The Growth of the K-Defense Should Lead to Greater Democratic Control

[정일영]

[The Korean Odyssey]

*A K2 Black Panther, the pride of Korea, practicing shooting. @iStock

Il Young Jeong

Research Professor_Institute of Social Sciences_Sogang University

Expectations for the K-defense industry have been rising recently. In July, 2022, the Korean government signed an export contract worth about $12.4 billion with Poland including K2 Black Panther tanks, K9 Thunder howitzers, FA-50 aircraft, and K239 Chunmoo rocket artillery systems. This contract alone amounted to more than Korea’s total defense industry exports in 2021.

The K-defense industry has continued to gather praise both domestically and overseas. In addition to looking at expectations the K-defense industry’s future growth, this article will ask the uncomfortable question that need to be addressed when we think about the future of the industry.

The Opportunities presented by the Age of Peace for K-Defense

Since the Korean War, Korea has been striving to realize its dream of ‘independent national defense’. However, South Korea's wartime operational control still rests with the ROK-US Combined Forces Command (CFC). Korea does not actually have the authority to control its own troops during wartime. As a result, the dream of Korea gaining independent self-defense capability through the transfer of operational control remains out of reach so far.

On the other hand, the K-defense industry, which has been promoted since the Kim Dae Jung administration (1998-2003), has recently enjoyed some public achievements. The K-defense industry has successfully achieved rapid growth in Korea's military power, especially in the performance and localization of military weapons production, which are arguably just as important as wartime operational control.

Korea's K-defense industry has enjoyed success in multiple arenas, including on land, in the sea, and in the air. On land, Korea boasts K2 Black Panther tanks, K9 Thunder self-propelled howitzers, and the Hyunmoo series surface-to-surface guided missiles (I, II, III).

The Korean Navy has also developed 3,000-ton Dosan Anchangh-class submarines capable of firing submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) and Sejong the Great-class (Korean Aegis) destroyers. Lastly, in the air, we have the is the 4.5-generation fighter KF-21 Boramae, which entered the stage of test flight after astonishing success in localizing key technologies that the US had refused to relocate.

The K-defense industry, which has in tandem with the development of Korea's IT and manufacturing technologies, is now expanding into the overseas arena. Ironically, the demand for K-weapons is increasing as countries that neglected to invest in their domestic defense sectors in peacetime now contend with a growing security crisis resulting from strategic competition between the US and China and the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Additionally, the Korean National Assembly enacted the “Defense Industry Development and Support Act” in 2020 which institutionalized government support for the defense industry.

According to the "2022 World Defense Industry Market Almanac" published by the Defense Technology Promotion Institute, Korea ranked eighth in the world and accounted for 2.8% of the global defense industry export market between 2017 and 2021. As a result of a 177% increase in exports compared to the previous five years (2012-2016), Korea’s growth rate alone ranked first in the world. This figure is even more impressive considering that it excludes the enormous export contract with Poland mentioned earlier in this article.

In a related development, at the "Defense Industry Export Strategy Meeting" last November, President Yoon Suk Yeol presented a national goal of capturing 5% of the global defense industry market share by 2027 and to rank within the top 4 of the global defense industry. In other words, his announcement positions the K-defense industry as an emerging new Korean export industry.

Beware of the K-Defense Industry Exports Without Democratic Control

The growth of the K-defense industry is simply spectacular. There is no doubt that the K-defense industry’s achievements will greatly accelerate our path to independent national self-defense. But that is not the end of the story. There remains an uncomfortable question we need to ask ourselves.

In the movie "Iron Man," Tony Stark, the main character and CEO of a global weapons manufacturer, is shocked to see his weapons being used by terrorists. At a time when everyone is excited about the tremendous demand for K-defense exports, we must ask ourselves the same question that Tony Stark asked himself. What exactly is the K-Defense Industry for?

Is the K-defense industry a tool for exports? So long as we can export in extraordinary quantities, is how those exports are used irrelevant? I don't think so. We are exporting weapons of destruction. As such, we should be able to bear responsibility for the consequences when those weapons are used.

Amid intensifying U.S.-China strategic competition, "value diplomacy" is being emphasized more than ever. Our values of freedom and democracy are values that cannot be traded for anything. Yet, on our divided peninsula, peace is also a value we cannot compromise on. The K-defense industry should also be a tool for peace. Conversely, the K-defense industry cannot become a tool for aggression or terrorism.

Of course, weapons exports are not an unregulated business. South Korea’s “Decree on the Defense Acquisition Program Act” stipulates that the head of the Defense Acquisition Program Administration has the power to adjust or restrict the export of defense materials and defense technology "in the event that is necessary for international peace and security or for national security," "in the event of urgent changes in the international situation such as war and terrorism,” or if the export of said materials would likely generate "diplomatic friction”. Also the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) that took effect in 2017 also delineated measures to prevent illegal sales and appropriation of weaponry.

However, these regulations are rather vague and opaque. As the defense industry grows in importance, there is likewise a growing need for the laws surrounding the defense industry to be clearly defined. Additionally, we also need to guarantee democratic controls over the industry through the National Assembly and participation from civil society.

The Growth of the K-Defense Industry Should Lead to the Return of Wartime Operational Control

The growth of the K-defense industry places burdens Korea with a heavy responsibility. Rather than blindly lauding the growth of the K-defense industry, we should spend more time considering how to deal with our increased responsibility and how to place democratic controls on the industry.

Moreover, the growth of the K-defense industry should lead to the return of true self-defense, in other words, wartime operational control. The argument that the transfer of wartime operational control weakens the US-ROK alliance is tantamount to giving up on independent self-defense altogether. No country wants to relinquish operational control of its troops to another country, even under the auspices of an alliance. The United States itself has stressed that the return of wartime operational control will further advance the US-ROK alliance.

In the end, the growth of the K-defense industry should lead to an opportunity to realize the Korean dream of independent defense through the return of wartime operational control and to establish the Republic of Korea as a direct player in peace on the Korean Peninsula.

*IL-Young Jeong is a research professor at Sogang University in Seoul. His key research interests include North Korea's social control system, inter-Korean relations, and peace on the Korean Peninsula.