We strongly denounce the U.S. of pressing the South Korean government to accept the "strategic flexibility" of the United States Forces in Korea (USFK). 



Prior to the Korea-U.S summit in June 2005, the U.S. is putting increasing pressure on the South Korean administration because of South Korea's objection to the mobilization of USFK as part of the U.S. Asia-Pacific force. 

On a news report on May 18th it was said that along with some administration and Congressional officials, Evans Revere, the U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, explicitly pressured the South Korean administration, saying that South Korea will benefit from the new strategy and that the U.S. is the only country that can help South Korea in an emergency. Moreover, he claimed that "strategic flexibility" complies with the terms of the ROK-US Mutual Defense Treaty in the name of protecting South Korea. 

However, we firmly oppose the threatening position for the following reasons: 
The argument in favor of "strategic flexibility" is rooted in U.S.-centered thinking. This is well concealed by the cliche that the interest of South Korea is the same as that of the U.S. In the same vein, another common claim is that the U.S. is the only country in a position to help South Korea in case of conflict. The truth about the U.S. assistance is embodied in the "Operation Plan 5029", "CONPLAN 8022" and "Operation Plan 5027," which assume that the Korean peninsula will be a site for nuclear war. We do not need that kind of harmful "help" -- not under any circumstances. Again we strongly reject the U.S. agenda and position. 

Broadening the scope of the mobility of the U.S. troops in Korea into the broader Asia-Pacific region aims to project U.S. military power far beyond the Korean peninsula. This is well illustrated in the case of deploying USFK in the Iraq war. The US also aims to use Korea-based troops to interfere in China's coastal conflicts with Taiwan and the territorial dispute with Japan. 

So the plan will lead to fierce competition, an increasing arms race and the possibility of war on the peninsula and in the surrounding region. This is the reason why South Korea is opposing the plan, since it is self-evident that the U.S. forces in Korea will be involved in any regional conflict that are provoked by the U.S. 

In this respect, it is not useful to maintain the Republic of Korea-US alliance. The U.S. randomly makes threats and pursues only its own interests at Korea's expense. Therefore the unfair request should be withdrawn immediately. Our understanding is that peace on the peninsula will eventually be achieved by the early withdrawal of the U.S. troops. 

Again, we urge the U.S. to withdraw the request. Moreover, if the U.S. persists in its efforts to realize the plan, we, together with Korean people, will launch a nationwide campaign to demand the withdrawal of the U.S. troops from Korea. 

May 30, 2005 

Solidarity for Peace and Reunification of Korea 
Mr. Mun, Kyu-Hyun 
Mr. Hong, Geun-Soo 
Chief Director