Journalist

Jungwoo Lee
  • Iran war offers lesson and warning for Asias U.S. allies
    Iran war offers lesson and warning for Asia's U.S. allies SEOUL, March 13 (AJP) - As the war in Iran stretches longer and wider than expected, security analysts are increasingly applying its battlefield dynamics to other flashpoints — raising concerns among Asian countries that host U.S. military bases. For some strategists, Iran’s retaliatory missile and drone strikes on American facilities across the Middle East offer a preview of how a future conflict in the Taiwan Strait could unfold — and how Washington’s Asian allies might be drawn into it. The concern was highlighted in the South China Morning Post, which noted that Iran’s attacks on U.S. bases could serve as a template for potential escalation in Asia. In a Taiwan contingency, Beijing could similarly target American military assets hosted by U.S. allies, including Japan, the Philippines and South Korea. “Analysts said the retaliatory strikes could serve as a template for a potential conflict in the Taiwan Strait, as Beijing might consider actions against U.S. allies hosting American military assets such as Japan, the Philippines and South Korea,” the newspaper reported. Although the Trump administration has not released detailed damage assessments from the Iranian attacks, international media reports indicate that at least 11 U.S. bases in the Middle East — more than half of Washington’s facilities in the region — sustained damage. The scale and precision of the strikes have prompted renewed debate over the vulnerability of American military infrastructure abroad. The implications extend far beyond the Gulf. A 2024 report by the Congressional Research Service notes that the United States maintains 24 permanent military bases in the Indo-Pacific and has access to another 20 facilities. Key installations include Kadena Air Base in Okinawa and Camp Humphreys in Pyeongtaek, South Korea. The Philippines has also expanded American access to nine military sites since 2023, including three located on Luzon, close to Taiwan. Lyle Goldstein, a senior research fellow at Brown University’s Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs, said Iran’s strikes underscore how U.S. bases could become early targets in a Taiwan crisis. “These moves by Iran against nearby U.S. military bases in the Persian Gulf region do absolutely highlight the possibility that in a Taiwan scenario China would likely target U.S. bases throughout the Asia-Pacific region,” he said. For years, military planners have warned that U.S. forces stationed in Japan, South Korea and the Philippines could be vulnerable to large-scale missile strikes from China in the early stages of a regional conflict. The Iranian attacks, some analysts argue, show how even a middle power can challenge American military infrastructure through precision strikes. Yet the debate unfolding in Seoul and Tokyo is not solely about military vulnerability. It is also about the risks inherent in alliance politics — particularly the fear of becoming entangled in a conflict they did not initiate. Spencer D. Bakich, a professor at the Virginia Military Institute, notes that the concept of “entrapment” has long shaped U.S. alliance strategy in Asia. During the early Cold War, Washington worried that strongly anti-communist leaders such as South Korea’s Syngman Rhee and Taiwan’s Chiang Kai-shek might provoke confrontations with their adversaries and pressure the United States to intervene. To manage that risk, the United States constructed a network of bilateral alliances designed to maximize American leverage over its partners. Today, however, Bakich argues the concern may be reversing direction. Many policymakers in South Korea and Japan fear that conflicts elsewhere — including the war in the Middle East — could pull them into wars they would prefer to avoid. “I assess that it is highly unlikely that either South Korea or Japan will find themselves directly committed to this war,” Bakich said. Both countries, he noted, face immediate security challenges closer to home — North Korea in South Korea’s case and China in Japan’s. As a result, a division of labor has gradually taken shape within the alliance: the United States focuses on security challenges in the Middle East, while its Asian allies concentrate on maintaining stability in the Indo-Pacific. Practical constraints reinforce this arrangement. South Korea and Japan possess powerful militaries designed to address regional threats, but they have limited capacity to contribute forces to conflicts beyond their immediate neighborhood. That reality, Bakich argues, provides both governments with leverage in negotiations with Washington. Instead of direct military participation, their most likely contribution to a U.S.-led war effort against Iran would be financial support — similar to the role both countries played during the 1990–1991 Gulf War. Not all analysts, however, view the situation solely through the lens of alliance entrapment. Jennifer Murtazashvili, a professor at the University of Pittsburgh who is currently conducting research in Tel Aviv, argues that focusing exclusively on the risk of being dragged into war may obscure a larger strategic question: what happens if Iran emerges from the conflict stronger. “The entrapment problem in alliance politics is well established,” she said. “But South Korean and Japanese policymakers should resist framing their calculus purely around alliance obligation alone.” Iran’s nuclear ambitions, ballistic missile program and expanding partnerships with China and North Korea could have direct implications for Northeast Asia’s security architecture. An Iran emboldened by the conflict, she argues, would not simply be an American problem. In that sense, engagement by U.S. allies may serve their own strategic interests — but the form of participation matters. Murtazashvili suggests that Seoul and Tokyo should seek clarity about war aims before offering support. Entrapment risks are highest, she argues, when allies join open-ended military campaigns with vague objectives. At the same time, allies possess a range of options short of direct combat participation. Logistical assistance, intelligence sharing and financial support can demonstrate alliance solidarity without exposing them to the full risks of military escalation. Domestic politics will also shape the calculus. Leaders in both countries must balance alliance expectations with public opinion, which historically has been cautious about overseas military operations. The result, analysts say, is a delicate strategic calculation. For America’s Asian allies, the war with Iran is both distant and immediate — geographically far away, yet rich with lessons about the vulnerabilities of U.S. military power and the enduring complexities of alliance politics. In that sense, the conflict may prove to be more than a Middle Eastern war. It could also serve as a rehearsal for the geopolitical dilemmas Washington and its allies may one day face in the Indo-Pacific. 