A final decision on the success or not of the South Korean government’s delay games in regards to the Camp Humphreys relocation will probably be announced next month:
South Korean and U.S. defense officials will negotiate a final timetable for the relocation of U.S. bases next month, officials said Wednesday.
The two sides had earlier set a date of 2012 for the $10-billion relocation project, but many believe it will be delayed by at least a year.
Maj. Gen. Park Byoung-hee, head of the U.S. base relocation office at the Ministry of National Defense, admitted the two sides have been at odds over some issues related to the relocation project.
“The sides are working to set the target year and to determine the exact cost of the project, but there still remains a difference of opinion on several issues,” Park told reporters.
He said Seoul was encouraging the United States to agree to a final date and estimated cost before the end of next month, so the countries can present their appropriate bills to their respective legislatures before year’s end.
Gen. Walter Sharp, the top commander of U.S. forces stationed here, also noted earlier this week that the timeline for the base move would become clearer in about a month, according to Stars and Stripes, a U.S. military newspaper.
Sharp said during a U.S. base tour Monday that he had asked a team of engineers for a timetable to complete Camp Humphreys’ expansion, which will roughly triple its current size. The team is now “reassessing the timeline,” the commander was quoted as saying. [Korea Times]
The last delay put the Camp Humphreys relocation project’s completion at 2016 and now there is another delay that is putting the relocation at 2017.
The Korean government has never wanted the USFK relocation to happen for a variety of reasons and the only reason it has gotten as far as it has was because of former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld’s threat to withdraw USFK which was made quite clear with the redeployment of 2nd Brigade of the 2nd Infantry Division from the Korean peninsula along with a host of other troop cuts. A few days after Rumsfeld resigned from office the Korean government immediately reneged on the transformation deal and announced the first delay of the Camp Humphreys relocation to 2012.
Since then the delays have only increased and now the Korean government wants to spend even less money for the maintenance of the US-ROK alliance. It is all so predictable and as long as the political will in Washington remains the way it is the USFK gravy train will continue to roll at the expense of the welfare of US soldiers forced to serve a year in Korea separated from their families and living in sub-standard living conditions. Obviously few people in Seoul or Washington care about that.
So is there any more bets yet if Songdo or Camp Humphreys will be built first?
Popularity: 2%
9:02 am on August 31st, 2008 1
Bring um home lets stop waisting our money and use the assets we have there in needed areas around the world. Let the DAKS build there bridge and the let the ones who do business around the bases watch the US wave bye bye, no GI to make you richer than you already are. LOL
9:56 am on August 31st, 2008 2
Are you still in the Uijeongbu area?
8:02 pm on August 31st, 2008 3
The underlying strata controlling the “timeline” that Gen Sharp talks about is the monies to complete the construction. The major distress has been the ROK wanting to dictate how the monies that it pays from its cost-sharing funds be used. In this way, the ROK can control the pace of the construction — and ultimately the move off the DMZ and out of Yongsan.
The USFK position has ALWAYS been from Gen Schwartz that these funds go into a bank account and the USFK uses it as it sees fit — where and when it sees fit. The ROK pays for the Yongsan move and it pays for the DMZ move (using the cost-sharing funds). This is the crux of the current “battle” going on.
The formula for cost-sharing reflects the Democratically-controlled Congress attitude that what the RoK pay 50 percent — actually the Congress said 75 percent. The RoK has tried every scheme possible to reduce its cost share — supposedly because it will cuts so deeply into their upgrade programs, but as I mentioned before, they really want to control the pace of the move by controlling the funds dispersal.
What has happened is that for the past TWO YEARS is that the ROK and USFK are NOT negotiating. They have meetings were each side sets out their positions and then they agree to disagree till next time.
The RoK is now trying to force the issue by saying the USFK MUST make concessions to meet the deadlines BEFORE the Oct SCM. It is an old Korean negotiation trick and the US side is not buying it.
Unlike GI Korea, I read between the lines at the end of the Oct 2007 SCM that the two sides were to be given another year to hash out the details of the Cost-Sharing formula BEFORE the next SCM. I read it as an “OR ELSE” threat — not a simple delay.
