Posted on 12/19/2019 1:55:39 PM PST by SeekAndFind
South Korea and the United States failed on Wednesday to agree on Seoul’s contribution toward hosting some 28,500 U.S. troops, but the U.S. side hinted after the two days of talks ended that it will no longer stick to its $5 billion demand.
No deal by Dec. 31, when the current agreement expires, may result in a repeat of last year when the two countries missed a year-end deadline but reached a retroactive deal in the new year. The two sides next meet in January in the United States.
U.S. President Donald Trump has accused South Korea of being a rich nation that is profiting off the U.S. military forces, which are stationed in the country as a legacy of the 1950-1953 Korean War and continued threats from North Korea.
South Korean lawmakers have said Washington is seeking up to $5 billion a year to support the troops - more than five times the amount Seoul agreed to pay this year.
But the United States’ chief negotiator James DeHart told reporters after Wednesday’s meeting that “($5 billion) is not a number we are currently focused on in the negotiations ... when we reach an agreement, we will be in a position to explain that number and how we got there.”
“We have been listening, we have been adjusting and we have been compromising, and we know that agreement ... when we reach the agreement, the figure will be different from our initial proposal and probably different from what we’ve heard from the Korean side so far,” he added.
Some U.S. and Korean experts say no deal could throw the future of the U.S. presence in South Korea into doubt.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
I am not opposed to unilateral withdraw and repeal of any treaties.
I think South Korea has the means and capability to defend herself. It’s time she learns to do that.
South Korea is far wealthier today than they were 20 years ago..or even 10 years ago.They should be able to pony up a fair chunk of change to help pay for our protection.
RE: They should be able to pony up a fair chunk of change to help pay for our protection.
THEIR protection. Not ours.
Yikes! Sometimes I wish the FR had an “edit” function Without it two fingered typists like me are often misunderstood.
About time we moved out and they picked up their own end of the rope. I was there in the early 60's. I had friends getting their a$$e$ "Frozen at Chosen" in the 50's. Bring 'em home.
The pricks had enough money to buy Bobcat and move a bunch of it over there.
They also recently spent a few billion and bought Schwanns Foods here in Minnesota.
Let the little jabbering ____ defend themselves.
If my math is right that’s about $180k per soldier/airman. Our troops lives are worth it.
Time to go - the modernized ROK armed forces can defend itself...
the new Camp Humphreys was a waste of money....
How much should we charge the Saudis?
Moon, Xi to hold summit in Beijing on Dec. 23
While they're busy cozying up to the dictators to their North, we would do better to outsource their protection to our loyal allies in Japan before the South Koreans reunify with PyongYang and China.
You can get a taste of Korean sentiment towards us in the following editorial:
CONSIDER THIS STUDY:
https://brill.com/view/journals/aas/15/2-3/article-p242_6.xml?lang=en
South Korean Attitude towards China: Threat Perception, Economic Interest, and National Identity
SUMMARY:
In the context of growing tensions in East Asia over territorial disputes and history issues, one can observe the rise of anti-Chinese sentiments among South Koreans in the early 2010s although many South Koreans had positive views on China a decade earlier. What affects South Korean attitude toward China? Despite China’s significance to South Korea, there have been surprisingly few scholarly works attempting to answer this question.
Based on an empirical analysis of survey data, this paper finds that Koreans’ favorable attitude towards China is negatively affected by threat perception of China’s military buildup, opposition to an fta with China, and exclusive national identity but not by whether or not one feels threatened by the American unilateralism and Japan’s remilitarization. This finding suggests that South Koreans’ feeling toward China is primarily affected by bilateral relationship rather than by balancing behaviors in consideration of broader security environments.
South Korea paid for that.
I agree, so long as no one has responded to the post in question and maybe within a period of time, say 5-10 minutes.
Since the U.S. does not want to be the key ally then what other choice does South Korea have?
They should be paying 100% of the cost.
Earlier this year the U.S. and South Korea agreed to $1 billion per year. Now Trump wants $5 billion per year. Next year will it be $10 billion? If the U.S. is there only if South Korea meets the financial demands then might as well cut the ties now and go looking for other partners.
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.