[Yang Nak-gyu's Defense Club] U.S. Forces Korea Reduction Rumors - ② Is Reduction Included in Strategic Flexibility?

B-2 Stealth Bomber Dropping Bombs

[Asia Economy Reporter Yang Nak-gyu] Amid the prolonged stalemate in the South Korea-US defense cost-sharing negotiations, remarks by Steven Biegun, US Deputy Secretary of State, regarding the US Forces Korea (USFK) have sparked subtle ripples. In March, following a Wall Street Journal (WSJ) report that the US Department of Defense had presented options for reducing USFK to the White House, concerns about the realization of troop reduction spread. However, Biegun denied any immediate plans for reduction while simultaneously emphasizing the need to resolve the defense cost-sharing negotiations as a prerequisite.

Biegun’s remarks came during a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on the 22nd (local time). Regarding the WSJ report, when asked how China might view the USFK presence, he immediately referenced Defense Secretary Mark Esper’s statement from the previous day, noting that Esper had made it quite clear that he had not presented any recommendations or specific proposals for reduction to President Donald Trump. Concerning Esper’s actual words, "There has been no order to withdraw troops from the Korean Peninsula," Biegun publicly interpreted at the hearing that "no reduction proposal was presented."

This was interpreted as a denial of the WSJ report that reignited controversy over USFK troop reductions by explaining Esper’s remarks, thereby drawing a line under immediate reduction rumors and attempting to curb further fallout. Since the WSJ report, opposition to USFK reductions had erupted among Congress and think tanks in the US.

The US Department of Defense advocates for expanded rotational deployments and enhanced strategic flexibility of US forces. Expanding rotational deployments and strategic flexibility means increasing the possibility of deploying USFK to conflicts in the Asia-Pacific region and, depending on circumstances, adjusting troop levels. Currently, the US is conducting troop optimization adjustments across all combatant commands, including the US Indo-Pacific Command, European Command, and Africa Command.

This aligns with the "Dynamic Force Employment (DFE)" concept introduced by the Trump administration. The DFE concept is an evolution of the "Global Defense Posture Review (GDPR)" introduced by the Bush administration in 2004. GDPR involved withdrawing forward-deployed forces from Europe and other regions back to the US mainland and operating forces globally based on rotational deployment and strategic flexibility. During this adjustment process, troop levels at specific commands may increase or decrease. Military experts’ concerns about possible changes in USFK troop levels reflect worries about where the repercussions of these adjustments might fall.

On the 21st (local time), US Secretary of Defense Mark Esper stated at a virtual seminar hosted by the UK’s International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) that the US is moving toward new concepts like DFE, saying, "We want to continue to pursue more rotational troop deployments across combatant commands because it provides greater strategic flexibility in responding to global challenges."

The DFE concept mentioned by Secretary Esper aims to increase uncertainty by preventing adversaries such as China and Russia from predicting US military operations and power projection plans. It moves away from the previous strategy of stationing US forces permanently in one location and instead promotes flexible global mobility of forces.