By This seems more like a political show of creating the appearance of doing something in response to the Cheonan sinking:
The U.S. and South Korea are planning two major military exercises off the Korean Peninsula in response to North Korea’s torpedo attack on a South Korean warship.Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman told reporters on Monday the joint exercises conducted in the “near future” will test the nations’ ability to defeat submarines and to monitor and prevent illicit activities.
Whitman says the exercises are being planned as a result of the March 26 attack, in which a torpedo blew up a South Korean warship and killed 46 Korean sailors. [Stars & Stripes]
Considering the fact that the North Koreans have infiltrated submarines for years that have costs the lives of dozens of people that submarine detection would have been a priority long before now.
1:49 pm on May 30th, 2010 1
The pipes in buildings all over Seoul freeze every winter. The news portrays it as a national crisis and everyone acts like they never expected it to happen.
2:23 pm on May 30th, 2010 2
I guess they decided that a computer assisted exercise (a la UFG or KR/FE) wouldn't quite cut it for this one…:)
2:43 pm on May 30th, 2010 3
Computer assisted exercises are a tool. Like all tools, if misused they aren't good for much.
They aren't for training soldiers and sailors. They are for senior leadership. In this case a computerized exercise would not be the proper tool. On the other hand, if you want to train some admirals to maneuver fleets against large enemy formations, there might be something to it.
3:03 pm on May 30th, 2010 4
Amazing how little money the ROK Navy (and AF for that matter) get out of their defense budget. Considering 90% of their trade goes by sea and nearly all of their energy plus the unfriendly neighborhood, you'd think they'd take their navy more seriously.
3:06 pm on May 30th, 2010 5
See post #1.
5:19 pm on May 30th, 2010 6
"Senior US officials say the sinking of a South Korean warship revealed that years of spending had still left the country vulnerable to a surprise attack." Admiral Mike Mullen says the exercises in the coming weeks are just the near-term piece. The longer-range effort will be finding ways to counter the min-subs.
The NY Times has a story buy Tom Shanker and David E. Sanger with reporting from Seoul by Choe Sang-hun.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/31/world/asia/31ko…
6:26 pm on May 30th, 2010 7
I have criticized that very situation several times over here at ROK Drop.
The Korean military is still too Army-centric; no balance of power (or budget) between the diffrent branches.
7:01 pm on May 30th, 2010 8
The 800lb gorilla in the room has always been the 1.1 million man NK Army. Unfortunately well equiped AirForces and Navies do not hold ground so I give the ROK MND the benefit of the doubt on their budget choices.
The real crime has been two Presidents that did not spend adequately on the military as a whole while gutting its reserves and active strength while dumping buckets of money on the North.
8:33 pm on May 30th, 2010 9
I guess detecting submarines is more difficult than people think.
9:06 pm on May 30th, 2010 10
Concur with Hamilton. Sure the previous 2 SK administrations spent money on expensive ships and jets but IMO they were just used as a justification for ending the US's operational control of ROK forces.
It looks like proper thing to do as ROK has become wealthier but IMO it only helps NK. Remember it's all about your postures and signals that you send on the peninsula. And US turning over operation control to SK sends wrong signal to NK.
11:45 pm on May 30th, 2010 11
Hey Leon,
I guess a good "best 2 outta 3" set of Battleship wouldn't help out the admirals on this one…?:)
Matt
9:31 am on May 31st, 2010 12
Probably not. But if they used electronic Battleship and the sounds and flashing lights might keep them interested… For a while.
11:28 am on May 31st, 2010 13
My thoughts as well.
1:47 pm on May 31st, 2010 14
While the large DPRK Army is not a threat to be taken lightly, they are already sufficiently accounted for. If you look at the quality and strength of symmetric forces, ROK has the advantage over the DPRK. On top of that you have the US military ready to support ROK.
It has always been the asymmetric forces up in DPRK that has worried ROKUS leadership. The biggest threat? NBC weapons, the huge number of DPRK special forces, DPRK sleeper agents already in ROK, and long range artillery pointed toward GSMA at the lives of noncombatants.
@Hamilton
"The 800lb gorilla in the room has always been the 1.1 million man NK Army. Unfortunately well equiped AirForces and Navies do not hold ground so I give the ROK MND the benefit of the doubt on their budget choices."
Yes, the DPRK Army is not a small gorilla. But our gorillas are bigger, faster, have the bigger stick and deeper pockets. Its the unconventional warfare tatics that is going to bite our ass. That is why DPRK has invested so heavily in asymmetric forces. They have known for quite a while that they have little chance with conventional forces.
Anybody with a knowledge of the changing ROKUS military doctrine and OPLAN knows that there is a big discrepancy between current ROK military structure and how we really want to fight the war. The longterm ROK military roadmap and budget is too heavily influenced by the ROK Army-centric mentality. If the status quo continues, ROK MND will merely stay an extension of the ROK Army.
