Korea to face an even tougher US resource-security line than Lutnick

US bundles energy and minerals as security issues

Linked to tariff policy…making talks tougher

Korea lacks a visible control tower, limiting response

An analysis suggests that South Korea’s trade authorities, which have so far dealt with US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, will now have to contend with a resource-security line including the White House National Security Council (NSC). The shift comes as the United States begins tying energy supply chains and critical minerals to national security and linking them to tariff policy. Assessments say Korea-US negotiations have entered an even more challenging phase.

According to industry sources on the 5th, the US trade policy apparatus is being reorganized from a Commerce Department and US Trade Representative (USTR)-centered framework into a national-security structure in which the White House NSC designs strategy and the State Department, Treasury Department, Department of Energy and others execute it. The view is that after classifying oil, gas and critical minerals as security assets, Washington is using as a key benchmark in tariff negotiations how much countries can reduce linkages with China in energy supply chains.

Some interpret that “the resource-security line could be more hardline than the Lutnick line,” given that once an issue is categorized as a security matter, there is far less room to adjust figures and terms as with tariffs. At the apex of this line is Secretary of State and National Security Advisor Marco Rubio, long described as a “hardliner.” In and around trade authorities, Rubio is described as “Washington’s most consistent China hawk.” Andy Baker, NSC deputy national security advisor, is cited as a leading working-level official who supports Rubio and focuses on internal coordination.

Amid these changes, critics say South Korea is exposing limits in its response system. They point to the absence of a clear control tower to comprehensively coordinate energy policy in response to the NSC, while energy, industry and diplomacy functions are dispersed across the Ministry of Climate, Energy and Environment, the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, making a consistent response difficult.

Hur Jeong, a professor in the Department of Economics at Sogang University, said, “With trade, energy and security handled separately by different ministries, differences in response speed and intensity are inevitable,” adding, “This could become a burden in future negotiations with the United States.”

Reporter Ha Ji-eun hazzys@hankyung.com