South

Community activist Karen Bass achieved a decisive victory in the Democratic primary for the 47th state Assembly district by assembling a coalition that extended beyond the traditional base of African American voters to include Latinos and organized labor.

That broader coalition, which allowed her to trounce two candidates who have long been part of the African American political establishment in the area, may signal a changing of the guard in South Los Angeles. The district extends from Westwood through Culver City to the Crenshaw area.

Bass captured 48% of the vote in the Democratic primary, while Nate Holden, who represented part of the area as a state legislator and city councilman for 20 years, received 21%. Attorney Rickey Ivie finished a distant third, despite support from many of the area’s most prominent black leaders, including current Assemblyman Herb Wesson (D-Culver City), County Supervisor Yvonne Brathwaite Burke, City Councilman Bernard C. Parks and state Sen. Kevin Murray (D-Culver City).

Bass and political experts said that her campaign had benefited from demographic shifts, grass-roots organizing and the power of organized labor.

The candidate said people had seemed to appreciate that, before running for office, she had toiled in the community for more than a decade as the executive director of the Community Coalition, a group that led the fight against rebuilding liquor stores in South Los Angeles after the 1992 riots, and championed education reform for schools in poor neighborhoods.

“I think the idea of new leadership resonated,” Bass, 50, said Wednesday. “People wanted a new style of leadership. I think they liked the fact that I was an activist who had been deeply involved in the community for years.”

Working in the community gave Bass a huge base of grass-roots supporters to draw on in one of the most ethnically diverse districts in the state, said Los Angeles City Councilman Antonio Villaraigosa, who, along with Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez (D- Los Angeles), formed a powerful group of Latino leaders that backed Bass.

“She has demonstrated that successful candidates in multiracial districts are going to have to build coalitions, and Karen Bass has been building coalitions for 30 years,” Villaraigosa said. Bass benefited from a $250,000 independent campaign by the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor, which also flooded the district with 450 volunteers to get out the vote on election day.

“She is part of a new paradigm, of an African American/labor alliance for South Los Angeles,” said Miguel Contreras, head of the labor organization.

The 47th Assembly District was redrawn in 2002 to make it less heavily African American, making it imperative to build alliances beyond a single ethnic group. That’s an increasingly important skill in Los Angeles, where the growing Latino population means there are few areas where someone can be elected with the support of black voters alone.

Assemblyman Mark Ridley-Thomas (D-Los Angeles), a Bass backer, said Bass had done the best job of reaching out to diverse groups. Bass said she had courted Jewish voters in the western end of the district, while organized labor had helped her by targeting Latino voters on her behalf. Ideology also played a role, Ridley-Thomas said, saying that Bass is more liberal than Ivie, Wesson and Burke.

“Ivie is a middle-of-the road, moderate Democrat and Karen is definitely left of center and progressive,” said Jaime Regalado, executive director of the Pat Brown Institute at Cal State L.A..

A Baldwin Vista resident who teaches health communications at the USC School of Medicine, Bass agreed that she was a better ideological match with voters in the predominantly Democratic district.

The 47th Assembly District was one of 100 state Senate and Assembly contests that drew California voters to the polls Tuesday.

Though Tuesday’s winners must still compete in the November general election, most districts have been drawn to strongly favor either Republicans or Democrats. As a result, odds are good that the people who will take seats as new lawmakers in December will include Van Tran, who would become the first Vietnamese American elected to the Legislature, and Lori Saldana, a San Diego community college teacher who shocked the Democratic establishment by spending just $50,000 to beat other Democrats who enjoyed hundreds of thousands of dollars of support from some of the biggest interests trying to influence the Legislature.

Saldana’s clear win over former Gov. Gray Davis aide Vince Hall and Democratic pollster Heidi Von Szeliski was the biggest decided upset in the state, but three races were too close to call Wednesday as counties tallied absentee ballots.

Interest groups, including trial lawyers, business groups and unions, sank nearly $7 million into races, either directly or through independent expenditure campaigns, but no special interest group emerged as a clear winner.

The election allowed some politicians to extend their careers, including Board of Equalization member Carole Migden, who won the Democratic primary in a liberal San Francisco state Senate district, and Assemblyman John Campbell (R-Irvine), who beat fellow Assemblyman Ken Maddox (R-Garden Grove) for the Republican nomination in a conservative Orange County Senate district. Johan Klehs, a Democrat who has served eight years in the Assembly and six years on the Board of Equalization, appears headed back to the Assembly. Unopposed, he won the nomination in a Democratic-leaning district east of San Francisco.

Another former assemblyman seeking a comeback, Democrat Tom Umberg, had a slight lead of 51.2% to 48.8% over opponent Claudia Alvarez in the heavily Latino 69th Assembly District, which includes Santa Ana. Alvarez held out hope Wednesday that the absentee ballot tally could swing the race her way.

