Seoul pushes back against US signal for OPCON transfer delay
Gen. Xavier Brunson, commander of U.S. Forces Korea, speaks at a seminar hosted by the Gold Institute for International Strategy in Washington, D.C., Wednesday (local time). Yonhap
USFK commander's remarks raise questions over military readiness, handover timeline
The South Korean military said Thursday it would stick to an existing agreement on conditions for wartime operational control (OPCON) transfer from Washington to Seoul, despite a warning from the top U.S. commander in Korea that evolving security threats require new standards.
It showed discomfort over U.S. Forces Korea (USFK) Commander Gen. Xavier Brunson’s remarks on the need to change standards and conditions for the transition because “the transfer would never be possible” under the existing standards. The military said it has not decided whether to accept any new conditions proposed by the U.S.
“The principle that OPCON will be transferred once the conditions mutually agreed upon by South Korea and the United States are met remains unchanged,” ministry spokesperson Chung Binna said at a briefing.
Defense Minister Kang Shin-chul said Thursday that Seoul had already conveyed its concerns to the U.S. side over Bronson’s remarks.
“We have already conveyed our position on that matter,” Kang said during a National Assembly audit, responding to a question from Rep. Son Sol of the Jinbo Party on whether Seoul should lodge a strong protest.
“Although he [Brunson] is speaking from a military perspective, we are concerned about the broader implications of his remarks and have made our position clear,” Kang said.
He added that the three main conditions governing the OPCON transfer remain unchanged, although assessment of how those conditions are met could vary.
It said the two countries are closely consulting on the transfer issue according to the Conditions-based Operational Control Transition Plan (COTP), which was agreed upon in 2015.
The allies have been verifying South Korea’s capabilities in three stages under the COTP, and Seoul hopes to complete verification of the second stage, Full Operational Capability (FOC) of a South Korean-led combined command, this year. South Korea aims to retake OPCON by 2028, or even earlier, while Brunson has shown more caution, citing the first quarter of 2029 as the potential target year.
The ministry’s response came after Brunson said on Wednesday (local time) during the Indo-Pacific Summit hosted by the Gold Institute for International Strategy in Washington, D.C., "Because the conditions have changed, because we've changed our plan, we have new standards which we have to uphold."
Pointing to North Korea’s recent missile launches, he added, “A cursory glance of a newspaper would tell you that the conditions have most assuredly changed.”
Brunson said he supports the transfer but warned against letting a timetable override military requirements. “We don’t have the benefit of changing the conditions to time. Time, in and of itself, is a condition,” he said.
The disagreement appears to extend to FOC verification. The U.S. side has reportedly questioned whether some requirements assessed as having been met last year still satisfy current needs, while Seoul favors retaining those earlier assessments.
The ministry acknowledged the remaining differences but did not confirm whether previously satisfied items are being reassessed. Chung said the two sides will resolve differences at the Security Consultative Meeting (SCM), the allies’ annual defense talks to be held in December.
But Seoul implied opposition to changing standards to assess the capabilities. “If the goalpost keeps moving, the OPCON transfer would never be achieved,” Chung said, adding that this was her personal opinion.
USFK, in a written response, reaffirmed the allies’ commitment to a conditions-based transfer.
“For operational security reasons, we do not publicly discuss details of bilateral assessments or certification activities,” it said.
Shin Beom-chul, a former vice defense minister and senior research fellow at the Sejong Institute, said Brunson’s remarks could imply changes to the requirements themselves, rather than simply stricter application of existing criteria.
“The conditions were not fixed in stone. The agreement allows changes in the security environment to be reflected,” Shin told The Korea Times.
He said North Korea’s improved missile and drone capabilities were likely behind Brunson’s warning, and questioned whether South Korea was expanding its surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities quickly enough.
North Korea’s announcement that it tested two types of submarine-launched strategic cruise missiles Wednesday highlighted the evolving threat.
“Launching two types of missiles with different ranges, speeds and approach directions at staggered intervals would force air defenses to deal with targets arriving from different directions and at different times,” said Hong Min, a senior research fellow at the Korea Institute for National Unification.
As for Seoul's hope for a 2028 transfer, Shin said Seoul was trying to accelerate the handover without matching that ambition with faster improvements in its military capabilities.
“The disagreement arose because Seoul is trying to bring forward the date while building up its capabilities at the same pace as before,” he said.