2026-03-13 16:22:21
  • South Korea PM meets US vice amid war and tariff tensions
    South Korea PM meets US vice amid war and tariff tensions SEOUL, March 13 (AJP) - South Korean Prime Minister Kim Min-seok met U.S. Vice President JD Vance at the White House on Wednesday, using the talks to underscore Seoul’s passage of a new law to support Korean investment in the United States and to press for faster implementation of broader bilateral security and industrial agreements. The meeting came as the alliance faces renewed strain from a U.S. tariff offensive and deepening energy insecurity caused by the Iran war and disruptions around the Strait of Hormuz. According to the prime minister’s office, Kim told Vance that South Korea’s National Assembly had passed special legislation designed to provide the legal framework for Seoul’s investment commitments in the United States, calling it proof of Korea’s determination to follow through on bilateral agreements. Reuters and AP reported that the new law is tied to Seoul’s pledged $350 billion investment package in strategic U.S. industries and shipbuilding, part of a broader deal reached with Washington last year. Kim said he hoped the legislation would help Korean companies contribute to the revival of U.S. manufacturing and job creation while opening the way for broader advances in bilateral ties. He also said the law would add momentum to implementing the joint fact sheet released after the recent summit between the two countries’ leaders. In the security sector, Kim called for swift execution of pending agreements involving nuclear-powered submarines, nuclear energy and shipbuilding cooperation. Korean media reports said the package also touches on Seoul’s long-running push to expand its nuclear and maritime strategic options as the allies deepen industrial-security coordination. Vance welcomed the establishment of the legal framework needed to carry out the investment deal and said the two sides should stay in close contact on implementation, according to the prime minister’s office. Kim also highlighted cooperation in critical minerals and briefed Vance on Seoul’s recent decision regarding a U.S. request linked to the export of mapping data by American companies. Vance expressed appreciation and said the allies should continue discussions on other non-tariff barriers as well, the office said. Kim additionally noted that issues Vance had raised in January — including matters involving Coupang and religious concerns — were now being managed in a stable way. Vance, in turn, thanked the Korean government for its efforts to remain in close communication while respecting South Korea’s legal framework. The meeting was the first between Kim and Vance in about six weeks since their previous talks on Jan. 23, and the prime minister’s office said it helped deepen personal trust and improve communication on pending alliance issues. The talks came at a delicate moment for Seoul. Just two days earlier, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative launched a new Section 301 investigation into “structural excess capacity and production in manufacturing sectors,” targeting South Korea and 15 other economies as the Trump administration seeks to rebuild its tariff arsenal after a court setback. At the same time, the war involving Iran has amplified South Korea’s vulnerability to external energy shocks. The conflict has sharply disrupted flows through the Strait of Hormuz, helping send oil prices surging and adding pressure on Asian import-dependent economies such as South Korea, which relies heavily on Middle Eastern crude and petrochemical feedstocks. 2026-03-13 10:47:59
  • Iran war may feel closer at home for South Korea and Japan if conflict stretches
    Iran war may feel closer at home for South Korea and Japan if conflict stretches SEOUL, March 12 (AJP) - The war with Iran may be unfolding thousands of kilometers away, but for U.S. allies in Northeast Asia it could begin to feel much closer if the conflict drags on. Questions are emerging in Seoul and Tokyo over whether Washington could eventually ask its key regional allies — South Korea and Japan — to support operations tied to the conflict, particularly given their reliance on energy shipments passing through the Strait of Hormuz and the presence of major U.S. military assets in both countries. Japan’s Yomiuri Shimbun reported Wednesday that the United States could press Tokyo to provide tangible support when U.S. President Donald Trump meets Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi later this month. Possible requests could include dispatching Japan’s Self-Defense Forces to escort oil tankers through the Strait of Hormuz or assisting with mine-clearing operations. The discussion reflects a broader concern in the region that a distant war could gradually draw U.S. allies into supporting roles even if they initially seek to remain on the sidelines. Signs of the conflict’s ripple effects are already visible. Parts of the U.S. military posture in East Asia appear to be shifting as Washington reallocates resources to the Middle East. U.S. media outlets have reported that the Pentagon is moving elements of a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system