[EDITORIAL]Cracks in alliance?

[EDITORIAL]Cracks in alliance? U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice emphasized here last month that the Korea-U.S. alliance remained strong, citing as evidence the dispatch of over 3,000 Korean troops to Iraq. But her views are challenged by an increasing number of skeptics in both countries who note a series of developments in recent weeks concerning military cooperation between the allies as signs of cracks in their relations. Among issues headlined were the U.S. move to scrap "WRSA-K," or the U.S. ammunition storage for war in Korea, the reduction of Seoul's share of the cost for U.S. forces stationed in Korea and the USFK's subsequent plan to cut back Korean employees, and the Korean decision to trim its 3,600-strong Zaytun Unit in Iraq by 240 men. Defense Minister Yoon Kwang-ung put it this way, "While problems tended to be settled quietly in the past, complaints of either side are publicly exposed these days." As we have observed, some issues have been magnified disproportionately or distorted due to a lack of truthful understanding or out of deliberate attempts to call into question the quality and status of the alliance. If media misrepresentation was partly responsible for the gap between reality and public perception, insensitive publicity by uniformed and civilian officials on either side contributed to creating unnecessary schisms. Take the example of the cost-sharing agreement. Soon after Seoul and Washington agreed to reduce the Korean contribution to USFK logistics by some 60 billion won from last year's 747 billion won, Lt. Gen. Charles Campbell, commanding general of the Eighth U.S. Army, who concurrently serves as USFK chief of staff, called a news conference on April 1 to announce a plan to lay off 1,000 Korean employees. Just as the 8 percent cost reduction reflected the established plan to reduce the USFK troop strength by a third, the smaller size of USFK must naturally require a cut in their Korean work force, in addition to the pressure of the lower Korean subsidy. Some elaboration could have produced a better understanding but Gen. Campbell read a prepared statement, took no questions from puzzled reporters and walked out, offering them fresh evidence of an alliance turning uncomfortable. In his statement, he also mentioned "tough" decisions in the areas of force capabilities and pre-positioned equipment and stocks for war in Korea. A few days later, a local daily reported the U.S. plan to dispose of the entire "war reserve stocks for allies" in Korea, linking it to the cost-sharing deal. The plan to dump WRSA-K by December 2006 was in fact notified to Korea in May 2004 in a letter from then U.S. deputy defense secretary Paul Wolfowitz to then Korean defense minister Cho Young-gil. Scrapping the ammunition, amounting to some 600,000 tons and estimated to be worth $5 billion, had been studied for years because of diverse factors independent of the cost-sharing negotiations, including Korea's economic capabilities. A USFK statement said the program "outlived its original purpose and was deemed no longer necessary." It is true that in Korea today, many people feel and express "fatigue" about the military interdependence with the United States that has lasted more than a half century. Administration officials need to review the status of the alliance in the changing global security environment, but what is worrisome is an inflated portrayal of any supposed setback in the U.S. alliance, still the foundation of Korea's national security. Greater caution is called for in the two major outlets, political speeches and media reports. 2005.04.12