Pentagon plans reduced US role in deterring North Korea

Published: 24 January 2026. The English Chronicle Desk. The English Chronicle Online

The United States is preparing for a significant recalibration of its security role on the Korean Peninsula, according to a new Pentagon policy document that suggests South Korea should take primary responsibility for deterring North Korea, with the US playing a more limited supporting role. The shift, outlined in the National Defense Strategy released on Friday, is already stirring debate in Seoul and among regional security analysts, who see it as a potentially consequential moment for the long-standing US–South Korea alliance.

For decades, the US military presence in South Korea has been the backbone of deterrence against North Korea’s conventional and nuclear threats. Around 28,500 US troops are stationed in the country, integrated with South Korean forces under a combined command structure designed to respond rapidly to any aggression from the North. The new strategy document, however, frames the future differently, stating that South Korea is now capable of assuming the lead role in deterring Pyongyang.

“South Korea is capable of taking primary responsibility for deterring North Korea with critical but more limited US support,” the document says. It adds that this “shift in the balance of responsibility” aligns with America’s broader interest in updating its force posture on the Korean Peninsula, reflecting changes in both regional dynamics and South Korea’s own military capabilities.

The timing of the announcement is sensitive. North Korea has continued to expand and refine its missile and nuclear programmes, conducting frequent weapons tests and issuing increasingly aggressive rhetoric toward both Seoul and Washington. At the same time, South Korea has been steadily increasing its defence spending, raising its budget by 7.5% this year as part of a long-term effort to modernise its armed forces and reduce reliance on external protection.

Washington’s new stance appears rooted in the Pentagon’s growing emphasis on defending the US homeland and preparing for competition with major powers, particularly China. In recent years, US defence officials have argued that American forces overseas must be more flexible and capable of responding to a wider range of contingencies, from a crisis in Taiwan to challenges posed by China’s expanding military reach across the Indo-Pacific.

Within this framework, US troops stationed in South Korea are increasingly viewed not only as a deterrent to North Korea but also as assets that could be redeployed or used more flexibly beyond the peninsula. The National Defense Strategy does not spell out specific troop reductions or redeployments, but its language suggests a gradual evolution rather than an abrupt withdrawal.

South Korea’s response has been cautious but measured. In a statement issued on Saturday, the country’s defence ministry stressed that US Forces in Korea remain central to the alliance and will continue to deter North Korean aggression. Officials emphasised that the alliance is adapting to new realities through what Washington calls “alliance modernisation,” not weakening.

President Lee Jae Myung, who took office with a pledge to strengthen South Korea’s strategic autonomy, has previously expressed support for a more self-reliant defence posture. In September, he criticised what he described as a “submissive mindset that self-reliant defence is impossible without foreign troops,” signalling a desire for Seoul to play a more assertive role in its own security. Even so, South Korean leaders remain acutely aware of the symbolic and practical importance of the US military presence as a deterrent to Pyongyang.

South Korea today fields a formidable military of its own, with around 450,000 active-duty troops and advanced capabilities in air defence, naval power and missile technology. Over the past two decades, it has invested heavily in indigenous defence industries, producing everything from fighter jets to ballistic missile defence systems. The country is also moving toward assuming wartime operational control of combined forces, a transition long discussed but repeatedly delayed due to regional tensions.

Despite these advances, many in Seoul worry that any perception of reduced US commitment could embolden North Korea. Analysts note that deterrence is as much about perception as it is about raw capability. “Even a subtle shift in language from Washington can have outsized psychological effects in Pyongyang,” said one South Korean security expert. “North Korea closely watches these signals and may interpret them as an opportunity to test the alliance.”

The Pentagon document also marks a notable shift in how Washington frames its objectives regarding North Korea’s nuclear programme. For the second major strategy paper in a row, it omits explicit reference to the “complete and verifiable denuclearisation” of the Korean Peninsula, language that featured prominently in earlier US policy statements, including the Biden administration’s 2022 strategy.

This omission has fuelled speculation that Washington may be quietly adjusting its expectations, moving from the long-stated goal of denuclearisation toward a strategy of managing and containing North Korea’s nuclear arsenal. Such an approach would acknowledge the reality that Pyongyang is unlikely to relinquish its weapons voluntarily, while focusing instead on deterrence, arms control and crisis management.

The broader National Defense Strategy underscores that the Pentagon’s top priority is defending the US homeland. In the Indo-Pacific, the document says, the primary focus is ensuring that China cannot dominate the region or threaten US allies. It frames the challenge posed by Beijing not as an existential struggle but as a competition that can be managed through a “decent peace” on terms favourable to Americans and acceptable to China.

Although Taiwan is not mentioned by name in the roughly 25-page document, the implications are clear. China claims the democratically governed island as its own territory and has not ruled out the use of force to take control of it. Taiwan rejects Beijing’s claims, insisting that only its people can decide their future. The Pentagon’s emphasis on flexibility and alliance burden-sharing is widely seen as part of preparations for potential contingencies related to Taiwan.

For Seoul, the challenge will be balancing greater defence autonomy with the reassurance that the US security guarantee remains firm. South Korea has historically resisted any significant change in the role of US troops on its soil, fearing that a diminished American presence could destabilise the delicate balance with the North. At the same time, South Korean leaders recognise that their country’s growing economic and military strength brings with it greater responsibility.

Public opinion in South Korea is also divided. Some see the Pentagon’s new stance as a natural evolution of an alliance between two advanced democracies, reflecting South Korea’s maturity as a military power. Others worry that it could be the first step toward a gradual US disengagement from the peninsula.

In Washington, officials insist that the alliance remains “ironclad.” The Pentagon document does not call for troop withdrawals or a reduction in commitments, but rather a rebalancing of roles. Supporters argue that empowering allies like South Korea ultimately strengthens deterrence by making it more resilient and less dependent on a single actor.

As North Korea continues to test missiles and refine its nuclear capabilities, the credibility of deterrence will remain under scrutiny. Whether South Korea can successfully take on a primary role while maintaining close coordination with the US will be a defining question for regional security in the years ahead.

For now, the Pentagon’s message is clear: the US remains committed to its allies, but it expects them to shoulder more responsibility in an increasingly complex and contested global security environment. How that message is received in Seoul—and how it is interpreted in Pyongyang—may shape the future of the Korean Peninsula.