US set for tactical withdrawal in Korea

The Sydney Morning Herald ^ | March 10, 2003 | Hamish McDonald

[conservativecorner]

By Hamish McDonald, Herald Correspondent in Beijing March 10 2003

While North Korea signals it will continue missile firings in an apparent attempt to draw the United States into direct peace talks, Washington has also begun a more subtle diplomatic brinkmanship of its own, intended to rally South Korea and other regional powers around its confrontation of the North's Stalinist regime.

The region was yesterday waiting North Korea's likely second test of a 240-kilometre range anti-ship cruise missile, following a three-day warning issued on Friday to shipping in a sector of the Sea of Japan. The first test took place on February 24, just before South Korean President Roh Moo Hyun was sworn into office.

It has also emerged that in last Sunday's interception of an unarmed American RC-135S spy plane over the Japan Sea, the four missile-armed North Korean MiG fighters had tried to make the US crew surrender and fly to North Korea.

The naval missile test breaks no undertakings by the Pyongyang government, though the timing is being seen as provocative by US allies including Australia, which called in North Korea's envoy to Canberra for an official protest.

But announcements in Washington have set off alarm bells in Seoul and possibility other regional capitals.

The US Defence Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, said on Thursday that the US was studying ways of either withdrawing its 37,000 troops in South Korea, or shifting them further away from the Demilitarised Zone, the North-South truce line.

South Korea's own army might provide "the kind of up-front deterrent that is needed", he said, with backing from US air and sea power.

This was a bombshell in South Korea, where the Defence Minister, Cho Young Kil, told the National Assembly that the US had "never officially informed us" on troop redeployments or raised the possibility of withdrawal.

He said South Korea "will not discuss any possibility of movement of US troops before the [North Korean] nuclear issue is resolved".

Up to now, the US garrison has been stationed on the DMZ as a key assurance to South Korea.

Although it would not be strong enough to repel a blitzkrieg attack by the North's 1.1 million strong army, its location means US forces would be drawn immediately into fighting and leave Washington little choice but to wage a major campaign.

But as memories of the Korean War and past tensions fade, South Korean public opinion has looked more at the negative side of hosting foreign troops, including their occupation of prime sites in Seoul and their immunity from local legal proceedings, and swung behind the tolerant approach of Mr Roh and his predecessor Kim Dae Jung towards the North. Mr Rumsfeld's statement seems intended as a jolt to this attitude.

[RightWhale]

a more subtle diplomatic brinkmanship of its own

They threaten to nuke everything, you pull back out of range. That's subtle. Right.

[bart99]

Mr Roh campaigned on a platform of not needing or wanting such an american presence in the South anymore. Now that the North is doing a bit of saber-rattling, he's backing off. I think Rumselfd should FORCE the countries in the region to confront North Korea, including the South (who WANTS reunification with the Norht), China, and Russia, and Japan.

His comments seem not only rational to Americans, but may just make the South take some initiative and talk with China and Russia about maybe helping them with this little problem they've encountered since the new administration ran on an anti-US platform!!

[KantianBurke]

[blam]

"His comments seem not only rational to Americans, but may just make the South take some initiative and talk with China and Russia about maybe helping them with this little problem they've encountered since the new administration ran on an anti-US platform!! "

Pull out our troops and let China handle it. The anti-US protests in the south have turned me.

[John Lenin]

Maye the South should "Pay" for our protection.

The Free Ride is Over !

[Polybius]

South Korean Defence Minister, Cho Young Kilsaid: South Korea "will not discuss any possibility of movement of US troops before the [North Korean] nuclear issue is resolved".

Ummm.....Did we miss a re-structuring of the U.S. Armed Forces chain of command?

Somehow, the South Korean Defense Minister got the idea that he has the power to dictate that American troops will stay in South Korea.

[medscribe]

So the South Korean cowards want to have it both ways? They want to bash and assault our troops on a daily basis. They want to have million-man marches denouncing us as the Great Satan or Evil Occupiers. They insult us by not backing us up when our UNARMED plane is attacked by 4 NK MIGs. And now, when we give them what they want, they're screaming and hollering about "formal notification?" Go to hell, South Korea. We're bring our boys and girls home, where they will be appreciated as defenders of freedom and democracy. Have a nice life under your Dear Leader Kim Jong Il.

[bart99]

It isn't just that we should let China handle it. We should properly do some payback and have South Korea go begging to China to help them out of the mess they are in. ~chuckling~

No way they can play us for fools.

Of course, we MAY just decide to Nuke North Korea after pulling our troops out of the South. Though the casualities will be high in the South, the problem will be resloved then.

OK... Ok.... I'm sorta kidding.

[DoctorMichael]

The South Koreans have grown fat and lazy under American largesse.

I proscribe the Kim Jong Il Diet: Liberal quantities of tree bark.

[Dubya]

Very good post.

[Cold Heat]

Just a subtle reminder the S. Korean govt. (which has been very soft and hiding under our skirts) that the U.S. forces are not a given. They must get actively involved in their own defense and stop the re-unification BS!

[1rudeboy]

Wouldn't this qualify as a strategic withdrawal, rather than a tactical one?

[gcruse]

and stop the re-unification BS!

If we are ever going to get out of there short of war,
re-unification is one way to do it.  Were you against
German re-unification as well?

[Bill Davis FR]

bring the troops home and station them along the southern border...

[Kevin Curry]

But as memories of the Korean War and past tensions fade, South Korean public opinion has looked more at the negative side of hosting foreign troops, including their occupation of prime sites in Seoul and their immunity from local legal proceedings, and swung behind the tolerant approach of Mr Roh and his predecessor Kim Dae Jung towards the North.

How quickly they forget, how soon ungrateful.

May the last American GI in Seoul turn out the lights.

[11B3]

Move the troops from South Korea to Taiwan. Watch the Chinese get really nervous and upset that we will have taken away their prize. Checkmate.

[etcetera]

"This was a bombshell in South Korea..."

Change of underwear required! LOL!

[Cold Heat]

Were you against German re-unification as well?

Yes, actually. I thought that the economic differences would break the financial back of West Germany within 20years.

It looks good on paper, but was nearly equivalent to the U.S. merging with Mexico.(only worse)

As to the Korea's, no talk of re-unification at the present time is legitimate. The current regime in N.Korea is not going to make that possible. He will just use the issue to play games with the South and use them like toilet paper. (That is what I meant by BS)

But, with a different situation, I would be for it wholeheartedly.The peoples are the same and the country is undeveloped. It would be a good thing.

East germany, on the other hand was just a lot of people in a small place with nowhere to go. They were desperate and had no resources. They are not helping the situation and have added back to Germany, the very type of unrest and social crap that has made Germany a pariah and a danger since WWI. and earlier.

They are very likely to slide back into social strife and become another dictatorship or a false democracy.