USFK withdrawal believed feasible scenario: experts

Helicopters are parked inside the U.S. Army Garrison Humphreys in Pyeongtaek, Gyeonggi Province. / Korea Times file

By Kang Seung-woo

U.S. President Donald Trump's decision to withdraw some U.S. troops from Germany is intensifying speculation that he may do the same thing with those serving in Korea.

Although the Ministry of National Defense says that there have been no talks over the issue with the U.S., experts, who criticize Trump's transactional approach to alliances, think reducing or withdrawing U.S. forces from the Korean Peninsula is not an impossible scenario.

While officially confirming the pullout due to what he called German “delinquency on military spending,” Monday, Trump said, “And I'm not only talking about Germany, by the way. I'm talking about plenty of other countries.”

The withdrawal comes amid stalled negotiations over how much Korea will pay for the upkeep of 28,500 American troops here. Washington requests $1.3 billion (1.56 trillion won) annually ― a nearly 50 percent increase from last year ― but Seoul is maintaining its proposal of a 13 percent increase from the previous cost-sharing accord of $860 million.

During his election campaign in 2016, Trump criticized Korea and other allies' “free-riding” on the U.S. defense budget.

“I greatly fear that if President Trump is re-elected, it will lead not only to the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Korea, but elsewhere around the globe, even Japan,” Daniel Sneider, an expert on Korean and Japanese foreign policy at Stanford University, told The Korea Times.

“The president is a deep believer in his own ideology of America First and has no understanding or support for the system of American security alliances around the world that have preserved peace and stability since World War II. He sees these relationships in purely transactional terms and believes that the American military presence in these countries is solely to protect them from their enemies. That is sheer nonsense.”

Bruce Klingner, a former CIA analyst and North Korea watcher at the Heritage Foundation, echoed Sneider's view.

“Many experts are concerned that President Trump will carry out his oft-stated desire to reduce or withdraw U.S. forces from South Korea. For decades, he has had a negative view of alliances and the stationing of U.S. forces overseas,” he told The Korea Times, adding the U.S. president has a transactional perception of alliances, seeing them as business deals based on cost.

Some say that it would not be easy for Trump to make such a bold decision thanks to the 2020 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that bans reducing U.S. Forces Korea (USFK) personnel below the current level.

However, the experts do not believe that the NDAA is a perfect safety net.

“In the face of congressional resistance, as well as strong opposition from other quarters to withdraw U.S. forces, it's not clear if the president would decide to pursue this battle,” Terence Roehrig, a professor at the U.S. Naval War College, told The Korea Times.

“I have seen assessments in both directions and this would be another chapter in the constitutional tussle over legislative and executive powers in foreign and defense policy. But if the president were determined to follow through despite the opposition, it may be an action difficult to stop given the deference U.S. presidents often receive in these matters.”

Sneider also said that the language of the NDAA does not block a decision by President Trump to withdraw U.S. forces from Korea.

“It requires the secretary of defense to certify to Congress that is in the national security interests of the U.S. Given the president's control of the Republican Party, it will be very difficult, though not impossible, for the Congress to act to block such a decision,” he said.

Amid the stalled talks over the Special Measures Agreement (SMA) that determines Korea's share of the cost for stationing American troops, the decision on Germany is seen as leverage in the negotiations ― an idea that failed to get a favorable responses from the experts.

“In the SMA negotiations with Korea, Trump is seeking to make a profit on U.S. forces overseas by seeking an exorbitant increase in Seoul's contribution. Trump could use the stalemated negotiations as justification for reducing troops. This would be a major mistake,” Klingner said.

Roehrig also said, “Pulling U.S. forces as part of a negotiating strategy over burden sharing is a bad idea and hurts these important relationships that are essential for U.S. and Korean interests along with regional security.”