The Death of an Alliance, Part 45: An October Surprise?

[This is an updated post, originally published Saturday morning (22 July 06). An interview with the USFK Commanding general has partially confirmed what it asserts, so I’m supplementing the old post rather than starting a new one.]

Jodi at The Asia Pages appears to be the recipient of some inside information that a dramatic reduction of the U.S.-Korean military welfare state alliance will be announced this fall, which coincides high-level security consultations scheduled for October. According to Jodi’s source, the USFK will not only announce the withdrawal of its ground forces, but most of their equipment. Deep cuts in its air and naval contingents are also likely. A much-reduced USFK would remain under a different name. Jodi’s source — putting two and two together, you get the impression that he’s U.S. military or intel — speculates this will set off a panic in some financial and military circles of South Korean society.

I don’t know enough to vouch for any of the details, but the overall theory seems plausible enough. Read, then wait and see.

====================================================

Update: The wait was not as long as long as I had expected. Here is USFK Commanding General Burwell B. Bell, speaking to the Stars and Stripes:

The top U.S. military commander on the peninsula said U.S. and South Korean officials hope to have a “road map” toward independent military commands here completed by October.

U.S. Army Gen. B.B. Bell, who heads the Combined Forces, U.S. Forces Korea and United Nations commands, said he hopes to have a macro-level road map approved at an October security consultative meeting in Washington, D.C.

“So we’re conducting a range of meetings “¦ in hopes of laying out these road maps,” he said in an interview with Stars and Stripes last week. “I don’t know if we’ll make it “¦ but we’re working on it.

The difficulty is neither drafting a plan nor saying that the nations have agreed to a deadline for setting up independent commands, Bell said. Rather, what’s more difficult, he said, is enacting the plan and meeting the deadline.

I see three ways to translate that: Either both sides have agreed on everything (which would be unprecedented), we’ve agreed with the Roh Administration but not the adults who actually run the government and defend Korea, or we already know what we’re going to do, and the only questions are (a) whether we can pack fast enough, and (b) whether the Koreans can stop us.

He told the Korean National Assembly’s Security Forum on July 13 that officials are considering creating two independent commands that would take advantage of U.S. air and naval powers but place U.S. Forces Korea in a supporting role.

Translation: We’re pulling out our ground forces.

Asked whether the goal of restructuring implied fewer ground soldiers — or additional Air Force or Navy assets on the peninsula — Bell said, “Not at all. We’re not anywhere near that kind of level of fidelity.

Translation: “So we’re pulling out our ground forces?” “I didn’t exactly say that.”

He said his emphasis in the speech on air and naval strengths reflected the reality of U.S. forces on the peninsula, that “quite frankly, today, our most competent, immediate capability is air and naval.

He said South Korea’s army has more than 500,000 active troops; North Korea’s, 600,000 to 700,000.

“The American Army in Korea, what is it? Ten thousand. “¦ The total number of U.S. ground forces in this theater is a little speck compared to the big armies that are facing each other,” Bell said.

I think he’s underestimated the number just a bit. It’s probably closer to 15,000 or 20,000 at the moment. But key to this analysis is that the Pentagon won’t put U.S. soldiers under foreign command.

He said that realistically, U.S. forces “have today an air- and naval-centric capability. It’s very powerful, it is very good, it’s very reliable and it is capable of “¦ bringing enormous military power to bear very quickly.

Translation: You have six months to teach your officers how to call in air strikes.

A key question, he said, is determining how U.S. forces can support an independent South Korean command that would “bear the principal war-fighting burden.

“We’re not even close to defining all that,” he said.

Translation: All I know is that we’re drawing ourselves a road map to Fort Hood. The rest is your problem.

In the Security Forum speech, Bell also stressed the need for a modern air-to-ground training range. He said that lacking such a range in South Korea, he’d “be forced to pursue other approaches” to train U.S. crews.

Asked whether “other approaches” meant moving Air Force crews out of South Korea either temporarily or permanently, Bell declined to provide specifics.

A range requires electronic devices to rate aircrews, Bell said. “You’re not just looking for a splash of water or a big field of dirt somewhere. You’re looking “¦ to score the capabilities of these aircrews.

Bell said officials believed they’d have that type of range soon after South Korea closed the Kooni Range Complex in August 2005. He said he thought it appropriate to remind the National Assembly of this and to emphasize how important he considers it.

