http://www.nola.com/newsflash/international/index.ssf?/base/international-3/1068719641119490.xml
I don't want troops in South Korea - for a variety of reasons. It is dangerous. The Cold War is over. There is no sense getting into a pissing contest over Korea with China in Cold War II. Japan is a better strategic defensive position. And most of all, SK has a culture of hate for the troops and they can afford to man and pay for their own defense against North Korea -- a dangerous but pitifully poor and starving nation kept alive, in large part, but South Korea.
Having said that....I'm not crossing my fingers.....even with all the talk of the last year or so.
He has questioned, for example, why the 37,000 U.S. forces stationed in South Korea cannot be more readily available for use beyond the Korean peninsula. They have stood guard near the Demilitarized Zone separating South Korea from communist North Korea since the end of the Korean War in 1953.
Washington and Seoul have been negotiating for months on details of a plan to consolidate U.S. bases in South Korea. That is a lengthy, two-phase process that the Bush administration believes can substantially shrink the U.S. force there — possibly cutting it by as many as 12,000 troops.
Rumsfeld would not discuss any numbers. Addressing only the broad policy goal, he said the hope is to move away from arrangements not suitable for current security challenges like fighting terrorism.
"That requires much more agility, it requires access to a larger number of locations" for U.S. forces globally and it requires moving away from static defenses, he said. In this context Rumsfeld did not specifically mention Korea, but by almost any definition the U.S. defense there is static.
Well, that is true for the US needs, but in reality, South Korea is still locked in a serious Cold War.
Even if they won't admit it publically or even to themselves these days.
South Korea doesn't have to worry much about China or Russia paying for another Northern adventure, so it technically should be able to defend itself with its dominance in people, industry, and wealth, (and why not say US air power as well)...
But we all know SK will never pay for it. Not because they believe the North doesn't warrant the expense due to its threat level....
but because they will demand the US pay for it by keeping USFK in place.
If the US tries to take troops out, South Korea will scream bloody murder. And many people, including many in the US, will listen to them.
They have a point of sorts. A somewhat legitimate line of argument --- but one that covers up the fact they can defend themselves..
The argument goes something like, "You divided us into two nations and helped arm us to the teeth. It was also fine for you to stay here as long as it suited your national geopolitical economic advantage, but now that your threat is gone, you will leave us to face a madman with WMD and awesome firepower!!"
Of course, for those of us who watch Korea, we would expect God to make SK's head explode for making such a huge whopping 180 degree turn around ------ in short, having to admit they fear the North greatly and use this fear against the US ---- after at least 5 years of saying the North was wonderful and the US should cool its "hardline" policy and accept the nicer and friendlier Pyongyang regime......
But the argument will still sell well in much of the world.
You also have to plug in the Japan Fear Factor ---- for some reason I have never understood, many experts take it for granted leaving Korea will mean leaving Japan.
I highly doubt it. Rumsfeld mentioned realignment in Japan as well, but I think it is a very safe bet even if we leave Korea and pull some troops out of Japan, the bulk will stay there.
We will not want to leave East Asia altogether.
And more importantly, nobody will want to see Japan rearm into a world class military their economy can support, including much of the Japanese people.
Even if they won't admit it publically or even to themselves these days.
South Korea doesn't have to worry much about China or Russia paying for another Northern adventure, so it technically should be able to defend itself with its dominance in people, industry, and wealth, (and why not say US air power as well)...
But we all know SK will never pay for it. Not because they believe the North doesn't warrant the expense due to its threat level....
but because they will demand the US pay for it by keeping USFK in place.
If the US tries to take troops out, South Korea will scream bloody murder. And many people, including many in the US, will listen to them.
They have a point of sorts. A somewhat legitimate line of argument --- but one that covers up the fact they can defend themselves..
The argument goes something like, "You divided us into two nations and helped arm us to the teeth. It was also fine for you to stay here as long as it suited your national geopolitical economic advantage, but now that your threat is gone, you will leave us to face a madman with WMD and awesome firepower!!"
Of course, for those of us who watch Korea, we would expect God to make SK's head explode for making such a huge whopping 180 degree turn around ------ in short, having to admit they fear the North greatly and use this fear against the US ---- after at least 5 years of saying the North was wonderful and the US should cool its "hardline" policy and accept the nicer and friendlier Pyongyang regime......
But the argument will still sell well in much of the world.
