I would first like to thank The Heritage Foundation for its kind
invitation to speak today. It is always a pleasure for me to visit
Washington, where I spent five very enjoyable years in the mid
1980s working for the International Monetary Fund and the World
Bank.
In those days, there was widespread speculation that the United
States was losing its competitive edge, so I must say that it is
quite encouraging to find the U.S. economy today continuing the
longest expansion in its history.
The U.S. economy recorded an exploding growth rate of 5.6
percent during the first quarter of this year. For a mature economy
like that of the United States, it surely is an
extraordinary achievement. Moreover, an unemployment rate of 4.9
percent, the lowest since 1973, together with an inflation rate of
a mere 3.0 percent at present, suggests that the future is even
more promising.
With the economic worries currently facing us in Korea, I can
assure you that this offers great encouragement for us.
This is my first opportunity to address a meeting at The
Heritage Foundation, and I have been greatly looking forward to it.
My remarks this afternoon will address three broad topics: the
current situation of the Korean economy, Korea's trade and economic
policies, and the U.S. Korean economic relationship.
KOREA'S ECONOMIC SITUATION
Why, you may ask, should it matter very much to an American
audience what state the Korean economy happens to be in? Twenty
years ago, a strong South Korean economy was important to the
United States as a capitalist showcase and as an anti-communist
bulwark. But today, and for many years to come, the Korean economy
is important to Americans as a market for U.S. goods, services, and
capital. I imagine that very few Americans realize that Korea is
the fifth-largest market for U.S. exports--larger than France or
Italy--and the fourth-largest market for U.S. agricultural
products.
During the past year alone, U.S. exports to Korea and Korean
investment in the United States created tens of thousands of
American jobs and $33 billion in sales for U.S. companies. American
banks, stockbrokers, and insurance companies operating in Korea
enjoy growing business opportunities and profits.
Investment, moreover, is no longer a one-way street in which
capital flows west across the Pacific. Now Korean companies
increasingly are taking a stake in the U.S. economy. Just recently,
for example, Hyundai Electronics and Samsung Electronics began
construction of semiconductor plants in Oregon and Texas,
respectively. Their investment stake in these projects eventually
will total $2.6 billion.
For these reasons, the state of the Korean economy should
be a matter of considerable interest to Americans, particularly
American businessmen and policymakers.
Basically, there are two schools of thought regarding the
current state of the Korean economy: the optimists and the
pessimists. The optimists believe that the fundamentals of the
Korean economy are sound, and that the current economic
difficulties are merely cyclical and thus manageable. The
pessimists, however, attribute our current problems to fundamental
structural weaknesses in the Korean economy rather than to business
cycle reasons. Let me now present some essential facts and
statistics that we need in order to put this argument into
perspective.
Last year, Korea's gross domestic product (GDP) growth fell to
7.1 percent, and this year it could reach as low as 5 percent. By
the standards of most countries, these would be considered fairly
healthy growth rates. Yet from our perspective, it is a
"recession," as we are accustomed to annual growth rates of almost
8 percent over the last three decades. We Koreans are concerned
that these reduced growth rates will complicate our efforts to
expand the full benefits of development to all our citizens. And
the concern is even more severe because the current slowdown is
leading to unemployment, which has risen to 3.4 percent currently
from 2 percent last year. In a country like ours, with limited
social welfare schemes, this is a matter of serious worry.
Most worrisome of all is Korea's current account deficit, which
reached $24 billion last year, or about 4.8 percent of GDP. This
was our worst ever, and more than double the estimate made at the
start of the year. I understand that U.S. policymakers are
concerned about the U.S. current account deficit as well, which was
2.3 percent of GDP last year. But the GDP value of Korea's deficit
was more than twice that ratio, so I hope Americans will appreciate
our dilemma.
This deficit has helped boost foreign debt to $105 billion, or
approximately $2,000 per capita. Some Koreans who recall the severe
foreign debt crunch of the early 1980s, when the average per capita
debt was $1,000, feel there is particular cause for concern. As
demonstrated in the case of other countries, a heavy debt burden
can seriously threaten long-term sustainable development.
The combination of these indicators has led the general public,
as well as the Korean business sector, to regard the situation as a
crisis. In response, some private organizations have called on the
general public to moderate its consumer behavior. This so-called
frugality campaign has caused some concern among our trade
partners.
It is important to me, during this visit, to try to provide some
context for this "frugality campaign." Fundamentally, Koreans
increasingly understand that the country's current consumption
patterns should be rationalized. There is growing awareness, for
example, about the massive increases in our consumption of energy
and our general lack of energy efficiency. Since we produce no
basic energy resources, this situation is creating a serious drain
on our competitiveness. Our energy imports increased more than
twofold between 1990 and 1996, and our energy consumption is 1.8
times as large as that of Japan in producing one unit of
manufactured goods. We also are seeing declining use of public
transportation, the use of more and bigger personal cars, an
enormous wastage of food, and a lack of effective recycling.