“One thing is for sure,” Bell said. “We are not going to allow American aircrews to go into a war, or to propose that they can deter a war, unless they’re trained and ready.

“If I can’t get access to an air-to-ground range, I’m going to have to do something.

Translate that on your own. And here is one prediction I will make with great confidence: the U.S. military will not leave troops deployed in a high-risk foreign position without close-air support.

“Obviously I’m not too worried about Taepodongs landing around here,” he said. “I’m worried about short-range missiles “¦ Scud and Nodong missiles that are built for theater deployment.

Bell said a salvo of such missiles were fired and “all appeared to work pretty well. “¦ We’ve now seen an expression of their readiness to be able to shoot those missiles relatively accurately, at night, in quick succession, effectively.

“That signals that we ought to be able to do something about that, at least in a defensive construct. If there was an argument for a more capable missile defense, they made it very effectively for us. “¦ Until there’s a peace treaty on this peninsula, I think we should be able to defend ourselves against them.

Translation: Some people here really need to pull their heads out of their asses.

What I just have to ask myself is this: how exactly does it work, having U.S. forces stationed in Korea but under a completely separate command from the host-nation forces? What, exactly, is the point of that? Exactly.

0Shares

19 Responses

  1. I expected this to happen but not this year…

    NO and his cronies wanted this badly as afterall NO won by less than 2% margin thanks to flaming up anti-american sentiments using 2 poor girls accidental death.

    To make matters worse, NO and his cronies even subsidizing the violent leftist commie protesters not to mention dragging their feet on PT move must have been one of the nails to the coffin.

    Perhaps the new “right” and GNP’s recent resurgence combined with news of USFK withdrawal and its effect of “psychic” of general population will turn the tide and drive away the 10% PIG Uri supporters like Mihwa.

  2. A big reason for the cutback in the USFK probably has to do with the need for troops in the Middle East. Iraqi leaders are increasingly worried about a civil war. A UK general said that Afghanistan is near anarchy.

    It’s also unnecessary to have a large US ground troop in SK. The ground troops can’t protect SK from NK missiles and rockets anyway. Also, SK has its own ground troops.

    Some Americans think that the USFK has stayed in SK for too long – for 53 years.

  3. I hope it happens! The u.s. troops don\’t know why they are there for the most part. The ones that are extending in Korea, do so to avoid service in the middle east. I saw that in 2003. I was in Iraq 2004. I liked Iraq in 2004 more than I did Korea in 2003! Locked on post either place because of the violence outside. At least in Iraq, I always had an M-16 and loaded mags. I hope the government is as tired of helping the Ungrateful SK as I am. Is it just me, or did the SK public turn on a dime when the north fired those missles. An old WWII vet thanked me at the airport on my way to Iraq, Thats all I ever really wanted to hear. Not one SK has ever thanked me! But at least the ones in camp towns were fun to be around. Thank you An jung-ri. I will miss you folks.

  4. None of what the source said is really new news. Just today General Bell said he wasn’t the war time command issued settled by October and hinted that the US Air Force may be pulled out if a new training range isn’t found for them. If the Air Force goes the ground troops will go with them.

    The US government has struggled with the issue of cutting back troops on the peninsula since the Carter administration, Roh and company has just provided the spark needed for the US government to do so.

    I think Roh and company didn’t actually expect all their demagoging of issues against USFK to actually lead to such a quick response from the US government. I guess you reap what you sow.

  5. Mi-hwa has nailed it. The US really needs well trained combat troops elsewhere. Given Roh’s current policy it must be tempting to flip him the finger and redeploy. But I think cool heads will do nothing while Asia is digesting the new assertive Japan and her deepening military links to the US. Plus the US hasn’t built out Guam yet. When that happens USFK will have a redundant feel to it.

  6. Nixon seemed to be heading toward pulling all troops out but stopped at taking out a huge chunk of them.

    The thing I don’t want to see most is leaving US air assets on the ground but taking out the rest.

    Unless NK were to fold immediately after starting Korean War II (if it ever does), having any GIs on the ground in Korea – like those on an air base – will mean more US troops will be poured back into the South to fight.

    If we are going to do that, then keep troops on the ground ready to fight – and deter Korean War II.

    But, I would prefer no GIs on the ground with the promise of air and sea support coming from outside the peninsula.

