Lee Jae Myung’s envoy diplomacy begins; shift in Korea’s foreign priorities?

Welcome to Within The Frame, where we bring the most pressing issues across the globe into focus. I'm Kim Mok-yeon.

It's been just over a month since President Lee Jae Myung officially took office, and already, diplomatic gears are turning.

South Korea is signaling a full return to international engagement after a six-month vacuum following the impeachment of former President Yoon.

Special envoy teams have been dispatched to key global players—including France, the UK, India, and the EU—marking a clear departure from the traditional focus on Washington, Beijing, Tokyo, and Moscow.

At the same time, Foreign Minister Cho Hyun is reportedly preparing for his first trip to the U.S., aiming to break ground on stalled tariff negotiations.

With summit diplomacy hanging in the balance and geopolitical tensions still active, many are asking—how is South Korea recalibrating its foreign policy?

For more on this, we invite Hannah Kim, Associate Professor at Sogang University GSIS. Welcome.

Also joining us is Robert Kelly, Professor of International Relations at Pusan National University. Good to see you.

1. (Kelly) Let's start with Prof.Kelly, the Lee Jae Myung's administration recently sent special envoys to three major countries—France, the UK, and India, as well as the EU—starting July 14th. This marks a shift from previous governments, which traditionally prioritized ties with the U.S., China, Japan, and Russia. How do you interpret the latest move?

2. (Kim) Building on that, South Korea went through a roughly six-month suspension of summit diplomacy following the impeachment of President Yoon. Could this latest round of envoy dispatches be read as a clear signal that Korea is reopening formal diplomatic channels?

3. (Kelly) Now turning to a broader scope, Seoul's presidential office has announced plans to send envoys to as many as 14 countries. How likely could this expanded outreach translate into tangible economic and security partnerships?(Some see this as a message of practical diplomacy, while others worry the impact may be diluted if too many countries are engaged at once. Where do you stand?)

4. (Kim) Let's narrow in on the U.S. angle, so just over a month into the new administration, a special envoy to the U.S. was formed, headed by former KCCI Chairman Park Yong-maan. Given that a business leader was chosen to represent the administration, should we interpret this as a signal that Korea intends to emphasize economic issues—especially trade—in its U.S. relations?

5. (Kelly) Looking eastward, envoys to China, Japan, and Russia haven't been finalized yet. These countries involve complex issues tied to history, security, and trade. Would you say the administration is taking a more cautious, calculated approach?

6. (Kim) Meanwhile, Foreign Minister Cho Hyun, who officially took office today—reportedly is coordinating a visit to the U.S. During his confirmation hearing, he expressed optimism that the Korea-U.S. tariff negotiations could be concluded on time. Do you expect his trip to bring a potential breakthrough moment for those talks?

7. (Kelly) Taking all these factors into account, when do you think would be the most realistic timeframe for a Korea-U.S. summit to actually take place?

8. (Kim) In the absence of a confirmed Korea-U.S. summit date, there's speculation that a Korea-Japan summit might happen first. What's your outlook on that possibility?

9. (Kelly) Lastly, reports say President Lee has decided not to attend China's 80th Victory Day commemoration, after deliberation. While this may reflect consideration for Korea-U.S. ties, there's also talk of a Korea-China summit during the APEC meetings in Gyeongju later this year. What kind of impact do you think this might have on Seoul-Beijing relations? And more broadly—how should Korea navigate its diplomatic path with China?