Korea

Full restoration of the North Korean navy destroyer is expected before a major communist party meeting later this month.

North Korea has raised a capsized warship and moored it at a port in the country’s northeast for repair, after the vessel was damaged during a failed inaugural launch in May, the country’s state news media reports.

KCNA reported that “after restoring the balance of the destroyer early in June, the team moored it at the pier” in the city of Chongjin on Thursday.

The report on Friday aligns with South Korea’s military assessments and recent commercial satellite images, which indicated that the 5,000-tonne destroyer has been restored to an upright position following the “serious accident” on May 21, when it suffered damage to its hull after a transport cradle detached prematurely during a launch ceremony.

The failed side-launch of the ship, which was witnessed by North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, also left the vessel partially capsized in a port.

Kim described the incident as a “criminal act caused by absolute carelessness”. As part of a probe into the accident, four officials were arrested and accused of tarnishing North Korea’s national dignity, according to KCNA.

Experts will now examine the warship’s hull for the next stage of restorations, to be carried out at Rajin Dockyard over the coming week to 10 days, KCNA said. The ship’s full restoration is expected to be completed before a ruling party meeting later this month.

Jo Chun Ryong, a senior official from North Korea’s ruling Workers’ Party, was quoted by KCNA as saying that the “perfect restoration of the destroyer will be completed without fail” before the deadline set by the country’s ruler, Kim.

The damaged warship is North Korea’s second known destroyer and is seen as a crucial asset in Kim’s goal of modernising his country’s naval forces.

The South Korean military estimates, based on its size and scale, that the new warship is similarly equipped to the 5,000-tonne destroyer-class vessel Choe Hyon, which North Korea also unveiled last month.

Pyongyang has said the Choe Hyon is equipped with the “most powerful weapons”, and that it would “enter into operation early next year”.

South Korea’s military said the Choe Hyon could have been developed with Russian assistance, possibly in exchange for Pyongyang deploying thousands of soldiers to help Moscow fight Ukraine.

Kim has framed the modernisation of his military as a response to threats from the US and South Korea, who are key allies and regularly conduct military drills together.

The North Korean leader has also said that the acquisition of a nuclear-powered submarine would be the next step in strengthening his country’s navy.

On Wednesday, Kim met with Russian Security Council Secretary Sergei Shoigu in Pyongyang in the latest sign of the countries’ deepening ties, which were elevated when they signed a mutual defence pact in June last year that obliges them to provide immediate military assistance to each other using “all means” necessary if either faces “aggression”.

North Korea has arrested a fourth official over the failed launch of a new warship that has enraged the country’s leader, Kim Jong Un.

Ri Hyong-son, deputy director of the ruling Workers’ Party’s Munitions Industry Department, was “largely responsible for the serious accident” last week, state-run news agency KCNA said on Monday.

The 5,000-ton destroyer had tipped over and damaged its hull, in what Kim had described as a “criminal act” that “severely damaged the [country’s] dignity and pride”.

The vessel is being repaired under the guidance of an expert group, KCNA said.

Mr Ri, who is part of the party’s Central Military Commission, is the highest level official arrested over the incident so far.

The commission commands the Korean People’s Army and is responsible for developing and implementing North Korea’s military policies.

Over the weekend, Pyongyang also detained three officials at the northern Chongjin shipyard, where the destroyer was built and where its launch failed.

The officials were the chief engineer, its construction head and an administrative manager.

Kim earlier said Wednesday’s incident was caused by “absolute carelessness, irresponsibility and unscientific empiricism”.

It is not clear what punishment they might face, but the authoritarian state has been known to sentence officials it finds guilty of wrongdoing to forced labour and even death.

It is uncommon for North Korea to publicly disclose local accidents, though it has done this a handful of times in the past after failed satellite launches.

Some analysts believe Kim’s swift and severe response was meant as a signal that Pyongyang will continue to advance its military capabilities.

“This sends a clear message to South Korea and the US that North Korea isn’t going to stop in trying to repair and strengthen its naval technology,” Edward Howell, a North Korea expert at Oxford University told ABC news.

A commentary on Seoul-based Daily NK, a news outlet focussing on North Korea, suggests that Kim’s “transparency, however reluctant” shows he views naval modernisation as such a critical priority, and that “even public failures cannot derail the broader narrative of military advancement”.

Last week’s shipyard accident comes weeks after North Korea unveiled a similar warship in another part of the country.

Kim had called that warship a “breakthrough” in modernising North Korea’s navy and said it would be deployed early next year.

North Korea has detained three shipyard officials over an accident during the launch of a new warship on Wednesday, state media has reported.

Parts of the 5,000-ton destroyer’s bottom were crushed during the launch ceremony, tipping the vessel off balance.

An investigation into the incident, which North Korea’s leader Kim Jong Un described as a “criminal act”, is ongoing.

KCNA, North Korea’s official news agency, identified those detained as the chief engineer of the northern Chongjin shipyard where the destroyer was built, as well as the construction head and an administrative manager.

The report said that the three were “responsible for the accident”.

On Friday, KCNA said the manager of the shipyard, Hong Kil Ho, had been summoned by law enforcers.

Satellite images showed the vessel lying on its side covered by large blue tarpaulins, and a portion of the vessel appeared to be on land.

North Korea’s state media did not mention any casualties or injuries at the time, downplaying the damage.

KCNA reported that there were no holes on the ship’s bottom – contrary to initial reports.

“The hull starboard was scratched and a certain amount of seawater flowed into the stern section,” the agency said.

Kim said on Thursday the accident was caused by “absolute carelessness, irresponsibility and unscientific empiricism”.

He added that those who made “irresponsible errors” would be dealt with at a plenary meeting next month.

It is not clear what punishment they might face, but the authoritarian state has a woeful human rights record.

It is uncommon for North Korea to publicly disclose local accidents – though it has done this a handful of times in the past.

This particular accident comes weeks after North Korea unveiled a similar 5,000-ton destroyer, the Choe Hyon.

Kim had called that warship a “breakthrough” in modernising North Korea’s navy and said it would be deployed early next year.

SEOUL, May 23 (UPI) — North Korea began a full-scale investigation into an accident that damaged a new warship at its launch ceremony this week, state-run media reported Friday, with investigators vowing that those culpable “can never evade their responsibility for the crime.”

The accident occurred on Wednesday at the Chongjin Shipyard during the launch ceremony for the 5,000-ton destroyer. North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, who was in attendance, called the incident a “criminal act” and said it “could not be tolerated.”

South Korea’s military assessed afterward that the North had attempted to “side-launch” the vessel by sliding it into the water sideways rather than launching it from a drydock, a technique analysts believe Pyongyang had never used before.

Satellite imagery captured by Airbus Space and shared on X on Thursday by British research organization Open Source Centre showed the warship listing on its side, draped by blue tarpaulins. OSC called the coverings “a visible attempt to contain the disaster.”

While the North’s initial media account on Thursday claimed that sections of the ship’s hull were crushed during the launch mishap, Friday’s report in state-run Korean Central News Agency downplayed the damage.

“Detailed underwater and internal inspection of the warship confirmed that, unlike the initial announcement, there were no holes made at the warship’s bottom,” the KCNA report said.

The hull starboard was scratched and seawater flowed into the stern section, KCNA said, calling the extent of the damage “not serious.”

It would take around 10 days to restore the warship’s damaged side, the report added.

Kim Jong Un blamed government officials, engineers and shipyard workers for the incident, KCNA reported on Thursday. He warned that their “irresponsible errors” would be dealt with at a plenary meeting of the ruling Workers’ Party central committee next month.

The accident “brought the dignity and self-respect of our state to a collapse,” Kim said, and ordered the ship to be restored before the June meeting.

Hong Kil Ho, manager of the Chongjin Shipyard, was summoned by authorities, the KCNA report said Friday.

The ruling party’s Central Military Commission instructed investigators to determine the cause of the accident and find those responsible for it, KCNA said.

“No matter how good the state of the warship is, the fact that the accident is an unpardonable criminal act remains unchanged, and those responsible for it can never evade their responsibility for the crime,” the military commission said.

The destroyer was the second warship introduced by North Korea in recent weeks, following the launch of its 5,000-ton Choe Hyon destroyer at the Nampo Shipyard on April 25. That vessel is armed with a wide range of weapons, including supersonic cruise missiles and strategic cruise missiles, according to North Korean reports.

Photos released by the North showed that the Choe Hyon’s missile and radar systems resemble those found on Russian vessels, prompting speculation that Pyongyang received technical assistance from Moscow in its development.

North Korea has deployed troops, artillery and weapons to Russia to aid in Moscow’s war against Ukraine, and is believed to be receiving much-needed financial support and advanced military technology for its own weapons programs.

The warship damaged during the launch accident appears to be similarly equipped to the Choe Hyon, South Korea’s military said Thursday.

Gameshow host on The Accidental Tourist getting emotional, his love for Celebrity Catchphrase and how Holly Willoughby told him she was quitting You Bet!

Stephen Mulhern says viewers will see a very different side to him in The Accidental Tourist, in which pals Ant and Dec send him on a journey of discovery to Korea. The much-loved gameshow host, whose ITV shows include Celebrity Catchphrase, Deal or No Deal and You Bet!, says he’s very happy to always hide behind his presenter alter ago.

But in the one-off special later this year, the audience will watch the real Stephen properly struggle as he pushes his boundaries by travelling to an unfamiliar country to eat food he doesn’t like with people he doesn’t know.

At the time of filming last year, he had just lost his father, Christopher, and his attempts to become more intrepid left Stephen, 48, feeling incredibly emotional at times. “No one’s ever seen me cry on the telly,” he muses now, admitting that it took nearly three years for him to be persuaded.

“But it was quite nice to not be behind a format, I’ve never done that. You’re going to see behind the razzle-dazzle, if you like. People have thankfully seen me on TV for nearly 25 years, but they may go, ‘Well, what’s he like at home? Is he going out with someone?’ I’m at the very centre of this and it’s scary.

READ MORE: Call the Midwife star lands lead role in huge 10-part BBC Jane Austen drama

“They film and they film and they film and they just get everything. I think what you’re going to see is a lot of emotion. You’ll see me totally out of my comfort zone.”

For the programme, designed to help him unleash his inner traveller, Stephen is sent to Asia, a continent he’s never visited because he only ever holidays in Florida. “I like the food and the theme parks,” he laughs. “Only Ant and Dec would choose Korea. Why couldn’t it have been Tokyo? It looks like New York.”

He says the idea to send him out into the world came about because he was so unadventurous and the Geordie pair thought it would be funny to see him learn new things. Already, the show has been compared to An Idiot Abroad, in which Ricky Gervais and Stephen Merchant sent their pal Karl Pilkington off on daft adventures. “The difference is that I got very emotional because of the timing,” he sighs. “I’m not very worldly. I don’t travel a lot. And my body’s been used to eating plain food.”

His reluctance to broaden his horizons has led to teasing from celebrity pals including Emma Willis and Holly Willoughby. “They would call me 50 Shades of Beige because of the food I eat, which is embarrassing really,” he laughs. But when he got back to the UK after filming ended, he found that the exotic diet had played havoc with his insides. “The food was just horrific, we’d try things like octopus, fish penis, something they dug out the very bottom of the sea and like a worm that’s wriggling, but when you squeeze it squirts water,” he shudders. “When I came back I couldn’t eat for two and a half weeks. I literally couldn’t stomach anything – I lost half a stone.”

He nearly quit along the way but managed to stick it out and, once home, his family asked if he’d be prepared to do it again. “The answer is, I don’t know,” he says now, looking faintly terrified at the prospect.

Having got over the experience, he does feel proud of himself, but it’s tinged with regret. “My dad had just passed away,” he says sadly. “So that’s the only thing. I’m gutted that he didn’t see it.”

Fully recovered from the ordeal, Stephen is now on screen with the final two episodes of Celebrity Catchphrase with guests including Mel Blatt, Michelle Visage and Jeremy Vine yet to come.

He’s also making a second run of You Bet! – this time without co-host Holly Willoughby, who pulled out ahead of filming. Stephen says Holly, with whom he also hosted Dancing on Ice until it was axed after the most recent series, told him in person that she didn’t want to continue with the fun challenge show. “I’m gutted she’s not doing it, but I’ve had time to think about it,” he reasons. “Bruce Forsyth was the first person to do You Bet!, and he did it on his own. Matthew Kelly made it the best show on the telly. So maybe it’s happened for the right reasons. We’ve filmed one episode already and it felt very comfortable and it felt good. I think maybe it is just a one presenter show.”

It’s been reported that her Netflix series Celebrity Bear Hunt has been dropped after one run, and he says it’ll be “interesting” to see what she does next. “I don’t know what happened. She just said, ‘Look, sorry, I can’t do it.’ She told me face to face. She said, ‘Look, I’m gutted, but it’s all over.”

For himself, he has a hard time choosing between Catchphrase and Deal or No Deal when it comes to a favourite. On the one hand he’d choose the former, because he’s hosted it for so long – and would love to see a return for the original version featuring everyday people. But he also has a lot of love for the newer show because it was his market trader dad’s favourite and he was filming it while visiting him in hospital towards the end. “We were doing three a day and he would be asking me, ‘What were the winnings today?’ So it’s very, very dear to my heart simply because of that.”

As something of a gameshow expert, Stephen believes that simplicity is the key to success. “If you can’t sum up the show in a sentence, it will never work,” he insists. “Catchphrase, say what you see. Play Your Cards Right, high or lower? You Bet, will they or won’t they? Deal Or No Deal, pick the right box. The Price Is Right, guess the prize,” he reels off. The road to failure, he believes, lies with having to think too hard as you play. “Catchphrase is a prime example of that – anyone can play it,” he says. “As I say to the contestants, if you have a good time, I promise you’ll do all right.”