from South Korea to the Middle East. Some Patriot missile batteries stationed with U.S. Forces Korea may also be redeployed. South Korean President Lee Jae Myung acknowledged that Seoul had voiced concerns about the removal of certain air-defense systems, but emphasized that the move would not significantly weaken the country’s deterrence posture against North Korea. “If asked whether that would seriously hinder our deterrence strategy against North Korea, I can say with certainty that it would not,” Lee said during a cabinet meeting Tuesday. Still, the redeployment has sparked debate about the durability of the U.S. security commitment to East Asia at a time when Washington is engaged in a major conflict elsewhere. Tokyo faces a particularly delicate dilemma. Japan hosts roughly 50,000 U.S. troops and provides critical bases for American operations across the Indo-Pacific. At the same time, the Japanese government has been cautious about becoming entangled in the Iran conflict. Under Japan’s postwar constitutional framework, military participation abroad is tightly constrained. Any direct support for U.S. combat operations would likely require legal justification under Japan’s doctrine of collective self-defense — allowing force to protect an ally if Japan’s own survival is at stake. Government spokesperson Minoru Kihara recently said the current situation does not constitute an “existential crisis” that would trigger collective self-defense. Yet pressure could grow if the war disrupts global energy routes. The Strait of Hormuz — through which a large share of Japan’s oil imports passes — remains one of the world’s most vulnerable maritime chokepoints. If Iran threatens shipping there, Japan could face calls to contribute maritime escorts or logistical support to ensure safe passage for energy supplies. Despite these concerns, many analysts believe direct military involvement by U.S. allies remains unlikely — for now. Yasuyuki Matsunaga, a professor at Tokyo University of Foreign Studies, said the strategic logic of the alliance system makes such participation improbable. “The possibility of South Korea and Japan becoming involved in the Iran war is rather low,” Matsunaga told AJP. “The U.S. does not need our military participation in the active war theater in the Middle East, and more importantly it does not want to create vulnerabilities in East Asia that could open a second war front.” That logic reflects Washington’s broader strategic dilemma: while concentrating forces against Iran, the United States must also deter potential adversaries in Asia, including North Korea and China. Still, even limited logistical or maritime support could mark a shift in the role U.S. allies play in conflicts beyond their immediate region. South Korea has long faced concerns about “entrapment” — the risk that alliance commitments could draw it into distant conflicts initiated by Washington. Brandon Ives, a professor at Seoul National University, said the likelihood of such entrapment depends largely on how the war evolves. “If the conflict becomes a prolonged, low-intensity struggle, Iran may rely more on asymmetric tactics and attacks against actors perceived to support the U.S. or Israel,” he said. “But overall, Iran would likely avoid directly targeting third-party countries.” For both Tokyo and Seoul, the Iran war is quickly becoming a test of alliance politics in an era of globalized security risks. Neither government appears eager to play an active military role in the conflict. Yet as the war expands and U.S. forces reposition across the globe, the political pressure on allies to contribute — even indirectly — may continue to grow. For now, both governments hope the conflict remains distant enough to avoid a difficult choice. 2026-03-12 17:23:00
  • AI reshapes entry-level jobs as Korea nears 20,000 Ph.D. era
    AI reshapes entry-level jobs as Korea nears '20,000 Ph.D. era' SEOUL, March 11 (AJP) - As artificial intelligence reshapes white-collar work, more South Koreans are staying in school longer — and earning Ph.D.s in record numbers. Universities awarded 19,831 doctoral degrees in 2025, according to data released Tuesday by the Korean Educational Development Institute, the highest since records began in 1999 and a 51.6 percent increase over the past decade. The milestone places the country on the brink of what policymakers call the “20,000 Ph.D. era.” The surge reflects a rapidly changing labor market in which AI is increasingly automating entry-level analytical and research tasks — from finance and legal work to data analysis — pushing many young professionals to pursue deeper specialization to remain competitive. Yet the rise also highlights a growing paradox: while more South Koreans are earning the highest academic credential available, many struggle to find jobs that match their qualifications. Among 7,005 doctoral graduates employed last year, 10.4 percent reported earning less than 20 million won annually, roughly $15,000 — up from 6.3 percent in 2011. When the national statistics series began in 1999, only 5,586 people earned doctoral degrees nationwide, and a Ph.D. was widely seen as a rare credential reserved mainly for future academics. The numbers climbed steadily as universities expanded graduate programs and competition in the labor market intensified. By 2010 the annual number of Ph.D. graduates surpassed 10,000, marking the rapid expansion of doctoral education. With nearly 20,000 new doctorates last year, the figure has almost quadrupled over a quarter century. The latest data also highlight a major shift in gender balance. In 2025, 8,629 women received doctoral degrees, the first time the number of female Ph.D. graduates exceeded 8,000 in a single year. Women accounted for 43.5 percent of all doctoral recipients, the highest proportion since records began. The change is striking compared with the late 1990s. In 1999, only 1,144 women earned Ph.D.s, representing 20.5 percent of the total. The motivations behind doctoral study have also evolved. In a survey of 10,498 recent doctoral graduates conducted by the Korea Research Institute for Vocational