USFK Commander Against Further Troops Cuts (Update: USFK Denies)
General Burwell B. Bell III, commander of United States Forces Korea, expressed his wish to keep the status quo at a meeting last month, the sources said. South Korea and U.S. officials met for talks in Washington on Jan. 23. According to the sources, Bell asked Korean officials to back his proposal to hold force levels at the current 28,500 troops. As a part of a plan to realign US. troops around the world, Washington and Seoul have agreed to cut the number of troops here gradually.
Under the plan, the number of U.S. forces was to go from 37,500 in 2004 to 25,000 by the end of this year. In 2004, 5,000 were withdrawn, and another 3,000 left Korea in 2005. [Joongang Ilbo]
Yes, if we keep a ground component in Korea, it should be robust enough to carry out its mission. The question is whether we really should keep a ground component there at all.
Not the first time something like this has happened, by the way — South Korea has anti-American tantrum, U.S. decides to cut troops, South Korea begs us not to, we relent. Been there, done that.
Update: Robert will be pleased to hear that according to the USFK Spokesman, via the Hanky, plans to reduce the force to 25,000 will proceed according to plan.
There has been no proposal by Gen. Bell or any other United States government official to change the 2004 agreement on troop reductions between South Korea and the United States, Col. Franklin Childress, public affairs officer of the USFK, said in a statement, adding the policy to reduce the troop level to 25,000 remains in effect.
“Any changes to our agreements would be the subject of formal consultations and would be announced jointly by both the United States and the Republic of Korea should a change be agreed upon,” the USFK spokesman said, referring to South Korea by its official name. [The Hankyoreh]
Gen. Bell is even accusing the Korean media of misquoting him.
I’m also happy not to see us folding so quickly and without gaining anything in return, though I do believe that’s probably just a matter of time until we do fold. I continue to believe that fidgeting with this-or-that battalion misses the greater issues — what are the alliance’s likely missions? Which of those likely missions would require U.S. ground forces? Would the employment of ground forces in Korea serve greater U.S. interests?
Update 2: See also Yonhap, apparently the source for the Hanky’s report:
Gen. Bell, who also heads the South Korea-U.S. Combined Forces Command, said the erroneous attribution of statements to him was unfortunate, according to the statement.
6 Responses
-
Pingback: OneFreeKorea » 2008 » February » 07
Cutting down to 25,000 won’t mean much. I’m waiting to see what the next administration in the US does with the move of Yongsan and expansion of Pyongtaek and other items connected with the reformation of USFK. If the White House pushes for that, it will then be interesting to watch what the Blue House does, but I doubt we will see Washington push for the move, and without that, there is little chance it will go through —- and little chance we will see a big reduction in troop strength.
Shocking the Korean media misquoting people. Who would of thunk it? I would not be surprised at all if the misquote was intentionally done.
The only way I see USFK reducing any further than 25,000 is that the last remaining combat brigade in 2ID be redeployed. If that is done the number of US troops would go down to around the 20,000 range and leave only the Air Force, aviation assets, C2, and logistics people on the peninsula. If the ROK government doesn’t keep to the relocation timeline and tries to play the delay game which they are masters at, the Pentagon should seriously think about withdrawing that brigade.
The only way I see USFK being able to withdraw under 20,000 is if the ROK’s buy some of the capabilities we provide for them now. We all know the ROK’s are not eager to foot the full bill for their own defense so USFK will at least remain above 20,000 for some time I suspect.
I can’t picture any of the runners for the White House doing anything with USFK. I don’t picture any of them putting another Rumsfeld in the top chair, and without that, I think Lee’s Blue House will be able to do pretty much as it pleases in regards to USFK and the ROK forces.
I foresee more movement on the canal project than USFK reformation.
(But I’m having a cynical day too….)
If whoever becomes the president doesn’t vigorously push the ROK government to make the transformation happen than yes we are more likely to see Lee’s canal become a reality than we are to see the closing of Yongsan Garrison.