[Editorial] "Collaborative Self-Reliance of National Defense," What Really Is It?

President Roh Moo-hyun said, "It has been expected that U.S. troops stationed in Korea would be restructured. So stick to your guns in dealing with the issue and review the necessary measures for the early establishment of a self-reliance system for national defense," during the security-related ministerial conference. He might have said this in order to relieve the people`s security concern under the situation of a scheduled large-scale troop cuts. However, we don`t think the situation we are facing can`t be settled down by the president`s brief remark.

In the U.S. forces` global defense posture review (GPR), it was affirmed that U.S troops stationed in Korea came in ranked as 1.5 or 2, inferior to the troops stationed in Japan. The report of the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), including plans to withdraw all U.S. troops from Korea and leaving 1,000 soldiers among the currently more than 28,000 soldiers, was also made public. This means that the U.S. is virtually open to all possibilities. Also, this shows that the troop reduction plan doesn`t originate only from emergency situations in Iraq.

The government says it pursues “collaborative self-reliance of national defense,” but we have some doubts over whether recent situations are really “collaborative.” Is it a collaborative stance to agree to troop relocation from Korea to Iraq, being already notified and hushing up that notification?

In order for “collaborative self-reliance of national defense” not to be limited to a simple slogan, concrete execution plans have to be prepared. The government has to draw up plans to raise funds for self-reliance of national defense and negotiate with the U.S. so that the strengthening of the fighting potential of Korean troops and the schedule of the U.S. troop cuts are harmoniously performed, and acquire concrete results. This can reduce the vacuum in the military strength due to change in the security environment.

If the government has that kind of master plan, it is time to make public only part of that scheme. By not doing that and trying to relieve reiterating “collaborative self-reliance of national defense,” the government cannot persuade the people.