Also awaiting absentee ballot results were the trial lawyers who sank hundreds of thousands of dollars into the 21st Assembly District south of San Francisco. A four-way race among Democrats has been narrowed to a neck-and-neck contest between Redwood City Councilman Ira Ruskin, with 37.4% of the precinct vote and attorney Joe Carcione, with 36.6%.

COLUMBIA, S.C. — Sen. Darline Graham stumbled in a Tuesday night debate over an elementary question about foreign policy, a signature issue of her late brother. It was a high-profile misstep a week before she faces a runoff election in her bid to hold onto the South Carolina seat to which she was appointed last month.

Graham, a political novice, was asked whether the U.S. has a national security interest in Taiwan and the South China Sea — a longstanding contention of both Democratic and Republican administrations. She struggled to answer before admitting “national security is not my thing.”

“I’m not that informed on national security,” she added.

Her rival in next week’s runoff for the GOP nomination, Rep. Ralph Norman, suggested the answer showed Graham was unqualified for the role.

“By her choice, she’s running for the United States Senate. It’s a six-year term,” Norman said. “You need to get fully versed in what issues you’re going to be dealing with. This isn’t a ‘get training on the job.’ You can’t do that.”

It was a moment that drew a stark contrast to Graham’s brother, Lindsey, who died unexpectedly July 11. It also gave Norman, an established conservative politician, a fresh avenue of attack as he tries to overcome President Trump’s endorsement of Graham in her first campaign. The Republican president is set to visit South Carolina on Friday to campaign for her.

During his decades in the Senate, Lindsey Graham was known for his foreign policy involvement, making countless foreign trips, sometimes as part of a group of U.S. lawmakers meeting with international leaders and observing contentious areas firsthand.

There were multiple trips to Taiwan, including in 2022, when he led a delegation for a two-day visit that included meetings with Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen and the island’s defense minister.

Darline Graham had been asked, “Are Taiwan and the South China Sea national security issues for the United States and if so, why or how?”

Graham avoided a direct response, and instead mentioned her brother’s wealth of experience and her desire to lead differently.

“My brother was in the Air Force for 33 years, so I will do everything I can to support the military,” said Graham, who often read during the debate from a legal pad on which she had notes, its pages draped over the front of her lectern. “My dad was in the Army. I’m not a polished politician up here; national security is not my thing, not my area of expertise, but I do support the military.”

As interim senator, Graham is surrounded by many of her brother’s Capitol Hill staff, many of whom worked with him for years on issues foreign and domestic. She’s repeatedly thanked them for getting her up to speed on legislative issues and has pointed to her several weeks on the job as a productive time in which she’s gotten legislation passed, including a Russia sanctions bill named for her brother.

In the wake of her brother’s death, Graham has been asked multiple times about how she would either further or shift away from his intense focus on national security, an attitude that was at the essence of his Senate portfolio.

Asked after the debate by reporters if she wanted another crack at her answer to the moderators’ question, she doubled down, saying she was more focused on South Carolinians’ everyday concerns.

“They’re worried about their pocketbooks more than they’re worried about the South China Sea, quite honestly,” Graham said. “So that’s going to be my biggest focus.”

Graham added that she had spoken multiple times during the debate about the overall national security threat posed by China.

“I realize national security is very important,” Graham said. “I probably said 10 times up there tonight how bad China is, how they’re a national threat to us.”

Taiwan has often been a flash point for aggression from China and international efforts to support its right to self-rule. The U.S. maintains a policy of strategic ambiguity over whether it would defend Taiwan militarily if the mainland invaded, but has committed to bolstering the island’s defense for generations.

Claimed by China as part of its territory, Taiwan sits along a South China Sea global trade route, virtually all of which China claims despite a 2016 arbitration ruling based on the 1982 U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea that invalidated Beijing’s expansive claims.

During a visit to Manila this week, Adm. Frank Bradley, commander of the U.S. Special Operations Command, said that American special operations forces are ready to step up warfighting-readiness exercises with counterparts in the Philippines and other countries in Asia to further strengthen a security alliance and help deter a major conflict in the region.

Kinnard and Junkroski write for the Associated Press.

SEOUL, Aug. 19 (UPI) — South Korea and the United States will significantly scale down their ongoing Ulchi Freedom Shield joint military exercise, Seoul’s Joint Chiefs of Staff said Wednesday, cutting it short by almost a week following an order by U.S. President Donald Trump.

“South Korea and the United States have agreed to make partial adjustments to the exercise period and scale at the suggestion of the U.S. side,” the JCS said in a statement.

“First, it was decided to adjust the duration of this UFS exercise to run from the 17th to the 21st,” the statement said. “Second, it was decided to conduct the combined field maneuver training on a reduced scale.”

The allies are discussing specific details of the field training reduction, the JCS added.

Ulchi Freedom Shield began Monday and was originally scheduled to run through Aug. 27.

The move comes after Trump called for the drills to be “substantially reduced” in a Truth Social post Sunday, saying they are expensive and “send a signal that is totally inappropriate and hostile” to North Korea.

