August 22, 2011
Written by Wooksik Cheong(Representative of Peace Network)

Conflicts related to the navy base construction in Jeju Gangjeoing Village are being intensified day by day. This is because the South Korean government and the navy never change their stance on the construction, whereas civil activists, local villagers, and opposition parties are raising their voice requesting suspension or cancellation of the construction.

Conflicts concerning the Jeju navy base can be reached and viewed from different angles. First of all, there are two diverging voices regarding this Island. The first claim is that the large scale of military base is totally incompatible with the identity of Jeju Island which was designated as a “World Peace Island”. On the other hand, the other says that Jeju Island should develop into “Joint Civil-Military site” like Hawaii where U.S. Pacific Fleet is located.

In addition, it has been designated as a Biosphere Reserve, registered as a World Heritage, and accredited as a Global Geological park. Under this circumstance, building a new military base in Jeju Island is also incompatible with the values of Jeju which is aiming to be the center for the ecosystem, the environment, and peace. However, the government and the military authorities assert that they can wipe out these concerns through “Green Growth” and enforce the construction, ignoring the procedural democracy.

The security validity of the construction is also controversial. “The Southern part of Jeju Island has abundant seabed resources and vital transportation route of South Korea. Considering every aspect including the future of Jeju which will be a hub of the Northeast Asia, the national security and also the economic value, the Southern part of Jeju should be protected,” insisted by the navy authorities. They believe “the Jeju navy base construction is a national project which must be continued for the national security.”

However, they fail to provide appropriate reasons for the base construction which is being implemented under the name of protecting seabed resources and transportation route, by the sacrifice of massive social conflicts, destruction of ecosystem and environment, and construction cost which reaches up to 1 trillion in Korean won. Just like a Four River Restoration Project, the unilateral argument that “construction has already started and cannot be stopped” only exists.

The consenting side of the construction claim that Japan and China has massive navy power and, thus South Korea needs to tackle the threat by the countries. Yet, there is no clear evidence which shows they are threatening the national security of Korea, including Jeju Island.

The proportion of foreigners visiting Jeju Island is mostly Japanese and Chinese. Construction of Navy base due to threat of these countries under this circumstance can only increase distrust between the countries and intensify the arms race. It will eventually make Jeju Island less attractive to Japanese and Chinese people.

Especially, while the President Lee Myungbak administration has promoted “ROK-U.S Strategic alliance” as an attempt to check emerging China and South Korea seems to be included into U.S.-led Missile Defense (MD), the military base in Jeju Island is highly likely to impede South Korea - China cooperation.

Why it is to be the U.S. Navy’s outpost?

Since 2005 the issues with Jeju navy base was brought out, I have constantly advocated that if the base is constructed in Jeju Island, it will alse be a forward base of the U.S. navy. Awareness of the problem at the time became clearer as time goes by. Below are the logical grounds for my argument or the following shows the evidences of my argument.

First, it is the structural problem within the alliance between South Korea and U.S. The ROK-U.S. Mutual Defense Agreement states that “The Republic of Korea grants, and the United States of America accepts, the right to dispose United States land, air and sea forces in and about the territory of the Republic of Korea as determined by mutual agreement”. This shows U.S does not have obligation to discuss with South Korea in advance about deploying its weapon system, and also there is no prior negotiation system practically. Regarding this issue, the closed discussion that I had with the senior official from President Roh Moo Hyun government, in early July in 2005 when Jeju Navy base construction was in the point of dispute, implies a lot.

The senior government official: “Why do civil groups keep trying to connect Jeju Navy base with U.S?”
I:” We cannot rule out the possibility that the Aegis destroyer can harbor with the U.S. missile defense system if Navy base is constructed.”
The senior government official: “Roh Moo-Hyun administration pledged that they will not participate in MD. Why can’t you believe us?”
I: “Why does the government which pledged not to participate in MD accept PAC-3 deployment which is a part of US-led MD system?
The senior government official: “How can we block the U.S. for deploying it into U.S Forces of Korea(USFK) base?
I: “Doesn’t that mean we can’t block the U.S. Aegis destroyer harboring in Jeju Navy base?
The senior government official: “….”

Second, the military strategy of U.S. and the shift of ROK–US alliance during the President Lee’s administration is also another factor making the Jeju navy base ROK-U.S. Joint base. U.S. is planning to shift its military strategic focus to the Asian-Pacific region and transfer its 60 per cent of the Navy forces to the region. Especially U.S. has reorganized its aircraft carriers for rapid response and centralized their Missile Defense(MD) with Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense system which is Aegis Destroyers equipped with SM-3 missiles. According to the plan, it has equipped 20 Aegis Destroyers with MD system by 2010 and is intended to constantly increase the number. Needless to say, the more navy force is transferred to Asia-Pacific region, the more necessary navy base will become.

