[COVER STORY] Hormuz deployment could expose Korea to unnecessary risks: critics

Critics say Korea should stay out of the U.S.-led military mission in the Strait of Hormuz because joining would undermine Seoul’s diplomatic principles and expose it to unnecessary security risks. They argued that even noncombat support would still amount to participation in military operations. The critics also rejected using the Korea-U.S. alliance or pending negotiations as pressure to join.

Political commentator Lee Kang-yun said the war lacked sufficient justification and criticized U.S. President Donald Trump for what he called an impulsive approach to foreign policy.

Lee said the conflict had become increasingly bogged down and that the U.S. Navy was in a difficult position that made it harder for Washington to disengage.

The Korean Council for Justice and Remembrance for the Issues of Military Sexual Slavery by Japan said logistics support vessels and maritime patrol aircraft would still constitute participation in the war.

People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy said Korea would contradict its own diplomatic principles if it joined what it called a war of aggression and urged the government to rule out deployment under the constitutional principle against wars of aggression.

Lee said Iran’s ability to launch drone attacks against maritime targets made security risks an important concern, and he questioned whether Korean naval forces were sufficiently trained to respond to such threats.

Published Sep 8, 2026 4:31 pm KST

Updated Sep 8, 2026 6:04 pm KST

Members of civic groups wearing masks depicting President Lee Jae Myung and U.S. President Donald Trump stage a protest against the possible deployment of Korean troops to the Strait of Hormuz in front of Cheong Wa Dae in Seoul, Monday. Yonhap

Korea should stay out of the U.S.-led military mission in the Strait of Hormuz because participating in a war with questionable legitimacy would undermine Seoul’s diplomatic principles and expose it to unnecessary security risks, critics said.

They argued that even a limited contribution involving noncombat assets would effectively amount to participation in military operations. They also rejected the idea that concerns over the Korea-U.S. alliance or pending economic and security negotiations should compel Seoul to join the mission.

“The war itself does not have sufficient justification,” political commentator Lee Kang-yun said, adding that U.S. President Donald Trump has faced criticism for what he described as an impulsive approach to international relations and foreign policy, including starting the war with Iran in late February.

Lee also noted that the conflict has become increasingly bogged down, while the U.S. Navy is in a difficult position that makes it harder for Washington to disengage.

“It is under these circumstances that the U.S. is pressuring us,” he said.

Civic groups have raised similar objections, arguing that the distinction between combat and noncombat contributions does not change the fundamental nature of Korea’s involvement.

The Korean Council for Justice and Remembrance for the Issues of Military Sexual Slavery by Japan rejected the government's characterization of assets such as logistics support vessels and maritime patrol aircraft as playing a strictly noncombat role.

“Supporting military operations itself clearly constitutes participation in the war,” the group said in a statement. “No calculation of diplomatic benefits can justify participating in a war that disregards international law and takes countless lives.”

People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy (PSPD) also characterized the conflict as an unjustified war launched by the U.S. and Israel against Iran while nuclear negotiations were underway in late February.

It also argued that Korea would undermine its own diplomatic principles by joining the mission.

“It would be contradictory to advocate peaceful coexistence on the Korean Peninsula while participating in a war of aggression in another region,” the group said, calling on the government to rule out deployment in accordance with the constitutional principle against wars of aggression.

Lee questioned whether Korea had sufficient justification to participate when other major U.S. allies have refrained from doing so.

“If countries such as the United Kingdom and Japan are not doing it, and we participate because we cannot withstand U.S. pressure, Korea’s national standing and position in the international community would be significantly weakened,” he said.

Security risks surrounding a deployment also need to be considered, Lee said, particularly given Iran’s ability to launch drone attacks against maritime targets.

He questioned whether Korean naval forces were sufficiently trained to respond to such threats, even if their stated mission was limited to protecting Korean vessels.

Another central issue is whether refusing Washington’s request could complicate pending Korea-U.S. negotiations on diplomatic, security, economic and trade issues.

Lee acknowledged that Washington could seek to use those issues as leverage to pressure Seoul but argued that Korea should not yield to such tactics.

Individual bilateral issues have their own history and logic, he said, and should not be overturned simply because Seoul refuses a U.S. demand on Hormuz.

Economic and trade negotiations, in particular, cannot be determined solely by Washington because they are also shaped by market forces and the interests of both countries, he said.

“Every economic activity involves reconciling the interests of both sides and finding a point of compromise,” Lee said.

He argued that even under Trump, there should be limits to linking unrelated bilateral issues to Korea’s participation in a Hormuz mission — and that Seoul should not give in if Washington crosses that line.

