In the long arc of alliance politics and peninsular tension, President Trump has once again reached for a personal diplomatic gesture — scaling back joint US-South Korea military exercises — framing it as both a cost-saving measure and a signal of goodwill toward North Korea's Kim Jong Un. The announcement, made less than a day before the drills were set to begin, carries echoes of his 2018 suspension during denuclearization talks, raising enduring questions about whether personal relationships between leaders can substitute for the institutional architecture that keeps fragile peace intact. S
Trump to cut US-South Korea military drills, citing Kim Jong Un relationship
The cost savings are marginal while diplomatic benefits are doubtful
Why would Trump frame this as being about his relationship with Kim Jong Un rather than, say, cost or strategy?
Because it's true to how he sees the world. He believes personal relationships with leaders matter more than institutional arrangements. He's signaling to Kim that he's willing to move away from the military posture that North Korea has always seen as threatening.
But doesn't that weaken South Korea's security?
That's what the experts are saying, yes. The drills aren't just theater—they're how the two militaries stay coordinated and ready. Scaling them back means slower response times, less practiced coordination, and a weaker deterrent if something actually happens.
So why do it at all?
Trump sees it as a gesture of goodwill toward Kim, a way to restart the kind of diplomacy he had going in his first term. He also genuinely believes the exercises are expensive and that the US shouldn't be paying for South Korea's defense.
Is there any chance this actually works—that it brings Kim back to the negotiating table?
Experts are skeptical. North Korea has been accelerating its nuclear and missile programs since the 2019 talks collapsed. They've just tested missiles twice in a week. The diplomatic benefits are doubtful, and the military costs are real.
What about South Korea's refusal to help with Iran?
That seems to be a separate frustration that Trump is bundling into this decision. He's unhappy with multiple allies for not supporting his Middle East priorities, and he's using the military drills as leverage to express that displeasure.
Where does this leave the alliance?
In a precarious place. South Korea needs the US security guarantee, but Trump is signaling that the guarantee comes with conditions—and those conditions are shifting based on his personal relationships and his broader foreign policy priorities.
Il Polso
- Trump posted the reduction announcement less than 24 hours before the drills were to begin, leaving no time to cancel and injecting sudden uncertainty into a carefully coordinated military event.
- He tied the decision to two grievances at once — the cost of exercises he says the US largely funds, and South Korea's refusal to support American operations aimed at Iran's denuclearization.
- Just hours before the announcement, Trump shared a nostalgic photo with Kim Jong Un, signaling that his personal bond with the North Korean leader continues to shape his strategic instincts more than alliance doctrine.
- North Korea had conducted two ballistic missile tests in as many weeks — in violation of UN restrictions — yet the reduction in exercises risks softening the very deterrent designed to check such provocations.
- Experts warn the cost savings are marginal while the risks are real: slower South Korean defense readiness, weakened alliance coordination, and a diplomatic signal that may embolden rather than reassure.
- Seoul says the 11-day Ulchi Freedom Shield drills will proceed as planned, quietly holding the line on an alliance that Trump's own words have placed under strain.
In the long arc of alliance politics and peninsular tension, President Trump has once again reached for a personal diplomatic gesture — scaling back joint US-South Korea military exercises — framing it as both a cost-saving measure and a signal of goodwill toward North Korea's Kim Jong Un. The announcement, made less than a day before the drills were set to begin, carries echoes of his 2018 suspension during denuclearization talks, raising enduring questions about whether personal relationships between leaders can substitute for the institutional architecture that keeps fragile peace intact. South Korea, caught between its hope for renewed engagement with the North and its need for credible deterrence, says the exercises will proceed regardless — a quiet assertion that alliances, too, have their own logic.
President Trump announced Sunday that the United States would substantially reduce its joint military exercises with South Korea, citing the cost to American taxpayers and what he called an 'inappropriate and hostile' signal the drills send — all while praising his personal friendship with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. The announcement landed less than 24 hours before the exercises were scheduled to begin, too late to cancel them outright.
Trump also linked the decision to a secondary frustration: South Korea had declined his request to join US efforts to pressure Iran on denuclearization. He appeared to treat the two issues as connected, suggesting Seoul's reluctance to support American Middle East policy had consequences for the security relationship on the peninsula. Similar complaints have been leveled at Japan, France, and the UK.
South Korea's government responded by saying the drills — known as Ulchi Freedom Shield, an 11-day exercise involving roughly 18,000 South Korean troops — would proceed as scheduled. Military leaders from both countries had held a joint press conference just the week before, noting the exercises were designed to account for new threats, including North Korean soldiers deployed in support of Russia's war in Ukraine. Around 28,500 American troops remain stationed in South Korea.
