The German Marshall Fund of the United States

  • Our Organization
    • About GMF
      The German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMF) strengthens transatlantic cooperation on regional, national, and global challenges and opportunities in the spirit of the Marshall Plan.

    Transatlantic Offices

    • Washington, DC
    • Ankara
    • Belgrade
    • Berlin
    • Brussels
    • Bucharest
    • Paris
    • Warsaw
    • Alliance for Securing Democracy
  • Our Work
    • Policy
      GMF provides effective ways forward to solving today’s transatlantic policy issues.
    • Leadership
      GMF programs offer rising leaders dynamic opportunities to hone their leadership skills.
    • Civil Society
      GMF supports civil society by fostering democratic initiatives, rule of law, and regional cooperation.
    • Research
      GMF publications examine the challenges facing the transatlantic region today and offer policy recommendations to address these challenges.
    • Perspectives
      Media, blogs, podcasts, video on the issues shaping the transatlantic relationship.
  • Our Events
    • Major Conferences & Forums
      GMF brings together hundreds of policymakers, elected officials, academics, and business leaders from around the world to discuss topics from energy to migration, economics to security, urban growth to diplomacy.
    • Recent & Upcoming Events
      GMF is committed to bringing the policy community together around transatlantic topics. Learn about events in its offices and other locations around the world.
  • Our Experts
  • Stay Informed
Search
Home
  • Our Experts
  • ABOUT US
  • FOUNDING CHAIRMAN
  • EXPERTS
  • LATEST RESEARCH
  • NEWS&EVENTS
  • PUBLICATIONS
  • SUPPORT CHARHAR

The Charhar Institute

  • About Us

    • About Us
    • Founding Chairman
    • Membership
    • Contact Us
    • Careers
    • Support Charhar
  • Regions

    • All Regions
    • America
    • Europe&Middle East
    • Asia
    • Africa&Latin America
    • Indo-Pacific
  • Topics

    • All Topics
    • Public Diplomacy and International Relations
    • Belt & Road Initiative
    • The Korean Peninsula
    • Economic and Trade
    • Communication
    • Law, Culture and Religion
    • Energy, Safety and Peace
  • Experts

  • Publications

    • All Publications
    • Public Dipmacy Quarterly
    • Other books and reports
    • Charhar Public Diplomacy series
    • Charhar Newsletter
    • Charhar International Relations series
    • Introduction to Public Diplomacy
  • News&Events

    • News&Events
    • Public Diplomacy
    • Peace Studies
    • Belt & Road
    • Charhar News
    • Announcement
    • For Media
Facebook Twitter YouTube Instagram LinkedIn
ForeignAffairs.com
  • ABOUT US
    • About Us
    • Contact Us
    • Careers
  • FOUNDING CHAIRMAN
  • EXPERTS
  • LATEST RESEARCH
  • NEWS&EVENTS
  • PUBLICATIONS
  • SUPPORT CHARHAR

NEWS&EVENTS

Facing challenges, US' IPEF may make the Asia-Pacific economy more...

June 09, 2022

Behind Biden’s Asia Trip

June 09, 2022

US sinks its claws back into Somalia with an eye on China and Russia

May 23, 2022

The Taiwan Question amid Russia-Ukraine Conflict

May 06, 2022

China’s Oil Deal v.s. the Dollar Mar 28, 2022

March 28, 2022

Biden’s Indo-Pacific Foray

February 26, 2022
More

Energy, Safety and Peace

Sudan's 'military-civilian co-governance' dies halfway

November 03, 2021

Human rights standards shall not be monopolized

October 14, 2021

Law, Culture and Religion

Israel's diplomatic breakthrough in Maghreb faces challenges

December 11, 2020

Meng ruling makes Ottawa new front line between Washington and Beijing

May 29, 2020

Communication

He Wenping: Fake news fails in damaging Sino-African ties

January 31, 2019

Resistance from within the White House

September 10, 2018

Economic and Trade

Challenges for the G20 in overcoming the pandemic

November 26, 2020

Liberalization and non-interference by government will clean up Pakistan'...

July 07, 2020

The Korean Peninsula

Su Hao: Tokyo should give ground to resolve tensions with Seoul over ‘comfo...

June 26, 2019

Swaran Singh: Can next U.S.-DPRK meeting be expected?

June 12, 2019

Belt & Road Initiative

China-Africa unity sees friendship of new era

January 05, 2021

Unchangeable Commitment

February 19, 2020

Public Diplomacy and International Relations

The key to peace between Russia and Ukraine CGTN

March 03, 2022

Biden’s first year marked by lows and challenges

March 03, 2022
More

Introduction to Public Diplomacy

Diplomatic Theory and Practice

June 21, 2018

Introduction to Public Diplomacy 2nd Edition

June 20, 2018

Charhar International Relations series

International Public Product: China and the World at the Midst of Revolut...

June 21, 2018

Power and Wealth: Economic Nationalism and International Relationships und...

June 21, 2018

Charhar Newsletter

Charhar Newsletter

August 16, 2018

Charhar Public Diplomacy series

Winning the Chinese Hearts and Souls

June 20, 2018

City Diplomacy: China’s Practice and Foreign Experience

June 20, 2018

Other books and reports

The impotence of conventional arms control

March 25, 2020

How Did Stalin Fall into the “Thucydides Trap”

February 27, 2020

Public Dipmacy Quarterly

Public Diplomacy Quarterly

August 17, 2018
More

US Forces’ Presence Hinders Peninsula Self-determination

October 08 ,2018

During an interview with Fox News on September 25, South Korean President Moon Jae-in said that the two Koreas and the US had generally formed a consensus over the fact that a declaration to end the war should be issued as soon as possible. However, he added, "Even after the conclusion of the Peace Treaty and further after the conclusion of the peace treaty and achievement of the reunification of the Korean, the US Forces are needed to stay on the Korean peninsula for the sake of the peace and stability of the Northeast Asian Region."  


