January 22, 2007

 

South Korea, US proceed in FTA talks, gaps remain
 

 

South Korea and the US recently wrapped up a week of tough free trade talks but gaps still remain if they are to clinch a deal ahead of a fast-approaching deadline.

 

"There are still many differences on important issues," said Kim Jong-hoon, the chief of South Korea's negotiating team.

 

Kim cited "no progress" in the issues related to antidumping laws, automobiles and pharmaceuticals.

 

Assistant US trade representative Wendy Cutler, Kim's counterpart expressed optimism though concurred that much needs to be done to bridge the gaps in coming weeks.

 

However, she said she was hopeful the deal could be finalised.

 

A successful deal would slash tariffs and other barriers on a wide range of goods and services between the two nations, which already do US$72 billion in business a year.

 

If successful, this could be the biggest deal for the US since the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1993. South Korea, the world's 10th-largest economy, is the seventh-biggest trading partner for the US.

 

The two sides need to wrap up a deal by the end of March before the expiry of US President George W Bush's special trade authority which makes it easier to get agreements through Congress.

 

A seventh round of talks would be held in Washington for four days beginning Feb 14. Cutler said it was uncertain if more rounds would be needed.

 

US President George W Bush, under special "fast-track" trade promotion authority, can submit a deal to Congress for a straight up-or-down vote without amendments until the end of June.

 

But a deal must be completed 90 days before that so lawmakers in Washington have time to review it before voting. South Korea¡¯s legislature must also approve the pact.

 

Cutler also said an ongoing beef dispute between the two countries must be resolved, even though it was not technically part of the FTA talks.

 

In South Korea, the prospect of free trade with the US has sparked protests by labour unions and farmers who feel the deal would threaten their livelihoods.