| |
US-Korea: Toward an equal
partnership
By William M Drennan and
James J Przystup
(Used by permission of Pacific Forum CSIS)
Fifty
years ago, the United States and South Korea signed a
mutual defense treaty designed to meet the "common
danger" North Korea posed to the survival of the South
and to vital US interests. The golden anniversary should
be cause for celebration, but hold the applause. The
alliance is in serious trouble, and possibly terminal
decline, unless urgent steps are taken to revitalize it.
By any objective standard, the alliance has been
a huge success. It has deterred North Korea from further
large-scale aggression, while creating an environment in
which the South Korean people have built the world's
12th-largest economy and transformed authoritarian rule
into vibrant democracy.
The problem is not that
the alliance has outlived its purpose - with its nuclear
weapons and missile programs, North Korea has only grown
more dangerous - but rather that the US and South Korea
no longer agree on the "common danger".
In
today's South Korea, solidarity with the United States
is being undermined by a hyper-nationalism that
emphasizes the "one-ness" of Koreans - both North and
South, ascribes a new, benign intent toward the
repressive regime in North Korea and paints the United
States as the principal obstacle to Korean
reconciliation. The older "silent majority" of alliance
supporters is giving way to younger generations
determined to build a different relationship with the
North, even at the expense of ties to the United States.
It is this generational divide in Korean society that
runs the risk of splitting the alliance.
Looking
ahead, three questions need to be addressed by South
Koreans and Americans. Does the alliance have a future?
If so, what should it look like? And how do we get
there?
The short answer to the first question is
"Yes, it should." The alliance continues to serve the
broad national-security interests of both parties. Aside
from addressing the clear and present danger posed by
the North, the alliance provides vital reassurance to
Korea, whose geographical setting among larger regional
powers has historically made it the strategic prize in
Northeast Asia.
The alliance is also critically
important to the United States. The past century has
underscored the fact that what happens on the Korean
Peninsula affects vital US national interests. Today,
the alliance is the cornerstone of stability in
Northeast Asia. Weakening that alliance serves no one's
interests.
What should the alliance look like?
The simple answer is "more equal". Roles and
responsibilities within the alliance need to be
rebalanced. For the United States to be seen as more
concerned with the security of South Korea than South
Koreans themselves is an unsustainable situation. With
double the population of the North and a world-class
economy, South Korea is fully capable of carrying more
of the burden of its own defense. Doing so would bolster
the pride of Koreans and help relieve pressure on a US
military increasingly engaged in the "war on terrorism".
The recently announced plans for the future
(three to five years hence) redeployment of US ground
troops and headquarters to positions south of the
capital Seoul is a step in the right direction.
Ultimately, "more equal" would involve South Korea's
move from a supporting to a leading role in the defense
of the South.
But these adjustments buttress
only the alliance's superstructure. Of even greater
importance is the need to repair its foundation - the
consensus among both South Koreans and Americans on the
benefits of the alliance. The alliance partners should
create a binational commission, broadly representative
of their populations (including successive generations),
to review the alliance's form and function, with the aim
of creating a strong and sustainable platform for the
future.
After half a century, the ties that bind
the United States and South Korea are both broad and
deep. But the foundation for the relationship remains
the security alliance. If the alliance is to prosper,
the consensus that has sustained it must be recreated to
adapt to a new era. This is the central challenge for
both countries' political leaders, one that will require
a commitment to educate the public on the importance of
the alliance and a readiness to the make the tough,
national interest-based decisions that sustaining it
demands.
William M Drennan (bill_drennan@usip.org)
is the deputy director of research and studies at the
United States Institute of Peace. James J
Przystup (przystupj@ndu.edu)
is a senior fellow at the National Defense
University's Institute of National Strategic Studies.
This article originally appeared in the San Jose Mercury
News and is reposted here with the permission of Pacific Forum CSIS.
|
| |
|
|
 |
|
