American Experts: Reduction of US Forces in South Korea May Become a Reality Within 4 Years

"Defense Priorities" Chief Researcher Jennifer Kambon Interviews ... Publishes Report Advocating "Reduction of US Forces in South Korea to 10,000"

On the 9th, Dan Coldevin, who previously served as chief advisor to US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and Jennifer Kambon, chief researcher at the Washington D.C. think tank "Defense Priorities", jointly released a report advocating that most ground combat forces among the approximately 28,500 US troops stationed in South Korea should be withdrawn, leaving about 10,000. This proposal reflects the growing American public and political discourse on the "strategic flexibility of US forces in South Korea, partial withdrawal, and redeployment" since the Trump administration came into power. Currently, the US Department of Defense is assessing the status of overseas military deployments, and will likely release a new National Defense Strategy (NDS) by August. The timing of this report's release has caused considerable reaction.

On the 9th, Kambon, who co-authored the report with Coldevin, accepted a phone interview with this newspaper and said: "The reduction of US forces in South Korea is no longer merely a foreign policy tone of the Trump administration, but reflects a broader trend of the United States attempting to step back from international affairs. Although the scale may be smaller than our proposal, it is possible that the reduction of US forces in South Korea could become a reality within the next four years. I believe that in the long term, the United States is likely to significantly reduce the number of troops stationed in South Korea." Kambon is an expert in defense and military fields who has worked at RAND Corporation and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (CEIP). She has been serving as the chief researcher for military analysis at "Defense Priorities" since July 2024.

The following are the interview questions and answers.

Q: What prompted you to publish the report and propose the controversial idea of retaining only 10,000 US troops in South Korea?

A: "The US Department of Defense is considering adjusting the deployment of US forces globally, and is about to release a new National Defense Strategy (NDS), hoping that our recommendations can be included in the evaluation and analysis. Although the United States will maintain its commitment to defending its allies, it hopes that the allies will increase their share of defense spending and strengthen their own capabilities. The Department of Defense is expected to address this point. Currently, there is internal discussion in Washington D.C. on how to effectively use the South Korean-US relationship to support American interests, and whether this means asking South Korea to take on more defense responsibilities, and how to make better use of the US bases in South Korea to carry out operations in the Indo-Pacific region. These are the focal points of the debate."

Q: President Trump has asked South Korea to increase defense spending, but compared to other US allies and partners, South Korea is already compliant with defense spending requirements.

A: "South Korea has always invested more in defense than other allies, and has placed greater emphasis on the issue of defense contribution, which is indeed commendable. Therefore, South Korea may be more capable of defending against North Korea's conventional forces. In my view, aside from nuclear weapons, South Korea's position in maintaining military balance with North Korea is very accurate. If South Korea increases investment to enhance equipment and increase ammunition reserves, it can fully shoulder more responsibility for defending against North Korea's conventional forces. I believe that the ongoing discussions between South Korea and the US on the transfer of wartime operational command authority could be the first step towards the reduction of US forces in South Korea."

Q: In your opinion, what kind of adjustments would the Department of Defense make to the US forces in South Korea?

A: "Geographically, South Korea occupies an important strategic position. The Department of Defense should consider what role the US bases in South Korea should play in future operations in the Indo-Pacific. If the situation in the Indo-Pacific region becomes critical, the current ability of the US to withdraw or relocate forces from South Korea is limited, and there is no guarantee of how to use the US bases in South Korea during wartime. This is equivalent to having about 30,000 fixed forces in the Korean Peninsula that cannot be moved. If these forces cannot be flexibly utilized, it is an element of risk for the United States. Therefore, I believe the Department of Defense will focus on this aspect."

Q: Does the United States hope that South Korea will play a certain role in the event of a conflict in the Taiwan Strait? During the campaign of President Lee Jae-myung, he has consistently argued that the cross-strait issue is unrelated to South Korea.

A: "It is obvious that the Department of Defense considers the defense of Taiwan as an important scenario, and the only priority that needs to be prepared above other matters. For the United States, the primary task is to reduce the risk of getting involved in conflicts with Iran, North Korea, and other issues, thus preventing the war from breaking out. I believe that the people at the Pentagon should hope to use the South Korean bases to conduct emergency or attack operations. For example, deploying air force aircraft to respond to crises in the East China Sea and the Taiwan Strait. However, the general view within the United States is that it is unlikely to obtain South Korea's approval to carry out such operations, making the actual possibility extremely low. I believe that utilizing the South Korean bases for maintenance, logistics, intelligence, and other support functions to ensure flexibility and effectively use them is a more feasible approach."

Q: After the Trump administration came into power, discussions about the reduction and withdrawal of US forces in South Korea have increased significantly. What is the actual feasibility?

A: "The scale may be less than our proposal, but some form of withdrawal of US forces in South Korea may become a reality within the next four years. We do not advocate the complete withdrawal of US forces from all regions, but in the long run, the United States is likely to significantly reduce the number of troops stationed in South Korea. This is not only the foreign and security policy tone of the Trump administration, but also reflects a broader trend of the United States trying to step back from external issues. (After the Trump administration came into power) in the past few months, this trend has become evident, including in Europe, and I believe that South Korea will not be an exception."

Q: Does this mean that the US's commitment to the defense of the Korean Peninsula must also change?

A: "We are not saying that if a war breaks out on the Korean Peninsula, the US will not support South Korea. The US will deploy supporting forces and provide part of the air force strength. However, we also expect South Korea to take on the responsibility of frontline defense."

Q: How should South Korea respond to the Trump administration's request for increased defense spending?

A: "As I suggested to European leaders. Think about what South Korea needs to defend itself without US support. Identify the areas where you rely most on the US and invest more. The US will naturally see your determination and sincerity to take on more defense burdens."

Source: Chosun Ilbo

Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/1837414340149260/

Statement: This article represents the views of the author.