[Koo Bon-young Column] Even in the AI era, a strong military is essential

The Iran crisis made it clear that this was not a distant problem. As ceasefire talks between the U.S. and Iran dragged on through a series of twists and turns, the fallout kept reaching us. With the Strait of Hormuz blocked, South Korea, which relies heavily on oil and natural gas from the Middle East, was hit hard. There were even concerns about a shortage of disposable trash bags because of supply disruptions in naphtha, a petroleum byproduct.
The Iran war also shook the security landscape on the Korean Peninsula. North Korea fired the Hwasong-11Ga short-range ballistic missile, also known as the KN-23 short-range ballistic missile, for three days starting on the 6th. The test launches were aimed at South Korea and the U.S. air defense network, with an Electromagnetic Pulse Bomb and cluster bombs mounted on the missiles. This suggests that Kim Jong Un, President of the State Affairs Commission, drew two misguided conclusions from the Iran crisis. One is that he intends to accelerate nuclear armament, seeing Iran come under attack by the U.S. even though it had only secured uranium enrichment capabilities, a prelude to nuclear weapons. The other is that he believes he can avoid such a fate by using South Korea as a hostage. Iran's strategy of holding oil-producing countries near the Strait of Hormuz hostage appeared to work.
At the same time, the government announced a plan to introduce advanced scientific systems and drastically reduce the number of troops guarding the front line. It aims to cut the Guard Post (GOP) force, now at 22,000, to about one-quarter of that level over the long term. Defense Minister Ahn Gyu-back said at a press briefing on the 7th, "We will build an AI-based scientific surveillance system so that about 6,000 troops will handle guard duty along the GOP line." In other words, the plan is to replace 16,000 troops with advanced systems.
In theory, expanding AI-based scientific surveillance is the right direction. Given low birth rates and the shrinking pool of military manpower, it may even be an unavoidable stopgap. But while the idea is to replace guard troops with AI or robots, the limits are clear. Look at how the Iran crisis unfolded. The U.S. and Israel overwhelmed Iran from both the air and the ground with missiles, air power, air defenses, and advanced interception systems. Even so, they could not force Iran to surrender. That was because the U.S. could not send in ground troops to occupy territory and plant the flag of victory.
Israel's painful experience is also a lesson for us. In 2023, Israel trusted its "Iron Wall," a fence lined with highly sensitive sensors, and moved many of its guard troops to the West Bank. It was then caught off guard by a surprise attack from the Palestinian armed group Hamas. More than 1,000 Israelis were killed at the time. That is why Joo Eun-sik, head of the Institute for National Security Strategy, said, "AI can assist in surveillance, but it cannot fully replace humans." His point is persuasive, because sensors can malfunction and AI cannot respond immediately to a North Korean surprise attack.
Moreover, North Korea's military is far superior to Hamas in both equipment and manpower. In particular, North Korea has been fortifying the Military Demarcation Line (MDL) since declaring the two Koreas to be "hostile states." In such a situation, should South Korea alone drastically cut front-line guard forces? It would be unwise to rush into replacing guard troops with a scientific surveillance system without carefully examining its effectiveness. That would only create a security vacuum. The shortage of military manpower is fundamentally due to the decline in the birth rate. Still, it cannot be ignored that past governments also bear responsibility for excessively shortening service periods in a fit of security populism.
There are already more than enough reasons not to place blind faith in AI-based surveillance systems. Of course, they should be expanded in step with the AI era, but prior measures are essential. That means significantly upgrading thermal imaging surveillance devices and Intelligent CCTV systems to reinforce the GOP fence, while also securing in advance the mobility routes needed to redeploy guard troops from the second line in an emergency.
If the expansion of advanced surveillance systems stems from the current administration's blanket appeasement policy, that would be an even bigger problem. In other words, if the goal is to reduce front-line defenses first in the name of easing inter-Korean tensions, that would be a mistake. President of South Korea apologized on the 6th for North Korean drones, while setting aside the fact that North Korea had repeatedly sent drones south in the past. Even so, North Korea staged another show of force on the 20th by test-firing ballistic missiles in the presence of Kim Jong Un. The missiles were fitted with cluster bombs and Family of Scatterable Mines, weapons so destructive that they are often called "devil's weapons."
For that reason, South Korea should not rush to reduce front-line guard forces simply because of a vague hope that it might help improve relations with North Korea. That would be nothing more than a dangerous gamble. A nation's security cannot be left to the other side's goodwill alone. This is why the government must not fall into wishful thinking when dealing with security issues.
kby777@fnnews.com Reporter