Here is an opinion piece in the Korea Times on what the ROK should do with the issue of deploying troops to reopen the Strait of Hormuz:
Korea faces a dilemma over whether to deploy military assets to the Strait of Hormuz. The alliance with the United States is too important for Seoul to simply disregard Washington’s request for a military contribution. At the same time, dispatching a warship would carry serious consequences. Such a deployment could be interpreted as Korea joining U.S. military action against Iran, unnecessarily turning Tehran into an adversary.
The multinational maritime mission being developed by the United Kingdom and France deserves close attention. Early reports indicated that roughly 15 countries were involved in operational planning, while a considerably larger number later joined diplomatic consultations and expressed political support. Korea has also endorsed an international statement calling for freedom of navigation in the Strait and has discussed possible contributions with the United States, Britain and France. Seoul’s choice, therefore, need not be reduced to a simple question of accepting or rejecting a U.S. request.
The most important feature of the U.K.-France initiative is its stated effort to distinguish itself from U.S. military operations against Iran. Its purpose is not to attack or retaliate against Iran, but to ensure the safe passage of civilian vessels and remove mines and other threats to navigation. The proposed mission would focus on defensive activities such as merchant-vessel escorts, mine clearance and maritime and aerial surveillance. It is also intended to begin only after a ceasefire, consent by the relevant parties and other conditions necessary for a sufficiently permissive operational environment are in place.
That distinction is crucial for Korea. Sending a Korean warship to support U.S. operations against Iran would carry a fundamentally different political and military meaning from joining a multinational effort to restore an international sea lane. The former would expose Seoul to accusations that it had effectively become a party to America’s war. The latter could be justified as international cooperation to protect a global public good vital to the world economy.
You can read more at the link, but the waiting for a ceasefire sounds like a way to avoid doing the deployment. We already had a ceasefire and the international community had over a month to do something and instead did nothing before the Iranians decided to violate the ceasefire. There is likely going to no longer be any more ceasefires since the Iranian regime already violated one. The Trump administration now seems firmly committed to the slow economic strangulation of the regime which means no ceasefires.
If Korea wants to do something that is low risk to their troops, but still beneficial to their position in the Middle East, I propose they send anti-drone and cruise missile defense units to help defend the United Arab Emirates. The UAE has been a long-term economic and defense partners with South Korea. The Lee administration can frame the deployment as assisting the UAE and protecting ROK economic interests and not joining the US war against Iran. Additionally, this would showcase ROK military technology and provide valuable real-world experience against the same hybrid threats North Korea would use during a crisis on the peninsula.
I guess we will see if President Lee has the political courage for such a deployment, or rather, just be like the rest of the world and hide from the Thugs of Tehran.
