Members of the Democratic Party of Korea in the National Assembly Agriculture, Food, Rural Affairs, Oceans, and Fisheries Committee stated on the 27th, "Do not make agriculture a 'sacrifice' in the Korea-U.S. trade negotiations." This was just two days after the presidential office officially acknowledged that the 'trade negotiation package' with the U.S. includes the agricultural sector, making it unusual for members of the ruling party's standing committee to publicly oppose the presidential office's negotiation stance.
According to the political circles on the 27th, 11 members of the Democratic Party of Korea's Agriculture, Food, Rural Affairs, Oceans, and Fisheries Committee, including its chairperson, Eo Gi-goo, issued a joint statement the previous day, expressing "deep regret over the current situation trying to make agriculture the victim of trade negotiations," stating, "Concerns are becoming a reality that issues directly related to public food safety such as additional opening of the rice and agricultural product market, relaxed quarantine regulations, and reduced import restrictions are being relegated to bargaining chips in negotiations."
They emphasized, "Food sovereignty and quarantine sovereignty are not matters to be traded as temporary diplomatic achievements or means to expand exports," stating that "the value of agriculture, which supports public health and survival, must not be compromised under the name of negotiation flexibility."
Previously, Kim Yong-beom, head of the presidential office's policy office, noted during a briefing on the 25th, a week before the Korea-U.S. tariff negotiation deadline (August 1), that "agricultural products are on the Korea-U.S. trade negotiation table." The government has so far set the 'expansion of U.S. rice imports' and 'imports of U.S. beef aged over 30 months' as a 'red line' considering their potential impact on local farmers. Although specific items like rice and beef were not mentioned, it is the first time the presidential office officially stated it would make strategic decisions regarding agricultural imports.
In this situation, it is noteworthy that lawmakers from the ruling party's standing committee on agriculture publicly opposed the negotiations. They stated, "If agriculture is again forced to sacrifice, it would not be a simple economic compromise but a serious error of relinquishing food sovereignty and the right to survive," adding that "the additional opening of agricultural products and relaxed quarantine cannot be justified by any rationale."
They further stated, "The government must clearly convey that food sovereignty and public food safety are the top priorities at the negotiation table." They also noted, "For over the past 30 years, agriculture and rural areas have endured the burdens of international trade negotiations alone," and added, "As a result, the declining grain self-sufficiency rate and increasing farmer liabilities, as well as rural extinction, are scars and damages that have yet to be remedied."