On the 5th the South Korean government approved, at a vice-ministerial meeting, a revised motion to extend the Cheonghae Unit’s deployment and widen its area from the Gulf of Aden to the open sea south of Oman. According to Kyunghyang Shinmun and News1, the compromise tells Washington Seoul will contribute to stabilizing the strait while telling Tehran Seoul will stay out of the war, but the Progressive Party, the Rebuilding Korea Party and civic groups call it a ‘detour deployment to a conflict zone’.
According to Kyunghyang Shinmun, the government on the 5th approved the revised motion to extend the dispatch of Korean troops to waters off Somalia and the open sea south of Oman. It goes to the Cabinet Council on the 10th, then to the National Assembly, where the National Defense Committee reviews it and the plenary votes with a majority of members present and a majority of those present in favor. Kyunghyang said a plenary referral around the end of this month is expected.
광고 문의 · 300×250Combining the Defense Ministry explanations reported by News1 and Kyunghyang, the operating range roughly doubles from about 600 nautical miles (about 1,100 km) to 1,200 nautical miles (about 2,222 km), ending at the southern edge of Oman’s Duqm port, about 650 km in a straight line from the Strait of Hormuz. A P-8 Poseidon patrol aircraft (45 personnel) and a 30-member explosive ordnance disposal team, 75 people in all, join from the first half of next year, lifting the unit from 320 to 395. Unmanned underwater and surface vessels for mine clearance will also be sent.
Government: ‘This counters piracy; it is not a war deployment’
The Defense Ministry cited a more than threefold rise in piracy around the Gulf of Aden compared with last year. According to Polinews, the government set out four principles: no involvement in the war, a mission limited to protecting citizens and ships, no entry into Iranian territory or waters and no detection inside Hormuz, and an independent chain of command under the Joint Chiefs chairman. Segye Ilbo analyzed that the expanded zone lies well outside the range of Iranian surface-to-air missiles, suggesting an intent not to provoke Iran.
Seoul did not shut the door entirely. According to News1, Defense Ministry spokesperson Jung Bit-na left open the possibility that mine-clearing assets could join maritime safety operations around Hormuz, on the condition of a ‘permissive environment’ such as an end to the U.S.-Iran war or a memorandum of understanding between the two. The ministry said actual participation would require a separate motion in the Assembly, and the motion adds a new mission of ‘supporting restoration of freedom of navigation on international sea lanes’.
Progressive Party, Rebuilding Korea Party, PSPD: ‘Detour deployment to a conflict zone’
According to Kyunghyang Shinmun, the Progressive Party sees the waters south of Oman, the Gulf of Oman and the Strait of Hormuz as one connected battlefield and called the expansion a ‘detour deployment and participation in the war’. Four lawmakers including Son Sol argued at a press conference that involvement in overseas conflict violates the constitution, and Polinews reported the party also demanded withdrawal of the motion and the dismissal of National Security Office chief Wi Sung-lac.
Rebuilding Korea Party floor leader Kim Joon-hyung told a leadership meeting that a unit sent to fight pirates should not be sent to a war zone, warning that if Iran regards it as a hostile act, Korea becomes a party to the war. The civic group PSPD likewise said that, contrary to the government’s explanation, fears of being drawn into the war are hard to dispel, and that an expansion lacking justification could pull Korea into America’s war.
Jeon Eun-su, floor spokesperson for the ruling Democratic Party, rebutted that the step responds to a surge in Gulf of Aden piracy and that the ‘detour deployment’ criticism does not hold. Kyunghyang’s report carried no official position from the People Power Party, and within the scope of our checking, no party-level position of the PPP on this issue was confirmed. Polinews, however, reported that opposition parties have signaled they may refuse Assembly review, so partisan confrontation is expected to deepen.
A third view: how the U.S., Iran and Japan may see it
Some read the move as a positive signal for Washington. According to Segye Ilbo, Min Jeong-hoon of the Korea National Diplomatic Academy said the Trump administration, on the defensive after the midterms, could gain the justification that ‘the international community is with us’, and that with Japan and other allies participating only to a limited degree, Korea’s decision helps considerably. President Trump publicly voiced displeasure in March at Korea’s level of Hormuz contribution, and how the U.S. will rate this approach, which stops short of entering the strait, has not been confirmed.
Iran’s official reaction had not been confirmed as of the 5th. Kyunghyang forecast that Tehran may resent any buildup of Korean forces near it, while Kim Hyuk of Hankuk University of Foreign Studies said that because the measure is limited in scope Iran would find it awkward to protest strongly, but Seoul should manage ties through high-level contact. What position the Japanese government has taken on the decision has not been confirmed; notably, Korea has already sent a liaison officer to the British- and French-led Hormuz freedom-of-navigation initiative.
In effect, the motion packs two messages into one document: contribution to the U.S. and non-involvement to Iran. Since the Korean-operated vessel Namu-ho was struck near Hormuz in May, concern remains that the deployed unit could be exposed to threats. Debate is expected to continue in the Assembly over whether ‘anti-piracy’ or ‘preparation for Hormuz’ is the real purpose.