Education and Training, the most common reason for pursuing a Ph.D. was to improve professional expertise, cited by 37.5 percent of respondents. The share slightly exceeded the 35.5 percent who said they aimed to become professors or researchers. That represents a shift from earlier years. When the survey began in 2011, 43.2 percent cited academic careers as their primary goal. Analysts say the shift reflects growing uncertainty about academic career paths as well as broader changes in the labor market. Even as doctoral graduates increase, evidence suggests the labor market has struggled to absorb them. A report by the vocational education institute found that 31 percent of South Korean workers are overeducated for their jobs, significantly higher than the 23 percent average among countries in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. At the same time, 49 percent of college graduates work in jobs unrelated to their majors, compared with the OECD average of 38 percent. “The high level of overeducation indicates a strong inflow of highly educated workers into relatively simple positions,” the report said. Researcher Lee Soo-hyun, who led the study, warned that such mismatches could have long-term economic costs. “A double mismatch — being both overeducated and working outside one’s field — can prevent individuals from fully utilizing their capabilities,” she said. Economists say the surge in doctoral degrees ultimately reflects structural pressures in South Korea’s labor market. “The high level of overeducation in Korea is largely due to insufficient demand for high-quality jobs,” said Kwon Sang-uk, a professor at Kyungpook National University. “When there are far more job seekers than desirable positions, workers naturally try to differentiate themselves by accumulating more qualifications.” He contrasted the situation with the United States, where academic credentials more closely align with labor market segmentation. “In Korea, a university diploma no longer guarantees employment,” Kwon said. “That pushes people to build increasingly stronger credentials.” External factors may also be contributing to the rise in domestic Ph.D. programs. A weaker Korean won has made studying abroad more expensive, while stricter immigration policies in the United States have discouraged some Korean students from pursuing doctoral programs overseas. Those shifts may be pushing more students to remain in Korea for graduate education or for some to stay competitive against AI competition. “The Ph.D. represents deep expertise in a specific field,” Kwon said. “While artificial intelligence makes general knowledge widely accessible, understanding complex systems and applying advanced research methods still requires intensive training.” Demand for such expertise is likely to grow in sectors such as robotics, advanced manufacturing and cutting-edge technologies, he added — even as competition intensifies in traditional academic careers. 2026-03-11 17:46:19
  • South Korea, Ghana agree to cooperate on climate change, maritime security
    South Korea, Ghana agree to cooperate on climate change, maritime security SEOUL, March 11 (AJP) - South Korea and Ghana have agreed to strengthen cooperation on climate change, maritime security and digital development, Cheong Wa Dae said on Wednesday. President Lee Jae Myung met with Ghanaian President John Dramani Mahama in Seoul, and the two leaders signed a series of agreements including three memorandums of understanding (MOUs) on climate cooperation, maritime safety and security, and collaboration in technology, digital development, and innovation, following their summit. Among the key agreements, the two countries pledged to work together on climate change initiatives and related technology development, and plan to set up a joint committee to coordinate their efforts. This includes the use of Article 6 of the Paris climate accord, which allows countries to trade internationally recognized carbon reduction credits through voluntary cooperation. South Korean officials said the mechanism could help both countries meet their nationally determined contributions for greenhouse gas reductions. South Korea's Coast Guard and Ghana's Navy also agreed to cooperate on maritime safety and security through expanded personnel exchanges including educational training programs and seminars, as well as information sharing on maritime crimes such as piracy, arms trafficking, and drug smuggling. The two sides also agreed to collaborate on search and rescue operations for ships, aircraft, and people in distress at sea. Officials said the cooperation could help improve safety in the Gulf of Guinea region while strengthening protection for South Korean citizens and vessels operating in the area. The two leaders also agreed to deepen collaboration in technology, digital development and innovation with plans to support vocational training for young people, expand education in artificial intelligence (AI) and STEM fields — science, technology, engineering and mathematics — and improve digital accessibility. Mahama's visit marks the first visit by an African head of state since Lee took office in June last year. It is also the first visit by a Ghanaian president to South Korea in about two years, following the Korea-Africa Summit in 2024. Ahead of the visit, Cheong Wa Dae said it had placed specially produced "Ghana chocolate" as a gesture of warm welcome. The chocolate was made using cocoa beans sourced primarily from Ghana. Presidential spokesperson Kang Yoo-jung said the packaging featured both countries' national flags and Mahama's name. Kang recalled that Lee once drew encouragement from a bar of the same chocolate brand given to him by a child during a hunger strike in September 2023, when he was serving as leader of the opposition party. 2026-03-11 17:28:25
  • Seoul may revive decades-old fuel price cap, but experts urge caution
    Seoul may revive decades-old fuel price cap, but experts urge caution SEOUL, March 10 (AJP) - South Korea is considering reviving a rarely used cap on retail gasoline prices as policymakers brace for a potential third wave of global oil shocks if the Middle East conflict drags on, though economists warn the government should move cautiously given the risks of distorting market prices. President Lee Jae Myung on Tuesday instructed his cabinet to explore emergency measures to curb surging fuel costs, urging officials to move beyond “normal procedures and manuals” during crisis conditions and quickly prepare a workable price ceiling system. Finance Minister Koo Yun-cheol said the government aims to introduce a framework for a cap within the week. The authority for such a measure comes from the Petroleum and Petroleum Substitute Fuel Business Act, introduced during the oil shocks of the 1970s. The law allows the finance minister to impose price ceilings or floors on petroleum products if prices fluctuate severely and threaten economic stability or daily life. The provision, however, has not been used for nearly three decades since South Korea liberalized its fuel pricing system to enable market forces to determine retail prices. The debate over reviving the mechanism comes as oil prices swing sharply amid the Middle East conflict. Domestic gasoline prices briefly rose above 2,000 won per liter over the weekend, reflecting the volatility in global crude markets. Economists warn against rushing intervention Some economists say introducing a price cap too early could create unintended consequences. Kim Jin-young, a professor of economics at Korea University, argued it is premature to adopt strong interventionist policies while the trajectory of the conflict remains uncertain. “I believe there is a fairly high possibility that the war in Iran will not end soon,” Kim said. “If the conflict becomes prolonged, oil prices could rise even further. But since the war has only just begun, we should focus on conserving supply and managing demand rather than immediately introducing this system.” Kim warned that price ceilings often impose hidden costs. “A price ceiling introduces a different kind of price — not a monetary one,” he said. “During the oil crisis in the United States, government price controls led to long lines at gas stations. In effect, the system imposes a higher cost on those who value their time.” Others say a cap for temporary purpose could help prevent excessive price spikes and protect consumers during periods of extreme volatility. Im Tobin, a professor at Seoul National University’s Graduate School of Public Administration, said the policy could serve as a corrective tool if market prices overshoot. “When crude oil has already been imported and stored, raising retail prices immediately simply because war breaks out allows oil companies to earn excessive profits,” Im said. “In that sense, the policy can help correct market distortions.” He stressed that any price cap should be strictly temporary. “The key is to shorten the duration of this system,” he said. Chang Yenjae, an economics professor at Soongsil University, also said the measure could help cushion the impact of surging energy costs. “During periods of rapidly rising energy prices, a price ceiling can help protect the real purchasing power of low- and middle-income households and stabilize transportation costs,” Chang said. However, Chang emphasized that price regulation alone cannot address structural energy challenges. “It is essential to clearly define the temporary and conditional nature of the price ceiling,” he said. “Relying solely on price controls is not a fundamental solution to energy problems.” Instead, he suggested improving fuel distribution systems and expanding fiscal support for vulnerable households as potentially more effective tools to manage the inflationary ripple effects of higher energy prices. 2026-03-10 17:50:44
  • Oil shock a sober reckoning to diversify away from Middle East crude: Rep. Lee Un-ju
    Oil shock a sober reckoning to diversify away from Middle East crude: Rep. Lee Un-ju SEOUL, March 10 (AJP) - The turbulence triggered by the Middle East conflict raises a sober reckoning over South Korea’s energy vulnerabilities and the urgency to correct its energy sourcing structure, which is heavily dependent on imports of Middle Eastern fossil fuels, a three-term ruling party lawmaker said. “The spike in oil prices since the war reminds us how important energy security is and how poor South Korea stands in energy sufficiency,” Rep. Lee Un-ju, a First Member of the Supreme Council of the Democratic Party of Korea, told AJP in a recent interview. The country must raise the share of clean energy through nuclear reactors or renewables and diversify away from heavy imports of fossil fuels, she said. South Korea relies on the Middle East for 70.7 percent of its oil imports and 20.4 percent of its liquefied natural gas supplies, of which roughly 15 percent comes from Qatar — a structure that explains the havoc caused in Korean capital markets when oil prices surged above $100 per barrel on Monday. To “kill two birds with one stone” — reducing reliance on the Middle East while facilitating tariff negotiations with the United States — Korea should more actively consider participating in oil and gas production in the United States and expanding purchases of U.S.-produced energy, Lee said. Unlike the previous liberal government under President Moon Jae-in, which pursued a phase-out of nuclear power, the Lee Jae Myung administration is “thoroughly practical on energy policy,” she said. President Lee understands the crucial role of energy in the transition toward an AI-driven economy, she said, noting that energy reliability ultimately determines the quality and cost of AI services. To ensure competitiveness in AI technologies, the government recognizes the essential role of nuclear reactors, she said. “Renewables alone cannot guarantee power demand in the AI transition. We have the world’s most advanced nuclear reactor technology,” Lee said, highlighting the broad range of industries supported by the country’s reactor ecosystem. Lee said, "I hope that Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power's participation in U.S. nuclear plant construction becomes the first project in our investment in the