Track II dialogue reveals South Korean concerns over Trump's second term

Tim Lawler (far left) with fellow members of the Foundation's delegation and Prof Wongi Choe of the Korean National Diplomatic Academy (second right)

As the recent Asia New Zealand Foundation delegation to South Korea touched down in Seoul in the wake of the US election, one question loomed large: how will a second Trump administration re-shape the Indo-Pacific?

South Korean academics, journalists, and business leaders we met voiced concern over the potential disruption to their nation’s economy, security, and the US-South Korea alliance.

Three key “Trump risks” stood out: US troop commitments in South Korea, Trump’s overtures to North Korea, and new trade tensions arising from Trump’s aggressive use of tariffs.

 The US-South Korea alliance is based on a close defence relationship; there are more than 28,000 US troops stationed in South Korea (tracing back to the Korean War).

Statue of Brothers war memorial in Seoul

This deployment forms the cornerstone of the US commitment to defend South Korea against aggression from the North. Yet during his first term in office – and more recently on the campaign trail – , Trump has repeatedly questioned the decadeslong troop deployment as unfair to the US.

He has argued that the US pays too much for South Korea’s defence and has stated that South Korea should pay as much as $5 billion USD annually for US troops stationed on the peninsula.  

Under a recent Biden-South Korea deal, Seoul has attempted to address this concern, by agreeing to increase its defence spending for the US troop deployment by 8.9% to $1.13 billion USD annually by 2026.

However, it is unclear whether Trump will be satisfied with this agreement or whether he will instead push for more defence spending from South Korea. 

As with Trump’s other America First foreign policy positions, he may find that pushing South Korea too hard on defence, such as by making unilateral moves to revoke US defence commitments, may result in a cascade of unintended consequences for regional security in the Indo-Pacific.

The New Zealand delegation held roundtable talks with South Korea's Asan Institute, pictured

In our discussions we found that nuclear proliferation was a matter of serious debate within South Korea as they consider how to ensure their security in the years ahead.

A key variable pushing South Korea down a path of some kind of nuclear armament appeared to be the actions of the US and their perceived reliability as a defence partner.

Trump’s moves with respect to North Korea will also be worth watching.

In his first term, Trump met in person three times with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, demonstrating his affinity for personal, leader-to-leader diplomatic engagement. However, this unconventional diplomacy yielded no major breakthroughs and didn’t change the status quo on the peninsula.

We heard there is a possibility Trump may send birthday wishes to Kim Jong Un in January as a way to potentially re-open dialogue between the two countries.

However, we also heard that the North Korean leader may be reluctant to re-engage with the US given the apparent insult Kim felt following his last Trump summit in Hanoi in 2019.

Furthermore, Kim’s growing alignment with Russia and close relationship with Vladimir Putin –  demonstrated by a recent North Korea-Russia “Comprehensive Strategic Partnership” pact and the sending of over 11,000 North Korean troops to fight alongside Russia in Ukraine – may reduce North Korea’s appetite for dialogue.

Donald Trump and former Republic of South Korea President Moon Jae-in participate in a joint press conference in Seoul, 2019

 Unlike in his first term, Trump may also be less interested in this dialogue. He appears closely focused on domestic issues and the foreign policy challenges that grab his attention.

The Ukraine War, the war in Gaza, and relations with China, mean that North Korea could fall off his radar.

One possible scenario could be Trump seeing North Korea as a low-hanging foreign policy win, especially if other challenges like the Ukraine War prove intractable.

Whatever moves Trump makes with respect to North Korea will be watched closely from Seoul. Any attempt to alter the status quo unilaterally, without close consultations with South Korea, could damage the alliance and cause South Korea to view their security as being undermined.

Another issue front of mind for our South Korean counterparts was the potential impact Trump may have on South Korea’s economy through his threats to impose extensive new tariffs.

South Korea has a trade surplus of $44.4 billion USD with the US as of 2023, a fact that has not gone unnoticed by Trump, who called South Korea a “money machine” in October.

A think tank in South Korea estimated that should Trump put in place his blanket tariffs of 10 to 20 percent on all US imports, South Korea could lose as much as $44.8 billion USD in exports.

While some analysts downplayed the likelihood of sweeping tariffs, citing their potentially inflationary impacts for the US economy as a constraint on Trump, others remembered the Trump era trade war with China as a cautionary tale.

Trump's threatened tarrifs have the potential to have a major impact on South Korean exports (Photo: Busan Port, S.Korea)

Trump’s second term could see renewed economic nationalism, further straining an alliance already tested by security challenges. 

This gets to the crux of the issue in many of our discussions; to what extent will Trump’s second term be a continuation of his first? Will Trump be more than just bluster?

Early indications from Trump’s cabinet picks suggest that Trump’s foreign policy 2.0 will be less aligned with Republican Party orthodoxy and more in keeping with an America First foreign policy agenda.

Picks such as Pete Hegseth for Secretary of Defense or Tulsi Gabbard for Director of National Intelligence suggest more drastic swings in policy.

For allies like South Korea, the unpredictability of a second Trump administration underscores the importance of diversifying security and economic partnerships.

We heard a straightforward question asked: what does Trump mean by an ally?

For alliances to be stable and durable there needs to be mutual recognition that both countries have shared values and interests that can only be preserved by working together.

Trump’s rhetoric indicates a stark move away from this philosophy of mutual benefit to one of win/lose competition, placing new strain on the US-South Korea alliance.

The Foundation's Track II programme supports informal diplomacy with thinktanks in Asia on issues and challenges facing the region.

Our NextGen Track II programme offers opportunities for tertiary students and young professionals to kick start their future in foreign, trade and security policy through NextGen activity.