The upcoming presidential election in South Korea on June 3 will present critical challenges for the US-South Korea alliance as the new leader must address growing concerns among South Koreans regarding reliance on the United States’ nuclear arsenal to deter North Korea.
As North Korea continues to enhance its nuclear and ballistic missile capabilities, the alliance faces its most significant test to date, heightening security concerns for both nations.
Recent estimates indicate that North Korea possesses enough fissile material to construct up to 90 nuclear warheads, which could strain relationships between the longtime allies, the United States and South Korea.
In recent developments, Kim Jong Un has prioritized nuclear weapons development, branding them as crucial not only for defense but also as instruments for military success.
A notable shift in North Korea’s stance was evident in September 2022 when the regime enacted a new law outlining a broader perspective on nuclear weapon usage.
In 2023, Kim further amended the state constitution to secure the right to rapid nuclear development aimed at ensuring the country’s existence and maintaining peace both regionally and globally.
The situation escalated when North Korea released images in September 2024 of a suspected second uranium enrichment facility, as Kim insisted on expanding his nuclear arsenal substantially.
This upcoming key deadline of 2025 marks the limit for Kim to achieve ambitious military development objectives previously laid out in his five-year plan.
Furthermore, North Korea’s capacity for a nuclear dyad, possessing both land- and sea-based nuclear capabilities, underpins the urgent need for a combined response from the US and South Korea.
The ongoing advancements in missile technologies, including hypersonic glide vehicles and potential multiple independently targetable reentry vehicles, are aligned with Kim’s aspirations to enhance his missile program and reinforce North Korea’s strategic position.
North Korea boasts a range of missile capabilities including short-range, medium-range, intermediate-range, and intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), along with extensive road-mobile launch systems.
The development of a rail-based ballistic missile system in North Korea highlights efforts to diversify launch platforms, which enhances the survivability of their strike capabilities.
Despite a growing ability to target the US homeland directly, North Korea remains focused on optimizing its tactical nuclear weapon effectiveness, posing threats to both South Korea and US military installations in the region.
Additionally, the regime is progressing with plans for a sea-based deterrent, including submarine-launched ballistic missiles and strategic cruise missiles intended for potential nuclear deployment.
Recent tests of underwater nuclear systems signify North Korea’s commitment to enhancing its deterrent capabilities amid increasingly assertive trilateral military exercises involving the US, South Korea, and Japan.
North Korea’s persistent belligerent posture could jeopardize the long-standing US-South Korea alliance and introduce significant uncertainties into regional security dynamics.
The second major challenge facing the alliance concerns South Korea’s evolving defense architecture, particularly the establishment of the ROK Strategic Command (ROKSTRATCOM).
Although this command may signal an increase in South Korea’s military autonomy, it may also create divergence in strategic objectives between the allies.
ROKSTRATCOM, officially initiated on October 1, 2024, represents a response to escalating threats from North Korea and underscores growing skepticism regarding the sufficiency of US extended deterrence guarantees.
While some American observers question the necessity of ROKSTRATCOM, noting existing US military commitments, the command reflects South Korea’s desire for enhanced self-defense capabilities.
ROKSTRATCOM operates independently from the longstanding Combined Forces Command, suggesting potential complications for collaborative military engagement in times of conflict.
This command structure aligns with South Korea’s strategy to integrate its armed forces’ strategic capabilities, including nuclear and conventional options, into a unified operational approach.
With the command’s focus on developing comprehensive combat strategies across various domains, its role in deterrent actions becomes paramount, particularly under the Kill Chain and Korea Massive Punishment and Retaliation strategies.
However, the evolving command architecture raises fundamental questions about how South Korea’s independent strike capabilities will be integrated within the existing alliance framework, which has relied heavily on a unified command model.
The establishment of ROKSTRATCOM can be seen as a historic shift, as South Korea appears unwilling to eliminate the option of pursuing indigenous nuclear capabilities despite assurances from the US nuclear umbrella.
As South Korea navigates its multifaceted defense challenges, it is crucial for the United States to engage in open dialogue and integration with ROKSTRATCOM, reinforcing mutual understanding regarding each nation’s defense intentions.
The third challenge arises from potential policy shifts expected under the new US administration, alongside anticipated adjustments from the incoming South Korean government regarding their alliance approach.
Presidential transitions in both nations could introduce new tensions and discussions about military presence, assurance strategies, and mutual commitments.
While the South Korean populace is generally optimistic about the new US administration, uncertainties loom about evolving US defense policy, including rumored reductions in troop presence in Korea and potential shifts in strategic objectives.
With South Korea poised for a leadership transition following President Yoon’s removal from office, the emerging administration may influence the trajectory of bilateral relations significantly.
As dialogues continue on South Korea’s defense posture, discussions about nuclear latency and weapons capability are increasingly relevant in the face of a dangerous North Korean arsenal.
Arguments for establishing a domestic nuclear capability have gained traction in South Korean political discourse, reflecting underlying fears about dependence on US security assurances.
The notion of nuclear latency capability, as proposed by presidential candidate Kim Moon Soo, indicates a rising sentiment within South Korea to maintain a position of deterrence against North Korean threats.
This position raises complex challenges for US reassurance efforts concerning nonproliferation policies and could introduce significant ramifications for the global nonproliferation regime.
In summary, the US-South Korea alliance now faces numerous challenges, including an ascendant and emboldened North Korea, evolving defense structures and strategies in South Korea, and political changes that could reshape the landscape of their relationship.
Despite these challenges, the resilience of the alliance is underscored by a legacy of cooperation spanning over seventy years.
Both nations must adeptly adapt to the changing security environment and recommit to collaborative strategies that enhance mutual defense and stability in the broader Indo-Pacific region.
In anticipation of the new South Korean presidential administration, early and proactive engagement by the US will be crucial to maintaining and strengthening the alliance.
Addressing these emerging challenges will ensure that the US-South Korea alliance remains a cornerstone of stability in the face of dynamic security threats.
image source from：https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/in-depth-research-reports/issue-brief/new-presidents-and-new-nuclear-developments-test-the-united-states-republic-of-korea-alliance/
