As I expected, there’s nothing in there about any requirement for the US to physically station any of its armed forces on the territory of the ROK.

“ARTICLE IV
The Republic of Korea grants, and the United States of America accepts, the right to dispose United States land, air and sea forces in and about the territory of the Republic of Korea as determined by mutual agreement. ”

Meaning the US can fulfill its obligations under the treaty from air and naval forces stationed elsewhere in the Far East (ones which will be there anyway regardless of the existence of this treaty).

And thereby end our indirect subsidies to North Korea, the ones that we provide by the presence of our ground and air forces physically on the soil of ROK –that, in turn, free the ROK to send considerable direct subsidies north to “stabilize” the regime there.

Don’t even know what I meant to say up there.

Anyway, SK’s forces, in edu sessions and the like, continue to focus almost exclusively on NK.

Well said. And I’m wondering. Has the military in Hyde’s country ever had an officially defined “main enemy”? As in “such and such a country is the US’s main enemy”? Don’t think it has, even in times of war. Meanwhile, SK’s miltiary is focused only, to my knowledge, on NK, so not actually saying that other enemies could be just as much a problem is the only problem here.

You selectively omit an essential corollary fact, which is that ROK is now a legitimate democracy which has elected two successive administrations that find it politically useful to “triangulate” between the US and the “main enemy” (defined or not). And that a substantial portion of the ROK populace must agree with this, or they wouldn’t have voted in these administrations…

Somebody made a snarky comment in an earlier thread about how the ROK “learned” to be a cynical manipulator of totalitarian regimes, when it suited their own interests, from the US example. I don’t agree, naturally, but I do agree that the ROK’s pols and populace learned their triangulation strategy from emulating that master of triangulation, our beloved former Prez Bill Clinton.

Oh well, maybe if everybody can just hang on till 2009, “the Big He” will be back (indirectly). Then perhaps we’ll all be able to forget this unpleasant interlude period, and return to the halcyon days of drinking toasts with the tyrants up north, while slipping them cash and goods “under the table” to keep them from rattling their nukes too loudly and disturbingly.

Henry Hyde became well known to TV viewers as the former chairman of the House Judiciary Committe during their impeachment hearings on Clinton (1998?).

Left that job a few years ago and became Chairman of the House International Relations Committee which is why he’s pronouncing on this issue. http://www.house.gov/hyde/Biography.htm