USFK Withdrawal Controversy: What are the Impacts on Korean Peninsula Security?

This is interpreted as showing a will to strengthen military cooperation between Korea, the US, and Japan to counter China, in addition to responding to North Korea's threats.

Experts are focusing on Trump's dual-track strategy announced this time. This means thoroughly separating and operating appeasement policies toward North Korea and containment of China, which can be seen in the method of reducing the UFS exercise while proceeding with the Freedom Edge exercise as normal.

This exercise includes maritime missile defense, anti-submarine warfare, anti-air defense, and cyber defense, focusing on strengthening integrated defense capabilities against various threats.

However, as this Freedom Edge exercise primarily focuses on missile defense, officials state that the absence of a carrier does not significantly impact the exercise.

An analysis suggested that if China invades Taiwan, North Korea's participation could be considered an essential condition. It is argued that if North Korea launches a diversionary attack on South Korea or US Forces Korea, US military power would be dispersed, potentially allowing China to attack Taiwan. This implies a complex security scenario where a Taiwan war and a Korean Peninsula war could occur simultaneously.

This was mentioned in an August 30 interview with Fox News, suggesting it's used as a tool to enhance negotiating power rather than truly believing Korea is free-riding.

This is based on an assessment that Korea possesses top-tier capabilities when comprehensively considering three criteria: defense spending, self-defense capabilities, and contributions to the US defense industry. Unlike European countries, Korea has actual troop deployment and industrial support capabilities, making it difficult to evaluate with a simple free-rider argument, according to Kim.

Despite this year's defense cost-sharing increasing by 8% to 1.5192 trillion won, the US side is demanding further increases by presenting inaccurate justifications. In particular, it is pointed out that there is a tendency to distort the actual number of US Forces Korea personnel from 28,000 to 39,000, or to speak as if the US is 100% responsible for Korea's defense. This can be seen as making unilateral claims, overlooking Korea's self-defense efforts and contributions.

Simultaneously, he is adopting a dual stance, showing an appeasing gesture to North Korea and emphasizing improved relations. It is criticized as a contradictory strategy that is inconsistent to stimulate security anxiety in Korea while promoting friendly relations with North Korea.

This is a means to gain more economic benefits from Korea, a situation where an unjustified strategy is being pushed through by force. It is interpreted that bringing up security free-riding and claiming friendship with North Korea is ultimately an intention to pressure Korea to gain economic benefits.

This appears to be in response to a US request, but with other allies like Japan and European nations not actively participating, the need for careful consideration of diplomatic repercussions and domestic public opinion if Korea decides to dispatch troops is raised.

In particular, the P-8 Poseidon is known as a submarine killer and is the latest aircraft received by South Korea last year. The Soyang-class ship can play a very important role in supplying materials during maritime operations.

Basic material shortages, such as food, are occurring as aircraft carriers and warships remain at sea for extended periods, and some vessels are even found to be corroded like old pirate ships.

The possibility of dispatching this Soyang-class ship to support the US Navy's supply shortage problems is raised. Additionally, the explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) mission capability of the Navy UDT/SEALs also has the potential to contribute to the special circumstances in the Strait of Hormuz.

There are several internal and external obstacles to dispatching troops to the Strait of Hormuz. First, it is pointed out that the justification for dispatch is somewhat insufficient. On August 31, the oil tanker Senegal Prosperity, owned by the Korean shipping company Jan Geum Sang Sun, was hit by a projectile near Hormuz, but there is controversy over whether this constitutes sufficient justification for dispatch. Second, the overseas deployment of ROK forces must go through parliamentary approval, making a partisan confrontation likely. Third, with no specific request or offer of compensation from the US, discussions about dispatch are proceeding, leading to significant diplomatic uncertainty.

This means that official and legal procedures are essential, beyond a request from an individual like former President Trump. No overseas deployment can take place without the National Assembly's consent, so political agreement and the formation of a national consensus must precede it.

As an ally, it is difficult to ignore a US request, but former President Trump's statements alone are insufficient to decide on troop dispatch. The US Secretary of Defense or Secretary of State must present detailed cooperation plans, including how the US will cooperate specifically with Korea and what compensation the US will provide if Korea dispatches support forces. Furthermore, efforts are needed at the US government level to persuade former President Trump to show a unified stance.