United States." “Some may see it as a loss for our side,” she said. “But once a reactor starts operating with our help, it will require Korean parts and maintenance for decades, creating enormous revenue and profits for Korean companies.” Lee also pointed to the sharp depreciation of the Korean won, which recently revisited levels last seen in the aftermath of the global financial crisis 17 years ago. The weakness reflects market jitters over oil supply disruptions and potential U.S. tariffs, she said. The government is working closely with domestic refiners to respond to supply instability, and the exchange rate is expected to stabilize once supply concerns ease, she added. Trade concerns with Washington could also be addressed through the passage of a special bill on U.S. investment through a vote on Thursday and a high-level government delegation visit to Washington, Lee said. “All the relevant ministerial-level officials will go,” she said, expressing determination to resolve the tariff issue within the month. Legislators will also support the effort through parliamentary diplomacy. A bipartisan Korea-U.S. Parliamentarians’ League delegation will depart on March 23 for a five-day visit, where members will meet U.S. senators serving on foreign affairs, defense and energy committees, as well as executives from major technology companies. The delegation will include Reps. Lee Un-ju, Cho Kyung-tae and Min Hong-chul. “We must speak on behalf of the government when our national interest comes under challenge,” Lee said. The geopolitical environment has become increasingly tense and unpredictable, she added, describing the current era as one defined by “survival ideology.” “It doesn’t matter whether you are left or right. We are all striving to survive,” she said. The upcoming local elections in June — widely viewed as a midterm test of the administration — will focus on competence rather than negative campaigning, she said. “We won’t resort to negative or black propaganda,” Lee said. “Instead, we will present candidates who will work hard for the people and the country.” About the lawmaker: Rep. Lee Un-ju graduated from Seoul National University with a degree in French Language and Literature. After passing the National Bar Examination in 1997, she worked as a lawyer before becoming an executive director at S-Oil, a South Korean oil refining company, in 2008. She was elected to the National Assembly in Gwangmyeong, Gyeonggi Province, in both the 19th and 20th general elections, and won again in the 22nd general election from the Yongin Jung constituency, becoming a three-term lawmaker. 2026-03-10 10:25:00
  • Seoul braces for worst-case scenario as oil shock rattles markets
    Seoul braces for worst-case scenario as oil shock rattles markets SEOUL, March 09 (AJP) - President Lee Jae Myung on Monday ordered the government to prepare for a “worst-case scenario” as the widening Middle East conflict threatens to deliver a triple shock to South Korea’s economy from high oil prices, dollar, and interest rates. Chairing an emergency cabinet meeting, Lee warned that the trajectory of the crisis remains highly uncertain. “It is difficult to predict how the situation will unfold,” Lee said. “The government must be ready for the worst-case scenario with an extraordinary sense of urgency.” Senior officials from key ministries — including finance, foreign affairs, trade and industry, environment and agriculture — attended the meeting alongside heads of economic agencies such as the Fair Trade Commission and the National Tax Service. Lee instructed authorities to prepare additional market-stabilization measures beyond the existing 100 trillion won ($75 billion) financial safety program, saying the government and the Bank of Korea should be ready to expand interventionist actions if needed. The emergency meeting came after the surge in global oil prices rattled financial markets earlier Monday. The benchmark KOSPI plunged nearly 8 percent, while the Korean won weakened toward levels last seen during the aftermath of the global financial crisis. Government bond yields also jumped about 25 basis points, climbing to their highest levels since September 2022. Lee also warned against profiteering as energy prices rise. “We must strictly crack down on those seeking unfair profits from market turmoil,” he said, adding that the crisis should also serve as a catalyst to “push forward structural reforms to strengthen the resilience of Korea’s capital markets.” With domestic fuel prices approaching 1,900 won per liter, Lee ordered officials to prepare the swift implementation of a price ceiling system for gasoline and diesel. Under the proposed mechanism, the government would cap retail prices and compensate fuel distributors for losses incurred from the policy. He also instructed ministries to work with strategic partner countries to secure alternative supply routes that bypass the Strait of Hormuz, a critical oil chokepoint now facing disruption amid the conflict. Emphasizing the social impact of rising energy costs, Lee vowed to crack down on price collusion, hoarding and speculation by refiners and gas stations. “Violators should face penalties several times greater than the profits they earn from such illegal acts,” he said. “Crisis always carries opportunity,” Lee added. “Everyone is suffering from the same global shock, but how we prepare and respond will determine what comes next.” 2026-03-09 12:19:26
  • Seoul tells Koreans to leave seven Middle East countries immediately
