U.S. President Donald Trump’s July 8 remarks about South Korea’s troop costs, made during a White House cabinet meeting, are part of a larger effort to extract greater financial and trade concessions from Seoul. The comments followed a July 7 letter from the administration demanding that South Korea remove non-tariff barriers affecting U.S. exports.
In trade talks, the Trump administration has targeted restrictions on U.S. rice and beef imports as well as limits on exporting sensitive geographic data—key issues within South Korea’s non-tariff trade barriers.
A former senior South Korean official said, “President Trump’s overriding concern is financial gain—he is seeking to maximize leverage in both trade and defense cost-sharing.”
South Korean officials are working to frame negotiations within the broader context of the U.S.-Korea alliance. Wi Sung-lac, presidential national security chief, who returned July 9 from meetings with U.S. National Security Advisor and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, emphasized to Washington the need for a long-term vision focused on the alliance’s “end state.”
“We proposed an early summit to anchor negotiations in the future of the alliance,” Wi said. “Our goal is to advance a comprehensive package that includes trade, investment, procurement, and security cooperation.”
South Korea is considering whether to bring sensitive security matters into the negotiations. Asked about the possible inclusion of U.S. troop levels and the transfer of wartime operational control (OPCON), Wi said, “These are among the subjects under discussion, alongside defense spending.”
While such security issues may require longer-term resolution than trade matters, Wi confirmed they are active topics at the working level.
Wi’s acknowledgment that troop presence and OPCON transfer remain on the agenda is notable given their sensitivity. He reaffirmed OPCON transfer as a key policy of the current administration and said South Korea remains committed to pursuing it. “We don’t yet know if it will surface in high-level talks with the U.S., but it’s definitely one of our strategic cards,” he said.
President Lee Jae-myung, elected on a platform accelerating OPCON transfer, described it as “the core of national sovereignty.” South Korea and the U.S. agreed in 2014 that transfer would occur only when Seoul met military readiness criteria and the regional security environment, especially North Korea’s nuclear threat, was deemed stable.
However, prematurely raising the issue with the Trump administration could prompt a U.S. troop drawdown. Elbridge Colby, a key figure in shaping Pentagon policy under Trump, has argued publicly for OPCON transfer and redeploying U.S. forces toward China. President Trump’s skepticism toward overseas deployments increases the likelihood of rapid changes to troop posture.
Such a shift could weaken deterrence on the Korean Peninsula and complicate U.S. reinforcement capabilities in a crisis.
Concerns are growing that Trump’s demand for $10 billion in annual defense cost-sharing—roughly nine times South Korea’s current $1 billion contribution—may be tied to broader alliance negotiations.
Wi denied discussing specific figures during talks with Secretary Rubio but confirmed that South Korea is reviewing overall defense spending in line with global trends.
President Trump has pushed NATO allies to raise defense budgets to 5 percent of GDP. South Korea’s current defense budget stands at 61.2 trillion won, about 2.3 percent of GDP. Adding the Trump administration’s demand would bring this closer to 3 percent.
