When it comes to policy on South Korea, Donald Trump has long made several points that, when put together, could reduce the Asian nation to an erstwhile ally that hosts no American troops, develops its own nuclear weapons and struggles to save a free trade deal with the U.S.
Previously shrugged off as something warranting no serious thought, these arguments appear to have slowly been unnerving experts -- and presumably policymakers as well -- as Trump looks headed toward the Republican nomination and some polls even suggest he could beat Democratic rival Hillary Clinton and win the White House.
Trump has so far won 996 delegates, about 80 percent of the magic number of 1,237 necessary to win the nomination. He is expected to further solidify the lead should he win 57 delegates up for grabs in the state of Indiana on Tuesday.
"Trump's treatment of America's alliance relationships in the speech is deeply troubling," Evans Revere, a former senior State Department diplomat, said, referring to last week's foreign policy speech in which Trump said allies should pay more for U.S. defense support or defend themselves.
Defense cost-sharing with allies has been one of the highest foreign policy priorities for Trump. In last week's address, Trump renewed accusations that allies are not paying their fair share, saying the U.S. "must be prepared to let these countries defend themselves" unless they pay more.
"We have no choice," he said.
The real-estate tycoon has long made the case for having allies pay more, but the address was seen as carrying more weight than before because it was the first time Trump has outlined his foreign policy priorities in such a formal and refined manner.
Though he made no mention of South Korea, the remark suggested that, if elected, he could pursue U.S. troop withdrawal from the Asian ally unless Seoul agrees to pay more. About 28,500 American troops are stationed in South Korea to deter North Korean aggression, a legacy of the 1950-53 Korean War.
As a way to reduce American security burdens, Trump has even suggested allowing South Korea and Japan to develop their own nuclear weapons for self-defense in the face of growing nuclear and missile threats from the North.
"He regards these alliances as mere transactional 'deals,' ignoring the fact that they are time-tested partnerships that serve the security interests of both America and its partners," said Revere, who currently serves as senior adviser for the Albright Stonebridge Group.
Trump has turned a blind eye to the fact that South Korea has long shared the cost of stationing U.S. forces. Gen. Vincent Brooks, commander of U.S. Forces Korea, said recently that Seoul is shouldering a "significant load" of the cost and it would cost more to keep those troops stationed in the U.S. than it does in Korea.
"In repeating his erroneous arguments in his speech, he has ignored the facts and sent the wrong message to our allies," Revere said. "His implicit threat to end America's alliances contains within it the seed of a policy approach that would end America's leadership and predominance in the international security arena."
A Trump presidency could also upset economic ties between the two countries.
Trump has said he would seek to break or renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and other trade deals. The Korea-U.S. free trade agreement is not expected to be any exception, though he didn't directly mention it.
Moreover, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL), considered a key foreign policy adviser for Trump, has expressed deeply negative views of the agreement, saying it brought no benefits to the U.S. and ended up increasing South Korea's exports to the country.
"We didn't get any increase at all -- virtually none. They had a huge increase to us, and our trade deficit with our allies and friends in South Korea increased 280 percent. This is a serious matter," Sessions said during a Senate plenary meeting last week.
South Korea's Foreign Ministry said it believes the U.S. support for the alliance with Seoul is firm, adding that it is trying to strengthen communication with the Trump camp and other candidates to convey Seoul's position on key foreign policy issues.
Some experts say that despite all such talk, Trump's policy on alliances won't be much different.
"I'm not at all sure that in the end, if Trump is elected, it would mean all that much of a change. The issue of host nation support is hardly new, and it doesn't surprise me that Trump (and others) will continue to advocate greater support from allies," said Alan Romberg, a distinguished fellow at the Stimson Center in Washington.
"But the realities of the security challenges in Asia will, I believe, cause any president to stay with our alliance relationships in the region, not move away from them," he said.
David Straub, associate director for the Korean Studies Program at Stanford University, said it is "understandable that Koreans are concerned about even the slightest possibility of a Trump victory in the presidential election."
"Most Americans are far more concerned about the possibility," he said.
Any effort by Trump to renegotiate the Korea-U.S. FTA or threaten to end the alliance unless the ROK provides more financial support for USFK "would be fiercely opposed by the ROK and by most of the American establishment," he said.
"His notion of supporting the acquisition of nuclear weapons by the ROK and Japan is simply lunatic and has zero support among American leaders," Straub said.
"Given the extreme unlikelihood of Trump becoming president, the best path for Korea is mostly to 'lie low' during the presidential campaign, that is, say as little as possible about Trump and his candidacy and let the American people defeat him," he said. (Yonhap)
Previously shrugged off as something warranting no serious thought, these arguments appear to have slowly been unnerving experts -- and presumably policymakers as well -- as Trump looks headed toward the Republican nomination and some polls even suggest he could beat Democratic rival Hillary Clinton and win the White House.
Trump has so far won 996 delegates, about 80 percent of the magic number of 1,237 necessary to win the nomination. He is expected to further solidify the lead should he win 57 delegates up for grabs in the state of Indiana on Tuesday.
"Trump's treatment of America's alliance relationships in the speech is deeply troubling," Evans Revere, a former senior State Department diplomat, said, referring to last week's foreign policy speech in which Trump said allies should pay more for U.S. defense support or defend themselves.
Defense cost-sharing with allies has been one of the highest foreign policy priorities for Trump. In last week's address, Trump renewed accusations that allies are not paying their fair share, saying the U.S. "must be prepared to let these countries defend themselves" unless they pay more.
"We have no choice," he said.
The real-estate tycoon has long made the case for having allies pay more, but the address was seen as carrying more weight than before because it was the first time Trump has outlined his foreign policy priorities in such a formal and refined manner.
Though he made no mention of South Korea, the remark suggested that, if elected, he could pursue U.S. troop withdrawal from the Asian ally unless Seoul agrees to pay more. About 28,500 American troops are stationed in South Korea to deter North Korean aggression, a legacy of the 1950-53 Korean War.
As a way to reduce American security burdens, Trump has even suggested allowing South Korea and Japan to develop their own nuclear weapons for self-defense in the face of growing nuclear and missile threats from the North.
"He regards these alliances as mere transactional 'deals,' ignoring the fact that they are time-tested partnerships that serve the security interests of both America and its partners," said Revere, who currently serves as senior adviser for the Albright Stonebridge Group.
Trump has turned a blind eye to the fact that South Korea has long shared the cost of stationing U.S. forces. Gen. Vincent Brooks, commander of U.S. Forces Korea, said recently that Seoul is shouldering a "significant load" of the cost and it would cost more to keep those troops stationed in the U.S. than it does in Korea.
"In repeating his erroneous arguments in his speech, he has ignored the facts and sent the wrong message to our allies," Revere said. "His implicit threat to end America's alliances contains within it the seed of a policy approach that would end America's leadership and predominance in the international security arena."
A Trump presidency could also upset economic ties between the two countries.
Trump has said he would seek to break or renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and other trade deals. The Korea-U.S. free trade agreement is not expected to be any exception, though he didn't directly mention it.
Moreover, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL), considered a key foreign policy adviser for Trump, has expressed deeply negative views of the agreement, saying it brought no benefits to the U.S. and ended up increasing South Korea's exports to the country.
"We didn't get any increase at all -- virtually none. They had a huge increase to us, and our trade deficit with our allies and friends in South Korea increased 280 percent. This is a serious matter," Sessions said during a Senate plenary meeting last week.
South Korea's Foreign Ministry said it believes the U.S. support for the alliance with Seoul is firm, adding that it is trying to strengthen communication with the Trump camp and other candidates to convey Seoul's position on key foreign policy issues.
Some experts say that despite all such talk, Trump's policy on alliances won't be much different.
"I'm not at all sure that in the end, if Trump is elected, it would mean all that much of a change. The issue of host nation support is hardly new, and it doesn't surprise me that Trump (and others) will continue to advocate greater support from allies," said Alan Romberg, a distinguished fellow at the Stimson Center in Washington.
"But the realities of the security challenges in Asia will, I believe, cause any president to stay with our alliance relationships in the region, not move away from them," he said.
David Straub, associate director for the Korean Studies Program at Stanford University, said it is "understandable that Koreans are concerned about even the slightest possibility of a Trump victory in the presidential election."
"Most Americans are far more concerned about the possibility," he said.
Any effort by Trump to renegotiate the Korea-U.S. FTA or threaten to end the alliance unless the ROK provides more financial support for USFK "would be fiercely opposed by the ROK and by most of the American establishment," he said.
"His notion of supporting the acquisition of nuclear weapons by the ROK and Japan is simply lunatic and has zero support among American leaders," Straub said.
"Given the extreme unlikelihood of Trump becoming president, the best path for Korea is mostly to 'lie low' during the presidential campaign, that is, say as little as possible about Trump and his candidacy and let the American people defeat him," he said. (Yonhap)
![[INTERVIEW] 'Minari' actor Han Ye-ri recalls why the film is special to her](http://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/4245ae26c4694ac896066ba666ef3726.jpg/dims/resize/178/optimize)
![Earth is suffering [PHOTOS]](http://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/newsV2/images/Y2021021900416_2e5f2c74ca18f.jpg/dims/resize/268/optimize)
