Time to Keep Going: The Role and Structure of U.S. Forces in a Unified Korea

Abstract

This year Korea and the U.S. celebrate 50 years of their alliance, which has seen many ups and downs since it came into existence. Today a very intense debate is going on in the USA and Korea about the future role of the U.S. in both the re‐unification process and a post‐unified Korea. Anti‐Americanism is on the rise in South Korea, and demand for withdrawal of American forces is gaining ground in Korean society. An American withdrawal from Korea, however, would be very destabilizing for Korea and the whole of the East Asian region. Since the Korean war, the factors that have made it possible for South Korea, and other countries in the region, to economically prosper are the combination of sound economic polices and hard work by the peoples of these countries, and of the U.S. policies of reopening international markets to the countries of the region. While the presence of the U.S. forces in a post‐unified Korea would be a positive factor, the actual structure of these forces would depend on the ground realities and threat perceptions at that time. It would be determined by complex issues of peace and stability inside Korea, its economic situation, and the external situation outside Korea's borders, including Korea's threat perceptions from China. Despite great improvements in technology in the Naval and Air forces, almost all military contingencies still require the use of ground forces to fight or to deter wars. Thus even if U.S. air and naval forces remained stationed in Korea, the absence of the U.S. ground forces would seriously undermine the deterrent and fighting power of the United States in the country and the region as whole. Given the terrain of the Korean peninsula, any possible future military conflict involving Korea would almost certainly be won or lost on land. Accordingly, infantrymen and tanks must remain an essential component of the American forces in Korea. What is more, dependence on air and naval forces for the protection of Korea would weaken traditional alliances and deterrence as well as American support for the very values and political principles that make other countries respect and trust the United States.