I agree with you on that, at the end of the day it's the Army and its people on the ground who ultimately make the stand. But I will have to disagree with you on that the ROKAF and ROKN do not hold gound. Without going into specifics, if the DPRK forces do push south the brunt of the forces are going to be intercepted and attrited by the ROKUS AF and the ROKUS Navy at sea. While the ROK Army presence near the DMZ are going to act as tripwires and buffers against the first DPRK forces near the DMZ, overall the ROKUS Army are the last line of defense. They play catcher. What I am trying to convey is that all the military branches have an important role to play and therefore the planning and budget distribution should be a more realistic and balanced affair.
@Hamilton
"The real crime has been two Presidents that did not spend adequately on the military as a whole while gutting its reserves and active strength while dumping buckets of money on the North."
The previous president focused more and spent more on the military than the current administration. Gutting its reserve? The ROK reserve system is a joke! Sheer numbers is not what is going to stop the DPRK, its the quality of the people. Transforming the ROK military into a more professional force is the way to go. Keeping the status quo is not.
Why did the previous administration spend money on expensive ships(e.g. AEGIS Combat Systms) and aircraft(e.g. AWACS, F-15K)? They were trying to increase 1) ISR capabilities to better detect and monitor DPRK conventional and unconventional forces without being totally dependent of US ISR assets, improve 2) C4I capabilities and 3)stike capabilities, so that ROK military as a whole can become less dependent on the US military.
What is wrong with preparing for OPCON transfer? Is the ROK military ready for OPCON transfer? Personally I will have to say no. But if we don't set up a deadline and start preparing for it, its never going to happen. The ROK military has to become a true professional military and one of the first step it needs to take is to become less dependent on the US military. How is this sending the wrong signal? The ROK with its own military soveriegnty is the way to become true allies of equal footing with the US and a force to be reckoned with by the DPRK.
ROK and US, as long as their interest in the region coincide, they are going to work with each other. But for ROK to truly earn the respect of other nations and the US, it needs to take the fundamental military soveriengty into its own hands. OPCON transfer has little to do with whether the US forces are going to stay in ROK or not. OPCON is something that has to happen, while the US forces staying in Korea has to do more with what national interest of both nations deem most beneficial.
3:02 pm on May 31st, 2010 15
Juan, I understand your position but it is a little off.
President Roh did spend more and did acquire some decent weapon systems. However after demanding OPCON transition he took his own MND's lowest spending increase request(15%) at the time and low balled it by only allowing a 9% increase while simultaneously requiring the Army to upgrade the quality of life of its soldiers. While that was overdue, this imposed an additional cut on the percent that could be applied to modernization. Then he forced MND to recalculate the cost and within 24 hours they agreed 9% would cover the costs. This was before they even analyzied the mission sets they were picking up. Now we know the number is much higher and the US will have to maintain a number of capabilities well after the transfer since they are unfunded.
Also the reserves were not the ony cut. (And 5 days a year training is a joke, agreed) Regular gound forces were cut from 580,000 to around 480,000. This makes those reserves even more critical in a slug fest and for securing the rear area against SOF. Quantity has a quality all by itself in COIN like operations.
6:49 pm on May 31st, 2010 16
@Hamilton
It's great talking to someone who knows what they are talking about
Okay, the issue I took with your statement was, "…I give the ROK MND the benefit of the doubt on their budget choices.
The real crime has been two Presidents that did not spend adequately on the military as a whole while gutting its reserves and active strength while dumping buckets of money on the North."
I will first have to make some disclaimers. Though I may sound like it here, I am not for huge military budgets. I have always believed that national security, the national economy and the national welfare system needs to strike a balance. Where that balance lies, is not what I want to talk about. If you look at the data (please google it, I haven't been able to find English sources yet, only Korean ones) the ROK military budget in absolute terms have been on the rise, while in relative terms (compared to the GDP and national budget) it has talken up ever decreasing portions. Obviously this means that the military budget has been growing, but just not as fast as the ROK GDP or government budget. Which is fine by me as long as the military budget is realistic in its growth.
Also all government branches ask for more budget increase, they are bureaucrats that's what they do
I'm not familiar with your recounting of the event but even if it is true, I don't see how anyone can imply the previous administration didn't focus on the military.
MND: I want a 15% raise!
Leadership: I think that's too much, how about a 9% raise, and while at it how about moving along with the Military Reform Plan 2020.
What I really want to talk about is the ROK Military Reform Plan 2020 which was set in motion in 2005 during the previous administration. Its a mid-long term military roadmap to create a more balanced, professional ROK military. What did the current administration do with it? They changed it in 2009 as follows (read it and decide for yourselves, which administration is better focused on the ROK military):
1. The total military long-term budget has been cut from KOR 621 Trillion WON to KOR 599 Trillion Won.
2. Slowed down and reversed to some extent the cut in reserves and regular ground forces. (I think this is Hamilton's main point, and I will get back to this)
3. ROK Navy Air Asset have been canceled and the new 2000ton FFX(Korean Frigates) has been pushed back to 2011.
4. ROK Navy nine 3000ton new submarines have been pushed back 2years.
5. Integrated ROK Army Operations Command for the 3rd Army in Kyunggido and 1st Army in Kangwondo has been pushed back to 2015.
6. ROK Army: was planned for two K-2 corps and 600 K-2s. The number has been cut in half.
7. ROK AF: The ISR UAV has been pushed back 4 years and air refueling tankers has been pushed back more than a year.
I could go on and on.
Okay now, while I agree with you that number of men on the ground is important, it should not come at the expense of a more professional better equipped military. The 2020 plan was trying to INCREASE better equipped professional soldiers while cutting away the "fat" if you will. We don't have an endless budget, and the large number of NONOPERATIONAL reserves and draftees, are a huge burden on ROK Military budgets spend better elsewhere. The draftees need to be fed, clothed, housed, trained, entertained, and the administration bureaucracy that has to keep this going is expensive. There is a joke that to keep one combat colonel operational the ROK has ten administrative colonels supportin him. I am not saying that administrative duties are not important. I am merely pointing out the huge inefficiencies of the current ROK military system which still relies too much on keeping the facade of numbers.
It is the quality of the people that makes the organization special. The Korean military has fallen way behind the civilian sector in its professionalism. The truly gifted smart people no longer work for the military other than their foced brief stint as a lowly draftee. If the ROK military is not able to attract a pool of great people because they are busy maintaining "numbers" of people who really do not have much to add in modern combat situations, that is indeed a tragedy.
Pertaining the current LMB administration, actually I don't really have a problem with it. Yes I think they could have done better with the 2020 plan but to each administration its own style. What I do have a problem is with people who mistakenly compare the former administration and the current administration with the incomplete or distorted picutre. From a military perspective, the previous administration was the true conservative, not the curent administration. Many criticize the previous administrations for the "Sunshine Policy" and other DPRK related projects that funneled a lot of money up there. To as certain extent I would agree with the criticisms especially on how many of the projects were executed. But when dealing with other nations, especially a noncoventional one like DPRK, we have to remember DIME. Diplomacy, Intelligence, Military and Economic policies all have to executed holistically. While there is no doubt in my mind that the KJI regime needs to be put down, unless the ROK or US is going to execute any military attempt now to end the KJI regime, we need to put all other cards on the table. The previous administration did that. They didn't ignore the DPRK hoping the problem would disappear. They took a realistic multidimensional approach. They strenghtened the military while simultaneously trying to open relations with the DPRK. Also opening channels with the DPRK also probably had other effects not PRed by the ROK government for obvious reasons. Whereas before the DPRK people were not easily accessible by the outside world, as the DPRK and ROK relations increased, outside influences began to more quickly seep in to the DPRK community, albeit under much limits. Unless the ROK or US is going to take actions now to bring down the regime, another better alternative is to help "enlighthen" the DPRK people and erode DPRK from the inside.
9:12 pm on May 31st, 2010 17
Juan, right back at you. Debate is a learning experience and a nice change from the usual emotional flaming.
My problem with NMH is that he started a very aggressive OPCON transition plan which he didn't understand and didn't fund it while sticking the ROK MND with a multitude of more expensive mandates and simultaneously downsizing the military as a whole. Closing bases actually costs more in the short term which is something non-military types like President Roh often can't understand. Reducing 50,000 won a month privates who live 20 to a plank in a tin roofed hut and hand clean/dry clothes is not a big money saver versus defense.
An oblique shot was that the turned over US Bases due exceed ROK standards, but were often prime real estate for ROK units and civilian ventures. Moving units costs more money, look at BRAC in the US. Every municipality with Car shops dumping oil down their drains and dry cleaning shops with not a single Hazmat disposal certificate suddenly looked to Uncle Sugar who rightfully extended the peace sign.
The ROK Military has less buying power than they did ten years ago. The toll is not enought new systems to close the manpower divide. Certainly not enough for anti-Sub systems unless that is the scream for the day.
9:13 am on June 1st, 2010 18
What is MND? Who are LMB and NMH?
9:44 am on June 1st, 2010 19
The Minister of National Defense, Lee Myung Bak the current President and Noh Mu Hyun the previous President who killed himself.
7:21 pm on June 1st, 2010 20
MND : [Ministry] of National Defense
Hamilton sorry for not replying to your comment. Have something important to take care of. I will be back after the weekend
9:33 pm on June 1st, 2010 21
MND is actually shorthand for both, but I was referring directly to the minister since he was appointed by NMH, his own man who probably intentionally low-balled the estimate and further undercut.
1:19 pm on June 5th, 2010 22
"On the night a torpedo-armed North Korean submarine allegedly sank a South Korean patrol ship, the U.S. and South Korea were engaged in joint anti-submarine warfare exercises just 75 miles away, military officials told The Associated Press."
http://ap.stripes.com/dynamic/stories/U/US_US_KOR…
On September 11, 2001, wasn't America having an exercise to simulate… wait for it… terrorists flying planes into buildings?
On 7/7, wasn't London just happening to have… wait for it… a subway bombing exercise?
(The upcoming nuclear attack exercise in LA should be of some concern.)
Anyway, the sinking of the Cheonan just keeps getting curiouser and curiouser… making one wonder if the Official Story is the Real Story.