South Korean Workers in USFK Face 'Unpaid Leave'? US Insists on 'Significant Defense Cost Increase' and 'Comprehensive Agreement'

US State Department: "Greater Focus and Flexibility Required from Korean Side... Differences in Understanding Between Korea and US Remain"
7th Round of ROK-US Defense Cost-Sharing Talks Ends Without Agreement, Remote Negotiations Expected to Continue... Last-Minute Compromise Uncertain
Ambassador Jeong Eun-bo: "US Officially Opposes Priority Negotiation on Korean Workers' Salaries for USFK"
Korean Workers' Union of USFK Announces 'Work Stoppage' Protest

Jeong Eun-bo, the ambassador for South Korea-US defense cost-sharing negotiations, is returning home after concluding the defense cost negotiations in Los Angeles, USA, from the 17th to the 19th (local time). [Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Lim Cheol-young] The 11th Special Measures Agreement (SMA) negotiations to determine the scale of South Korea-U.S. defense cost-sharing have failed to find a breakthrough toward a resolution despite seven rounds of talks. Ahead of the planned unpaid leave for Korean workers employed by the U.S. Forces Korea (USFK) scheduled for April, the two sides’ representatives engaged in intensive negotiations during the 7th round but could not narrow their differences. With the likelihood of direct meetings between the South Korean and U.S. delegations becoming very low, concerns are growing that both sides may face the worst-case scenario.

According to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and related agencies on the 21st, the South Korean and U.S. negotiation teams met again in Los Angeles from the 17th to the 19th (local time) after a two-month gap since January, when the agreement expired, but failed to bridge their differences. The 7th round of negotiations, which had raised hopes as a deadline for implementing unpaid leave for Korean workers at USFK, also yielded no significant progress.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated, “Although there are differences in positions between the two sides, both parties agreed to closely consult to minimize the gap caused by the agreement’s lapse and contribute to the South Korea-U.S. alliance and combined defense posture through the prompt conclusion of a mutually acceptable agreement,” providing a brief summary of the defense cost-sharing negotiations held over three days from the 17th to the 19th.

The U.S. insistence on a “significant increase in defense cost-sharing” and a “comprehensive agreement” appears to have persisted this time as well. Unlike the previous six rounds, Jeong Eun-bo, South Korea’s SMA ambassador, and James DeHart, the U.S. State Department’s SMA representative, extended the negotiation schedule by a day and frequently held meetings between the representatives, but this did not increase the likelihood of an agreement.

On the 20th (local time), the U.S. State Department remarked, “Differences remain between South Korea and the U.S. regarding the value contributed to American taxpayers.” According to a comment requested by Voice of America (VOA), a spokesperson from the U.S. State Department said, “Greater focus and flexibility from the South Korean side are required to reach a fair and equitable defense cost-sharing agreement that accurately reflects the value contributed to U.S. taxpayers.”

U.S. Maintains Demand for Large Defense Cost Increase and Comprehensive Agreement... Rejects South Korea’s Proposal for ‘Prior Agreement on Labor Costs’

In the 7th round of negotiations, the U.S. side insisted on a comprehensive agreement based on a significant increase in defense costs. After demanding an exorbitant $5 billion defense cost-sharing amount compared to South Korea’s 2023 contribution of 1.0389 trillion KRW (approximately $900 million), the U.S. lowered its increase demand to around $4 billion, but South Korea reportedly countered with an increase of about 10%. The South Korean delegation holds that the U.S. proposed increase is neither reasonable nor an equitable burden.

Furthermore, the U.S. delayed responding to South Korea’s ‘prior agreement on labor costs’ proposal submitted after the January negotiations and ultimately officially rejected it. Ambassador Jeong Eun-bo, returning from the 7th round, told reporters, “We proposed signing a memorandum of understanding to resolve the labor cost issue for Korean workers at USFK first if the total defense cost agreement is delayed, but the U.S. side officially opposed this, saying it could delay the main negotiations.”

South Korea proposed two measures to prevent the unpaid leave crisis for Korean workers at USFK. One was for USFK to pay wages upfront from its own budget and then be reimbursed by South Korea. The other was to sign a separate memorandum of understanding allowing the Ministry of National Defense to pay labor costs first from the secured cost-sharing budget and reimburse afterward. However, the U.S. rejected both proposals during this negotiation and maintained its stance on a comprehensive agreement.

Korean Workers at USFK Face ‘Unpaid Leave’... USFK’s April Unpaid Leave Implementation Becomes Concrete

With the collapse of the last-hope 7th round of defense cost-sharing talks, the livelihoods of Korean workers employed by USFK have become even more precarious. USFK announced on the 27th of last month that it plans to implement administrative unpaid leave and has issued prior notice. On the 23rd, it plans to classify essential personnel among the 9,000 Korean workers and allow them to continue working, revealing the specific scale. The unpaid leave is expected to affect about half of the 9,000 workers. This move anticipates delays in the defense cost-sharing negotiations.

In response, the Korean Workers’ Union at USFK held a press conference on the afternoon of the 19th in front of the U.S. Embassy in Jongno-gu, Seoul, declaring that if the U.S. side enforces unpaid leave, they will engage in a ‘work attendance struggle.’ The union stated in its press release, “This unprecedented unpaid leave situation will be a historical stain that damages the spirit of the South Korea-U.S. alliance,” and claimed, “The U.S. is negotiating by holding hostage not only 9,000 Korean workers but also tens of thousands of USFK families.”

Until the implementation of unpaid leave, the South Korean and U.S. delegations plan to continue non-face-to-face negotiations. However, it remains uncertain whether substantial progress can be made through remote talks. Ambassador Jeong Eun-bo said, “It will be difficult to hold face-to-face meetings again,” adding, “There are various communication methods such as phone and email, and embassy channels, so we will continue consultations.”

Some argue that the current one-year validity period of the agreement should be extended on the negotiation table. Given the widening gap between South Korea and the U.S. over the increase amount, it is difficult to find common ground based solely on the increase scale. This suggests the need to lower the U.S. demand for increases while seeking practical benefits. In the 10th SMA negotiations, South Korea agreed to change the negotiation cycle to one year in exchange for a slight reduction in the U.S. demand for cost-sharing, which drew considerable criticism.

An anonymous diplomatic source said, “While the increase amount is important, the South Korean delegation seems to need to conclude an agreement extending the one-year negotiation cycle in this round,” adding, “The U.S. needs an increase that can be politically utilized, and South Korea needs to reduce the burden of cost-sharing while changing the negotiation cycle to 3 to 5 years.”

[Image source=Yonhap News]

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.