Latest news with #JejuForum
Korea Herald
21 hours ago
- Politics
- Korea Herald
Strategic pivot, not pullback, if US troops relocate from Korea, says Harris
No US resistance to wartime OPCON transfer to S. Korea; handover depends on meeting conditions -- time, effort, money SEOGWIPO, Jeju Island — Repositioning of US forces on the Korean Peninsula, even if it occurs, would not signify a diminution of America's defense commitment to South Korea, but rather reflect a strategic and holistic recalibration to meet regional challenges across the Indo-Pacific region, former US Ambassador to South Korea Harry Harris said. Harris repudiated 'stovepiped' approaches, underscoring the improbability of conceiving of a contingency on the Korean Peninsula as discrete from a Taiwan crisis or other potential regional flashpoints, in an interview with The Korea Herald on the sidelines of the Jeju Forum at the International Convention Center Jeju. Anxiety over a possible reduction in the roughly 28,500 US troops in South Korea has flared anew, following a Wall Street Journal report in May that the Pentagon is weighing an option to pull out approximately 4,500 troops and move them to other locations in the Indo-Pacific region. Pentagon chief spokesperson Sean Parnell publicly stated that the report of a US Forces Korea drawdown is 'not true,' but his denial has done little to assuage Seoul's concerns. 'There's always the possibility that we're going to restructure forces in the Pacific, but it's not a scaling back,' said Harris, a former four-star admiral in the US Navy and former commander of US Pacific Command, when asked about the prospect and feasibility of a USFK reduction. 'That term has a negative connotation. It implies that we're somehow going to reduce our commitment to Korea. I don't think that will ever happen.' Harris pointed to the Pentagon's classified internal 'Interim National Defense Guidance' — which he has not seen but was reported by the Washington Post in late March — as signaling a shift in US military focus to the Indo-Pacific region, with China identified as the central focus. 'That's not a negative reduction of forces. That's so that we are better postured to defend Korea and meet our obligations to our other treaty allies and deal with the possibility of having to confront China over Taiwan,' Harris said. Harris underscored the need for the US military to break down stovepipes to better cope with regional threats, admitting, 'We have been stovepiped in our approach to operational planning, and I was guilty of that when I was the PACOM commander.' 'We have the Taiwan problem, we have the North Korea problem, and we have the China problem, and we tend to look at these as if they're independent problem sets without any spillover of effects. And that's wrong. We have to look at it holistically,' Harris said. 'If we move forces from Korea to somewhere else, it's so that we can better integrate all of the challenges that we face in the Indo-Pacific. It's not a reduction in commitment; it's a refocusing of our ability to meet all of the challenges that confront us.' Asked whether the number of US troops in South Korea, by itself, is what matters most in terms of deterrence and the strength of the alliance, Harris said, 'No, it is not.' 'It is the commitment to defend Korea to the best of our ability in order to meet our treaty obligations,' Harris explained. 'If — this is a big if, this is hypothetical again — if North Korea invaded South Korea again, then it would require far more than the 28,000 troops that are here in South Korea to help South Korea defend itself.' Harris further highlighted that the US has air force wings and marine units stationed in Japan, and that the US 7th Fleet is based in Yokosuka, stating, 'There are forces that will come from all over the region.' In response to Seoul's growing apprehensions regarding the strategic flexibility of US Forces Korea, Harris emphasized that the issue ought to be viewed within the broader framework of addressing regional challenges through a holistic approach. Strategic flexibility means the ability to be rapidly redeployed for expeditionary operations and used for broader regional missions beyond the Korean Peninsula, including a potential Taiwan contingency. 'It would be hard to imagine a North Korean scenario independent of a Taiwan scenario, or some other scenario, if they were to happen. I see the hidden hand of China in a lot of this. And so, we cannot look at these things as independent actions,' Harris said. 'We have to consider them in a holistic way. And so that's why strategic flexibility is important — not only for the United States, but it's important for South Korea as well.' OPCON transfer when conditions are met With regard to the South Korean military's regaining of wartime operational control, or OPCON, Harris said the transfer will take place once the conditions agreed upon by both allies are met. 'There's no resistance from the United States on the idea of OPCON transition,' Harris said. 'I think it's simply a matter of meeting the conditions that were determined, and that's just a matter of time, effort and money.' When asked what ought to be the foremost priority for the South Korean military to further bolster its capabilities, should the US request that it assume a greater share of responsibility in countering North Korean threats, Harris identified command and control as one of the foremost priorities. 'One is command and control, which is not a thing, but a capability, in order to effectively command and control forces — including US forces,' Harris said. 'So, in order to effectively command and control forces — including US forces — if we achieve OPCON transition, the transition of operational control of Korean forces during wartime, then Korea will have to have the ability to command and control American forces as well as, obviously, Korean forces, for which you already have that capability.' Harris denied that any shift had taken place, responding to a question about whether the nature of the Korea-US alliance has changed under President Donald Trump's 'America First' doctrine. 'No, I don't think so. I think it's about focusing on the threats and how we are going to meet our treaty obligations.' At the same time, Harris noted that while burden-sharing negotiations are expected to continue, Washington's strategic focus is now shifting toward China and the broader Indo-Pacific region. As for Seoul, a debate exists over whether it should seek greater autonomy in its alliance amid Washington's more inward-looking 'America First' foreign policy. In response to such calls, Harris was unequivocal: 'Today, the alliance is needed more than ever. But that's my opinion.' 'If the South Korean people, as manifested by the people they elect into office, feel that the alliance has served its course, or if they feel — that's a hard point — that the alliance should somehow change so that Korea can embark on a more independent course, that's up to Korea,' Harris said. 'It's not up to the United States, nor is it up to anyone else. It's an independent decision that has to be made by both countries. We can't want it more than South Korea wants it.' dagyumji@
Korea Herald
3 days ago
- Politics
- Korea Herald
How Korea's next leader should set foreign policy compass
JEJU ISLAND -- The crux of the new Korean government's foreign and security strategy, former foreign ministers said, must be adapting to a shifting, more inward-looking US -- one demanding greater burden-sharing from its allies under President Trump's 'America First' doctrine -- while keeping the alliance at the core of its foreign policy at this critical crossroads. Facing a wave of increasingly interconnected global crises and a more inward-looking Washington, the former top diplomats urged Seoul's next leadership to move beyond the conventional US-centric approach and adopt a more holistic, big-picture foreign policy suited to the shifting global order. 'What's most important as Korea's new government takes office is that we are facing not just one or two challenges, but a complex web of simultaneous crises. We all know that these issues are unfolding on multiple fronts at once,' former Foreign Minister Yun Byung-se, who served under the former conservative Park Geun-hye administration, said during Thursday's session at the Jeju Forum held on the southern island of Jeju. 'Therefore, the new administration should not approach strategy solely through the lens of relations with the US, but should instead adopt a broader, more comprehensive perspective,' Yun said during a session on South Korea's diplomatic and security strategy ahead of the early presidential election on June 3. With no transition period before taking office, the new South Korean leadership will also need to quickly find its footing as it responds to growing US calls for greater responsibility in national and regional defense, as well as increased demands across the board within the bilateral alliance framework, Yun said. He also noted that, unlike in the past when North Korea's provocations were the main concern for an incoming administration, this time will be different: "the new government will need to prioritize how quickly it can formulate its own position in response to US priorities." 'Ultimately, it comes down to two main points: the role of US Forces Korea and South Korea's own regional role,' Yun explained. In Seoul, concerns are growing that the operational scope of US Forces Korea could extend beyond the Korean Peninsula and expand to regional defense, including being repurposed for a potential Taiwan contingency. 'In 2003, some units from US Forces Korea were redeployed to Iraq. Now, if they are redeployed -- not to Iraq, but to areas near Taiwan -- that could present a whole new set of challenges, and it's something we need to think about very carefully,' Yun said. 