South Korea's presidential policy chief, Kim Yong-beom, said Monday that three mega projects in semiconductors, artificial intelligence data centers and physical AI should be treated as a 10-year national strategy that continues regardless of changes in government. The statement ties long-term infrastructure spending directly to the demand forecasts of Samsung Electronics and SK hynix, the country's two largest chipmakers.
Decade-long commitment across administrations
Kim, who serves as President Lee Jae Myung's chief of staff for policy, pushed back against concerns that the projects could favor certain regions or weaken after the Lee administration ends. "This is not a project that ends with the remaining four years of the Lee Jae Myung government," he said. "It is a project that must continue under the next government as well." The projects are built around investment timelines announced by the semiconductor companies, which Kim said are based on demand projections for three, five and ten years out.
Strong demand has already led the firms to accelerate their completion schedules by eight to 12 years. "Because these are demand-based plans, they are projects that must be carried out regardless of the government," Kim said. The South Korean approach mirrors efforts in other countries where governments are integrating AI for Government into national industrial strategies.
Infrastructure as a government responsibility
Kim framed the government's role primarily as an enabler of electricity, water and land so memory chip supply can keep pace with AI-era demand. "If memory is not supplied on time, the AI revolution cannot gain speed," he said. Delays, he added, would drive up prices and benefit only those able to afford high-priced chips. "I believe it is South Korea's responsibility to support electricity and water so memory can be supplied in large quantities without delay."
Regional spread to avoid capital overconcentration
Kim also argued for building semiconductor fabrication plants outside the Seoul metropolitan area. A fabrication plant may require up to 1.5 million pyeong of land, or roughly 5.3 million square feet, and as much as 2 million pyeong when suppliers are included - land that is hard to secure in the crowded capital region. He pointed to Japan and Taiwan as examples where industrial bases are spread nationwide. "It may look strange from the perspective of a system concentrated in the capital area," he said, "but in other countries industrial bases are spread nationwide."
Broader regional investment, he said, is both a balanced-development measure and a macroeconomic strategy. Social consensus matters because the gap between regions that host major projects and those that do not could widen, and Kim urged "efforts to present policy from the middle and lead consensus." Policy makers navigating complex multiyear infrastructure plans may find an AI Learning Path for Policy Makers relevant for understanding the governance demands of such long-term technology bets.
Warning on real estate speculation
As the semiconductor boom and stock market gains draw investor attention, Kim cautioned against liquidity flowing into real estate. "The worst outcome is for liquidity to flow into real estate," he said. "If it flows into assets in certain areas of the capital region, there can be very severe side effects." He acknowledged that money moving into stocks might be acceptable, but real estate speculation raises both jeonse deposits and monthly rents, threatening the basic right to housing for most people.
Why this matters for government professionals
Kim's remarks show a deliberate effort to insulate nationally critical technology investments from election-cycle politics. For public-sector professionals, the case underscores several structural challenges: how to align government infrastructure support with private-sector demand signals, how to build long-term policy consensus across parties, and how to manage the regional and housing-market side effects of large industrial pushes. The insistence on a decadelong framework - anchored in corporate capital plans, not short-term political cycles - offers a concrete model of how governments can create stability for the supply chains that power emerging technologies.
Your membership also unlocks:
