Uh Oh: US Walks Out On South Korea Talks Over Military Cost-Sharing

Hotair ^ | 11/20/2019 | Ed Morrissey

[SeekAndFind]

In a region where the subtlest of signals sends shockwaves, this one looks like a tsunami. Talks between the US and South Korea broke down earlier today in a remarkable show of public acrimony, with the Trump administration’s negotiator accusing Seoul of acting in bad faith. At issue is the bill that the White House wants South Korea to pay for our military protection, which quintuples Seoul’s current contribution:

The United States broke off talks with South Korea on Tuesday over how to share the cost of the two nations’ military alliance, injecting fresh tension into the relationship over Washington’s demands that Seoul pay sharply more.

President Trump has demanded South Korea raise fivefold its contribution to cover the cost of stationing 28,500 U.S. troops in the country, asking for nearly $5 billion, officials on both sides said. But that demand has triggered anger from Korean lawmakers and sparked concerns that Trump may decide to reduce the U.S. troop presence in the Korean Peninsula if talks break down.

The top U.S. negotiator, James DeHart, said the U.S. side decided to cut short the negotiations on Tuesday morning, the second of two days of planned talks. In a rare public show of disunity between the allies, he blamed South Korea for making proposals that “were not responsive to our request for fair and equitable burden sharing.”

“As a result we cut short our participation in the talks today in order to give the Korea side time to reconsider,” he said in a statement. “We look forward to resuming our negotiations when the Korean side is ready to work on the basis of partnership, on the basis of mutual trust.”

Trump has slammed NATO allies over their lack of proper contribution to common defense resources, so this isn’t out of the blue. The administration has raised the issue with South Korea before too, but until now managed to keep the issue from looking as though it had become a point of fracture. To do otherwise would be to send a very bad signal to North Korea that they can peel the US away from Seoul and start using their nuclear arms to pressure the South into capitulation — a situation that would present dire concerns to Japan.

So why allow this to blow up so spectacularly in public now? Trump might be getting tired of having his funding demands left unmet, part of his usual hardball negotiating tactics. Perhaps it also has something to do with signals out of Pyongyang the day before:

President Trump hinted at a possible meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un on Sunday, tweeting to the leader he addressed as “Mr. Chairman” that he would “see you soon!” But hours later, North Korean state media responded with a curt message: We don’t want a meeting if we don’t get anything from it.

In a statement to the Korean language website of the official Korean Central News Agency on Monday, Foreign Ministry adviser Kim Kye Gwan said that he had read Trump’s Twitter post but that North Korea was not interested in another fruitless meeting. …

Despite three meetings between Trump and Kim, “there has not been much improvement in relations with the United States,” wrote Kim Kye Gwan, a veteran diplomat who previously led the North Korean delegation in six-party denuclearization talks.

“We are no longer interested in such talks that bring nothing to us,” the statement continued. “As we have got nothing in return, we will no longer gift the U.S. president with something he can brag about, but get compensation for the successes that President Trump is proud of as his administrative achievements.”

That puts the shoe on the other foot. One of the criticisms of Trump’s attempt at personal negotiation with Kim had been that it unnecessarily raised the dictator’s profile as a legitimate head of state and a credible statesman. The insult intended by reversing that criticism and applying it to Trump cannot possibly have been missed. They are also openly accusing Trump of “betrayal” by not offering more incentives for bilateral progress.

At the very least, this leaves an apparent vacuum on the Korean peninsula. And guess who’s swooping in to fill it? This development didn’t get much attention yesterday, but after today’s diplomatic rupture, it should:

The defence ministers of South Korea and China have agreed to develop their security ties to ensure stability in north-east Asia, the latest indication that Washington’s long-standing alliances in the region are fraying.

On the sidelines of regional security talks in Bangkok on Sunday, Jeong Kyeong-doo, the South Korean minister of defence, and his Chinese counterpart, Wei Fenghe, agreed to set up more military hotlines and to push ahead with a visit by Mr Jeong to China next year to “foster bilateral exchanges and cooperation in defence”, South Korea’s defence ministry said.

Seoul’s announcement coincided with growing resentment at the $5 billion (£3.9bn) annual fee that Washington is demanding to keep 28,500 US troops in South Korea.

China would love nothing more than to squeeze the US off the Korean peninsula and make both regimes reliant on Beijing. It would greatly enhance its prestige, force the US out of a strategic position in Asia, and send a signal to Japan that it should rethink its own partnerships in light of American vacillation and self-interest. Thus far, it looks as though China won’t even need to offer trade concessions to the US in that exchange — they’ll just develop it on their own as the US infuriates Seoul.

This is a disaster in the making of far more importance than anything relating to Ukraine. Perhaps Trump has some master plan in place, but so far it hasn’t paid off in anything except North Korea’s occasional moratoriums on weapons testing and some photo ops. If Trump loses South Korea to China over $4 billion, it’s not going to look like greatness to anyone.