'From what I see, neither (presidential election) camp is fully prepared to address this issue yet.' Both the classified 'Interim National Defense Guidance,' as reported by The Washington Post, and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth's statement on the development of the 2025 National Defense Strategy make clear that US forces will prioritize deterring China as the sole pacing threat. Another key point is that allies should shoulder more responsibility for defending against other regional threats -- for South Korea, this means threats posed by North Korea. Former Foreign Minister Song Min-soon underscored that 'Korea needs to transform its current alliance system -- which is now overly dependent on the US -- into a more autonomous alliance, while still faithfully upholding the Korea-US alliance.' "This is something the US also wants," Song said. "However, in Korea, there is a fear that moving toward a more self-reliant alliance could lead to isolation from the US, and how to overcome that fear is the challenge." Song, who served in the former liberal Roh Moo-hyun administration, also called for the next South Korean government to 'more actively explore ways to achieve a nuclear balance between the two Koreas,' instead of merely relying on US extended deterrence. Extended deterrence refers to Washington's commitment to deter or respond to coercion and external attacks on its allies and partners with the full range of its military capabilities, including nuclear weapons. 'However, it doesn't necessarily mean that we need immediate nuclear armament,' Song continued. Former Foreign Minister Kim Sung-hwan, however, said the next government should continue to focus on diplomacy with the United States and ensure that US extended deterrence is well maintained, opposing the idea of South Korea independently seeking a nuclear balance against North Korea. On the diplomatic front, Kim emphasized that the key challenge is how to navigate between the Korea-US alliance and China amid the shifting global order. "From the perspective of our diplomatic and security interests, regardless of who becomes the next president, the most important point is what stance South Korea should take between the US, our ally, and China, given our geopolitical realities," Kim said. "This remains our greatest diplomatic challenge." But Kim also pointed out that the US is no longer willing to unilaterally provide public goods as it did in the past, as it needs to focus its limited capacity on addressing mounting domestic challenges. Kim, who served under former conservative President Lee Myung-bak, expressed his concerns over a potential return to what's known as the 'Kindleberger Trap,' highlighting this as a key factor for South Korea to consider in devising its foreign policy. The trap refers to the failure of the international system due to the under-provision of global public goods and the dangers inherent in a shifting balance of power. "Looking at the current global order, if the US stops providing public goods, who will take on that role? Is Europe economically strong enough to take on that responsibility?" Kim said. "These are the kinds of questions we need to seriously consider in the context of international affairs."
Korea Herald
3 days ago
- Politics
- Korea Herald
Will Seoul's leadership change disrupt warming ties with Tokyo?
Stability ahead — but mutual public trust still missing ingredient of Korea–Japan relations Bilateral relations between South Korea and Japan are unlikely to face a major upheaval after South Korea's new government is swiftly inaugurated next week, former vice foreign ministers from the two countries said Thursday, citing deeper public understanding and recognition of the ties' importance by the top two presidential contenders. Still, both emphasized that rebuilding public trust is essential for forging lasting, future-oriented relations at a time when strategic cooperation — from countering North Korean threats to addressing routing regional challenges — has never been more vital. Kenichiro Sasae, president of the Japan Institute of International Affairs and former Japanese vice foreign minister, offered an optimistic outlook for Seoul-Tokyo relations, ahead of South Korea's early presidential election on June 3. The focal point is on whether the incoming government will carry the baton forward in improving Seoul-Tokyo ties, as the two countries mark the 60th anniversary of normalized diplomatic relations this year. The liberal Democratic Party of Korea's presidential candidate, Rep. Lee Jae-myung, remains the front-runner and is widely expected to win. The outgoing administration of disgraced former President Yoon Suk Yeol of the conservative People Power Party had placed great emphasis on mending fences with Tokyo. 