That in part reflects the fact that the Republic of Korea only last week ended a lengthy political crisis. President Park Geun‐hye was charged with corruption and impeached by the National Assembly last December; in the interim the appointed prime minister served as acting president. Moon Jae‐in was elected to replace her last Wednesday, in a vote advanced from December of this year.
Presidents Moon and Trump spoke last week, with the latter extending a summit invitation. But such a meeting might divide as much as unite. For instance, when President Kim Dae‐jung visited President George W. Bush in Washington in March 2001, their differences were on public display.
Just as Presidents Kim and Bush were very different, so are Presidents Moon and Trump. Moon’s father was a refugee, and President Moon served in South Korea’s Special Forces. He was jailed for protesting against the military dictatorship and became a human‐rights lawyer.
He was friends with another activist attorney, Roh Moo‐hyun, eventually working to elect the latter as president, for whom he served as chief of staff. Moon ran for president in 2012, losing narrowly to Park. He headed the opposition party in the interim and was well positioned when Park’s presidency imploded, essentially taking down the conservative ruling party as well.
President Moon has a well‐developed ideology. A liberal, his economics run toward Bernie Sanders. He promised to reign in South Korea’s dominant chaebols, or corporate conglomerates. His foreign policy is pacific, most notably supporting the “Sunshine Policy,” first initiated by President Kim Dae‐jung, a former dissident elected president in 1997, and continued by President Roh.
As a result, the South transferred an estimated $10 billion in various forms to Pyongyang even as the latter was developing missiles and nukes. The Kaesong Industrial Complex was constructed in the North, for ROK companies that hired North Korean workers, providing Pyongyang with around $100 million in hard currency annually. Moon advocates reopening and even expanding Kaesong. Moon also proposed resuming the Six‐Party Talks, intended to lead to denuclearization, as well as initiating bilateral talks, including a third North‐South presidential summit in Pyongyang.
Matched with, and possibly against, Moon is Donald Trump. His administration’s policy toward both South and North Korea is, at best, in flux. The president sharply criticized the alliance during the campaign, then seemed to embrace it. He proposed talking with the North’s Kim Jong‐un, even saying he’d be honored to do so, but his aides set conditions that the president didn’t mention. He demanded that the ROK spend more on the military and provide $1 billion for the THAAD missile system, only to have those positions downplayed, even dismissed, by his appointees. About the only policy he and those who supposedly work for him agree on is threatening military action, which most observers, and almost all South Koreans, view as inconceivable.
Officially, the South Korean government says little about the Trump presidency. Even privately, officials are circumspect. With a new president just elected, they emphasize that they can’t speak for their government. And even if they could, they wouldn’t openly criticize the U.S. government. Nevertheless, people with whom I spoke seemed uncomfortable discussing future relations with the Trump administration.
Those outside government are less hesitant to express their views. President Trump’s criticism of the alliance and especially his inconstancy unsettle even America’s best friends. Long reliant on America for their nation’s defense, they are nervous about the future. Talk of military action against the North is particularly disconcerting: I was asked more than once, would the administration really risk triggering another Korean War?
President Trump has his defenders, but they are a distinct minority. A couple of analysts argued that the rhetoric of the two presidents was similar—mention of possible negotiations and preconditions for engagement. One even repeated National Security Advisor H. R. McMaster’s unconvincing dismissal of the president’s demand for $1 billion for THAAD: that the comment merely reflected the president’s general concern with burden sharing. Another researcher believed the threat of military action merely reflected Washington’s past commitment to South Korea’s security.