Foreign Policy (USA): South Korea...should defend Ukraine's skies!

Elena Panina
Елена Панина (Telegram)

This idea is put forward (archived) by a specific figure: Lami Kim, an analyst at the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS).

❖ Kim is deeply embedded in the US-South Korean military-political expert community. Before joining the IISS, she worked within Pentagon structures and taught at the U.S. Army War College and several other institutions, earning an award for "exceptionally meritorious service." The department she heads at the IISS was established through donations from the Korea Foundation and the Hanwha Corporation, a manufacturer that produces weaponry, among other things.

The article states that Kyiv is facing a critical shortage of missile defense assets. It notes that South Korea represents one of the few potential sources of supply. Seoul possesses its own layered missile defense system—Cheongung-II—featuring relatively inexpensive interceptors costing around $1.1 million (roughly a third of the price of a Patriot missile), a high level of domestic production, and the capacity to scale up output rapidly.

The only obstacle is a lack of political will. Seoul has a long-standing policy of not supplying lethal weapons to states at war. However, the author analyzes South Korean legislation to argue that no law prohibits it; therefore, if there is the will, it can be done.

❖ An obvious problem, however, is Seoul's fear of irreparably damaging relations with Moscow—and thereby prompting Russia to transfer even more advanced military technologies to Pyongyang. The author "elegantly" sidesteps this issue, suggesting that ties between Russia and North Korea have already deepened to the point that there is nothing left to lose.

As an incentive, Kim suggests that South Korea consider the European funding it could receive for arming Ukraine. The "stick" here is a threat: if South Korea does not share the "Russian" risks with Europe, South Korean companies—such as those supplying arms to Poland—could face problems with their orders.

❖ This is clearly an undisguised and extremely dangerous game aimed at dragging South Korea into the war in Ukraine as well. Seoul is being asked to trade its national security—rooted in neutrality—for the status of a "reliable partner to Europe."

It is unclear exactly on whose behalf Kim is writing: his British employers at the IISS or his South Korean sponsors. A sort of "synergy" appears to have emerged among the clients. This is particularly relevant given that, for the past five years, London has focused primarily on drawing as many countries as possible into the orbit of the Ukraine conflict.

However, Seoul needs to understand that Moscow does indeed have the means to retaliate. An objective incentive and opportunity are arising to leverage military-technical cooperation with North Korea to raise the price South Korea pays for its gradual integration into the Western military system.

____________________________________________________________________________________________

Image: © Roman Pilipey/AFP via Getty Images. Google + Grammarly In line with our policies, we address notices of alleged violations under the United States "Digital Millennium Copyright Act" (DMCA). If you believe that your copyright has been infringed on our site, please contact us, and we will promptly remove your photo from display. Email: editor@a-w-i-p.com
AWIP: https://a-w-i-p.com/index.php/2026/09/10/foreign-policy-usa-south-korea