA 를 잘 분석해봐야 한다. TPP 를 추진하려는 사람들이 부러워 마지않는 한미 FTA 는 좋은 교본이 된다. FTA 는 관세의 완전철폐와 급속한 무역자유화를 지향하며, 다뤄지는 분야는 물품뿐만 아니라 금융, 투자, 정부조달, 노동, 환경 등 거의 모든 경제활동이 그 대상이 된다. TPP 추진론자들은 ” 라이벌 한국이 한미 FTA 에 합의했으니까 일본도 뒤쳐지면 안돼. ” 라며 선동하고 있다. 한미 FTA 의 내용을 보면 일본은 미국과 FTA 를 체결하면 안된다는 것을 알 수 있다. 한미 FTA 는 한국에게 극히 불리한 영향을 끼칠 것이다.
– 한국은 무의미한 관세철폐를 대가로 환경기준 등 미국제품에 대한 규제능력을 빼앗겼다.
한국이 수출할 수 있는 공업제품에 대한 미국의 관세는 이미 충분히 낮다. 예를들어 자동차는 겨우 2.5 % , TV 는 5% 정도밖에 되지 않는다. 게다가 미국 자동차 회사에 심각한 영향을 미치게 된다고 미국기업이 판단하면 관세폐지가 무효화 된다는 조건이 붙어 있다. 한국은 원래 자동자와 전자제품의 미국현지생산을 진행하고 있었기 때문에 관세는 기업경쟁력과 거의 관계가 없다. 한국기업의 경쟁력은 관세가 아닌 원화약세 덕분이다. 일본기업의 부진은 엔화강세 탓이다. 관세가 아닌 환율이 중요한 변수이다. 한국은 무의미한 관세철폐 대신에 한국시장에 미국자동차회사들이 들어오기 쉽도록 제도를 바꿔줘야 한다. 미국 차는 배기가스 배출기준과 안전기준을 일부 면제받게 됐다. 미국차가 경쟁력을 갖는 대형차의 세부담도 더 경감받게 됐다.
– 쌀시장은 일시적으로 지켰지만 개방당할 가능성이 크다.
제조업을 지키고 싶은 미국과 농업을 지키고 싶은 한국이 서로 관세를 철폐하면 제조업에서 관세가 무의미해진 현재 한국이 불리하다. 관세는 아직도 농업보호에 중요하기 때문이다.
또 한국은 법무, 회계, 세무 서비스에 관해 미국인이 한국에서 사무소를 개설하기 쉽도록 제도를 바꿔야 한다. 지적재산권제도에서도 미국기업이 한국의 웹사이트를 폐쇄시키는 것이 가능해졌다. 의약품분야에서도 미국 제약회사가 자기들 제품의 보험수가가 낮게 책정될 경우 한국정부에 불복하는 것이 가능해졌다.
농협, 수협, 우체국, 신협 등에서 판매되는 보험상품은 한미 FTA 발효 후 3 년 이내에 민간보험회사와 같은 조건에서 경쟁하도록 세금 공제로 혜택을 받을 수 없도록 해야 한다. 상호부조 목적으로 만들어진 이들 보험들이 해체되고 미국보험회사로 흡수되도록 하기 위함이다.
– 래칫 규정과 ISD 조항의 무서움.
한미 FTA 에는 몇가지 무서운 장치가 있다. 그 하나가 래칫 규정이다. 래칫은 한 쪽으로밖에 돌지 않는 쳇바퀴다. 즉 지금의 한미 FTA 보다 무역자유도에서 후퇴하는 것은 인정되지 않는다. 어떤 사정에 의해 시장개방을 멈추고 싶어도 한국정부는 규제를 할 수 없다. 이 규정이 채택된 분야는 은행, 보험, 법무, 특허, 회계, 전력, 가스, 택배, 통신, 유통, 교육, 항공 등 모두 미국기업이 강한 분야뿐이다. 또 앞으로 한국이 타국과 FTA 를 체결할 때 그 조건이 미국보다 유리하면 미국은 자동으로 그 타국과 같은 조건을 적용받게 된다는 규정까지 있다.
