On Sunday, August 16, 2026, local time, Trump posted a lengthy message (commonly referred to in China as a "tweet") on his own social platform, Truth Social:

"Given my very good relationship with North Korea's Kim Jong-un, I am dissatisfied with the fact that the United States long ago agreed to participate in joint military exercises with South Korea.

These drills are not only extremely costly, with the vast majority of expenses borne by the United States (as always!), but also send a completely inappropriate and hostile signal to a nation that, during Donald J. Trump’s presidency, has been non-threatening and respectful.

Therefore, based on the fact that canceling them now would be too late, I have instructed Secretary of War Pete Hegseth to drastically reduce the scale of these joint military exercises!"

"Although somewhat tangential (?), I recently asked the South Korean president whether they would be willing to join us in pursuing nuclear disarmament of the Islamic Republic of Iran—they replied, 'No, thank you.'"

The essence of this tweet lies in Trump’s attempt—against a backdrop of being overstretched in the Middle East and facing uncooperative allies—to simultaneously appease North Korea, pressure South Korea, and justify his actions domestically by cutting military exercises. At its core, this move represents the complete "transactionalization" of the U.S.-South Korea alliance security commitment, marking a shift in America’s military posture in Northeast Asia from a "institutionalized commitment" toward a "leverage subject to adjustment at the discretion of the sitting president."

Context and key facts behind the tweet’s release:

On August 16, 2026—less than 24 hours before the start of the U.S.-South Korea “Ulchi Freedom Shield” (UFS) joint military exercises—Trump posted a lengthy message on Truth Social announcing he had already directed “Secretary of War” Pete Hegseth to significantly reduce the scale of the drills. Originally scheduled for August 17–27, the 11-day exercise involved 18,000 South Korean troops and substantial numbers of U.S. forces stationed in Korea, aimed at enhancing readiness against potential threats from North Korea. Trump publicly cited two reasons: the enormous cost of the drills, most of which is paid by the U.S.; and the perception that the drills send a "completely inappropriate and hostile signal" to North Korea, which, under his administration, had been "non-threatening and respectful." The post concluded with a pointed remark: he recently invited South Korea to join U.S.-led efforts to denuclearize Iran, to which Seoul responded, “No, thank you.”

Canceling the exercise just hours before it began—with 18,000 South Korean soldiers and U.S. forces already deployed, and countless rehearsal scenarios completed—Trump overturned all preparations with a single tweet. This was not a diplomatic gesture; it was an open dismantling of an ally’s decision-making process.

Reactions and future implications:

North Korea: Previously labeled the drills as a "prelude to aggression." Trump’s statement objectively aligns with Pyongyang’s stance, though no formal response has yet been issued.

South Korea: President Yoon Suk-yeol had just proposed, on August 15, a “comprehensive and stable blueprint for peaceful coexistence with North Korea.” While Trump’s action partially aligns with this vision, Seoul is more concerned about being targeted directly by the U.S.—now facing dual pressures over defense cost-sharing and the Iran denuclearization initiative.

Domestic U.S.: The Pentagon and military leadership had previously expressed repeated dissatisfaction with Trump’s unilateral adjustments to military exercise scales. This latest “cancellation” may further deepen the rift between civilian leadership and the military establishment.

In summary, Trump’s tweet appears to be about saving money and signaling goodwill toward North Korea—but in reality, it uses the peninsula’s security commitments as bargaining chips, simultaneously pressuring South Korea, satisfying domestic political demands, and extending an olive branch to Pyongyang. What matters most is not how many fewer troops will be involved in this particular exercise, but rather: when Trump next expresses dissatisfaction, what other ways might the U.S.-South Korea alliance be leveraged?

Original article: toutiao.com/article/1873732957386761/

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.