[Mariner]

“It does seem like a lot. $5B/28,500 = $175,000 per soldier.”

Our real costs are easily 4x that. Easily.

And that does not even include the cost of keeping the sea lanes open. And that is the absolute bedrock of SK security.

[billyboy15]

Trump has said it all along. Then world has been taking advantage of us for decades, literally picking our pockets.

Libs are madly trying to figure out how they can blame Trump because S Korea won’t pay.

[Yo-Yo]

Do you for one second believe that South Korea would willingly go over to China?

Before that ever happened, they would probably enter into a mutual assistance treaty with Japan and possibly with Taiwan, Indonesia, or even Australia and/or New Zealand, forming a new and meaningful “SEATO” organization.

[catnipman]

it’s simple, SK: you no payee, we no stayee ...

[Dr. Sivana]

I read elsewhere that this is a dress rehearsal for the big fish ... Germany.

[entropy12]

Why should South Korea, Saudi Arabia, Germany etc should pay anything for the military protection we give them? We have good credit, we can borrow more money, load it on to the national debt and protect all these countries. Because we are the mighty Super Power! Who gives a damm if our kids and grand kids will be burdened with more national debt which is going to obliterate their economic viability. So long as WE don’t have to pay the debt let us keep protecting all our Allies out of the goodness of our hearts and because we are THE SUPER POWER!

[MacNaughton]

Isn’t the left of center RoK administration working hard towards reconciliation/ re-unification with the NorKs? Careful what you ask for.

[USS Alaska]

The top U.S. negotiator, James DeHart, said the U.S. side decided to cut short the negotiations on Tuesday morning, the second of two days of planned talks. In a rare public show of disunity between the allies, he blamed South Korea for making proposals that “were not responsive to our request for fair and equitable burden sharing.”

“As a result we cut short our participation in the talks today in order to give the Korea side time to reconsider,” he said in a statement. “We look forward to resuming our negotiations when the Korean side is ready to work on the basis of partnership, on the basis of mutual trust.”

The question is, "Are we protecting the sokoe's border or are they protecting our border?

Do we need them or do they need us?

POTUS is tired of the USA pissing our tax dollars away when the countries we are protecting are living off of the back of US tax payers {me and you}.

THANK GOD FOR PRESIDENT DONALD JOHN TRUMP!!!

[NEMDF]

Wait for the media to turn this into:
POTUS is trying to bribe another country by threatening to draw down troops, unless SK will pay more.

[Scarpetta]

This is great news! I’m sick of milquetoast, mealymouthed diplomacy, even with our so-called staunched allies. America is no longer the world’s doormat.

[rightwingcrazy]

Maybe the South Koreans have been getting advice from Democrats promising an end to Trump. No more Trump, no more pressure.

[SeekAndFind]

RE: Marcos flew to Beijing(Peking) after Viet Nam fell. What did it get him?

Well, he was ousted by a coup and a People’s revolution 10 years later. In the end, he ended up in Hawaii and died there.

[odawg]

Wait just a minute. According to the current new wisdom unveiled at the impeachment hearings, when a more powerful leader requests something of a less powerful leader, it is not a request, it is an order.

[Grimmy]

I’d be surprised if South Korea went ‘all in’ with China.

*************

If South Korea doesn’t have large deposits of rare earths used in the manufacturing of electronics, China doesn’t want to own or have anything to do with South Korea, except maybe just enough to tweek our nose.

China’s moves in Africa and, more recently Greenland, are all about global control of the supply of rare earths for electronics manufacturing.

[dfwgator]

China and South Korea have one thing in common, a fear that if North Korea deteriorates, both countries would be flooded with millions of refugees they can’t handle.

[Sacajaweau]

Think about how much our soldiers contribute to their economy before you chalk us up as thieves. Remember, we have plenty of artillery that goes with those soldiers.

[Roman_War_Criminal]

China and S Korea might eventually go to war over the cobalt, manganese, nickel, copper and aluminum metal deposits worldwide to produce those lithium ion batteries that their tech companies are hedging bets on.

[DoodleDawg]

China and South Korea have one thing in common, a fear that if North Korea deteriorates, both countries would be flooded with millions of refugees they can’t handle.

At least South Korea has a couple of million land mines between them and the hungry horde. China doesn't.

[subterfuge]

Dealing with the South Korean government is difficult if not impossible at times. I’ve done it with a DOD contractor I worked for. They are notorious for demanding more just when deal seems to be done. Eventually you have to walk away from them because they won’t stop doing it.

[DoodleDawg]

If South Korea doesn’t have large deposits of rare earths used in the manufacturing of electronics, China doesn’t want to own or have anything to do with South Korea, except maybe just enough to tweek our nose.

Reason enough. If South Korea decides they can't depend on us then China may be their only option. For South Korea, moving closer to China places China between them and North Korea. For China, South Korea is an affluent trading partner to sell to and buy from.