With In For a Penny currently being rested, he’s decided to have a go at creating his own family entertainment show entirely from scratch. “I’m going to film a 20-minute pilot, I’m just going to invest my own money and then pitch it and see if it goes well,” he says. Inspired by the likes of Beadle’s About and Surprise, Surprise, it will involve his two favourite things – magic and practical jokes. “It’s very heartwarming as well,” he explains. “I just think it would be nice to do a show where I get to do a bit of magic and a bit of wind up, which I love doing,” he says. “I think that’s missing from our screens at the moment.”

– Celebrity Catchphrase, ITV/ITVX/STV, Sunday, 6.55pm

The intricate and multifaceted matters of normative relations among the nations of the Northeast Asian countries, even though they are entangled in specific issues stemming from territorial disputes, challenge a well-established norm and order of diplomatic relations. One of the problems is the matter of Dokdo Island’s ownership, which was disputed by the authorities of South Korea and Japan. With its significant historical and geopolitical implications, this dispute is a key factor in the region’s diplomatic landscape. On the other hand, with another matter of dispute, China and South Korea still have an issue with the overlapping territory of the exclusive economic zone. The problem is currently exacerbated by China’s installation of aquaculture facilities in the Provisional Measures Zone (PMZ), a move that has significantly heightened the tension in the region and underscores the need for resolution. This territory is located off the west coast of the Korean Peninsula, making it a complex challenge to maintain Korea-China’s diplomatic relations.

At the same time, China and Japan confronted another issue similar to the South Korean dispute. Both of them claim the Diaoyu or Senkaku Islands. The controversy also concerns the island’s ownership and reflects each country’s historical and cultural perspectives. Japan’s government called the island the Senkaku Islands, while China’s authority named the islands the Diaoyu Islands.

Amid the tariff oppression, which refers to the imposition of high tariffs on Chinese goods by the Trump administration, China has to face two different challenges. In one position, China has to stand against the high-handed Donald Trump’s ruling, which is seen as aggressive and unfair, but in the other position, China also struggles to bring a solution with its nearest neighbor countries in Northeast Asia, where the territorial disputes add a layer of complexity to the already well-established relations.

China’s authority realizes the crucial role of Japan and South Korea, which act as part of the US’s allies in Asia. Their relationship is strategic for the US and makes sense for China, as their connections become part of the US’s long history. This is in stark contrast to China’s past, when it was the US’s opponent during the Korean War. However, China might be letting Japan and Korea connect to the US as allies because they were China’s nearest neighbors in Northeast Asia, which could share and maintain a partnership without causing overwhelming disruptions. The mutual respect and relationship between China, Japan, and South Korea is a beacon of hope, offering a promising and positive outlook for the region’s future.

China and the US, as two economic powerhouses, often find themselves at odds. However, it’s important to note that their relationship is not solely defined by geopolitical tensions. The two countries are deeply intertwined economically, with significant trade and investment ties. This economic interdependence, which is further underscored by their influence in the G20 forum and their status as major trading partners with Korea and Japan, is a complex web that cannot be easily untangled. Despite China’s efforts to diversify its economic relationships, it continues to value the US’ political, legal, and justice systems and its socio-economic structure. The significance of these financial ties cannot be overstated, as they play a crucial role in shaping the geopolitical landscape of Northeast Asia.

Despite the unfortunate geopolitical situation, the Chinese government’s steadfast commitment to resolving the interrelations crisis is unwavering. China’s Foreign Minister Spokesperson, Guo Jiakun, clarified that the construction of the aquaculture facilities, a point of contention, did not violate any previous agreements. The Chinese government’s decision to send its delegation, led by Hong Liang, Director-General of the Department of Boundary and Ocean Affairs of the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, for in-person dialogue with a South Korean representative is a clear demonstration of this commitment. The recent meeting between Hong Liang and Kang Young-Shin, Director-General for Northeast and Central Asian Affairs at the South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs, on 23 April 2025, is a promising step towards potential progress. This progress in the dialogue instills optimism for the future and underscores the potential for a peaceful resolution, providing a ray of hope in an otherwise complex situation.

The dialogue of top government officials presents a pivotal platform for resolving the prolonged standoff initiated by both countries in 2019. The potential for a mutually accepted agreement in the Yellow Sea dispute dialogue is not just a beacon of hope but a realistic possibility that should inspire optimism. However, it’s essential to acknowledge that the outcome of this dialogue may not necessarily mirror the outcome of the Dokdo or Takeshima Island dispute. The Yellow Sea dispute dialogue, which encompasses territorial claims and maritime rights, remains crucial in Northeast Asian geopolitics.