Faced with this situation of skewed consumption patterns, and
confronted with a stressful economic period, the Korean people are
drawing on a cultural tradition of what, in this country, is called
"belt tightening." A more rational pattern of consumption is in the
long-term interest of Korea's economic health, and thus in the
interest of the United States and others in the international
community.
So I hope that our American friends can take a broad view of
what the Korean people are trying to achieve. For my part, I want
to assure you that the Korean government is committed to ensuring
that this campaign is not intended as discriminatory behavior, or
in any way to discourage the competition which is so central to our
future economic success.
KOREA'S TRADE AND ECONOMIC POLICIES
A new team of economic ministers, including myself, was
appointed to office in March of this year. You might be curious
about the economic management philosophy of the new economic team.
If I may summarize, that philosophy is reliance on the principles
of market economy which stress minimum government intervention and
promotion of competition domestically as well as internationally.
We believe that this policy direction offers the best prospects for
ensuring the Korean economy's long-term competitiveness.
First, we are placing top priority on improving the current
account over achieving a high growth rate. The Korean government
pursues macroeconomic policies in such a way as to stabilize
consumer prices and encourage national savings through the stable
management of aggregate demand. The government has decided to
reduce fiscal spending by $2.5 billion this year and has frozen
salaries for senior government officials. These policies will
affect domestic production and imports alike.
This, for me, is a critical point about our current economic
policy direction. The government has no intention either of taking
discriminatory measures to restrain imports or of providing
protection to domestic firms losing competitiveness. We understand
clearly that the long-term solution to the deficit problem lies in
increased international competitiveness for Korean industry.
Therefore, we will assist--with the help of domestic and foreign
investment--in creating dynamic, competitive new industries on
which to build the future of our economy.
Second, we will maintain and even accelerate the pace of trade
liberalization. As you doubtless know, Korea is the newest member
of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
(OECD). As such, we will make a concerted effort with our fellow
OECD members to promote free trade policies comparable to those of
other member countries.
Third, we will continue strengthening the market mechanism
through deregulation and reform of financial markets. Indeed, I
believe that deregulation is the key to revitalizing the nation's
economy. By lifting the administrative burden from the private
sector, deregulation helps business to cut costs, rationalize
production, and streamline management structures.
The financial sector is proving to be the toughest nut to crack
in our deregulation drive, but reform in this area should receive a
major boost from the work of the Presidential Commission on
Financial Reform, appointed in January. The Commission is set to
issue its final report in the second half of this year. This report
will supply the blueprint for the next phase of financial reform
and deregulation. It is expected that some of the key
recommendations will address the need for greater transparency of
financial supervision and more flexible rules on mergers and
acquisitions.
We also are doing more to meet the concerns faced by foreign
investors in Korea. For example, foreign investors are now
permitted to finance not only fixed investment, but also operating
funds at interest rates applied in international financial markets.
In another incentive, we are providing low-rent or no-rent
arrangements for high-tech foreign firms at national industrial
parks.
In addition, we are working to address the interest of both
domestic Korean companies and foreign investors in a stable and
flexible labor market. While the process of developing the new law
clearly involved some rough spots late last year, we are confident
that we have achieved a final version which meets the concerns of
all parties and will place the flexibility of the Korean labor
market on par with that of labor markets in the United States and
West European countries. As a result of our new labor law, we
already have seen a significant decline in labor disputes and much
better cooperation between unions and management.
We are especially pleased that foreign investors--above all,
Americans--seem to be getting the message. Last year, U.S.
companies increased their investment stake in Korea by 35.8
percent. In the first quarter of this year, U.S. investment was up
nearly 800 percent over the same period of 1996, reaching $838
million.
THE U.S.-KOREA ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP
This leads me directly to my next topic: namely, the status and
future of the U.S.-Korea economic partnership.
During the latter half of the 1980s, the United States recorded
annual deficits in its trade with Korea, reversing the trend of
previous decades. Korea took assertive action that helped to
correct the imbalance by, among other measures, appreciating the
Korean won by 24.3 percent between 1985 and 1990, liberalizing its
import market, and dispatching buying missions to the United
States.
But now, as we all know, Korea suffers a trade deficit with the
United States of $11.6 billion. This figure is bigger than Korea's
largest trade surplus with the United States--$9.6 billion,
recorded in 1987--and accounts for more than half of Korea's total
trade deficit.
During my visit here, I hope to convince U.S. policymakers that,
just as Korea acted to address U.S. deficit concerns several years
ago, it is now in the long-term interest of the United States to
help Korea reduce its own deficit to a more manageable level.
