By Tom Fowdy
For years, every US-Republic of Korea Presidential summit is peppered with the flowery language of a so-called "ironclad" alliance, which every time is ritually proclaimed to be "deepening" and "strengthening" no matter what the actual circumstances may be. As a part of this alliance, originally created to protect the country from North Korea, South Korea hosts tens of thousands of American troops and pays them billions for the privilege of doing so, catering to Washington's demands to pay even more if necessary.
This asymmetrical arrangement of Seoul being a junior partner to Washington is accepted as an ordinary fact of life, largely due to the country's precarious geopolitical situation which is enforced due to the division of the Korean Peninsula, the post-colonial trauma of Japanese occupation and nationalistic sentiments that reject civilizational and cultural subordination to China. Thus, Koreans have overly positive views of America and tolerate the US's exploitative behaviour towards them, even if it also involves overtly blocking attempts to end the Korean war, or undermining democracy at home, seeing it all as a strategic greater good.
But what about when this so-called "ironclad" alliance is proved to be a hollow, empty shell that can be revoked at any time in a way Seoul is powerless to stop? Ten years ago, the United States supplied South Korea with a THAAD missile defence system against growing North Korean Missile capabilities. The system, due to its advanced radar capabilities, triggered a massive fallout in relations with China, its largest trading partner, who saw it as a threat to its national security, resulting in sanctions against Korean businesses and products in the country. Samsung quickly lost the Chinese market because of it. Again, was this a worthwhile price to pay? The Korean public said yes, and the opinion of China sunk.
But the massive costs Korean paid following the fallout were not in fact reciprocated with the goodwill of its so-called "ironclad" ally (who still, after that incident, demanded they pay billions more to host US troops anyway). This week, following Trump's disastrous and reckless war against Iran that has sent the Middle East up in flames, the United States announced they were now withdrawing the THAAD missile system they installed in South Korea and shifting it to, guess where? Israel. This is the payment South Korea gets for its loyalty to this "ever deepening alliance," as they put it, a missile defence system, which for all practical purposes, is a safeguard against the DPRK's growing capabilities, is quickly whisked away.
While South Korea has to pay all of these costs for US support, Israel, on the other hand, gets everything for free, even though Tel Aviv is a massive detriment to American strategic interests as it continually loops Washington into destructive Middle East conflicts that distract from its other goals, and in this case even undermines them. Amidst the THAAD system's withdrawal, South Korean leaders could only say they were opposed to it but were powerless to stop it. History shows that it is all well and good to get the protection of the United States, but Washington can withdraw its support at any time, whenever it pleases, and offer not a flicker of regret about it.
While South Korea depended upon the United States for its own existence for the most of the Cold War era (1950s-1970s), it does not now and needs to be more confident about itself rather than wearing the tin foil hat of an inferiority complex against China and Japan, believing that the only alternative to American subservience, is domination by these two, or Pyongyang. Given that Koreans champion their own achievements so strongly, how have they missed the reality that they are one of the most technologically advanced countries in the world? Rather than pouring billions into hosting ungrateful Americans, it should be rapidly advancing its own military capabilities across multiple domains, and ironically doing what North Korea is doing in a more sensible way. Despite having vastly different ideological systems, the DPRK does understand that Korea will be continually dominated by foreign powers unless they develop massive capabilities. So, what is stopping South Korea from making their own missile defence systems? Rapidly advancing missile technology? Or even going nuclear itself?
When early Korean nationalism arose in the 20th century, it adopted a principle of rejecting "Sadaejuii" (사대주의 - 事大主義) which meant "serving the great." While this concept was coined to refer to thousands of years of Korean tributary relations with China, ironically, it simply replaced Beijing with Washington, paying them billions for the privilege of hosting troops in their own country and missile defence systems that can be taken away the moment the US starts a reckless war in another part of the world. Will this finally open the eyes of locals? One can only hope.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of DotDotNews.
Read more articles by Tom Fowdy:
Opinion | Why the US can never escape the Middle East Quagmire
Opinion | The vindication of North Korea
Opinion | Trump has made the biggest strategic mistake of his presidency
Comment