US officials: wartime command transfer conditions unchanged, but threats evolving faster

A senior Trump administration official said on 20 October (US local time) that the basic requirements for transferring wartime operational control (OPCON) to South Korea have not changed. The official added that the threat environment is evolving faster than ever and that South Korea and the US must together be prepared to deter and defeat all regional threats to the alliance. Yonhap, Seoul Economic Daily, Chosun Ilbo and Dong-A Ilbo said the answers were given to queries from Korean media. [ 1 , 2 , 3 , 5 , 6 ]

A US Defense Department official answered the same query by saying OPCON transfer remains a mutually agreed, conditions-based process and that the conditions must be met. The official said both countries remain committed to ensuring the conditions are met before the transfer takes place and that the US will not prejudge the decisions or outcome of this bilateral process. [ 1 , 2 , 3 ]

Yonhap, Maeil Business and Seoul Economic Daily said the unchanged requirements appear to refer to the evaluation criteria in the 2015 conditions-based OPCON transfer plan (COTP). Its three conditions are the military capability needed to lead the combined defence, the alliance's comprehensive capability to counter North Korea's nuclear and missile threat, and a Korean Peninsula and regional security environment consistent with a stable transfer. [ 1 , 2 , 3 ]

The outlets linked the remarks to Brunson, the commander of US Forces Korea. On 14 October at a think-tank seminar in Washington, he cited North Korea's recent missile tests and said that, because conditions had changed and plans had been changed, there was a new standard to meet. Yonhap read the official's comments as saying North Korea's nuclear and missile technology is advancing quickly, so deterrence and defence preparations need to be stronger. Seoul Economic Daily read them as signalling caution on an early transfer and said the reference to regional threats could also be read as having China in mind. Yonhap added that some observers link the remarks to the US Army setting China as its top threat in new combat guidance. [ 1 , 2 , 3 , 5 , 6 ]

Dong-A Ilbo reported that a US official told it that if the grass in front of the goalposts has grown too long, perhaps it needs to be cut, and that it is important to consult so the alliance can respond effectively to all threats after the transfer. The paper read this as stressing that a changing security environment should be reflected in the decision even if the conditions are not changed. It noted that Defense Ministry spokesperson Jeong Bit-na said on 15 October, as a personal view, that if the goalposts keep moving the transfer can never be made. [ 6 ]

Chosun Ilbo reported that Brunson spoke on 21 October at a luncheon in Yongsan, Seoul, hosted by the American Chamber of Commerce in Korea. He said the security environment is not standing still and cited North Korea's continued missile launches, deepening North Korea-Russia military cooperation and grey-zone activity. He did not mention OPCON transfer directly, the paper said. [ 5 ]