The review of the Korean government's approach to the
Uruguay Round in the previous section shows that during the
remainder of the Uruguay Round negotiations, Korea should
attempt to be more forthright, imaginative, forward-looikng, and
global in perspective.
To do so, Korea should first of all develop a clearcut
position on the issue of graduation. In doing so, it should
seriously consider committing itself to graduation, while also
proposing a formula or rules which will govern trade policy
reforms of graduating countries and that are sensitive to the
transitional structural adjustment needs of these countries.
Also, Korea should make more serious efforts to contribute
to strengthening the multilateral trading system by seeking to
eliminate discriminations, on the one hand, and strengthening the
GATT system, on the other. This will require Korea to be more
determined and explicit in rejecting such grey-area measures as
VERs. It will also require Korea to support efforts to increase
the transparency of national trade policies as well as to promote
global policy coordination.
Korea may also strive to establish a linkage between the
graduation issues and the issues of nondiscrimination. In this
way, Korea's Uruguay Round strategy amy acquire globality.
For this purpose, as well as others, Korea may want to form
and mobilize a coalition of graduating countries to more
effectively represent these countries' common interests.
Also, crucial for Korea's Uruguay Round strategy as well as
for better management of Korea-U.S. relations is the need for a
more macro-oriented, structures, and less confrontational, policy
dialogue between the two countries. Through this, the two
countries should cultivate a global partnership on economic
issues of mutual interest, bilateral or multilateral, and promote
Korea's graduation while also furthering the maturation of the
partnership into an increasingly horizontal one.
Finally, Korea should critically examine the efficiency of its
domestic trade policymaking process and adjust it to the new
realities of democracy, with a view to maximizing economically
rational decisions by improving the transparency of the process,
among other thins. Also, Korea should critically examine the
intra-governmental process that leads to negotiating positions. At
the moment, this process is too fragmented and decentralized,
devoid of an effective coordination mechanism, encouraging
interministerial inconsistency and rivalry. This seems to be an
important factor at the root of Korea's present trade policy
turmoil, urgently requiring reform.