Nevertheless, the Yellow Sea dialogue’s resolution couldn’t significantly affect how the Japan-South Korean government resolves the entire Dokdo or Takeshima Island dispute. Beyond territorial claims, this dispute symbolizes the intricate historical and cultural relations between Japan and South Korea. Diplomatically, South Korea and Japan have made substantial progress in finding a solution, presenting various evidence and approaches to ensure a fair judgment for both. However, as of the end of 2024, the problem remains in a stalemate without a final resolution. This situation underscores the critical need for a nuanced approach in international relations, where tact and understanding can pave the way for resolution, highlighting the importance of understanding the complexities.

The past geopolitical landscape in Northeast Asia is deeply entrenched in a long and complex history, notably Japan’s occupation of Chinese territory, South Korea, and some Southeast Asian countries. This historical context, with its layers of complexity and depth, is an undeniable part of the current geopolitical landscape. The Chinese can never forget this dark period, even though Japan and China have officially tightened diplomatic relations to construct a prospective and reliable Asia. Similarly, South Korea may never forget what Japan did in the past. Indeed, Koreans have not entirely forgiven what Japan did. This historical backdrop underscores the depth of the issues and the need for a nuanced approach to diplomatic relations in Northeast Asia. It’s not a matter of simple solutions but of understanding the intricate web of history, culture, and politics that shapes these relations. This complexity and depth of the problems in the region necessitate a nuanced approach, making the audience feel the weight of the issues at hand and the importance of understanding the historical and cultural context. Only by understanding this context can we hope to navigate the complexities of Northeast Asian geopolitics.

South Korea is also determined not to be left behind in economic and diplomatic relations with others. Therefore, today, Korea actively seeks intense cooperation with China and Japan regarding global security, trade, and cultural exchange, and fosters candid cultural and financial enhancement. This intense cooperation includes regular high-level diplomatic dialogues, joint security exercises, and collaborative economic initiatives. South Korea recognizes it cannot stand alone without China and Japan, as they are pivotal neighbors in Northeast Asia.

The governments of Northeast Asian countries are acutely aware that the US-China trade war significantly impacts the global economic landscape. This trade war, which has led to economic uncertainties and geopolitical tensions, has also influenced the diplomatic relations and security strategies of countries in the region. Despite the region’s bleak history, it is becoming increasingly clear that the countries in Northeast Asia are not isolated entities but deeply interconnected and interdependent. South Korea’s sustainable diplomatic relations with China and Japan are crucial for its global standing and security. By collaborating with these countries, South Korea can strengthen its position in the international community and ensure its protection in the face of global challenges, including those arising from the US-China trade war. The trade war has forced countries in the region to reassess their economic and security strategies, leading to a more interconnected and interdependent Northeast Asia. This reassessment includes a shift towards diversifying trade partners and strengthening regional security alliances, highlighting the region’s adaptability and resilience in the face of global challenges.

Northeast Asian interdependence underscores the need for peaceful and constructive relations among these countries and their collective influence on the worldwide community. The economic and diplomatic ties between South Korea, China, and Japan are not just about mutual benefits and shared security and prosperity in the region but also about the potential for increased economic growth and enhanced security. This collaboration offers reassurance about the potential benefits of these ties and the collective strength they can bring, reassuring the audience about the future and the positive outcomes that can be achieved through such cooperation.

Disclaimer: The Author wishes to reiterate that this article reflects his views and does not represent any institution. He also wants to emphasize that he takes personal responsibility for the content and accuracy of the information in this article, and any decision made based on this information is the reader’s responsibility.

SEOUL, May 20 (UPI) — South Korea sent a delegation to Washington to hold a second round of technical discussions this week over the Trump administration’s proposed “reciprocal” tariffs, Seoul’s Trade Ministry said Tuesday, with both sides aiming to reach an agreement by July.

A South Korean delegation led by senior ministry official Jang Sung-gil will visit Washington for talks slated to run from Tuesday through Thursday, the Trade Ministry said.

Discussions will be centered on the six areas of trade balance, non-tariff measures, economic security, digital trade, country of origin of products and commercial considerations, the ministry said. The agenda was set during a meeting held on the sidelines of last week’s Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation trade ministers’ meeting, held on South Korea’s southern resort island of Jeju.

“Through this technology consultation, we will respond from the perspective of prioritizing national interests in order to derive the direction of a mutually beneficial agreement centered on the areas that both sides have discussed so far,” Jang said.

This week’s discussions follow a first round of working-level talks held May 1 in Washington.