I believe the USFK can complete its move before 2012 — though it would mean that some troops would be living in a tent city until new dorms are built. The armor can be moved to Humphreys as the new highway movement procedures were worked out in 2007 — as the promised dedicated train system to Rodriquez Range never seemed to have come about. The training area won’t be fully complete, but I’m sure the USFK can come up with work-arounds by using a combination of Camp Humphrey and other training ranges.
So what I’m saying is that I am saying there MAY be some surprises in store. It could go two ways — (1) the way GI Korea predicts with an extension of the date or (2) the US playing hardball and cuts come about that were delayed by Bush (reductions to 25,000 by the end of 2008).
This timeline that Gen Sharp speaks of is ESSENTIAL to the discussions of the Oct SCM. Last year there were too many things left undone because Roh Moo-hyun was still in control. Now it is a completely new ball game with Lee Myeong-bak in control — but LMB sees that there is no way the the ROK will be able to take control (on its terms) by 2012. He wants it stretched out to 2016 — and then further.
Remember that the USFK becomes a “support” command headed by a four-star — for however long that lasts — that is NOT subordinate to the ROK command. The USFK will be playing hardball — but with kid gloves as LMB is atleast an ally who wants to work with the USFK.
I believe the overall time-line is filled with “holes”. Although the ten critical tasks have been handed over to the ROK, I believe that the actual capabilities “eye-washed”. Anyway, they are now into the exercise/qualification phases. Even Gen Sharp admits that the ROK-USFK combination are only in the “crawl-walk” stages.
The USFK must make a decision. I believe the ROK military cannot be fully-capable by 2012. I believe the ROK can meet the eye-wash form of fulfilling the negotiated requirements (fact-based) by 2012 — versus the actual ability to meet the wartime tasking (opinion-based). The USFK decision comes down to whether it is willing to “backfill” the ROK weak areas, while turning over operational control to the ROK. This would mean that some elements of the USFK would be subordinate to the ROK in times of war. If it is NOT willing to do so, then the date will be extended. If it is willing to do so, the OPCON date stands.
I believe the ROK generals are looking objectively at their ability to fulfill the actual war-time tasking and see that they won’t be ready until 2016 or more — as most of their weapons systems are now on order/on the drawing boards and won’t be ready until after 2012. (The fault can be laid at the feet of Roh Moo-hyun and the Uri Party — now the merged UDP who like Bill Clinton slit the throat of the military to support his social programs.)
Thus I believe there is still some suspense left in the “time-line” that deals with Camp Humphreys — but how the USFK will meet the time line is still in question. The Oct SCM will be the decision-maker — whether the US is tired of the “negotiating game” and will take a “put-up or shut-up” stance.
With a Presidential election in the balance, it certainly looks like the GI Korea prediction would be the political choice — to put off any decision until the next President — whoever he may be — is in place. I hope otherwise.
9:28 pm on August 31st, 2008 4
For the 100th time: Surprise!
LL: Tellin’ ya I told ya so since…
How fondly I remember this quote: “CRC will be closed by 1992.”
7:06 am on September 1st, 2008 5
A few questions.
Can the US remove any or ALL of its troops without notifying/asking permission of the ROK ?
Can USFK deploy w/o permission of ROK to a military conflict?
8:52 am on September 1st, 2008 6
By the time a final date is set N. Korea may no longer exist and just be a part of “Korea”. Of course we would like to keep US forces in Korea, but the reason may have to be changed. I would suggest that the US do whatever it takes to get the troops moved and in place so that move, and the cost on our part, can be used as a reason to keep US forces in Korea. The dollar figures are not that high when compared to what we are spending in Iraq and may be a lot less than trying to construct bases elsewhere or building new A/C carriers.
8:19 pm on September 1st, 2008 7
Upon the unification of Korea, Korean nationalist forces thus unleashed will make untenable the continued basing of US forces in the Southern half of the peninsula. We will be blamed for all of the considerable economic displacements that result from the collapse of the impoverished Northern state.
8:56 pm on October 4th, 2008 8