U.S.-KOREA RELATIONSHIP NEEDS OVERHAUL, EXPERTS SAY

Date: 01-09-2003

HONOLULU (Jan. 9) -- American and Korean experts gathered at the East-West Center this week agreed that the U.S.-South Korean relationship needs an overhaul if tensions on the Korean Peninsula are to be reduced.

Twenty experts met Jan. 6-8 to discuss "Enhancing the Partnership Between Korea and the United States in the 21st Century." They said this is a good year to review the relationship as it marks the centennial celebration of Korean immigration to the United States.

Included is a summary of their discussions, links to papers presented at the conference, and contact information for participants. To contact Korean participants if an email address is not listed, contact Jong Young Ye at the Asiatic Research Center, Korea University, narara@arc.re.kr

Summary of discussions includes:

1. Victor D. CHA, chair of the D.S. Song-Korea Foundation at Georgetown University, chav@georgetown.edu
For Cha's paper, see second entry Victor D. Cha

2. Jang Jip CHOI, director of the Asiatic Research Center, Korea University, and former chair of the Presidential Commission on Policy Planning.
For Choi's paper, see first entry Jang Jip Choi

3. Carter J. ECKERT, Korea Institute, Harvard University, eckert@fas.harvard.edu

4. In-Taek HYUN, Department of Political Science & International Relations, Korea University, Seoul, ithyun@chollian.net
For Hyun's paper, see second entry (to be updated Friday, Jan. 10) In-Taek Hyun

5. Hong Koo LEE, chair of the Seoul Forum for International Affairs and a former South Korean prime minister and ambassador to the United States.
For Lee's paper, see third entry Hong Koo Lee

6. James PALAIS, The Jackson School of International Studies, University of Washington, palais@u.washington.edu
For Palais' paper, see first entry James Palais

7. Young Shik YANG, professor at Korea University and former deputy minister of unification, yang2236@hanmail.net

Papers only:

1. Lawrence KRAUSE, International Relations & Pacific Studies, University of California, Sand Diego, lkrause@ucsd.edu
See second entry Lawrence Krause

2. Chang Young JUNG, Department of Economics, Yonsei University, jungcy@base.yonsei.ac.kr
See first entry Chang Young Jung

3. Sang Jin HAN, chair of Presidential Commission on Policy Planning, Seoul
See third entry(to be updated Friday, Jan. 10)
Sang Jin Han

Summary of discussions:

1. VICTOR D. CHA:
Changes in U.S. military forces stationed in South Korea are inevitable, if not imminent. Despite the urgency, there is little discussion on needed changes and instead "buck-passing between Seoul and Washington." What is discussed focuses on details rather than a mutually agreed-upon, long-term strategy and vision of what the United States and Korea want to do in the region.

These discussions and changes should not be take place after the North Korean threat is gone. The landscape of the future northeast Asia is one that is not favorable to the United States because of history, economies, politics and geography. "The new vision must look beyond North Korea, define an alliance that goes beyond the Cold War -- stands for something rather than just against something" such as promotion of democracy, open markets, anti-terrorism, peacekeeping, human rights, and arms control. This kind of alliance is less provocative to China as well. "It becomes the glue that prevents allies from being washed away by the geopolitics of the region."

The relationship should become similar to the permanent political relationships the United States has with European countries, which can say no to U.S. military requests without spelling the end of the alliance. For example, South Korea may not want to be involved in confrontations between China and Taiwan.

U.S. Forces Korea must be restructured to become more flexible, react swiftly, maintain credibility and be "an unobtrusive presence" with smaller mobile forces rather than heavy ground forces -- a "footprint that is not perceived as an obstacle to peace by the Korean people."

"I don't think we should see candlelight demonstrations in Seoul as people wanting the troops to leave. It's how the troops should be governed."

In the United States, reports of anti-U.S. feelings in South Korea are sparking debate about whether the United States should withdraw its forces and leading Americans to feel South Korea is free-riding, avoiding war at any cost, and appeasing North Korea too much.

2. Jang Jip CHOI

"The current dispute between the two countries centers on two issues: the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) revision and the nuclear crisis generated by the combined effects of North Korea's nuclear policy and the U.S.'s hard-line policy toward North Korea. These disagreements, no matter how important they are, will be able to be solved through discussions and negotiations."

"Why can't I as a Korean disagree on a particular policy of the U.S.'s incumbent government? Moreover, why don't I?"

"If I participated in a demonstration one night taking place in the Kwanghwa Moon Road, am I anti-American? I don't think so. The protests were aimed at reforming the U.S. policy, regarded by Korean people as unreasonable, concerning the law and legal proceedings governing unlawful actions committed by the U.S. Army personnel."

3. CARTER ECKERT:
Although the humiliating reception given to South Korea President Kim Dae Jung by President George Bush did not go unnoticed in South Korea, the rise of anti-U.S. sentiment there is symptomatic of much deeper issues.

The United States has exercised significant control over the South Korean military. The relationship between the United States and South Korea should change to one in which South Korea is more independent. South Korea has become strong both militarily and economically, it has changed much more than the United States. "The younger generation feels no sense of inferiority or dependence toward the United States. On the contrary, they feel a sense of pride. There is a failure of the United States to recognize this."

Policy in South Korea is being formed more and more through public debate, but in the old relationship, the United States dealt mainly with the South Korean president. "Bush is trying to lobby the current administration, but it is more connected to the democratic process."

To South Koreans, the issues of peace and war have become more important than nuclear containment. "The young increasingly see the United States as an obstacle. They take pride that the North seems to be standing up to the United States." The fact that North Korea has violated agreements is irrelevant. "Unless there is change, I worry that the relationship will continue to deteriorate."

But if the South Koreans believe the North is no longer the enemy, and the reason for U.S. troops to remain is the North, why should they remain? "Koreans have to come to grips with this. The new president will have to articulate a clear policy. Time is of the essence. The way in which this problem is resolved will determine the future of the relationship. It could get worse quickly."

Developments with China will have much impact on the relationship. "What if China becomes the (U.S.) enemy and pressures South Korea?"

4. IN-TAEK HYUN:
"Forget about whatever" South Korean President-elect Roh Moo Hyun said during the election campaign that stirred up anti-American sentiments. "They were empty commitments." A meeting between Roh and Kim Jong Il would be premature. "South Korea has nothing to receive from the North at this moment."

Close consultation with the United States should begin immediately, and South Korea should not be a third party in negotiations between the United States and North Korea.

The South Korean media and non-governmental organizations are "eagerly looking for problems" in the Status of Forces Agreement with the United States that immediately become national issues. But both countries say the U.S. troops are necessary. "This is not the right time for public debate on U.S. Forces Korea" or to change their size, shape or structure. The U.S. force presence should be separate from arms-control issues.

The South Korean military, meanwhile, is becoming stronger and better equipped. "Koreanization of defense is the key."

"The possibility of a full-scale war on the Korean peninsula has been greatly diminished. However, we should continue to cope with various different North Korean threats: infiltration, limited armed conflict, Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD), non-conventional security threats, and regime collapse. The ROK-U.S. security alliance should be adjusted not only to cope with a full-scale conventional attack from North Korea but also to cope with those low intensity conflicts and other contingencies."

"The engagement policy toward North Korea as a normative approach should be pursued. In this sense, we should continue to support the humanitarian aid to North Korea and to solve the North Korean nuclear issue peacefully. However, such policies should not be an appeasement policy that is conducted at the expense of the security of the Korean peninsula and regional peace and stability."

"If the North Korean threat diminishes greatly and a peaceful coexistence of the two Koreas is institutionalized, the ROK-U.S. security alliance should be adjusted in a regional context. Even in the post-unification phase, South Korea will still need a robust alliance relationship with the United States. South Korea will have to live with strong neighboring countries such as China, Japan, and Russia. South Korea should seek friendly relations with these three countries. However, it is necessary that South Korea has a robust alliance relationship with the United States as the last resort or as the insurance of her own security."

"In this sense, utmost efforts at the government level should be exerted to cope with anti-American sentiment in South Korea. Korea's new government should reconfirm the importance of the ROK-U.S. alliance and the necessity of the USFK (U.S. Forces Korea)."

5. HONG KOO LEE:
The United States has been the liberator and defender of South Korea and had a major role in its post-war reconstruction. But the relationship has become asymmetrical. "There is a tremendous gap in perception" on both sides. In this centennial year celebration of Korean immigration to the United States, "we must emphasize the need for a new vision and understanding."

"Before we concentrate on the States of Forces Agreement, we have to think about the changed status of nations." South Korea has become the 12th largest economy in the world and hosted the World Cup. "South Koreans are very conscious of their status" and the United States must recognize these changes. On the other hand, Koreans don't understand the impact that "the most single powerful country now feels vulnerable to attack from outside."

"The United States needs a partner in the region. In the past Korea couldn't play that role." Now it can.

6. JAMES PALAIS:
One of the more serious failures of U.S. policy since the Korean War has been placing political stability over democracy, human rights and an independent country. "In every crisis U.S. policy has desisted from action and developing democracy...The protection of South Korea by the United States helped develop the economy and democracy but through dictatorship." For 30 to 40 years it was a struggle of students for democracy until South Korea developed an educated middle class.

The Status of Forces Agreement should have been eliminated a long time ago because it's unfair and symbolizes the dominate-subordinate relationship between the United States and South Korea. It is not an equal relationship. "Americans want status quo, South Korea wants change. This has fueled anti-U.S. sentiment." The question is if South Korea can remain under the dominance of the United States.

The Bush administration is a holdover of the Cold War with a hardened attitude toward North Korea. The recent election in South Korea and the continuation of the sunshine policy is almost a rejection of the Bush policy. "The young don't regard the nuclear threat as dangerous. They want to work out a peaceful means."

Regarding North Korea, "I don't see the North attacking. They want unification under communist rule. I don't see the North collapsing. There's no Gorbachev there." It has sealed off the population and indoctrinated the people. Korea has some of the longest dynasties in history.

7. Young Shik YANG:
Candlelight demonstrations in Seoul should not be interpreted as anti-U.S. but a desire for fair negotiations, anti-war and pro-peace.

"It's not desirable to show any conflict between the United States and South Korea." The new president should not try to make any quick summits (with the North) or changes regarding the North.

This is an East-West Wire, copyright East-West Center