Why would removing troops from South Korea or Afghanistan be bad?
There's one very obvious answer: deterrence. What helps keep the peace we have right now?
In South Korea, deterrence works in a couple of ways.
Many authors claim that a withdrawal causes a North Korean invasion into the South for reunification purposes. One author who agrees with this claim is Peter Huessey. He is the senior Defense Associate at National Defense University Foundation who specializes in nuclear weapons, missile defense, terrorism and rogue states. The reason the troops in South Korea were implemented at first was to stop the North Korean spread and attempt at violent reunification with the South. Right now, we can tell the troops in the South are working very well since there hasn't been an invasion since the Korean War.
Any deterrent scenario is proliferation of nuclear weapons. An author named Christopher Hughes says South Korea would try to proliferate in self defense if the US troops abandon them. They had tried to proliferate in the past, but were forced to return to the US' security mechanisms. The US troops there are the only thing stopping South Korea from proliferating right now. Also, many other nations also under the US' security blanket, such as Japan, might see a US withdrawal out of South Korea a declining commitment and might start proliferating themselves as well. A New York Times article says other countries might start as well as South Korea should our troops be withdrawn.
In Afghanistan, specifically withdrawing counter-insurgency presence, one major scenario is present. The stability and turmoil of the Middle East region.
I think this one is self-explanatory. Without counter-insurgency troops, the insurgencies in Afghanistan and Pakistan could potentially take over, which might lead to a corrupt regime. The US counter-insurgency troops stationed there now are the determining factor that help keep the relative peace in that area.
~ Amber
Sources cited:
- http://www.nationalinterest.org/Article.aspx?id=18560 (this is a qualified source because the author is an expert in the field - see the blog)
- http://www.nbr.org/publications/asia_policy/AP3/AP3Hughes.pdf (read blog about qualifications of the author)
- http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/05/weekinreview/05JDAO.html (this is a good source because it's from the New York Times, a source with breaking news and good authors)
No comments:
Post a Comment