批评人士认为，韩国不应参与美国主导的霍尔木兹海峡军事行动，因为加入该行动将损害首尔的外交原则，并使其面临不必要的安全风险。他们认为，即使是非战斗性的支持也等同于参与军事行动。批评人士还反对利用韩美同盟或正在进行的谈判来施压韩国加入该行动。

政治评论员李康允表示，这场战争缺乏充分的理由，并批评美国总统唐纳德·特朗普采取了冲动的外交政策。

李表示，冲突变得越来越僵化，美国海军处境艰难，这使得华盛顿更难脱离冲突。

韩国日本军事性奴隶问题正义与纪念委员会表示，后勤支援舰艇和海上巡逻机仍将构成参与战争。

参与式民主人民团结组织表示，如果韩国加入其所谓的侵略战争，将违背其自身的外交原则，并敦促政府根据反对侵略战争的宪法原则排除部署的可能性。

李表示，伊朗有能力对海上目标发动无人机袭击，这使得安全风险成为一个重要问题，他质疑韩国海军是否有足够的训练来应对此类威胁。

发布于2026年9月8日下午4:31（韩国标准时间）

更新于2026年9月8日 下午6:04（韩国标准时间）

周一，一些民间团体成员戴着印有韩国总统李在明和美国总统唐纳德·特朗普头像的面具，在首尔青瓦台前举行抗议活动，反对韩国可能向霍尔木兹海峡部署军队。（韩联社）

批评人士表示，韩国应该置身于美国领导的霍尔木兹海峡军事行动之外，因为参与一场合法性存疑的战争会破坏首尔的外交原则，并使其面临不必要的安全风险。

他们认为，即使是提供有限的非战斗资源，实际上也等同于参与军事行动。他们还驳斥了因担忧韩美同盟或悬而未决的经济和安全谈判而迫使首尔加入此次行动的观点。

政治评论员李康允表示，“这场战争本身并没有充分的理由”，并补充说，美国总统唐纳德·特朗普因其在国际关系和外交政策方面采取的冲动做法而受到批评，其中包括在2月下旬发动对伊朗的战争。

李还指出，这场冲突变得越来越僵化，而美国海军的处境也十分艰难，这使得华盛顿更难脱离冲突。

“正是在这种情况下，美国才向我们施压，”他说。

民间团体也提出了类似的反对意见，认为区分战斗贡献和非战斗贡献并不能改变韩国参与战争的根本性质。

韩国日本军事性奴隶问题正义与纪念委员会驳斥了政府将后勤支援舰艇和海上巡逻机等资产描述为严格发挥非战斗作用的说法。

该组织在一份声明中表示：“支持军事行动本身就明显构成参与战争。任何外交利益的考量都不能为参与一场无视国际法、夺去无数生命的战争辩护。”

人民参与民主团结组织（PSPD）也把这场冲突定性为美国和以色列在2月下旬核谈判进行期间对伊朗发动的一场不正义的战争。

报告还指出，韩国加入此次特派团将损害其自身的外交原则。

该组织表示：“一方面倡导朝鲜半岛和平共处，另一方面却参与另一地区的侵略战争，这岂不是自相矛盾吗？”该组织呼吁政府根据宪法中反对侵略战争的原则，排除部署的可能性。

李质疑，在其他美国主要盟友都未参与的情况下，韩国是否有充分的理由参与。

他说：“如果英国和日本等国家不参与，而我们因为无法承受美国的压力而参与，韩国在国际社会中的国家地位和地位将会大大削弱。”

李表示，部署过程中存在的安全风险也需要考虑，特别是考虑到伊朗有能力对海上目标发动无人机袭击。

他质疑韩国海军是否训练有素，足以应对此类威胁，即使其既定任务仅限于保护韩国船只。

另一个核心问题是，拒绝华盛顿的要求是否会使正在进行的韩美外交、安全、经济和贸易问题谈判复杂化。

李承认华盛顿可能会利用这些问题作为筹码向首尔施压，但他认为韩国不应该屈服于这种策略。

他表示，个别双边问题有其自身的历史和逻辑，不应仅仅因为首尔拒绝美国在霍尔木兹问题上的要求就推翻这些问题。

他表示，特别是经济和贸易谈判，不能仅仅由华盛顿决定，因为它们也受到市场力量和两国利益的影响。

李说：“任何经济活动都涉及协调双方的利益，并找到妥协点。”

他认为，即使在特朗普执政时期，也应该限制将不相关的双边问题与韩国参与霍尔木兹海峡特派团联系起来——如果华盛顿越过这条界限，首尔不应该屈服。