ISD 는 투자자국가소송제도로 한국이 한국사회 공공의 이익을 위해 만든 정책으로 미국 투자자가 손해을 본 경우, 미국 투자자가 한국 정부를 「 국제투자분쟁해결센터 」 라는 기관에 고소할 수 있는 제도이다. 이 경우 한국의 정책이 한국사회 공공의 이익을 위해 필요한지 여부는 고려대상이 아니다. 심판도 비공개이며 예측이 불가능하다. 또 이 심판에 불복해서 상소할 수도 없다. 심판에 오류가 있더라도 한국의 사법기관은 이것을 바로잡을 수 없다. 게다가 믿을 수 없게도 이 ISD 조항은 한국에게밖에 적용되지 않는다. 가엾게도 한국은 이 조항을 수용했다.
미국과 FTA 를 체결한 캐나다와 멕시코는 이 ISD 조항으로 미국에게 국가주권이 침해되는 사태가 몇번 있었다. 캐나다는 신경성물질이 첨가된 연료의 사용을 금지했다가 미국 기업에게 ISD 로 제소당해 배상금을 지불하고, 금지규정을 폐지당했다. 멕시코에서는 미국기업의 폐기물 매립을 불허했다가 고소당해 1670 만 달러의 배상금을 미국기업에게 지불해야 했다.
ISD 조항은 결국 한국정부가 한국국민들의 안전, 건강, 복지, 환경을 한국의 기준이 아닌 미국의 기준으로 결정해야 하는 「 치외법권 」 규정이다. 글로벌 기업이 국가의 주권과 민주주의를 침해하는 것이다.
– ISD 조항은 독극물.
미국이 ISD 조항을 끼어 넣은 것은 미국 기업이 투자와 소송 테크닉으로 돈을 벌수 있도록 하기 위함이다. 어느 나라 기업이든 기업의 이익을 위해 타국의 국민주권을 침해하는 것은 허용되서는 안된다. 일본이 부러워하는 한미 FTA 의 결과를 보면 미국과 FTA 협상을 시작하는 것 자체가 어리석은 짓이다.
– 노다 일본총리는 이명박 한국대통령처럼 미국에서 환영받을 수만 있으면 만족할 수 있다는 것인가?
한미 FTA 에 대해 오바마 미국대통령은 의회연설을 통해 ” 미국의 고용은 7 만명 늘어난다. ” 고 승리선언을 했다. 미국의 고용을 7 만명 늘렸다는 것은 한국의 고용을 7 만명 빼앗았다는 의미이다.
한국의 前대통령 정책기획비서관 정태인씨는 ” 주요한 쟁점에서 한국이 얻은 것은 아무 것도 없다. 미국이 요구하는 것은 거의 하나도 남김없이 모두 양보해 버렸다. ” 고 한탄했다. 이렇게 무참하게 끝난 한미 FTA 이지만, 한국국민은 거의 정보를 알지 못한다. 오바마 대통령은 이명박 대통령을 국빈으로서 초대해 성대하게 환영해줬다. 일본 정부는 이것을 부러워하면서 일본도 TPP 에 참가해서 미일관계를 개선해야 한다고 선동하고 있다. 미국에게 이익이 되니까 이명박 대통령이 미국에게 환영받는 것도 당연하다. 일본도 TPP 에 참가하면 노다 총리도 미국으로부터 국빈대접을 받을 것이다. 미일관계가 좋아졌다고 기뻐하는 사람들도 많을 것이다. 하지만 이런 어리석음의 대가는 너무나도 크다. 국가라는 것은 이런 사람들때문에 쇠퇴하는 것이다.
