In a move that echoes the transactional diplomacy of his first term, President Trump has ordered the Pentagon to scale back joint military exercises with South Korea, framing a decades-old alliance as a courtesy to be extended or withdrawn based on personal rapport with a dictator. The decision, announced via social media on the eve of the Ulchi Freedom Shield drills, suspends training involving 18,000 troops at the very moment North Korea is conducting ballistic missile tests those exercises are designed to counter. What unfolds here is an older and recurring tension in American foreign polic
Trump's decision to scale back South Korea military drills draws bipartisan criticism
America's commitments are negotiable when a dictator is flattered
Mark
Why would Trump frame North Korea as unthreatening when his own administration's threat assessment says the opposite?
Mimi
Because the framing serves his narrative about having a special relationship with Kim. The facts don't matter as much as the story he's telling himself—and the world—about his diplomatic prowess.
Mark
But doesn't suspending these exercises actually weaken America's ability to defend South Korea?
Mimi
Exactly. The drills aren't theater. They're how US and South Korean forces practice coordinating in a crisis. Without them, both militaries lose muscle memory. That's what Kelly was getting at.
Mark
Why did Trump tie this to South Korea refusing to join the Iran campaign?
Mimi
He's punishing an ally for not doing what he wanted. And he admitted the two things are unrelated. It's using military security as a tool for personal grievance.
Mark
Could North Korean troops really end up in Ukraine?
Mimi
That's Tillis's point—if North Korea isn't focused on deterrence exercises with the US, those troops become available for other commitments. Russia has been recruiting foreign fighters. It's a real concern.
Mark
Has Trump done this before?
Mimi
Yes. After his Singapore summit with Kim in 2018, he suspended the exercises entirely, calling them provocative. They came back when diplomacy failed. This looks like the same pattern repeating.
Mark
What's the actual risk here?
Mimi
You're weakening a 73-year alliance at a moment when North Korea is testing missiles and technically still at war with the South. You're signaling to every US ally that commitments are negotiable if the president feels slighted.
Le Pouls
- Trump suspended the Ulchi Freedom Shield exercises — involving 18,000 troops and designed to rehearse responses to missile strikes, drone attacks, and cyber incursions — just days after North Korea conducted the very ballistic missile tests those drills exist to prepare for.
- The president justified the move by citing his 'very good relationship' with Kim Jong-un, describing North Korea as 'unthreatening and respectful' even as his own administration's threat assessments warned of an increasingly dangerous regime with missiles capable of reaching US soil.
- Democratic lawmakers condemned the decision as reckless and incoherent, warning that treating alliance commitments as bargaining chips — and punishing Seoul for refusing to join a Middle East campaign it never agreed to — tells every US ally and adversary that American promises are for sale.
- Republican Senator Thom Tillis raised a chilling downstream consequence: scaling back joint exercises could free thousands of North Korean troops currently supporting Russia's war in Ukraine, widening the strategic damage far beyond the Korean peninsula.
- The move revives a pattern from Trump's first term, when he suspended exercises after the 2018 Singapore summit with Kim, only for them to be quietly restored once nuclear diplomacy collapsed — raising the question of whether this, too, is theater or something more permanent.
In a move that echoes the transactional diplomacy of his first term, President Trump has ordered the Pentagon to scale back joint military exercises with South Korea, framing a decades-old alliance as a courtesy to be extended or withdrawn based on personal rapport with a dictator. The decision, announced via social media on the eve of the Ulchi Freedom Shield drills, suspends training involving 18,000 troops at the very moment North Korea is conducting ballistic missile tests those exercises are designed to counter. What unfolds here is an older and recurring tension in American foreign policy: whether alliances are sacred commitments or negotiable instruments, and what the answer to that question signals to both friends and adversaries across the world.
President Trump announced via social media that he was ordering the Pentagon to scale back Ulchi Freedom Shield, an 11-day joint military exercise with South Korea scheduled to begin August 17th. The drills, involving roughly 18,000 troops, rehearse responses to missile strikes, drone incursions, and cyber-attacks — among the most visible expressions of a 73-year alliance. Trump's stated reason: the exercises sent signals that were 'totally inappropriate and hostile' to North Korea, a country he described as 'unthreatening and respectful,' despite its recent ballistic missile tests and expanding nuclear arsenal.
The timing was difficult to ignore. North Korea had conducted those very missile tests just days earlier — precisely the kind of provocation the exercises are designed to prepare for. Trump framed the suspension as a gesture toward Kim Jong-un, citing his 'very good relationship' with the North Korean leader. In the Oval Office, he claimed Kim had responded positively to his overtures. 'I understand him,' Trump said. 'He understands me.'
Congress responded sharply. Senator Jack Reed called it 'another inane, haphazard decision,' arguing Trump was handing Kim a propaganda victory while punishing South Korea for declining to join a US military campaign in the Middle East that Seoul had never agreed to fight. Senator Mark Kelly was more pointed about the operational stakes: 'North and South Korea are still technically at war. Hollowing out these joint exercises is shortsighted and a mistake.' Senator Andy Kim urged the administration to treat a critical ally with the seriousness it deserved rather than venting frustration on social media.
