What Is the Future of USFK after Korean Reunification?
A reunified Korean peninsula is a big if, but if it did happen one thing is for sure that USFK’s role in South Korea would undoubtedly change if not end all together. That is what former CIA analyst Sue Mi Terry writes about in a paper discussed in the below National Interest article. I for one think that the ROK would want to keep USFK intact with less troops on the ground as a hedge against any Chinese adventurism on the peninsula:
Last week Kim Jong-un marked the fourth anniversary of his succession to leadership and his father’s death in North Korea. The leadership transition reignited discussion among North Korea watchers over how and whether the regime would be able to survive. Two years later, Kim had his uncle, Jang Song-thaek, executed for treason, sparking another round of speculation over whether the execution reflected a step toward consolidation of power under or was evidence of infighting that might lead to a leadership vacuum in Pyongyang. Because North Korea’s totalitarian system requires isolation to perpetuate political control yet is increasingly penetrated by markets and information, speculation about North Korea’s collapse will persist, and outside observers will judge that Kim is playing a losing hand.
For this reason, policy wonks continue to discuss whether North Korea might collapse and what challenges might emerge out of such a scenario. Nevertheless, seldom discussed is how a unified Korea might behave or how the U.S.-South Korea alliance might or might not adapt, change or even dissolve as a result of unification. Answers to these questions, of course, are speculative and are difficult to conceptualize, but Sue Mi Terry, managing director for Korea at BowerGroupAsia and former CIA analyst, seeks to tackle them straight on in her discussion paper, “Unified Korea and the Future of the U.S.-South Korea Alliance.”
Starting with the most likely scenario that unification will occur with South Korea absorbing the North without a devastating war, Terry argues that a unified Korea would face three possible strategic choices: continuing the alliance with the United States in some form, becoming an independent regional power and tilting toward China. A multilateral security arrangement or a collective security mechanism is unlikely to materialize as an option. [The National Interest]
You can read the rest at the link.
Reunification would mean, among other things, the official end of the war which started in 1950. At that point, the mission of the United States and the United Nations to defend the ROK from North Korean aggression will have ended, mainly because the two countries would no longer exist as separate entities. If the unified country remains a member of the UN and a signatory to the NPT, then it would be up to Korea to decide if they would like the US to continue its military presence on the peninsula. The thorny issue would be the nuclear umbrella, because ostensibly that is in place to protect the ROK from NK. If we continue to offer this protection to the unified Korea, the implication is that we are protecting them from Russia and China. It’s interesting to consider that China’s continued support of North Korea actually justifies the US military presence in the region, including the nuclear umbrella.
Won’t happen in our lifetimes
They said that about the Berlin Wall. Then an official from the GDR went off his notes and the Wall came down
North Korea has one “Strongman” who has purged the people who actually know what they are doing, and replaced them with ??? Well, with people who rubber stamped Fatty Kim’s Ski Resort and Amusement Parks. But should Fat Boy stumble and fall down the steps one day? Older Brother Jong Nam is wholly owned by China, Middle Brother Jong Chul is a pole smoker, and Baby Sister Sul Song is an icky, smelly girl, and thus a non-starter without major ground preparations.
No one else is left, something the Kim Family has worked hard to ensure. The fall of North Korea could happen very fast.