By: Azhar Azam
Following reports that the US President Donald Trump has ordered the Pentagon to slash the country's troops in Germany by 9,500 from an existing level of 34,500 and White House said that he is continuously assessing American military presence overseas – the concerns have mounted in Seoul about his possible analogous plans in South Korea.
Seoul currently hosts a 28,500-strong US Forces Korea (USFK). Trump in December said it is up for debate whether stationing that much troops in the South is in the national security interest of the US and his decision “can go either way.” In April, he however retreated but questioned the cost-sharing formula for the upkeep of American troops.
The two long-time allies have locked their horns to conclude the negotiations on apportionment of military expenditure even though Washington has backed off from its initial demand of $5 billion to $1.3 billion a year, still 50% more from last year while Seoul is insisting on 13% increase.
In a buildup to soaring frictions between the two bordering countries, after North Korea on Tuesday said that it would suspend its all communications lines with South Korea, the long-drawn-out deadlock in burden-sharing consultations could urge Trump to threaten Seoul on scaling back the number of the USFK.
North’s certitude to sever the liaison links, including the hotlines between the political and military leaderships of two nations if Seoul does not stop defectors from sending anti-Pyongyang leaflets and other materials into North, elevated fears in South that the US president might adopt a tougher policy on cost-sharing agreement.
The officials in North are particularly enraged with South over airing of about 5,000 balloons in the past few weeks by its activists carrying flyers slating Pyongyang’s nuclear ambitions amid slackened efforts to provide it the relief on international sanctions in exchange for rolling back its fissile program.
Seoul is also troubled with Washington’s bellicose attitude to extort it on capitulating over a new cost-sharing pact albeit the former last year unveiled plans to spend an additional $239 billion on military modernization between 2020 and 2024, an influx that will include everything from anti-missile systems to reconnaissance satellites, to be bought mostly from the US.
The White House on the other hand is wary of Seoul’s warm-heartedness toward Beijing after South Korean ambassador to the US Lee SOO-hyuck told reporters last week that he feels pride his country being able to “choose” between the two superpowers, complaining reduced US interest in Korean peninsula due to Covid-19 and burden-sharing issues.
South Korea is trying to rebalance its relationship with its longstanding ally, the US and largest trading partner, China. On May 27, North Korean Director of Foreign Affairs Go Yun-ju attended a conference hosted by the American Research Center at the Sejong Institute and said, “Korea is in an alliance with the United States and has a strong economy connection with China,” offering South’s role to reset China-US relations.
Although the US Department of Defense and Seoul had reached an agreement to fund $200 million for 4,000 furloughed Korean nationals who work for the USFK through the end of 2020, the arrangement did not resolve the months of impasse on Special Measures Agreement (SMA), the mechanism by which South shares the cost of American troops to defend its territory.
Irked by Berlin’s reluctance to ratchet up its defense budget, adhesion to Iran nuclear deal and support for Russian Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline – Trump’s move to cut the US troops in Germany is widely seen as a pressure tactic to force South agree on cost-sharing accord and that the current nuisances between two Koreas would help him in making Seoul more flexible.
The growing rifts now endanger the collapse of the Panmunjom Declaration, which pledged ending Korean War and beginning of a “new era of peace” in the peninsula and drove the two heads on a consensus to go for trilateral talks involving the US or four-way dialogue including China. As Kim Jong-un's powerful sister Kim Yo-jong has already threatened to tear the historic treaty apart, the apprehensive situation now threatens a full-blown military confrontation.
While Seoul should prevent any provocation, Pyongyang also needs to understand that military adventurism can further weaken its international credibility. With the increasing realization of the higher associated costs of war and its subsequent ceaseless and fatal consequences amid a global pandemic, the nations across the world aren’t in an ideal position to play an effective mediation role between the two rivals.
If North and South fail to assess the changing global dynamics and don’t make a swift progress to end the going deadlock and shun a cliff edge that was the tip-sheet of the past era – it won’t be either of the sides who will decide the fate of the war, it would potentially the massive civilian casualties, sprang from pouring missiles and Covid-19, which would lay the landmines for the destruction of the economies and infrastructure of the two.