South Korea is facing 25% tariffs threatened by U.S. President Donald Trump as part of his sweeping package of “Liberation Day” trade measures. Trump announced the tariffs on April 2 but quickly put their implementation on hold for 90 days. Tariffs on steel and automobiles, two key South Korean industries, are already in place.

Seoul and Washington agreed to work toward a “package” deal on trade and other related issues before July 8, when the 90-day pause on tariffs is set to expire, South Korean Trade Minister Ahn Duk-geun said in April.

The uncertain trade environment has shaken the export-dependent Asian powerhouse, which saw its economy unexpectedly shrink in the first quarter of the year.

Last month, the International Monetary Fund sharply cut its forecast for South Korea’s 2025 economic growth as part of an overall global decline reflecting “effective tariff rates at levels not seen in a century and a highly unpredictable environment.”

The April edition of the IMF’s quarterly World Economic Outlook projected 1% growth for Asia’s fourth-largest economy, down from a 2% forecast in its previous edition.

South Korea is looking to get a reduction or exemption from the American tariffs, Trade Minister Ahn Duk-geun said Friday after he met with U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer at the APEC event in Jeju.

“In Friday’s meeting, we tried to raise awareness that South Korea has a bilateral free trade agreement with the United States, unlike some other countries, and has expanded trade and investment with the U.S. under the FTA,” Ahn told reporters at a press briefing.

“We are continuing to request exemption from all reciprocal tariffs and item tariffs against us,” Ahn added in a statement. “Our government will actively consult with the United States to establish a mutually beneficial solution by prioritizing national interests.”

SEOUL — In South Korea, the Trump administration’s 25% tariff on imported cars has sent local automakers Hyundai and Kia scrambling to protect one of the country’s most valuable exports. But General Motors, which last year shipped 418,782 units from its factories here to American consumers — or 88.5% of its total sales — may be facing a much larger predicament.

Unlike Hyundai and Kia, which control over 90% of the domestic market here, the Detroit-based automaker produces budget SUVs like the Chevrolet Trax or Chevrolet Trailblazer almost exclusively for the U.S. market. The Trax has been South Korea’s most-exported car since 2023.

That business model has made GM, which operates three factories and employs some 11,000 workers in the country, uniquely exposed to Trump’s auto tariffs, resurfacing long-running concerns in the local automobile industry that the company may ultimately pack up and leave.

Until last month’s tariffs, cars sold between the U.S. and South Korea were untaxed under a bilateral free trade agreement. That helped South Korea become the third-largest automobile exporter to the U.S. last year to the tune of $34.7 billion — or around half of its total automobile exports. In contrast, South Korea bought just $2.1 billion worth of cars from the U.S.

Earlier this month, GM executives estimated that the tariffs would cost the company up to $5 billion this year, adding that the company would boost production in its U.S. plants to offset the hit. With additional factories in Mexico and Canada, GM currently imports around half of the cars that it sells in the U.S.

“If the U.S. tariffs remain in place, GM will no longer have any reason to stay in South Korea,” said Lee Ho-guen, an automotive engineering professor at Daeduk University.

“The tariffs may add up to $10,000 to the sticker price on cars shipped to the U.S., while GM sells less than 50,000 units a year in South Korea. There is very little room for them to adjust their strategy.”

Kim Woong-heon, an official in GM Korea’s labor union, said that the union is approaching current rumors of the company’s potential exit with a dose of caution, but added that broader concerns about the company’s long-term commitment remain.

“The cars we’re manufacturing here are on the lowest end of GM’s price range so labor costs will make it impossible to immediately shift production to the U.S.,” he said.

“But we have painful memories of GM shutting down one of its factories in 2018, so we get nervous every time these rumors surface.”

GM Chevrolet automobiles bound for export sit parked at the Port of Incheon in South Korea.

(SeongJoon Cho / Bloomberg via Getty Images)

This isn’t the first time that GM’s prospects in the country have come under question. The company first established itself in South Korea in 2002 by acquiring the bankrupt Daewoo Motor Co. in a government-backed deal that some at the time criticized as “GM taking the cream off Daewoo for almost nothing.”

Struggling to compete with the likes of Hyundai, GM briefly positioned itself as a production base for European and Asian markets until its bankruptcy in 2009.

Amid the global restructuring efforts that followed, concerns that it would close its South Korean operations led the government to once again intervene. In the end, GM stayed after receiving $750 million in financing from the country’s development bank on the condition that it would remain open for at least 10 more years.

But in 2018, the company closed its factory in the city of Gunsan, which had employed around 1,800 workers, and spun off its research and development unit from its manufacturing base — a move that many saw as the company strategically placing one foot out the door.