South Korean Foreign Minister Cho Hyun said Wednesday morning that Seoul was not given advance notice of Trump’s directive.

“Neither our government nor officials within the U.S. government had any prior knowledge of what President Trump revealed on Truth Social,” Cho said at a parliamentary hearing. “Consequently, we were not notified beforehand.”

In his Sunday post, Trump said Pyongyang “has been unthreatening and respectful” while he has been in the White House.

Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office on Monday, Trump touted his personal relationship with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, saying Kim had “always treated me with great respect.”

“I understand him. He understands me,” Trump said, adding that Kim had responded to his requests for talks but providing no further details.

The Wall Street Journal, citing U.S. officials, reported Tuesday that Trump is pushing aides to arrange a meeting with Kim as soon as this fall, although no official planning is underway. Trump has privately discussed holding talks during his next trip to Asia, which could come in November when world leaders gather for the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Shenzhen, China.

North Korea, meanwhile, has not publicly responded to Trump’s overture. In a commentary published earlier Wednesday, before Seoul announced the reduction, the state-run Korean Central News Agency criticized Ulchi Freedom Shield as “frantic exercises” pushing the Korean Peninsula to the “threshold of a war.”

The commentary threatened that Pyongyang would continue exercising its “right to self-defence” to counter what it called military threats from the allies.

North Korea frequently condemns U.S.-South Korean military drills as rehearsals for an invasion.

Trump similarly called for suspending or scaling back the exercises in his first term, when he pursued direct diplomacy with Kim that included summits in Singapore and Hanoi and a brief meeting at the DMZ.

After the 2018 Singapore summit, Trump surprised observers by announcing that the United States would halt what he called “provocative” joint military exercises with South Korea. That year’s Ulchi Freedom Guardian exercise was canceled, while several subsequent drills were reduced in scale.

Crude oil and natural gas supplies have been disrupted worldwide by the United States-Israel war on Iran, but one energy sector appears to be cashing in – coal.

This week, South Africa’s thermal coal producer Thungela Resources said it had doubled its half-year profits as the war has forced more countries to buy the fuel.

Although abundant and relatively cheap to produce, coal is considered one of the dirtiest fossil fuels.

Mining it causes water pollution, and burning it releases enormous amounts of carbon into the atmosphere, which contributes to global warming.

In recent months, several countries, especially in Asia, have reversed or delayed promises to scale back on coal production.

Global coal consumption was already rising in 2025 with the Eurasia region and the US using the fuel to power artificial intelligence data centres, according to the World Bank.

Here’s what we know:

Why is more coal being used?

The US-Israel war on Iran has triggered a global energy crisis. Soon after strikes on Tehran began on February 28, Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz, through which about one-fifth of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) supplies were shipped during peacetime.

Negotiations to reopen the strait are ongoing.

Its closure has reduced oil and gas supplies and caused oil prices to soar, prompting many countries to fall back on the most readily available alternative to keep the power on – coal.

While coal prices have also risen, the fuel is still much cheaper than oil – and is more readily available.

No region has been more impacted than Asia, which largely depends on the Gulf for its energy needs. About 82 percent of oil and gas shipments through the Strait of Hormuz went to Asia in 2022, according to the US Energy Information Administration. China, India, Japan and South Korea were the top destinations.

Besides being unable to ship exports through the strait, Gulf countries caught up in the conflict have also been badly impacted by Iranian strikes. Qatar, for example, was forced to declare force majeure on its delivery contracts in March when Iranian drones hit its Ras Laffan oil facility – the world’s largest LNG complex – forcing it offline. Iran’s attacks had knocked out 17 percent of Qatar’s LNG exports by March, state officials said.

Similarly, the United Arab Emirates’s Das Island LNG terminal, Fujairah oil terminal, Ruwais Refinery Complex and other energy sites have been attacked during the conflict. Facilities in Saudi Arabia and Oman have also been hit.

Where has coal use increased?

According to an analysis by the energy data company Ember, coal output will rise globally by 1.8 percent by the end of 2026 compared with 2025 in a “worst-case” scenario.

This represents a notable uptick considering that countries are meant to be transitioning away from coal, experts said.

Since the war began, several Asian countries have announced plans to increase coal-fired electricity generation.

Japan has lifted restrictions on older, high-emission coal plants to cope with the energy shocks while South Korea has delayed the shutdown of coal-powered plants it promised to wind down by 2040.

In Bangladesh, the government at first imposed power cuts, closed universities and rationed fuel sales for vehicles before announcing it had ramped up coal-powered electricity generation.

Thailand, the Philippines and Vietnam have also increased coal-powered electricity generation to preserve dwindling gas reserves.

In Pakistan, data from the National Electric Power Regulatory Authority showed that by July, electricity generated from imported coal had risen by 90 percent compared with the same period the previous year.

China and India already consume 70 percent of the world’s coal and are also major producers. In India, where electricity demand is increasing partly due to more intense heatwaves, the government plans to launch several new coal-mining projects that will see global supplies increase by 2.5 billion tonnes a year, according to the Global Energy Monitor.

Germany also said it won’t jeopardise electricity generation because of earlier climate promises it made while Italy has pushed back its coal phase-out plans from late 2025 to 2038.

Who is making a profit from coal?

Indonesia is the top coal exporter by a wide margin, followed by Australia and Russia.

In March, Jakarta reversed previous plans to curb coal production and reduce oversupply in a bid to benefit from the rising prices. Prices were set at $131.85 per tonne in July, compared with $102.20 in the previous year.

South Africa’s Thungela, meanwhile, reported doubled profits from January to June, compared with the same period of 2025, driven largely by higher production from its Ensham mines in Queensland as well as higher demand and higher prices at both Ensham and its South Africa operations.

Production at Ensham rose by 38 percent in the first half of the year – during the peak of the conflict – to 2.2 tonnes, compared with 1.6 tonnes in the previous period.

The company reported 4.80 South African rand ($0.30) in headline earnings per share – or HEPS, a primary metric of profitability used in South Africa. That’s up from 1.92 rand ($0.12) in June last year.

In a statement, Thungela said prices will likely remain high as European and Asian markets prepare for winter.

What does this mean for the drive for clean energy?

In 2021, more than 40 countries, including Indonesia and Vietnam, promised to scale back coal use at the COP26 global climate summit. India and China did not sign up, however. Last year, South Korea joined the Powering Past Coal Alliance, which helps coal-dependent economies transition away from the fuel.

However, the Middle East crisis has upset those plans largely because many countries do not have sufficient renewable energy-generating capacity to fall back on, said Nick Hedley, an energy transition analyst at South Africa-based Zero Carbon Analytics.

“For the likes of Bangladesh, it’s easy to lift coal use when global gas supplies are disrupted because the country invested heavily in coal infrastructure in recent decades, and much of that capacity has been sitting idle,” he said.

“Coal becomes cheaper than imported gas when gas prices surge. Importantly, coal still cannot compete with renewables on cost,” Hedley added.

It’s not all doom, however. Analysts noted that upticks in some places are being offset by long-term declines in coal use in places like Europe.

China’s domestic coal production also fell this year as the government tightened oversight following a deadly explosion in May at the Liushenyu coal mine, where 82 people died. Beijing has also made large investments in renewables.

In addition, the breakdown of global fossil energy supply chains could make clean alternatives more competitive and force more countries to invest in them, Hedley pointed out.

“The lesson here is that Asian countries need to speed up their shift to clean energy and electrification to safeguard themselves against future global crises,” he concluded.

The U.S. Army has chosen Hanwha Defense USA to advance to the next phase of its Mobile Tactical Cannon (MTC) program. The company will now provide prototypes of its wheeled 155mm K9 Mobile Howitzer for further testing. This, in turn, could lead to its adoption as a replacement for the Army’s existing towed 155mm M777 howitzers.

“The U.S. Army announced today an agreement with Hanwha Defense USA, Arlington, Virginia, for the development of prototypes for the Mobile Tactical Cannon program, a critical priority in the Army’s ongoing continuous transformation and long-range fires modernization efforts,” according to a press release the service put out this evening. “Awarded competitively under an Other Transaction Authority (10 U.S.C. Section 4022), the firm-fixed-price agreement will provide the Army with up to 18 wheeled Self-Propelled Howitzer Systems for rapid prototyping, testing, and Soldier experimentation over an estimated four-year period of performance. The amount of this action is $100,302,961 with a total cumulative face value of $262,903,274.”

OTAs are a contracting mechanism that U.S. government agencies regularly use to help accelerate advanced research and development and prototype efforts.

The Army’s release does not explicitly mention the K9 Mobile Howitzer (K9MH), also known as the K9A2. However, Hanwha Defense USA has confirmed that this is the design it will be supplying in its own press release. The company had also announced this would be its entry for the MTC competition back in March. American Rheinmetall, BAE Systems, General Dynamics Land Systems, and Elbit Systems USA had also been in the running.

“The agreement provides for the accelerated delivery of six prototype MTC systems, with an option for an additional 12. Soldiers will use these platforms in a series of operational experiments to assess performance, reliability, and supportability in realistic combat conditions,” the release adds. “This Soldier-centric, experiment-driven approach reflects the Army’s continuous transformation initiative to rapidly deliver lethal capabilities, incorporate immediate Soldier feedback, and adapt the force to pace emerging threats in multi-domain operations.”

The K9MH was developed from Hanwha’s earlier tracked K9 design, variants and derivatives of which are already in service in South Korea, as well as Australia, Egypt, Estonia, Finland, India, Norway, Poland, and Turkey. Both the tracked and wheeled designs share the same 52-caliber 155mm cannon. Caliber here is a measurement of length in relation to the diameter of the barrel. A 52-caliber 155mm barrel is just under 26 and a half feet long. The M777’s barrel is 39 calibers long, or just around 16.7 feet.

