 |
| Gettyimagesbank |
This article is the fifth in a series about the 2022 presidential election candidates' campaign pledges. In this article, their pledges for Korea-US relations are examined and compared. ―ED
Lee calls for immediate OPCON transfer; Yoon says wait until South Korea is ready
By Nam Hyun-woo
 |
Based on this belief, Lee has yet to show a clear stance regarding questions such as what his choice will be, if elected, in case the nation is forced to choose between the United States and China _ just as when South Korea faced mounting pressure from both countries' opposing calls over the deployment of a U.S. Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) battery years ago.
Meanwhile, his rival Yoon Suk-yeol, the presidential candidate of the main opposition People Power Party (PPP), has maintained a rather a clear stance on diplomatic priorities amid the U.S.-China rivalry.
He reiterated that the South Korea-U.S. alliance became significantly impaired during the Moon Jae-in government, and if elected, he would fix it to make it stronger than ever before. When asked during a TV debate weeks ago to list the leaders he would meet in sequence, he named the United States first and China later.
On top of the South Korea-U.S. alliance, the two leading candidates share little in their positions on other key issues about bilateral relations.
The following are comparisons between the U.S. policies of DPK presidential candidate Lee and PPP candidate Yoon.
 |
South Korea-US alliance
The DPK's Lee stresses pragmatism in foreign policy as the core value of his diplomatic stance, distinguishing himself from President Moon Jae-in, who has been accused of prioritizing South Korea's relations with China and North Korea over other bilateral relations.
Lee underscores the importance of upgrading the current Seoul-Washington alliance to "a comprehensive" one. His remarks mean that the alliance should not only cover areas of security or the military, but should expand further to other fields, such as advanced technologies and industrial partnerships.
In a Feb. 23 contribution to Foreign Affairs magazine, Lee cited the joint statement between President Moon Jae-in and his U.S. counterpart Joe Biden in May of last year as an example of his idea.
"The joint statement went far beyond security priorities and covered diverse issues such as the response to COVID-19, climate change, and even space exploration," Lee wrote. "The two countries already enjoy a relationship of remarkable breadth and depth, which will continue to be upgraded in the coming years."
 |
| Ruling Democratic Party of Korea presidential candidate Lee Jae-myung sings during his campaign in Chungju, North Chungcheong Province, Thursday. Yonhap |
Wi Sung-lac, former South Korean ambassador to Russia who is currently in charge of foreign policy at the Lee Jae-myung camp, said that the candidate views the joint statement as a case showing "the current and future relations between the two countries."
"There are critics, especially the main opposition candidate, saying that South Korea-U.S. relations turned soured during the Moon administration, but Lee does not agree," Wi told The Korea Times. "He believes the joint statement between Moon and Biden in May well reflects the current and future relations between the two countries. By carrying agreements in the statement, the alliance can evolve into a comprehensive one."
Wi said Lee's idea on policies toward the U.S. is largely in line with that of Moon, but the candidate will seek to expand the fields of bilateral cooperation.
"If Lee wins the election, he is anticipated to expand the areas of cooperation, such as technologies related to the Fourth Industrial Revolution and new economic order," Wi said.
 |
| Main opposition People Power Party presidential candidate Yoon Suk-yeol speaks during an endorsement event at the National Assembly, Thursday. Joint Press Corps |
On the other hand, the PPP's Yoon believes Seoul's relations with Washington "collapsed" under the Moon administration, and the alliance should be "rebuilt" strong enough to "revive trust between the allies.
During a TV debate on Feb. 3, Yoon stressed "South Korea's relations with the U.S. and Japan had collapsed under the DPK administration's submissive stance to China and North Korea, so the top priority is rebuilding the alliance with the U.S."
Kim Sung-han, a professor at Korea University and former vice foreign minister who is in charge of diplomatic policy at Yoon's camp, cited former U.S. Forces Korea (USFK) Commanding General Robert Abrams' Dec. 25 interview with Voice of America as an example showing why Yoon thinks the alliance has collapsed.
"In the interview, the former commander said he has been requesting the South Korean military for the past two years that Washington and Seoul should develop new operational war plans (OPLANs) to account for military aggression by Beijing, but Seoul did not respond properly," Kim told The Korea Times.
"Adding to this, the allies have not been conducting proper joint military exercises for years, and there also seems to be differences in the two countries' perspectives on President Moon's proposal to declare a formal end to the Korean War," Kim said.
"The reason is Moon's obsession over appeasement policies involving North Korea and subsequent policies leaning toward China. This caused serious damage to the South Korea-U.S. alliance. This is why we are calling for a 'rebuilding' of the alliance, because the damage is too serious to be restored."
In his Feb. 8 contribution to Foreign Affairs magazine, Yoon also noted, "A foreign policy tailored mostly to improving relations with North Korea has allowed Seoul's role in the global community to shrink."
 |
| Armored vehicles are seen at Camp Casey, a U.S. military base in Dongducheon, Gyeonggi Province, in this Aug. 10 file photo. Korea Times photo by Bae Woo-han |
Yoon believes the two countries should rebuild their mutual trust through strong military ties, and then move on to pursue a comprehensive alliance in various fields, such as semiconductors, batteries and artificial intelligence.
