It appears that new Korean President Lee Myung-bak is committed to strengthening the US-ROK Alliance by actually paying more to fund the USFK transformation plan:
"And already, in that physical process, South Korea has spent about $2 billion in an effort that’s going to cost them around $10 billion," the general said. "It’s of the magnitude of the Guam move."
The U.S., on its part, agreed to provide family housing and officer quarters at Camp Humphreys, estimated at about $1.4 billion over a 15-year period, Bell said.In March last year, the South Korean government said it expected to pay about $5.6 billion to move out of the Yongsan facilities.
The USFK commander said that the two countries have agreed to split the cost 50-50 to relocate the 2nd Infantry Division, and that part of the money will come from the host-nation fund provided by the South Korean side.
Seoul’s position has been that it would pay to move out of Yongsan Garrison since it had requested it, but that Washington should be responsible for relocating the infantry division since that was the request of the U.S. This argument was behind South Korea’s opposition to using host-nation funds, used to maintain U.S. forces in the country, for relocation costs.
"Our agreement is about a 50-50 split, and so what I’ve done is take 50 percent of the cost to move the remaining force that is north of Seoul to its garrison location of the future south of Seoul," Bell said.
"The other 50 percent, we need to use host-nation funds for, and we will." [Yonhap]
ROK Drop readers may remember that equal cost sharing is something that has been stressed prominently by the US government and General Bell in recent weeks. It is good to see that President Lee is backing up his rhetoric with action, however I would still like to hear from the Korean side if they intend to continue to advocate for the delay of the relocation of the 2nd Infantry Division or not? I also wonder what the US side had to give up in order to get the ROK government to agree to pay more? Could a delay of the operational control handover been a possible bargaining chip?
Popularity: 2%
10:09 am on March 17th, 2008 1
This is fairly big news, I think. I’ve pulled my U.S. flag/Korean flag lapel pin from retirement.
10:28 am on March 17th, 2008 2
I think it is fairly big news as well getting the ROK government to equally share cost of the USFK transformation, however I’m still curious on what was given up to get them to agree to equal cost sharing?
When it comes to negotiations with the ROK, Uncle Sam has been nothing more then Uncle Sucker in the past. So what did the US government get suckered by this time?
12:08 pm on March 17th, 2008 3
I remember that the Land Partnership Plan (LPP) had the ROKs paying for 100% of the cost of relocation from Camps we were going to vacate and return. Now the ROKs are being cheered because they are going to pay 50% and the US ends up paying the other 50%. What did I miss?
3:47 pm on March 17th, 2008 4
Jerry — the LPP was pre-2003 idea to create a super-garrison up north. As to the move out of Yongsan, the ROK signed the MOU in 1990 and then promptly reneged. You’re talking of different times.
As to what Gen Bell was saying to Congress was that same old crud. He’s saying the same story over and over — and he has not changed. The ROK is also saying the same thing about the “unfairness” of the USFK using the SMA funds to make up the differences in the USFK move off the DMZ. Nothing’s changed…
9:40 pm on March 17th, 2008 5
[...] United States Forces Korea Commander B.B. Bell testified to Congress that a deal had been reached with the Korean government to equally fund the USFK transformation costs. I suspected something [...]
10:31 pm on March 17th, 2008 6
The LPP Phase 1 plan consolidated onto Casey and CRC. Phase 2 was to shift south. The whole thing was to be funded by sale of the vacated properties, with the profits being used to build the next round of required new facilities to allow the next move. Might have worked except for the fact that the MND guys who agreed to the plan didn’t have the authority (or weren’t willing to use it) to follow through and none of the vacated properties produced the required profits for the next steps. I’m giving them the benefit of a doubt and am giving them credit for having negotiated in good faith, but I wouldn’t bet on that. The US kind of lost interest because most of the folks that were to move around ended up moving a whole lot further (and forgot to come back when they were done).