K9 and K10 prove compatibility with US munitions during a live-fire demonstration at YPG

In general, longer barrels on howitzers translate to greater range. Hanwha says the maximum range of the K9MH is just over 37 miles (60 kilometers), though it is unclear if this is only when using rocket-assisted or other specialized ammunition. The stated maximum range of the M777, even when using specialized rounds, is just under 20 miles.

As a self-propelled howitzer, the 8×8 K9MH also offers the benefit of integrated mobility over the towed M777, which requires a separate vehicle to move it from point A to point B. “Its emplacement/displacement times of under 30 seconds enables ‘shoot and scoot’ tactics,” according to Hanwha’s website.

The K9MH can also carry 40 rounds of ammunition onboard, as well as be rapidly reloaded in the field via a companion K10 resupply vehicle.

“We’re focused on creating a U.S.-anchored K9 Mobile Howitzer manufacturing network – with Opelika, Alabama, as the current phase I launch point – that can deliver advanced Mobile Tactical Cannons at the speed and scale the U.S. Army needs,” Jason Pak, Hanwha Defense USA Head of Land Systems-Artillery, also said in a statement.

“Hanwha’s global supply chain and local production experience in Australia, Egypt, Poland and Romania demonstrate a proven commitment to local execution we’re excited to bring to the U.S.,” Michael Coulter, Hanwha Defense USA CEO, said in his own statement. “Localization is central to Hanwha’s global business model, leveraging our global leading industrial technology and process in Korea to create sovereign industrial strength in the U.S., whether it be in shipbuilding, munitions or combat vehicles.”

The Army has been actively exploring the idea of replacing the M777 with a new wheeled self-propelled howitzer since at least 2019, and has even conducted shoot-offs of various designs in the past. The service has also made clear that its selection of Hanwha Defense USA to advance in the MTC effort does not guarantee that it will field the K9MH.

“Data and insights gained from these experiments will directly inform senior leaders’ decisions on future fielding. If approved for fielding, MTC will replace M777 towed artillery systems in select formations, significantly increasing their lethality, mobility, reliability, and survivability on the modern, highly transparent battlefield,” per the Army’s release today. “By rapidly prototyping these systems, the Army is advancing a more mobile and adaptable fires formation aligned with the rigorous demands of large-scale combat operations.”

The release does not elaborate on what “select formations” might be in line to eventually receive K9MHs. However, a past MTC contracting notice says the initial focus is on replacing M777s within Brigade Combat Teams equipped with Stryker wheeled light armored vehicles. Airborne, airmobile, and ‘leg’ infantry brigades also have M777s that could be supplanted by new wheeled self-propelled howitzers.

The possibility of the Army replacing at least a portion of its existing M109-series tracked self-propelled 155mm howitzers has also been raised in the past. However, the service’s press release today makes clear that the focus of the MTC program right now is still on replacing towed M777s. There is a long-standing debate about the relative pros and cons of wheeled versus tracked self-propelled howitzers, with the U.S. Army long having favored the latter. Tracked designs typically offer greater off-road mobility and are often more heavily armored. They are also generally heavier overall, which can negatively impact mobility and transportability more broadly, and can be more costly to acquire and operate.

“If you look at the [fight] in Ukraine on either side, it’s really hard to move out and get fires ready to go. … The Paladin [the name applied to the latest A6 and A7 variants of the M109] is just incapable of it at speed,” Secretary of the Army Dan Driscoll told members of the House Appropriations Committee at a hearing earlier this year. “And so while we think the Paladin will be in our lives for a while, because we want to be good custodians of the assets the American taxpayer has given us, we think that new purchases to balance that platform out should be something different.”

At that time, Driscoll was defending his service’s omission of funding for any more M109A7s in its Fiscal Year 2027 budget proposal.

It is worth noting here that both sides in the ongoing conflict in Ukraine have and continue to employ tracked and wheeled self-propelled howitzers, as well as towed types. The war has underscored the continued importance of artillery, in general. At the same time, mobility, and greater speed while on the move, are ever more important considerations in an era of drone warfare and expanded kill chains that put anything that stays in one place too long at higher risk

MTC is part of a larger Self-Propelled Howitzer-Modernization (SPH-M) effort that could also include the separate acquisition of a new tracked self-propelled howitzer. There have been several abortive Army attempts to replace the venerable M109 family since the 1990s. This includes the advanced XM2001 Crusader, which was canceled in 2002 ostensibly due to growing costs. The service axed the more recent XM1299, developed under its Extended Range Cannon Artillery (ECRA) program in 2024. The XM1299 featured a 58-caliber cannon and had a demonstrated range of 40 miles (just over 60 kilometers). The Army has previously said that the length of the barrel presented technical challenges that contributed to the program’s cancellation.

