USFK may include peackeeping role

Jon · Korean Citizen Joined: Mar 19, 2004 Posts: 512

General says U.S. firm on deterrence against N. Korea aggression

A top U.S. general, stressing unwavering commitment to deter North Korean aggression, raised the possibility yesterday that the Korea-U.S. combined forces in future could perform peacekeeping and humanitarian missions in Northeast Asia.

"Those forces may also be called on to perform in regional contingencies or to meet other global requirements," said Lt. Gen. Charles C. Campbell, commanding general of the Eighth U.S. Army and No.2 man at the United Nations Command.

His remarks appeared to signal a shift in the U.S. forces' past commitment of only dealing with communist North Korea and its strategic plan to realign forces worldwide to be more mobile so they could deal more promptly and better with regional conflicts.

"It's not beyond the inconceivable that conditions in the 21st century might warrant the deployment of a Korea-U.S. combined formation to perform some function or mission in the region. It could be humanitarian, it could be peacekeeping," he said.

Eighth U.S. Army commander Gen. Charles Campbell speaks in a press meeting yesterday. [The Korea Herald]

But Campbell reiterated Washington's strong alliance with Seoul, saying the U.S. commitment to deter any North Korean aggression on the Korean Peninsula remains "firm, enduring and unwavering."

"Think about the capabilities U.S. Forces Korea maintain, not about the number of troops in the peninsula," he said.

In an hour-long meeting with Korean reporters, he focused on quelling security concerns among Koreans following the U.S. plan to pull out 3,600 troops from the border area with North Korea to redeploy them in Iraq because of the worsening situation in the war-ravaged country.

The United States is expected to pull out by summer the 2nd Brigade of the 2nd Infantry Division near the heavily fortified Demilitarized Zone facing North Korea's 1.1 million member military.

"The capabilities of Korean and U.S. forces in the Korean Peninsula and capabilities of U.S. forces in Northeast Asia will reinforce simultaneous operations in case of aggression," Campbell said.

He said Korean forces were first-rate and high-quality. Korean and U.S. troops were ready to deter aggression and, if that failed, to win any war decisively.

He said the alliance between Korea and United States had been successful and enduring over the past 50 years and had helped to create unprecedented peace and prosperity on the peninsula.

But the redeployment of U.S. troops was inevitable to meet future requirements in the 21st century.

U.S. forces needed to be deployed "to serve the international security environment," Campbell said, in an obvious reference to the U.S. military strategy for the future known as the global defense posture review, or GPR. "New formations (of troops) should be responsive, agile, deployable, survivable and sustainable," he noted.

Campbell, however, said theater armament formations, such as enhanced missile defense capabilities, would remain on the peninsula in line with the U.S. plan to invest $11 billion by 2006 to increase air and sea defense capabilities on the peninsula.

He also stressed that this did not mean all U.S. infantry soldiers would leave South Korea.

Ministerial and presidential level discussions would be conducted before any talks on further troops cut, Campbell said.

Whether the 2nd Brigade troops would return to South Korea after their one-year rotation in Iraq was not known, he said, and did not elaborate on Seoul's fear that further troop reductions would translate into a big increase in South Korea's military spending.

South Korea has opposed any reduction in U.S. troops since their presence has guaranteed immediate intervention if the North initiated a war with the South.

(smjoo@heraldm.com)

By Joo Sang-min