Intelligence sharing is toughest issue in Korea-U.S. alliance, ambassador says

WASHINGTON — Intelligence sharing is currently the most problematic issue in South Korea-U.S. diplomatic ties, according to Seoul’s top envoy in Washington.

Kang Kyung-wha, South Korea’s ambassador to the United States, made the remarks during the National Assembly Foreign Affairs and Unification Committee’s parliamentary audit on government bodies, which took place at the South Korean Embassy in Washington on Monday.

She also confirmed that U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio raised the matter directly to South Korea’s foreign minister last month, and that high-level contact with the Donald Trump administration, including the White House National Security Council, is not happening as often as she would like.

“I will admit that there are limits to our communication with the White House,” she said. “We frequently meet with the National Security Council and other key White House figures. But for now, consultations at the high level are not happening as often as I would like — to the point that I find [the infrequency] frustrating.”

Asked to name the most problematic issue in South Korea-U.S. relations, Kang pointed to the limits of the two countries’ intelligence sharing, stating that the U.S. side had brought up the subject directly to Foreign Minister Cho Hyun when he met Rubio at the U.S. State Department on Sept. 18.

“I have learned that at that meeting, Secretary Rubio asked that President Lee Jae Myung be told that trust in South Korea’s current intelligence leadership has been damaged and needs to be restored,” Rep. Han Dong-hoon, an independent lawmaker, said during the audit.

Kang, who had attended the meeting between Cho and Rubio, described the exchange in milder terms.

“It was more of an explanation from the U.S. side than a complaint,” she said.

But Han went further. He claimed that Rubio said, “No more,” when requesting that intelligence not be disclosed again and asked Kang to confirm the exchange.

“I cannot confirm the specifics of that conversation,” she responded.

When asked how Seoul had responded to Rubio’s request, Kang conceded that the issue remains ongoing.

“I do not think that the problem has been resolved yet to the extent that the United States wants,” she said.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ press release after Cho and Rubio’s meeting stated only that the two reaffirmed their commitment to the ironclad alliance. It did not mention the White House’s concerns.

The issue dates back to March. During a National Assembly Foreign Affairs and Unification Committee meeting, Unification Minister Chung Dong-young named Kusong — in North Pyongan Province — as the site of a uranium enrichment facility in North Korea. Washington treated the remark as a disclosure of classified information and has reportedly restricted the intelligence that it shares with Seoul since then.

Some lawmakers argued that U.S. concerns over intelligence sharing are tied to distrust of National Intelligence Service (NIS) Director Lee Jong-seok and Chung, who are at the center of the controversy. During the audit, they asked whether Washington had made any request about the two officials’ futures.

Kang gave the same answer several times.

“There were various consultations about the problems in intelligence sharing, but no individual was singled out,” she said.

Though she confirmed that Chung had called to ask her to help clear up the misunderstanding, she did not say how Washington responded to the unification minister’s position, which she conveyed through the “usual channels.”

After Washington took his remark as an intelligence disclosure, Chung explained the circumstances to U.S. officials and to the ambassador, he told reporters at a press briefing in Seoul on Monday.

“Intelligence cooperation is an important pillar of the South Korea-U.S. alliance,” Kang said. “I fully agree with the view that we must quickly overcome a situation that has become difficult.”

Rep. Kim Gunn of the main opposition People Power Party, a former diplomat, painted a bleaker picture of the two countries’ working channels.

“Of the military, intelligence and diplomatic channels between South Korea and the United States, two — the military and intelligence channels — are barely working,” the lawmaker said. “It is embarrassing that NIS officials trying to take up posts at the embassy cannot even get visas.”

“I understand that there are two or three cases [of that happening],” Kang said.

Visas for some NIS employees who are slated to work at the embassy have been delayed, not rejected, because of stricter U.S. entry procedures involving applicants’ personal information, the agency said on Oct. 6.

The delays have nothing to do with the dispute regarding South Korea-U.S. intelligence sharing, it added.

Kang disputed Kim’s view of the military channel.

“The [problems in the] intelligence channel have already been reported, but I see things differently when it comes to the claim that the military channel is not working either,” she said. “We communicate closely with the [Pentagon], and I am also trying to create opportunities to meet senior policymakers there and exchange views with them regularly.”

In response, Kim pointed to how the Trump administration makes decisions.

“A defining feature of the Trump administration is that policy decisions depend on a small circle of close aides,” he said. “The biggest problem is that the Lee Jae Myung government has yet to cultivate a so-called champion of the alliance among Trump’s closest confidants.”

Kim urged closer work with the Pentagon in particular and brought up the late 1970s, when U.S. President Jimmy Carter planned to withdraw U.S. ground troops from South Korea.

“During the Carter administration, the powerful force that held up the South Korea-U.S. alliance was the Pentagon and the military,” he said.

The audit also turned to a land mine explosion in the demilitarized zone on Sept. 21 that wounded three South Korean soldiers.

President Lee called it an “unfortunate accident” in his Armed Forces Day speech on Oct. 1.

“The blast could not yet be identified as an attack, Unification Minister Chung said at his ministry’s audit last Wednesday.”

Asked by Han whether she believed North Korea had acted deliberately, Kang first cited the Joint Chiefs of Staff’s (JCS) findings.

“The JCS has made clear that the mines were definitely not ones that had been swept away, and that North Korea planted them,” she said. “I can share [my own view] freely in a closed-door setting.”

She declined to weigh in on Chung’s remark about the incident.

“I do not think that it is my place to comment one way or another on what [Chung] said,” she said.

When pressed to state her own position as ambassador, Kang gave a clearer answer.

“Judging by what the JCS announced, these are mines [that North Korea] installed,” she said. “In that case, they were installed with intent, and in that sense, I do not see it as an unfortunate accident.”

As the exchange continued, Rep. Park Sung-joon of the ruling Democratic Party stepped in.

“Has the JCS not clearly determined [that North Korea planted the mines]?” Park said. “If we keep leaving it open to interpretation, that only invites a dispute. [The ambassador] can say it with confidence.”

BY KANG TAE-HWA [[email protected]]