Translation result.\u25a0 Yoo Ju-hee, Deputy Political EditorOn the 20th of this month, a U.S. security negotiation team finally confirmed it would visit South Korea. These talks are the long-delayed follow-up on security issues \u2014 including nuclear-powered submarines and nuclear power \u2014 agreed at last October\u2019s Korea\u2013U.S. summit, and they are only now getting under way after more than six months of delay.That postponement exposed several weaknesses in South Korea\u2019s diplomatic and security apparatus. Government offices failed to coordinate policy and to secure timely legislative responses, producing repeated confusion. The National Assembly also delayed bills linked to supporting South Korean firms\u2019 investment in the United States, prompting U.S. President Donald Trump to voice public displeasure. Because the executive and the legislature did not operate under a unified negotiating strategy on matters of national interest, that gap weakened Seoul\u2019s bargaining position.The Coupang controversy added another complicating factor. Although Coupang grew out of the South Korean market, its active lobbying in U.S. political circles and related business interests influenced the Korea\u2013U.S. security talks, leaving important lessons. Wi Seong\u2011rak, director of the National Security Office, has acknowledged that \u201cthe Coupang issue is affecting Korea\u2013U.S. security talks.\u201d In short, a single company\u2019s interests affected negotiations tied to national security, and Korean diplomatic authorities did not sufficiently insulate the talks from that influence.Even before 54 Republican members of the U.S. House sent a joint letter to the South Korean embassy in Washington urging, \u201cDo not discriminate against Coupang and other American companies,\u201d sympathetic voices in the U.S. political establishment had been relaying Coupang\u2019s position through diplomatic channels. At the same time, in February the U.S. and Israel attacked Iran. With the objectives of that military action unclear, the U.S. redirected significant resources to the Middle East, raising doubts about whether the U.S. negotiating team \u2014 which had said it might arrive as early as February \u2014 would actually travel to Seoul.After navigating multiple hurdles, the start of negotiations is finally at hand. Looking back, it is regrettable how vulnerable our institutions proved to be when confronted with extraordinary events. Whatever variables arise, we must respond in a calm, precise \u201clanguage of national interest.\u201d That need is especially acute because these talks intertwine security and industry, technology and trade, and diplomacy and domestic politics. To succeed, all actors must move as one; the moment ministries or political factions pursue separate agendas, negotiating initiative will slip to the other side.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
US security negotiation team to visit Korea as delays reveal weaknesses in diplomatic strategy, impacting national interests and corporate relations.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/cdn-union.tenbizt.com\/contents\/crawler-dev\/thumbnail\/2026\/05\/CP-2023-0094\/thumb-78978ea9-1db8-492e-8cc9-8295e11ebbb1.jpg","footnotes":""},"categories":[278093],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-261467","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-politics"],"yoast_head":"\n