Analysis: Strategic flexibility is excluded from South Korea's electoral discourse
South Korea’s June presidential election will sideline strategic flexibility to preserve centrist swing votes.
Significance. Strategic flexibility — the concept that U.S. (and potentially South Korean) forces stationed on the Korean Peninsula will deploy regionally without explicit prior approval — remains one of the most contentious defense issues between Washington and Seoul. It has been conspicuously absent from electoral discourse for the presidential election.
Despite mounting regional tensions and renewed interest from U.S. policymakers, neither conservative nor progressive candidates want to address the issue. The issue's volatility risks alienating centrist swing voters, a critical demographic both camps are vying to secure. South Korean progressives fear being painted as anti-alliance, while conservatives risk accusations of compromising sovereignty.
As a result, strategic flexibility will be a political third rail — recognized as crucial but too controversial for open public campaign discourse. Its omission underscores a broader trend: the depoliticization of strategic defense debates to avoid electoral backlash.
Analysis. Strategic flexibility refers to the United States’ ability to redeploy forces stationed in South Korea to other regional theaters, such as Taiwan or the South China Sea, without prior South Korean consent. This concept has sparked domestic controversy since it emerged during the George W. Bush administration, and was quietly reaffirmed in the 2023 U.S.-ROK Security Consultative Meeting.