    Seoul tells Koreans to leave seven Middle East countries "immediately" SEOUL, March 09 (AJP) - South Korea has raised its travel alert for parts of the Middle East to Level 3 — “leave immediately” — as the U.S.–Israel war with Iran widens across the Gulf region and threatens key energy infrastructure. The Foreign Ministry said Sunday it upgraded a special travel advisory for Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Oman, Qatar, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Jordan, urging South Korean citizens to leave areas where the new alert applies. Under the revision, Level 3 warnings now cover the entirety of Bahrain, the UAE, Oman, Qatar and Kuwait, replacing the previous special travel advisory. In Saudi Arabia, the warning applies to the Ras Tanura area, home to major Saudi Aramco refining facilities, as well as a 20-kilometer radius around the Shaybah oil field and Prince Sultan Air Base. In Jordan, the Level 3 alert was adjusted to cover the eastern region along the boundary of Zarqa city. The ministry urged South Koreans planning to travel to the affected areas to cancel or postpone visits, while those already there were advised to leave unless their stay is essential. The warning reflects rapidly escalating regional tensions nine days after U.S. and Israeli airstrikes killed Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and other senior figures, triggering a widening military confrontation across the Middle East. The war’s targets have increasingly expanded beyond military facilities. Israeli strikes hit fuel storage depots near Tehran, sending large fires across the skyline, while Bahrain reported damage to a desalination plant following a drone strike blamed on Iran. Desalination facilities are critical infrastructure for Gulf states, which rely heavily on processed seawater for drinking supplies. Iran has also launched missiles and drones toward Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, though several attacks were intercepted by regional air defenses. Saudi Arabia reported its first civilian deaths, saying a projectile struck a residential area and killed two foreign workers while injuring several others. Traffic through the Strait of Hormuz — the key shipping lane carrying roughly one-fifth of global oil supplies — has effectively halted, with shipping companies avoiding the route amid military threats. Iraq said its crude production has plunged to about 1.3 million barrels per day, less than one-third of its normal output, after Baghdad cut production amid storage constraints following the disruption of tanker traffic. Oil prices have surged sharply, with Brent crude jumping about 27 percent in the first week of the war, marking the fastest weekly gain since the pandemic shock in 2020. State media reported that Mojtaba Khamenei, son of the slain leader, has been selected as the country’s next supreme leader — a move that appears to contradict U.S. President Donald Trump’s public insistence that Washington should have a say in Iran’s postwar leadership. Trump has vowed to continue the military campaign, describing it as going “unbelievably good,” while warning that Iran’s new leadership “is not going to last long” without U.S. approval. The White House has indicated the war could last four to six weeks, while U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth warned Tehran that attacks on Americans would trigger direct retaliation. The conflict has already expanded beyond Iran. In Lebanon, Israeli airstrikes on Beirut targeted commanders linked to Iran’s Quds Force while fighting resumed with Hezbollah in the south. In Israel, air raid sirens sounded across southern regions after new Iranian missile launches, while the Israeli military reported its first combat deaths since the war began. The conflict has so far killed more than 1,300 people in Iran, nearly 400 in Lebanon and at least 11 in Israel, according to official tallies. U.S. casualties have also risen, with the Pentagon confirming seven American service members killed in attacks on U.S. forces in the region. The widening war has also triggered diplomatic backlash across the Arab world. The Arab League condemned Iran’s strikes on neighboring countries as “reckless,” while the Gulf Cooperation Council warned that attacks on member states threaten regional stability. Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian apologized for some cross-border attacks but other senior officials signaled the strikes could continue as long as Gulf countries host U.S. military bases. With missiles and drones already striking across the Gulf, Seoul’s decision to raise its travel warning underscores concerns that the conflict — now entering its second week — could spill further across the region. 2026-03-09 08:32:40
  • Day 7 Middle East War: Trumps Iran war exposes fractured alliances and global ripples
    Day 7 Middle East War: Trump's Iran war exposes fractured alliances and global ripples SEOUL, March 06 (AJP) - The U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran under Operation Epic Fury have done more than cripple Tehran’s leadership and military infrastructure. They have also exposed deep fractures in the Western alliance system and revived questions about the future of the post–World War II international order. The campaign began with the assassination of Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on Feb. 28 — a dramatic opening move that President Donald Trump framed as a decisive effort to dismantle Iran’s military and nuclear capabilities. Yet the manner in which the operation unfolded — executed without meaningful consultation with traditional allies — has underscored a striking shift in Washington’s approach to global security: rapid unilateral action first, alliance management later. As Iranian missiles and drones struck Gulf targets, including near Dubai’s airport, the war quickly illustrated the unpredictable consequences of that approach. Italy’s defense minister Guido Crosetto, who happened to be vacationing in Dubai when retaliation hit the United Arab Emirates, later acknowledged that even analysts had not expected Iranian strikes on Gulf commercial hubs. Allies left in the dark Europe’s major powers — long pillars of the transatlantic alliance — were largely excluded from pre-strike deliberations, forcing governments into awkward post-facto positioning. French President Emmanuel Macron publicly acknowledged Paris had been “neither informed nor involved,” a rare and pointed rebuke that echoed across Europe. The European Union eventually convened an emergency security meeting more than two days after the strikes began, highlighting the continent’s discomfort with a war initiated outside its consultation structures. Even Britain, traditionally Washington’s closest military partner, found itself politically divided. Prime Minister Keir Starmer had earlier denied U.S. access to the British-controlled Diego Garcia base in the Indian Ocean. His subsequent cautious endorsement of the strikes drew criticism from both Labour’s anti-war wing and Conservative hawks demanding stronger support for Washington. The diplomatic confusion extended across the Middle East as well. Gulf states condemned violations of their airspace while simultaneously bracing for Iranian retaliation across the region. Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and other Gulf monarchies have since faced waves of drone and missile attacks on civilian and energy infrastructure. Russia, meanwhile, has limited its response largely to rhetoric. Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov condemned the strikes as aggression following talks with Iranian officials, but Moscow has offered little tangible assistance. The muted response reflects Russia’s weakened position after years of geopolitical setbacks, including heavy losses in Ukraine and the collapse of allied governments in parts of the Middle East. No coalition for ground war Security experts say the structure of the operation itself suggests Washington is not seeking a multinational ground campaign similar to those in Iraq or Afghanistan. Andrew Gordon of Harvard University said Trump’s decision to launch the war without building an international coalition will likely deter allied participation in any potential invasion. “No one expects multiple countries to join a U.S. intervention sending troops into Iran,” he said. Instead, analysts say the operation appears designed as an air- and cyber-heavy campaign aimed at weakening the Iranian state without occupying the country. Chiara Redaelli of the University of Geneva described the strategy as a shift toward coercive regime pressure conducted largely from the air. “The operation signals a move from limited strikes toward sustained military pressure without the political burden of occupation,” she said. Several analysts also expect the conflict to remain relatively short. Muhamed H. Almaliky of Harvard argues Iran’s missile and drone stockpiles could be depleted within several weeks if the country receives no outside assistance. He added regarding Iran: "Iran does not have partners or allies of the type willing to endure the risk and consequences of joining it. Apart from the proxies in Lebanon, Iraq and Yemen who are not expected to have a substantial impact on the course of the war." European participation is likely to remain limited to defensive naval deployments protecting shipping lanes, according to historian Jeremy Friedman of Harvard. A short war — but lasting disruption Even if the fighting ends quickly, analysts warn the geopolitical and economic disruptions could persist far longer. Christian Bueger of the University of Copenhagen notes that insurance premiums, shipping routes and global energy markets often remain unstable well after military operations subside. “The conflict itself may last weeks, but disruptions to trade and maritime security can last much longer,” he said. Bueger added, "U.S. leadership continues to be unpredictable. For Korea, stable regional and international partnerships become ever more important. That includes the relationship to Japan, but also ASEAN and the EU." Kenneth Rogoff, the Harvard economist, adds that the war’s strategic lessons will be closely watched by other states. He said regarding the possibility of other countries joining the war: "the US will almost certainly get some other countries to join in, though probably it will require exerting considerable leverage to do so." North Korea, already armed with nuclear weapons, may draw the conclusion that nuclear deterrence remains the ultimate protection against external intervention. Strains on the rules-based order Operation Epic Fury also raises broader questions about the future of the international system built around U.S. alliances and multilateral institutions. Jeffrey Frankel of Harvard Kennedy School said the unilateral nature of the intervention represents another blow to the post-war global framework Washington helped build. “It’s another blow to the 80-year structure of alliances and multilateral rules that the United States itself created,” he said. Redaelli similarly warned that the growing gap between Western rhetoric about a “rules-based order” and the willingness to use unilateral force risks weakening the credibility of international law. For South Korea, the war’s most immediate impact is economic rather than military. The country relies heavily on Middle Eastern energy supplies, with much of its oil passing through the Strait of Hormuz, a strategic chokepoint now under heightened risk. South Korean lawmakers have warned that even a short disruption could ripple through domestic industries ranging from petrochemicals and shipping to aviation and semiconductors. “If the Strait of Hormuz issue is not resolved promptly, Korea will inevitably be affected across all industries,” said Democratic Party lawmaker Maeng Seong-gyu, chairman of the National Assembly’s transport committee. Others see a deeper shift in the global security environment. People Power Party lawmaker Kim Ki-woong, a former vice minister of unification, argued the conflict reflects a broader transformation in international politics. “The era of norms, order and morality has ended,” he said. “We have entered an era where power is openly displayed.” As Operation Epic Fury enters its second week, its military trajectory remains uncertain. But the geopolitical implications are already clear. Trump’s strategy of decisive, alliance-light military action may weaken adversaries quickly. Yet it also risks reshaping alliances, challenging global norms and deepening geopolitical fault lines far beyond the Middle East. For countries like South Korea — deeply tied to global energy flows and U.S. security guarantees — the conflict is a stark reminder that wars fought thousands of miles away can still reshape the strategic landscape at home. 2026-03-06 17:03:18