[USFK Forums] 1) South Korea-U.S. Alliance Faces Challenges 1) Clinton Clarifies

[C. Y. Lee]

[Uploaded by C. Y. Lee, Monday, October 31, 2005] The complete title should read: 1) South Korea-U.S. Alliance Faces Challenges 2) Clinton Clarifies Alliance Remarks.

S. Korea-US Alliance Faces Challenges

The Korea Times, Sunday, October 30, 2005

By Moon Chung-in

Yonsei University Professor Moon Chung-in

South Korea and the United States celebrated the golden jubilee of their bilateral alliance two years ago. But the alliance, often viewed as one of the most successful in modern world history, is facing new challenges that place its future in jeopardy. This time, the sound and fury are surfacing mostly from the U.S., centering on the historical meaning of the alliance and the efficacy of its continuation.

What triggered a chorus of outrage from the U.S. was the demand by a few radical Korean youths to have Gen. Douglas MacArthur’s statue in Inchon torn down, accusing him of being a ``war criminal.’’ MacArthur, who engineered a decisive victory during the (1951-1953) Korean War through his historic Inchon landing, has long been cherished as a symbol of American security commitment as well as glorifying the U.S. role in defending South Korea from a communist North Korean invasion. To assault his statue is to deny the history of the alliance and American sacrifice. Even liberal Sen. Hilary Clinton is critical of the incident, lamenting that South Koreans are suffering from ``historical amnesia.’’

More serious is the shifting American perception of the merits of the alliance. Having North Korea as a common enemy bound Washington and Seoul together through close military ties, but recent inter-Korean rapprochement amidst the North Korean nuclear crisis has raised critical concerns on the future of the bilateral alliance. ``If you need our help, please tell us who your enemy is,’’ queried U.S. Congressman Henry Hyde.

American Perception Shift

Doug Bandow of the Cato Institute argues that there is no need to continue the bilateral alliance because South Korea exhibits an ``ostentatious popular hostility towards the U.S. and official appeasement of North Korea,’’ even suggesting ``an amicable separation, rather than a nasty divorce.’’

Dennis P. Halpin, an influential congressional aide, goes further by saying that “the body, the alliance, is laid out in the front of the room for all to view… All that remain is for the family to take a final view of the body before the undertaker then seals the coffin.’’ In his view, a ``siren’s song of romantic ethnic reconciliation’’ is winning the hearts of South Koreans and undermining the alliance.

The two accusations of historical amnesia and the primacy of a Korean nation over the alliance are not groundless, but are blown out of proportion. South Koreans have not forgotten American sacrifices and contributions, and the hostility toward the U.S. and appeasement of North Korea is unfounded. More importantly, the alliance is still healthy enough not to warrant an early epitaph.

Were it not for American blood and the alliance, today’s security and prosperity in South Korea would never have materialized. The alliance with the U.S. and forward presence of its troops have assured South Korea of its security through a credible military deterrence against North Korea, and American economic assistance, cooperation and policy guidance proved to be one of the most vital factors in shaping the South Korean economic miracle.

American Soft Power

American soft power also matters. South Koreans as a whole strongly endorse and emulate the universal values embodied in American culture and civilization. The quest for liberty, human rights and democracy, the rush to the U.S. for education, and the dominance of American intellectual paradigms in South Korean academic circles all indicate the country’s willingness to learn about and appreciate American values and aspirations. South Koreans may oppose certain U.S. foreign policies, but this should not be seen as a denial of and opposition to the U.S.

South Korea has also been a faithful ally of the U.S., South Korean soldiers fought alongside Americans in Vietnam. It has not only dispatched troops to Afghanistan and Iraq to support American causes, but has also joined American efforts to fight global terrorism.

But it should be remembered that as with the U.S., South Korea is a pluralistic society, and its people share diverse perceptions of the United States. ``Panmi,’’ Korean for ``anti-American,’’ is only one aspect of the national psyche, as there are, in fact, a variety of South Korean positions toward the United States, ranging from ``chinmi (pro-American)’’ and ``sungmi (worship America)’’ to ``hyommi (loathing America).’’ Those who attempted to tear down the MacArthur statue represent only a tiny segment of the population. A great majority of South Koreans still remember the U.S. role as a savior and remain grateful.

The South Korea-U.S. alliance is undergoing a major realignment, and differences have emerged in the process, but it is far from being a corpse awaiting interment. The alliance faces a major challenge regarding a common threat perception where South Korea and the U.S. have shown a growing divergence. For Washington, a nuclear North Korea with severe human rights violations is a clear and present threat.

Seoul also regards the North as an enemy, but at the same time perceives the North as a counterpart with which to realize peaceful co-existence and national unification. Whereas treating the North as the main enemy can perpetuate military tension and confrontation on the Korean Peninsula, promotion of inter-Korean exchanges, cooperation, and reconciliation can compromise its military alliance with the U.S. Escaping from this horn of dilemma is not a simple task.

No alliance can last without corresponding social and political support in both countries. This is another challenge to the alliance, as democratization, the advent of the post-Cold War ambiance, and inter-Korean rapprochement have weakened social and political support for the alliance in South Korea. The same can be said of the U.S., as a major realignment of the American social template and military posture following Sept. 11 has considerably diminished its traditional support of the alliance.

The divergent threat perception and weakened social and political support can certainly endanger the future of the bilateral alliance, but mutually complementary interests and institutional inertia serve as positive factors for sustaining the alliance.

The overall strategic landscape in Northeast Asia necessitates South Korea-U.S. security cooperation. Relinquishing its alliance with the U.S. will leave South Korea with a profound security dilemma. Neither banding with China or Japan nor realigning itself as a middle power with strengthened military force can be viable security options for South Korea. Maintaining an alliance with the U.S. seems to be the ideal choice. For Washington, the alliance with South Korea is still valuable because it is vital to maintaining the status quo under its leadership. American abandonment of South Korea and the strengthening of ties with Japan would only pressure South Korea to ally with China. Given the strategic uncertainty of Northeast Asia, with the rise of China and Japan’s transformation into a normal state, such developments would certainly not align with American national interests.

Additionally, the institutional inertia built by the half-century alliance should not be taken lightly, as the South Korea-U.S. alliance is an extremely well structured one. The Mutual Defense Treaty, joint military maneuvers, the presence of American military bases in South Korea, regularized security consultative meetings, ROK-US Combined Forces Command and U.S. operational control over South Korean forces during wartime underscore its depth and cohesiveness.

No alliance, with the possible exception of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, has such a degree of institutionalized cooperation. Tearing down such an alliance would be neither easy nor desirable.

Mixed Outlook of Alliance

The South Korea-U.S. alliance appears to have a mixed outlook. Whereas mutual interests and institutional inertia favor its continuing cohesiveness, threat perception and social support point in an opposite direction. The future of the alliance will depend on how we reconcile the two conflicting dimensions.

There are additional agendas that can influence the future course of the alliance. Potential trade-offs between South Korea’s pursuit of military self-reliance and American security commitments could pose another challenge. Return of wartime operational control to Seoul within the Combined Force Command structure will not be an easy task either, warranting a skillful coordination. Expediting the process of building an inter-Korean peace regime will also entail formidable tasks such as the dismantling the armistice regime as well as realigning the American command structure in the South. The doctrine of American strategic flexibility and South Korea’s fear of entrapment in unwanted regional conflicts could become another source of discord.

Ultimately, an alliance is an instrument for enhancing national interests. Allies’ national interests cannot remain identical, but rather change over time depending on domestic, regional and international contexts. It should be emphasized here that the differences should not be used as an excuse for undermining the alliance of 50 years. They can be narrowed through diplomacy and mutual consultation. That is what diplomacy among allies is all about.

But one thing is clear. Seoul and Washington may not be able to sustain the current form of alliance, as a threat-based alliance cannot last long. In the medium- to long-run, the current military alliance needs to be transformed into a comprehensive alliance based on such common values as a market economy and liberal democracy.

As in Europe, the comprehensive alliance can pave the way to a collective defense system, multilateral security cooperation, and ultimately a community of security that can assure a collective security system. South Korea and U.S. need to plan a positive transition and resuscitate the alliance by looking toward an entirely new horizon that goes beyond an exclusive bilateral alliance system.

Moon Chung-in is a professor of political science at Yonsei University in Seoul.

10-30-2005 22:15

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Clinton Clarifies Alliance Remarks

The Korea Times, Sunday, October 30, 2005

WASHINGTON (Yonhap) _ Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-New York), who earlier this week seemed to suggest that South Koreans had forgotten the role of the United States in their country’s development, explained Saturday that she was only emphasizing the importance of bilateral relations.

In a statement sent to the South Korean Embassy here, the senator’s office said Clinton ``continues to believe that a strong relationship between the United States and South Korea is critical to meeting the challenges posed by North Korea and other issues.’’

On Tuesday, during a confirmation hearing for Gen. Burwell B. Bell, nominated as commander of U.S. Forces Korea, Clinton said the lack of understanding between the two nations bordered on ``historical amnesia.’’

The changing bilateral ties have to do with ``their (South Koreans’) understanding of the importance of our position there and what we have done over so many decades to provide them the freedom that they have enjoyed to develop the economy that is now providing so many benefits for South Koreans,’’ the senator said.

``I think there is a lack of understanding and a sense of historical amnesia,’’ she said, urging that the people of the two countries recognize ``what the stakes are.’’

The remarks were played up by the South Korean press, who took them as the senator’s criticism of current Seoul-Washington relations.

``At a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing... Senator Clinton emphasized the importance of a strong U.S.-South Korea relationship. She urged General Bell, if confirmed, to reach out to the South Korean people in order to ensure that this relationship remains strong,’’ the statement from Clinton’s office said.

10-30-2005 18:31