– 나카노다케시 ( 교토대 교수. 前 일본통상산업성 근무. )
7:56 pm on October 31st, 2011 10
9. Good to see the Japanese are defending Korea!
Or, does this inscrutable Jap have ulterior motives by seeming to side with their friends, the Koreans…
8:08 pm on October 31st, 2011 11
@6,
The US Military is one of the worlds lead exporters of arms and military technology. While the desire for our consumer goods is debatable, there no end to the number of people who want to get their hands on our military tech.
8:09 pm on October 31st, 2011 12
What he says are facts. Korea’s one and only benefit is that it lowers US tariffs. That’s it. On the other hand, the US has virtually rewrote Korea’s domestic laws so that US manufacturers can exploit the Korean market to their delight. No such manipulations of US domestic laws were done for Korea’s firms. Even with lower US tariffs, that still does not mean anything because the US, by FTA rules, can raise their tariffs if imports from South Korea goes up too much to their comfort. So what’s the purpose of FTA for Korea, if the US raises tariffs just because Korean exports go up? After all, wasn’t that the whole goal of South Korea for signing the FTA with the US? Furthermore, much of the products destined for US markets are already made in the US and Mexico by Korean firms who are giving jobs to Americans, while this translates little to South Korean jobs. I see absolutely zero benefit for South Korea, while South Korea giving up everything.
8:16 pm on October 31st, 2011 13
In other words, South Korea by signing this FTA deal with the US, will be turned into a US vassal state where US firms will dump their products and services at will, with no Korean law to regulate them, since Korea gave up control to the US government. Just watch as Korea’s healthcare costs will skyrocket, as US drug firms demand Korea play by rules dictated by American corporations. Koreans don’t know what they’re getting into, because most have not even bothered to get educated on this.
8:40 pm on October 31st, 2011 14
the US has virtually rewrote Korea’s domestic laws so that US manufacturers can exploit the Korean market to their delight. No such manipulations of US domestic laws were done for Korea’s firm
Assuming what you say is true: no such manipulations of US domestic laws were necessary as we are open to free trade whereas there were Korean laws on the books which prevented or hindered the sale of US products in Korea.
Are you insinuating (vastly superior and less expensive) Korean products cannot compete on a level playing field with US products?
8:56 pm on October 31st, 2011 15
Laport, how is it a leveled field, for instance, if the US cars are able to be imported into Korea with lower emission standards versus the Korean domestics who still have to abide by higher environmental standards? Korea has lowered environmental standards so that US products can compete with one advantage after another, while Korean companies do not get that same advantage. How is that a leveled field?
Tell me genius.
10:39 pm on October 31st, 2011 16
Ehem, Major America…
It’s true that Korea at the moment has slightly smaller purchasing power than California. Korea’s purchasing power is $1.6 trillion, California is at $1.9 trillion.
But trades look more into the future than the present. Take into consideration the fact that the Korean economy is expanding much faster than the United States. By the 2020s Korea will be the world’s 4th largest developed country in purchasing power and no, this won’t require unification. This FTA is going to last for generations in which both the United States and Korea are huge economic powers and I believe it’s quite prudent that we establish the foundation to this long-lasting trade relationship as fast as possible. I do think it’s going to be beneficial to America itself.
7:28 am on November 1st, 2011 17
@16
I am so tired of the pointless comparisons of developing or newly developed countries comparing their growth to that of the U.S. If the the U.S economy never grows again, and Korean economy grows at the desired 4-6% rate it would still take Korea another hundred years just to get to the half way point of what the U.S economy is TODAY!
I don’t see either country getting any sort of dramatic economic lift/benefit from the FTA now or in the foreseeable future. I am thoroughly convinced the FTA is almost entirely for Political and Military purposes and has little to do with economics. It is just a case of two countries using an economic tool for political and military expediency. I say this because the FTA erases almost all of the military trade barriers that existed in the past. Contrary to the crap that Tom spews on here I don’t see anybody getting screwed from the FTA except for the fledgling Korean Defense industry, and any other industry that benefited from outdated trade barriers.