You also have to plug in the Japan Fear Factor ---- for some reason I have never understood, many experts take it for granted leaving Korea will mean leaving Japan.
I highly doubt it. Rumsfeld mentioned realignment in Japan as well, but I think it is a very safe bet even if we leave Korea and pull some troops out of Japan, the bulk will stay there.
We will not want to leave East Asia altogether.
And more importantly, nobody will want to see Japan rearm into a world class military their economy can support, including much of the Japanese people.
So there will be much pressure abroad to "not abandon" South Korea. And it will be a political factor at home.
It is far, far from clear to me that reason will NOT win -----
That the US government and/or people will decide that heavily industrialized and fatanstically wealthy (compared to the North) South Korea can easily provide 95% of its own defense with an offer of US air cover in the event North Korea invades...
will not be the conclusion the American people will be led to accept....
I think it is more likely the "abandoning" Korea idea will win and the troops will stay.
It is far, far from clear to me that reason will NOT win -----
That the US government and/or people will decide that heavily industrialized and fatanstically wealthy (compared to the North) South Korea can easily provide 95% of its own defense with an offer of US air cover in the event North Korea invades...
will not be the conclusion the American people will be led to accept....
I think it is more likely the "abandoning" Korea idea will win and the troops will stay.
The power of the status quo is heavy --- especially when we will have South Korea pleading and yelling for troops to stay and laying a heavy guilt trip on the US which many in government and the experts in the US will agree despite efforts by the contemporary military and Bush administration.
The only way our politicians will bypass the political difficulties in taking our troops out will be if the American people become energized by the reality of South Korea's power and what they have been doing for far more than a decade....
But I can't see that happening.......
But I do believe with this kind of thing.......with the way the US-SK alliance has been and the environment in East Asia as a whole....
if the wind does change direction.........it will increase to hurricane strength fast.....
What I mean is......there is a boat load or two of very recent history in the US-SK alliance that ---- if the American people really understood -------- would lead to US troops being pulled in a heart beat.....
In short, the best thing South Korea has going for it is the almost complete ignorance of the American people about our committment there.
As long as significant numbers of US politicians, the State Department, academic experts, and the media continue to find it too difficult to "bash" South Korea ----- feeling squeemish about showing anti-Americanism and the nature of the US-SK alliance ----
the "abandoning" Korea idea will win. In fact, I expect people in the above named social sectors of the US will be co-champions of this idea with the South Korean people.
But if they don't, for some reason, or if some others are able to get out in print and video the recent history, what these groups have a tendancy to say won't matter.
We saw a brief little glimpse of this at the very start of 2003 when most of the US media got half a clue about the anti-Americanism so rampant in 2002 in South Korea.
The only way our politicians will bypass the political difficulties in taking our troops out will be if the American people become energized by the reality of South Korea's power and what they have been doing for far more than a decade....
But I can't see that happening.......
But I do believe with this kind of thing.......with the way the US-SK alliance has been and the environment in East Asia as a whole....
if the wind does change direction.........it will increase to hurricane strength fast.....
What I mean is......there is a boat load or two of very recent history in the US-SK alliance that ---- if the American people really understood -------- would lead to US troops being pulled in a heart beat.....
In short, the best thing South Korea has going for it is the almost complete ignorance of the American people about our committment there.
As long as significant numbers of US politicians, the State Department, academic experts, and the media continue to find it too difficult to "bash" South Korea ----- feeling squeemish about showing anti-Americanism and the nature of the US-SK alliance ----
the "abandoning" Korea idea will win. In fact, I expect people in the above named social sectors of the US will be co-champions of this idea with the South Korean people.
But if they don't, for some reason, or if some others are able to get out in print and video the recent history, what these groups have a tendancy to say won't matter.
We saw a brief little glimpse of this at the very start of 2003 when most of the US media got half a clue about the anti-Americanism so rampant in 2002 in South Korea.
But the media coverage was shallow - not passing beyond the contemporary demonstrations, and the US-SK alliance was firmly protected by the usual crowd of media, academic experts, former State Department and government people, and the US military and Korean government.
And if what was going on throughout most of 2002 couldn't get American society to focus on details in South Korea, I don't know what would.....????....
So to sum up ---- I don't think the right combination of will, determination, and public support will be around to see US troops pull out of South Korea anytime in the near future.
Too many elements will work against it.
So to sum up ---- I don't think the right combination of will, determination, and public support will be around to see US troops pull out of South Korea anytime in the near future.
Too many elements will work against it.