XM2001 Crusader Howitzer Prototype

Since the XM1299’s cancellation, the Army has also been investing heavily in new long-range artillery shells, including ramjet-powered types.

Today’s announcement is also another important win for South Korea’s defense industry, which has made major export gains globally in recent years. Poland, in particular, has become a huge customer for South Korean arms exports, including versions of the K9. Further progress in the U.S. Army’s MTC program could offer a major inroad into the American market for Hanwha.

With today’s announcement, the Army has taken an important new step toward adding a new wheeled 155mm self-propelled howitzer to its arsenal.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

Yes. The US South Korea relationship has not broken down under Donald Trump, but it has become more transactional, cost focused and strategically uncertain. The latest decision to scale back joint military exercises highlights a broader evolution in which Washington increasingly expects Seoul to shoulder more of the alliance burden while seeking greater flexibility for US forces across the region.

From deterrence to deal making

Trump’s approach to South Korea has been shaped heavily by his personal diplomacy with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. His first term moved rapidly from threats of “fire and fury” to unprecedented summits with Kim, followed by the suspension or redesign of major US South Korean military exercises.

Although the Hanoi summit collapsed without a denuclearisation agreement, Trump has continued to emphasise his relationship with Kim. His latest instruction to reduce joint exercises therefore carries significance beyond cost savings. It signals that Washington may once again be willing to modify elements of its alliance posture in pursuit of diplomatic space with Pyongyang.

The strategic environment, however, is very different from 2018. North Korea has expanded its nuclear and missile capabilities and strengthened military cooperation with Russia. Reducing exercises therefore creates a more complicated calculation for Seoul: diplomatic engagement with Pyongyang may reduce tensions temporarily, but weaker military preparedness could also increase the risks associated with North Korea’s growing capabilities.

The alliance is becoming more transactional

The clearest transformation under Trump is arguably the growing emphasis on burden sharing.

Trump has repeatedly questioned the cost of maintaining roughly 28,500 US troops in South Korea and has pushed Seoul to contribute more to its own defence. The existing cost sharing agreement requires South Korea to contribute about 1.52 trillion won this year toward the upkeep of US forces.

For Washington, the argument is straightforward: South Korea is wealthy enough to assume a greater share of the financial and military burden. For Seoul, however, the US military presence remains central to deterring North Korea.

This creates a fundamental tension. The alliance is still strategically valuable to both sides, but Trump increasingly approaches it through a cost benefit framework rather than solely through traditional alliance commitments.

Defence cooperation is expanding even as exercises face pressure

The apparent contradiction is important. Trump is seeking to reduce certain military exercises while South Korea itself is increasing defence spending.

President Lee Jae Myung has pledged a larger security role and increased defence spending, while continuing to insist that Washington’s security commitment remains firm. Seoul has also sought greater strategic autonomy, including greater latitude over nuclear fuel technology and faster progress toward transferring wartime operational control.

This suggests that the alliance may be evolving rather than simply weakening.

South Korea appears to be preparing to assume greater responsibility for its own defence, while Washington wants the alliance to become more flexible and potentially address security challenges beyond the Korean Peninsula.

That latter objective is particularly sensitive for Seoul. The United States increasingly views its Asian alliances through the broader strategic competition with China, while South Korea remains primarily focused on the immediate threat from North Korea.

Trade has become inseparable from security

Under Trump, economic relations have also become an increasingly important component of the alliance.

Washington’s tariff pressure has pushed Seoul toward major investment commitments in the United States, including the $350 billion investment pledge associated with tariff relief. South Korean companies have already invested heavily in US semiconductors, batteries, electric vehicles and shipbuilding.

But disagreements over how the investment should be structured have exposed the limits of Trump’s transactional approach. Seoul has warned that demands for large upfront cash commitments could place pressure on its economy.

The detention of hundreds of South Korean workers during an immigration raid at a Hyundai LG battery project in Georgia further demonstrated how economic and political tensions can spill directly into the strategic relationship.

The result is an alliance in which security guarantees, trade concessions, investment and troop costs increasingly form one interconnected negotiation.

The deeper problem is strategic uncertainty

The central challenge for Seoul is not simply whether Trump wants fewer exercises. It is whether Washington’s definition of the alliance is changing.

For decades, the US South Korea alliance rested on a relatively clear bargain: Washington provided extended deterrence and military forces, while Seoul contributed financially and militarily to maintaining the security architecture.

Trump’s approach introduces more conditionality into that bargain.

If military exercises can be reduced because they are considered too expensive or diplomatically inconvenient, Seoul has to consider how predictable the US commitment remains. At the same time, Washington expects South Korea to spend more, invest more and potentially assume greater responsibility.

This could ultimately produce a stronger South Korean military, but it could also create greater uncertainty about the role of the United States.

What this means for China and the Indo Pacific

The evolution of the alliance also has implications far beyond the Korean Peninsula.