"The key to the Seoul-Washington alliance is their military alliance," Kim said. "When you see DPK candidate Lee's foreign policies, he also stresses the comprehensive alliance, but when you look inside his pledges, the expansions he claims are not based on solid military ties. We believe the core value of the alliance is military, and an alliance having an untrained army is meaningless."
US-China rivalry
While stressing pragmatism in his foreign policies, Lee seeks to exploit the current U.S.-China rivalry as an opportunity for South Korea's greater national interest, but has been relatively unclear about his diplomatic priority.
On Aug. 21, he commented: "The U.S. is our only ally and China is our strategic partner. There is no reason for us to choose a side and limit our capability by ourselves. Competent diplomacy is making the two countries choose us."
He also believes that excessive antagonism toward China is not helpful for the alliance with the U.S., citing Beijing's cooperation in persuading North Korea to drop its nuclear programs.
Lee wrote in his contribution to Foreign Affairs magazine, "South Koreans have good reason to be concerned by Beijing's increasingly assertive behavior. But overt antagonism serves neither South Korea's national interests nor its alliance with Washington."
The PPP's Yoon, meanwhile, has been rather clear. He called for a stronger South Korea-U.S. alliance, saying Seoul should enhance its military or strategic ties with Washington to create a greater deterrence against North Korea's threat and take a firm stand with the U.S. to counter China's assertion.
Showing this stance is Yoon's pledge to enhance the military exercises between South Korea and the U.S., such as the annual command post exercises and combined field training exercises. He also promised to deploy carriers, nuclear submarines and other strategic assets in South Korea, as well as deploying additional U.S. THAAD batteries on his home soil.
South Korea's 2017 deployment of a THAAD battery in Seongju, North Gyeongsang Province triggered China's strong opposition and economic retaliation, such as shutting down South Korean retailers in China or banning Chinese tourists from visiting South Korea.
Also, Yoon promised to restore the "Kill Chain," a South Korea-U.S. preemptive strike system to more effectively counter potential nuclear threats posed by the North.
 |
| U.S. President Joe Biden speaks during the Quad summit at the White House, Sept. 24. Seated clockwise from left, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Biden, Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison, Secretary of State Antony Blinken and then-Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga. AP-Yonhap |
The candidates are also showing differences in the debate over the Quadrilateral Strategic Dialogue (Quad), which is a U.S.-led multilateral network widely viewed as a mechanism to keep an assertive China in check.
The DPK's Lee refrains from using the term of "joining" Quad or Quad Plus (inclusion of other countries), but has said that he intends to cooperate with member countries over its agendas _ COVID-19 pandemic, climate change and emerging technology.
"The three main agendas of Quad are the field in which South Korea can cooperate with Quad members, and the candidate is also interested in active cooperation over those agendas," Wi said. "Lee also believes there will be additional areas for cooperation."
On the other hand, the PPP's Yoon has a clearer stance _ joining Quad's working groups of vaccine, climate change and emerging technologies to enable functional cooperation, and seek official entry as a Quad Plus member if the member countries open the door.
"We oftentimes try to find security and strategic traits in Quad, like an alliance, but it is a forum for non-traditional regional security issues, which is far from a military alliance," Kim said. "Since South Korea is now in Quad's vaccine working group, we seek to join the working groups of climate change and emerging technologies to prove the country's capability, and seek an entry as a member country."
Along with Quad, Yoon also pledged that he will pursue Seoul playing host to the Summit for Democracy, which was held by U.S. President Joe Biden in December last year and was widely viewed as a meeting to counter China's growing influence.
 |
| U.S. Forces Korea Commanding General Paul LaCamera, right, and his predecessor Gen. Robert Abrams, second from right, attend the former's inauguration ceremony at Camp Humphreys in Pyeongtaek, Gyeonggi Province, in this July 2 file photo. Joint Press Corp |
OPCON transfer
The rival candidates are also showing clear differences in how they view the debate over Seoul taking over wartime operational control (OPCON) of its forces from the United States.
The DPK's Lee believes OPCON should be transferred as promptly as possible.
On Dec. 30, Lee said, "OPCON should be transferred as soon as possible and it is important to finish assessment quickly based on a mutually agreed processes." Wi also said it is necessary to finish the assessment process and Seoul should promptly take over the OPCON of the South Korean military.
The OPCON transfer is a subject of deep-seated tension between Seoul and Washington.
In 2014, Seoul and Washington agreed upon a conditions-based OPCON transition, and Moon had sought to complete the task before his term ends in May 2022, although the plan has fallen through due to a lack of adequate assessment.
Abrams, the former USFK commander, has expressed his view that South Korea's military capabilities are not sufficient for an OPCON transition, and his successor Gen. Paul LaCamera also said the OPCON plan needs to be adjusted.
Yoon's stance is closer to the position held by the USFK chiefs.
On Dec. 1, Yoon said the OPCON transition is "a great principle that should be realized ultimately," but it should be transferred when Seoul is capable of leading combined missions, and has enough reconnaissance and missile defense capabilities, as well as a suitable inter-Korean environment.
"One of the reasons why Yoon is reiterating the importance of reconnaissance assets is because it decides early responses in case of a full-scale war, and this still requires dire efforts," Kim said. "Also, the current inter-Korean situation of North Korea firing missiles is raising doubts over the prompt transfer of OPCON. So we believe there is no need to preemptively set a time to take over control."
