0
An Apache helicopter moves at Camp Humphreys in Pyeongtaek, Gyeonggi Province, on August 18, as the Ulchi Freedom Shield exercise began. / Source: Yonhap News

At the Aug. 26 summit between South Korean President Lee Jae-myung and U.S. President Donald Trump, speculation quickly arose after Trump suggested that Washington could seek ownership of U.S. Forces Korea (USFK) bases. Analysts, however, dismissed the possibility, stressing that while the U.S. has rights to use the bases, ownership remains entirely with South Korea.

Under the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA), permanent U.S. ownership of bases in South Korea is impossible. The U.S. typically operates overseas bases under three arrangements: usage rights, long-term leases, or special agreements/occupations. In South Korea, as in Japan, Germany, and Italy, the facilities are formally owned by the host nation.

The Korea-U.S. Mutual Defense Treaty states that South Korea grants the right for U.S. forces to be stationed on its territory, while SOFA Article 2 specifies that “facilities and areas used by U.S. forces shall be returned to the Republic of Korea whenever they are no longer needed, under terms agreed upon through the Joint Committee.” In other words, bases are provided, not ceded.

Changing the arrangement from usage rights to a lease or special agreement would require ratification by the National Assembly, and even then could conflict with constitutional provisions on territorial sovereignty and property rights. In addition, many USFK bases were built on privately owned land, raising thorny issues of restitution and restoration once they are eventually returned.

“Transferring ownership is impossible because it is directly tied to our sovereignty and territorial integrity,” said Jung Kyung-woon, a researcher at the Korea Research Institute for Strategy. “South Korea provided the bases free of charge, and the U.S. is using them without restriction. Trump is well aware of this — his comment was likely meant to raise pressure in defense cost-sharing negotiations.”