Posted on 05/07/2010 8:07:02 PM PDT by ErnstStavroBlofeld
Charles Reeder remembers the backlash after the ‘Highway 56 Incident’ in 2002, when a couple of US soldiers driving an armoured vehicle accidentally crushed two South Korean schoolgirls, yet were found not-guilty of negligent homicide by a US military court.
‘It rocked the whole USFK,’ says Reeder, 42, a recent retiree from the United States Forces Korea, who was stationed in downtown Seoul at the time. ‘It was painful…We were out there on the gates, and it was like a siege mentality.’ South Korean activists broke into a US facility in the northern part of the capital, he recalls, and firebombed a warehouse base near the port of Incheon.
Besides being a tragic loss of young life, the incident marked a low point for the half-century long US-South Korea alliance. It dragged down US military morale here and brought to the surface tensions about the presence of the 28,500 foreign troops.
Several new presidents and two North Korean nuclear tests later, there are signs that attitudes on both sides of the fence have changed significantly. But with the upcoming transfer of wartime operational control (OPCON) back to South Korean hands and major shift in the US military stance, there are mixed and complicated feelings here about the future of the USFK’s role.
‘Meet the Common Danger’
In talking about the current state of the US-South Korea military alliance, Mark Monahan starts like any good history professor: from the beginning. Monahan teaches Asian studies and the Korean War to US soldiers here through the University of Maryland. But as a North Korean-born naturalized American and Korean War Veteran–who has served in both the South Korean and US armed forces–he recalls events in a way that is far from dry academia.
On Oct. 1st, 1953, months after the Korean War armistice was signed, the United States and the Republic of Korea (South Korea) sealed the Mutual Defense Treaty. The short, six-article pact gave the United States the right to base troops in South Korea and established that both will ‘meet the common danger’ if faced by the threat of war; North Korea is not expressly cited.
First
“sonofstrangelove” Ping
We should have left in 1976, just as Jimmy Carter promised.... Oh, wait.
We signed a Mutual Defense Treaty with South Korea. We are obligated to protect them.
Last I saw the riots in the news, most semed pretty willing for us to leave.
Of couse, I may have misread the fire-bombs. They might mean - we love you ....
Korea is the only place in mainland Asia where we maintain a physical presence. Why would you want to give that up?
IN WWII and befiore, when ships ran on oil and coal, and air to air refueling was a dream, it might have made sense.
Now, a very large expense. RoK has the 5th largest standing Army on the planet. And IIRC, we are a tad busy elsewhere.
We still have bases in Japan (for now) and Guam - if it doesn’t tip over.
We have a Mutual Defense Treaty with South Korea and we are obligated to protect them.
I disagree. The political benefit vis a vis China and Russia of a US presence on mainland Asia cannot be understated. Okinawa and Guam are not the same.
correction...cannot be over stated. Sorry.
One last thought
Two words
Atom bombs
China has ‘em.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.