According to media reports today, U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld sent a letter to his South Korean counterpart earlier this month expressing the U.S. desire to transfer wartime operational command by 2009:
“Rumsfeld said in his letter to Yoon in mid-August that it is reasonable to hand over the operational control to South Korea in 2009 considering the timing of moving the USFK Seoul base to Pyeongtaek and the proposed dissolution of the command of U.S.-South Korea Combined Forces,” a Korean government source said on condition of anonymity.
It is first time that the U.S. secretary has suggested 2009 as the target year for the transfer of the wartime operational control.
Seoul is proposing a 2012 handover. The Chosun Ilbo, quoting a Korean source, reported early this month that the U.S. date might reflect Washington’s irritation with what it believes to be politically motivated demands for operational command.
Some Koreans, however, apparently believe the sooner the better, albeit they’d turn it right over to the North Koreans if they got the chance.
Even more interesting is that Rummy appears to have asked Seoul to put up 50 percent of the bill for keeping USFK around:
Rumsfeld called on Seoul to share an “equitable” amount of defense costs in keeping with South Korea’s growing economy, which is the 10th largest in the world, as well as the Korean military’s greater role in national defense, a diplomatic source said.
Read: Let’s see if you put your money where your “pride” is. Korea currently pays about 40 percent of the bill, and Korean experts believe “equitable,” in this case, means 50 percent.
Some, however, believe Rummy’s letter was a way of putting pressure on Seoul so that negotiations regarding a number of pending military issues—including cost sharing, cleaning up polluted former U.S. bases and the search for a new bombing range—go Washington’s way. In particular, one expert working for a government-funded institute said the United States was well aware of the debate within Korea about the transfer of operational command, and Washington may be trying to use those tensions to its advantage.
Anyway, with the Korea-U.S. summit coming up in September and military talks in October, some believe Korea urgently needs to work on its negotiating strategy. From the U.S. position, they say, the transfer of operational command could be very advantageous, as it would fit into the Global Posture Review, allow Washington to reduce costs to defend South Korea and boost arms sales as Seoul obtains what it needs to assume greater defense responsibility.
17 Comments
Much of what Korea contributes pays for the Korean nationals who work on the bases. Need the local know-how to get the goods off the trucks, into the tunnels, and onto the economy. Anyway, if Korea were genuinely interested in an “equal partnership” it would ante up what the Japanese contribute.
Korea should pay more of the bills, as it is for their own defense, otherwise the US should just draw down the number of troops even further.
It’s time for Korea to pay it’s dues as the 10th largest economy in the world. Selfish bastards…
This is the Rumsfeld Corollary to the Korean insistence on including Kaesong in the Korea-United States FTA discussions: Inclusion of a known non-starter as a baseline demand in order to undermine the success of the talks while looking “sincere.” How ready are the Koreans to accept a major increase in cost-sharing? Well, in last year’s talks Korea wangled a 9% reduction in its cost-sharing contribution.
That reduction took Korea’s share to less than a third of the notional “stationing cost”, but in actual fact Korea is only contributing about 0.2% or less of the actual total cost of 1/10 America’s total combat arms — which is what Korea has committed to its defense right now in the form of the 2d Infantry Division, 7th Air Force, and Marine and Navy components tied up here or on call to come rushing over from Japan, Okinawa, and Guam to throw their chests in front of North Korean artillery shells bought and paid for with South Korean Shoeshine Policy money. True equity would be at least a hundredfold increase, something so difficult as to be impossible. Yet these Korean clowns live in a Reality Distortion Field so powerful Steve Jobs would sell his very soul to control, so we can expect teeth-gnashing about how unfair the American demand for a few hundred million dollars is.