'Of course, if leadership changes, the details of the policy could change as well. But on that basis, I think what's most important is that, even if there is political change or instability, there should be a strong sense of mutual understanding and interaction between the peoples of both countries,' Sasae said in remarks in Japanese during a session at the Jeju Forum on Jeju Island. 'Over the last five, 10, even 20 years, I think there has been significant progress in this area,' he added, speaking at a session reflecting on the past and exploring visions for future cooperation between Seoul and Tokyo as the two countries mark the 60th anniversary of diplomatic relations. People, not politics, lead ties Sasae highlighted active cultural exchanges — including pop culture and television dramas — as well as increasing people-to-people exchanges between the two countries as positive factors for bilateral ties. The number of travelers between South Korea and Japan surpassed 12 million in 2024 — including 3.22 million Japanese visitors to Korea and 8.82 million Korean visitors to Japan — the highest figure ever recorded, according to the Korea Tourism Organization and the Japan National Tourism Organization. 'The reason I bring this up is because, especially among younger generations, I feel there's a growing optimism that even if the political climate changes, the way Japanese and Korean people feel about each other won't be so easily swayed,' Sasae said. 'There are more and more people whose attitudes aren't dictated by shifts in government or politics.' Sasae also argued that Seoul and Tokyo should seek to strike the right balance between historical disputes stemming from Japan's colonial occupation of the Korean Peninsula from 1910 to 1945 and pending issues that require bilateral cooperation. 'I hope Korean politics will respond to this reality, and at the same time, as I mentioned earlier, I hope Japanese people will try to better understand the feelings and memories that are central to Koreans," Sasae said. 'We must continue to hold these feelings deeply in our hearts as we move forward and share them. It's about striking a balance between these two aspects.' Consistency expected, risks still lurk On the prospects for bilateral ties, Shin Kak-soo, deputy chair of the Seoul-based NEAR Foundation and a former vice foreign minister, said, 'Even if there is a change of government in South Korea, I don't think there's a high likelihood of major turbulence in Korea-Japan relations.' Shin noted that the People Power Party's candidate, Kim Moon-soo, emphasizes continuity, while Lee Jae-myung stresses pragmatic diplomacy. 'So I believe there will be a certain degree of consistency maintained,' Shin said. Yet Shin pointed out that disparities between Seoul and Tokyo in their actions on North Korea- and China-related issues — despite similar rhetoric — could pose a risk of turbulence in bilateral ties. 'What does concern me, however, is that there are significant differences between the two sides when it comes to responding to US-China tensions, addressing North Korea's nuclear threat and dealing with China's assertive diplomatic and security policies,' Shin said. "That's why I can't be entirely optimistic about Korea-Japan relations going forward. These are potential risk factors. In this regard, it's all the more necessary for Korea and Japan to engage in deeper strategic dialogue and communication." Shin said Seoul-Tokyo ties should not remain at the level of abstract cooperation. 'To minimize strategic uncertainty and volatility in Northeast Asia, East Asia and the Indo-Pacific, there is no alternative but for Korea and Japan to pursue strategic cooperation,' he said — a view echoed by Sasae. On historical disputes, Shin assessed, 'most of the major fires have been put out,' but said both sides 'should work together to put out remaining sparks,' given the possibility that lingering embers could flare up again. Public trust above new declarations Asked about the need for a new joint declaration to mark the 60th anniversary of diplomatic ties — following the historic 2008 declaration on building a new, future-oriented partnership — both agreed that what matters most is not another document, but restoring public trust. 'The most important thing, in my view, is restoring mutual trust between the people of Korea and Japan," Shin said. "Without greater understanding and restored trust, it will be extremely difficult for both countries, as they are both democracies." Echoing the sentiment, Sasae also underscored, 'the most important thing is to create an atmosphere where people feel, 'Yes, this is something we can achieve.'" "Unless there is trust between both sides, such cooperation is very difficult, no matter what's written on paper. That's why I think it is essential to make efforts to build up that trust first." dagyumji@