Moreover, the Lee Myung-bak administration whose top priority of foreign policy is strengthening ROK-U.S alliance pledged the strategic alliance with U.S. The underlying intention of this is to keep not only North Korea but also China out. In addition, the Lee administration is accelerating the MD coalition with the U.S. as well. The administration underwent the maritime MD exercise with the U.S and even signed the joint MD research agreement. Also, the administration is now seeking South Korea–Japan military intelligence pact, which can accelerate the establishment of East Asia’s MD, which reach out to South Korea-US-Japan, and to Australia. This is what the U.S. has hoped for. Under this circumstance, the navy base is highly likely to be a major military base narrowly for ROK – U.S. military alliance, broadly for the U.S. led East Asia military alliance. At the center of this alliance is MD.

Third, the geographical feature of Jeju is also the factor which confirms that Jeju base will be the outpost of the U.S. military. South Korean navy insists that the U.S military already has its naval base in Okinawa, Japan 330 nautical miles apart from Taiwan. So, it has no reason to use the Jeju navy base considering that the Jeju base is 560 nautical miles apart from Taiwan. However, it is nothing but a “Ostrich belief”.

Okinawa base is mostly occupied with the air force and marine, and lack large-scale navy base unlike the one in Jeju. Naha harbor located in Southern west part of Okinawa is not capable of accommodating ships weighing over 3000 tons. Even this harbor is supposed to give back to Japan according to U.S military redeployment agreement, signed in October 2005. Put simply, not only aircraft carriers, but also Aegis destroyers cannot dock at Okinawa.

However, the Jeju navy base is designed to accommodate six destroyers and submarines, even an aircraft carrier. Thus, when it is completely constructed, the U.S military will feel huge temptation to use this navy base which is not only close to Taiwan strait, but also huge enough to be harbored big ships. Given the asymmetry of the ROK-U.S Mutual Defense Agreement and its hierarchal alliance structure, it will be so hard for South Korea to refuse it.

When we think about ‘contingency’

The ROK government and navy mention the ‘contingency’ to rationalize the construction of navy base in Jeju Island. Preparedness for the contingency by the government and the military are adequately understandable because they have fundamental duties to fulfill: to protect citizen’s life and property.

However, this ‘contingency’ cannot rationalize everything. The reasonable explanation and countermeasures should be followed. But there are no concrete explanations within the construction and vaguely leveling the situation by irritating security anxiety. This implies to circumstantial evidence that there is no existence of living threat within Jeju Island.

So, the roots for frequent media reports for the discussion is that ‘future’s uncertainty threat’. However, the construction of the navy base should be withdrawn for this reason. If the construction is enforced under the name of security, it can actually result in turning the uncertain threat into the certain one and make South Korea caught up in danger in case of ‘contingency’.

Maybe, estimation on ‘contingency’ that can relate South Korea to the Northeast Asia can be divided into two big pictures. One is U.S. and China’s assist in military collision on Korean peninsula and the other is U.S.-China military collision over Taiwan strait or others. The risk of the Jeju navy base construction comes from this U.S- China military collision.

If Jeju Island’s naval base is used as U.S. navy’s departure base or even for the central base, then it means that South Korea does military hostility over China. Thus, it is hard to get away from China’s counter-attack. Also, as part of China’s retaliatory measures, there is possibility that China will blockade Taiwan Strait and not allow Korean ship to pass it through. If situation keep continues, South Korea’s marine transport way’s security could be harshly damaged and could not avoid the direct confrontation with China.

On the other hand, if ROK do not permit U.S military ‘s the Jeju navy base use in order to keep out the military collision between United States and China, South Korea might face even the cancellation of South Korea-U.S alliance. The U.S government will accuse South Korea of violating ‘the mutual defense treaty’ and within the United States, the word ‘ingratitude’ will likely to come out about South Korea.

The reasons for the government and military authorities to be wise for protecting the security lie here. If the construction is continued in the name of preparing ‘contingency’, then it is likely to be stuck in a dilemma of ‘being caught’ and ‘thrown away’ when the real ‘contingency’ comes. This extensive dilemma can be prevented by stopping the construction of the navy base.

* Son Dae-kwon and HongYeun-hwa, Peace Network Interns, contributed to this English translation from the original Korean text.