Thursday, August 20, 2026

Punishing South Korea Does Not Make Sense on Any Level

By Jim Geraghty

Thursday, August 20, 2026

 

President Trump, speaking to reporters yesterday:

 

Now, I didn’t like the fact that we’re doing these massive military exercises really against North Korea. It was, you know, an exercise against North Korea. When I’m friendly with him, when we have — I don’t see anything happening for certainly two and a half years, it’s not going to happen with me, but I don’t see anything happening.

 

And I was not happy when South Korea said, no, they’re not interested in helping us with the Hormuz Strait, and yet they get 60 percent of their oil from the Hormuz Strait. I said would you like to help us. He said, no, thank you. I said that’s nice, please, thank you. He made us a lot of money; I didn’t like that.

 

So, I felt that to do a massive — we were doing a massive war exercise. I thought that was very insulting to somebody that frankly has been, during my term at least, very well-behaved yeah.

 

Got that? Joint U.S.–South Korean military exercises, which have occurred in some form or fashion every year since the end of the Korean War in 1953, are “very insulting” to North Korean Supreme Leader Kim Jong-un.

 

Oh, no! Heaven forbid that the U.S. ever insult a man who boasted a couple of years ago, “The whole of [the United States] mainland is within the range of our nuclear strike and the nuclear button is on my office desk all the time.”

 

Trump says that there’s no chance of North Korea doing anything provocative or aggressive while he’s president. Here’s how the administration’s 2026 National Defense Strategy characterizes North Korea and its regime:

 

The DPRK [Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, a.k.a. North Korea] poses a direct military threat to the Republic of Korea (ROK) as well as to Japan, both of which are U.S. treaty allies. Although many of North Korea’s large conventional forces are aged or poorly maintained, South Korea must stay vigilant against the threat of a North Korean invasion. North Korea’s missile forces are also capable of striking targets in the ROK and Japan with conventional and nuclear weapons as well as other weapons of mass destruction. At the same time, the DPRK’s nuclear forces are increasingly capable of threatening the U.S. Homeland. These forces are growing in size and sophistication, and they present a clear and present danger of nuclear attack on the American Homeland.

 

Back in June, I wrote that the now dead-as-a-doornail memorandum of understanding represented a series of immediate U.S. concessions in exchange for vaguely worded Iranian promises — promises that the mullahs in Tehran started breaking almost immediately.

 

The pattern continues in Asia. Here’s how the North Korean regime demonstrated its appreciation for Trump announcing the U.S. would “substantially reduce” its role in the joint military exercises:

 

Pyongyang fired off a barrage of short-range ballistic missiles on Thursday, Tokyo and Seoul said, just hours after U.S. President Donald Trump claimed he would meet North Korean leader Kim Jong Un later this year.

 

The South Korean military said it had detected the launch of around 10 short-range missiles from the Pyongyang area toward the Sea of Japan, which Seoul calls the East Sea, the Yonhap news agency reported.

 

The Defense Ministry in Tokyo, meanwhile, said the North had fired off “multiple” ballistic missiles, with all traveling an estimated 320 kilometers and hitting a maximum altitude of 90 km before splashing down in waters outside Japan’s exclusive economic zone.

 

President Trump said Wednesday that he would meet with Kim Jong-un this year. Here’s what the North Koreans said about that:

 

The sister of North Korean leader Kim Jong Un has denied any ongoing communication between US President Donald Trump and her brother, maintaining that the US continues to engage in a “hostile” policy towards her country.

 

“Regarding the recent news from Washington about communication between the leaders of North Korea and the United States, I am completely unaware of it, and it is likely the only matter concerning our top leadership’s foreign policy that I am unaware of,” Kim Yo Jong said in a statement published by the state-run Korean Central News Agency on Wednesday.

 

I wish I had something more optimistic to write than the fact that our president is a doddering octogenarian who just blurts out the first thing that pops into his head, and who ardently believes that dictators of hostile states are not so threatening to the U.S. and its allies because they personally flatter him. But that is where we are.