Some say that signing a war-ending declaration would lead to a crack in the Washington-Seoul alliance and a pullout of the US Forces Korea (USFK), and will affect the status of the UN Command. Moon's words can be seen as a response.


North Korea has been demanding that the US withdraws its forces from South Korea, not deploys its strategic forces on the Korean Peninsula, and to stop protecting South Korea under the nuclear umbrella to achieve complete denuclearization. But Moon's words may not affect the further development of the two Koreas' relations, because both sides had discussed it before.


During the Q&A session on the 2018 Inter-Korean Summit Pyeongyang, Moon said that "a political declaration to end the war should first be made, and should be regarded as a starting point for peace negotiations to arrive at a peace treaty, and when the North achieves complete denuclearization, the peace treaty should be signed and North Korea-US relations can simultaneously be normalized," and that the declaration "will in no way affect the status of the UN Command, the necessity for the US forces stationed in the South or other related matters." He also said, "Regarding the issue of the US forces, they are stationed in the South pursuant to the South Korea-US alliance, and thus [their status] depends entirely on a decision made between South Korea and the United States, regardless of a declaration of an end to the war or a peace treaty. Chairman Kim agreed to this." "A peace treaty would be reached in the final stage wherein complete denuclearization is fulfilled. Until then, the existing Armistice System would be maintained," Moon said.


From Moon's words, it is obvious that he communicated with Kim during the third Moon-Kim summit and won Kim's understanding and approval. Moon has played an important role in persuading Kim, but it's also closely related to Pyongyang's own interests.


Pyongyang's most important diplomatic appeal to Washington is signing the war-ending declaration. North Korea wants to end their hostile relations and attain denuclearization as soon as possible, as well as achieve a peaceful environment that benefits its economic development. To persuade the US to sign the war-ending declaration, South Korea may agree that the US forces can still stay.


The US has been deploying forces in South Korea since 1953, with approximately 28,500 US troops in the country at present. The US still has South Korea's wartime operational control, and the USFK will affect the situation on the peninsula and the security of East Asia.


North Korea's temporary concession is expedient. It has agreed to let the USFK stay on the peninsula, hoping that the US will sign the war-ending declaration. Once signed, Pyongyang may change its position again. After all, the USFK makes Pyongyang feel more unsafe compared to South Korean forces.


The Chinese People's Volunteer Army withdrew from the Korean Peninsula in 1958, showing the world that China loves peace and never interferes in other countries' domestic affairs. But the US still keeps its forces on the peninsula, which keeps the Cold War structure in the region. The issue of the end-of-war declaration would only tell the outside world that the war status has ended, but still can't change the Cold War structure.


If the peninsula is reunified in the future, whether the USFK will be realigned to the China-North Korea border will be a significant security issue which influences China-US strategic balance. Countries that host the USFK will be forced to take part in a major power geopolitical game and will be hard for them to extricate themselves. That's the strategic price these countries need to pay for hosting the USFK, and the price may be too high.


Moon Jae-in hopes that the US-South Korea military alliance goes beyond an economic alliance and will expand into a global partnership. It means that the US-South Korea alliance will be weakened. Whether their alliance can be turned into a global partnership depends on the US' attitude.


The US-South Korea alliance is an imbalanced one, as South Korea is relatively weaker. South Korea is dependent on and obedient to the US' dominance, while the US leads the future of their alliance. Such a condition will harm South Korea's diplomatic independence, national defense, strategic initiative, and make the country fall into "flunkeyism."


The US and South Korea haven't reached a consensus on burden sharing in support of the US military presence in South Korea. It shows that there are rising tensions between the two allies. "We have 25,000 soldiers over there protecting them. They don't pay us. Why don't they pay us?" complained Donald Trump in 2016 before he was elected US president.


At the third Moon-Kim summit, the two leaders waved the flag of self-determination. But how can a peninsula which allows the USFK's permanent stay achieve self-determination? It is obviously a deceptive daydream. We hope that the two Koreas will wake up from that dream, and re-weigh the pros and cons of letting the USFK stay on the peninsula.


Copy Editor/Liang Chenglu

Editor/Kang Sijun



The author: Li Jiacheng is an Adjunct Fellow at the Charhar Institute and the Research Center for Economies and Politics of Transitional Countries of Liaoning University. 

Source: Global Times, 2018-10-04

Original Link: http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1121708.shtml


Author

LI Jiacheng

Li Jiacheng is an Adjunct Fellow at the Charhar Institute in Beijing. He is an Associate Professor atSchool of Internatinal Studies of Liaoning University, and a Research Fellow at the university's Research Center for the Economics and Politics of Tra

Stay Informed

Don't miss our latest dynamic. Sign up to receive emailed news, events, opinion, and publication notifications.

Subscribe

Follow

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Linkedin
  • Youtube
  • SoundCloud
  • Instagram
Charhar Institute
  • About Us
  • Founding Chairman
  • Experts
  • Latest Research
  • News&Events
  • Publications
  • Support Charhar
  • Careers

 

"The Charhar Institute is committed to promoting progress in China’s foreign policies and the development of international relations in a more orderly manner."
- Dr Han Fangming,Charhar Chairman

CONTACT US

  • Phone:+86 10 68290431
  • Fax:010-80777830
  • Email:secretariat@charhar.org.cn
  • Facebook:The Charhar Institute
  • Twitter:@CharharINST

©2023 Charhar Institute. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy and Terms of Use