Defense minister nominee and presidential office clash over wartime command transfer

Home > Opinion > Editorials

Defense minister nominee and presidential office clash over wartime command transfer

Published: 16 Jul. 2025, 00:00

Audio report: written by reporters, read by AI

Defense Minister nominee Ahn Gyu-baek speaks to lawmakers during a confirmation hearing at the National Assembly in Yeouido, western Seoul on July 15. [JUN MIN-KYU]

At the confirmation hearing for Ahn Gyu-baek, nominated as Korea’s first civilian defense minister since the 1961 military coup, discrepancies emerged between the nominee and the presidential office over the timeline for the transfer of wartime operational control (Opcon) from the United States to Korea.

When asked by Rep. Yoon Sang-hyun of the People Power Party about the timing of the Opcon transfer, Ahn said he understood that “the goal is to achieve the transition during the Lee Jae Myung administration.” He added that the transfer process, based on a 2006 agreement between Seoul and Washington, had progressed through regular evaluations, with “significant results achieved through the Korean military’s efforts.”

Shortly after his remarks were made public, the presidential office distanced itself from the nominee’s position. Presidential spokesperson Kang Yu-jung stated, “While the government has mentioned Opcon transfer as part of its policy agenda, no specific deadline, such as within five years, has been considered.” The disavowal created an awkward scene in which the defense minister nominee’s statement was publicly contradicted by the presidential office.

Tensions over Opcon have grown since National Security Director Wi Sung-lac’s recent trip to Washington. While some ruling party members have called for a renewed push toward the Opcon transfer, others within the presidential office have urged caution. Wi attempted to clarify the government’s position last week, saying that “no new Opcon negotiations have been initiated under the Lee administration.” Ahn’s statement now threatens to reopen divisions reminiscent of past disagreements during the Roh Moo-hyun and Moon Jae-in administrations.

The issue of OPCON transfer has become increasingly sensitive amid rising uncertainty over the future role of U.S. Forces Korea under President Donald Trump’s second term. It is also deeply tied to evolving military strategy in the face of growing coordination among North Korea, China and Russia. A shift in operational control could have significant implications for the Korea-U.S. alliance and the regional balance of power.

Reflecting this caution, the U.S. Senate recently passed the 2026 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which includes a provision requiring congressional approval for any significant reduction in U.S. troop presence in Korea or Opcon transfer. Against this backdrop, mixed signals between Korea’s government and ruling party risk heightening public concern and weakening Korea’s negotiating position in concurrent tariff and security talks with the United States.

President Lee Jae Myung, right, speaks with National Security Director Wi Sung-lac during a full session of the National Security Council at the presidential office in central Seoul on July 10. [NEWS1]

Concerns over Ahn’s nomination have also lingered. During the hearing, opposition lawmakers questioned why Ahn served 22 months as a conscripted reservist from 1983 — eight months longer than the standard term at the time. Ahn declined to provide documentation, citing privacy concerns. As a nominee tasked with overseeing national security, scrutiny over his military service record has become an unavoidable issue.

To maintain credibility, the administration and ruling party must present a unified, well-coordinated stance on the Opcon transition moving forward.

Translated from the JoongAng Ilbo using generative AI and edited by Korea JoongAng Daily staff.