In February, shortly after President Trump announced the 25% tariffs on foreign-made cars, Paul Jacobson, GM’s chief financial officer, hinted that the company may once again be facing similarly tough decisions:

“If they become permanent, then there’s a whole bunch of different things that you have to think about in terms of, where do you allocate plants, and do you move plants.”

In recent weeks, executives from GM Korea have sought to assuage the rumors that the company’s South Korean operations would be affected.

“We do not intend to respond to rumors about the company’s exit from Korea,” said Gustavo Colossi, GM Korea’s vice president of sales, at a news conference last month. “We plan to move forward with our sales strategies in Korea and continue launching new models in the coming weeks and months, introducing fresh GM offerings to the market.”

The union says the company’s two finished car plants have been running at full capacity, with an additional 21,000 units recently allocated to the factory in Incheon, a city off the country’s western coast — a sign that business will go on as usual for now.

But with GM’s 10-year guarantee set to expire in 2027, Kim, the union official, said that their demands for measures that prove the company’s commitment beyond that have gone unanswered.

These include manufacturing GM’s electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles in South Korean factories, as well as making a greater range of its products available for sale in South Korea and other Asian markets.

”If the company intends to continue its operations here, it needs to make its business model more sustainable and not as reliant on imports to the U.S.,” Kim said.

“That will be our core demand at this year’s wage and collective bargaining negotiations.”

GM’s immediate prospects in the country will depend on the ongoing tariff talks between U.S. and South Korean officials that began last month with the goal of producing a deal by July 8.

Although South Korean trade minister Ahn Duk-geun has stressed that cars are “the most important part of the U.S.-South Korea trade relationship,” few expect that Seoul will be able to finesse the sort of deal given to the U.K., which last week secured a 10% rate on the first 100,000 vehicles shipped to the U.S. each year.

Unlike South Korea, which posted a $66-billion trade surplus with the U.S. last year, the U.K. buys more from the U.S. than it sells. And many of the cars that it does sell to the U.S. are luxury vehicles such as the Rolls-Royce, which Trump has differentiated from the “monster car companies” that make “millions of cars.”

“At some point after the next two years, I believe it’s highly likely GM will leave and keep only their research and development unit here, or at least significantly cut back on their production,” Lee, the automotive professor, said.

In the southeastern port city of Changwon, home to the smaller of GM’s two finished car plants, local officials have been reluctant to give air to what they describe as premature fearmongering.

But Woo Choon-ae, a 62-year-old real estate agent whose clients also include GM workers and their families, can’t help but worry.

She says that the company’s exit would be devastating to the city, which, like many rural areas, has already been under strain from population decline.

GM employs 2,800 workers in the region, but accounts for thousands more jobs at its suppliers. The Changwon factory, which manufactures the Trax, represented around 15% of the city’s total exports last year.

“People work for GM because it offers stable employment until retirement age. If they close the factory here, all of these workers will leave to find work in other cities, which will be a critical blow to the housing market,” she said.

“Homes are how people save money in South Korea. But if people’s savings are suddenly halved, who’s going to be spending money on things like dining out?”

Authors: Darynaufal Mulyaman and Abdullah Akbar Rafsanjani*

In June 2025, South Korea will prepare to hold elections, and there is a figure who is in the political spotlight, namely Lee Jae-myung. He is the leading candidate of the Democratic Party in South Korea and represents a new direction of pragmatic progressivism based on the socio-economic reality of society and not an idealistic and rhetorical one. His views on inter-Korean relations, foreign policy, and his approach to the United States and China reflect an effort to balance national identity with geopolitical realities. If you look back at history, in the history of politics in South Korea, there are two big names that show or define progressivism, namely Kim Dae-jung and Moon Jae-in.

Both figures have left a legacy through diplomacy and careful engagement with North Korea. However, Lee Jae-myung comes with a different approach; he still brings the spirit of peace, but the style he carries is a more populist, more grounded style, and his commitment to inter-Korean peace has not diminished. With the presence of Lee Jae-myung as a candidate, it signals a return to building engagement with North Korea. Lee Jae-myung offers more policies, such as conditional sanctions relief, which is linked to verifiable denuclearization, where sanctions will be eased if North Korea shows real and verified steps in the denuclearization process. What Lee Jae-myung is doing is completely different from Kim Dae-jung’s “Sunshine Policy,” which is more based on trust and reconciliation without harsh conditions.

At the same time, however, his economic initiatives, such as reviving joint tourism projects, show continuity with the Moon Jae-in era with thawed relations and cultural diplomacy. Economic projects such as joint tourism, cultural exchange, and cross-border cooperation still remain part of Lee Jae-myung’s vision. He believes that economic stability and social interaction can be a stepping stone to broader peace. However, what sets Lee Jae-myung apart is his distinctive voice in the broader geopolitical discourse and the most prominent aspect of Lee Jae-myung’s foreign policy, namely his vision to make South Korea a strategically autonomous country.

