Category: US-ROK Alliance

To properly study the effects the THAAD system has on putting greens and sand bunkers the environmental assessment has to be conducted through four seasons according to this ROK Presidential advisor:

The adviser also said that the environmental assessment that South Korea plans to conduct over the U.S. THAAD missile defense system could take one year because the study should take into consideration the deployment’s impact over four seasons.  [Yonhap]

Here are the questions I have which I doubt any journalist will bother tracking down.  How long did the environmental assessment take to approve bulldozing the top of a mountain and installing the golf course where the THAAD site is?  Also how long did the environmental assessment to install the ROK military’s Green Pine radars take?

Here is an update from the anti-THAAD frontlines in Seongju county:

In Soseong-ri, a small farming village of about 80 residents in southern South Korea, a band of elderly women is at the forefront of protests against the deployment of a U.S. anti-missile system next to their neighborhood.

A dozen or so women, in their 60s to 80s, stand watch each day around the clock to make sure no military vehicles enter the deployment site through the only road to it — a former golf course owned by a leading conglomerate, the Lotte Group.

The vigil has forced the U.S. military to use helicopters instead to shuttle fuel and supplies to the site hosting the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system.  (………..)

The women, who brandish canes and umbrellas at the military helicopters and shout for them to go away every time one flies through the village, say they have no interest in the politics of the deployment.

But they protest, longing for the peace they had before.

“I can’t sleep. I’m taking sedatives at night but I still get only two hours of sleep,” said 87-year-old Na Wi-bun, who lives within a kilometer (0.62 mile) of the site and says she can hear the generator that powers THAAD humming around the clock.  [Reuters]

You can read more at the link, but it is ironic they are complaining about noise when their protest is causing the noise.  The helicopters would not be flying if trucks were allowed to drive up the road to the site.  Also the generators as we have seen in with the radar site in Japan can be muffled and the noise ultimately eliminated when the radar is hooked up to commercial power.  However, if construction crews cannot drive up the road to hook up to commercial power then the noise will remain.

Ian Buruma a very notable author in regards to Asian affairs had this to say in the New Yorker about the US military presence in South Korea and Japan:

The problem is that the existing order, put in place by the United States after the Second World War, might be exactly what hampers efforts to thicken that web. In a sense, America is experiencing the dilemmas typical of an empire in its twilight years. Imperial powers in the middle of the twentieth century used to argue that they couldn’t withdraw as long as their colonial subjects were not ready to rule themselves. But, as the British Prime Minister Harold Macmillan once explained to a rather baffled William F. Buckley, Jr., the continuance of colonial rule would not make them more ready. If the United States were to give up its policing duties in Asia too quickly, chaos might ensue. The longer its Asian allies remain dependent on U.S. military protection, however, the harder it will be for them to take care of themselves.

The most desirable way to balance the rising power of China would be the creation of a regional defense alliance stretching from South Korea to Burma. Japan, as the leading economic and military power, would be the logical choice to lead such a coalition. This would mean, in an ideal world, that Japan should revise its pacifist constitution after a national debate, led not by a government of chauvinistic revanchists but by a more liberal administration. But we do not live in an ideal world. Abe’s revisionism (he has currently set 2020 as a deadline for the amended constitution) is unlikely to achieve its aims in Japan. Most Japanese are no keener than most Germans to play a major military role once again. And as long as Japanese leaders insist on whitewashing their country’s recent past they will never persuade other countries in the region to trust them.

This is the status quo that dependence on the United States has frozen into place. As much as Abe’s government wishes to remain under the American military umbrella, the American postwar order, including the pacifist constitution, still inflames right-wing resentment. Yet Washington, and especially the Pentagon, which shapes much of U.S. policy in East Asia, has consistently supported conservative governments in Japan, seeing them as an anti-Communist bulwark. Meanwhile, as long as the United States is there to keep the peace, the governments of Japan and South Korea will continue to snipe at each other, instead of strengthening their alliance.  [The New Yorker]

You can read much more at the link, but Buruma’s comments are based on a book he reviewed titled “Avoiding War with China: Two Nations, One World” by Amitai Etzioni.  This analysis seems pretty accurate, does anyone disagree with it?

Like I have beens saying President Moon is not stupid and the THAAD is not going anywhere.  The whole current environmental assessment issue with the THAAD deployment is just domestic politics:

Chung told reporters Friday that the decision to postpone the full deployment was a domestic measure to ensure a “transparent and democratic process.” He didn’t give a timeframe.

“Our government plans to deal with the THAAD deployment with a few principles while being fully aware of North Korea’s nuclear and missile threats,” Chung said. “The government has no intention to fundamentally change what it has promised under the Korea-U.S. alliance.”

“THAAD was a decision made to protect South Korea and U.S. Forces Korea from North Korea’s growing threats,” he added. “The government will not handle such a decision lightly just because there has been a government change.”

