Seoul must sever corrupt links in defense industry
What is the fundamental problem with the nation's defense industry and the military's arms procurement? This is the question the recently launched interagency team of investigators into defense-related corruption should ask.
It is meaningful in this regard that the joint probe squad has expanded its focus away from officers, active or retired, to the middlemen in weapons transactions. A case in point is the policeman-turned-arms broker-turned-businessman who reportedly has prospered after many dubious deals and unwarranted profiteering.
The broker, Lee Kyu-tae, is suspected of pocketing about $46 million by inflating ― almost redoubling ― the price of pilot-training equipment supplied by a Turkish company.
One of the so-called first-generation arms brokers, Lee, 66, was also involved in the next-generation fighter project as the agent of Rafale of France, as well as the military's helicopter, submarine and anti-tank gun development projects. He was arrested in 2009 on embezzlement charges over Korea's weapons purchases from Russia, but was released from jail after just a few months.
Lee's defense equipment company, which took part in the latest project as a subcontractor to the Turkish company, failed to meet the delivery deadline twice but was exempt from all penalties. What all this indicates seems rather clear: Lee has friends within the Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA), and other government agencies. That Lee has been able to thrive for 30 years under successive governments suggests many political connections, too.
Koreans are accustomed to various sorts of corruption, but given the situation facing the nation, sleaze in the defense sector is unforgivable.
This makes it all the more deplorable that so many officers, regardless of rank or branch of the armed forces, have been involved in all kinds of irregularities related to arms procurement. Now people can see why the military is so swift to import expensive arms, even at the slightest hint of threat from North Korea. There are so many new weapons systems that have yet to undergo actual tests. In 2010, for example, South Korea could not repel the North's artillery attacks on Yeonpyeong Island adequately in part because the then chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff did not know F-15 jet fighters had air-to-ground missiles.
To think that considerable portions of these astronomical sums could have gone to officers, procurement officials, arms brokers and foreign weapons sellers ― all at the expense of incapacitating the nation's military preparedness ― one can't help but wonder how the military can remain as it is now, as well as how patient Korean taxpayers could be.
President Park Geun-hye was right, albeit rate, when she called for thorough investigations into defense industry corruption recently. Past experiences show, however, the strong determination of a leader is hardly enough unless it is accompanied by absolute delegation of authority and continuous support to help investigators break though political hurdles. We hope the President has all of that in mind.
At stake is not just the success of the sweeping anti-corruption drive, but the nation's security. The military also ought to realize that any further resistance to reforms will not be helpful for itself.