Over 55% of Koreans want THAAD in Korea while 32% are against

More than one half of the people in the Republic of Korea (south) want the THAAD (Terminal High Altitude Area Defense) anti-missile system of the United States deployed in the ROK and a little over 30% others are opposed to it.
However, many Koreans feel that THAAD alone is not sufficient to protect the ROK from the threat of North Korean nuclear attack.
They assert that the ROK needs the United States tactical nuclear weapons re-deployed in South Korea, which were withdrawn in 1991.

Vice President Michael Pence of the United States (fourth from left, foreground) is entering the National Cemetery in Dongjak-dong, Seoul on April 16, 2017 during his recent visit to Korea on April 16-18. VP Pence is accompanied by Mrs. Pence (third from left), Commander-in-Chief Gen. Vincent K. Brooks of the U.S. Forces Korea is seen second from left with Charge d’Affaires Ambassador Marc E. Knapper of the U.S. Embassy in Seoul at far right.

THAAD:
An opinion survey published by a mass-circulated Korean-language daily, Chosun Ilbo, on March 6, 2017, showed 55.8% of the Korean people support the deployment of THAAD anti-missile system in Korea, while 32.8% said that they did not want it. The remaining 11.5% said they had no answer.
Earlier on Sept. 23-24 last year, the supporters were slightly higher with 53.4% and nays were 33.4%. In most of the polls on the topic, fluctuations are very small and it may be safely said that the majority of the Korean people want THAAD in Korea--no matter what other country or countries (eg., China and China) might say about the THAAD deployment in Korea.

The table shows there is no significant change in the attitude on the part of the Korean people on the deployment of THAAD in Korea. The figures show the results in three polls conducted on Feb. 28-March 1, 2016 (left), Sept. 23-24, 2016 (center) and March 3-4, 201 (right).

Korea has Presidential elections slated on May 9 this year, and the five major Presidential candidates have slightly different views on the THAAD deployment in Korea. However, they mostly favor the deployment, including the front-running Candidate Moon Jae-in of the majority opposition Minjoo (Democratic) Party, who is seen to be the most pro-North Korean among all Presidential candidates.
However, Moon, too, obviously mindful of the generally pro-THAAD deployment tendency among the people (see table), seems to be publicly favoring the deployment of the air-defense missiles in Korea—although he might want to try to adjust his position on the matter if he is actually elected next President of the Republic of Korea.
Reports indicate that Moon once said that he would invite President Kim Jong-un of North Korea to his inauguration ceremony in Seoul and visit Pyongyang before he would Washington.
Appearing at a JTBC TV show on Feb. 9, 2017, Moon said “Pyeongyang” when he was asked if he would visit Washington first or Pyongyang if elected President Republic of Korea at the Presidential elections slated on May 9, 2017.
This attitude, needless to say, comes against the wishes of the majority of the Korean people as seen in the foregoing opinion polls.

Against this backdrop, Moon has changed his attitude and assumes an opaque position when it comes to this question. Now he wants to win the elections at all cost, and seems to go as close to the wishes of the voters as possible.
Once elected, however, it appears that no one can guarantee if he would abide by all the promises he now makes in regard to the question of deployment of THAAD in Korea.
All the same, it seems that he would not be able to totally ignore the opinion of the majority of the Korean people who want THAAD deployed in Korea against the North Korean military threats.
It appears that there is some misunderstanding about the ‘harm’ and ‘demerit side’ of the THAAD deployment in Korea, which often makes the local residents in the designated region of development of THAAD worried (often needlessly, according to experts).

Here is the position of General Vincent K. Brooks, commander-in-chief of the U.S. Forces in Korea, US-ROK Combined Forces Command and United Nations Forces Command. Gen. Brooks:
“THAAD will add area protection and increase the ability to intercept at higher altitudes than we can without THAAD and it is a part of a layered system. The continued procurement of Patriot Advanced Capability-3, or PAC-3 missiles, further enhances the defensive layers. The pursuit of Surfaced-Based-at-Sea Interceptors also adds layers to the defense. And there are other capabilities that should still be considered, and evaluated, and then procured to improve the defenses in the Republic of Korea.

Photo shows a B61-12 ‘Smart Tactical Nuclear Bomb’ possessed by the United States Armed Forces.

“Let me repeat something I have said in public before in regard to the safety of the THAAD radar system—and let me tell you that I have been involved in placing four different systems in four different places in three different places over the past five years—so I am very familiar with this capability myself.
“When it comes to the safety in and around the radar system, no one will be closer to that equipment than the soldiers under my command. I would not recklessly endanger these soldiers while they are protecting someone else, neither would I allow them to endanger anyone they are trying to protect. And I do hope that those facts continue to meet the public so that there can be an acceptance of this important defensive capability.
“I would say the investment and procurement decisions being made by the Republic of Korea will significantly improve the capabilities of the alliance to deter attacks and to defeat aggression. Moreover and finally, these actions, training, organizing, modernizing, working closely together, all are part of setting the conditions for the transfer of operational control of forces within the Combined Forces Command from U.S. led, to Republic of Korea led which is our objective. And we are progressing to this in a measured and steady way.”

