Why did the People Power Party criticize the Lee Jae Myung administration over OPCON transfer?

The PPP said Seoul and Washington appeared to disagree over the conditions and timing for transferring wartime OPCON. It called government and defense ministry remarks directed at the USFK commander a diplomatic and security blunder that could undermine the South Korea-U.S. alliance.

What did Gen. Xavier Brunson say about the conditions for transferring wartime OPCON to South Korea?

Brunson said earlier this week that conditions had changed and that new standards were needed because of North Korea’s recent missile launches. He indicated that the transfer should not be governed by a political timetable, while Seoul maintains that the existing requirements remain unchanged.

What timeline is South Korea pursuing for the wartime OPCON transfer?

Seoul seeks to retake wartime OPCON from Washington before President Lee Jae Myung’s five-year term ends in 2030, with the possibility of completing the transfer as early as next year. Washington has expressed reservations about accelerating the transition for political considerations.

Main opposition slams gov't over S. Korea-US gap on OPCON transfer

Listen

Summary

The People Power Party criticized the Lee Jae Myung administration in Seoul on Friday over apparent differences with Washington on wartime OPCON transfer. The criticism followed USFK Commander Gen. Xavier Brunson’s statement earlier this week that changing conditions, including North Korea’s missile launches, required new standards. Defense Minister Kang Shin-chul said Thursday that the existing requirements remained unchanged and that Seoul had conveyed its concerns to Washington. The PPP urged Lee to halt efforts to complete the transfer during his term, which ends in 2030.

Key Facts

Rep. Kim Tae-kyu called remarks by the defense ministry spokesperson about moving OPCON goalposts a serious diplomatic and security blunder.
Rep. Jung Hee-yong said North Korea’s advancing nuclear and missile capabilities made it too risky to rush the transfer.
South Korea seeks to retake wartime OPCON before the Lee administration’s five-year term ends in 2030, or as early as next year.
Washington has expressed reservations about rushing the transition for political reasons.

By Yonhap

Published Oct 16, 2026 12:38 pm KST

Jeong Jeom-sig, center, floor leader of the main opposition People Power Party, attends a party meeting to discuss the ongoing parliamentary audit at the National Assembly in Seoul, Friday. Yonhap

The main opposition People Power Party (PPP) on Friday criticized the government over what it called apparent differences between South Korea and the United States on the transfer of wartime operational control (OPCON), calling it a "serious diplomatic blunder."

The criticism came after U.S. Forces Korea (USFK) Commander Gen. Xavier Brunson said earlier this week that "conditions have changed" and that calls for new standards in the OPCON transfer, citing North Korea's recent missile launches.

During a parliamentary audit of military courts on Thursday, Defense Minister Kang Shin-chul said that the requirements for the OPCON transfer remained unchanged and that Seoul has conveyed its concerns to Washington.

"Instead of reviewing the warning, the Lee Jae Myung administration and the Democratic Party of Korea (DPK) made a series of intimidating remarks directed at the USFK commander," Rep. Kim Tae-kyu, the PPP's chief floor spokesperson, said in a commentary.

Rep. Kim also criticized the defense ministry's spokesperson for saying at an official press briefing that the transfer would never take place if "the goalpost kept moving," while maintaining that it was her own view.

"It is a serious diplomatic and security blunder for a spokesperson of a ministry responsible for national security to weigh in emotionally on a sensitive issue between South Korea and the U.S., and to hide behind her personal opinion to evade responsibility," he said.

Rep. Kim also urged President Lee to immediately halt the "reckless push" to complete the transfer within his term to tout it as an achievement, and called on the ruling DPK and the defense ministry to issue an apology for remarks that he said undermined the South Korea-U.S. alliance.

Rep. Jung Hee-yong, the PPP's secretary-general, argued the security situation is "too grave" to rush the transfer as Pyongyang continues to advance its nuclear and missile capabilities.

"Failing to lodge a single protest against North Korea's land mine provocations while hastily pushing for the OPCON transfer despite differences between South Korea and the U.S. only heightens public anxiety over security," Jung said during a party meeting.

Brunson's comments came amid a perceived gap between Seoul and Washington over the timing of the OPCON transfer.

Seoul seeks to retake wartime OPCON from Washington before the Lee administration's five-year term ends in 2030, or even as early as next year. Washington has expressed reservations about rushing the transition out of political considerations.

Explore More