Trump tariff reversals a blow to American credibility in Korea
The Trump administration’s decision to substantially reduce tariffs on Chinese imports marks a shift in what started out not as coherent trade policy but as macho bluster. That mucho bluster became all but weak and sterile with China, but is still biting and bullying with South Korea.
President Trump’s tariffs… who can really recall all the changes? China faced up to a 245% tariff on imports - that was a 125% reciprocal tariff, and a 20% tariff to address the fentanyl crisis, and a Section 301 tariffs on specific goods, between 7.5% and 100%… and a blusterous red-faced rage retributory 100%… until it became much lower to address rapidly emptying shelves for products ranging from phones to furniture and more. Down to 50% and 65%, and much lower still for those that impact the end of town…
A retreat under pressure from market instability and domestic interests. All up - egg on the face, for a poorly thought out tariff policy.
Enter South Korea - ready to negotiate.
An interim administration consisting of the leftovers of a disliked, martial law imposing, pro-US, pro-Japan clique, hoping to score a deal and make the alliance ‘more robust’. While Foreign Minister Cho Tae-yul has wisely stated that South Korea is in Washington to listen and give feedback (not to make a deal), Industry Minister Ahn Duk-geun and Finance Minister Choi Sang-mok may have different ideas after meeting U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer for the “2+2” talks.
As of writing, the latest reports indicate that the two sides will aim for a “July Package” deal with working-level talks on tariff- and non-tariff measures; economic security; investment cooperation; and exchange rate policies to start immediately. This means the new South Korean presidential administration will need to hit the ground running and be ready to face some very difficult decisions.
The fact is, Trump needs a win. Desperately. After the China tariff eggs in the face, the mounting domestic pressure and well… the poor ratings trump needs a win. Trump wants to say the tariffs have secured investment, and that he’s still protecting key industries. For the cream on top, he wants a dollar figure. “South Korea will pay us …” A number to bandy about in interviews that reinforces his belief that South Korea is his ATM.
Yet, somewhere underneath Trump, in the deep pits of power in Washington, is what he’d no doubt label the “deep state”. They’re pushing much longer-term interests that we’re all more familiar with: a stronger ROKUS alliance, the linking of the ROKUS and Japan-US alliances, and a broader linking of partners across the Indo-Pacific region. These have been the steady Democrat and Republican foreign policy aims for decades. These interests bubble through the Trump Administration intestines and burp out in the form of “strategic flexibility”.
Strategic flexibility refers to the U.S. military’s ability to deploy its forces stationed in South Korea to other regions as needed, without requiring Seoul’s prior consent. While framed by Washington as a way to respond swiftly to global threats, for South Korea it raises deep concerns about sovereignty, alliance trust, and entanglement in conflicts beyond the Korean Peninsula. It signals that American troops are not solely there for Korean defense but serve broader U.S. interests, potentially dragging Seoul into unwanted regional disputes—particularly with China.
So… what do we have? On the surface we have what looks like a weak America; Trump’s personal interests in making Korea pay; and the deep state’s interests in making Korea a target.
Washington needs to pause and think about what is happening here. There are three results:
- America looks weak. Reducing tariffs on China reveals that Trump’s tariffs were unsustainable and lacked long-term leverage. The retreat signals weakness, suggesting that the threats were more bluster than strategy. This is already getting repeated in Seoul’s thinktank and academic coffee breaks.
- America is hurting allies. Imposing tariffs on allies and coercing them into policy concessions undermines trust, making alliances appear transactional rather than cooperative. It signals that shared values and strategic goals take a back seat to short-term economic gain, weakening the foundation of long-term partnership.
- America is burdening allies. Strategic flexibility treats alliances as conditional arrangements, allowing allies to weigh the risks of involvement and opt out when national interests diverge. In contrast, a values-based alliance is rooted in shared principles and mutual trust, fostering deeper, more enduring commitments that transcend short-term calculations.
Transactional diplomacy, where relationships between states are treated as short-term deals rather than enduring partnerships, works both ways. It can appear effective—especially when one party holds more leverage. For the dominant player, it yields quick wins: increased payments, favorable trade terms, or geopolitical concessions. But this approach is inherently unstable.
Over time, the “losing” side begins to reassess the value of the arrangement, particularly when the costs outweigh the benefits or when reliability is replaced by unpredictability. Loyalty erodes, resentment builds, and once-stable allies start exploring alternatives—new security partners, trade blocs, or independent strategies. Sooner or later, the transactions become less and less valuable, and are discarded.
A recent podcast at CSIS discussed a quiet crisis in the Korea-U.S. alliance. On social media, I couldn’t help but say it was a pretty bloody noisy crisis here in Seoul.
Their concern was the quiet crisis of South Korean support for securing an independent nuclear weapons program. This has been simmering for a long time. In the end, it is but one small issue in a much larger array of issues.
CSIS is in Washington. With all due respect, they do great work, but they’re not in Seoul. When they do come, they interact at a level where politeness, decorum, and diplomacy reign. They interact with cosmopolitain gatekeepers and senior officials who know what should be said, and to put it politely, do not speak frankly. They miss a lot.
There is no quiet crisis in the alliance relationship. It is bloody noisy, and it will probably soon enough be heard in Washington itself! What can you expect when America looks weak, hurts allies, and burdens allies?
Transactional diplomacy brought America’s reliability into question. Now, China’s win on the tariffs question brings America’s credibility into question.
China does not have to push hard. It does not have to do anything. The U.S. is doing more to weaken its alliance relationships than China ever could.
