Even South Korea is not certain of a deal before July 9: on Trump's temperamental realism

The core of this conundrum is not just about trade tariffs or car exports — it’s about dealing with a deeply unpredictable actor on the global stage. Trump’s diplomacy, increasingly defined by Temperamental Realism, has created a volatile negotiating environment.

It is a realism based not merely on power calculations, but on the leader’s mood, intuition, and vendetta against multilateral norms.

Temperamental Realism is not rooted in classic Realpolitik. Rather, it operates through transactional ultimatums, public threats, and a disregard for conventional alliances. It thrives on disorientation: keeping friends and foes alike off balance, guessing the next move. Trump's blunt assertion that there would be “no extension” of the July 9 deadline for tariffs embodies this erratic doctrine. If South Korea does not concede to U.S. trade terms, its exports face a rise in tariffs from 10% to 25%.

President Lee, aware of the volatility, has chosen deliberate ambiguity over premature compliance.

Lee’s caution is justified. South Korea’s economy contracted in the first quarter of 2025, with the Bank of Korea (BOK) slashing its GDP forecast from 1.5% to a meagre 0.8%. The central bank has already cut interest rates four times since late 2024, most recently to 2.5% in May, as part of emergency monetary easing.

BOK Governor Rhee Chang-yong has flagged U.S. trade policy as a “major concern.” The tariffs—if implemented—would devastate key export sectors like semiconductors, electric vehicles, and consumer electronics. In a market already fatigued by global inflation and tight supply chains, South Korea cannot afford to let Trump's mood determine its fate.

From the Blue House, President Lee has called for a national economic revival. He has launched an emergency economic task force and vowed to stabilize the overheating property market. He understands that any sign of surrendering to U.S. pressure could shatter investor confidence and hurt his already fragile reform mandate.

Unlike his conservative predecessor Yoon Suk Yeol—whose close alignment with Washington triggered domestic backlash—Lee is attempting a balanced foreign policy. His public calls to reengage with North Korea, improve ties with China and Russia, and maintain a “flexible yet reasonable” approach to Japan signal a regional hedging strategy designed to insulate Korea from the whims of external powers. Temperamental Realism, however, is incompatible with this logic. Trump’s foreign policy demands binary choices. Either South Korea complies—or suffers.

Lee came to power after a rare political upheaval—the impeachment of Yoon following his controversial moves to impose martial law. Lee's ascent has reignited public trust, with consumer confidence at a four-year high and the Kospi index rising 25% since April.

But that trust is conditional. His “Kospi 5,000” vision, signalling hope for one of the world’s top-performing stock markets, hinges on careful governance—not erratic trade compliance. Yielding to U.S. terms without transparency or debate could undermine Lee’s credibility at home and signal to regional actors that Seoul has no strategic autonomy.

South Korea is not rejecting a deal; it is resisting a deadline imposed under the logic of Temperamental Realism. Lee’s approach seems to echo the Confucian principle of “governing by virtue, not force.” In other words, power should be stabilized by consensus, not coercion.

Moreover, Lee understands that siding too closely with Trump’s chaotic trade vision may compromise Korea’s long-term interests in Asia. Tensions in the Taiwan Strait, renewed Russo-Chinese cooperation, and the deterioration of multilateralism all point to a world that demands stability—not spectacle.

President Lee’s reluctance to confirm a trade deal with the U.S. is not a failure of diplomacy—it is a refusal to let Temperamental Realism dominate South Korea’s strategic compass. As the July 9 deadline looms, Seoul is playing for time, hoping that Washington might blink or that circumstances might shift. This is not indecision. It is realism with restraint.

Lee knows that in a world where the most powerful actor is also the most impulsive, the best way forward is strategic patience—and the quiet confidence that enduring partnerships are not built in 90-day deadlines, but over decades of mutual respect.