[Smart Q&A: Kim Young-ho] Implications of the New U.S. Defense Strategy and Tasks for South Korean Defense Policy

YouTube Link: video.eai.or.kr/120221_smartkyh_k.flv

Professor Kim Young-ho holds a Ph.D. in Political Science from The Ohio State University and is currently a professor in the Department of Security Policy at the National Defense University and the director of the Center for U.S.-China Studies at the Institute for Security Affairs.

Key Contents of the New U.S. Defense Strategy

Assessment of the Strategic Security Situation

"Background of the U.S. 2012 New Defense Strategy Guidelines – Seeking a New Strategy to Maintain Global Leadership Amidst a Changing Strategic Environment and Fiscal Pressures"

The U.S. war on terror, pursued globally over the past decade, is reaching its conclusion. The United States, having concluded its operations in Iraq and now Afghanistan, finds itself at a transitional juncture, needing to seek a defense strategy to prepare for new threats.

The continuous rise of China is assessed as a significant factor impacting U.S. national interests in the Asia-Pacific region.

The U.S. economic recession, exacerbated since the 2008 global financial crisis, shows little sign of recovery. Fiscal pressures from economic stimulus and war expenditures are intensifying. Consequently, the U.S. Congress passed the Budget Control Act of 2011 late last year, legally mandating budget reductions, which necessitates a cut of $478 billion in defense spending over the next decade.

It is within this context of a changing security environment and fiscal challenges that the new defense strategy guidelines, Sustaining U.S. Global Leadership: Priorities for 21st Century Defense, were proposed, aiming to maintain U.S. power and leadership.

New Directions of U.S. Defense Strategy

Aiming to foster a military that is small in size but agile and efficient.

The core of the new U.S. defense strategy guidelines is to build a military that is 1) small, agile, and efficient; 2) flexible and adaptable, capable of rapid projection and deployment; and 3) multi-functional, equipped with advanced weapons and equipment.

Key military focus areas have also been adjusted. Previously, Europe was the most strategically important region, followed by the Middle East. However, in the new defense strategy guidelines, the Asia-Pacific region has emerged as the most critical area, signifying a shift in strategic priorities.

The emphasis on enhancing capabilities to counter asymmetric warfare is another significant change. This can be seen as a natural consequence of the adjustment in key strategic regions. While plans include reducing ground forces by 100,000 (80,000 Army and 20,000 Marines), naval and air force capabilities are being maintained or even expanded. This is further evidenced by the emphasis on deepening the "Joint Operational Access Concept." In essence, the new strategic focus areas identify countries with Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2/AD) capabilities—primarily China and Iran—as major threats, as they can use missiles, submarines, and electronic warfare to impede U.S. force projection and operations. The strategy underscores the need to develop countermeasures against such threats.

Implications of the U.S. Defense Strategy Shift

Positive Aspects

"Strengthening U.S. Forces in the Region Will Enhance Deterrence Against North Korea"

"South Korea's Strategic Value Will Also Increase"

The shift in strategic priority from Europe to the Asia-Pacific region can be assessed as having positive implications. The strengthening of U.S. forces in the Asia-Pacific, including South Korea, Japan, and Australia, is expected to naturally enhance deterrence against North Korea.

In particular, the role of U.S. forces in South Korea and Japan will become crucial in managing future U.S.-China relations, thereby increasing South Korea's strategic value to the United States. Consequently, the U.S. is likely to place greater importance on and further strengthen the ROK-U.S. alliance.

Aspects Requiring Attention

"Increased Likelihood of Higher Alliance Maintenance Costs"

"If the Trend of Alliance Network Formation Among South Korea, the U.S., Japan, and Australia Strengthens, It Could Provoke China in the Medium to Long Term"

The challenge lies in the fact that the strengthening of U.S. forces in the Asia-Pacific is occurring amidst U.S. fiscal difficulties. This implies an increased likelihood that the U.S. will demand greater role performance and cost-sharing from its allies. Consequently, South Korea may face increased demands for defense cost-sharing or a broader regional role from the U.S. in the future. Therefore, preparation is needed for potential increases in alliance maintenance costs and the geographical and functional expansion of the ROK-U.S. alliance.

