Defense accord triggers criticism

Defense Minister Han Min-koo, left, lays flowers on a grave at Arlington National Cemetery in Virginia, across the Potomac River from Washington D.C. on Wednesday, after he arrived in the U.S. capital. / Yonhap

By Jun Ji-hye

Seoul and Washington’s agreement to delay South Korea’s takeover of wartime operational control (OPCON) of its troops from the United States is expected to trigger controversy for what critics say is a lack of independence in national defense capabilities.

Some analysts expressed concerns over a possible deterioration in inter-Korean relations as North Korea will likely object to the delay.

During the security consultative meeting (SCM) held in Washington, Thursday, Seoul’s Defense Minister Han Min-koo and U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel agreed to delay the transition of wartime OPCON until South Korea’s military capabilities are secured against nuclear and missile threats from Pyongyang.

Paik Hak-soon, a researcher at the Sejong Institute, said that the agreement means that Seoul will continue to lack a self-reliant national defense.

“The U.S. agreed with the delay as if it accepted Seoul’s request. But it is Washington that earned military gains from the decision,” said Paik. “Following the decision, it now sees its way clear to maintaining the ROK-U.S. Combined Forces Command (CFC) on the Korean Peninsula, which seemingly exists to handle threats from the reclusive state, but actually helps hold China and Russia in check.”

The CFC was to have been dissolved if the OPCON transfer had taken place as scheduled.

Paik argued that South Korea seems to have gained nothing from the 46th SCM as it placed more importance on alliance cooperation rather than its own strategic interests.

He also noted that the agreed delay of OPCON transfer could freeze inter-Korean relations as it would mean that “the U.S. will continue to apply the same, old military security strategy toward the North, which Pyongyang thinks is becoming more and more threatening.”

“All these things are happening in the absence of a South Korean strategic leader,” said Paik.

Rep. Baek Jae-hyun of the main opposition New Politics Alliance for Democracy echoed this view.

He said, “The delay proved the failure of the Lee Myung-bak and Park Geun-hye governments in dealing with North Korea and national security issues.”

On the other hand, Kim Dae-young, a senior research fellow at the Korea Defense and Security Forum, argued Seoul and Washington made the right decision at the right time amid mounting threats from Pyongyang.

“The North has not taken any specific steps to give up its nuclear ambitions. At this stage, the delay of OPCON transfer seems to be a timely decision,” he said. “Strengthening joint defense postures have been recent trends in international society.”

However, Kim also expressed concerns over the decision to leave the CFC in Yongsan, central Seoul, and the 210th Armored Brigade of the U.S. 2nd Infantry Division in Camp Casey in Dongducheon, Gyeonggi Province, north of Seoul.

“The defense ministry will have to offer the public a sincere explanation about the decision as fierce controversy is expected, given the Yongsan Relocation Plan (YRP) and the Land Partnership Plan (LPP),” he said.

According to the two plans, the Yongsan Garrison and the 2nd Division are scheduled to move to Pyeongtaek, Gyeonggi Province, by the end of 2016.

Critics have said, if the two units are left at their present locations, it would amount to violating the YRP and LPP, which were ratified by the National Assembly in 2002.

Local governments as well as their residents are also expected to complain.