Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010

South Korea Instability Turns Global Economy

South Korean economy linchpin of global economy- Instability destroys



Pesek 9 [William, April 14, The Age Business Day http://www.theage.com.au/business/signs-of-gloom-lifting-in-south-korean-economy-20090413-a4ur.html]KLS

IF YOU'RE looking for signs the world economy is bottoming out, South Korea could be the place. It's entirely possible things will get worse globally. Recessions may deepen, asset prices may slide further and credit markets may remain locked up. Doomsayers such as Nouriel Roubini still make plausible arguments that things will just get nastier. Amid such risks, hints that the Bank of Korea's most aggressive round of interest rate cuts in a decade is coming to an end are a rare ray of sunlight. Among developed economies, Korea's was arguably the first sent into freefall by the global crisis. Iceland got more headlines, but as the world's 13th-largest economy, South Korea is one that really matters.

South Korea instability disrupts global economy

Shin And Ciccantell 9 [Kyoung-ho, Professor of Psychology at Northwest Missouri State University, Paul S. Professor of Sociology at Western Michigan University, July 9, American Sociological Association, http://jwsr.ucr.edu/archive/vol15/Shin_Ciccantell-vol15n2.pdf Volume XV] KLS

The South Korean economy has grown remarkably since World War II, becoming a major player in the global economy by the 1990s. In 2003, the value of South Korean exports and imports totaled US$198.3 billion (2.6% of the world) and US$178.8 billion (2.3%) respectively. In the same year, South Korea produced 3.2 million automobiles, 5.2% of total global production and ranking 6th in the world. Electronics production totaled US$69.8 billion, trailing only the U.S.and Japan. Steel production was 46.3 million tons in 2003, 4.8% of world production (5th in the world) and the shipbuilding industry built 7,265,000 CG/T of ships, 32.4% of world production (ranked 1st in the world) (National Statistics Office 2004). South Korean ascent in the global economy prompted a number of analyses of the role of the Korean state and its policies of exportoriented industrialization, labor control, and state-business relationships (Amsden 1989; Deyo 1987; Kim 1997; Kohli 2004). The South Korean government has been flexible in shifting development policies from light industry (e.g., manufacturing of apparel and shoes) to heavy and high value-added industries such as automobiles and electronics, demonstrating its high capacity to adopt timely strategies and mobilize new technologies in response to the dynamically changing global market (Amsden 1989; D’Costa 1994).

South Korea-US Relations Solves Economy

US/ South Korean alliance is key to both america’s economic opportunity in Asia and to maintaining a stable region
Hwang 5 (Balbina, P.H.D in international law, Foreign Policy analyst, 5.18.5, The Heritage Foundation, http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2005/05/Beyond-the-US-South-Korea-Alliance-Reinvigorating-Economic-Relations ) ET

Enthusiasm for a U.S.-ROK FTA has grown steadily in recent years, particularly in South Korea, while American interest has been more cau tious. In principle, the Bush Administration has been a strong proponent of bilateral trade agree ments because they are an integral part of U.S. trade strategy to promote competitive liberaliza tion, both at home and abroadComprehensive agreements benefit both partners by injecting new competition into their domestic economies, lowering consumer prices, and shifting factors of production to more efficient uses, leveling the playing field for exporters. While free trade is certainly best pursued globally to minimize barriers and distortions in trade, the slow pace of negotia tions in the World Trade Organization (WTO) has led many nations to pursue free trade through bilat eral and regional agreements, allowing countries to customize agreements that meet the needs and con cerns of individual countries. For the United States, an FTA with South Korea makes immense sense considering the existing areas of economic convergence and complementa rities and the potential for even greater future gains. As one of America's top trading partners, with bilat eral trade exceeding $70 billion in 2004, South Korea currently enjoys relatively free access to the U.S. market while American exporters still face hurdles in South Korea. One of the greatest benefits of an FTA for the United States would be increased opportunity to export to South Korea. A 2001 U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) report predicted that a U.S.-ROK FTA would increase annual American exports to South Korea by nearly $20 billon, while South Korean exports to the United States would rise by $10 billion.[8]The ITC study concluded that the largest gains in American exports would be in agricultural products such as dairy and meat prod ucts. South Korea, which imports over $2 billion in U.S. farm products annually, is America's fifth larg est export market for agricultural goods. An FTA would provide greater access to agricultural goods by eliminating many of the strict non-tariff barriers. Official and private studies on the likely economic impact of an FTA conclude that it would benefit pro­ducers and consumers in both countries. For South Korea, increasing participation in trade agreements is not just beneficial, but may be necessary in order to achieve its stated goal of raising annual per capita income to $20,000 by 2010. Partially due to its scar city of natural resources and the economy's heavy reliance on external trade, which accounts for nearly 70 percent of GDP, South Korea will not realize this goal unless exports grow by 12 percent annually.[9] Significantly, the benefits of a U.S.-ROK FTA would go beyond promoting free trade, increasing economic benefits, and bolstering the broader bilateral relationship. Agreement and cooperation on economic issues provide a strong basis from which to reinforce collaboration in the political and security arenas. An FTA would undoubtedly rein vigorate and strengthen the dynamic and compre hensive U.S.-ROK alliance, which has been the cornerstone of peace and stability in Northeast Asia for more than 50 years.In addition, a U.S.-ROK agreement would pro vide the United States with a strong economic pres ence in Northeast Asia and allow South Korea to reduce its economic dependence on China. U.S. Ambassador to the ROK Christopher Hill alluded to this strengthening of America's strategic presence in Northeast Asia when he stated that "South Korea can solidify a role as America's economic bridge in the Northeast Asian region"[10] through an FTA.
US and asia are the most economically interdependent in the world- economic risks increase security risks- conflict multiplier
Wu 5 (Rong I, Taiwan Institute of Economic Research, Feb 19-21-05, Economic Interdependence and Security

in the Asia Pacific) ET

In the case of Asia Pacific, as economic liberalization and globalization advance, the extent of economic interdependence in the region is almost unprecedented today. Nonetheless, many traditional security issues in the region, including the China-Taiwan rivalry, North-South Korean conflict, South China Sea dispute, Chinese military buildup, and arms race problem, remain uncertain. More importantly, the increase of economic interdependence instead seems to extend the impacts of such new security threats as international terrorism, infectious diseases, and weapons of mass destruction (WMD), and thus even makes national and international security increasingly sensitive and vulnerable in the Asia Pacific. In this context, whether the increase of economic interdependence really enhances or improves overall security in the Asia Pacific becomes a very compelling question we have to explore and understand.