With the relative weakening of U.S. power, the U.S. may seek to activate a network among its allies in the Asia-Pacific, beyond traditional bilateral alliances. This could involve fostering military solidarity and cooperation among countries such as South Korea, Japan, Australia, and Thailand. Such a trend could be perceived by China as an attempt to encircle or contain it. Therefore, South Korea should be cautious about appearing too deeply involved in direct and overt U.S. military containment efforts against China.

Tasks for South Korean Defense Policy

(1) While short-term impacts are minimal, thorough analysis and response measures for medium- to long-term security environment changes are necessary.

"Care must be taken not to hinder the balanced development of South Korea's three armed forces."

"The strengthening of strategic flexibility for U.S. Forces in Korea could weaken alert posture against North Korea or lead to miscalculation by North Korea."

In the short term, the new U.S. defense strategy is unlikely to have significant negative impacts on South Korea's security situation. However, in the medium to long term, there are aspects that require wise strategic judgment and cautious handling.

Currently, ROK-U.S. military cooperation is structured with South Korean forces primarily responsible for ground forces and U.S. forces for naval and air power. If the new defense strategy guidelines lead the U.S. to reduce ground forces and strengthen naval and air power, the current division of roles in ROK-U.S. military cooperation is likely to become entrenched or further reinforced. However, from a future-oriented perspective, the enhancement of jointness and the balanced development of the three armed forces are crucial and urgent tasks for the South Korean military. Therefore, care must be taken to ensure that the new U.S. defense strategy guidelines do not distort South Korea's medium- to long-term force development direction.

The new defense strategy guidelines suggest an increase in U.S. forces in the Asia-Pacific, including those stationed in South Korea, while reducing forces in other regions like Europe. However, this also implies that U.S. forces in the Asia-Pacific will be utilized more extensively when contingencies arise in other parts of the world. In such scenarios, the strategic flexibility of U.S. Forces in Korea, meaning their potential deployment to other regions, will significantly increase. This could lead to a weakening of the alert posture against North Korea due to frequent deployments and withdrawals of U.S. Forces in Korea, or North Korea might miscalculate the situation as a weakening of readiness, even if the alert posture remains unchanged. Therefore, thorough contingency plans through close prior consultation between South Korea and the U.S. are necessary to prepare for such situations.

(2) "It should be utilized as an opportunity to enhance the capabilities of the South Korean military."

In accordance with the new defense strategy guidelines, the U.S. military will further accelerate efforts to enhance asymmetric capabilities, precision strike capabilities, and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities. The pursuit of enhanced capabilities in these areas can offer significant insights and assistance for the South Korean military's future-oriented advanced force development efforts. Therefore, it is necessary to actively participate through various channels and methods such as joint development, combined training and exercises, and military exchanges in the U.S. military's future force enhancement initiatives, thereby effectively utilizing this as an opportunity to develop and acquire advanced weapon systems and strategies/tactics needed by the South Korean military.

(3) "Wisely employ smart diplomatic strategies for peace settlement in Northeast Asia without getting caught in the U.S.-China competition."

The ROK-U.S. alliance is important and necessary for defense against and deterrence of North Korea, at least until unification is achieved. However, given China's suspicions regarding the new U.S. defense strategy, South Korea's participation in overt and direct U.S. containment policies against China will not significantly benefit South Korea's national interests or security. Therefore, while maintaining the ROK-U.S. alliance, South Korea should also activate bilateral and multilateral military exchanges and cooperation with neighboring countries, including China, Russia, and Japan. Furthermore, in the medium to long term, it should pursue wise strategic military diplomacy for the establishment of a regional multilateral security cooperation system.

The East Asia Institute (EAI) has been selected as a core research institution for the MacArthur Foundation's 'Asia Security Initiative' program and is receiving financial support. EAI has been conducting Smart Q&A interviews with domestic and international experts to provide timely and in-depth analysis of current issues. This manuscript was compiled by Researcher Kim Yang-gyu (EAI Center for Asian Security Studies) and Team Leader Kim Ha-jeong (EAI Center for Asian Security Studies) based on interview content. The opinions expressed are those of the individual experts and do not represent the views of the East Asia Institute. Please cite the source when quoting from Smart Q&A.