Many South Koreans oppose THAAD because they fear it will have negative economic and environmental effects while being positioned mainly to protect U.S. forces in southern areas. China also strongly objects to the anti-missile battery, fearing it can be used against its military.  [Stars & Stripes]

You can read the rest at the link, but the talking point that the THAAD is just there to protect US forces in the southern sections of the country like much of the criticism of the THAAD is stupid.    First of all it is the US-ROK alliance which means the THAAD will protect ROK assets as well.  The US military is not going to let ROK bases get blown up.  Secondly, if a nuclear warhead is launched at a US or ROK base at Busan for example, shooting the ballistic missile down protects the entire city not just the military base.

Finally the environmental concerns talking point has already been disproven and yet people continue to repeat it.  The Congresswoman from the one other location in the world that has an forward deployed THAAD battery, has said Guam has had no problems with the system in the four years it has been there.

I don’t mind criticism of the THAAD deployment, but like so many other issues between the ROK and the US the criticism is largely not fact based.

This was actually clever what the Korean Defense Ministry did to comply with ROK environmental laws that would have delayed the deployment of the THAAD missile defense system for up to year:

A fact-finding mission into the deployment of a U.S. antimissile system in Korea in April raised a new suspicion that the Ministry of National Defense tried to sidestep an environmental study required by the law, the Blue House said Monday.

Following the discovery, President Moon Jae-in ordered a proper environmental study, effectively stalling the deployment schedule to be completed by the end of this year.

The probe also found that Lt. Gen. Wee Seung-ho, deputy defense minister of policy, has ordered his team to delete crucial pieces of information from a report to Moon’s security team, Yoon Young-chan, senior secretary for public relations, said in a press briefing.

Moon ordered last week an investigation into the ministry’s failure to fully brief his team about the U.S. military’s delivery of four additional launchers for the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (Thaad) antimissile system.

The probe identified Wee as responsible for the omission and revealed that the ministry tried to avoid the environmental impact study. The conclusion was reported to Moon at the senior secretariat meeting on Monday.

Despite protests by Beijing and Moscow, Seoul and Washington agreed on the deployment of a Thaad battery in July 2016.

Key components of a Thaad battery, including a radar system and two missile launchers, were installed on a former golf course in Seongju, North Gyeongsang, on April 26 – less than two weeks before the May 9 election that brought Moon to power.

A Thaad battery typically consists of six launchers, 48 interceptors, a fire control and communication unit and radar. The military authorities of Korea and the United States planned to complete the deployment before the end of this year.

According to Yoon, the ministry created a plan on Nov. 25, 2016 that it will offer the Seongju site to the U.S. military in two separate transfers. Of the 700,000 square-meter (173-acre) site, a 328,779 square-meter piece was transferred in the first phase and another piece, about 370,000 square meters, was planned to be offered later in the second phase.

“By designating the first phase site to be smaller than 330,000 square meters, the ministry planned that only a summary environmental impact study was needed,” Yoon said. The law requires a full-scale environmental study when the site is larger than 330,000 square meters.

Yoon then said the first phase site is an odd-looking inverse U-shaped piece of land. “The shape was abnormally designed in order to exclude the land that is supposed to be inside the U shape,” he said.  [Joong Ang Ilbo]

You can read more at the link, but General Wee claims that he ordered the deletion in the report about the four launchers because the US military asked him to.  My guess would be that the US military wanted to keep the location of the launchers secret for operational security reasons.  We will see how this plays out, but my assessment is that the Moon administration will use this to maximum political advantage to appease his base without actually changing the deployment decision.

The THAAD battery already has what is called an initial operational capability, so this doesn’t stop the deployment of the THAAD battery as claimed.  All this announcement of an environmental assessment means is that the four additional launchers cannot be installed.  This ultimately means less THAAD interceptors to defend the country to appease those against the deployment:

The government will conduct a full-scale environmental study on the U.S. military’s deployment of a controversial antimissile battery in Korea, a senior security adviser to President Moon Jae-in said Thursday, stressing that the probe will delay the installment of the battery.

Chung Eui-yong, head of the National Security Office of the Blue House, addressed the latest controversy surrounding the U.S. deployment of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense, or Thaad system. An investigation of top security officials from the previous administration is currently ongoing to find out if they intentionally withheld from the Moon government information on the delivery of four additional launchers for the system.

“In order to conduct a more thorough environmental-impact study, I think [the deployment] may take more time than originally planned,” Chung said. “But I cannot predict how long the environmental study will take.”

Chung made the remark as he arrived in Washington to meet with senior U.S. officials to prepare for the upcoming summit between Moon and U.S. President Donald Trump.  [Joong Ang Ilbo]

You can read more at the link, but does anyone else find it interesting that a one year environmental assessment needs to be done on a golf course that was dug into the top of the mountain whatever natural vegetation and wildlife there has already been developed over?  Are they going to assess the potential damage the launcher back blast area will have on the putting greens before it can be installed?

That is what opposition parties in Korea are supposedly claiming:

Since the Blue House’ probe of the incident, the Thaad deployment may have to stop for a while. The four additional launchers cannot be activated anytime soon. Public criticism of the deployment is spreading. While opposition parties believe the presidential office is attempting to sway public opinion to support a cancellation of the deployment, the Pentagon insists the deployment procedure was transparent. Our internal friction could also damage a summit in June in Washington between Moon and U.S. President Donald Trump.  [Joong Ang Ilbo]

You can read more at the link, but in my opinion the Blue House is looking for reasons to put the Defense Ministry on the defensive and possibly clean house.  This allows the Blue House to appease their left wing base that is against the THAAD deployment without actually cancelling it.  I would be very surprised if President Moon tries to cancel the THAAD deployment considering the ramifications to the US-ROK alliance.

Plus I think President Moon being the experienced politician he is wants negative public opinion against the deployment which he can use for upcoming cost sharing talks between the US and the ROK.  President Moon can basically counter President Trump’s demand for the ROK to pay for THAAD by saying the majority of the ROK population does not want THAAD so why should they pay for it?  This allows the ROK to get the defense benefits of THAAD without having to pay for it.

This is playing out like I expected, the Moon Jae-in administration will make protests and complaints domestically to appease their base that was against the THAAD deployment, but ultimately will not change it and just blame the last administration for deploying it:

President Moon Jae-in said Wednesday South Korea’s ongoing probe of the delivery of a U.S. missile defense system is not intended to reverse its deployment agreement between the two countries but to conduct it with appropriate domestic procedures, according to the presidential office.

Moon ordered a probe on Tuesday into the “undisclosed” delivery of four additional launchers of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system after the defense ministry failed to report it to the presidential policy advisory panel in a recent briefing.

During a meeting with visiting U.S. Senator Dick Durbin, he said South Korea will continue to host the THAAD under the correct domestic procedures.

“Procedures over THAAD are entirely domestic ones; we do not intend to change the existing decision or send a different message to the U.S.,” Moon told Durbin at the presidential office, according to presidential spokesman Park Soo-hyun.  [Yonhap]

You can read more at the link.

This phone call would have likely been much more interesting if President Trump would have repeated his demand for Seoul to pay for the deployment of the THAAD system to Korea:

U.S. President Donald Trump raised the topic of renegotiating a free trade deal with South Korea first before mentioning cooperation on the North Korean nuclear front in a recent phone conversation with Moon Jae-in, South Korea’s new president, an informed official here said Saturday.

“President Trump, during the phone conversation, first delivered congratulatory remarks, then said the FTA should be renegotiated for the mutual interest of both countries,” an official at Cheong Wa Dae, South Korea’s presidential office, told Yonhap News Agency Saturday.

Moon and Trump spoke over the phone on Wednesday, vowing to maintain close cooperation in handling North Korea’s nuclear threats.

The official, who was next to Moon as he spoke with Trump, also said the U.S. president mentioned the trade issue “in a light fashion, mentioning it on a principle level” and added that the “focus was on the North Korean nuclear issue.”

Moon reportedly did not offer a particular reply to Trump’s mentioning of renegotiating the trade deal.  [Korea Times]

You can read more at the link.

Oh Young-jin over at the Korea Times seems to have a better understanding of President Trump than the rest of Korea:

Let’s calm ourselves down.

It’s exasperating to hear U.S. President Trump demand South Korea pay $1 billion for a missile interceptor owned and operated by the U.S. After all, the two allies cut a deal by which Korea provided land for a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) battery, while the U.S. paid for the rest ― hardware and maintenance.

It’s tempting to shout back at Trump and tell him that we don’t want it so he can take it back.

But here are some sobering questions.

Can we defend ourselves without U.S. forces? The South excels the North in the size of economy many times and is more than double it in terms of population. So the answer to this question is yes, we can.

But if so, what extra cost would we have to pay for their absence? Billions of dollars would be needed to make up for the U.S. Forces Korea with its 28,000 American troops stationed here. They serve as a tripwire to bring in bigger and more powerful reinforcements ― the so-called extended deterrence (nuclear umbrella) included ― from the U.S. in the event of a war. The tab for this is uncountable because it has worked as the bedrock for Korea’s sense of security for decades.

Would you be willing to pay that extra cost? The bulk of the budget for welfare, infrastructure and other key state affairs would have to be diverted to cover our own defense spending. This means bigger tax bills for fewer services. Then, the security void that would be created by the U.S. withdrawal would have foreign investors rethink their plans involving Korea.

THAAD can turn this chain of hypotheses into reality. (……….) Now, it is important to think of how Trumpian arithmetic works.

Trump is a “successful” businessman and showbiz celebrity.

Therefore, he shuns money-losing businesses and sticks to the “beneficiary-pays” principle. This characteristic reflects his demand for Korea’s THAAD payment as he sees the U.S. as a benefactor and Korea as a beneficiary so he thinks it is natural for Seoul to pay.  [Korea Times]

You can read the rest at the link, but Mr. Oh advocates for paying Trump off by having a pro-rated cost for use of the THAAD system each year. This gets back to my belief this whole topic is about the USFK cost sharing negotiations next year which President Trump wants the Korean government to understand they need to pay more for advanced US capabilities.

By the way I still love Mr. Oh’s email:  foolsdie5@gmail.com.