Logistics Article Index : Current 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics
Paying The Babysitter
   Next Article → COLOMBIA: The Many Rewards Of Crime
January 24, 2009: South Korea is decreasing the amount of money it pays towards the costs of American troops being stationed in South Korea. Previously it contributed $790 million a year, but starting this year, that will be reduced to $692 million. There are currently about 28,000 American troops there, and it costs the United States nearly $4 billion a year to maintain that force in South Korea.

American troops have been in South Korea for over 60 years, since the end of World War II in 1945. At the end of the Korean War, in 1953, there were over 350,000 U.S. troops in South Korea. Within a year, that shrank to 223,000, and by 1955 it was only 85,000. By the mid-60s it was 63,000. By the mid 70's there were only 42,000. There it stayed for over two decades. Then came the September 11, 2001 and the war on terror. U.S. troops were needed elsewhere. By 2004 the U.S. force in South Korea was down to 37,000. In 2006 that dropped to 30,000 and this year will go to 28,000.

The troops are there to help protect South Korea from any other attack by North Korea (whose 1950 invasion led to a three year war, and a 56 year old ceasefire.) Babysitting a cranky North Korea has been seen in American's interests. As South Korea's economy has boomed, payments to defray the expense of U.S. troops was begun, in 1991, and have been increasing. The 1991 payment was $150 million.

Such payments were first seen in Germany and Japan, where the U.S. urged those nations to help cover the cost of having American troops there to help defend them during the Cold War. Those payments continue, if only because the U.S. forces are also a major contributor to the local economy.

Next Article → COLOMBIA: The Many Rewards Of Crime
  

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Gerry       1/24/2009 9:59:16 PM
Lets face it, US troops are there for only one reason currently and its political.  The US should have left South Korea 20 years ago, but have only remained because of it was a political trip wire. The trip wire is no longer needed either and so it becomes strickly political. For the troops stationed there its still the same as it was in 1955, a one year isolated tour. Much of it due to the inhospitality of the South Koreans as a nation.
 
Quote    Reply

sjdoc    How many troops are actually needed there?   1/26/2009 9:42:08 PM
--
Let's assume that the ability of the South Korean government to defend against an NKPA "throw of the dice" desparation move - the sort of "wargasm" to which kleptocracies in their death throes may be prone - is enhanced significantly by the presence of some U.S. troops, if only to maintain liaison and thereby to facilitate coordinated military response.
 
How many personnel are so required, and what sort of specialties are genuinely necessary?  How structured, deployed, and commanded?  Are U.S. combat units really worth keeping in-country any longer?
 
The political ramifications can't be ignored, of course.  The U.S. troops in Korea provide opportunities for electronic intelligence (ELINT) signals monitoring personnel to be "folded into the mix," and doubtless there are other purposes being served by the U.S. presence there, not only with regard to keeping a weather eye on the North Korean People's Prison Camp.  But how can this be reduced to a satisfactory minimum for the sake of economy?
 
--
 
Quote    Reply