Rethinking the FTA
Hankyoreh, Korea
Rethinking the FTA
By Jeong Yeong-mu, Editorial writer
6 May 2008
“At a remote ranch named Adams in Nebraska, there were some 80,000 cattle. About 3 kilometers away from the ranch, a nasty smell greeted my nose. Kept in corrals, the cattle tumbled about in their own excrement and urine. Still, the animals were given food containing animal parts. Antibiotics and growth hormone were essential for breeding them.” This remark was part of the state-run Korea Broadcasting System’s investigative television news program “Special,” about U.S. beef aired in October 2006. At the time, one of the program’s producers said, “I came here after seeing hell.” Munhwa Broadcasting Company’s investigative television news program “PD Notebook” recently ran a similar report about the U.S. meat, amid the occasionally prejudiced criticism that it inflated the risks and increased fears of mad cow disease. The warnings against, and feelings of uneasiness about, mad cow disease run deep.
Massive fears of mad cow disease arose in South Korea in 2000 after the discovery of the brain-wasting illness in Germany. By early 2001, people had shunned restaurants with grilled ribs and small butcher shops after newspapers and TV programs continued to question the safety of beef. A so-called mad cow disease “ghost story” started after dried blood from cattle was imported to South Korea to be used as feed for pet animals, and was then believed to have been used in feed for cows. It got worse when some media reported, without any confirmation, that powered cattle bones imported as raw material for use in ceramic ware could cause mad cow disease. All of these rumors spawned massive fears and prompted people to think that “Our country’s cattle aren’t safe” or “I could be infected by mad cow disease.” Though the fears faded after some 10 days due to a lack of evidence, the reports took a heavy toll. It’s ironic because certain media outlets, which played a leading role in heightening fears at that time, are now putting their focus on reassuring the public of the safety of U.S. beef as South Korea gets ready to resume imports of the American meat this month.
Safety is one of the fundamental desires for human beings. The right to impose a quarantine, oft-cited as the second military defense for any country, is a sensitive issue. Although there are no rules that say U.S. beef should have “zero risks,” people have no choice but to fear U.S. beef because there has been no sufficient discussion about how dangerous the meat is or how the government will manage the risk.
Along with the safety of U.S. beef, what’s also important is the survival of local cattle farmers. As the nation opens up to imports of U.S. beef, even if there are people who don’t buy it, domestic livestock farmers will have no way to avoid the direct fallout. Amid the soaring prices of animal feed, the prices of home-grown meat, considered the only asset for the local livestock farmers, fell sharply. Many smaller livestock farmers were suffering a triple blow because they were excluded from government measures designed to support farmers with large livestock farms. The recent suicide of a livestock farmer in Pyeongtaek was a dead-end choice made because of mounting threats to his survival. If worries about mad cow disease were a forthcoming danger, the threat to the survival of livestock farmers should be compared to a large wave that is already sweeping them away.
The resumption of U.S. beef imports was one of the prerequisites for South Korea to begin negotiations with the United States on a free trade agreement. To launch the trade talks, South Korea partially resumed imports of the American meat in 2006.
This time, South Korea has made too many concessions in order to gain approval of the agreement by the U.S. Congress. However, beyond the beef issue, there will be bigger waves hitting South Korea in the wake of the South Korea-U.S. free trade deal. Though the impact of the trade deal will rumble all the way through South Korea, trampling over public policy and services, it will deal a particularly severe blow to the country’s agriculture industry. Under the deal, South Korea will be required to abolish its 40 percent tariff on beef over the next 15 years, helping U.S. beef producers increase their competitiveness. In addition, the deal calls for South Korea to open up all of its agriculture markets, excluding only rice, to products from the United States. The deal is considered unprecedented in the history of global trade. If the South Korea-U.S. free trade deal comes into force, it will abolish tariffs on 65 percent of all products in the farm, fisheries and livestock industries in the first year after the deal goes into effect. Tariffs on the remaining 35 percent of products in these industries will be phased out or abolished within five to 15 years. Many experts predict that the nation’s farm industry, of which farmers aged above 60 account for more than 60 percent of all farming households, will suffer irreversible damage from the U.S. trade deal. Once collapsed, it will be difficult for the industry to recover. Without the development of the agriculture industry, it will be more difficult for South Korea to become an advanced nation. Over the past several thousand years, our farm industry has developed with the wisdom and knowledge of how it can sustain our ecosystem. The South Korea-U.S. free trade agreement got off on the wrong foot. The deal, along with a pending bill on trade deal procedures, should be readjusted by the National Assembly.
