US-Korea friction over Coupang: Lobbying and regulatory perceptions

The recent tensions between South Korea and the United States concerning the e-commerce giant Coupang are not merely a matter of corporate lobbying, according to Woo Jeong-yeop, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute. Woo argues that attributing the conflict solely to Coupang's lobbying efforts is a misjudgment. Instead, he posits that the core of the issue lies in the perceptions of Korean regulations held by US politicians, particularly within Congress.

“

Lobbying is most difficult to exert influence when the relationship between countries itself is poor. If you mistakenly believe that conflict arose due to Coupang's lobbying when there were no problems in the South Korea-US relationship, you will make the wrong judgment.

Woo dismisses the notion that a change in the US political landscape, such as Democrats securing a majority in the House of Representatives following the midterm elections, would automatically resolve the dispute. He labels such expectations as a "dangerous hope," emphasizing that the underlying concerns about Korean regulations persist regardless of party control. He asserts that South Korea needs to develop a "meticulous strategy" to shift these perceptions.

Specific regulations, such as South Korea's "Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection" (often referred to as the Network Act), have drawn criticism from US lawmakers. A report from the US House Judiciary Committee previously alleged that the South Korean government unfairly targeted American companies like Coupang, potentially violating trade agreements. Woo notes that US politicians, like House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, have long been critical of South Korea's trade and commercial practices.

“

You should not hold onto the hope that the situation will improve if the Democratic Party gains a majority in the US House of Representatives. You need to devise a meticulous strategy to change perceptions of Korean regulations.

To navigate this complex situation, Woo advises South Korea to proactively address these concerns. He suggests that when regulations are perceived as unfavorable by US businesses, opportunities for dialogue and potential adjustments should be explored. He also draws a parallel to past instances where US companies successfully lobbied for favorable outcomes, highlighting the importance of "access" – the ability to engage directly with policymakers. Woo concludes that effective lobbying requires not just presenting arguments but also understanding and influencing the political environment in Washington D.C.

“

US politicians will likely remain negative about the 'Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection' (Network Act). You need to create sophisticated logic and strategies on how to persuade them.