Photo: VCG

On Saturday, the US Department of Energy officially confirmed that South Korea had been placed on the lowest tier of the Sensitive and Other Designated Countries List in January by the administration of then-president Joe Biden. The designation will come into effect on April 15. This decision triggered a strong shock in South Korea, and is considered to be a direct reaction to the rising "nuclear armament" theory in South Korea that calls for a nuclear arsenal in the country. The mutual suspicion between the US and South Korea is exacerbating the rift of trust between the alliance.

US authorities did not explain the specific reason for this decision, nor whether the current Donald Trump administration plans to reverse the measure. In response, the South Korean government appeared to be overwhelmed. 

As South Korea is labeled a "sensitive country," its researchers will be subjected to strict scrutiny for cooperation with the US in key areas, such as nuclear energy, artificial intelligence and quantum technology, and the channels for technological exchanges are at risk of being blocked.

It is widely believed that the US' decision likely stems from the growing call in recent years in South Korea to develop its own nuclear weapons. Yet, this not only runs counter to the US' longstanding nuclear non-proliferation policy, but also reflects Seoul's distrust of Washington's security commitments, which has triggered US alarm and resentment.

At present, while the political crisis triggered by the emergency martial law incident in South Korea continues, the issue of being labeled a "sensitive country" has become a new focus of the party struggle in the country. The ruling party and opposition forces are using this new development in US-South Korea relations to criticize and attack each other.

At a deeper level, the US' attitude toward South Korea on this issue exposes the crisis of undercurrents in the alliance. During the Biden administration, the US never agreed to the Yoon Suk-yeol administration's demand for a "nuclear sharing deal," but only increased its "nuclear umbrella" commitment to South Korea by upgrading extended deterrence. However, the urges from South Korea for a "nuclear armament" continue to emerge, which the US views as "capricious" and "unreasonable." From this point of view, the inclusion of South Korea in the "sensitive country" list is more like a "stern warning" from the Biden administration.

Looking forward, the prospects are not optimistic for South Korea which hopes to lobby the Trump administration to remove the country from the list before April 15. 
In fact, the disagreement between the US and South Korea triggered by the nuclear issue has shown the early signs of the two countries' sharpening contradictions after the new US administration took office. 

At the same time, the Trump administration's tariffs on steel, aluminum and automobiles will have a serious impact on South Korea's pillar industries. 

The pessimistic outlook of the alliance is exacerbating the spread of "US skepticism" in South Korea.

In the face of the political crisis caused by the martial law incident in South Korea, the US is left confused and unsure as to who, within the country, it should be dealing with. 

 In the upcoming new US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth's first trip to Asia-Pacific, South Korea is not even on the list of destinations. Seoul seems to have been reduced to a minor and insignificant player on Washington's global strategic chessboard. 

Facts have proved that the pro-US policy pursued by the Yoon administration has not only failed to receive substantial security protection and benefit sharing from the US, but has made Seoul an easier target for Washington to pressure and squeeze, with South Korea's national interests undermined. Such a predicament of the US-South Korea alliance exposes the short-sightedness and imbalance of Seoul's diplomatic strategy under the domestic political split and should give the South Korean people a chance to wake up from the fantasy of "relying on the US to seek support."

For South Korea, the political turmoil triggered by the martial law incident and the risks in its alliance with the US are not only a crisis for the Yoon administration, but also a historic test of the country's national strategy. Seoul needs to fundamentally review its strategic thinking in foreign relations and rebuild a balanced and pragmatic foreign policy. South Korean society must also work to heal divisions and resolve partisan conflicts. 

The author is a distinguished research fellow at the Department for Asia-Pacific Studies of the China Institute of International Studies. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn