News & commentary by Dave Maxwell. Edited and published by Ahyoung Shin
1. Unification minister nominee wants drills postponed
2. Esper says he has issued no orders to withdraw forces from S. Korea
3. U.S. push for troop flexibility could boost chances of off-peninsula USFK mission
4. At least 13 Army soldiers infected with coronavirus at front-line unit (South Korea)
5. Cluster infections, imported cases push new virus cases above 60
6. Esper says US considering troop 'adjustments' in South Korea
7. The Pyongyang General Hospital and Kim Jong Un's Benevolent Dictator Economics
8. Spotlight: White House's plan to reduce troops in South Korea draws skepticism in Washington
9. 'It's not happening until it does': South Korea braces for US troop withdrawal
10. The plight of North Korean migrants in China
11. Activists slam South Korea's crackdown on propaganda against North Korea
12. Woman fined over illegal supply of goods to North Korea
13. Guest opinion: We must not forget the heroic veterans of the Korean War
14. UN rapporteur concerned with Seoul's actions against defector groups
15. Our S Korean ally has a plan to bail Kim Jong-un out, but it's no better than the rest of them
1. Unification minister nominee wants drills postponed
The Unification Minister nominee could not be more wrong on this. Postponing military exercises is not going to improve North-South relations. The Minister should not be meddling in military affairs. He is willing to put the security of his country at risk over a fantasy that North Korea is going to change after 7 decades.
2. Esper says he has issued no orders to withdraw forces from S. Korea
en.yna.co.kr · by 이해아 · July 22, 2020
For the coming days and weeks (and even months or as long as President Trump is in office) this will be Korean reporters’ number one question for all senior US officials. Will the US withdraw or reduce forces?
3. U.S. push for troop flexibility could boost chances of off-peninsula USFK mission
en.yna.co.kr · by 오석민 · July 22, 2020
The US has long wanted "strategic flexibility." Koreans should remember that the US withdrew a US Brigade Combat Team in 2004 to go to Iraq and that force never returned. Secretary Rumsfeld initiated the entire OPCON transition process and the plans for the relocation of US forces because he really wanted to get as many US forces off the Korean peninsula (and likely all of them if he could). He called US forces in Korea a "waste" because he could not employ them elsewhere (i.e., could not put the Army units on the "patch chart" for employment in Iraq and Afghanistan). In any other negotiation a recognition by the ROK side that US forces in Korea can and must be employed wherever necessary to support US national security objectives would be very positively received and would be more important than any amount of burden sharing funds. Of course, that is not so with our current President. The Korean side has always opposed "strategic flexibility" because they view it as code for employment against China and the Koreans do not want to be caught in the middle of a war between the US and China (The fact is if there is war between the US and China the ROK will not be able to sit idly by and somehow remain neutral though of course it could make North Korea want to exploit opportunities likely with Beijing's blessing). But as Korea tries to restrain the use of US forces on the peninsula it will drive military planners and advisers to want to withdraw troops so that there can be more strategic flexibility. And South Korea has provided the US with excellent basing arrangements to support strategic flexibility with the consolidation of the majority of US ground forces at Camp Humphreys with the strategic air and sea ports of embarkation at Osan Air Base and the Port of Pyeongtaek. South Korea has to remember that as much as our forces are stationed on the Korean peninsula to meet our treaty obligations the stationing and deployment of US forces first and foremost must be in support of US national security interests and the national security and defense strategies. It is important for the ROK side to understand and accept this and it would make negotiations go smoother.
And as an aside and a point of clarification. If US forces deployed from Korea to other locations they would not be "off-peninsula USFK missions." USFK would not conduct missions off the peninsula. USFK would only be a force provider to other commands that would be responsible for conducting missions. USFK is not a war fighting or operational HQ. It is a sub-unified command of USINDOPACOM and a force provider to the ROK/US Combined Forces Command. But like any other US military HQ it could provide forces to multiple commands and that would include both on and off the peninsula.
4. At least 13 Army soldiers infected with coronavirus at front-line unit (South Korea)
en.yna.co.kr · by 최수향 · July 22, 2020
This could have more impact on readiness that anything else if this spreads.
5. Cluster infections, imported cases push new virus cases above 60
en.yna.co.kr · by 강윤승 · July 22, 2020
I wonder if there will soon be calls to further restrict international travel. It is what is going to keep this virus alive and spreading.
6. Esper says US considering troop 'adjustments' in South Korea
AP · by ROBERT BURNS · July 21, 2020
We should not be surprised by this and the Koreans should not be alarmed by this (though it is easy to understand why based on the words of the President and his expressed opinion of how he feels about alliance commitments).
We periodically conduct reviews of our global force posture in an effort to have our forces located in the best position to (1) support US national security objectives, (2) provide US strategic flexibility and agility, and (3) to meet our treaty obligations. As long as we go into the review with the question of how we best optimize our force presence to meet the above three criteria we should have nothing to worry about. The number of forces could be reduced or increased (though it would be nice not to be fixated on the number of troops because it is not the number that counts, it is the capability of the units that is most important - we could have a fewer number of troops and yet have increased capabilities if we station the right kind of units in the right places). But if we go into such a review with the question of how do we reduce the number of troops then we will make a strategic error that could haunt us for years.
And rotational forces are not a panacea. Some types of forces are more appropriate for rotation such as we currently do with brigade combat teams. It might make more sense to rotate the squadrons in the two air wings as they could train better in off peninsula locations. But the bulk of the Army forces in Korea are not ground combat maneuver forces. It makes no sense to rotate the Fires brigade since it is a critical component of the counterfire fight and must be integrated with the Korea forces 24/7. You do not want to rotate military intelligence or signal or logistic units because they all need to conduct sustained operations many of which are optimized by strong host national relationships. But to me the biggest danger with rotational forces is when someone decides they need to save money (or employ them elsewhere) they will not be available for their primary mission. It would be too easy of a decision to just say leave them at their CONUS home station and tell them to train there and we will only deploy them if we need them (and of course that puts a new level of complexity in the TPFDD planning process). But with that caveat the right kinds of forces can be effective on a rotational basis not all forces.
7. The Pyongyang General Hospital and Kim Jong Un's Benevolent Dictator Economics
nkeconwatch.com · by Benjamin Katzeff Silberstein
We make snide comments about the construction of this hospital, but this is the key point from this important article: "Kim's criticism against construction officials, however, is about much more than the hospital construction project itself. It relates to the very structure of the North Korean system, and of communist economies in general." Despite the Juche ideology and the cries for self-reliance the North Korea economy is communism based. The author goes on to say this type of criticism is not exceptional but quite the standard procedure. However, I would not place "benevolent" next to "dictator" when describing Kim Jong-un.
8. Spotlight: White House's plan to reduce troops in South Korea draws skepticism in Washington
Chinese media reports on the issue of troop withdrawals in Korea and interviews US experts.
9. 'It's not happening until it does': South Korea braces for US troop withdrawal
Washington Examiner · by Abraham Mahshie · July 21, 2020
Excellent commentary from Bruce Klingner. However, we should keep in mind the 4500 or so troops of the rotational brigade combat team are not part of the 28,500 US troops stationed in Korea since they are not by definition stationed in Korea. By not rotating them we will save the cost of transportation to and from Korea, but it will not reduce any US costs of the permanently stationed forces. All it will do is create the condition in which we will not have ground combat maneuver forces in Korea, we will have to assess what that means for strategic reassurance and strategic resolve.
10. The plight of North Korean migrants in China
HRNK · by Emma DiGiovanni · July 21, 2020
Not only is China a human rights abuser in its own right it is complicit in North Korean human rights abuses.
11. Activists slam South Korea's crackdown on propaganda against North Korea
DW · by Deutsche Welle
I wish the officials in the Moon administration could understand this: "This is a political and tactical maneuver by the North that makes them look stronger and Seoul weaker because it is only trying to curry favor." The Moon administration plays right into the regime's hands.
12. Woman fined over illegal supply of goods to North Korea
straitstimes.com · by SHAFFIQ ALKHATIB · July 22, 2020
13. Guest opinion: We must not forget the heroic veterans of the Korean War
deseret.com · by Elayne Wells Harmer · July 21, 2020
As we approach the 67th anniversary of the Korean Armistice Agreement on July 27 we should think about those who answered the call. The Korean War Memorial in DC describes why American is a great nation:
Our nation honors her sons and daughters
who answered the call to defend a country
they never knew and a people they never met
14. UN rapporteur concerned with Seoul's actions against defector groups
We should all be concerned.
15. Our S Korean ally has a plan to bail Kim Jong-un out, but it's no better than the rest of them
freekorea.us · by Joshua · July 21, 2020
Another pithy critique from Joshua Stanton. One important reminder from Josh is that for North Korea everything is zero-sum. There is no 'win-win" outcome for the North. There can only be the North wins and the ROK and everyone else loses.
-----------
"Somewhere a True Believer is training to kill you. He is training with minimal food and water, in austere conditions training day and night. The only clean on him is his weapon and he made his web gear. He doesn't worry about what workout to do - his ruck weighs what it weighs, his runs end when the enemy stops chasing him. This True Believer is not concerned about 'how hard it is;' he knows he either wins or he dies. He doesn't go home at 17:00; he is home.
He knows only The Cause"
- Unknown
"Remember: it's not just the virus. it's the virus + economic crisis + political crisis + growing international tensions etc"
- Adam Elkus @Aelkus via Twitter
"There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."
- Issac Asimov