South Korea needs U.S. tactical nuclear weapons in addition to THAAD:
Korean military strategists insist that THAAD (Terminal High Altitude Area Defense) alone is not sufficient to protect the ROK from the possible attack from North Korea who continues to improve and expand its military power, including continuously improving nuclear capabilities.
Increasing number of people who are familiar with military affairs insist that, in addition to THAAD, the ROK needs strategic nuclear weapons to stay safe from possible North Korean military adventures.
Director Moon Sung-Mok of the Unification Strategy Center of the National Strategy Institute in Korea stated in an article published by Korean-language business day, Maeil Business News, on Sept. 19, 2016, “The North Korean nuclear missile threat against us has now crossed the red line, which means that North Korea now can send its nuclear warhead loaded on its own missile to any target in the Republic of Korea.”

THAAD anti-missile system of the United States.

The North Korean regime seems to be confident that whatever it does with nuclear weapons there is no one in the whole world who can say anything about it. This is because the North is sure that China and Russia would be opposed to any action to stop the North Korean nuclear endeavor.
The United Nations Security Council is mulling increased restrictive actions but as long as China and Russia do not agree with the idea there is little chance of their materialization.
The only answer against this backdrop, to deter and discourage North Korean from making any dangerous provocation, is deployment of strategic nuclear weapons by the U.S. Forces in South Korea.
This is because the U.S. strategic nuclear weapons in South Korea would have the effect of ‘balance of terror’ which, in effect, is considered to maintain the peace and stability among all the different countries of the world possessing nuclear weapons, the Free World versus the two former Communist giants (China and Russia), India versus Pakistan and other countries suspected to possess nuclear weapons. The United Kingdom and France are also countries possessing nuclear weapons. Israel is known to be 'a country who possesses nuclear weapons but who has not declared that it has.' And, of course, North Korea is pretty close to having nuclear weapons if it does not already have them.
The Republic of Korea (south)? Korean military strategists insist that Seoul had almost made it shortly before the passage of the late former President Park Chung Hee who was slain by his own Central Intelligence Agency Director Kim Jae-kyu on Oct. 26, 1979.
This is 27 years before North Korea carried out its first nuclear test on Oct. 9, 2006. So, in fact South Korea was 27 years ahead of North Korea in terms of development of nuclear weapons.
Some military strategists in Seoul wonder today, "Well, if President Park did not die but continued to develop nuclear weapons, I would say the North Korean regime should have given up its hope of ever attempting to develop its own nukes because there would no way they could every think of competing with the South in nuclear competition!"
When the U.S. withdrew its strategic nuclear weapons from the ROK in 1991, it was to induce the denuclearization of North Korea, which, however, failed and, on the contrary, incurred a result where North Korea succeeded in developing and securing nuclear weapons.

The external restraint, nothwithingstanding, South Korea is seen more than capable of favorably competing with North Korean in nuclear armament if permitted by the international community. Reports indicate that South Korea, with its nuclear potential, can develop nuclear weapons within six months if she really wants to and that within mere two years she could easily overtake North Korea in terms of nulcear weapons development and stockpile.

However, international and domestic restraint against South Korea's going nuclear, the country continues to be exposed to the nuclear blackmailing from North Korea.

America's THAAD anti-missile system is designed to shoot down ballistic missiles in their terminal phase using a hit-to-kill approach.

North Korea developed nuclear weapons ignoring, defying and violating the agreement concluded between North Korea and the then President Roh Tae-woo in November 1991 when the two sides signed the Korean Peninsular Denuclearization Joint Declaration.
The North Korea regime has been blatantly violating this inter-Korean agreement and has been continuing its nuclear weapons development.
In this situation, the ROK has no reason to one-sidedly abide by the provisions of the now-dead ‘Korean Peninsular Denuclearization Joint Declaration.’
Deployment of U.S. strategic nuclear weapons in the ROK will beautifully work to deter North Korean from making attempt to use its nuclear weapons against the ROK or the U.S.
The U.S. strategic nuclear weapons should be much more sophisticated compared with those of North Korea and in this situation the North Korean regime would not dare try to use its own nuclear weapons that by no means can be considered to be equal with those of the U.S. in terms of quality and effectiveness.
The U.S. strategic nuclear weapons deployed in the ROK could even make the Kim Jong-un regime change its mind and choose to accept the demand of the international society for denuclearization of the Korean peninsula.
In 2012, the U.S. Congress approved the deployment of U.S. tactical nuclear weapons. On Sept. 9 in the same year, the then U.S. President Barack Obama of the U.S. reaffirmed its public pledges to the ROK that “We will mobilize all possible means to protect the Republic of Korea.”
THAAD is not sufficient to protect the U.S. Forces or the people in the ROK from the danger of North Korean nuclear attack.
Against this backdrop, U.S. strategic nuclear weapons in the ROK would have a great extent of psychological and practical effect of deterrence in the face of the growing North Korean nuclear threat.
China and Russia would be opposed to the deployment of the U.S. tactical nuclear weapons in the ROK. They might be even more strongly opposed to them than the THAAD deployment.
However, the ROK should be prepared against such opposition from China and Russia, and should try to do its best to persuade China and Russia that the ROK must have them to stay safe from the North Korean nuclear threats.
The ROK should try to persuade China and Russia that deployment of the U.S. strategic nuclear weapons in the ROK could even encourage North Korean to give up its nuclear weapons. The ROK and the U.S. could even propose a condition to China and Russia that the moment North Korea gives up its nuclear weapons the U.S. tactical nuclear weapons would be immediately withdrawn from the ROK.
In 1991 when the U.S. Forces in Korea had tactical nuclear weapons in the ROK, the ROK were a member of the NPT. Redeployment of the U.S. tactical weapons in South Korea means that the ROK is only returning to the status of that time.

저작권자 © The Korea Post 무단전재 및 재배포 금지