  7. Last time there was big USFK withdrwal was when about 20k soldiers from 7th division left Bupyong in 1971 under Nixon doctrine. GREAT honorable president Park vehemently opposed this withdrawal and he was under more duress when Carter (worthless liberal country boy) in 1976 mentioned withdrawing all USFK. Scroll forward 30 years and now the liberal commie sympathizers like NO, PIG Uri and Mihwa who can muster ONLY 10% support are demanding USFK withdrawal.

    MOST ROK CITIZENS DO NOT WANT USFK WITHDRAWAL.

    Here is great source on USFK history from trusty globalsecurity.org (better site than FAS).

    http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/korea-orbat.htm

    By the way, I was born and lived in Bupyong and moved to Yongsan when 7th division left town as my father was ex-KATUSA and worked for USFK. There were much hunger at my school and USFK provided much food relief to poor starving children. Take that liberal commie aholes! US not only helped economic miracle under GREAT president Park but fed the hungry children instead of KILLING them like your midget MURDERER Kim!

  8. Duke, the more I read your posts, the more I respect what you say. I hope if/when the GNP takes power again, they will impliment some “reforms” that address the subversive agenda of the far left. I’m so sick of the crap they’re getting away with. It wouldn’t surprise me if Roh was implicated as a NK agent.

  9. Duke, I agree that most Koreans don’t want the USFK to leave, but I believe most of them also agree with the sentiments in that sign. They want us there to protect them because they can see the financial benefit, but most would prefer that the soldiers spent their entire tours locked down on post, except for shopping tours.

    Things have changed since you left, Duke. We’re a little sick of being treated like this by the people we’ve put our lives on the line to defend.

  10. Mantra:

    The vast majority of Koreans below the age of 65 view the US military, and to a slightly lesser extent the whole of the US relationship with Korea, as a cancer on their society – a cancer they just can’t afford to cut out yet.

    Mantra:

    To Korean society, USFK members are post-modern mercenaries; Mercenaries because they are used but despised at the same time; Post-modern because they don’t make a profit (contrary to what even most pro-USFK Koreans believe).

    Mantra:

    To the radicals and average Korea below 65 years old, the US in Korea is a evil, but to the average Korean – a necessary one.

  11. Joshua,

    It’s sad to see how “destitute” Koreans got little better off in last 20 years thanks to blood of Americans/UN soldiers and they treat Americans, kyopos from China and even from US and refugees from DPRK like crap… Talk about thankless selfish self centered and really insecure “buh run up nun nom dl”. I’m afraid this is bit of “koreaness”…

    And many young liberals think they can defend themselves from DPRK attack? Korean historians kind a rewrote the history of how poorly ROKA did during Korean war. Sure it was lack of good training and not led by good officers but there were reasons why PLA and DPRK army units usually attacked ROKA units and GIs had to come to rescue and prevent wholesale breach in the defense lines. The Korean boys now days are into looking like girls with metrosex look (AKA homo look) is in and out with masculinity. More into music and vanity and brainwashed to perceive DPRK forces as more of liberators. People really think these “pretty boys” will defend ROK? Gag me.

    Maybe even “center” Koreans will wake up when there is financial sell offs in stocks and housing instigated by annoucement of USFK withdrawal.

    I’ve grown up in Bupyong and Yongsan so aware of the base life and vice of “camp followers” and sometimes unfair treatment of locals by bunch of hormone pumped drunk teenage boys but this is no different than what local Korean boys act anyway. It’s just that liberal Korean TV media plays up any issues out of proportion.

  12. Kevin,

    Thanks for the kind words. My concern is whether GNP can hold itself up as 1 party and win next prez election in Dec 2007. One and half year is long time in ROK politics and recent infighting among GNP is disturbing. It’s possible that the next prez election is split between GNP, split-GNP, new party led by ex PM Koh, DJ’s old fart party and newly revived PIG Uri. In this scenario, it’s possible for PIGs to win again. Five more years to totally destroy ROK and hand it over to MURDERER Kim. Scary indeed…

    As for NO and PIG Uri – they’re puppets and agents of sugar daddy MURDERER Kim one way or another. Thank god that people like Mihwa/NO/PIG Uri for now only can garner 10% approval.

