Unpredictable U.S. Policy Toward China: "South Korea Must Prepare for Sudden Shifts" [Meeting U.S. Think Tanks]

Colby, a Hardliner on China, Sees Waning Influence
Reduction of U.S. Forces Korea Remains the Direction
"Strategic Flexibility Has 100% Support from the White House"

On the 10th (local time), Andrew Yeo, Korea Chair, met at the Brookings Institution in Washington DC, USA. Washington DC - Photo by Cha Minyoung

Diplomacy and security experts from major U.S. think tanks have pointed out that the Trump administration's policy direction toward China remains ambiguous, emphasizing that South Korea must also prepare for rapidly shifting policy changes. They also urged that, as Chinese President Xi Jinping is revealing military ambitions, South Korea should take the U.S. policy of 'strategic flexibility' seriously.

Andrew Yeo, Korea Chair at the Brookings Institution, met with Korean journalists on September 10 (local time) in Washington D.C. and stated, "Even Washington experts find it difficult to fully understand which direction the Trump administration is heading regarding its China policy." The meeting was held as part of a Korea-U.S. journalist exchange program organized by the Korea Press Foundation and the East-West Center.

Yeo explained, "Ultimately, President Trump will make the final decisions, but the messages are mixed, making it hard to interpret. For instance, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and Elbridge Colby, Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, take a hardline stance on China. However, if you talk to the United States Trade Representative, the Treasury Department, or the Department of Commerce, they believe making deals with China is important. For now, this seems to be President Trump's position."

Colby, who was previously considered a key figure in U.S. China policy, appears to have lost some influence after falling out of favor. In July, the U.S. suspended, then resumed, military aid to Ukraine, including Patriot air defense missiles. According to reports by Politico and others, Colby was involved in this decision without President Trump's knowledge. However, Nikkei Asia reported at the end of August that Colby's book "The Strategy of Denial," along with Vice President J.D. Vance's foreign and security policy line, will serve as the two main pillars of the next National Defense Strategy (NDS) draft. The final version is expected to be released this fall.

Yeo added, "The word in D.C. is that the State Department has people with extensive Asia-Pacific experience, like Allison Hooker (Under Secretary for Political Affairs) and Kevin Kim (Deputy Assistant Secretary for East Asian and Pacific Affairs), and Secretary of State Marco Rubio also values the Korea-U.S. alliance and sees China as a threat. There is even talk that if Colby's view on reducing or withdrawing U.S. Forces Korea becomes mainstream, the State Department might provide some resistance."

However, regardless of Colby's position, the overall direction toward reducing U.S. Forces Korea is unlikely to change, as President Trump and other key cabinet members share this view.

Yeo said, "President Trump believes that allies are taking advantage of the U.S. or not paying enough, and he questions why so many U.S. troops are stationed in Korea. Therefore, he thinks either a withdrawal or increased burden-sharing by South Korea is necessary."

He continued, "Colby believes North Korea is not a major threat and that the military should be restructured to send forces to the Taiwan Strait. Although the reasons differ, the conclusion is the same. Vice President Vance questions why the U.S. needs such a global presence and opposes wasting money overseas. While the reasons vary, the outcome seems to be a reduction of U.S. Forces Korea."

On the 11th (local time), Patrick Cronin, Chair of Asia-Pacific Security, met at the Hudson Institute in Washington DC.

Given the military ambitions China displayed at the 80th anniversary Victory Day parade, there have also been calls for South Korea to seriously consider the policy of strategic flexibility, which has recently gained prominence in the U.S.

Strategic flexibility is the concept that, in the event of an emergency anywhere in the world, U.S. forces stationed globally, including U.S. Forces Korea, should operate as mobile strike units rather than being tied to a specific region. This idea began to attract attention after the September 11 attacks in 2001.

Patrick Cronin, Chair of Asia-Pacific Security at the Hudson Institute, stated, "Strategic flexibility is a Defense Department initiative, but it is an idea that receives 100% support from the White House. In the U.S., it is considered an unquestionably valid concept, though negotiations with South Korea will, of course, be necessary."

He added, "Compared to the past 20 years, the concept of strategic flexibility now carries significant strategic importance. The new National Defense Strategy, which will be announced soon, prioritizes addressing the threat from China, and from the U.S. perspective, containing China is the most critical issue."

He continued, "From the U.S. perspective, strategic flexibility also reflects the idea that South Korea should take the lead in defending itself against the North Korean threat, as the U.S. must focus on the larger challenge posed by China. Of course, since North Korea possesses nuclear weapons, it will be difficult for South Korea to handle 100% of its own defense, and even if traditional troop levels decrease somewhat, the U.S. will continue to provide nuclear extended deterrence."

He also noted, "The problem here is that the messages from the State Department and Defense Department are somewhat mixed with those from the White House. While the State and Defense Departments continue to assure the South Korean government of extended deterrence, the White House sometimes sends different messages. This shouldn't be a difficult issue, but the mixed signals are making things unnecessarily complicated."

Cronin emphasized, "From the U.S. perspective, while U.S. Forces Korea are stationed to defend South Korea, ultimately, South Korea must be able to defend itself in case of a contingency. If something happens in the U.S., it will naturally impact South Korea's security. For this reason, South Korea must seriously consider strategic flexibility."