The OPCON Transfer: Why the Delay?
 
By Kim Sun-woo, Cub-Reporter
 
South Korean and the U.S. agreed in Toronto on June 27th to postpone the U.S. transfer of wartime operational control (OPCON) to South Korea until 2015, three years later than the previously agreed schedule of 2012. The U.S. decision for a three-year delay is stirring controversies again in Korea because the military control transfer has been a major political issue in recent decades. Let’s examine how the foreign press reported the decision between the two countries after it was announced.  
The Wall Street Journal, an English-language international daily newspaper, reported that “the actions provided an opportunity to reinforce U.S. influence in northeast Asia. For South Korea and Mr. Lee, the moves are important as Seoul tries to persuade Beijing and Moscow to acknowledge that their ally North Korea is responsible for an attack on a South Korean warship in March that killed 46 sailors.” It expressed its opinion that through the delay the U.S. will have a stronger influence to South Korea and also North Korea.
The New York Times, an American daily newspaper, said “the announcement about warship control was an apparent attempt to signal to the North, which has long wanted American forces off the peninsula that the United States would remain firmly in control of military operations if war were to break out.” Also it commented “the agreement allowed Washington and Seoul to take some action after months of struggling for ways to punish the North-and attempt to deter it from further violence- without provoking the country’s erratic leader, Kim Jong-il, to launch new attacks.” According to these reports, this decision will enable the United States to keep North Korea in check..
BBC News, a department of the British Broadcasting Corporation, quoted that “the alliance is coming under increasing strain, but that Seoul says it is still committed to a strong relationship with the U.S.” Also it said “many South Koreans see the U.S. as a bigger threat to peace than the North and lots of nations should be concerned by the North’s continued development of weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles, along with the danger of proliferation of those weapons, and technologies.” It had a negative view of the rescheduling of the OPCON transition to South Korea
People’s Daily, the official newspaper of the Communist Party of China, reported the historical process of the OPCON transfer in the past in detail. “Seoul’s wartime operational control was given to the U.S. Command at the outbreak of the 1950-53 Korean War, which was later transferred to the South Korea-U.S. Combined Forces Command. Also South Korea regained peacetime control in 1994, and the late former President Roh Moo-hyun stuck a contentious deal with Washington in 2007 to take over the wartime command, a move that angered conservatives fearing a possible security vacuum.” Its opinion of the matter was slightly negative: “The United States has had wartime control of South Korea since 1950, far too long.”
In view of the above mentioned reports, foreign presses had various opinions about the delaying of the OPCON transfer to South Korea. Most of the articles stated that wartime control was reinforcing the U.S.’s power over South Korea. They paid attention to North Korea and the meeting of President Lee and President Obama last month. In addition, they shared the opinion that the main reason the U.S. will have military control until 2015 was due to North Korea and the decision will draw criticism to President Lee Myung-Bak from civic groups and opposition groups in Korea.
 
 
▲ President Lee and U. S. President Obama hold a summit in Toronto on June 26th.
저작권자 © Chonnam Tribune 무단전재 및 재배포 금지