Message behind Bush's bypass of Seoul

Richard Halloran, Contributor, Honolulu

The glaring omission in President George W. Bush's journey to Asia this week is a stop in South Korea, which speaks volumes to the sorry state into which relations between Washington and Seoul have plunged.

The president, whose trip begins in Japan Friday, is scheduled to visit the Philippines, Thailand, and Australia, with which the United States has security treaties. He plans stops in Singapore, with which the U.S. has an informal alliance, and Indonesia, the world's most populous Muslim nation in which the U.S. seeks to encourage the campaign against terror.

Only South Korea, with which the U.S. has a security treaty and in which 37,000 American troops are deployed, has been left off the itinerary. Moreover, this is the first time in memory an American president has traveled to Japan and not to Korea. Given the historic animosity between Korea and Japan, the U.S. usually tries to be even-handed in its dealings with each.

The reasons excluding Seoul are evident: Rampaging Korean anti-Americanism, concern for the security of the U.S. president, lukewarm Korean support for the U.S. in Iraq, differences in approach to North Korea, and anxiety over the stability of President Roh Moo-Hyun's government.

The president's national security advisor, Condoleezza Rice, sought to be reassuring when she briefed the press in Washington. "Let me just say that we have no really stronger alliance than the alliance we have with South Korea." That seemed to be diplomatic double-speak intended to paper over the quarrels.

President Bush is on the way to Bangkok for a meeting of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum where Rice said he intends to emphasize "the need to out security at the heart of APEC's mission because prosperity and security are inseparable."

In Bangkok, President Bush is scheduled to meet with President Roh on the sidelines of the APEC gathering. Even that is not promising as President Roh was expected to say Korea would find it difficult to dispatch to Iraq the troops as the U.S. has requested.

The chief advisor for foreign affairs to President Roh, Ban Ki-Moon, told reporters in Seoul that the meeting "will be a chance for President Roh to explain the government's position as the issue of dispatching troops to Iraq has become a key security issue." That seemed to be political double-speak intended to skim over Korean opposition to the deployment.

U.S. politics most likely played a part in the decision to skip Seoul. President Bush, already under fire for his stance in Iraq and heading into a re-election campaign, does not want American voters to see televised pictures of frenzied anti- American demonstrations, not to say a threat to his security.

Moreover, President Bush is evidently skeptical of President Roh who campaigned a year ago on a stridently anti-American posture. As a Korean scholar has written of Roh: "He was not ashamed of being anti-American."

About the time President Roh took office last February, however, the U.S. Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, suggested that American forces be reduced or withdrawn from Korea. Since then, the U.S. has begun to move its headquarters out of Seoul and reposition its troops from posts between the demilitarized zone and Seoul to garrisons well south of Seoul. Their duties will also change from helping to defend Korea to preparing for missions elsewhere in Asia.

That threat produced a change as President Roh and his associates urged the Yankees not to go home. The president underscored that point during his first trip to Washington, in May, but a 36-minute summit meeting, cursory remarks in the White House's Rose Garden, and a routine joint declaration did not provide much substance.

Presidents Bush and Roh agree that North Korea must abandon its nuclear ambitions but disagree on how to achieve that. The American takes a hard line, the Korean a softer approach. U.S. officials are watching the South-North talks taking place in Pyongyang now, wondering if the South will agree to something the U.S. would not like.

The Bush Administration is worried about President Roh's political longevity as the Korean leader is in serious trouble. He has rejected an offer by the cabinet to resign to deflect criticism directed at him but has called for a referendum on his rule, saying he would resign if the voters did not support him.

Rice, asked for a reaction, wisely stayed away from that question. "This is a matter for the South Korean government," she said. "Because it's a vibrant democracy, I'm certain that South Korea can figure this one out."

The writer is a former Asia correspondent of The New York Times and a columnist for the Honolulu Advertiser on Sunday.