 

Does the U.S. have some fair gripes with the South Korean government? Absolutely. (Read our Abigail Anthony for an eye-popping recent example.)

 

After the extremely messy end of right-of-center South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol — remember the whole “declaration of martial law” and impeachment and removal from office — left-of-center Lee Jae Myung took over. The Center for Strategic and International Studies summarizes that Lee has “pursued a nuanced strategy with China, one that evades regional security issues (e.g., Taiwan and the South China Sea), while maintaining ‘neighborly’ relations and acknowledging the importance of soliciting Chinese cooperation on issues ranging from North Korea to stable supplies of critical minerals.”

 

But as the Hudson Institute’s Patrick Cronin observes, punishing South Korea doesn’t make sense on any level. In fact, Lee, like Trump, has been eager to restart a dialogue with the North Korean regime:

 

Despite South Korea’s sharp political shift from Yoon Suk-yeol to Lee Jae-myung, and President Lee’s recent calls for renewed inter-Korean dialogue, Kim remains resolutely uninterested in serious engagement. . . .

 

Washington may disagree with some of President Lee’s policies, but it should not fault his government for failing to contribute to the alliance. South Korea carries a substantial defense burden and possesses industrial capabilities increasingly vital to American security. Few major U.S. allies devote a larger share of their economy to defense, and South Korea is indispensable to revitalizing the U.S. defense industrial base, particularly in shipbuilding, while remaining a critical partner in technologies such as semiconductors.

 

As for not helping the U.S. in its war against Iran, yes, the South Korean navy could have been an asset. South Korea has run the Cheonghae Unit — a rotating anti-piracy/escort deployment of roughly 260 personnel, a destroyer, small boats, and helicopters — since 2009. Back in 2020, during the first Trump administration, South Korea deployed the Cheonghae Unit to the Strait of Hormuz. But antipiracy and escort duties are a different task from deployment into an active war zone.

 

Of course, President Trump didn’t consult South Korea before launching the war against Iran, which set off a major energy crisis, the biggest stock market drop in South Korean history, a huge drop in the value of the South Korean won currency, and a spike in inflation in that country.

 

Let us also recall that, roughly a month before launching the war against Iran, Trump announced that the United States would “increase its tariff on imports from South Korea from 15% to 25% and also hike levies on the country’s automobiles, lumber and pharmaceutical goods.” If you take the most aggressive and combative stance on trade possible, you cannot be surprised that the same country you’re hitting economically doesn’t want to put its soldiers and sailors in harm’s way to help you militarily.

 

Hard to believe the government in Seoul wasn’t eager to help the Trump administration, huh?

 

America’s Continued Global Withdrawal

 

I know it sounds bizarre to level the charge of isolationism at an administration that launched a unilateral war against Iran. But look around the world, and you’ll see a recurring pattern.

 

In the Middle East:

 

One of the key areas the Defense Department is assessing is whether to pull back troops from the Persian Gulf, where America’s large overseas military bases have been battered by months of Iranian strikes, two people familiar with the ongoing analysis said.

 

The damage to these facilities has prompted a once-in-a-generation chance for the Pentagon to reconsider its presence in the region. The Defense Department has already signaled that it might not rebuild its bases as they were before the conflict.

 

In Europe:

 

The Pentagon is planning to withdraw about 5,000 American forces from Germany, senior defense officials said Friday.

 

The officials characterized the move as a signal of President Trump’s discontent with the level of assistance that European allies have offered in the U.S.-Iran war. Mr. Trump has publicly criticized German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and the leaders of other NATO member states for not getting directly involved in the U.S.’s military campaign against Iran.

 

That rotation of additional U.S. troops to Poland, announced in May to the elation of the Poles, has been very slow-moving.

 

In the Pacific:

 

The only remaining U.S. aircraft carrier patrolling the Pacific departed Asia through Singapore last week en route to the Middle East, marking the latest step in a steady drawdown of American military assets across the region.

