Pentagon dismisses USFK troop cut report as 'not true,' reaffirms US' firm commitment to South Korea

Washington, May 23 A Pentagon spokesperson on Friday dismissed reports on the United States' consideration of a US Forces Korea (USFK) troop drawdown as "not true", reaffirming that America remains "fully" committed to the defence of South Korea.

Chief Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell issued a statement after The Wall Street Journal reported that the US is weighing the idea of pulling out roughly 4,500 troops -- part of the 28,500-strong USFK -- and moving them to other locations in the Indo-Pacific, including Guam.

"The US remains firmly committed to the defence of the ROK and we look forward to working with the incoming government officials to maintain and strengthen our iron-clad alliance," Parnell said in a statement sent to Yonhap News Agency.

ROK is short for South Korea's official name, the Republic of Korea.

"Reports that the Department of Defence will reduce US troops in the Republic of Korea are not true," he added.

The report on the idea of the USFK troop cut raised eyebrows in South Korea as the reduction, if realised, could affect deterrence against a muscle-flexing North Korea and be construed as a sign of a diminished security commitment to South Korea.

It came as the Pentagon is looking to rebalance and reapportion its military assets in the region to optimise deterrence against its geopolitical rival, China, amid US President Donald Trump's belief that South Korea, a "wealthy" ally, is not "reimbursing" the US sufficiently for America's "big-time" military protection of it.

US Indo-Pacific Command Commander Adm. Samuel Paparo Jr. and USFK Commander Gen. Xavier Brunson have presented their negative views about the drawdown idea.

During a Senate hearing last month, Paparo warned the withdrawal or reduction of American troops from Korea would raise a "higher" likelihood of a North Korean invasion, while Brunson stressed that a troop reduction would be "problematic."

The USFK has maintained the current troop level since the late 2000s.

Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor