For 75 years, the US has wielded wartime operational control (OPCON) of South Korean forces.

The set-up has its origins in the Korean War which erupted in 1950 and largely ended with the truce of 1953.

In simple terms, Seoul can command its troops only as long as there is no open conflict, and despite South Korean leadership taking on more and more responsibility in the intervening decades, a major breakout of hostilities would still see Washington take command.

S. Korean bombs hit near N. Korea border in military drill

At one point, the handover of wartime command had been planned for 2015. Shortly before this deadline, however, the US and South Korea agreed to only proceed with it after certain conditions are met in a bid to ensure Seoul is truly ready to face the escalating threat from Pyongyang.

The recent visit by US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth once again highlighted the issue of transferring this responsibility to Seoul.

US ready to transfer full command

In South Korea, having full control of its own troops is seen as a matter of national sovereignty and pride. The current US administration, led by President Donald Trump, is also in favor of OPCON transfer — with Washington keen to see its allies reduce their reliance on the US and take on a larger role in their own defense.

South Korea is still technically in war with North Korea, despite the 1953 truceImage: dpa/picture alliance

The current plans by South Korean President Lee Jae Myung foresee the transfer happening before his term ends in 2030 — and yet, there is a growing number of voices asking: Is Seoul really ready to take on this responsibility?

Is OPCON being rushed?

Analysts told DW that the eventual transfer of OPCON is inevitable. At the same time, there are some who warn that the move is being rushed and North Korea might perceive its southern rival as weakened by the handover process.

“The US is in an ‘if you want it, you can have it’ mood,” said Chun In-bum, a retired lieutenant general in the South Korean military and now a senior fellow with the National Institute for Deterrence Studies, a US-based think tank. “And that makes me worried because transfer could happen without the right conditions in place.”

He warns that “right now, there are a lot of people who are concerned that the date is the priority, not the preparedness of the military.”

“We must also remember that North Korea is still a very viable threat to us all,” said Chun.

US sees ‘meaningful progress’ in transfer process

After a meeting between the head of South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff Jin Yong-sung and his US counterpart John Daniel Caine last week, the two generals hailed “meaningful progress in many areas” regarding the transfer of wartime command.

US political leaders also expressed their support, with Defense Secretary Hegseth describing Seoul’s position as “great” and emphasizing Washington’s position that the alliance “requires only US leadership in contingencies.”

Yet, there are still unanswered questions over South Korea’s readiness measured against previously set parameters. These included South Korea’s ability to lead the combined US and South Korean forces, its ability to respond to North Korea’s nuclear and missile threats, and overall stability and security of Northeast Asia.

Seoul lacks command experience in crisis

Mason Richey, a professor of politics and international relations at Hankuk University of Foreign Studies in Seoul, is skeptical that those conditions can be met before the end of Lee’s term as president.

“The South Korean military still lacks some major capabilities, notably command-and-control and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities,” he said. “Those are critical for taking the lead of combined forces strategically, but especially tactically and operationally on missions.”

Low birth rates shrink South Korea’s military

The issue also goes deeper than military capabilities, Richey said, pointing out that South Korean military leaders have not exercised operational independence since the Korean War and while Seoul’s military is strong, it lacks the critical experience of taking control in a time of crisis.

Lee sticking to his OPCON guns

Nevertheless, the left-leaning government of President Lee seems set on sticking to his deadline.

The desire for wartime OPCON has always been strongest among “progressive” administrations in Seoul, said Richey, with the administrations of Kim Dae-jung and Roh Moo-hyun (in power between 1998 and 2008) vocally supporting it as a symbol of “national sovereignty” and normalcy.

The US military is regularly conducting joint drills with South Korean forcesImage: Defense Ministry/ZUMAPRESS/picture

The current president, Lee Jae Myung, has also portrayed it as a way to “alleviate the US’ defense burden in the Indo-Pacific region.”

Given Washington’s backing for the plan, as well as Lee’s large parliamentary majority and popular support, the South Korean leader seems poised to succeed in his efforts to transfer wartime OPCON to Seoul before leaving office.

“I think Lee is also hedging against this US administration, against abandonment,” Richey said. “The Trump administration is mercurial and if South Korea is able to gain extra sovereignty over its armed forces, that would seem to be a prudent step in the face of potential unreliability.”

Edited by: Darko Janjevic