Lawmakers clash over South Korea-U.S. joint factsheet

Since the release of the joint factsheet on South Korea-U.S tariff and security negotiations on Nov. 14, lawmakers from both ruling and opposition parties have clashed over how the National Assembly should handle the results. The government and the Democratic Party argue that the factsheet is a memorandum of understanding, not an international treaty, and therefore does not require parliamentary ratification. They have proposed enacting a special law on U.S. investment to implement follow-up measures.

The People Power Party, however, insists that parliamentary approval is necessary because the agreement could impose a significant financial burden on citizens.

Some experts, however, caution that ratifying the entire MOU at once could limit flexibility in the so-called “forever negotiation” process, which may last for an extended period and potentially harm national interests. Once ratified, the agreement would carry legal force, making compliance mandatory even if U.S. political conditions change. Notably, neither the United States nor other countries that reached similar agreements, including Japan and the European Union, required legislative ratification. Leaving room for follow-up negotiations could allow negotiators to secure more favorable terms and maintain strategic flexibility.

The government must provide sufficient explanations to the National Assembly and engage in consultations regarding the agreement. However, procedural debates over ratification cannot be allowed to delay action. For automobiles and parts, the law establishing a U.S. investment fund stipulates that tariff reductions are retroactively applied to the first day of the month when the bill is submitted to the National Assembly. Any delay in submitting the special law beyond this month could cost the automotive industry about 300 billion won per month. Lawmakers should prioritize minimizing damage to key export sectors and support domestic industry through legislation rather than treating the matter purely as a political issue.