The move drew immediate concern from security analysts. Leif-Eric Easley of Ewha University in Seoul argued that the joint drills are essential for readiness and coordination, and that reducing them could slow South Korea's ability to shoulder more of its own defense while weakening regional deterrence. The financial savings, he noted, are modest compared to the strategic costs.
The echoes of Trump's first term were hard to miss. In 2018, he suspended the exercises entirely during denuclearization talks with Kim, calling them provocative and expensive. This time, the announcement came just days after North Korea's second ballistic missile test in two weeks — violations of UN restrictions that Pyongyang paired with condemnations of the drills as rehearsals for war.
For Seoul, the moment is layered with contradiction. South Korea had invested heavily in managing Trump's expectations — committing $350 billion in US investment earlier this year — and had quietly hoped his renewed interest in Kim might open a diplomatic path. South Korea's own president has proposed talks with the North about formally ending the war, which has remained technically active since the 1953 armistice. Whether Trump's gesture creates room for that diplomacy, or simply erodes the deterrent that has kept the peninsula stable for seven decades, remains the central and unanswered question.
President Trump announced on Sunday that the United States would substantially reduce its joint military exercises with South Korea, framing the decision around his relationship with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. The timing was tight—Trump posted the announcement less than 24 hours before the annual drills were scheduled to begin on Monday, making it too late to cancel entirely. He characterized the exercises as costly, with much of the expense borne by the United States, and said they sent a signal that was "totally inappropriate and hostile."
The announcement also carried a secondary grievance. Trump noted that he had recently asked South Korea's president whether the country would join the United States in efforts to denuclearize Iran, and Seoul had declined. He seemed to link the two issues, suggesting that South Korea's unwillingness to support American operations in the Middle East factored into his thinking about the military drills on the peninsula.
The timing of the move was striking. Just hours before posting about reducing the exercises, Trump had shared an old photograph of himself and Kim Jong Un from 2019, describing them as great friends despite what he called the "unfriendly look" in the image. The posts painted a picture of a president prioritizing his personal relationship with the North Korean leader over the established military posture that has anchored the US-South Korea alliance for decades.
South Korea's government responded by saying the drills would proceed as scheduled. The exercises, called Ulchi Freedom Shield, were planned as an 11-day event involving about 18,000 South Korean soldiers, similar in scale to previous years. Military leaders from both countries had held a joint press conference the week before to announce the drills, noting that they accounted for emerging threats, including North Korean troops that had been deployed to support Russia's war in Ukraine. Roughly 28,500 American military personnel are stationed in South Korea.
Experts warned that scaling back the exercises carried real risks. Leif-Eric Easley, a professor at Ewha University in Seoul, argued that the joint drills were essential for military readiness and alliance coordination. Reducing them could slow South Korea's ability to take on greater responsibility for its own defense and weaken deterrence against potential conflicts in the region. The cost savings, he suggested, were marginal compared to the diplomatic uncertainty and military vulnerability that might result.
The move echoed Trump's first term. In 2018, he had suspended the exercises entirely during denuclearization negotiations with Kim, calling them provocative and expensive. The drills were scaled back again in 2020 during the Covid-19 pandemic. This time, the announcement came just days after North Korea conducted its second ballistic missile test in as many weeks—tests that violated United Nations restrictions. Pyongyang's foreign ministry had already condemned the joint drills as a rehearsal for aggressive war.
For Seoul, the situation presented a complicated picture. On one hand, South Korea had been hoping Trump would engage directly with North Korea, and his recent overtures suggested he might be willing to return to the negotiating table. But Trump's criticism of South Korea's refusal to support American operations in Iran signaled displeasure with the alliance itself. He had expressed similar frustrations with Japan, France, and the UK over their reluctance to become involved in Middle Eastern conflicts. Trump has also repeatedly complained that the United States provides security to South Korea without receiving adequate compensation, and he has questioned the cost of maintaining American troops on the peninsula.
South Korea had tried to manage these tensions. Earlier in the year, Seoul committed $350 billion to investment in the United States. Last year, South Korea's president had described Trump as a peacemaker. But the latest announcement suggested that such gestures might not be enough to shift Trump's calculus. Meanwhile, South Korea's own president had proposed talks with North Korea about officially ending the war between the two nations—a conflict that has technically remained active since the 1953 armistice. The question now was whether Trump's reduction of the military exercises would create space for such diplomacy or simply weaken the deterrent that has kept the peninsula stable for seven decades.
Citazioni salienti
These exercises are not only costly, with much of these costs paid for by the United States, but send a signal that is totally inappropriate and hostile.— President Trump, posted on Truth Social
Scaling back joint drills can damage alliance coordination, slow South Korea taking on greater responsibility for its own defense, and weaken deterrence against possible conflicts in Asia.— Leif-Eric Easley, professor at Ewha University in Seoul