Plan to Pull Troops Off DMZ Causes Stir

AP | 6/07/03 | SANG-HUN CHOE

[kattracks]

SEOUL, South Korea (AP) — The Pentagon's announcement this week that American forces will pull back from the demilitarized zone between North and South Korea after 50 years of duty threatens to change the dynamic along the boundary.

Since the Korean War ended in 1953, South Korea has viewed U.S. troops guarding the zone as a "tripwire" — a guarantee that the United States would intervene immediately if the communist North attacked.

Now, the Pentagon says it can better deter North Korea by moving U.S. troops farther south. But while the allies have yet to say when the relocation will occur, many South Koreans are already wondering about the repercussions.

"When people hear the news, their immediate reaction often is, 'What? Who's going to defend the border? Are the Americans moving south so that they can leave our country fast when the war breaks out?'" said Song Young-sun, an analyst in Seoul's Korea Institute of Defense Analysis.

South Korea's military could fill in the border security role when the Americans pull back.

In Manila on Friday, Adm. Thomas Fargo, U.S. military commander for the Pacific, said South Korea's military is "much more capable than it was 10 or 15 years ago ... They have made dramatic improvements in their own capability."

Elderly South Koreans have vivid memories of the 1950-53 Korean War, when communist invaders from the North swept over most of the South within weeks. Eventually, the Northern forces were pushed back by American-led U.N. forces, but allied forces suffered heavy losses in the fighting, including 33,700 U.S. troops.

A half-century after the war ended in an armistice, not a peace treaty, tensions remain high today over Pyongyang's suspected development of nuclear weapons.

North Korea keeps two-thirds of its 1.1 million-strong military, the world's fifth largest, near the border. In a moment's notice, its artillery and rocket launchers can showers thousands of shells on Seoul, turning the capital, only 37 miles south of the border, into what North Korea says would be a "sea of fire."

From a military standpoint, keeping so many American ground troops within the range of artillery doesn't make much sense, strategists say. Large numbers of U.S. troops would likely die in the first hours of a North Korean attack, or would have to retreat and regroup.

Younger South Koreans, growing up amid economic comforts and a mood of reconciliation with North Korea, are less grateful for the American military presence and more confident of peace.

Some radicals even see the foreign military presence as a slight to national pride. The death of two girls hit by a U.S. military vehicle triggered massive anti-American rallies late last year.

President Bush and South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun believe South Korea's economy, the world's 11th largest, allows it to play a bigger role defending itself.

"This is a time to move beyond outmoded concepts or catch phrases such as the term 'tripwire,'" Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy U.S. defense secretary, said in Seoul on Monday.

In the Pentagon's view, moving U.S. troops away from the DMZ and consolidating them at perhaps two main "hub" bases south of Seoul will still enable them to respond quickly. It believes the relocations will give the U.S. forces the flexibility to train for missions elsewhere in the region.

But "the redeployment can also be a direct message to North Korea that the United States is now readier than ever to launch a pre-emptive strike if Pyongyang does not behave," said Park June-young, a political scientist at Seoul's Ewha Woman's University.

Bush has said he prefers diplomacy in trying to persuade Pyongyang to give up its nuclear weapons programs, but has not ruled out military options. Pyongyang says Washington plans to invade following its victory in Iraq.

Prime Minister Koh Gun had urged the U.S. military to delay talk of redeployment until after the North Korean nuclear crisis has been resolved.

Some South Koreans worry the removal of U.S. forces from the border could raise the potential for hostilities on the peninsula. "The U.S. troop presence near the DMZ meant they wouldn't do anything dangerous because they were so close to North Korea. Now when they are far away, they will feel more comfortable to attack North Korea and start a war," said Kim Jong-soo, 42, a textile dealer in Seoul.

South Korean Foreign Minister Yoon Young-kwan told Seoul's SBS radio Friday that the redeployment would take "a significant amount of time," probably five to six years.

The realignment will force South Korea to boost its defense spending to help finance part of the relocations and make up for equipment lost by the withdrawal.

"The concept of tripwire is a selfish concept for South Koreans," said Park. "It's time to change that. It doesn't really matter where the U.S. troops are stationed, as long as they are in South Korea."

But many here don't buy that explanation.

"We could sleep in comfort, with our legs stretched, because of those American soldiers between us and North Korea," said Park Joong-kwon, 65, who attended a recent rally in Seoul supporting U.S. military presence.

With the troops farther south, he said, "I will feel more vulnerable."

[dokmad]

"With the troops farther south, he said, "I will feel more vulnerable."

I have a feeling that this move, strategically, will shut up the SK's whining about Americans as well as send a message to the north that it's getting closer to fireworks time. This is going to become quite interesting.

[dennisw]

I have no problem with this

BUT.....

So much for US and UN guarantees to police and enforce a MidEast peace treaty. Because they sure won't police themselves.

[DB]

Give S.K. exactly one H bomb and leave.

Just fantasizing...

[gulfcoast6]

The South Koren demostrators should have thought about this when they demostrated against us, over and over and over again. I say bring our troops home.

[Paul_B]

This recalls the massive anti-US demos in SK during the ramp-up to the Iraqi War. IIRC, Rumsfeld wondered aloud if keeping US troops in the likes of SK and Germany continued to be wise.

