Lee Hyo-jin covers the Bank of Korea, the banking industry and broader financial news. Her previous beats include foreign affairs, North Korea and general reporting on Korean society.
Long way to go for Korea's nuclear-powered sub despite Trump's nod
A 3,600-ton-class naval submarine, the first of three Changbogo-III Batch-II class submarines, is seen at shipbuilder Hanwha Ocean's dockyard on Geoje Island in South Gyeongsang Province, Oct. 21, a day before its launch ceremony. Courtesy of Republic of Korea Navy
By Lee Hyo-jin
Analysts say Seoul must guard its interests amid Washington's shipyard revival drive
Despite what seemed like a breakthrough at last week’s Korea-U.S. summit, questions linger over Seoul’s plan to build its first nuclear-powered submarine, with crucial details yet to be worked out with Washington.
Ironing out the technical and political details between the two sides may be a formidable challenge, analysts say.
Following President Lee Jae Myung's summit with U.S. President Donald Trump on Oct. 29, the U.S. leader approved Korea's plan to build nuclear-powered submarines, signaling a possible revision of the Korea-U.S. nuclear accord.
According to Seoul officials, Lee asked Trump to approve the supply of nuclear fuel for the submarines. Under the current Korea-U.S. nuclear cooperation agreement, Seoul is prohibited from enriching uranium or reprocessing spent nuclear fuel for military use.
Trump, however, stopped short of addressing the fuel issue directly during the meeting. Instead, he announced through social media the next day that he had approved the construction of the nuclear-powered submarines in the United States. This appeared to be an unexpected development for Seoul officials.
"South Korea will be building its Nuclear Powered Submarine in the Philadelphia Shipyards, right here in the good ol’ U.S.A. Shipbuilding in our Country will soon be making a BIG COMEBACK," Trump wrote on social media.
Choi Il, a retired Navy captain who now leads the Submarine Research Institute, a Korean defense think tank, said he viewed Trump’s remarks more as a political statement than a formal policy decision.
"The actual implementation of the submarine development would require approval from U.S. Congress and a technical review by the U.S. Department of Defense," Choi said. "At this point, it remains unclear whether U.S. authorization would cover only fuel supply or extend to the transfer of nuclear-propulsion technology."
He added that from Washington's perspective, the greater significance of the project lies in having the submarines built at the Philly Shipyard, which is owned by Korea’s Hanwha Ocean.
"For Trump, the move seems less about regional security, and more about leveraging the project to revive America’s shipbuilding industry," Choi said.
Hanwha Philly Shipyard in Philadelphia, Pa., July 20. Courtesy of Hanwha Ocean
Even if negotiations between the two countries proceed smoothly, experts say it will take at least a decade for the submarines to be built.
A conventional diesel-powered submarine typically takes eight to 10 years from the start of the project to deployment. Nuclear-powered submarines require the additional establishment of complex infrastructure for handling, storing and disposing of nuclear fuel.
Examples abroad offer reasons for skepticism about U.S. commitment in the long term. The AUKUS pact among the U.S., the United Kingdom and Australia — which aims to provide Canberra with nuclear-powered submarines — has been mired in delays, as the U.S. Navy struggles to maintain production for its own submarine fleet.
Some critics point out that the Philly Shipyard lacks both the facilities and workforce to build military submarines. It was designed for commercial ship construction, meaning it would require massive investment and recruitment before nuclear-powered submarine production could even begin.
Rep. Yu Yong-weon, a defense expert from the main opposition People Power Party, said the submarine should be built at a domestic shipyard rather than at the Philly Shipyard.
"Korea already possesses sufficient capability to build nuclear-powered submarines domestically. It would be most reasonable to carry out the construction here, utilizing our own industrial base and defense capabilities in design, technology and safety management," the lawmaker said during a press conference Monday.