[Column] Bush trade policy negative on Korea

Incoming U.S. President George W. Bush named Richard Zoellick as U.S. Trade Representative (USTR). Known as an advocate of free trade, he once worked with the U.S. Automobile Association. That part of his background makes some Koreans fear that the Bush administration will adopt an aggressive trade policy toward Korea, demanding Korea to open its auto market more. Such misgivings stand to reason in that free trade calls for market opening.

In assessing Washington's trade policy, Korea is preoccupied with its administrative branch, including the office of USTR. Such a perspective cannot but be called inadequate as it looks only over the surface of the trade policy.

The U.S. constitution vested trade powers in Congress, and they are delegated to the president in charge of foreign relations. In the conduct of trade policy Congress could be described as the head and the administration the limbs. Therefore, we ought to focus our attention on the members of Congress to see what the future trade policy will be like following the inauguration of the new president -- in particular, members of the Senate finance committee and the House of Representatives Ways and Means Committee, both of which command great power over commerce and trade.

The 107th Congress going into action this year is characterized by the near equal division of seats between the Republican and the Democratic parties in the Senate, where the Republicans enjoyed a majority up until last year. This near balance of power and the personal orientations of senior senators increase chances of the U.S. Congress tending toward protectionism rather than trade liberalization.

For example, the administration should seek from Congress fast-track authority for effective trade negotiations. The Senate, where the Republicans and the Democrats are well matched numerically, is likely to begrudge granting the authority.

The Democratic Party insists on linking labor and environmental issues to trade bargaining, while the Republicans oppose them. It is worth noting that such influential members of the Finance Committee as Chuck Grassley and Max Baucus, as well as Republican leader Trent Lott and Democratic leader Tom Daschle of the Senate support fair trade, instead of free trade.

Argument for fair trade requires trade relations to be based on international norms, and oftentimes it differs little from protectionism. The small edge commanded in the lower house by the Republicans in favor of free trade may give us a cause for relief, yet the House can hardly restrain the protective attitude to be taken by the Senate.

In these circumstances, the likelihood is that U.S. trade policy will drift about in the midst of a tug-of-war between the equally strong Republicans and the Democrats in the Senate, paving the way for Congress to opt for protectionism in the name of fair trade. On the campaign trail Bush declared strong enforcement of U.S. trade laws. Then, the trade policy of Washington at the beginning of the 21st century will turn out quite negative as far as Korea and similar trade partners of the United States are concerned.

What should be our response? The best way will be to take an active part in the drive for open trade led by the World Trade Organization (WTO). Open markets abroad is the lifeline of Korea heavily dependent on foreign trade. We must also be ready to open our own market.

Abstaining from policies that contravene the international norms imposed by WTO, we should always remain alert to their possible breaches by the United States and other nations. WTO procedures for dispute settlement need to be pursued vigorously when necessary to protect our commercial interests.

Moves in the U.S. Congress for trade legislation call for our constant watch. In case Congress grants the fast-track authority, Washington might try to revise antidumping provisions and Article 201 and 301 of the trade law in favor of U.S. businesses, even in defiance of WTO rules.

Efforts should be made to forge close ties with U.S. leaders supporting free trade. Thorough understanding of the new U.S. administration's trade policy and coping with it successfully could offer fresh opportunities for the growth of Korean economy in the 21st century.

Park No-Hyung, director of Trade Law Institute, Korea University