The United States’ response to the war involving Iran and its tariff talks are increasingly converging into what amounts to a single front. The era when military, security and trade policy moved on separate tracks is ending. Washington is pressing allies on both security contributions and trade rules as it seeks to reshape the international order.
After President Donald Trump appeared to target the European Union’s lack of cooperation on the Iran war by floating a review of withdrawing 5,000 U.S. troops stationed in Germany, he announced plans to restore a 25% tariff on EU-made cars. The sequence was no coincidence. It was an explicit signal that security and trade will be negotiated together. “America First” is no longer a campaign slogan; it is becoming an operating principle of global dealings.
South Korea cannot treat this as someone else’s problem. It is among the allies most dependent on U.S. security guarantees, while also relying on exports as an open economy. With geopolitical shocks from the Middle East and U.S. tariff pressure arriving at the same time, South Korea faces one of its hardest equations, caught between two conflicts.
Core industries such as autos, semiconductors, batteries and shipbuilding are deeply tied to the U.S. market and supply chains. Each shift in U.S. tariff policy can rattle investment plans, production strategies and profitability. If tensions around the Strait of Hormuz drag on, South Korea could also face higher energy import costs and logistics disruptions. For companies, it becomes a double burden: a “tariff war” alongside an “energy war.”
In such conditions, the priority is not emotion but clear-eyed realism. Anti-American sentiment or vague calls for self-reliance will not resolve a complex crisis. Nor is unconditional compliance with U.S. demands a solution. What matters is a carefully calibrated diplomacy centered on national interests.
U.S. demands can be summarized in three areas: shifting supply chains to the United States, expanding allies’ strategic contributions, and increasing investment in the U.S. Japanese and European companies have already moved quickly to expand local production and make large investments. South Korea, too, needs a practical negotiating strategy to minimize corporate damage, rather than an emotional approach.
First, Seoul should separate investment in strategic industries in the United States from the risk of hollowing out domestic industry. Even if some U.S. investment is unavoidable, it must prevent core technologies and high value-added production bases from moving offshore. Domestic research and development capacity, advanced materials and equipment ecosystems, and the pipeline of future talent should remain at home.
Second, security contributions should be designed in stages and within realistic limits. On the Strait of Hormuz, for example, policymakers should first consider practical steps that manage risk, such as intelligence sharing, dispatching liaison officers and joining international coordination, rather than committing excessive military assets. National interests are not protected by principles alone; they require strategic action within what the country can sustain.
Third, South Korea should raise the level of its trade diplomacy. Today’s negotiations are not simply about tariffs. Security, energy, investment and technology competition are intertwined. The time when the Industry Ministry, Foreign Ministry and Defense Ministry could act separately is over. A unified strategy should be built around an economic security control tower.
Above all, Seoul should guard against partisan framing. It is risky to denounce any compromise as capitulation, or to portray acceptance of U.S. demands as patriotism. In a harsher international environment, what matters is not pride but survival, not slogans but calculation.
The global order is rapidly shifting toward power politics. The United States is sending a clear message that there will be no more “free security” and no “unconditional free trade.” South Korea must face that reality. Minimizing corporate damage, protecting industrial competitiveness and securing as much negotiating space as possible within the alliance framework is the difficult, unavoidable task now facing the South Korean government.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.