From Foreign Policy · Syrus Solo Jin · · 3m
Why Hormuz Could Cost Washington Seoul
Trump wants Korean ships in the Strait of Hormuz, and just asking has already damaged the alliance.
In brief
Trump wants Korean ships in the Strait of Hormuz, and just asking has already damaged the alliance. The deployment itself would change little in Hormuz, but forcing Seoul to choose is pushing Koreans toward self-reliance and away from Washington. Originally reported by Foreign Policy.
A deployment nearly announced
Last week President Lee Jae-myung's team looked ready to ask the legislature for a naval deployment to the Strait of Hormuz. Ships and maritime aircraft, described as noncombat.
Tehran answered in Korean
Iran issued warnings against the deployment in Korean, aimed straight at the public Lee has to persuade.
The navy can do it
South Korea's fleet is well equipped for long missions far from home, with counterpiracy and patrol experience in exactly those waters.
The problem is political
Operationally this is routine. What makes it hard is Korea's long, tangled history of being asked to fight America's wars.
“The challenge, then, that Lee faces is not operational. Instead, it is political”
Trump wants a partner
No U.S. ally has joined his war on Iran, and it grates. He criticized Lee for not backing it while ordering cuts to joint U.S.-Korean drills.
Koreans say no
Polls show a majority oppose sending warships. Protesters keep showing up outside the presidential estate.
The Assembly splits
The left urges caution. The right accuses Lee of failing a powerful ally. The question itself has widened the divide.
Vietnam is the memory
Protest signs in Seoul read "Remember the mistakes of the Vietnam War." Korea sent combat troops from 1964 to 1973 for hundreds of millions in U.S. aid, and was called a mercenary state for it.
Iraq showed the pattern
In 2003 Washington pulled assets out of Korea without consulting Seoul, then pressed for troops. Roh Moo-hyun promised medics and engineers, then caved and sent combat forces.
What Roh bought with it
He argued the deployment protected U.S. backing for the Six-Party Talks with North Korea. It fractured the progressive camp and hardened the sense that the alliance was unequal.
Noncombat is a label
In a war of missiles and drones, support troops get hit. Korean sailors would sit in a combat zone where U.S. air defense stockpiles are already thin.
“Korean Marines may not be invading Kharg Island, but they will still be deployed in a combat zone”
The conservative bet
Send ships, keep Trump happy, keep U.S. forces on the peninsula. Business leaders with big U.S. investments see the same logic protecting their market access.
The trap in that bet
Trump wants nuclear talks with Kim Jong Un for his legacy, and those would demand military concessions. Korea could risk sailors for one war and still be asked to give up security at home.
Self-reliance is winning
Anti-U.S. feeling has climbed fast, the right is openly calling for Korean nuclear weapons, and the left's reluctance is softening. Washington may be trading a real ally for a futile war.
“Washington may very well be squandering a valuable alliance in pursuit of a futile war.”
Here's the gist
The deployment itself would change little in Hormuz, but forcing Seoul to choose is pushing Koreans toward self-reliance and away from Washington.
