Seoul urged to make 'fair' demand in defense cost sharing talks

Foreign Minister Kang Kyung-wha shakes hands with U.S. Ambassador to South Korea Harry Harris after they sign the 10th Special Measures Agreement, or the latest defense cost sharing agreement, at the former's headquarters in Seoul on March 8. Yonhap

By Lee Min-hyung

With defense cost-sharing negotiations between Seoul and Washington approaching, calls are growing for South Korea to also make what are considered “fair” demands, rather than focusing on defending itself from intensifying political pressure from the United States, military and diplomatic experts said Friday.

The allies have yet to officially start negotiations for the 11th Special Measures Agreement (SMA) with a foreign ministry official only saying the upcoming talks will start sometime in September, at the earliest, after the Chuseok holidays.

“We will announce a new chief negotiator for the talks. He will be assigned to handle the entire process and asked to narrow the conditions and differences with Washington regarding Seoul's share burden,” the official told reporters last week.

Experts are voicing a consensus that Seoul will face a tough road ahead in the talks, but should also take full advantage of its bargaining chips to sign a fair and reasonable deal.

“For instance, South Korea plans to build a light aircraft carrier capable of carrying vertical-landing F-35B stealth fighters,” Kim Yeol-soo, director of the security research office at the Korea Institute for Military Affairs, said.

If the U.S.-made jets can be fully utilized by this vessel, it will help the U.S. enhance its military readiness here, according to Kim. This will be of great help for the U.S. military to monitor any security threats from China.

“South Korea can get support for such a plan, and these kinds of negotiating chips will help Seoul reduce its cost burden during the 11th SMA,” he said.

He also said that Washington will intensify pressure for Seoul to accept its earlier demand to add a new category ― “operational support” ― into the upcoming SMA.

The U.S. made the demand during negotiations for the 10th SMA, in a move to force Seoul to shoulder more of a financial burden under the category, which includes costs for joint exercises and the deployment of strategic weapons to the Korean Peninsula.

But with Seoul flatly refusing to consider this, it was not included in the latest SMA, under which Seoul pays 1.04 trillion won ($861 million), up 8.2 percent from the previous year.

“This is nothing new that U.S. President Donald Trump has outwardly stepped up political pressure on South Korea over defense cost sharing,” Kim said.

Trump has recently intensified pressure on the South to pay more, saying that Washington spends a lot on its ally and does not get proper compensation.

Earlier this month, he even called the Seoul-Washington joint military exercise “ridiculous and expensive.”

The government should not be swayed by such political rhetoric, but instead, stay focused on ways to make logical and reasonable claims to minimize the cost, according to the expert.

Kim also underscored the need for Seoul to sign a mid- to long-term contract with Washington, extending the current one-year agreement.

Under the 10th SMA, the allies signed a one-year agreement, much shorter than previous five-year ones.

“If both sides continue to renew the contract each year, this will end up deepening distrust between the two countries,” Kim said. “This will possibly create cracks in the security alliance. The best-case scenario for South Korea is to renew the upcoming contract for three to five years.”

Park Won-gon, a professor of international politics at Handong Global University, argued that Washington's demands were too excessive, as they run counter to the purpose of the SMA.

Seoul and Washington signed the first SMA in 1991 to divide the cost for upkeep of the USFK.

“The U.S. is highly likely to demand the South agree to include the operational support category when renewing the agreement, but the government should never accept this.”

If Trump wants Seoul to pay more to cover the joint military exercises or the deployment of tactical weapons, the allies should revise the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA), according to Park.

Under SOFA, the U.S. bears the cost for the maintenance of the USFK, so South Korea did not have to pay for its upkeep.

But starting in the early 1990s, the U.S. urged the South to pay part of the cost in line with South Korea's economic growth. The allies then signed the “special” and “exceptional” agreement, the SMA.

Given what some claim as the “unpredictable nature” of the current U.S. president, the chances are that Washington may pressurize Seoul to sign a “wholly new type of a deal,” other than the SMA, during the upcoming negotiations, Park said.

“It remains uncertain over whether the allies will continue the defense cost sharing talks under the framework of the SMA or engage in a new form of negotiations,” Park said.

The foreign ministry, the authority that handles the defense cost-sharing talks, just reiterated its earlier position that it would only accept a U.S. demand that was “reasonable and fair.”

The government is also facing challenges on the matter, as Trump keeps expressing his complaints about the joint military exercises by taking political advantage of the North. The annual military exercises with the U.S. are viewed by many as crucial to maintaining security readiness amid lingering military threats from the North.