Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

soryang

(3,304 posts)
Tue Sep 3, 2019, 01:00 PM Sep 2019

Role of UNC contested by S. Korean, U.S. militaries last month: Sources

Role of UNC contested by S. Korean, U.S. militaries last month: Sources
Arirang News (South Korean English broadcast transcript) Sep 3

youtube-




Seoul and Washington recently discussed the commanding authority over the South Korean military after the transfer of wartime operational control.

The two sides have reached a compromise... but according to our defense ministry correspondent Kim Ji-yeon, there still remain a few important questions that need clear-cut answers.

The role of the U.S.-led United Nations Command after Washington completes the transfer of wartime operational control to South Korea... was hotly contested by the two countries' militaries.

This has fueled speculation that the U.S. would still maintain its military authority over the Peninsula even after OPCON transfer.

Multiple military sources confirmed that during the preliminary sessions conducted in the run-up to their Combined Command Post Training held last month... the South Korean and U.S. militaries debated on whether the UNC had operational authority over the South Korean military during times of peace,... even after the envisioned OPCON transfer from Washington to Seoul.
The two sides had reached a compromise before the actual training... largely thanks to the leadership of Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Park Han-ki... and his rapport with U.S. Forces Korea commander General Robert Abrams.

But the incident highlights the need for a clear guideline before the OPCON transfer on the roles of the South Korean general... who serves as the commander... and an American general... that takes on the role of a deputy.
1 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Role of UNC contested by S. Korean, U.S. militaries last month: Sources (Original Post) soryang Sep 2019 OP
[Editorial] US needs to let S. Korea take charge of its own military affairs soryang Sep 2019 #1

soryang

(3,304 posts)
1. [Editorial] US needs to let S. Korea take charge of its own military affairs
Thu Sep 5, 2019, 06:09 PM
Sep 2019

[Editorial] US needs to let S. Korea take charge of its own military affairs
Posted on : Sep.5,2019 16:45 KST Modified on : Sep.5,2019 16:45 KST
Hankyoreh


Reports indicate that the US has insisted that the United Nations Command (UNC), which is currently charged with maintaining and overseeing the armistice agreement, should also take part in managing crisis situations on the Korean Peninsula after South Korea recovers operational control of its military, known as the OPCON transfer. This appears to be an attempt by the US army to stay in charge of military activities on the Korean Peninsula via the UNC even after a South Korean general takes charge of the ROK-US Combined Forces Command (CFC) in the early or mid-2020s. Such an attempt runs contrary to the spirit of the OPCON transfer. If the US didn’t intend to yield control to the South Korean military, why would it have agreed to the OPCON transfer in the first place? The US needs to rethink its plan to continue exercising military leadership via the UNC.


More:

http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_editorial/908599.html

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»National Security & Defense»Role of UNC contested by ...