This year Korea is begrudingly offering to chip in W680 billion (US$708 million); skinflint Japan, by the way, throws in more than US$5 billion. Is it fair to call the Republic of Korea a “free rider” or even a “bloodsucking parasite“? Seven hundred million dollars is 0.16% of the Pentagon’s $416 billion budget request for 2006 (which admittedly is swollen by the costs of the Iraq war), but as noted, about 10% of total United States combat power is tied up in the defense of the Republic of Korea from its impoverished, starving neighbor. For this selfless, thankless (and then some) commitment the Yankee is generally reviled and identified as thief of national sovereignty — even, in some surveys, as Korea’s most likely future enemy. The Republic of Korea is one of the world’s largest economies and a rich country with a $20,000 per capita GDP (a fact they only stop crowing about when the Yankee raises the spectre of an end to the free ride); why can’t they pay for their own defense? America wants out of troop presence here (and has wanted out since 1972!), and we may expect a ratcheting up of demands for basic equity until things break down. Don’t think Yongsan will be vacated by 2008? Don’t bet on that. It happened in the Philippines tout suite. Pyongtaek land speculators ought to be anxious as well.
As I noted in comments to an earlier Marmot’s Hole thread, if there were any justice in the world (alas, there usually isn’t) mid-September’s visit to the White House should be an interesting experience for Roh Moo Hyun. Roh should have to cool his heels in the waiting room for a while as Dubya attends to more important business, like figuring out if he and Koizumi will wear matching shirts to the next G8 world leaders’ meeting. Then, after being ushered across a vast room to have a seat in a chair which has had its legs shortened in the fashion of Chaplin’s “The Great Dictator” to match Roh’s dwarvish stature, bringing his eye level to Dubya’s elbows (watch that you don’t get that guy’s mascara on your sleeve, Mr. President!), the Malcolm Reynolds Make-a-Wish Foundation would announce to the world the independence of the Republic of Korea. Pay for it yerself, Mr. Monchhichi. Now git!
Well, Koreans blew it. They wanted to be in charge of their own destiny apart from the US (and UN). That basically called for the favorite expression of Arnold Schwartznegger, “You must pay the fair share”.
Do you know Arnold won the California governorship by asking indian tribes to “pay faeer sheer”? Talk about going after a minority.
But, he did. These days he, being a republican, is asking the bottom one third of wage earners to “pay faeer sheer”, while giving million dollar tax breaks for his rich frieends.
I voted for him expecting him to be different from average politicians, him from a foreign country and all. But, he turned out to be a typical asshole republican; “R” of republican party stands for racists and the rich. I guess liars, aka politicians, can come from all over the world.
Brendon, great post! and a hilarious bit at the end. Yes, I might even be able to see eye to eye with the leftist nutbars in SK- ‘US troops out now’. Now or a few years down the road works for me.
No matter how much smoke the Roh gov’t blows up their collective ass, N. Korea is still at war with the South–in fact, the norks are threatening (as usual) to rip up the armistice, and a couple of weeks ago their troops took some potshots across the DMZ. The S.K. conscript system has been falling apart recently, and even nations without a direct threat at their borders spend more than S.K. does, so there’s a definite gap in defense outlays that in all likelihood is far larger than what we’ve been hearing from either the U.S. or S.K.
does america not get anything in return? i imagine it must be nice to have bases so close to china. isn’t pusan a nice deep-water port? and, although there are problems with the bombing run for the air force, doesn’t america get space to run exercies in korea?
considering how well america manages to work trade deals around the world (i’m thinking of the soft wood deal they screwed canada over with), i find it hard to believe that the korea-america deal is really all that bad for the “yanks.”
i’m more than willing to be set straight, though.
America gets nothing from the “alliance”. America used to have a strategic interest in opposing Communism. It was an existential crisis for the United States, one which made logic go out the window. Bear any burden, pay any price, and all that. That one-time strategic interest is now gone, worldwide Communism having been defeated (ironically, the Republic of Korea is now the only industrialized state in the world at risk of getting more Communist). The Soviet Union is dead, Eastern Europe is free and prospering, China now works for Wal-Mart, and all that Communism has brought to its periphery is hardship and even starvation. So whereas in 1950 standing “shoulder-to-shoulder” to prevent a poor and wretched land from being gobbled up by worldwide Communism made sense, in 2006 when the erstwhile poor and wretched land is rich, fat, and lazy (just like us!) it doesn’t. In 2006 we have the luxury to look at the math.
