What Cheongung-II's success reveals about Korea's defense industry
Chun In-bum
The ongoing conflict between Iran, Israel and the United States has now entered its third week. The fighting is not confined to one battlefield. Iranian missiles and drones have struck targets across the region, affecting shipping lanes, energy infrastructure and several Gulf states.
One particular episode has drawn unusual attention in South Korea.
When Iranian missiles and drones were launched toward the United Arab Emirates, reports indicated that over 90 percent of the incoming threats were intercepted by UAE air defenses. Among those defensive systems were South Korean medium-range surface-to-air missiles: the Cheongung-II also known as M-SAM. Cheonggung means "Heaven’s Arrow."
Unconfirmed reports claim that approximately 60 Cheongung-II interceptors were launched with an accuracy rate approaching 96 percent. If accurate, this would represent a remarkable operational success.
For many South Koreans, this moment has become a source of national pride.
South Korean defense exports have been surging in recent years. Korean K2 tanks, K9 self-propelled artillery, armored vehicles and FA-50 light combat aircraft are now serving in multiple countries across Europe, the Middle East and Asia. The Cheongung system’s apparent success only strengthens the perception that South Korea has entered the ranks of major defense industrial powers.
Indeed, the UAE’s decision to purchase an additional 30 Cheongung-II systems appears to confirm confidence in Korean technology.
Yet success can sometimes obscure the challenges that lie beneath it.
South Korea’s defense industry has made extraordinary progress, but several structural obstacles remain. If these are not addressed now, they could limit Korea’s long-term strategic autonomy and industrial resilience.
Tech dependency
The first challenge is technological dependence. Many of South Korea’s most successful weapons systems incorporate significant foreign technology. Engines, sensors, semiconductor components and specialized materials often originate from allied countries, particularly the United States and Europe.
This cooperation has been beneficial. Without it, Korea’s defense industry could not have advanced as rapidly as it did.
However, cooperation and dependence are not the same thing.
Reliance on foreign technology exposes Korean defense exports to political constraints such as export licensing and third-party approval requirements. In several cases, Korean arms deals have required approval from foreign governments because certain components were not produced domestically.
In a world where supply chains are increasingly weaponized and geopolitical competition is intensifying, such dependencies can become strategic vulnerabilities.
The practical solution is clear: South Korea must prioritize the domestic development of core technologies.
This does not mean abandoning international cooperation. Rather, it means identifying critical technologies — propulsion systems, radar arrays, guidance systems, semiconductor chips and advanced materials — and investing aggressively in domestic research and development.
South Korea has already demonstrated its ability to achieve this when necessary. The rapid growth of the semiconductor industry is one example. A similar national effort directed toward defense technologies would significantly reduce strategic dependency.
Culture of zero failure
The second challenge is subtler but perhaps even more important.
It is cultural. South Korea’s bureaucratic and corporate culture often operates under an implicit rule: Failure is unacceptable.
In many government organizations and defense procurement programs, failure carries severe professional consequences. As a result, officials and engineers are incentivized to avoid risk rather than pursue innovation.
This approach produces reliability in the short term, but it can suppress experimentation, slow technological breakthroughs and discourage bold engineering.
Innovation, particularly in advanced military technology, rarely occurs without repeated trial and error. The United States, Israel and even China have built their defense industries on a willingness to experiment, fail, learn and try again.
South Korea must move in this direction.
A practical solution would be the establishment of dedicated experimental defense programs insulated from traditional bureaucratic evaluation metrics. Programs similar to the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) allow engineers and scientists to pursue high-risk, high-reward innovations without the fear that an unsuccessful project will end their careers.
South Korea has the intellectual talent and industrial capability to do the same. What it needs is an institutional environment that allows risk.
Scale and sustainability
A third challenge concerns scale.
South Korea’s defense industry has grown rapidly, but much of its recent success has come from a small number of major export deals. Sustaining this momentum will require expanding production capacity, strengthening supply chains and ensuring long-term maintenance support for overseas customers.
Defense exports are not simply about selling equipment. They involve decades of logistical support, training, spare parts, upgrades and political relationships.
Countries that purchase Korean weapons systems must be confident that South Korea can support them for decades.
This means Korea must continue investing in manufacturing infrastructure, global maintenance networks and defense diplomacy.
Despite these challenges, South Korea’s achievements remain remarkable. A country that once depended entirely on foreign weapons has become one of the world’s most dynamic defense exporters in just a few decades.
This transformation reflects the discipline, technical talent and determination of Korean engineers, soldiers and policymakers. But success should not lead to complacency.
The world is entering an era of strategic competition and technological disruption. Artificial intelligence, autonomous systems, cyberwarfare and space technologies will shape the future battlefield.
If South Korea wishes to remain at the forefront of defense innovation, it must address its remaining vulnerabilities now: technological dependence, cultural resistance to risk and the need for sustainable industrial scale.
The reported success of the Cheongung-II missile system in the UAE is encouraging. It demonstrates that Korean defense technology can perform under real combat conditions.
Yet the true measure of success will not be a single interception rate or a single export contract.
The real test will be whether South Korea can transform today’s momentum into a self-sustaining, innovative and strategically independent defense industry.
That is the challenge ahead. And it is a challenge South Korea is fully capable of meeting.
Retired Lt. Gen. Chun In-bum is the former commander of the Republic of Korea Army Special Warfare Command.