[Analytics] As the US and South Korea play hardball on defence, will China emerge the winner?

Tensions in the US-Korea relationship have flared over rumours of a troop drawdown and mixed messages from Washington. This has raised questions about whether Seoul will go looking for security and defence support from other sources, including Beijing. John Power, Meaghan Tobin specially for the South China Morning Post.

When South Korea’s Chosun newspaper reported this week that the Trump administration planned to slash US troop numbers on the Korean peninsula if its long-standing ally did not cover far more of the cost, officials in Washington and Seoul scrambled to correct the record.

The Pentagon insisted on Thursday that there was “absolutely no truth” to claims that President Donald Trump could cut 3,000 to 4,000 troops if Seoul did not agree to pay up, and demanded an immediate retraction from the newspaper.

The defence ministry in Seoul stressed that the report, based on an unnamed diplomatic source in Washington, was not the official position of the US government, which keeps military forces in South Korea to deter aggression by Pyongyang.

But the episode served to accentuate deepening fissures in an alliance described as “forged in blood” during the Korean war, throwing into doubt a partnership that has been a linchpin of the regional security status quo.

It has raised questions about whether Seoul could go looking for security and defence support from other sources, including Beijing.

Seoul’s last-minute decision on Friday to temporarily extend a military intelligence sharing pact with Japan – after a strong push by Washington to maintain cooperation between the allies amid a dispute over wartime history and trade – will come as a relief to the US.

Yet uncertainty over the US commitment persists, especially after the Americans, led by US State Department official James DeHart, walked out of cost-sharing negotiations this week after Seoul balked at US demands to increase its contribution fivefold to US$5 billion.

Just days earlier, Korean defence minister Jeong Kyeong-doo and his Chinese counterpart Wei Fenghe agreed to pursue closer military cooperation – including increasing military hotlines and defence communication – on the sidelines of the Asean Defence Ministers Meeting in Bangkok.

Trump threatens South Korea, but US military commitments to long-time allies are considered safe
“There is growing embarrassment in the Korean military that this maelstrom has left the US alliance in a hostile state,” said Uk Yang, an adjunct professor at the Graduate School of National Defence Strategy at Hannam University.

“An alliance that has lasted 66 years won’t collapse overnight, but its firm foundations are being shaken by the administrations in Seoul and Washington.”

While Seoul has been publicly restrained in its statements on the rift, South Korean politicians and civic groups have expressed outrage over the White House’s treatment of its long-time ally.

“The Trump administration’s approach has sadly degraded US efforts to the level of a mercenary,” said Yang, comparing Trump’s tactics to blackmail.

Ahn Se-hyun, an international relations professor at the University of Seoul, said the US president was “confusing business and diplomacy”.

“His problem is his lack of understanding of security and diplomacy,” Ahn said.

Last week, a group of 47 left-leaning lawmakers, including members of the governing party of President Moon Jae-in, released a statement in which they accused Washington of stationing troops in Korea for its own interests and pledged to “stand tall in defiance and endure Trump’s threat”.

Nam Chang-hee, professor of international relations at Inha University, said many Koreans resented their country’s decades-long contributions being diminished as freeloading.

“During the cold war, Korea hosted nuclear weapons instead of the American people to reduce the risk of nuclear attack by the Soviet Union,” said Nam, comparing the South to other US allies such as Tokyo. “Japan could avoid this risk due to its Three Non-Nuclear Principles.”

Washington’s hardball tactics have incensed even South Korean conservatives, who have historically viewed the US as a protector from the threat of communism.

In an editorial on Thursday, the conservative and typically pro-American Chosun newspaper lambasted Trump for being “obsessed with the notion that Korea is stiffing him” and warned that Seoul would be forced to acquire nuclear weapons in the event of a US withdrawal.

South Korea refuses to pay US$5 billion to cover cost of US troops, causing talks to break down
Last year Korea was responsible for roughly 40 per cent of the day-to-day costs of hosting 28,500 US troops – about US$890 million, 8 per cent more than the previous year.

Korea also provides the land for US facilities rent-free, and covered more than 90 per cent of the US$10.7 billion it is costing for the ongoing relocation of the largest US base to Pyeongtaek, about 65km (40 miles) outside Seoul.

“The success or failure of the US-Korea alliance should not depend on dollar amounts,” said Derek Grossman, a senior defence analyst at the RAND Corporation, a think tank based in Washington.

“Korea and the United States not only have shared interests, but also shared values in upholding a rules-based order and promoting human rights and democracy,” added Grossman, a former Asia-Pacific intelligence analyst.

Analysts say Seoul may be posturing for better treatment from Washington by highlighting the possibility of closer defence cooperation with Beijing.

Soo Kim, a former US intelligence analyst now based at Rand, said if Korea were to gravitate towards China as a defence partner, this could start to tip the scales in the region’s balance of power.

“Even if the two sides haven’t signed an agreement, that the Korean government was willing to go public about this potential move reflects a bit of daring,” said Kim. “Perhaps [this is] Seoul’s way of trying to warn Washington it has other options.”

Grossman said losing its defence partnership with Korea to Chinese influence would be unacceptable for Washington’s Indo-Pacific strategy, “which is predicated on competing with and countering Beijing at nearly every turn”.

Despite warming ties, Nam at Inha University said there were constraints on how far Seoul could take any potential security cooperation with Beijing.

“Because South Korea is a democracy where public sentiment exerts a powerful influence, it would be difficult for the government to consider a military alliance with an unpopular, totalitarian state like China,” he said.