Trump hikes price tag for US forces in Korea almost 500% as Seoul questions alliance
Washington (CNN)Secretary of Defense Mark Esper landed in South Korea on Thursday to navigate renewed threats from an "enraged" North Korea
and newly heightened strain in the alliance with Seoul that
congressional aides, lawmakers and Korea experts say has been caused by
President Donald Trump.
Trump
is demanding that South Korea pay roughly 500% more in 2020 to cover
the cost of keeping US troops on the peninsula, a congressional aide and
an administration official confirmed to CNN.
The
price hike has frustrated Pentagon officials and deeply concerned
Republican and Democratic lawmakers, according to military officials and
congressional aides. It has angered and unnerved Seoul, where leaders
are questioning US commitment to their alliance and wondering whether
Trump will pull US forces if they don't pay up.
"Nothing
says I love you like a shakedown," said Vipin Narang, an associate
professor at MIT who follows the Korean peninsula, summarizing South
Korean uncertainty about the US.
Hard feelings
In
the US, congressional aides and Korea experts familiar with the talks
say the President's $4.7 billion demand came out of thin air, sending
State and Defense Department officials scrambling to justify the number
with a slew of new charges that may include Seoul paying some costs for
US personnel present on the peninsula and for troops and equipment that
rotate through.
Negotiations are
underway as North Korea threatens to step up its weapons development,
deepening Seoul's anxiety. On Thursday, Pyongyang condemned US-South
Korean joint military exercises, saying it was "enraged" and threatening
to respond with "force in kind."
North
Korea has already launched 24 missiles this year, each a violation of
UN resolutions, to match the country's previous annual record for firing
off projectiles that threaten South Korea and Japan, according to Bruce
Klingner, a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation.
Germany,
France and the United Kingdom recently condemned Pyongyang for the
launches, saying they undermined regional security and stability.
Meanwhile, South Korean leaders are acutely aware that Trump has
downplayed the launches, saying he is "not at all" troubled by them.
"There
are a lot of hard feelings," Klingner said of South Korean views of the
US right now, adding that "people are questioning the viability of the
US as an ally."
That's
being driven in part by US acquiescence to North Korea's missile
launches, which "is raising angst... about whether the US is a reliable
ally," Klingner said. "The exorbitant push to further increase the US
demand for the cost of stationing US forces overseas is adding to that."
Scott
Snyder, director of the US-Korea policy program at the Council on
Foreign Relations, said the extreme nature of the price hike is creating
"worry that Trump is doing this as a pretext for withdrawal" of US
troops.
"The main side effect that
I see is that it raises questions about the credibility of the United
States as a protector, as an alliance partner," Snyder said. "And that's
not good for the relationship."
The
administration official said the argument is that the US does many
things to ensure South Korean security that haven't been accurately
accounted for, for decades. "It was one thing when Korea was recovering
from the war, but now they're one of the world's leading economies," the
official said.
"The Koreans have
said themselves they ultimately want to take over the security of Korea
and stand as a peer in the security sphere," the official said. Now,
"they need to make some fundamental investments to get where they say
they want to be, so this is an opportunity for them."
Shared responsibility
A
spokesperson for the State Department, which has the lead on
negotiations, said that "sustaining the costs of our global military
presence is not a burden that should fall on the US taxpayer alone, but
is a responsibility that should be shared fairly with allies and
partners who benefit from our presence."
The Korean embassy did not return requests for comment.
The
US-South Korea cost sharing agreement has been in place for decades
and, until Trump, was renegotiated every five years. During the 2016
campaign, candidate Trump declared that he would pull US troops from the
peninsula if he didn't get 100% compensation for their presence.
Last
year, when the Special Measures Agreement came up for negotiation,
Trump asked for a 50% increase from Seoul. Ultimately, the two sides
agreed South Korea would pay 8% over the prior year's cost, but that the
agreement would be renegotiated yearly.
This
year, Trump raised the asking price from approximately $1 billion to $5
billion before being convinced by officials at the State Department and
Pentagon to winnow that down to $4.7 billion, according to a
congressional aide and the administration official.
Esper,
like other administration officials, has refused to confirm that figure
publicly, saying Wednesday only that "we have asked for a significant
increase in the cost-sharing for our deployed troops."
'A backwards process'
Klingner
is one of several Korea experts who suggest that Trump pulled the
figure out of thin air. Officials at the relevant agencies and aides in
Congress who follow Asia are similarly perplexed. "I have no idea where
the President pulled this number from," said the congressional aide.
"It
seems pretty clear ... that State and DOD were working to figure out
how to justify the $5 billion figure... it's not like, 'We were
developing a new concept that includes the following 17 categories and
this is what it comes to.' It was a backwards process," said the aide
characterized the reaction to be one of shock, " 'the President wants $5
billion and how do we justify that to the Koreans?' They were throwing
everything in there that allowed them to argue with a straight face that
this covers the burden-sharing costs of the alliance."
To
justify the price tag, officials at State and the Pentagon expanded the
costs Seoul would cover "from basing, sewage, the usual things, to
include 'readiness,'" the aide said. Administration officials would not
confirm that.
But it could mean
charging Seoul for joint military exercises, including rotational forces
that aren't always present on the peninsula. "So if we had bombers stop
by the peninsula as a show of force, I guess like an Uber driver, we
would bill them for the trip," the aide said.
The
US may also ask South Korea to pay for "a whole range of personnel
costs for US personnel stationed on Peninsula," the aide said. In
response, the aide said, the Koreans are asking, " 'Are you guys
mercenaries now? Is this a business arrangement?' "
Military
officials have told CNN they are distressed about the request and that
they have been concerned the President's foreign policy decision making
could increasingly be shaped by his concerns about the 2020 election
campaign or impeachment pressure.
The
congressional aide said Pentagon officials are expressing their
discomfort on Capitol Hill as well. "The career professionals and career
military: they're beside themselves," the aide said, "but [Trump is]
the commander in chief, so they're in a box."
"The
Koreans are outraged," the aide continued, particularly because
elections are coming in April and they don't think the cost increase is
defensible in their National Assembly.
Council
on Foreign Relations expert Snyder said that historically, the formula
for cost sharing has seen increases of 5% to 10%, but "the gap between
5% and almost 500%... stretches the bounds of political plausibility."
A
particular hurdle, Snyder said, is any request that Seoul pay for
assets "that may be used in the event of a conflict, but that aren't
actually based in Korea. That's the most sensitive question if you're
talking about the Korean taxpayer."
'A lot of concern'
Sen.
Edward Markey, the leading Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations
subcommittee on Asia said that he was "troubled by President Trump's
demand. ... If South Korea decides that it is better off without the
United States, President Trump will have undermined an over 60-year
shared commitment to peace, stability, and rule of law. The region is
less safe when countries lose confidence in America's ability to lead."
Sen.
Cory Gardner of Colorado, the Republican chairman of the Senate Foreign
Relations subcommittee on Asia, did not respond to repeated requests
for comment. Neither did the second ranking Republican on the
subcommittee, Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, or the chairman of the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. James Risch of Idaho.
Behind
closed doors though, the congressional aide echoed another colleague on
Capitol Hill, saying that "there's a lot of concern up here with both
Democratic and Republican staff. People ... are not happy. They think
this is really dangerous."
No comments