  13. I’ve grown up in Bupyong and Yongsan so aware of the base life and vice
    of “camp followers” and sometimes unfair treatment of locals by bunch
    of hormone pumped drunk teenage boys but this is no different than what
    local Korean boys act anyway. It’s just that liberal Korean TV media
    plays up any issues out of proportion.

    Duke nailed it.

    Yes, some of our guys drink too much and act like thugs (just like some Koreans). What irritated me is that when I’d try to prosecute these asshole soldiers, the Korean victims and witnesses would always refuse to testify, especially if the soldier had a smart lawyer who’d explained the importance of a cash settlement and sent the soldier off to see the SOFA rep, who’d broker the deal.

    After I went over to the defense, that smart lawyer was me. I went one better. I’d always find the Korean victims and insist that my client apologized to them in person, unless doing so would prejudice his legal rights in the US system (in such cases, it might have been malpractice). My clients were usually very genuinely remorseful, and I recall being present when one, who had taken an ill-fated drunken joyride in a Bongo truck, was literally in tears as he apologized (thankfully, the damage was minimal). As a result of that, his sincere remorse, his good progress in A.A., and the fact that the soldier’s performance was otherwise outstanding, his punishment was light. The Korean owner of the truck was a mensch about the whole thing.

    In that case, I may have been too successful. There was another identical crime in the very same platoon two months later — the only two such incidents I encountered in my entire four years in the ROK. The platoon sergeant and the squad leader were absolutely superb, funny, smart guys, and completely copied my strategy from the first incident. It worked just as well the next time.

    Lesson: an apology goes a long way in Korea.

    In some cases, the victims would even sign statements acknowledging the apology and offering forgiveness.

    Win-win….

  14. Joshua,

    Yep, I think maybe it’s only in Korea “cash justice” where good old cold CASH settles the “score” between victim and perpetrator and we’re not talking about petty crime sometimes. Sad really. Both parties work out the “amount” of damage or often “days at hospital” monetary formula then VOILA – settled with cash and handshake and at time insincere apology. Gotta be tough for prosecutors…

    And let’s not start the revising the SOFA BS liberal commies bring up.

    PS – I had to settle for beating up a real ahole in a “dabang turned bar at night time” in Kangnam residential area. This ahole deserved a good beating from me for making fun of me for being kyopo and trying to grab my bar GF snd telling us he was a “big shot TV actor” – he was an actor but not big shot. I think he was being coward and allowed me to beat the shit out of him in order to call the cops (I bolted with my bar GF to her pad to spend blissful night) and demand cash. Anyway, cops came afer my bar GF and I had to return to states so sent my cousin to settle with this SOB. Sure it was expensive but it was nice to beat the coward up too. 🙂

  15. Yep the settlement charade after bar brawl in Korea with the jerk I managed to kick ass despite being drunk… Luckly my punches missed this pseudo actor’s face. I guess I fell down while kicking the jerk and landed on my side with a bruise. It was used during “negotiation” that I got hurt too. Advice from cousin who had history of settling with other drunks in bar brawls. Nice part was that my cousin did the apology in my behalf with my bar GF since I returned to states. Owner of bar was on my side as my cousin was “dangol” at the bar and she couldn’t stand the SOB for acting big that he was TV star even though he was not. So with 2 female witnesses on my side plus a bruise, I got off with paying just few $100 bills plus a big bar tab to get the SOB drunk again with my cousin during cash settlement negotiation.

    Man, I miss partying in Seoul now. 🙂

  16. Sorry to interrupt Duke’s Auld Lang Syne, American Men in Asia stories are funny sometimes.
    If these stores of immenint USFK bugging out are true, I wonder who the Americans have told about our leaving?
    Japan? China? ROk? After all, America leaving the Asia mainland is uncommon.
    China would be elated to hear it, I wonder if that is why they voted in the UN on the sanctions resolution?

  17. Back to the USFK withdrawal – good observation changehappens.

    Monumental indeed as USFK withdrawal from Korean peninsula means departure of US military presence in mainland Asia since around boxer rebellion in China.

    PRC would be elated to drive out Americans along with midget Kim but be careful what you wish for as resurgence of Japan’s military with better tactical capabilities vs defense orientation under the ausipicion of US not to mention with allied with US to prevent PRC commie’s influence beyond it’s brown waters may turn out to be worse nightmare. USN, JDN and ROCN will certainly whip PLAN and control the sea channels thruout Asia to Indian ocean.