Trump also tangled the decision with a separate grievance — South Korea's refusal to join the US campaign against Iran — even while acknowledging the two issues were largely unrelated. The alliance he was now straining dates to the 1953 Mutual Defense Treaty; roughly 28,500 American troops remain stationed in South Korea today. His own administration's 2026 threat assessment had described an 'increasingly confident' North Korean regime, and his former intelligence director had testified that North Korean ICBMs could already reach US soil.
The broader consequences alarmed lawmakers across party lines. Republican Senator Thom Tillis warned that reducing joint exercises could free thousands of North Korean troops to support Russian operations in Ukraine — meaning the decision risked destabilizing not one theater of conflict but two. This was not Trump's first use of the drills as a bargaining chip; he suspended them after the 2018 Singapore summit before they were quietly restored when nuclear diplomacy collapsed. Whether this suspension follows the same arc, or represents something more lasting, remains the open and unsettling question.
President Trump announced via social media that he was ordering the Pentagon to scale back Ulchi Freedom Shield, an 11-day military exercise scheduled to begin on August 17th involving roughly 18,000 South Korean troops. The drills, which rehearse responses to missile strikes, drone incursions, and cyber-attacks, represent one of the most visible demonstrations of the US-South Korea military partnership. Trump's justification was direct: the exercises, he wrote, sent signals that were "totally inappropriate and hostile" to North Korea, a country he described as "unthreatening and respectful"—this despite North Korea's recent ballistic missile tests and its expanding nuclear arsenal.
The timing was striking. Trump made the announcement just days after North Korea had conducted those very missile tests, the kind of provocation the joint exercises are specifically designed to prepare for. He framed the decision as a courtesy to Kim Jong-un, the North Korean dictator, citing his "very good relationship" with him. In the Oval Office on Monday, Trump claimed Kim had responded positively to his overtures, though he offered no details. "I understand him," the president said. "He understands me."
Democrats in Congress responded swiftly and sharply. Jack Reed, the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, called it "another inane, haphazard decision by President Trump and his chaotic administration." Reed argued that Trump was handing Kim a propaganda victory while punishing South Korea for declining to join a military campaign in the Middle East that Seoul never agreed to fight. "When President Trump cuts military exercises to flatter a dictator or punishes South Korea for declining to join a war he started, all of our allies—and adversaries—think that America's commitments are negotiable," Reed said. Mark Kelly of Arizona, also on the armed services committee, emphasized that these drills were not merely symbolic. "North and South Korea are still technically at war," Kelly noted. "Our ability to help defend our ally against the North Koreans is because our forces are well trained and able to coordinate with the South Koreans. Hollowing out these joint exercises is shortsighted and a mistake."
The alliance Trump was now unwinding traces back to 1953, when the Mutual Defense Treaty was signed in the aftermath of the Korean War armistice. Roughly 28,500 American troops remain stationed in South Korea, backed by a combined US-South Korean command structure and Washington's nuclear umbrella. Yet Trump's own administration's 2026 Annual Threat Assessment described an "increasingly confident North Korean regime" with weapons of mass destruction and cyber capabilities that threaten the US, South Korea, and Japan. His former director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, had testified in March that North Korea's intercontinental ballistic missiles could already reach US soil.
Trump also linked the decision to a separate grievance: South Korea's refusal to join the US military campaign against Iran. He acknowledged the two issues had little to do with one another, even as he used one to justify punishing Seoul over both. "While somewhat unrelated (?), I recently asked the President of South Korea if they would like to join us in the Denuclearization of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and they said, 'No thanks'!" Trump wrote. Andy Kim, the New Jersey senator on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, saw in this a troubling attitude toward a critical partner. "Our alliance with the Republic of Korea is essential for US security and prosperity," Kim said. "We should treat them that way instead of venting frustration on social media."
This was not Trump's first time using the drills as a bargaining chip. After his 2018 summit with Kim in Singapore, he had suspended major exercises outright, calling them costly and provocative, before they were quietly restored once nuclear diplomacy with Pyongyang collapsed. The current move raised broader strategic concerns. Republican Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina warned that reducing joint exercises with South Korea would "free up thousands of North Korea's troops to support Putin's systematic kidnapping, torture, rape and murder of innocent Ukrainian citizens." The decision, in other words, risked not only destabilizing the Korean peninsula but also strengthening Russia's hand in its war against Ukraine—a consequence that cut across party lines in its troubling implications.
Citations marquantes
When President Trump cuts military exercises to flatter a dictator or punishes South Korea for declining to join a war he started, all of our allies and adversaries think that America's commitments are negotiable.— Jack Reed, top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee
North and South Korea are still technically at war. Hollowing out these joint exercises is shortsighted and a mistake.— Mark Kelly, Senator from Arizona
Envie de l'histoire complète ?
Lire l'original sur The Guardian ↗
War & Conflict