Washington wants greater flexibility for US forces stationed in South Korea to respond to regional contingencies, particularly those involving China. Seoul, however, has historically been reluctant to become directly involved in a confrontation over Taiwan.

That creates a structural divergence in strategic priorities.

For Washington, South Korea is increasingly part of a broader Indo Pacific security network. For Seoul, the primary purpose of the alliance remains deterrence against North Korea.

Trump’s transactional approach therefore forces South Korea to navigate between two competing imperatives: maintaining the American security umbrella while avoiding excessive strategic dependence on Washington’s wider confrontation with Beijing.

The alliance has changed, but it has not collapsed

Trump has not dismantled the US South Korea alliance. Instead, he is redefining its terms.

Military exercises are being reconsidered, defence burden sharing remains contentious, trade and investment have become bargaining instruments, and Washington increasingly expects Seoul to assume greater responsibility for regional security.

For South Korea, this creates both a risk and an opportunity. Greater defence spending and military autonomy could make Seoul less dependent on American forces. But if Washington simultaneously reduces visible commitments while demanding greater financial and strategic contributions, Seoul could find itself paying more for an alliance that feels less predictable.

The most important question, therefore, is not whether Trump is weakening the alliance. It is whether he is transforming it from a traditional security partnership into a transactional strategic bargain.

If that transformation continues, the US South Korea alliance could survive Trump, but it may emerge fundamentally different from the alliance Washington and Seoul built over the past seven decades.

With information from Reuters.

President Donald Trump doubled down on Monday about one of his reasons for ordering the Pentagon to “substantially reduce” joint military training exercises with South Korea. Trump said he is upset Seoul would not assist his war against Iran after years of U.S. protection from North Korea. This all started a day earlier in a Truth Social post where he said his close relationship with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un and concerns about the cost of military exercises were motivating factors for his decision.

“South Korea has been protected by us for many, many years, and during my first term, they agreed to pay close to $3 billion a year for protection because they essentially weren’t paying,” Trump explained at an afternoon press conference. “And I asked them to do that at my request. They weren’t happy about it, but they agreed. I asked for $10 billion and they were very unhappy, but we agreed for a short term that it would be $3 billion, and next year would go up, and the next year would go up. So they start paying for their protection.”

That stopped when Joe Biden became president, Trump complained.

“When I called recently, the president of South Korea, who I like, I think he’s very nice actually. But I called him. I said, ‘Would you like to give us a little hand? We don’t need help with Iran, but if you’d like, give us a hand with Iran.’ He said, ‘No thanks.’ And I said, ‘Wait a minute. We have 39,000 soldiers over there guarding you from Kim Jong Un, your next-door neighbor, and you’re not going to help us on a very easy military operation in Iran. That’s strange.’”

Trump claimed South Korean President Lee Jae-Myung said, “No, no, we’d rather not get involved.”

“I said, ‘well, why are we involved in helping you?’” the American leader proclaimed.

Monday afternoon, the Pentagon said it “is actively working on executing the Commander-in-Chief’s directive” regarding the annual Ulchi Freedom Shield military exercise in South Korea. It already began on Monday as scheduled. When asked by TWZ for details about the timeline or how much U.S. support for the exercise will be reduced, the Pentagon declined comment.

South Korea’s presidential Blue House said it was reviewing Trump’s comments, adding that it would continue working with the U.S. on details related to the drills and the “maintenance of firm combined defense posture,” CNN noted.

There are about 28,500 U.S. troops on the peninsula and many have already begun preparation for the exercise, according to U.S. Forces Korea (USFK). While the U.S. has typically provided few details about how many of its troops take part in Ulchi Freedom Shield, there will be about 18,000 South Korean forces involved, which mirrors last year’s levels.

Scheduled to run through Aug. 27, Ulchi Freedom Shield is “a defense-oriented exercise featuring live-fire, constructive, and field training exercises that engage alliance forces and governmental agencies,” according to U.S. Forces Korea. This year’s drills were designed to reflect evolving threats from North Korea including drones, GPS disruption and cyberattack.

The goal is to “build understanding between Combined Forces Command, United States Forces Korea, the United Nations Command, and ROK Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS), ROK government agencies.”

The exercise traditionally integrates ground, air, naval, space, cyber and information elements. It focuses on a wide range of training for urban warfare, counter Weapons of Mass Destruction, wet-gap crossing, air defense mobilization, tactical aviation dogfighting, contested logistics and combat search and rescue among many other aspects. 

“This combined exercise program highlights the ironclad commitment between the two nations to maintain a robust combined defense posture and to defend the people of the ROK from any threat,” USFK said about last year’s exercise. 

As noted earlier in this story, Trump said he ordered the rollback in U.S. participation in joint exercises on the peninsula as a result of his bonds with North Korea’s leader and concerns about cost involved. He also said South Korea’s decision not to provide more support for the war against Iran was a factor.