JD, more at issue is whether the host country, whose president goes on about being “independent” and says the U.S. should “withdraw” wartime control of S. Korean troops, has created a situation where costs outweigh benefits for the U.S.
The entire region has benefited from the U.S. presence–think of what S.K. and Japan (and even Russia) would have to face in its absence: N. Korea and China, two dictatorships with territorial expansion aims.
If you think there’s an economic benefit, such as selling weapons to S.K., it’s far offset by the trade protections, earlier aid and FDI from the U.S.
Like Mr. Carr said, it’s a new world and communism is no longer the global threat. But for S.K., with a belligerent dictatorship to the north, pulling the plug on the alliance without dealing with the threat is plainly stupid and shortsighted.
My Korean friends gave me a sour face this morning when I pointed to the Chosun Ilbo and asked if this meant that their taxes were going up or not.
Despite this, I listened to one young lady tell me that she thought Roh Mu Hyan had done a good job. . . go figure
The hand-out junkie should have been forced to go cold turkey 10 years ago. Recall that upon the economic melt down Korea demanded and received a sizeable reduction in its contribution to USFK. Yet during this time Korea spent billions for now little-used World Cup stadiums across the country, built the KTX, expanded its highway & subway systems, and gave the Dear Oompa Loompa $500,000,000 for a photo op. And let’s not forget the billions wasted on cabbage and rice farmers to prepare them for market liberalization.
I agree w/ R. Elgin’s lady friend, albeit for different reasons. President Noh has done a fine job shaking things up and thus exposing the money pit that Korea is. Best Korean friend America ever had.
Rummy is doing the right thing, even though I feel sorry for Koreans. He is avoiding the China -Japan war which is inevitable.
Korea happens to be the smack middle of these two warmongers. Too bad, Yobo, uncle Sam cannot stay.
The next move will be pulling troops out of Japan and let these two, the pig and the monkey, start a tango that they have been so eager to dance.
More fighters and weapon systems to sell to Japan. Time to pay off national debt.
Nice post Brendon Carr
IMO Korea should pay 100% of the maintenance cost at the very least. The US is still paying the costs of the troops themselves. All korean would be doing is paying for the cost of having them stationed in Korea. Korea is no longer a third world country. As stated they are the 10th biggest economy and need to pay their fair share.
If troops can’t be redeployed around the world and have to stay in korea. Then i think korea should pay for 50% of the troop cost on top of 100% of the maintenance cost.
This whole thing reminds me of two people that are in a relationship that are looking desperately to find an excuse to break up.
oh and having troops in Korea is no longer a benefit for American foreign policy- it is a liability.
Gotta admit the South Koreans are better at extracting funds from stupid foreigners. World Communism died in 1991. Since then — 15 years ago — they have continued to tie down 1/10 of American combat arms which cost the Yankee taxpayer a minimum of $20 billion a year to recruit, equip, and pay (my own guess is closer to $40 billion since the Pentagon budget is now $416 billion/year). So since the death of Communism at least $300 billion has been taken out of the pockets of billionaire industrialists and Appalachian hillbillies alike (with the hillbillies at greater risk of actually being in the Army and ending up stationed here) and transferred to subsidize the Korean chaebol, who then compete with American businesses and put Americans out of jobs. (This is, of course, not taking into account how money not spent by Korea on its own defense is also distressingly spent on bribes for photo-ops with North Korea.)
Meanwhile, the total annual GDP of North Korea is only about $25 billion. American taxpayers dump more money into the Korea hole than the total annual GDP of the impoverished, starving state from which we’re protecting the Republic of Korea.
” i find it hard to believe that the korea-america deal is really all that bad for the “yanks.””
It got really shitty after about 1990 - when the global Cold War came to an end. Post-9/11 just made the turd swell to gigantic propotion.
i asked and you answered. my thanks to those who provided some interesting information.
part of me wants america to leave korea and for korea to defend herself. but another part of me has savings in korean won and a korean wife who like living here.
i don’t think the future looks all that bright with america gone.
One Trackback
[...] The Marmot has more on this issue and make sure you read Brendon Carr’s posting in the comment section as well. It’s a great read. [...]