hold oneself bolt upright The discussion of the US should not withdraw troops from South Korea has quickly turned into a debate on whether the United States will withdraw troops or when the United States will withdraw troops. The news that a Trump has ordered the military to withdraw troops from South Korea has set off huge waves in Northeast Asia, and the wave may not be limited to the Asia Pacific region. South Koreas contradiction In fact, South Korea has always had a contradictory mentality about the US garrison. On the one hand, the presence of the American garrison is a major obstacle to the peace process between the north and the South; on the other hand, it is very difficult to break away from the security provided by the United States. This is the life-saving straw that the North Korean psychological defense line is not broken down. So in the end of last month, after a historic meeting between the heads of North Korea and the South and the decision to end the war this year and hope to convert the armistice agreement into a peace agreement, a tentative statement by Wen Zhengren, the special assistant to the Korean Presidents diplomatic security, if the peninsula is to be stopped and the mechanism is converted, the US troops in Korea are lacking. Justifiable nature. Matisse, the US Defense Secretary, made a quick statement on the issue that he could discuss with his allies. In addition to the issue of whether there is a need for US troops to continue in Korea, the Chong Wa Dae spokesman had to quickly clarify, the president made clear that American troops in Korea... There is no connection to the signing of the peace agreement between the Korea and the Korean. But this kind of performance let the outside world immediately read out the panic in South Korea: is Trump serious when the US troops withdraw from the peninsula as a strategic option? From now on, US President Trumps order to do a good job of reducing the number of US troops in South Korea is not a hole in the hole, nor is it just as simple as the US DPRK head talks in exchange for the denuclearization of the DPRK. When Trump held talks with Japanese Prime Minister Abe Shinzo in April this year, the president of the United States asked Abe Shinzos opinion on the possibility of cutting or evacuating the U. S. forces in Korea. So, this is not Trumps whim. The U. S. Army has never left since the 1950 Inchon landing. In the next 70 years, no matter how the peninsula situation and the relationship between the United States and the United States fluctuate, the president of the United States has not flagrantly moved on the army, even Obama, who has been named change to the White House. Since his inauguration for more than a year, Trumps mode of thinking and various unconventional manipulations in diplomacy have been constantly frightening to the world, and the international community, including its traditional allies, has gradually realized that it can not be turned in the old frame. For Trump, everything is possible. American Heart machine Although the United States stationed in the peninsula has ambivalent attitude towards South Korea, its significance is obvious. The effect that the US wants to achieve is to make Seoul aware that if the US army withdraws, it will throw itself into the panic of isolation, struggle and even drowning. Therefore, even the most ambiguous statement, the uncertainty conveyed is enough to make Korea shiver. People can not help asking, what is Trump doing this for? First, South Korea and the United States have long argued over the issue of military spending. Trump wants South Korea to realize that it is unnecessary to think that umbrellas are superfluous after a long sunny day. At present, the number of US troops in Korea is about 28 thousand and 500, and Trump has always believed that South Korea has not provided enough funds for the US garrison. The time of Trumps push to withdraw is coincided with the latest round of negotiations between the United States and South Korea on defense cost sharing. Since the 90s of last century, part of the cost of Garrison has been transferred to the ROK side. The two sides have so far signed 9 sharing agreements, and the latest one will expire in December 31, 2018. At present, the Korean side has borne about half of the US garrison costs, with an average annual cost of $800 million, but the Trump administration insists that South Korea take full responsibility. Seoul has always stressed that although the absolute value is less than that of Japan and Germany, the cost of South Korean military spending per capita is higher than that of other United States allies. This also caused great differences between the two sides. Secondly, Trump also believes that the United States spent a lot of money on the Korean Garrison for decades, but failed to prevent the DPRK from getting the threat to the United States. The Trump administration has sharply cut spending on overseas garrisons, and the principle of American priority has also been fully reflected in the military budget. The US $700 billion defense spending act 2018 increased by 81 billion over the previous fiscal year. It is important to note that more than 9 of the oversize defense expenditure is classified as the basic defense funds centered on sophisticated weapons procurement and nuclear weapon research and development, and only less than 1/10 of the budget is used for us operations abroad. It is one of the important goals of the Trump administration to see that in order to maintain the normal performance of the security function of the alliance system and to urge the allies to substantially increase the share and absolute amount of defense expenditure. European misgivings Trump strongly advocated more military spending for the global allies, including the Asian region, so the Miln, the vengeance of the fight was also quietly staged between the United States and NATO allies. The United States has now borne nearly 70% of NATOs military expenditure. Among its 27 allies, more than 20 countries still have no military expenditure to meet the standard of the covenant that accounts for its own GDP2%. Last May, when Trump first attended the NATO summit, he directly expressed his strong dissatisfaction with the long term being liberally by his allies. However, it was depressing that the leaders of Germany and France were unmoved. The reason why some NATO members do not buy American accounts is doubtful about the orientation and development direction of NATO, and fears that its military expenditure is used by the United States to dominate the world. As early as Trump ran for president, he had repeatedly criticized NATO for being outdated and even threatened to withdraw from NATO if necessary. Although he revised this statement after he took office, he never made concession on the issue of collective defence. Since the end of World War II, the United States has boasted as the defender of the free world. In the past 70 years, the United States has continued to invest in huge strategic and material resources and set up an American international security and welfare system. This cooperative mode of low investment and high return for the allies has gradually solidified the inertia and inertia of South Korea, Japan and NATO countries for us security protection. Today, the Trump administration, which is the United States first, is unwilling to shoulder the previous international morality and ally responsibility. Moreover, we are still tirelessly putting down the world and bargaining with the world. Therefore, the US military gradually reduces the scale of the US troops in South Korea. There is no room for operation. Trump always takes an ally as the object of first cut down. Further, who will dare to decide trick or treat will not be staged in Europe? (the writer is a senior research fellow at Pangu think tank and executive director of Northeast Asia Research Center). More brilliant, please log on to World Wide Web http://www.huanqiu.com editor: Liang Lian Fei _NBJS6165 Since the end of World War II, the United States has boasted as the defender of the free world. In the past 70 years, the United States has continued to invest in huge strategic and material resources and set up an American international security and welfare system. This cooperative mode of low investment and high return for the allies has gradually solidified the inertia and inertia of South Korea, Japan and NATO countries for us security protection. Today, the Trump administration, which is the United States first, is unwilling to shoulder the previous international morality and ally responsibility. Moreover, we are still tirelessly putting down the world and bargaining with the world. Therefore, the US military gradually reduces the scale of the US troops in South Korea. There is no room for operation. Trump always takes an ally as the object of first cut down. Further, who will dare to decide trick or treat will not be staged in Europe? (the writer is a senior research fellow at Pangu think tank and executive director of Northeast Asia Research Center).