|
The Korean government is scrutinizing the ¡°Korea-U.S Joint Security Declaration¡± in order to rebuild the alliance between the two countries. As the press has reported that even Japan is worried about the currently shaky Korea-U.S alliance, the government is seemingly attempting to prepare a breakthrough for a new alliance with the U.S., based on the ¡°U.S-Japan Joint Security Declaration¡± that provided a turning point in the security relationship between the U.S. and Japan in the 1990s.
However, the past U.S-Japan relations in which the ¡°U.S-Japan Joint Security Declaration¡± was born and the current Korea-U.S relations are totally different, except for the insecure future of the alliance. At that time, the U.S. and Japan had a vast human network across both countries who shared worrisome views about the future of their alliance and resolved the issue willingly. By contrast, in the U.S., not only the State Department and the Defense Department but also even experts on Korea are saying that Korea is no longer an area of interest. In Korea, people in charge of diplomacy and security within the government are offering empty diplomatic rhetoric of ¡°cooperative independent defense,¡± neglecting the true meaning of an alliance. Therefore, we cannot expect that the Korean government would move toward strengthening support and cooperation for U.S forces stationed here, as Japan did for U.S forces stationed on the islands despite fierce objections from leftists, opposition parties and civic organizations.
Accurate and realistic recognition of the current international relations and security situation is the prerequisite to a new security declaration between Korea and the U.S. The recent Korea-U.S relationship lacks this basic precondition. The typical example of the wrong recognition is the mistaken understanding on the presence of U.S forces in Korea. Some say that U.S. forces are stationing here for their own purposes, not for Korea¡¯s interests. Behind this understanding lies self-contradictory logic that even if Korea demands that U.S forces leave this country, they would not.
The U.S unhesitatingly gave up Subic Naval Station and the Clark Air Base in the Philippines, which were crucial outposts in its Asia-Pacific strategy to secure maritime transportation routes and to check the influence of China. The two bases¡¯ strategic importance was several times as great as those in Korea. The U.S. said at that time that it would not go to any country that doesn¡¯t need the presence of U.S. forces. The U.S. is telling Korea the same thing now.
The Korean government should recognize calmly and accurately the reality and the meaning of the Korea-U.S alliance before signing a new Korea-U.S joint security declaration. Otherwise, Korea would bear resemblance to the Philippines, which is asking the U.S to return to it only several years after the departure of U.S forces.
|