8:19 am on November 1st, 2011 18
“I don’t see either country getting any sort of dramatic economic lift/benefit from the FTA now or in the foreseeable future. I am thoroughly convinced the FTA is almost entirely for Political and Military purposes and has little to do with economics.”
Actually, we both agree on this. Right on Major. Korea won’t benefit from this deal. And the US won’t benefit economically either. But because the US is much bigger in size, the deal is going to be hugely negative toward Korea. Basically, the US now has full control of Korea’s health, environment, and safety regulations. I also agree with you that the US goal is political in Korea – to make Korea into a third rate US state with no rights – a vassal state to be controlled, and I agree with you it’s not about economics. If Korea doesn’t follow the US policies which were formulated to advance US political interests in the region, Korea will be endanger of being trade sanctioned by the US who will use the FTA to bring cases against Korea. FTA is a tool by the US to keep Korea in line.
I perfectly agree with your analysis Major.
8:30 am on November 1st, 2011 19
K, so tell us how Korea is going to be gaining out of this? Elimination of tariffs does nothing to address these following FACTS:
1. A big chunk of Korea’s auto and electronic exports to the US is already manufactured in the US and Mexico, under NAFTA free trade area. Elimination of 2.5 to 5 percent tariffs is not going to make much difference to the price of Korean products. What does Korea sell to the US other then cars and electronics? Not much else.
2. If by any chance #1 is not the case, and it does make a lot of difference, and let’s say Korea starts selling more and more products to the US, then the US has the right to protect their market by raising their tariffs. They call it a safety switch against sudden import increases from Korea. So they have already put in place, a rule, that will guard against Korean products being too successful in the US market. This is a rigged game from the start.
3. The US is world famous when it comes to anti-dumping charges brought against foreign companies. The FTA does not even address this form of hidden trade barrier. There’s no guarantee that if Korean products are too successful in the US, then the US would not retaliate by bringing anti-dumping charges. Just look how they’ve raised tariffs after they filed anti-dumping charges against Korean fridges made in Mexico. NAFTA sure didn’t help those Korean fridge makers who now face total sales ban, did they?
K and Major, you guys keep saying I’m spewing crap. But why don’t you address my points that I’ve raised? Is it because you guys don’t have any answers for them? I would say yes.
8:52 am on November 1st, 2011 20
“I am so tired of the pointless comparisons of developing or newly developed countries comparing their growth to that of the U.S. If the the U.S economy never grows again, and Korean economy grows at the desired 4-6% rate it would still take Korea another hundred years just to get to the half way point of what the U.S economy is TODAY! ”
No one is suggesting that Korea is going to surpass the US in economic size, just putting Korea’s true market size potential into perspective. It’s a fairly large market with its citizens having relatively high purchasing power.
Yeah yeah Tom you are totally right, may the FTA is really full of shiit, let’s accept this and let’s get on with our life.
8:58 am on November 1st, 2011 21
lol this leon wannabe french doesn’t even have common sense. he just defends fta because he’s american when he doesn’t even know what the hell he’s talking about
9:06 am on November 1st, 2011 22
And he tries to be funny when he can’t come up with a better argument. His smart ass comment: ‘Or, does this inscrutable Jap have ulterior motives by seeming to side with their friends, the Koreans…’ This is funny too because Jap was just trying to protect japan from TPP by using Korea’s FTA as an example. Leon can’t even speak korean and he thinks he knows everything. I would bet all my money he was either g.i. or esl teacher.
11:35 am on November 1st, 2011 23
#9 Tom – He’s from Kyoto University… Takeshi NAKANO…
Nice Source.
Orbit 22 is right about this guy’s motive of being against the TPP.
Holy crap, so much research to do….
12:52 am on November 2nd, 2011 24
With American standards… South Koreans would be forced to buy shitty outdated versions of US military hardwares with no technology transfers…Lee Myung Bak will be hanged for this if it ever passes….i’m voting NO !!!!