US President Donald Trump reportedly views the transfer of wartime operational control (OPCON) to South Korea as a possible way to reduce or withdraw American troops from the Korean Peninsula, raising concerns among US defence experts about the future of the alliance.
US President Donald Trump reportedly views the proposed transfer of wartime operational control (OPCON) to South Korea as a potential opportunity to reduce or withdraw American troops from the Korean Peninsula, according to assessments by US security experts.
The issue was discussed during an online discussion hosted by the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), focusing on the future of the South Korea-US alliance and the implications of transferring wartime command authority to Seoul.
Victor Cha, Korea Chair at CSIS, said there were credible indications that Trump considers the OPCON transition a possible route to removing American military forces from the peninsula.
“It has been said, and I think said very credibly, that President Trump sees OPCON transition as a way to pull the forces from the peninsula,” Cha said during the discussion.
He further pointed out that the US President, as Commander-in-Chief, possesses executive authority that could potentially enable him to pursue troop reductions even if Congress establishes restrictions through the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).
Cha cautioned that congressional measures establishing a minimum number of American troops in South Korea might not necessarily prevent the administration from finding alternative ways to reduce the military presence.
Randall Schriver, former Assistant Secretary of Defense for Indo-Pacific Security Affairs, also agreed with Cha’s assessment. He noted that Trump has previously expressed interest in reducing America’s military footprint in South Korea.
Schriver said there was a possibility that the President could view the OPCON transfer as an opportunity to withdraw or reduce US forces stationed in the country.
However, Schriver stressed the importance of allowing sufficient time for discussions involving the Pentagon, military leadership and Congress before any decision affecting the American military presence is considered. He said the strategic benefits of maintaining US forces in South Korea should receive careful consideration.
Meanwhile, Vincent Brooks, former commander of US Forces Korea, expressed concern over South Korean Defence Minister Kang Shin-chul’s earlier endorsement of an assessment that Seoul could defend itself without major difficulties even if wartime OPCON were transferred immediately.
Brooks questioned the suggestion that the transfer could take place immediately through a political decision. Comparing the situation to a university student claiming readiness to graduate without completing the required courses and examinations, he emphasised that the process must meet established military requirements.
According to Brooks, the transfer should proceed only after South Korea and the United States fulfil their mutually agreed conditions rather than relying solely on political decisions.
The debate follows Kang’s written response to a parliamentary inquiry in September, when he agreed with then-Defence Minister Ahn Gyu-back’s assessment that South Korea could defend itself without significant difficulties even if wartime operational control were returned the following day. However, Kang also stressed the importance of maintaining mutual trust within the bilateral alliance.
| Also Read: MEA Secretary Meets Somali President, Conveys Greetings from PM Modi |
The latest remarks have brought renewed attention to the future of the South Korea-US security partnership, particularly the relationship between transferring wartime command authority and maintaining American military forces on the peninsula.
As discussions over OPCON transition continue, defence experts have emphasised the importance of military preparedness, alliance coordination and strategic assessments before any major changes are implemented.