“Based on my very good relationship with Kim Jong Un, of North Korea, I am not happy with the fact that the United States has, long ago, agreed to participate in Joint Military Exercises with South Korea,” Trump stated on Truth Social. “These exercises are not only costly, with much of these costs paid for by the United States of America (as usual!), but send a signal that is totally inappropriate and hostile, to a Country that, as long as Donald J. Trump has been President, has been unthreatening and respectful. Therefore, and based on the fact that it is too late to cancel, I have instructed Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, to substantially reduce the Joint Military Exercises!”

In addition, Trump proclaimed that: “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’s Truth Social post came days after North Korea fired a ​ballistic missile toward the sea off the Korean peninsula’s east coast as a message of protest against the looming training exercise. As we have noted in the past, joint exercises like these are typically met by missile tests and other saber-rattling from north of the border, although Ulchi Freedom Shield is a regular summer occurrence, albeit one that focuses closely on North Korean threats.

Last week, the South Korean military “fired warning shots after a group of North Korean soldiers crossed the inter-Korean land boundary, prompting them to return to their side,” the Yonhap News Agency reported on Sunday. “It marked the South Korean military’s first warning shots this year in response to North Korean troops crossing the boundary. No prior MDL violations by the North Korean military had been reported this year.”

Trump’s Truth Social post hit just as South Koreans – 13 hours ahead of Eastern Time – were starting their work week. In-Bum Chun, a retired South Korean lieutenant general who ran that nation’s special operations forces and is now a military analyst, told TWZ that Ulchi Freedom Shield is a “very” important event for South Korea. He suggested there will be mixed reactions to Trump’s move in the country, with people on the left favoring the move, people on the right seeing it as “a good reason for nuclear weapons” and moderates not taking a stand either way.

With plans to build its own nuclear-powered submarines with ballistic missile capabilities, Seoul is at least keeping its nuclear options open, which you can read more about here.

Meanwhile, South Korea’s president has proposed officially ending the conflict with the North. The Korean War, which erupted in 1950, has been effectively frozen since an armistice was signed in 1953.

The president’s move toward a détente with the North is a repeat of previous actions toward Pyongyang. During his first term in 2018, Trump promised Kim that he would halt U.S.-South Korea military exercises, saying they are “provocative” and “tremendously expensive.”

In addition, he has also previously suggested reducing troop levels in South Korea. While his Truth Social post didn’t raise that issue, earlier this year, the Pentagon moved air defense assets from South Korea to the Middle East to help defend against Iranian missile and drone barrages. It is unclear if those systems have been returned.

Given the ongoing presence in the Middle East, the U.S. military is under strain, which is likely an unspoken motivating factor as well for the move to curtail training with South Korea.

There is growing concern among Asian allies about Trump’s commitment to the region. In January, the National Defense Strategy was unveiled and no longer focused primarily on countering China — a dramatic shift from even the first Trump administration. Last week, Trump ordered the USS George Washington, the only aircraft left in the western Pacific, to head toward the Middle East to relieve the beleaguered USS Abraham Lincoln. The Lincoln is at the center of a controversy over the mental and physical health conditions of those aboard after a long deployment.

USS George Washington (CVN 73) Nimitz-class aircraft carrier, USS Robert Smalls (CG 62) Ticonderoga-class guided missile cruiser and USS Shoup (DDG 86) Arleigh Burke-class Flight IIA guided missile destroyer westbound in the Singapore Strait – August 13, 2026 SRC: INST- dc_ah pic.twitter.com/kZWHc9QISt

— WarshipCam (@WarshipCam) August 13, 2026

America’s strongest ally in the region, Japan, is forging closer relations with South Korea over growing anxieties about U.S. reliability.

The two countries’ “exposure to a nuclear-armed North Korea, adds urgency to moving the relationship beyond its current surface-level fence-mending,” the East Asia Forum recently noted. 

Faced with concerns about the future of U.S. commitments, as well as growing tensions with China, Tokyo is undergoing its largest military buildup since World War II.

Meanwhile, in an issue that has spanned several U.S. administrations, there is a large backlog in the amount of U.S. military aid promised to Taiwan. Under the Trump administration, however, there is growing distrust in Taiwan about whether America will come to its aid should China invade. 

It is unclear why Trump is once again making overtures to Kim. Today at the White House, he said that the North Korean leader has responded to his request for a conversation, though he offered no further details.

How a reduction in U.S. participation in training exercises Kim sees as a direct threat will affect the North Korean leader’s actions remains unknown. As we have frequently reported, he is building up his military, including his nuclear arsenal and ballistic missiles and has sent his troops to Russia, gaining experience fighting Ukraine.

During his first term, Trump sent three aircraft carriers to patrol the waters off the peninsula after a 2017 Pyongyang ballistic missile test and promised to unleash “the fire and fury” of America’s nuclear arsenal on North Korea. While that eventually spurred three face-to-face meetings between Trump and Kim, there was no change in the North Korean leader’s ambitions and his nuclear program only grew.

Contact the author: howard@twz.com