Payback can be ... difficult. Taking in the American umbrella is sure to prompt an "interesting" political debate within SK. One that seems to be sorely needed.

Or perhaps those anti-American South Koreans actually are out and out communists, beyond the benefit of debate.

[Oschisms]

This recalls the massive anti-US demos in SK during the ramp-up to the Iraqi War. IIRC, Rumsfeld wondered aloud if keeping US troops in the likes of SK and Germany continued to be wise.

What is it that payback's called again?

More seriesly, this is going to force China to deal with the problem that they created.

[Jumper]

I spent over six years in Korea as soldier; these people no longer need US troops, but rather now need to use the fruits of democracy and industrialization to provide their own security. They compete with the US economically and the past two presidential administrations used an Anti-American theme to rally their voters.... Now they want American Soldiers there? We are no longer the cash-cow for those who treat us as a commodity to be used on a whim for personal gain. Now, Korea should look inward for her security and let that Pride that Demanded US Troop Withdraw find a ingenius way to make peace among themselves.

[Arkie2]

Militarily this makes sense. Our troops won't be overrun immediately and the pull back creates a kill zone. Anything that crosses the border can be attacked relentlessly with no fear of friendly casualties. I see it as a move to be ready for the N. Koreans if they really want to try us on.

[river rat]

Do the South Koreans desire Indepence and Freedom enough to have their sons die to defend what they have --- or, only enough to have American mother's sons die for them?

All Americans in the DMZ should be REMOVED...and placed where they would NOT be the first to die in the event of an attack....

The South Koreans need to feel the REAL HEAT of the situation - and get weaned from the American "security" tit of protection.....

North Korea will have to get right ---- or war WILL come...

Semper Fi

[bert]

Moving the troops south out of zeroed artillery range is an agressive move. They will be alive and ready to kill all that enter the DMZ.

[PPHSFL]

This is a good thing, but I have a feeling that the North will do something before we withdrawal to the South.

[q_an_a]

Too many people that don't pay taxes and get a vote hate having to make a sacrifice. This holds true in the USA and in S. Korea. A free pass makes people think they are owed something that others have done on their behalf.

Make everyone in S. Korea enter a draft to protect their country and you will see a few less jobs leaving the USA as they struggle to pay to defend themselves and transfer energy from cars to tanks. That holds true for lots of our allies.

[SandRat]

The South Koren demostrators should have thought about this when they demostrated against us, over and over and over again. I say bring our troops home.

.... should have thought --- that's the problem, they didn't! Like all college radicals that spew commie crap, they don't think; they just regurgitate the lies that socialism/communism has feed them and like good little socialist revolutionaries follow orders from the CommIntern.

[Cdnexpat]

I hardly know where to start, SK has a universal draft, thirty months military service for every male, they are also required to return to the military every year after their service to polish up there skills.
As for pulling your troops out think it through. You seem to forget that your government is signing treaties with other governments, not a bunch of students running around in the street. What do you think your word will be worth if you pull out of SK when the heat is on? What would happen to GW's efforts to stablize the middle east when everyone knows that your government does not honor it's treaties? Isn't this what France is being vilified for?
If you pull your troops the ROK will have to start building nuclear weapons and missles to deliver them. What would your pullout tell the Japanese? I guess they have to start building nuclear weapons and missles too. So much for non-proliferation.
What about the governments that your trying to bring onside in the war against terror? Korea sent troops to both Afganistan and Iraq and supported the US publicly in both wars. Is that your message to governments that are deciding whether or not to join the war against terror, America fair weathered friend?
In many ways your view is no different than that of the protesting students. You are recomending a course of action without considering any of the results that can occur because of it. These are serious issues and should be treated as such.

[Grampa Dave]

Get a grip on reality.

The message is very clear.

When a country doesn't support America in these days, they endanger American lives. That will not be tolerated after 9/11.

We have more than lived up to our commitment in Korea. We are not like Canada, France or Germany where doing right is against their inner core.

Remove our soldiers from the country all together. They have been there as a trip wire all too long. Maybe Japan would like to have our soldiers there. Australia is sending signals that they would be welcome in Australia.

[Cdnexpat]

Please define how you lived up to your commitment in Korea.

[Lady Eileen]

bump...thanks for the post.

[Grampa Dave]

Hey bozo, our women and men are not there to protect you and your family living in S. Korea. We have been there since the Korean War was ended.

If you have a problem with them leaving, you had best go back to Canada!

What an ingrate you are! You are typical of the whining ex Canadians who serve no real purpose in this world and bitch about what America has done.

[Cdnexpat]

Well for starters my family lives in Canada so I guess they are not in any real need of protection. I have not suggested that the US cannot withdraw it's troops, I have suggested that America has been living up to it's international obligations and must continue to do so or be willing to face the consequences of not doing so. I also suggested that some writers have not considered the consequences of a troop pullout and that this lack of thought makes them no different than the students who are protesting against the presence of the soldiers. If you read my post you will note that I have not commented at all on the redeployment of troops. I am not certain what exactly it is I am being ungrateful about. I do not believe that I have whined in any of my posts though in deference to you I shall review them. As for my serving no purpose in the world, I am probably too biased to comment on that accurately so I shall take your word for it. Finally I do not believe that I have made any comment on "what America has done".

Bozo