USFK Not to Be Deployed in Regional Conflicts
American troops in South Korea will not get involved in regional disputes without consent from Seoul, the U.S. ambassador to South Korea said Tuesday.
U.S. troops will not be mobilized for purposes other than defending the country from a North Korean invasion without full consultation with the South Korean government and taking care to safeguard the country’s security, Ambassador Christopher Hill said.
Hill made the statement on the embassy’s community website, Cafe USA (caf¿.daum.net/usembassy), in reply to a question whether the realignment of U.S. forces in South Korea would allow them to automatically intervene in a possible conflict between China and Taiwan.
He also said the U.S. was supportive of intra-Korean exchanges, including the Kaesong Industrial Complex Project, adding the White House would be even more positive were the North truly to abandon its nuclear development program.
Turning to the deployment of patriot missiles in Gwangju, the ambassador said the move was not part of the U.S.’ Missile Defense program but came at the request of the South Korean government to defend the country.
A conflict between Taiwan and China has always made me wonder if Korea is willing to fight for democracy in a country that is very similar to itself. Taiwan like Korea is a small country, with a hard working & educated population that has emerged from an authoritarian past to become a thriving democracy. If Korea is not willing to aid in the defense of Taiwan, than why should anyone aid in the defense of Korea? What is the difference between the two situations? Very little. They are both living under the point of a gun by communist thugs who they like to think the best of.
So if war was to come to Taiwan would Seoul be willing to side with the forces of democracy and fight China? I seriously doubt Seoul would ever go to war with China. They would probably try to stay neutral in the conflict but I don’t see how they could when they have thousands of US soldiers located on their peninsula that are a stone throw from the Chinese mainland. What do you all think?
Well, let's put it this way. Is the US willing to go to war with China over Taiwan? I highly doubt so. So what makes you think S.Korea will do something that even the US is trying to shy away from?
"Me" poses a good question, one that is never debated publicly in the US because all the politicians on both sides of the aisle don't see any point in bringing up this unpleasant subject — one whose discussion has lots of potential political downside.
Except for the greater downside that will happen if the Chinese do decide to make a move and we haven't thought through what we are going to do (I mean the US public and political response, not specific military contingency plans).
I think we owe it to the Taiwanese to make our policy abundantly clear; the old "deliberate" ambiguity of accepting the "one China" policy by the US is becoming increasingly outdated IMO, as China continues to improve its military and build up its forces across the Taiwan straits. National Review had an article taking an alarmed view of this recently; I'll see if I can find the link and email it to you or post it here.
If we are determined to resist a mainland attempt by force to actually invade Taiwan, then that's another good reason (added to many others) to pull out our ground forces from ROK, so as to prevent them from being tied down there in the event of a conflict over Taiwan.
I question, in a future potential crisis on the Korean peninsula, whether the current (or any future) ROK administration would let us take any premptive action to respond to a NorK threat to ROK. Much less allow the US to move its forces to/from/around ROK in response to a mainland threat to Taiwan!
The ROK pucker factor would be at the max and I can't really blame them; in fact I wonder if they would actually use their forces to hinder any attempt to redeply ours (!) (not by shooting, but by things like blocking the gates of our motor pools etc).
US ground forces would probably not be needed on Taiwan, as the Taiwanese should be able to do that for themselves. And anyway there exists no contingency planning for integrating such forces quickly into Taiwan's defense plan, even under nonhostile conditions.
No military coordination and staff planning exists between the Pentagon and the Taiwanese high level military staff, according to an article I read on the subject in the WSJ a couple of years ago! I wonder how many average US military officers in Asia (guys like you GI Korea) know that. All such planning/staff coordination/advisory training was stopped in the 70's, when we pulled all US military advisory presence out of Taiwan at mainland insistence.
The key US assets needed would be naval and air forces to cover the Taiwan straits — or (even worse) to attack the mainland line of communications across the Taiwan straits, if the mainland has managed to successfully lodge an invasion force ashore. Assuming of course a US administration made a decision to forcefully resist a mainland invasion.
Would it do so? What would the US public say if China insinuated the possibility of overwhelming air/ missile attack against US fleet forces far out at sea, moving to cover Taiwan — maybe even darkly hinting at nuclear possibilities?
What would President Hillary Clinton do? I have no earthly idea and I hope I never have to find out.
I think the conventional wisdom is that nothing will happen due to the enormous China/Japan/ROK/US economic connections; also China will want nothing to wreck the Beijing 2008 Olympic games.
So maybe Taiwan is safe — till then anyway.
Again it seems the Korean press have altered the intent of the message. The Chosun states the USFK will not act in the region without "consent" and "permission". Yet Hill's actual statement says something else entirely, "U.S. troops will not be mobilized for purposes other than defending the country from a North Korean invasion without full consultation with the South Korean government…" Consultation is not consent. The US consulted the RoK about their plan to move their forces back off the DMZ. They did not seek "consent" and "permission" (if they had they would likely be trapped up there for years to come) To consult is a good will gesture – non-binding. While "consent" indicates the SK gov't would have the final say – good for stoking the nation's pride, but inaccurate I would guess.