Tag: Cost Sharing

This is really nothing new on the U.S. President’s part; he has been very consistent on South Korea paying more for the upkeep of the US-ROK alliance. The only question at this point is how much is the increase going to be?:

U.S. President Donald Trump has publicly increased pressure on South Korea to pay more for the upkeep of 28,500 United States Forces Korea (USFK), ahead of the next round of negotiations for the ongoing defense cost-sharing talks scheduled to be held in Washington, D.C., Tuesday and Wednesday. 

The 11th Special Measures Agreement (SMA) ― as the talks are called ― between Washington and Seoul began in September last year for this year’s defense cost-sharing, but its year-end deadline has passed with the countries failing to narrow their differences. 

“These rich countries have to pay for it. South Korea gave us $500 million,” Trump said during an interview with Fox News, Friday (local time). “They’re a wealthy country. They build all your television sets, they took that away from us, they build ships, they build a lot of things. I said we’re protecting and you’ve got to pay. They paid us $500 million; they’re going to pay us a lot more.”

Korea Times

You can read more at the link.

It is looking like the Trump administration’s pressure on South Korea is not only causing them to consider picking up the costs of environmental clean up for closed out U.S. bases, but buy more U.S. weapons systems as well:

In an apparent move to reduce South Korea’s financial contribution to maintaining the 28,500 United States Forces Korea troops here, the government has proposed purchasing up to $1 billion worth of U.S. weapons, officials directly involved with the issue told The Korea Times, Thursday.

“The South Korean team in the defense cost-sharing negotiations suggested a revised proposal to the United States. This included a Korea’s plan to purchase up to $1 billion worth of U.S. weapons by the end of 2020,” one official said.

“The government is seeking more inventive ways and applicable plans to reduce U.S. pressure on Seoul to pay more for defense. On a possible shopping list of U.S.-made defense products for South Korea could be advanced surveillance aircraft, along with the possible co-development of an anti-missile system between South Korean and U.S. defense contractors,” another official said.

Korea Times

You can read more at the link.

Here is the latest on the US-ROK cost sharing negotiations:

South Korea’s chief negotiator for the defense cost-sharing issue with the United States dismissed speculations of a possible withdrawal of the United States Forces Korea (USFK) from South Korea.

“The possible USFK withdrawal from South Korea wasn’t an issue,” South Korean official Jeong Eun-bo told reporters after closing the fourth round of defense cost negotiations with his U.S counterpart at the State Department, Washington D.C., Wednesday morning (KST).

Jeong added he and his U.S. counterpart didn’t delve into the specifics of recent remarks made by U.S. President Donald Trump in London regarding the fate of the USFK. About 28,500 U.S. troops are currently stationed in South Korea. 

Korea Times

Here is what President Trump had to say recently about the US-ROK alliance:

In London, Trump, who attended an event to mark the 70th anniversary of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), said it’s up for debate whether maintaining the USFK is in Washington’s national security interest. “It can be debated and I can go either way and make arguments both ways,” Trump told reporters.

Not surprisingly, the U.S. president asked South Korea to make fairer financial contributions and claimed he was able to extract an additional $500 million from Seoul last year for U.S. “protection,” adding Washington wants additional commitments.

Korea Times

You can read more at the link.

It seems that Korean workers would only be furloughed if there was U.S. troop cuts in South Korea. This is essentially what happened in the 2004-2005 timeframe when 2nd Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division was removed from the peninsula which helped lead to a number of U.S. military camp closures. We are not at that point yet with the current cost sharing issue:

Either on normal tours of duty or under a rotational scheme, American troops have comfortably adapted to their new lives in Korea thanks to seamless administrative, health, transportation, communications and cleaning services on the ground.

At the core of their adaptation is a little-known group of around 12,500 South Korean workers, many of whom are gripped by concerns that they could face unpaid leave or furloughs should defense cost-sharing talks between Seoul and Washington go awry.

The concerns have hardened into fears for Kim Hyun-woo, agitated by the passing thought that he could fail to bring home the bacon should he be furloughed by the U.S. Forces Korea (USFK), albeit temporarily. He used an alias due to the sensitivity of the issue.

“Though my wife works part time, I am the breadwinner, shouldering all costs related to food, mortgage repayments, education fees for my children and so on. You know what would happen to my family should I be forced to go on leave,” Kim told Yonhap News Agency.

“I hope that my worries about the furlough will be cleared soon, but I also wish that South Korea and the U.S. can find a good compromise, not a hurried one that could end up damaging the interests of both sides,” he added.

Yonhap

You can read more at the link.

This appears to be a way that the Korean government may try and hit back at U.S. negotiators trying to work out a new USFK cost sharing agreement:

Members of the ruling Democratic Party of Korea (DPK) Thursday floated the idea of including South Korea’s indirect financial contributions for the U.S. Forces Korea (USFK) as “leverage” if Washington keeps asking Seoul to pay “excessive” costs. 

“If Washington keeps making absurd demands, South Korea will seriously reconsider the adjustment of indirect costs created by the USFK apart from defense cost-sharing,” Rep. Cho Jeong-sik, chief policymaker of the DPK, said during a party meeting, Thursday.

Underlining that U.S. President Donald Trump’s current rumored demand for Seoul to pay $5 billion for U.S. forces here is “excessive” and not written in the U.S.―South Korea Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) or the Special Measures Agreement (SMA), he added the U.S.’ demands for Korea to pay more in additional categories such as rotation of U.S. forces and off-peninsula drills are irrelevant to the defense of the Korean Peninsula.

“Korea is making large contributions in many categories directly and indirectly. For example, Korea is letting the USFK use harbors, railways and land for free. It costs 3.5 trillion won as of 2015. Seoul can [recalculate the indirect contributions] and use them as leverage,” another DPK lawmaker who is familiar with the SMA negotiations said during a phone interview with The Korea Times.

Korea Times

You can read more at the link.

I think it is probably wise that Secretary Esper is trying to stay out of the cost sharing negotiations issue and not speculate on what if scenarios from the media:

U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper refused to speculate when asked Tuesday whether the U.S. would consider reducing troops in South Korea short of a deal on defense cost-sharing.

Esper was asked the question during a briefing with reporters near Manila, the Philippines, after the U.S. walked out of defense cost-sharing negotiations with South Korea in Seoul.

The U.S. is reportedly seeking an increase of Seoul’s contribution to $5 billion from the current $870 million for this year to support the upkeep of 28,500 American troops stationed in the Asian ally.

“I’m not going to prognosticate or speculate on what we may or may not do,” Esper said when asked what steps the U.S. would take if no deal is reached before the end of the year, and whether the U.S. would consider reducing forces in the South.

“The State Department has the lead in these discussions, and I’m sure they are in capable hands. We just take this one step at a time,” Esper continued, in footage of the press conference posted on the Pentagon’s website.

Yonhap

You can read more at the link.

I wonder if the U.S. negotiators have learned a few techniques from the North Koreans to pressure the ROK on the cost sharing issue. Storming out of negotiations as the media is describing it comes off as very North Korean like and not a good look for U.S. negotiators in my opinion:

 Defense cost-sharing talks between South Korea and the United States were abruptly cut short Tuesday as the U.S. negotiators walked out of the meeting and accused Seoul of making proposals falling short of “fair and equitable burden sharing.”

The unexpected ending underlined wide differences between the two sides after Washington’s reported demand for a fivefold increase in Seoul’s sharing of the cost of the upkeep of about 28,500 American troops stationed in South Korea.

The latest round of negotiations, which began Monday, was supposed to last through Tuesday. But Tuesday’s second day of talks ended in about an hour as the U.S. negotiators left the meeting, South Korean officials said.

“Unfortunately, the proposals that were put forward by the Korean team were not responsive to our request for fair and equitable burden sharing,” James DeHart of the U.S. State Department told local media shortly after the talks ended.

“As a result, we cut short our participation in the talks today in order to give the Korean side some time to reconsider and, I hope, to put forward new proposals that would enable both sides to work towards a mutually acceptable agreement,” he said. “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.”

Yonhap

You can read more at the link, but it appears what is going on is that the ROK is refusing to include payment for the deployment of strategic assets to the ROK like aircraft carriers, submarines, etc. that support exercises as well as show of forces against North Korea.

The Moon administration is probably liking this because politically it will help them in upcoming parliamentary elections early next year if they are perceived to be standing up to the Trump administration who is trying to fleece the hard working Korean taxpayer. This is good politics for them and likely why there will be no movement on this issue unless the U.S. side gives up the big increase in ROK contributions.

It appears that the media in Japan is pushing the 5x times greater spending narrative for U.S. troops just like the Korean media:

Japan’s government on Sunday denied a report it had been asked to fork over five times as much as it now pays to support United States forces stationed in the country.

Kyodo News reported Saturday that Japan had rejected a request for the funding increase that was delivered by John Bolton, then national security adviser to President Donald Trump, when he visited Tokyo in July.

Japanese Defense Minister Taro Kono refuted the report, according to a transcript of a Sunday press conference posted on the Defense Ministry’s website.

In Japan’s fiscal 2019 draft budget, about $1.8 billion has been earmarked to host U.S. forces, which include more than 50,000 servicemembers, mostly stationed on Okinawa. Japan would have to pay more than $9 billion annually if it had acceded to the request, Kyodo reported.

The talk about cost-sharing echoes news from South Korea, where U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper on Friday called on the government to increase its share of the cost to support 28,500 U.S. troops stationed on the divided peninsula.

Stars & Stripes

You can read more at the link, but this is called negotiations. I am sure the U.S. side gave a big number to start out with that will be reduced over time to amount both sides can live with. What will be interesting to see over time is the difference in reactions between the Japanese and Korean governments over this issue.

An anonymous presidential aide from the Blue House is criticizing the Trump administration’s attempt to get South Korea to pay more for the upkeep of USFK:

Political analysts said the exit of Mattis, who had once been described as one of the “adults in the room,” meant there were no people in the administration protecting the country from Trump’s worst impulses.

“South Korea was ready to pay more; however, Trump was asking too much. Also, Washington seemed to pay less attention to the U.S.-South Korea alliance, from Seoul’s standpoint, because South Korea wanted it to play some role in resolving the ongoing feud with japan. Trump has been treating its key allies as a piggy bank with his demands, which I believe is not a good thing,” a presidential aide told The Korea Times, last week.

The aide said the South Korea-U.S. alliance was at a major crossroads as Trump’s continued insistence that Seoul should pay more for the U.S. military presence as a key deterrent to North Korea has “tested Seoul’s confidence” in the U.S.

Some civic groups are calling for a drastic shift in the alliance with the United States including a possible withdrawal or a drastic reduction of the USFK. 

A recent survey by the Korea Institute for National Unification released last week showed 96 percent of South Koreans were against paying more for the U.S. military presence. 

Korea Times

You can read more at the link, but the civic groups calling for the withdrawal of USFK are the usual leftist groups. These groups want USFK to withdraw because that is part of the master strategy they seek of a confederation with North Korea. This won’t happen as long as the US-ROK alliance exists.