[Correspondent’s Column] Look to Washington, Not Seoul

In May 2019, U.S. President Donald Trump was facing a domestic political crisis. The 22‐month Russia investigation was nearing its conclusion.
On May 29, Special Counsel Robert Mueller held his first public press conference after ending the probe. He said the report was his "testimony" and refrained from further elaboration, but his core message was clear: "If we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so."
Mueller investigated Russia’s interference in the election, possible collusion by the Trump campaign, and potential obstruction of justice by the president. He did not establish collusion. On obstruction, he declined to clear Trump and left the ultimate judgment to Congress.
Within the Democratic Party, calls for impeachment spread quickly. Around the House Judiciary Committee, the argument that "the special counsel has passed the ball to Congress" gained traction. In Washington, the political atmosphere was already saturated with the word "impeachment."
But the very next day, on May 30, President Trump made a dramatic move. He abruptly announced a 5% tariff on all imports from Mexico, declaring that if illegal immigration did not stop, he would raise it by 5 percentage points each month, up to 25%.
Financial markets swung sharply, and concern grew even within the Republican Party. The news cycle shifted quickly. The special counsel’s findings and impeachment talk that had dominated headlines just a day earlier were pushed aside by the new issues of "Mexico tariffs" and "border pressure."
In January 2026, President Trump again endured a string of politically damaging days. On January 7 and January 24, two American citizens were killed. Rene Nicole Good, a 37‐year‐old mother of three, died in her car after being shot by an officer of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
The news shocked people across the United States. President Trump publicly defended ICE, calling its critics "professional agitators."
But about two weeks later, when Alex Pretty, a nurse at a Department of Veterans Affairs hospital, died, public opinion turned sharply downward.
Opposition to Trump’s immigration policy surged to 55%. His approval rating fell to 39%, the lowest point of his second term.
On January 26, President Trump suddenly and unilaterally declared that he would raise tariffs on South Korea to 25%. He claimed the National Assembly of the Republic of Korea was dragging its feet on follow‐up work related to the United States–Korea Free Trade Agreement (KORUS FTA).
In South Korea, interpretations varied. Some pointed to non‐tariff barriers and the Coupang controversy as possible reasons. Others argued he was using tariffs as leverage to gain the upper hand on separate issues such as defense cost‐sharing or Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) negotiations over U.S. forces in Korea.
From inside the United States, the view looks somewhat different. In Washington, the focus seems less on South Korea and more on President Trump’s own political survival. The two pillars of Trump’s politics are immigration and tariffs. Immigration is the language of identity and mobilization; tariffs are the tool that delivers tangible impact.
The back‐to‐back deaths in January, however, recast immigration policy from "tough" to "excessive." As public opinion wavered, the White House needed to change the subject. Tariffs were the easiest card to play at that moment. They are expressed in numbers, take effect immediately, pressure the other side, and at the same time project to his base the image of a president who "takes action."
As with the Mexico case in 2019, Trump’s 2026 tariff threat against South Korea is likely a bargaining tactic. Yet the recurring pattern is unmistakable: whenever domestic politics grow unstable, a strong signal is sent outward. If immigration is the symbol, tariffs are the weapon.
This year, the United States also holds midterm elections. If the balance of power in the Senate and the House of Representatives shifts, the latter half of Trump’s second term could effectively enter a lame‐duck phase. In the end, the key questions lie not in South Korea but inside America. To understand Trump’s trade pressure, one must look first at the political winds in Washington, not the debates in Seoul.
pride@fnnews.com Lee Byung-chul, New York correspondent