You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
China-Japan-Koreas
U.S. Military Cuts to Reduce Emergency Reinforcements in Korea
2012-01-06
A new, more austere U.S. defense strategy unveiled Thursday gives up on fighting major wars overseas and reduces active-duty troops from 570,000 to 470,000. The aim is to cut more than US$450 billion in defense spending over the next decade.

The new strategy would make it virtually impossible for the U.S. military to fulfill a pledge to South Korea to deploy 690,000 troops on the Korean Peninsula in an emergency.
If that is how we're going to handle our defense, then we have to get out of the way and let the ROK defend itself. We need to let the ROK build or buy what it needs, train its forces, and let its officers run the show.
"Washington recently told us that the revision of its defense strategy will have no significant effect on South Korea," a government source said. "But there'll inevitably be a sea change in operational plans and troop augmentation in case of an emergency here."

South Korea would then have to take more responsibility for itself and shoulder a more substantial burden for its own defense, observers said. Washington is to hand over full operational control of South Korean troops to Seoul in December 2015.

Under a current operational plan for a full-scale war on the peninsula, the U.S. pledges to send about 690,000 reinforcement troops to the peninsula 90 days after a war breaks out. But under the troop reduction plan that much personnel will no longer be available.

The number of reinforcements could be cut to less than 200,000, some experts speculated. "It's highly likely that military strategies including [the operational plan] will be revised in a way that will cut the number of reinforcement troops," said Song Dae-sung, head of the Sejong Institute.
Posted by:Steve White

#10  More ...

* WORLD NEWS > CHINA IS "WEDDED TO STATUS QUO" ON KOREAN PENINSULA.

China's priority vee the DPRK + Korean Peninsula is NO COLLAPSE + NO WAR.

GOVT. REFORMS + ECON MODERNIZATION = not so much.

IMO the PRO-CHINA "STATUS QUO" - MORE GRASS-EATING + LESSER-N-LESSER OF "NORTH-KOREA-FOR-NORTH-KOREANS/KOREANS", is why the DPRK has a Nucprog to begin with.

IMo again, as per the above scope the ROK is NOT against the DPRK having a Nucprog asmuch as the DPRK using its Nukes-WMDS agz fellow South Koreans.

A DPRK NUCPROG "JUSTIFIES" A ROK-SPECIFIC NUCPROG, + by extension that also of JAPAN, OTHER ASEAN.

* SAME > RUMOURS OF NUCLEAR EXPLOSION IN NORTH KOREA SHAKE SEOUL BOURSE [ROK stock exchanges].

* CHINA DAILY FORUM > CHINA PUSHES FOR STABILITY IN NORTH KOREA. Beijing desires to prevent DPRK collapse, but not necessarily to foster in or support national improvements widin NOKOR per se.

IIUC, IOW CHINA WANTS CHINA-CENTRIC STABILITY ON THE KOREAN PENINUSLA.
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2012-01-06 22:21  

#9  DEFENCE FORUM INDIA > CHINA WARNS US OVER NEW ASIA-PACIFIC STRATEGY.

CHINA = Its okay, USA, but no heavy-handed "militarism" = overflexing of muscles.

* SAME > NEW PENTAGON PLAN CHANGES GAME IN ASIA.

ARTIC = New US Strategy is

> CONTRACTIVE while also prioritizing Asia-Pacific Region for the US.
> Aimed or focuses on Iran [Middle East] + China as LT Strategic or Security Targets for USA.
> CHINA [for now] CAN ONLY USE ITS STRENGTHS = ENDOWMENTS TO MAKE FRIENDSHIP/PARTNERSHIP WID THE [still-superior] US.

* SAME > US STRATEGY COULD MEAN GREATER ROLE FOR AUSTRALIA IN ASIA-PACIFIC.

* SAME > [Old = 09/2011] US CRUISE MISSLE BASE IN GUAM [+ 8000 Marines, etc.] AS A MAJOR THREAT TO CHINA.

* SAME > US NAVY'S EXPEDITIONARY FORCE EVOLVING WID NEW MOBILE LANDING PLATFORM SHIPS. Reduces or replaces the need for offshore support bases for the USMC [+ Rapid Deployment-Reax Forces].

ON A PERSONAL NOTE, THE SHIPS' PROPOSED DESIGN SCHEMAS RESEMBLE US VESSELS [future time] FROM OLD DREAMS/VISIONS OF MINE FROM MANY YEARS,DECADES AGO.

Personally I blame Michael J. Fox + Doc Brown.
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2012-01-06 20:20  

#8  How about cutting aid to North Korea?
Posted by: Ebbang Uluque6305   2012-01-06 17:13  

#7  Defending South Korea was already a rough mission - almost a suicide mission there. It is obvious that someone does not know when to NOT draw down forces there.
Posted by: newc   2012-01-06 15:36  

#6  O is looking to decrease the mil budget to pay for his entitlement programs. The issue of skor aid is governed by treaty and needs to be changed by level heads and negotiation. Do we have the people in authority that can do this? I wonder.
Posted by: Alaska Paul    2012-01-06 14:34  

#5  Perhaps. But the timing is unfortunate, don't you think? I mean with Pudgy looking to assert control and all.
Posted by: Bobby   2012-01-06 14:19  

#4  As proven in the past I believe the Japanese are more than able too handle their own military affairs especially since empire building is long gone. The koreans can buy whatever military equipment they need too defend themselves against the norks.
Posted by: chris   2012-01-06 11:05  

#3  Yep, first cut various entangling alliances military welfare programs for first world countries.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2012-01-06 07:56  

#2  Both Japan and S. Korea are big kids---well able to take care of themselves.
Posted by: g(r)omgoru   2012-01-06 03:42  

#1  Looks like JAPAN + ROK may get their own nukes after all???

As per 1990's + pre, post-911 NET, its either that, or US Milfors based or deployed overseas seemingly standby + watch as US Enemies rampage wid little to no US interference or intervention.
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2012-01-06 02:57  

00:00