Washington on Tuesday threw a jab at Beijing over its opposition to the possible stationing of an advanced U.S. missile defense unit on the peninsula, saying the issue is not subject to “strong representations” by a third country.
Daniel Russel, U.S. assistant secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific affairs, stressed that the Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense system is aimed at warding off North Korea’s unabated missile threats against South Korea and the U.S., and reiterated that they have not yet made any decision on its deployment.
“I find it curious that a third country would presume to make strong representations about a security system that has not been put in place and that is still a matter of theory,” he told reporters after talks with Deputy Foreign Minister Lee Kyung-soo in Seoul.
“(The allies) face a significant threat from North Korea’s ballistic missile program. … Our military authorities have a responsibility to consider systems that would protect the Republic of Korea and its citizens, protect the United States from that threat.”
 |
U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs Daniel Russel speaks to reporters after talks with Deputy Foreign Minister Lee Kyung-soo in Seoul on Tuesday. (Yonhap) |
THAAD is designed to shoot down short-, medium- and intermediate-range ballistic missiles in their terminal stage. The U.S. Forces Korea last week confirmed that the military has conducted a site survey for its possible stationing around the country.
But Seoul is struggling to balance its security and diplomatic priorities in the face of China’s stringent opposition to what it deems a U.S. effort to contain its rise by having a key regional ally on board its global missile defense scheme.
As Washington spurs its move, Beijing on the pressure appears to also be piling up. On Monday, Chinese Assistant Foreign Minister Liu Jianchao openly displayed discomfort, calling on Seoul to make an “appropriate decision” on THAAD taking his country’s “interests and concerns” into account.
Further stoking the U.S.-China rivalry is Beijing’s initiative for the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank. South Korea has reservations on China’s request for participation as a founding member due partly to Washington’s resistance to the $50 billion mechanism that may sway the U.S.-led regional financial order.
With the end-March deadline nearing for a decision, Seoul’s calculations are becoming convoluted since the U.K. announced its joining as the first major Western power and even Australia hinted at reconsidering its initial skepticism last week.
Russel reiterated Washington’s position regarding the AIIB ― that it perceives it to lack transparency in its principles and governance structure ― while tacitly urging Seoul to consider its viewpoint of similar values regarding the need for infrastructure growth.
“(The U.S. and South Korea) each would like to see the expansion of economic and financial support for infrastructure in the Asia pacific region,” he said.
“We would like to see that done in ways that are consistent with the principles, the standards, the good governance and the transparency that have become a hallmark of truly multilateral development banks.”
Russel signaled that joining the envisioned bank could be premature before Beijing ensures “unmistakable evidence” and clear governance standards in line with other multilateral development institutions.
He touched down in Seoul late Monday for a two-day trip designed to keep up the two countries’ policy coordination and reaffirm their commitment to the alliance in the aftermath of a knife attack on U.S. Ambassador Mark Lippert here.
During meetings with Lee and Vice Foreign Minister Cho Tae-yong, Russel expressed gratitude for Seoul’s response to the incident and the public support, and discussed future high-level exchanges and other bilateral, regional and global issues.
“The sides concurred on the AIIB’s necessity in developing and expanding infrastructure in Asia and agreed to continue consultations,” a senior Foreign Ministry official told reporters after the talks, requesting anonymity due to the sensitivity of the matter.
“But THAAD was not discussed, nor was it on the agenda ― it is an issue that primarily requires our military and technical consideration. We’ll make a decision after looking comprehensively into our national interests.”
By Shin Hyon-hee (
heeshin@heraldcorp.com)
