Dr. Jin Kyo Suh, Senior Research Fellow at the Korea Institute for International Economic Policy, explains that "Korea-US relations are entering a new era with the inauguration of the Yoon Seok-yeol government.." as "President Yoon Seok-yeol himself is well aware of the importance of universal values, such as freedom, democracy and human rights."
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, and Economy
Political Geography:
Asia, South Korea, North America, and United States of America
Mr. Seth Hays, Chief Representative, Asia-Pacific, at the International Trademark Association, explains that “both the US and ROK cooperate with ASEAN countries to improve IP protections, including on the issue of online counterfeits, most notably through their respective IP offices: the United States Patent and Trademark Office and the Korean Intellectual Property Office.”
Topic:
Bilateral Relations, Intellectual Property/Copyright, Cooperation, and Counterfeiting
Political Geography:
Asia, South Korea, North America, and United States of America
Julio Amador, Executive Director at the Philippine American Educational Foundation and Interim President of the Foundation for the National Interest, explains that “…A trilateral initiative would depend on two critical factors: 1) the growing ties between the Philippines and South Korea and 2) the extension of South Korea’s commitment beyond peninsular affairs to encompass the entire region.”
Topic:
International Relations, Security, Alliance, and Cooperation
Political Geography:
Asia, South Korea, Philippines, North America, and United States of America
Kimery Lynch, a Projects Coordinator at the East-West Center in Washington, explains how NATO has been stepping up engagement with its four “Asia-Pacific partners” (Japan, South Korea, Australia, and New Zealand) in the wake of Russia’s war on Ukraine.
Topic:
NATO, Partnerships, Engagement, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Japan, Europe, Ukraine, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, Asia-Pacific, and United States of America
The narrow victory of conservative candidate Yoon Suk-yeol in the recent South Korean presidential election comes against the backdrop of an intensifying U.S.-China rivalry, now compounded by the Ukraine crisis. Washington would like South Korea to play a security role in its Indo-Pacific strategy — a strategy that effectively aims to contain China.
However, South Korean elites (and the general public) are deeply ambivalent and internally divided on the question of containing China. Pushing South Korea — a robust democracy with major elite divisions — toward containing Beijing risks negative consequences for the United States. These include a reduction in U.S. influence in South Korea, erosion of the U.S.-South Korea alliance, a less-effective South Korean presence in the region, and, in the long run, the potential of South Korean neutrality with respect to China.
To avoid these negative outcomes for the United States, Washington should:
• Avoid pressuring South Korea to join its China-containment strategy,
• Refrain from including Seoul in emerging, non-inclusive, bloc-like structures of U.S. allies in Asia,
• Consider pulling back on its intended new Terminal High Altitude Area Defense deployments until a greater consensus is reached within South Korea on the issue,
• See South Korea’s role as a bridge and an opportunity to stabilize Washington’s own relationship with Beijing. For example, both South Korea and China could be included in non-traditional security activities of the Quad such as infrastructure and climate change, and
• More generally, demilitarize the Quad and open it to wider participation for strengthening U.S. influence in Asia, rather than see it as a zero-sum vehicle for containing China.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Containment, and Quad Alliance
Political Geography:
China, Asia, South Korea, North America, and United States of America
Kyu Yub Lee, Won Seok Choi, Ji Hyun Park, Min Ji Kang, and Unjung Whang
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
This study provides evidence on barriers to digital trade and the economic effect of digital trade, based on surveys of domestic firms in Korea and data collected from random sampling. After briefly examining the prospects of e-commerce talks at the WTO and characterizing digital trade rules at the FTA level, the study concludes by providing suggestions for major policy tasks and mid- to long-term directions of Korea’s digital trade policy.
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
In recent years, inequality has grown worse worldwide. Recent studies have pointed out weakening market competition and deepening industrial concentration as one of factors for this phenomenon. Therefore, the role of competition policies in promoting market competition should also be considered as a countermeasure against deepening inequality beyond the traditional view about competition policies. Against this backdrop, we empirically analyze cases of the US, the EU and Korea, and then propose a competition policy direction to achieve inclusive and innovative growth pursued by the Korean government.
Topic:
Inequality, Economic Growth, Innovation, Inclusion, and Economic Competition
Political Geography:
South Korea, United States of America, and European Union
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
This study suggests who is leading the ecosystem of China's 5G industry through analysis of the association standard network. Our study finds that the Chinese government think tank is in the most important position in the related network. Our study also suggests that it is important to monitor association standards in China and strengthen the standard cooperation of companies, scholars, and institutes in the Korean ICT industry.
Topic:
Government, Science and Technology, Think Tanks, and 5G
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
Even while we are suffering from the COVID-19 pandemic, cyclical events arrive mercilessly as scheduled. While some of them are held virtually (i.e., online), some cannot be completely virtualized, at least as of now, including national elections. A major risk in holding an election during a pandemic is the increase of contagion due to the gathering of people in polling stations and campaign events. The opposite direction of causality, that is, from contagion to voter turnout, is another serious, but much less recognized, risk, because voters may refrain from voting due to health concerns. This Brief reviews some of the empirical studies on the relation between the prevalence of COVID-19 and voter turnout in recent elections in Europe and Korea. It also discusses their implications for election administration during pandemic.