Seoul currently hosts a 28,500-strong US Forces Korea (USFK). Trump in December said it is up for debate whether stationing that much troops in the South is in the national security interest of the US and his decision “can go either way.” In April, he however retreated but questioned the cost-sharing formula for the upkeep of American troops.
The two long-time allies have locked their horns to conclude the negotiations on apportionment of military expenditure even though Washington has backed off from its initial demand of $5 billion to $1.3 billion a year, still 50% more from last year while Seoul is insisting on 13% increase.
In a buildup to soaring frictions between the two bordering countries, after North Korea on Tuesday said that it would suspend its all communications lines with South Korea, the long-drawn-out deadlock in burden-sharing consultations could urge Trump to threaten Seoul on scaling back the number of the USFK.
North’s certitude to sever the liaison links, including the hotlines between the political and military leaderships of two nations if Seoul does not stop defectors from sending anti-Pyongyang leaflets and other materials into North, elevated fears in South that the US president might adopt a tougher policy on cost-sharing agreement.
The officials in North are particularly enraged with South over airing of about 5,000 balloons in the past few weeks by its activists carrying flyers slating Pyongyang’s nuclear ambitions amid slackened efforts to provide it the relief on international sanctions in exchange for rolling back its fissile program.
Seoul is also troubled with Washington’s bellicose attitude to extort it on capitulating over a new cost-sharing pact albeit the former last year unveiled plans to spend an additional $239 billion on military modernization between 2020 and 2024, an influx that will include everything from anti-missile systems to reconnaissance satellites, to be bought mostly from the US.
The White House on the other hand is wary of Seoul’s warm-heartedness toward Beijing after South Korean ambassador to the US Lee SOO-hyuck told reporters last week that he feels pride his country being able to “choose” between the two superpowers, complaining reduced US interest in Korean peninsula due to Covid-19 and burden-sharing issues.
South Korea is trying to rebalance its relationship with its longstanding ally, the US and largest trading partner, China. On May 27, North Korean Director of Foreign Affairs Go Yun-ju attended a conference hosted by the American Research Center at the Sejong Institute and said, “Korea is in an alliance with the United States and has a strong economy connection with China,” offering South’s role to reset China-US relations.
Although the US Department of Defense and Seoul had reached an agreement to fund $200 million for 4,000 furloughed Korean nationals who work for the USFK through the end of 2020, the arrangement did not resolve the months of impasse on Special Measures Agreement (SMA), the mechanism by which South shares the cost of American troops to defend its territory.
Irked by Berlin’s reluctance to ratchet up its defense budget, adhesion to Iran nuclear deal and support for Russian Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline – Trump’s move to cut the US troops in Germany is widely seen as a pressure tactic to force South agree on cost-sharing accord and that the current nuisances between two Koreas would help him in making Seoul more flexible.
The growing rifts now endanger the collapse of the Panmunjom Declaration, which pledged ending Korean War and beginning of a “new era of peace” in the peninsula and drove the two heads on a consensus to go for trilateral talks involving the US or four-way dialogue including China. As Kim Jong-un's powerful sister Kim Yo-jong has already threatened to tear the historic treaty apart, the apprehensive situation now threatens a full-blown military confrontation.
While Seoul should prevent any provocation, Pyongyang also needs to understand that military adventurism can further weaken its international credibility. With the increasing realization of the higher associated costs of war and its subsequent ceaseless and fatal consequences amid a global pandemic, the nations across the world aren’t in an ideal position to play an effective mediation role between the two rivals.
If North and South fail to assess the changing global dynamics and don’t make a swift progress to end the going deadlock and shun a cliff edge that was the tip-sheet of the past era – it won’t be either of the sides who will decide the fate of the war, it would potentially the massive civilian casualties, sprang from pouring missiles and Covid-19, which would lay the landmines for the destruction of the economies and infrastructure of the two.
*This is one of my opinion pieces (unedited) that first appeared in "The Express Tribune":
https://tribune.com.pk/story/2252465/consequences-of-a-showdown-between-two-koreas
https://tribune.com.pk/story/2252465/consequences-of-a-showdown-between-two-koreas