[INTERVIEW] S. Korea wants more reassurances from US: American Enterprise Institute

U.S. military armored vehicles are seen in Paju, northern Gyeonggi Province, near the border with North Korea, Jan. 11. AP-Yonhap

This is the first in a series of interviews with security experts at leading think tanks in Washington and former U.S. officials on the implications of the escalating arms race in Northeast Asia and South Korea's growing nuclear ambitions. _ ED.

US President Joe Biden unlikely to meet North Korea's Kim

By Kim Yoo-chul

North Korea's relentless spike in the testing of its advanced missiles and the progress of its nuclear program has awakened the necessity for South Korea to reevaluate its longtime defense posture including the potential ― albeit controversial ― development of nuclear weapons.

A recent poll by Hankook Research, a local pollster, has found about 67 percent of South Koreans remain supportive of the idea of the country having independent nuclear capabilities. The mainstream interpretation behind the poll results is that more South Koreans are concerned over a passive U.S. response in the event of an actual North Korean attack on Seoul and the surrounding capital region.

President Yoon Suk Yeol's recent suggestion during a policy briefing that South Korea could acquire or develop a nuclear arsenal, but only if the situation with North Korea deteriorates, is raising debate in Washington and other key allies. Seoul's official possession of nuclear weapons would clearly represent a drastic shift in geopolitics given the United Nation's efforts to encourage "nuclear countries" to accelerate their work on nuclear disarmament.

Some political and security analysts said President Yoon's suggestion should be interpreted as a message to his political supporters as he is facing domestic political pressure to take a tough stance toward North Korea ahead of the 2024 general election.

But Washington wants to maintain the regional status quo with Beijing and doesn't want to see any instability in Northeast Asia that could result in unexpected changes.

Security experts in Washington and former U.S. officials said that given Yoon's wishes for more positioning of strategic U.S. military assets near the peninsula and his pursuit of NATO-style "nuclear sharing," the alliance structure between Washington and Seoul may have to be elevated further to address concerns about the durability of the U.S.' defense commitment to South Korea.

U.S. Air Force F-35 Lightning IIs fly side by side with Republic of Korea Air Force F-35s as part of a bilateral exercise over the western waters of Korea, July 12, 2022. Reuters-Yonhap

"It is natural for South Korea to think more seriously about nuclear deterrence dynamics since China and North Korea are building up their nuclear capabilities and Russia is actively making nuclear threats against Ukraine and Europe," Zack Cooper, who served as assistant to the deputy national security adviser for combating terrorism at the White House National Security Council (NSC), told The Korea Times in a recent interview.

Cooper, currently a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) where he studies Washington's strategy and alliance dynamics in Asia, stressed that it's understandable for South Korea to pressure the United States to provide an increased level of defense assurances.

"Moreover, concerns about U.S. extended deterrence guarantees are understandable given that Donald Trump could be re-elected in 2024 and is not trusted in Seoul. President Yoon and the South Korean public are trying to get a bit of leverage to push Washington to do more to reassure Seoul, which is a logical move given these concerns," said Cooper, who previously served as a special assistant to the principal deputy under secretary of defense for policy at the Pentagon.

In recent months, the United States and South Korea agreed to more positioning closer to the peninsula of U.S. strategic assets including B-series bombers, F-35 stealth jets and heavy air carrier groups. The South Korean military said it was planning to hold a tabletop drill with the United States in an expanded preparedness to counter North Korea's actual use of nuclear weapons. But U.S. officials have also refuted the possibility of Washington holding a "joint nuclear drill."

Zack Cooper, senior fellow, American Enterprise Institute

Given North Korea's continued nuclear threats, these steps aren't seen as enough for many South Koreans, who want the country to take on an expanded role in planning and actually controlling some U.S. nuclear assets. Cooper, considered one of the leading advisory figures regarding inter-Korean issues, plainly asked Washington officials to engage Seoul on this issue.

"It is critical for the United States to engage South Korea seriously on this issue to help officials in Seoul better understand U.S. nuclear capabilities and planning processes," Cooper said. But the thought of a nuclear-armed South Korea is something Washington is wary of.

This also means that if Seoul were to have nuclear weapons, it could risk breaking its alliance with Washington. "It would be unwise for South Korea to acquire nuclear weapons because the economic and diplomatic consequences would be substantial while the military benefits would be limited," Cooper said.

Regarding questions on the validity of Yoon's idea of nuclear sharing, the suggestion of which hasn't been embraced by U.S. President Joe Biden, Cooper responded he also doesn't support the idea of nuclear sharing.

"I do support American leaders having detailed discussions about how nuclear sharing works in a European context and why it could pose challenges in a Korean context. For example, nuclear weapons would have to be stored in a central location, which would be vulnerable to attack given South Korea's limited strategic depth. That being said, some sort of nuclear planning group could make sense, and might even include other U.S. allies too, namely Japan and Australia," he said.

A TV screen displays a news program with South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol speaking during a cabinet council meeting, at Seoul Station in Seoul, Dec. 27, 2022. AP-Yonhap

No reason for Biden to meet with North Korea's Kim

Despite Washington's repeated commitment to its policy against the Kim Jong-un regime ― a pursuit of complete and verifiable denuclearization on the peninsula ― some Washington think tanks are calling for beginning arms control talks with North Korea as part of a denuclearization process.

While some security experts argued that recognizing the North as a "nuclear-armed state" will be the sole prerequisite for the resumption of talks aimed at dismantling North Korea's nuclear arsenal, it's unlikely for President Biden to meet with Kim, according to Cooper, given Washington's long-time position which sees the North Korean nuclear program as illegal and subject to U.N. sanctions.

"I cannot imagine a summit between Joe Biden and Kim Jong-un this year. I doubt that Biden will want to meet with Kim when Trump did this and it basically failed to produce a deal. Why would the Biden administration think that an engagement with Kim would produce a better outcome this time than it did last time?" he said.

Since the summit in Hanoi ended without a deal, no progress has been made towards restarting nuclear talks.

"The Biden team is focused on problems that they can make some progress on and North Korea does not seem to be on that list. They are likely to continue aiming for denuclearization, but we have to be honest at this point that complete and verifiable denuclearization is almost impossible to imagine. I think real progress toward this end is very unlikely in the year ahead," added Cooper, who is also a professor at Georgetown University.