Tag: US-ROK Alliance

It is strange times in Korea when the conservative politicians are complaining about President Trump and the Korean left don’t like him either, but they really don’t know why:

Korean conservatives are generally pro-U.S. and advocates of a strong Seoul-Washington alliance. 

Yet their alliance appears to be cracking following U.S. President Donald Trump’s remarks on issues crucial for South Korea. The real estate developer-turned-politician has expressed his interest in trading the blood-forged alliance for an increase in national revenue and appears to favor North Korea over the South. 

Last Friday he even made fun of South Korea ― along with Japan and the European Union ― mimicking the Korean accent before his deep-pocketed supporters. 

Their sense of humiliation has seen even pro-U.S. conservative politicians speak out to slam Trump. Some lashed out at the president, calling him “empty-headed” or “too inept to figure out what’s right and wrong.”

“With the ‘money is everything’ mind of a merchant, Trump seems to be confused about what is his ally and foe,” Rep. Cho Kyung-tae of the main opposition Liberty Party of Korea (LPK) said on a radio show Tuesday. 

Korea Times

You can read more at the link.

There will probably be more missiles being fired by North Korea next week as the joint exercise between the ROK and South Korea is scheduled to begin:

South Korea and the United States will stage joint military drills as scheduled despite warnings from North Korea, the South Korean military authority said Sunday.

The joint drills will begin Monday with a computer-simulated command post exercise (CPX) to cope with any emergency on the Korean Peninsula and last for half a month, according to the authority.

After the CPX, the allies will spend the remaining 10 days intensively verifying Seoul’s capabilities for its envisioned retaking of wartime operational control (OPCON) of its troops from Washington.

But many watchers say the joint military drills could prompt further provocation from the North.

Yonhap

You can read more at the link.

Considering that last year the US negotiators had to fight to get the ROK to pay $879 million for this year’s upkeep, I don’t expect them to pay $5 billion next year:

South Korea and the United States have agreed to conduct discussions in a “reasonable and fair” way on how to share the cost for the upkeep of American troops here, a foreign ministry official here said Tuesday.

The two sides talked about the upcoming negotiations over Seoul’s share of the cost for the stationing of the 28,500-strong U.S. Forces Korea (USFK) for next year, when U.S. National Security Adviser John Bolton visited Korea last week, the official said.

The local daily JoongAng Ilbo reported that Washington has tentatively decided to request that Seoul pay US$5 billion under a renewed bilateral cost-sharing arrangement for next year, more than a fivefold increase from the previous year.

“When U.S. National Security Adviser John Bolton was visiting Korea on July 23 and 24, South Korea and the U.S. agreed to have consultations over the sharing of the defense cost in a reasonable and fair direction,” the official said on condition of anonymity.

Yonhap

You can read more at the link, but it would have been interesting to see the face of Moon administration officials when John Bolton dropped the $5 billion number.

The next round of cost sharing negotiations should be interesting:

U.S. President Donald Trump, after a summit with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, demanded Saturday a drastic increase in Korea’s contribution to defense sharing costs next year.

“We are defending wealthy countries. They can well afford to pay us,” Trump said Saturday in a campaign rally at the Resch Center Complex in Green Bay, Wisconsin. “There’s one country, I don’t want to say it, I don’t want to embarrass anybody […] I called the country. I called and said, listen, no good.”

Given the context and Trump’s earlier statements, it was obvious he was referring to South Korea. 

“We are losing $4.5 billion. We can’t do this anymore,” Trump said. “He got very upset, angry […] He said, well, we will give you 500 million more, because the budget, you see, had already been set. I said, I want more. We argued. They paid us more than $500 million more for one phone call. I’m not bragging.”

Joong Ang Ilbo

You can read more at the link.

Here is what the ROK Defense Minister had to say about any possible reductions in the size of USFK:

South Korean Defense Minister Jeong Kyeong-doo has ensured there will be no reduction of U.S. troops in South Korea. 

Meeting with reporters during his visit to Joint Base Meyer in Arlington, Virginia on Tuesday, the minister addressed speculations of a possible downsizing of U.S. Forces Korea triggered by ongoing upgrades of South Korea’s military weapons system. 

He said the augmentation of the forces is to further enhance the South Korean military’s capacity.  

KBS World Radio

You can read more at the link, but as I have always said, any reduction of USFK would likely happen after a peace treaty is signed. The left wing activist groups in South Korea will use a peace treaty as an excuse to protest the continued presence of USFK. These protests would be intended to make life difficult for US troops just like it currently is for the troops stationed at the THAAD site in South Korea.

In the Japan Times they have an op-ed published in response to the White House’s Cost Plus 50 strategy for paying for the stationing of US troops.

The “Cost Plus 50” formula means the White House is aiming for allies to pay 100 percent of U.S. stationing costs plus a premium of 50 percent on top of that. While there are arguments to be made about whether such a goal is even achievable (spoiler alert: it is not), it is important to highlight some of the bad assumptions that underwrite the belief that “allies don’t pay enough.” (……..)

Bad assumption 4: It is easy to tally up the cost of stationing forces overseas.
Reality: For the administration to demand Cost Plus 50, it must first assess how much it actually costs to station forces overseas. Take it from a former alliance manager who has run the “cost drill,” there are simply too many inputs to produce a figure without arbitrarily making decisions on what to include or exclude.
Do you include the salaries of overseas service members? What about costs for moving personnel and their families? How about rotational units who are only in a host nation for a few months out of the year? Do you add the cost of running overseas schools for dependent family members? Commissaries? Recreation areas? Uniform clothing sales stores?
How about research and development for the equipment that is stationed there? Should a country pay more if it has F-35s instead of F-16s or ballistic missile defense-capable destroyers instead of non-BMD capable ones?
The list goes on and on, and even then, the list ignores things like sunk costs and the fact those forces are overseas for U.S. interests.

Japan Times

You can read more at the link.

The next US-ROK cost sharing negotiations will be very interesting if this demand is made:

For years, President Donald Trump has complained that countries hosting American troops aren’t paying enough. Now he wants to get even, and then some.

Under White House direction, the administration is drawing up demands that Germany, Japan and eventually any other country hosting U.S. troops pay the full price of American soldiers deployed on their soil — plus 50 percent or more for the privilege of hosting them, according to a dozen administration officials and people briefed on the matter. (…….)

Victor Cha, a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, said the administration was sending a deliberate message by demanding “Cost Plus 50” from South Korea first, even though that effort fell short.
“We have a more integrated military with South Korea than with any other ally,” Cha said. “To send this message to a front-line Cold War ally is trying to say very clearly that they want a paradigm shift with the way they do host-nation support.” [Bloomberg]

You can read more at the link.

I doubt we will ever know, but it would interesting to see how much money is in fact saved with the changes to the joint exercise schedule?:

U.S. President Donald Trump said Sunday that he doesn’t want military exercises between the U.S. and South Korea because they are expensive and unhelpful for diplomacy with North Korea.
Trump made the remark on Twitter a day after the allies announced an end to two major combined exercises — Key Resolve and Foal Eagle.
“The reason I do not want military drills with South Korea is to save hundreds of millions of dollars for the U.S. for which we are not reimbursed,” Trump tweeted. “That was my position long before I became President. Also, reducing tensions with North Korea at this time is a good thing!”

Yonhap

You can read more at the link.