He argued that South Korea should not choose between Washington and Beijing. In a world that is now polarized between the United States and China, Lee Jae-myung offers a pragmatic, non-aligned approach, not as a passive neutral, but as an active position to balance South Korea’s national interests amid the pressures of the world’s two major powers. This is a bold vision because instead of choosing one of the camps to approach, Lee Jae-myung is pushing for policies that can better allow South Korea to maintain close relations with the United States, especially in the defense-security fields, such as through military alliances and defense system development. And at the same time, it continues to establish relations and economic cooperation with China, which is South Korea’s main trading partner. So this is a bold vision because it recognizes the strategic needs of the U.S. alliance and the gravity of China’s economy.

This approach is very different from conservative governments that are more inclined towards the United States as a whole or even from previous liberal strategies that were sometimes too soft on China. In Lee Jae-myung’s vision, diplomacy is a tool to maintain sovereignty in decisions and not a tool to fully conform to the will of foreign powers. In the midst of new tensions and a global realignment, Lee Jae-myung’s candidacy provides him with a sobering reminder that diplomacy works best not when chasing headlines, but when building trust done slowly. With this approach, Lee can also strengthen South Korea’s position at the regional level, especially through East Asia initiatives that encourage collaboration between countries on energy, technology, and climate change issues. In terms of rich communication, when compared to Moon Jae-in, who tends to be calm and diplomatic, Lee Jae-myung has a more aggressive and approachable communication style than Moon Jae-in. Then, compared to Kim Dae-jung, Lee Jae-myung is more grounded in working-class reality than Kim Dae-jung. Although their communication styles are different, their ambition to bring peace and dignity to the Korean Peninsula is clearly in line with theirs.

Although the style and approach brought are new, the ambition is seen in line with Lee Jae-myung, who does not necessarily reject the legacy of his predecessors to create peace on the Korean peninsula. From Kim Dae-jung, he has inherited the spirit of peace and the recognition that the problems facing Korea cannot be solved by violence. And through Moon Jae-in, Lee Jae-myung continues his efforts to include elements of cultural engagement and economic diplomacy as a tool to build greater trust.

Lee Jae-myung has realized that the South Korean people today are no longer satisfied with symbolism in politics. The South Korean people want real results, both in domestic affairs and foreign relations, especially between the Koreas. Therefore, Lee Jae-myung learns from their weaknesses. The idealism that exists in Kim Dae-jung is often used by North Korea without good faith to repay trust. And Moon Jae-in’s approach, which tends to be too diplomatic, is often criticized for being too slow and not pressuring the opponent enough. So, seeing from this, Lee Jae-myung is more of an approach that can be evaluated and measured, such as verified denuclearization, cross-border economic projects with success indicators, and diplomacy that is open but full of calculations. Therefore, his vision is not idealism, but a steady and deliberate movement towards peace.

Amid the ongoing turmoil and tensions on the Korean peninsula, the trade war between the two great powers, and the rising nationalism in many countries, the presence of figures such as Lee Jae-myung provides a more grounded alternative. Lee Jae-myung is not an idealistic hero but a technocrat who understands the importance of strategy and public communication; this style has made him beloved by many young voters and the working class. Lee Jae-myung’s vision does not dream of instant peace or dramatic reunification, but Lee offers a peace built gradually through small steps and careful calculations and based on trust that is built and tested consistently.

It is a pragmatic progressivism that sees the reality of what is happening in society and remains faithful to the principle that progress is only possible if the small people become the center of determining the direction of policy. In this context, Lee placed the people at the center to determine the direction of policy and did not place the elites or elite-centric ones who often ignored the needs and voices of ordinary citizens. Because, according to Lee, to achieve peace and especially security, it is not only about weapon systems such as missiles or soldiers but also about jobs in border areas and ensuring price stability for the South Korean people so that with development that leads to the economy, stability will be created.

This is what finally made Lee Jae-myung think about more often voicing policies of wealth redistribution, reducing inequality in society, and protection for vulnerable groups as part of achieving diplomacy and national security strategies. Therefore, pragmatic Progressivism is not trapped by moral rhetoric but is faithful to the principle that progress can be achieved or is possible if the people become the center to determine the direction of policy. And with the pragmatic progressivism carried by Lee Jae-myung, he can bring together the spirit of healthy change with a political vision that is not only ideal but also capable of being implemented in the complex realities that occur in today’s world.

*Abdullah Akbar Rafsanjani is a researcher assistant of CEO Research. Research interests are around security issues and foreign relations.