SEOUL, South Korea — A conflicted South Korea is weighing whether to deploy military forces to the Gulf to aid the U.S. in the on-again, off-again war against Iran.
The issue is one that is causing headaches in capitals that are traditional allies of the U.S., but which have declined to join the American campaign against Iran.
On Monday, Seoul announced that it was consulting with allies in the region about a possible deployment — despite warnings issued the same day by Tehran against any South Korean intervention.
Those developments followed the presidential Blue House announcing last week that no final decision had been reached on sending military forces to the Strait of Hormuz after multiple media reports suggested a deployment was being planned. The Blue House said a review was underway.
Neighboring Japan has been adamant that it will not deploy assets to the combat zone — a position that U.S. allies in NATO have also taken.
However, one expert believes Tokyo is acting evasively regarding its stated inability to commit.
South Korea and Japan, which both wield powerful militaries, are not the only American allies agonized by their decisions not to assist U.S. operations.
Britain has been placed in an uncomfortable position after U.S. President Trump indicated that he may throw his weight behind Argentinian President Xavier Milei, who renewed his country’s claim to the Falkland Islands last week.
London and Buenos Aires fought a short but intense land-sea-air war over the islands, which Argentina calls the Malvinas, in 1982.
South Korea’s choice
At a time when so many customary U.S. allies are refusing to join the war against Iran, a South Korean deployment could win diplomatic kudos with Washington. However, Seoul appears gun-shy.
“We are closely communicating with the international community, including relevant countries, to help restore peace and stability in the Middle East as soon as possible and to ensure the free passage of all vessels, including those of our country, through the Strait of Hormuz,” the ministry announced Monday.
Despite the immense military superiority at their disposal, U.S. war planners have been flummoxed by Iran’s continued ability to threaten the strategic waterway, a key channel for the Gulf’s global energy exports.
That ability has dealt a blow to U.S. prestige and infuriated Mr. Trump, who has angrily asked allies to commit forces to reopening the strait — unsuccessfully.
Iran warned South Korea against any moves to assist the United States in the region.
“Any other country’s military presence or participation in operations in the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz can only be regarded as direct support for the party responsible for the aggression and will have serious consequences,” Tehran’s Foreign Ministry stated in a Korean-language message monitored by South Korea’s Yonhap News Agency.
“Dangerous choices come with consequences,” the post warned. A South Korean tanker in the Gulf was damaged by an Iranian double-tap drone strike in May.
Seoul may nevertheless feel compelled to swallow risk and deploy some assets, given multiple frictions abrading current relations with Washington, its only major ally.
There is no apparent movement on either a promised South Korean $350 billion investment pledge in America, nor on an American agreement to supply its Asian ally with nuclear submarine technologies.
Meanwhile, Washington is angered at the legal woes facing Coupang in Korea. The e-commerce giant does most of its business in Korea but is listed on U.S. stock markets and has taken to lobbying in Washington.
For its part, Seoul is concerned that American troops based in Korea could be used elsewhere in the region, potentially infuriating neighboring trade partner China.
Given all this, a deployment to the region, where Washington and Tel Aviv unleashed a joint offensive against Iran in February, could feasibly earn Seoul some diplomatic points with the Trump administration.
Seoul maintains a base in the Gulf, with a special forces unit permanently based in the UAE.
However, since the Vietnam War, when Seoul deployed the largest foreign troop contingent to assist the U.S.-allied Saigon regime, South Korea has largely taken non-combat roles alongside American troops.
In Iraq, it deployed a stabilization force to the peaceful north of the country. In Afghanistan, it dispatched medical and engineering units.
Last week, South Korean media, citing leaks, reported that the country may deploy non-combat assets to the Gulf. Under consideration, per the reports, are maritime reconnaissance aircraft, underwater clearance teams and a logistics vessel.
“I could imagine that President Trump put some pressure on us over the Strait of Hormuz,” said Lee Soonchun, a former chancellor of the Korea National Diplomatic Academy. “That was one reason he cancelled the joint military exercises.”
