Since military and national security issues have been under the central government's authority, local government and communities' have not been consulted regarding policy. Even when there has been damage resulting from its directives, those affected have not been adequately compensated. However, as democracy and local self-government have advanced, we are facing a new situation where it is no longer possible for the central government to dictate policy. Such changes have a direct bearing on issues such as the readjustment in the ROK-U.S. alliance and the redeployment of USFK.
Many issues have arisen from the readjustment in the ROK-U.S. alliance, but in this study we will discuss the problems local communities and govemments face as a result of redeployment, There has been a dire lack of discussion on how to reflect the interests of those affected. Indeed, while there has been heated debate regarding deployment of USFK troops here, with one side arguing for complete withdrawal the other exclaiming the necessity of the ROK-U.S. alliance, there has been little discussion of how to deal with problems and damage resulting directly from the redeployment of USFK.
Although there is controversy surrounding the development of democracy in South Korea, compare to the period prior to 1987, the so called authoritarianism order era in Korea, it is clear that Korean government has advanced in terms of procedural democracy. Such domestic change in Korea has led to dialogue on national issues like the redeployment of USFK. In this study, we discuss the readjustment in the ROK-U.S. Alliance and USFK problems based on Korean internal change and necessity.
To sum up, "Central government's one-way policy, which does not reflect local communities' interests, has a high possibility of failure." When government decides on policy, it must take into consideration local citizens' opinions, even on issues of national security. Readjustment in the ROK-U.S. Alliance may be determined through inter-governmental discussion between Korea and the U.S.A., but how that policy is conducted is not up to He central government alone. In short if we hope for a successful, future-oriented development in the ROK-US alliance, our two governments are required to consider both the "what" and "how" of policy.