Seoul: A U.S. think tank has proposed a substantial reduction in the U.S. Forces Korea (USFK) troop level, suggesting a downsizing from the current 28,500 to approximately 10,000 personnel. This recommendation comes as speculation mounts that the Pentagon might consider a troop drawdown on the Korean Peninsula to focus efforts on deterring threats from China.
According to Yonhap News Agency, Defense Priorities, a Washington-based institution, released a report titled "Aligning global military posture with U.S. interests." The report argues for a reduction in U.S. troop presence in South Korea, emphasizing that further reductions should occur if Seoul restricts the U.S. ability to utilize USFK assets for other regional security crises outside the peninsula.
The report, authored by Dan Caldwell and Jennifer Kavanagh, recommends eliminating all ground combat units not essential for base security, including the removal of most of the 2nd Infantry Division from Korea. This would involve withdrawing the rotational brigade combat team and Army combat aviation units, as well as some associated support and sustainment units.
The think tank also suggests reducing airpower in Korea by moving two fighter squadrons back to the U.S. Additionally, about a third of air maintenance and other support units and personnel could be returned stateside. In total, this would decrease the U.S. military presence by more than half, retaining around 10,000 personnel, two fighter squadrons, and support forces in South Korea.
The report highlights that the remaining ground personnel would primarily handle support, sustainment, logistics, and maintenance, leaving combat operations to South Korean forces in the event of a crisis. The think tank's call for reduction is based on Seoul's reluctance to offer "unrestricted contingency access" for U.S. bases to conduct operations elsewhere in the region during conflicts.
Previously, The Wall Street Journal reported that the U.S. is considering relocating approximately 4,500 troops from South Korea to other locations in the Indo-Pacific, such as Guam. However, the Pentagon refuted this report as "not true," affirming America's full commitment to South Korea's defense.
Caldwell and Kavanagh propose that U.S. military strategy in East Asia should realign to counterbalance Chinese power and safeguard U.S. interests. This involves moving forces away from the Chinese coast and delegating more defense responsibilities to allies like Japan and the Philippines.
The report underscores the importance of a global military posture review focused on four priorities: homeland defense, preventing a regional hegemon's rise, sharing burdens with allies and partners, and protecting U.S. economic security. It notes that while China lacks a direct path to regional hegemony, it possesses "enough power to prevent the U.S. from sustaining sole regional dominance."
The think tank urges the U.S. to make strategic posture decisions to balance regional rivals' power, particularly China, by reinforcing military presence in strategic locations such as Japan, Asia's second island chain, or key maritime chokepoints in the Middle East or Northern Europe. It also advocates for shifting defense burdens to allies, maintaining U.S. forces only where necessary to protect U.S. interests.
The authors have shared the report widely in Washington and aim to discuss it with Trump administration officials. Ambassador Matthew Whitaker recently indicated that the U.S' global force posture review would be completed by late summer or early fall, with Elbridge Colby playing a significant role in reshaping U.S. force posture and missions.
In a previous interview with Yonhap News Agency, Colby emphasized adjusting USFK's role to focus more on Chinese threats, advocating for South Korea to assume greater responsibility for its own defense. He warned that heavy U.S. involvement in a war with North Korea would be a "perfect distraction" when countering Chinese threats should be the priority.