South Korea Plans to Cut Armed Forces to 500K by 2020
by Richardson ~ December 1st, 2006. Filed under: ROK Miltary.If they actually fund it, it could happen. Might be a big “if.”
The number of armed forces personnel will be slashed to 500,000 from the current 680,000 by 2020 in line with a military reform bill under consideration at the National Assembly.
The defense reform law is designed to boost South Korea’s war capability by introducing advanced weapons while reducing its dependence on U.S. troops.
The military is expected to exercise independent command in three to five years through the transition of wartime operational control from the U.S. military.
Currently, the Army has about 560,000 soldiers, and the Navy and Marines have a combined 63,000. The Air Force has some 63,000. An additional 4.5 million are in the reserves.
[. . .]
The Navy plans to introduce Aegis-class destroyers and the 214-type submarines to extend its ability to watch and hit opponents’ moves throughout its field of operation.
The Air Force is expected to equip itself with abilities to conduct surgical strikes throughout the Korean Peninsula, evidence of a strategy shift from the current one of targeting locations south of Pyongyang.
December 1st, 2006 at 9:26 pm
Nice to see that the US isn’t unilaterally reducing troops on the Korean peninsula.
December 1st, 2006 at 10:54 pm
As former unification minister Chung Dong-Young used to say, “if we just eliminate the military, we will unify with nK overnight.” I disagree, the nK tanks will take at least 72hours to roll into Pusan even over SK traffic.
—-
It is interesting though…”you can’t leave, but we will cut our forces to nothing.”
December 2nd, 2006 at 6:21 pm
reunification at last!
December 4th, 2006 at 3:58 pm
I wonder if professionalization of their armed forces is part of this deal. Any insiders here? Modernization is discussed. It is actually possible to do more with less, if
the “more”the “less” is highly trained and motivated, versus a brutalized draftee force.December 4th, 2006 at 4:27 pm
I’ve heard the idea of creating a professional ROK military a few times, but not recently and not in this context. To recruit 500,000 from a population of ~50 million (roughly 1/3 of the size of the U.S. military with a population 1/6 the size) would require a rate of pay that probably isn’t compatible with the proposed budget, particularly considering modernization costs. My guess is that conscripts will continue to partake in the fun.
December 5th, 2006 at 2:25 am
Modernization? Yes, they will move rapidly from a 1960’s conscript army to a 1975 era one. Modernization costs a lot of money if you want high quality/well trained NCOs and enlisted. The average SGT in the ROK Army makes less than $40 per month and sleeps on a hard raised platform. The plan is to pay him $100 to stay in and give him a bed with more freedom and education opportunities. I just don’t see many staying in, or the ones that you would rather get rid of since they can make more money minimum wage(even in Korea) and will live at home with mom and pop.
MND asked for a 22% budget boost to do the minimum movements to get this started, President Noh immediately told them they could have 19% and recalculate their needs. Like a miracle, now the political appointees say the 19% is fine(they wish to remain employed) and the independent estimates are around 35%. Oh well…
December 5th, 2006 at 4:16 pm
Thanks Pavlov - interesting insight.
December 6th, 2006 at 11:27 am
ROK is currently not planning to go all-volunteer, but it is planning to have a bigger cadre of volunteer professionals at the expense of fewer conscripts.
It is also, unfortunately, putting a lot of money into shiny gold-plated projects like F-15K, rather than spending money on items and training that would improve basic force readiness (they’re like the Pentagon in that light: hardware, ideas and people in that order of priority when as, John Boyd, said it should the reverse).
At this rate, the ROK armed forces will not be able to fight a sustained, high-intensity modern conflict (not that it can now). On the other hand, North Korean conventional military capability is growing ever obsolete, and its capacity to mount sustained mechanized operations, particularly in light of likely deep interdictions from the air, is approaching nil.
December 7th, 2006 at 6:21 pm
James, nK can still pound Seoul with hundreds of artillery and rocket systems that although obsolete are still quite effective for that project. sK is kidding itself.
December 8th, 2006 at 10:41 am
Let’s just assume, for the moment, that NKPA does “pound Seoul” with tens of thousands of tubes. Then what?
That threat is a single-shot weapon, a counter-value weapon (as opposed to counter-force, for all those former SAC types). Yes, Seoul will suffer devastating damage, but it will also mean the end of North Korea’s regime.
At that point, ROK will defeat North Korea and topple the Kim Dynasty. Yes it will be very bloody, especially without our help, but the disparity between the operational capability of the ROK conventional armed forces and the NKPA is deep and growing deeper by day.
There is NO danger that North Korea will take over ROK. None. However, there is always a possibility that ROK, whether it absorbs North Korea or not, will turn into a leftist, habitually anti-American “social demogracy” in a Western European mold. Then there is ROK’s strategic position between China and the U.S., but that’s another topic.
December 10th, 2006 at 6:44 pm
No danger, I think you overstate your position comrade.
December 20th, 2006 at 12:43 pm
An update to comments on this post about the future of the military in Korea. Safe to say ‘not yet.’
December 26th, 2006 at 11:22 am
Pavlov3:
There is no serious condition under which I can see a North Korean takeover of South Korea. If you did, please present the scenario, so we can discuss it.
Richardson:
I would argue, in this case, that the governing party is doing something right for the absolutely wrong reason.
The reason for having an all-volunteer, professional military force is for its efficacy and efficiency — for superior military capability even with a smaller force, not becaue of belief in some vague “permanent peace regime.”
December 26th, 2006 at 12:25 pm
James, I agree on both points. I say ‘not yet’ to a professional military in Korea due to the costs in starting it up - I think they will put it off for a good long time.
December 26th, 2006 at 7:39 pm
Takeover-no, I never implied there would be one, nice straw man. I illuminated the destructive capablility of the nK Army.
However there are no end to the scenarios within which nK can start a “limited” strike on Seoul for actions either started by SK, the US or simply manufactured to ratchet up tension and thereby aid demands. With the prospect of those artillery assets threatening Seoul, I don’t imagine SK will do anything in return.
They certainly are not “one shot” weapons, they have been paying dividends for the past 50 years. Many in SK are not the wanabe communists like President Noh, they are just afraid of the consequences of nK attacking, win or no win the SK civilian casualties will be immense.
December 1st, 2007 at 3:00 pm
[…] and have thus sought to limit the power of the ROK military as much as possible. Thus you see massive cut backs in soldiers, a lack of national military strategy, along with deliberately causing a complacency […]