Earlier this month, Mr. Trump used Truth Social to announce he was cutting back the scale of joint summer military drills with South Korea.
The unconventional communication method, and the short notice — mere hours before exercises were set to commence — caused consternation in Seoul.
One observer suggested South Koreans need to understand their ally is shifting stance.
“American expectations are different now, and we need to change: It’s ’No more free chicken,’” said Chun In-bum, a retired South Korean general. “We have to do our part and this thing in the Middle East is not just in U.S. interests: 70% of our oil comes through there, so it is in our interest to make it transitable.”
He added, ’Though it’s too bad [Mr. Trump] did not consult us when the war started.”
Tokyo wriggles out
Japan, even as it continues a decade-long build-up of its Self Defense Force — its destroyers are currently being fitted out with U.S.-made Tomahawk cruise missiles – has kept its head below the parapets.
In March, Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi told Mr. Trump that Japan was unable to assist in the Gulf. While she has been hawkish on a defense of Taiwan against China, she played a legal-political card: Article 9 of Japan’s pacifist constitution prevents Tokyo from using force to settle international disputes.
While the mechanism has been seen as a constraint on Tokyo’s freedom of action by some conservative Japanese politicians, it is also a handy tool for turning down U.S. requests to join military adventures.
Mr. Lee noted that Seoul lacks any such exit clause. “We don’t have that kind of thing,” he said.
However, Tokyo’s turn to Article 9 rests on dubious legal-legislative grounds.
The late Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe engineered a constitutional reinterpretation in 2014-2015 in the Diet. Under that legislative effort, “collective self-defense” — including the defense of allies under attack — was enabled.
At the time, the import of the Strait of Hormuz to Japan was specifically recognized as one potential area where future collective self-defense efforts might be required.
“A closure of the Strait of Hormuz was specified in Diet deliberations over this legislation as one of the prime cases where CSD would be invoked,” said Paul Midford, an American political scientist who teaches at Meiji Gakuin University. “Given that Takaichi is considered an ideological follower of Abe … it came as a real surprise that she invoked Article 9 to claim that Japan was unable to send its military to ensure the safety of ships in the Strait of Hormuz.”
Mr. Midford guessed that Mr. Trump’s aides were insufficiently briefed to push back.
“For some reason Trump accepted her argument, apparently because he or his aides were unaware of the reinterpretation of Japan’s constitution a decade earlier,” he said.
Britain gets boxed in
While Japan — which fields a highly capable mine-sweeping flotilla — has so far managed to avoid a commitment without consequences, another U.S. ally has had less luck.
London has permitted U.S. aerial assets to use British bases, and has deployed ground and air units to the Gulf to help defend against Iranian strikes. However, Mr. Trump has made clear his disappointment with Britain’s response.
Speaking last Thursday, Mr. Milei — a conservative who enjoys amicable relations with Mr. Trump — used a national broadcast to restate Argentina’s claims to the Falkland Islands.
Though geographically proximate to Argentina, Falkland residents, who are British overseas subjects, have overwhelmingly voted to remain under London’s administration.
Mr. Milei also suggested America may be moving away from its pro-London stance.
“The United States is considering this change in position because it knows that Argentina is a reliable partner, aligned with Western values, in a strategically important position that can be a valuable ally in the decades to come,” he said.
Asked about America’s position on the Falklands by British media outlet GB News prior to Mr. Milei’s statements, Mr. Trump did not respond directly, but said that Britain was “not there to help” in the Gulf.
Earlier, Mr. Trump, who is pressing London to increase its defense spending, said that Washington’s position on the Falklands could “come under review.”
Britons like to think they have a “special relationship” with the U.S. due to their shared language and legal systems, and their alliances on the battlefields of World War I, World War II, Korea and the Global War on Terror.
Mr. Milei is opposed to joint British-Israeli oil drilling moves set to start within months off the Falklands. Some British critics say he needs to position himself strongly on the Falklands, a highly emotive issue for Argentinians, ahead of a general election in 2027.
Contact the author
Please read our comment policy before commenting.