ID :
62987
Thu, 05/28/2009 - 13:06
Auther :

News Focus) N. Korean nuclear test renews concerns over U.S.-S. Korean alliance

(By Sam Kim, Byun Duk-kun
SEOUL, May 28 (Yonhap) -- North Korea's recent nuclear test has renewed concerns
of a possible lapse in the joint deterrence capabilities of South Korea and the
United States after the allies complete the readjustment of their military
partnership in 2012.

But such worries could backfire and benefit the belligerent North while
undermining preparations for what may be the most important change in the
decades-old alliance, analysts and officials say.
After North Korea carried out its second nuclear test on Monday, South Korean
conservatives, including lawmakers of the ruling Grand National Party (GNP),
called on their government to reconsider its plan to retrieve the wartime command
of its troops from the U.S.
The command was given to the U.S. at the onset of the 1950-53 Korean War, which
ended in a truce, and Seoul and Washington agreed two years ago that the control
would be returned in April 2012.
But Kim Hak-song, a GNP legislator who presides over a national security
committee, said Wednesday that the agreement needs to be "re-examined" during the
U.S.-South Korean summit scheduled for June.
"We should re-examine the transfer of the wartime operational control as the
threat of North Korean nuclear attacks increases," he said. The GNP said it has
formally requested its government bring up the issue during the summit in
Washington.
The control, also known as OPCON, was a subject of intense debate when former
President Roh Moo-hyun pushed for its transfer during his five-year tenure that
ended in February last year.
Critics fear the change would weaken the security alliance between South Korea
and the United States as their Combined Forces Command (CFC) will be dissolved
along with the transfer.
The U.S., which stations 28,500 troops here as a deterrent against North Korea,
has affirmed that the combined deterrence capabilities would not be compromised,
pledging to continue support.
"This is definitely the right thing to do for this alliance," CFC commander Gen.
Walter Sharp said in a recent interview with Yonhap News Agency. "It will move it
to the next level. It will increase the capability."
A senior South Korean defense official, who declined to be named, said that his
military is "closely monitoring" the political controversy. But he said
preparations for the transfer will continue.
"The military has no plan to slow down its preparation to receive back the
control because 2012 is a year not far. We don't have much time," he said.
Supporters of the OPCON transition argue that South Korea has toughened its
arsenal and gained enough military superiority over North Korea to command its
own troops in wartime.
The two countries are technically at war as the 1950-53 Korean War ended in a
truce rather than a peace treaty.
South Korea took back the peacetime control in 1994. Analysts say the talk of
revising the 2007 agreement for OPCON transfer appears more political than
strategic and could even end up benefiting Pyongyang.
"Such talk only bolsters the image of North Korea as an increased nuclear
threat," Kim Hak-seong, a political scientist at the Graduate School of Peace and
Security Studies at Chungnam University.
North Korea claims its two nuclear tests, including the first in 2006, have
irrevocably proven its status as a nuclear weapons state. The U.S. and South
Korea refuse to acknowledge the claim because it would undermine their leverage
in disarmament talks with the North.
"Postponing the OPCON transfer because of fears of nuclear attack would be an
indirect acknowledgment that North Korea possesses nuclear arms," Kim said.
A senior analyst at a state-run defense think tank in South Korea agreed, saying
renegotiation will only worsen ties between Seoul and Washington.
"The U.S. wanted to return the control as much as South Korea wanted it back," he
said, declining to be quoted by name citing a policy change. "There is no reason
why the U.S. would want to revise the agreement in the first place."
U.S. troops have served in a role that many historians have described as a "trip
wire" on the Korean Peninsula, suggesting a North Korean attack on an American
unit would prompt automatic U.S. engagement alongside South Korean forces.
The U.S. no longer seeks such a role, the analyst said, adding the OPCON transfer
allows Washington to juggle its military assets more freely in the region under a
global troop realignment project.
South Korean presidential officials said the proposal for reconsidering OPCON
transfer is premature.
"It's too early to request postponement," one official said, speaking on
customary condition of anonymity and dismissing speculation the issue will be on
the agenda when President Lee Myung-bak meets with Barack Obama in Washington in
June.
But the official suggested Cheong Wa Dae may be compelled to fall in line should
security risks spike on the divided peninsula in future.
"We don't know what may happen in the lead up to 2012, and if security
circumstances worsen and such need arises, we could make the request," the
official said.
South Korea and the United States are bound by their agreement to regularly
examine their progress in their preparations to transfer OPCON in April 2012.
Even though Lee has not openly spoken against OPCON transition, he maintained a
critical stance over his predecessor's move during his campaign in 2007.
North Korea conducted its first atomic test in October 2006. On April 5 this
year, it fired a long-range rocket despite warnings the move would be considered
a provocative test of ballistic missile technology.
samkim@yna.co.kr
(END)

X