The Trump administration has an increasingly low tolerance for foreign governments whose behavior is at odds with the president’s America First agenda.
This is the right instinct. Because “America” isn’t just our people, our military, or our government. It is our businesses that operate all around the world.
So, when a foreign government mistreats an American business, the White House correctly feels the same about that as it would about a faraway government arresting our citizens or threatening our military.
Commercial strength is national strength. When American firms succeed abroad, they advance U.S. interests, just as diplomats do. Caracas found out in the most extreme way what happens when a country treats American companies like its own private piggy bank; Brussels, with its attack on U.S. tech, is learning a similar lesson.
It seems that Seoul may need prodding as well.
After a productive meeting between President Donald Trump and South Korean President Lee Jae Myung late last year, many assumed the U.S.-Korea partnership was entering a new phase of strategic and economic alignment. Instead, over the past several months, the South Korean legislature and regulatory apparatus have taken steps that appear designed to disadvantage U.S. commercial interests, even at the expense of their own long-term competitiveness.
The most visible example involves Coupang, an American company that is now one of the largest private employers in South Korea. Stunningly, it is facing escalating attacks by the Lee government despite investing billions into the country’s economy. Lawmakers are threatening to end the company’s operations in Korea, have placed a travel ban, and are pushing criminal charges against Coupang’s acting CEO, who is a U.S. citizen.
The apparent goal is to replace Coupang — a U.S. business and major American exporter — with Korean and Chinese competitors, particularly as Lee is pushed by his political base of influential labor unions with ties to China.
Rather than viewing an American company’s success within its borders as evidence of a dynamic market — and a strengthening relationship with the U.S. — both Lee and members of South Korea’s National Assembly have pursued actions that would constrain the growth of American companies such as Coupang, Google, and Netflix, and tilt the playing field toward local and Chinese competitors. That is not ordinary regulation; it is selective targeting.
Some policymakers have tried to cast these moves as consumer protection. But the political rhetoric surrounding them makes the motivations clearer. A shocking example: Korea Fair Trade Commission Chairman Joo Byung-ki recently remarked that “white Midwestern American workers” are “angry” and suffering a “sense of deprivation” due to Trump-era policies. That’s not “consumer protection.” It is an insult.
What’s worse is that Lee has a long history of anti-America, pro-China rhetoric, saying that Korea should “respect China’s national interests” and the One China principle. As of this month, he also vowed to restore Korea-China relations fully. This is clearly a move designed ultimately to show American companies the door and insert companies such as Temu, Ali Baba, and others.
The deeper issue is not about one corporation or one case, but the signal this approach sends to investors, entrepreneurs, and allied governments: American commercial success can be treated as a political liability rather than an economic asset.
The United States is increasingly taking notice. Trump, who has posted on Truth Social about Korea’s issues, has attacked the European Union’s similar approach to U.S. tech companies. Republican and Democratic lawmakers have called on the Korean government to stop its attacks on Coupang and have signaled that, more broadly, discriminatory measures against U.S. firms in South Korea could prompt a broader reassessment of trade cooperation. Hearings have been held by the House Judiciary and Ways and Means committees on these issues as well.
This moment calls for clarity from both Seoul and Washington. Lee should reaffirm that his government’s regulatory institutions are guided by transparent rules rather than political expediency. Trump should make clear that defending American companies abroad is not merely a commercial priority — it is a strategic one.
The U.S. has long supported an open, rules-based system that allows innovation to flourish and competition to proceed without political distortion. That system has benefited South Korea immensely.
JAMES ROGAN: DON’T RISK THE AI REVOLUTION OVER ELECTRICITY POPULISM
But it cuts both ways. When governments undermine that framework for short-term political wins, they invite precisely the kind of strategic recalibration they least desire.
If South Korea wishes to remain a trusted economic partner — and there is every reason to believe it does — it should choose the path of regulatory consistency over protectionist impulses.
Mick Mulvaney is the former White House chief of staff and congressman from South Carolina.
