SCM will not work in Korea's favor: experts

Defense Minister Suh Wook, right, poses with his U.S. counterpart, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, during their meeting at the Ministry of National Defense in Seoul, March 17. Joint Press Corps

Mention of US troop levels to be included in joint communique

By Kang Seung-woo

In the lead-up to its annual defense ministerial talks with the United States, Korea is resolute to raise the issue of fixing a clear timeline for regaining wartime operational control (OPCON) of its troops from Washington.

But diplomatic observers expect that the U.S. side will not be happy about this initiative and will subsequently stick to its existing position of Korea needing to meet prerequisites for a successful OPCON transition.

Defense Minister Suh Wook is scheduled to sit down with his U.S. counterpart, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, at the Security Consultative Meeting (SCM) in Seoul, Dec. 2, and the OPCON issue is highly anticipated to remain one of the most important issues ― if not the most important ― on the agenda, according to experts.

President Moon Jae-in has sought to take over OPCON before his term ends in May 2022, but the U.S. has the final say. Citing the Korean military's lack of preparedness, the U.S. is skeptical about this push. The U.S. claims that the two allies have not had adequate assessment of whether the Korean military has, or can acquire, the capabilities necessary to make this shift, as the required joint drills have been scaled down due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The OPCON transfer has already been pushed back twice in the past. The two allies agreed upon a conditions-based OPCON transition plan in 2014, which means that the OPCON transition would take place only in the event that “critical ROK and alliance military capabilities were secured, and the security environment on the Korean Peninsula and the region was conducive to a stable OPCON transition.” The ROK refers to the Republic of Korea, South Korea's official name.

However, during a parliamentary audit session, Oct. 21, Suh said that he plans to have “strong” consultations on setting a precise date for the OPCON transfer during the upcoming SCM.

“I have the impression that the ROK has been working on many things other than its commitments, and that it is unlikely to make the United States very happy or very willing to agree to an OPCON transition, for which the ROK appears to not be prepared,” said Bruce Bennett, a senior international defense analyst at the RAND Corporation.

“If the OPCON transition is so important, why hasn't the Moon administration funded the capabilities it agreed to fund to become ready for OPCON? The United States has been clear that once the ROK has those capabilities, OPCON transition will be promptly concluded.”

He added, “The ROK is nowhere close to meeting its commitments in 2022.”

U.S. defense press secretary John Kirby also expressed a similar view, Nov. 10, saying during a press briefing that the two allies had more work to do before the conditions-based OPCON transition takes place.

Naval War College Professor of National Security Terence Roehrig said that U.S. officials were likely to give Seoul's demand considerable attention, but setting a precise date was “not a good idea.”

“OPCON transfer is important and should happen in the future. However, there were crucial reasons for the shift to a conditions-based transfer, including the need for Korea to possess the necessary military capabilities and experience for the success of this change,” he said.

“Moreover, on two occasions in the past, the date was set and then canceled, which was a problematic element of the process.”

Currently, the Korean government has been urging the Biden administration to compromise on declaring an official end to the Korean War, with the two sides having a series of discussions on the issue, although the U.S. perceives that it is premature to make such a declaration.

However, Bennett said that Korea's push for the OPCON transition was something different from dealing with the end-of-war declaration.

“Having compromised on the 'end-of-war' declaration, I think the United States will feel taken advantage of if pressed too hard on a rapid OPCON transition without the ROK having met its commitments to achieving that outcome,” he said.

“The ROK has tended to make the OPCON transition a political issue, trying to create a legacy for President Moon. But to the U.S., the OPCON transition is a military issue.”

Following last year's SCM, the joint communique failed to get the U.S.'s commitment to keeping its troops here at the current level of 28,500, raising speculation that the U.S. government may withdraw some American troops from the peninsula as part of the U.S. strategic flexibility policy, aimed at optimizing its forces to respond successfully to challenges around the globe.

However, Roehrig said the mention of U.S. troop levels will return to the joint statement to be announced after the upcoming SCM.

“This is a very different administration (from the former Donald Trump administration), and I don't believe there is much interest in withdrawing some U.S. forces from the peninsula,” he added.