SEOUL, South Korea — South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol wowed Americans with his karaoke game during his six-day trip to the U.S., but concerns have been raised back home about the nuclear assurances that President Biden’s team provided.
The visit, which ended Sunday, marked a U-turn for Mr. Yoon, whom some consider stuffy and who made some diplomatic gaffes early in his tenure. He turned up the charm by singing the opening lines of Don McLean’s classic “American Pie” at the White House state dinner and later told Americans what they like to hear in a joint speech to Congress.
The song was clearly planned, as Mr. Biden presented Mr. Yoon with a signed McLean guitar, but the presidential double act was played as an impromptu moment. VIPs in attendance appeared astonished and delighted.
Mr. Yoon’s vocals were likely honed in sessions in Seoul karaoke saloons (noraebang, or “song rooms,” in Korean). It is part of an after-hours Korean tradition in which colleagues bond over grilled pork, copious booze and hot mics.
“When drinking, we always had to be ready to sing a song. There was a bit of peer pressure to sing on any drinking occasion, so some people practiced it as a survival skill,” said Yang Sun-mook, a former adviser on foreign affairs to the opposition Democratic Party of Korea. “If you want to be an excellent boss, you have to excel in some entertaining stuff. Either you should sing or dance great or be a stand-up comedian. It’s a gung-ho kind of style in Korea.”
With this year marking the 70th anniversary of the bilateral alliance — dating to 1953, when the Korean War armistice was signed — the feel-good vibes continued in Mr. Yoon’s address on Capitol Hill.
SEE ALSO: U.S., South Korea escalate efforts to deter North Korea from launching nuclear attacks
Mr. Yoon talked up wartime U.S. heroism and the freedom, democracy and prosperity it helped birth in South Korea.
“Whoever wrote the speech deserves a bonus: They really understand the Americans,” said Lynn Turk, a retired U.S. diplomat with wide experience with South Korea. “It hit all the notes that Americans think about Korea and what they want to believe about history and the alliance.”
Others were critical.
“I did not see a Korean identity. I saw a U.S. identity to appease a U.S. audience,” academic Moon Chung-in said of Mr. Yoon’s speech. “It was good, but he is the president of Korea.”
Substance or symbolism?
Reactions also were mixed about tangibles. Key outcomes were outlined in the Washington Declaration, which sought to ease concerns in South Korea.
“There are fears about extended deterrence and the fears about abandonment and entrapment that go with any alliance,” said Dan Pinkston, a Seoul-based international relations expert with Troy University.
A standout in the declaration is the establishment of a bilateral Nuclear Consultative Group. The declaration states: “The United States commits to make every effort to consult [with South Korea] on any possible nuclear weapons employment on the Korean Peninsula.”
The document also clarifies “joint execution and planning for [South Korean] conventional support to U.S. nuclear operations in a contingency.”
With Seoul not possessing nuclear arms, the two parties have “established a new bilateral, interagency table-top simulation to strengthen our joint approach to planning for nuclear contingencies.”
Go Myong-hyun, a research fellow at the Asan Institute for Policy Studies in Seoul, was upbeat. The declaration is “totally different” to what had been the case prior, and “NGC” is a play on NATO acronym NPG (Nuclear Planning Group), Mr. Go said.
“The mechanism had been capped at the consultation level. It was a mode of briefing and debriefing, where the U.S. side would tell the Korean side,” Mr. Go said. “NATO’s NPG has two components: One is consultative; one is about nuclear use components, which is operationalized through dual-capable aircraft.”
The NCG “is a first step toward a proper NPG,” which would be, “realistically speaking, the maximum form of nuclear sharing any ally can aspire to,” Mr. Go said. “The U.S. offered a lot more than I thought would be possible at this juncture. It all happened sooner than I expected.”
Mr. Moon, who has advised the left-leaning Seoul governments that have engaged in summitry with North Korea, was downbeat.
“The consultation is not automatic; it is situational,” he said. “It says ‘make every effort,’ which means it may not consult with South Korea.”
Moreover, “Nuclear operations will be done by the U.S. alone, and South Korea will provide conventional support,” Mr. Moon said. “It is the same as before. It is more symbolic than substantive.”
The declaration states that South Korea “has full confidence in U.S. extended deterrence commitments.”
South Korea’s bestselling newspaper, The Chosun Ilbo, was unconvinced. It argued that the declaration puts “shackles” on Seoul policy.
“The question remains whether Washington will really protect Seoul even if that places U.S. territory in the crosshairs of North Korea’s nuclear missiles,” the right-wing paper, which supports the conservative Mr. Yoon, said in an editorial. “According to a survey early this year, half of South Koreans doubt that the U.S. will exercise its nuclear deterrence capabilities in the event of an emergency.”
In January, Mr. Yoon generated shock waves when he hinted offhandedly at the prospect of Seoul acquiring nuclear arms.
That issue was finessed to U.S. satisfaction in the declaration. “President Yoon reaffirmed the ROK’s longstanding commitment to its obligations under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty,” it reads.
“It was hasty to jettison South Korea’s right to protect its sovereignty and people at a time when North Korea is repeatedly threatening to launch a nuclear attack against it,” The Chosun fumed.
Another sign of U.S. commitment to South Korea will be the visit of ballistic-missile submarines. Such visits were halted after 1989.
Noting that the U.S. fleet possesses only 14 Ohio-class ships, Mr. Go was impressed that valuable assets are “being set aside … to defend South Korea.”
One expert warned against simplistic interpretations.
It was quietly revealed in March that Seoul is upgrading its defense matrix from a strictly kinetic “kill chain” to the more advanced U.S. concept of a “kill web,” which maximally integrates all domains.
From that viewpoint, the institutionalization of bilateral mechanisms offers real value.
“By reconstituting and standing up consultative mechanisms and normalizing discussions, people will realize that this process is not just about pushing a red button,” Mr. Pinkston said.
• Andrew Salmon can be reached at asalmon@washingtontimes.com.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.