I also hope to discuss with my counterparts that some current
U.S. trade policies do not appear to be fully in keeping with the
multilateral trade regime. On this point, I must note with regret,
for example, that the U.S. government has yet to decide whether to
revoke antidumping measures against Korean color TVs and DRAMs. In
the case of color TVs, the antidumping order has been in place
since 1984, but the order remains in place even though no Korean
color TVs have been exported to the United States since 1991. The
Korean government also takes the view that, as has been the case in
the past, the three consecutive de minimis dumping
determinations on Korea's DRAMs should result in revocation of the
case when the third and final determination is issued in July.
We also have concerns about recent developments in exchange and
financial markets. For example, the exchange rate between the U.S.
dollar and the Japanese yen has especially large implications for
Korea's trade position. The yen has depreciated against the dollar
by 30 percent since mid-1995 despite the significant level of U.S.
deficit with Japan, while the Korean won has depreciated against
the dollar by 15 percent for the same period. Since 60 percent of
Korean products compete head-to-head with Japanese products, the
relative advantage conveyed by the yen's value has a major, if
indirect, negative impact on Korea's price competitiveness in the
U.S. market.
At the recent meeting, the G-7 finance ministers and central
bank governors agreed that "exchange rates should reflect economic
fundamentals--and significant deviation from fundamentals are
undesirable." They therefore will "monitor developments and
cooperate as appropriate in exchange markets." We appreciate the
renewed attention to this issue and hope that the United States
will continue to play a leading role in making some significant
corrections.
I believe firmly that a more balanced trade expansion is
essential to the long-term health of our bilateral relationship. As
the United States is our major trading partner, we hope that
American businessmen and policymakers will share our concern about
the bilateral trade imbalance.
I speak frankly about these matters because I believe that
mutual trust is the foundation of economic cooperation. That is why
I have come here to the United States on my first overseas visit
since my appointment as trade minister two months ago.
Given the huge trade volume between the United States and Korea,
it is hardly surprising that trade disputes sometimes will occur.
What is most important is how to resolve them. We believe that the
best way to do so is through low-profile consultations, rather than
highly publicized confrontations. During my time here, I look
forward to solidifying relationships with my U.S. counterparts that
will help both of us approach trade relations in this constructive
way.
Trade will continue to be the linchpin joining our two
economies, but I believe that one of the fastest growing areas of
the future will be industrial cooperation. In this regard, let me
note that our new industrial policy emphasizes development of
venture businesses and high-tech industry. I understand that the
United States successfully promoted high-tech venture business in
the 1980s and 1990s. Korea is endowed with well-trained manpower,
and various programs are being prepared to assist the start-up and
growth of such companies. Some of these offer special incentives
for foreign participation. This would seem an especially promising
area for technical and financial tie-ups between U.S. and Korean
venture companies in the years ahead.
In broader terms, the U.S. and Korean economies are particularly
well matched. Korea's major industrial asset is its powerful
manufacturing base, whereas the greatest industrial strength of the
United States is its high technology. This combination makes for a
natural and highly profitable economic partnership.
In order to accelerate the pace of industrial cooperation, our
two governments agreed to establish a mixed public and
private-sector Committee on Business Cooperation. This committee,
which will be launched in the second half of this year, will
coordinate and assist the efforts of bilateral private-sector
bodies that already have been set up within specific industries. If
properly implemented, it will, I believe, provide powerful momentum
for expanded industrial cooperation between the United States and
Korea.
The United States and Korea work together as partners not only
bilaterally, but also in regional and multilateral economic forums
such as the World Trade Organization, the Asia-Pacific Economic
Cooperation (APEC) forum, and, since last October, the OECD. For
Korea, this constitutes a change from just a decade ago, when we
tended to be rather passive with regard to such international
bodies. Today, however, we recognize the necessity of playing a
productive role in global economic affairs commensurate with the
size and status of our economy. It is in the mutual interest of
both our countries to help strengthen the multilateral
institutional framework.
A recent example of Korea-U.S. cooperation at the multilateral
level is the Information Technology Agreement (ITA) initiated by
the United States. Korea moved quickly to back this proposal, both
ratifying the ITA and joining the World Semiconductor Council. Last
month, under the terms of the Agreement, we reduced our tariff rate
on semiconductors from 8 percent to 4 percent.
At the regional level, the United States and Korea both
recognize the enormous importance of Asia-Pacific economic
cooperation to the future of their economies. Accordingly, we have
worked together closely in APEC to reduce barriers to
intra-regional trade and investment.
Over the long term, the strength of the relationship will depend
on what private-sector businesspeople make of it. The government
will do all it can to remove obstacles and provide incentives, but
it can never supply the energy and impetus that drive a successful
economy. That can come only from businesses operating in a free
market environment.
In closing, let me say that I am especially grateful for this
opportunity to share my thoughts with this distinguished audience.
My goal is to ensure that the excellent cooperation that exists
between the United States and Korea in the sphere of security
affairs also will affect every aspect of our economic
relations.