• Commentary
  • Research
  • Experts
  • Events
Carnegie China logoCarnegie lettermark logo
{
  "authors": [
    "Jon Wolfsthal"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "NPP",
  "programs": [
    "Nuclear Policy"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [],
  "topics": [
    "Nuclear Policy"
  ]
}
REQUIRED IMAGE

REQUIRED IMAGE

In The Media

US Sends a Wrong Signal to North Korea

Link Copied
By Jon Wolfsthal
Published on May 31, 2004

Source: Carnegie

Originally published in the International Herald Tribune , May 31, 2004

The imploding situation in Iraq is directly affecting America's security interests not only in the Middle East but around the globe. The Pentagon's announcement that it would pull 3,600 troops from defensive positions in South Korea and redeploy them in Iraq threatens to undermine both deterrence in East Asia and the U.S.-$ South Korean alliance.

That more troops are needed in Iraq has been obvious for a long time. But given North Korea's growing nuclear arsenal and the ever-present risk of military conflict on the peninsula, scavenging troops from South Korea sends exactly the wrong signal at the wrong time to U.S. allies and adversaries alike. The benefit of the troop move to Iraq will be minimal and the long-term implications for deterrence in North Korea could prove disastrous.

The future of America's security and position in East Asia depends on many factors, but none more than the continued perception that the United States is prepared to defend its allies in the face of military threats. This applies not only on the Korean peninsula but also in the case of Taiwan.

While the United States and South Korea have been working for some time to realign U.S. forces, the decision to move support troops from South Korea could not come at a worse time. It is probable that in the past year North Korea has expanded its nuclear arsenal fourfold and could now possess eight or nine nuclear weapons.

The Bush administration did not create this crisis, but President George W. Bush's inability to enforce a policy direction on his cabinet and the ideological aversion within the White House to negotiating with the North has allowed Pyongyang to expand its nuclear arsenal, solidify its status as a nuclear state and continue to avoid international sanction or penalty.

The U.S. troop withdrawal is likely to be interpreted by North Korean leaders as a sign of weakness and may reduce the chances for a negotiated end to Pyongyang's nuclear program. North Korea will assume that its nuclear status has forced the United States to reduce its presence in the South, weakening the U.S. military option against North Korea. Worse, Pyongyang may even be emboldened to take more provocative action to extract concessions from Seoul and others in the region.

In addition, the timing of the decision will be exploited politically within South Korea by those who believe that America is no longer serious about protecting South Korea and that the U.S.-South Korea alliance is an anachronism. Many younger South Koreans believe that America does not really care about South Korea's security or prosperity and that the alliance no longer truly benefits South Korea. The growing political center now questions the importance of U.S. military support to the prosperity of South Koreans.

There are many ways the United States can undo the damage, reinforce deterrence in the region and help ensure that North Korea will not be able to use its nuclear capabilities to its economic or strategic advantage. The most important step the Bush administration should take is to pursue more aggressively a negotiated settlement with North Korea. There are signs that North Korea is still willing to trade its nuclear capabilities for a fundamentally different relationship with the United States.

This option must be fully tested before other steps are pursued. If, however, it proves impossible in the near term to reach an agreement, the United States must move to reinforce its political and military relationships with South Korea and Japan. This includes increasing the pace of military exercises, deploying additional troops and equipment to the region, including antimissile batteries and antiartillery armaments, and demonstrating that the United States remains unwaveringly committed to the defense and protection of both countries. An enhanced - not reduced - U.S. military capability in the region is the surest way to show Pyongyang that its nuclear actions weaken, rather than strengthen, its security.

The war on terrorism and the war in Iraq, which have fully consumed the Bush administration's foreign policy agenda, must not be allowed to undermine U.S. security commitments elsewhere.

There are already too many casualties in Iraq. America's alliances in East Asia and elsewhere should not be added to the list.

About the Author

Jon Wolfsthal

Former Nonresident Scholar, Nuclear Policy Program

Jon Wolfsthal was a nonresident scholar with the Nuclear Policy Program.

    Recent Work

  • Report
    Universal Compliance: A Strategy for Nuclear Security<br>With 2007 Report Card on Progress
      • +2

      George Perkovich, Jessica Tuchman Mathews, Joseph Cirincione, …

  • Article
    10 Plus 10 Doesn’t Add Up

      Jon Wolfsthal

Jon Wolfsthal
Former Nonresident Scholar, Nuclear Policy Program
Jon Wolfsthal
Nuclear Policy

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie China

  • Commentary
    Beyond the Putin-Kim Alliance: How Can the International Community Engage China to Contain Nuclear Risks Over the Korean Peninsula?

    Faced with an increase in strategic maneuvering by Moscow and Pyongyang, Beijing will not sit idly by and allow Putin and Kim to shape the security environment on its behalf.

      Tong Zhao

  • REQUIRED IMAGE
    Commentary
    Missile Defense and the Strategic Relationship among the United States, Russia, and China

    China views U.S. missile defense as posing a greater potential threat to China’s nuclear deterrent than other U.S. military capabilities.

      Tong Zhao, Dmitry Stefanovich

  • REQUIRED IMAGE
    Commentary
    About the P5 process, RevCon 2022, AUKUS and US-China Competition From The Chinese Side

    There are certainly other issues among other P5 countries, but the U.S.-China competition is so by far the most consequential great power rivalry in the international system, and it has very far-reaching geopolitical implications at and beyond the Pacific region.

      Tong Zhao

  • Commentary
    What’s Driving China’s Nuclear Buildup?

    Satellite data has revealed the construction of new nuclear missile silos in Gansu and Xinjiang in western China. How U.S. and Chinese experts interpret the buildup and the motivations behind it could greatly reshape their security relationship.

      Tong Zhao

  • Commentary
    To Reboot Arms Control, Start with Small Steps

    There are three guiding principles that can help make future arms control dialogues more successful.

      Andrey Baklitskiy, Alexandra Bell, Tong Zhao

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie China
Carnegie China logo, white
  • Research
  • About
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie China
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.