Partisanship over new envoy hurts national interest

Michelle Steel, the new U.S. ambassador to Korea, arrived at Incheon International Airport on Thursday. Greeting reporters in Korean, she said, "I respectfully greet the people of Korea. I was born in Seoul, but today I stand here representing the United States. I have mixed emotions." She also noted the alliance between the two countries, which spans more than 140 years, and pledged to work with Korea to strengthen bilateral ties while promoting regional peace and security.

At the same time, however, several progressive civic groups held a news conference at the airport opposing her appointment. It was an unfortunate start for a new ambassador, whose first day in Korea became a scene of both welcome and protest.

Steel is the first U.S. ambassador to Korea appointed during U.S. President Donald Trump's second administration. Her arrival ends a diplomatic vacancy that lasted for more than a year and a half. She is also the first Korean American woman to serve as ambassador to Korea and a former member of the U.S. House of Representatives. Because she is widely regarded as having direct political access to President Trump, her role carries particular significance at a time when Seoul and Washington face a long list of pressing issues, including tariffs, Korean investment in the United States, the transfer of wartime operational control, revisions to the bilateral nuclear agreement, North Korea's nuclear program and the Coupang issue.

Politicians and civic groups are free to criticize Steel's views on North Korea or China. Yet defining an ambassador appointed by another country's president through the lens of Korea's domestic political divisions before she even begins her work does little to advance the national interest. Diplomacy is not about choosing counterparts one prefers. It is about working with the representatives one is given, persuading them where necessary and achieving the best possible outcome for one's country. The success of diplomacy depends less on who occupies a position than on what results can be achieved.

The more important question is not Steel's political orientation but whether Korea can effectively make use of the access, influence and channels of communication she brings to the relationship.

Steel, for her part, should listen carefully to the diverse voices within Korean society and build trust across the political spectrum. Korea's government and political leaders should likewise place pragmatism ahead of preconceptions. Under the Trump administration, the alliance faces simultaneous tests in security, trade and advanced technology cooperation. The debate surrounding the new ambassador matters far less than whether she can become a reliable bridge between Seoul and Washington.