[ad_1]
Blue House National Security Officer Seo Hoon and United States Secretary of State Mike Pompeo take a commemorative photo before talks at the United States Department of State office on the 15th (hour local). [뉴스1]
On the 15th (local time), the head of the Blue House National Security Office, Seo-hoon, who is visiting the United States, said: “There is no difference between the United States and the Republic of Korea with regarding the declaration of the end of the war. Mr. Seo made this statement in the meeting with correspondents after a 30-minute interview with the Secretary of State of the United States, Mike Pompeo, at the Washington DC State Department building.
Interview with the Secretary of State of the United States, Pompeo
“There is no difference between the two countries.”
The contribution to defense costs is reaffirmed in principle
‘Keep USFK’ in SCM statement
US House of Representatives’ “Disappointing” Concerns Raised
“We stand in solidarity and confirm how deeply and well the strong alliance between the Republic of Korea and the United States is being managed,” Seo said. “After North Korea’s enthusiasm, we shared our assessment of the situation on the Korean Peninsula and how to steadily handle the situation on the Korean Peninsula. We had a comprehensive and productive talk.” On the 14th, Seo, who visited the United States on the 13th, met with his counterpart Robert O’Brien, a national security adviser at the White House.
Seo’s visit to the United States attracted special attention because it came after President Moon Jae-in called for an international effort to declare an end to the war in a speech at the UN General Assembly last month. Regarding this, Mr. Seo said, “I did not particularly speak in depth (about the end of the war). The issue of declaring the end of the war is not a new issue, “he emphasized, saying,” The issue has always been on the table, so there cannot be different ideas between Korea and the United States. ”
National politicians and diplomats have been controversial as to whether the denuclearization of North Korea is a prerequisite every time the end-of-war declaration is mentioned, or whether it is promoted as a separate declaration without conditions. In this regard, Seo said: “The declaration of the end of the war is just a question of what will be the relationship between denuclearization and the degree of association with denuclearization, but it is common sense that we cannot play with denuclearization separately.” . It would be better not to interpret it ”.
Suh said: “We did not have an in-depth conversation at this meeting” and “it is desirable to reach an agreement in a reasonable and mutually acceptable way as soon as possible. Revealed. At the 52nd Security Council of the Republic of Korea and the United States (SCM) held in Washington, DC on the 14th, the Secretary of Defense of the United States, Mark Esper, discussed the negotiations of participation in the defense costs and lobbied “American taxpayers cannot pay more unfairly.” It means that the speech level was adjusted to reaffirm the principle that has been maintained until now.
He then asked: “Is it the policy to conduct inter-Korean relations independently regardless of the alliance between the ROK and the United States?” It is a problem to continue, and I have been doing so until now. “The reason why this visit to the United States overlapped with the SMC program was explained as” regrettably. ”
Meanwhile, voices of concern were expressed in the United States Congress that the phrase “maintain current USFK level” was omitted from the SCM joint statement. A spokesperson for the United States House of Representatives Democratic Party Military Commission said in Voice of the United States on the 15th: “I am disappointed and concerned that this discussion on SCM is not an opportunity to clarify the size of the troops. Americans stationed on the Korean peninsula. ” Since the military speaker of the United States House of Representatives is a Democratic member of the House of Representatives Adam Smith, this statement can be interpreted as a reflection of the opinion of the president. A spokesman noted: “Although North Korea remains a significant threat to international security and requires a competent and sustained deterrence posture, the US position on maintaining US forces in Korea remains unclear.”
Earlier, four Democrats from the United States Senate and House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Relations and Military Committee, including President Smith, sent an open letter urging Esper’s Defense Minister to reaffirm the position of “ maintaining the current USFK level ” through this joint SCM statement. As such, the disappointing response from the United States House of Representatives after the SCM is interpreted as an expression of public regret that the request was ignored.
There were also claims that the US Congress could curb the reduction of US forces in Korea. “The voluntary reduction of USFK troops will only undermine national security and undermine America’s continued commitment to the region,” Lee said. “The United States Congress, in a bipartisan manner, expressed its opposition to this arbitrary approach. There are bars,” he emphasized.
This refers to the fact that the United States Senate and House of Representatives passed the Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2021 last July and set harsh conditions to reduce the US forces in Korea below the current level (28,000 people). ▶ It is in line with the national security interests of the United States. ▶ Does not hinder the security of allies. ▶ It means that we will block the arbitrariness of the Trump administration using as a shield the reduction conditions stipulated in the Defense Authorization Act.
In this regard, Bruce Klinger, Principal Investigator of the Heritage Foundation of the Central Intelligence Agency of the United States (CIA), Principal Investigator of the Heritage Foundation, told the VOA: It should be noted that it is a promise of the Obama administration ”. He analyzed: “It is possible that the US side did not intentionally reflect the phrase ‘maintain the size of the USFK’ in the joint statement to pressure the defense cost sharing negotiations with Korea.” .
On the other hand, there were also opinions that the reduction of US forces in Korea could take place sooner than expected. Principal Investigator Bruce Bennett Land Research Institute said: “As Defense Secretary Esper has repeatedly emphasized the importance of relocating US forces to the region, there is a possibility that the reduction of the USFK will be considered one of the real options.”
Washington = Correspondent Pilkyu Kim, Seoul = Reporter Geunpyeong Lee [email protected]
[ad_2]