 

An armada of naval forces, alongside a constellation of air-defense and missile capabilities, has been removed from a theater the Trump administration said just last year would be the battleground of the coming century.

 

And now, President Trump’s surprise decision this week to curtail military exercises with South Korea has further fueled anxiety across Asia, where Washington’s closest allies fear violent consequences from a vacuum of American power. . . .

 

The Australian government said it remained “deeply concerned” with North Korea’s nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs, while Japan’s defense minister, Shinjiro Koizumi, warned of historic stakes.

 

“As Japan faces the most severe and complicated security environment in the post-war era, the cooperation among Japan, the United States and South Korea is critical to the peace and stability of the region,” Koizumi said in a statement.

 

Trump isn’t an openly declared isolationist; he appears to genuinely love meeting and schmoozing foreign leaders. But he has no respect for, nor appreciation of, America’s alliances and insults our allies regularly. Most Americans have already forgotten that in January, Trump blithely asserted during an interview with Maria Bartiromo that our allies in NATO had never been useful and had never made any sacrifices. “We’ve never needed them. We have never really asked anything of them. You know, they’ll say they sent some troops to Afghanistan or this or that. And they did. They stayed a little back, little off the frontlines.” NATO fatalities in Afghanistan included 457 British; 158 Canadians; 90 French; 60 Germans; and 44 Danes, the most per capita outside the United States.

 

(Similarly, President Trump asserted Monday: “The [aircraft carrier U.S.S. Abraham] Lincoln has been out there for a period of time, good period of time. But over the years we’ve had them out there much longer.” That is completely wrong, and it’s not even close. The previous record for consecutive days at sea for a U.S. aircraft carrier was 206, set by the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower in 2020. The USS Abraham Lincoln is now past 260 days.)

 

President Trump rarely knows what he is talking about and just blurts out whatever sounds good. He is incontrovertibly wedded to a narrative that all of America’s allies are useless mooching freeloaders, while he keeps getting charmed and flattered by some of the worst and most dangerous men on the planet, and downplays the threat they present to U.S. interests. He is an easy mark, a sucker, easily captivated and fooled, all the while convinced that he is, in the official words of the U.S. State Department, “the greatest dealmaker in the world.”

 

The president may not intend to leave America weaker on the world stage than when he found it. But that is the course we are on, with his accumulated erratic decisions, fits of pique and spite, and dumb and insulting comments.

 

ADDENDUM: Our Jeff Blehar looks at the pollsters you’ve never heard of before. These are ones that seem to show up out of nowhere with numbers that alter the perception of a particular race:

 

But even when these lesser-known pollsters — with their generically coded, anonymous names like “Florida Values” or “Progress America, Etc.” — aren’t just making up the numbers wholesale in a vain attempt to slant expectations, they’re usually just chumps: bad at polling, bad with statistics, cheaply run, and little better than a front for all the same impulses that inspire the pure frauds. Witness the tale of The Public Sentiment Institute (TPSI), a startup pollster who rather clearly entered the race for ideological reasons: as friends of antisemitic bugman candidate James Fishback.

 

Fishback received 10 percent of the vote in the Florida Republican gubernatorial primary. The bad news is that this was about 177,000 votes. The good news is that more than 1.5 million Florida Republicans voted for the other candidates, Byron Donalds (who won the nomination) and Jay Collins.

 

In May, Fishback was the subject of a nearly 10,000-word profile in the New Yorker magazine, an article that asserted, “With voters under thirty-five he was beating Donalds by a factor of four — an indication, perhaps, of one direction the post-Trump right might take.”

 

(You’re seeing online comments like, “Fishback won 89 percent of the vote in the Florida State University precinct.” Yes, but that precinct had 28 total votes, and classes don’t start at FSU until next Tuesday, August 25. The only students who voted were A) registered Republicans and B) students who were already back for the fall semester on Tuesday.)

 

Gee, do you think the mainstream media wanted to hype up Fishback to demonize Republicans as a whole?

No comments: