■ Cast: Yang Wook / Associate Research Fellow, Asan Institute for Policy Studies
* The text below may differ from the actual broadcast content, so please check the broadcast for more accurate content. Citation Please specify.
[앵커]
Poland recently drew attention by signing an arms import contract worth 20 trillion won. Attention is being paid to whether the domestic defense industry can enter the European continent in earnest. Korea is already ranked as the 8th largest defense power in the world. Let’s take a closer look at how Korean-made weapons are evaluated globally and what are the challenges ahead.
Yangwook Yang, Associate Research Fellow, Asan Institute for Policy Studies. Welcome. Now, in the media, K-Defense is a splendid achievement, it hit the jackpot, and there are reactions like this.
[양욱]
Well, usually, we were expecting about 10 trillion won in defense sales this year, for example. So it’s almost doubled. Because not only this, but there are also other export news after that. This is very big. So, although it is large in Korea’s defense exports, this is the global defense market, no matter how large the market is, even though it is a market worth 60 billion dollars, it buys close to 1,000 tanks like this, buys more than 500 self-propelled guns, and there are very few contracts like this. So this is a very big business in terms of the global defense market, I can say.
[앵커]
I wonder if the global defense market will also pay more attention to K-defense right now, but it is the first time that they are exporting weapons of this size to the European market, and that Poland is a NATO member country, but it is also the first time to export to a NATO member country. . Can you see what this means?
[양욱]
Basically, the security threats or unrest in Europe that are emerging after the Ukrainian war have finally emerged as a result of a massive increase in armaments. Armaments actually cost a lot of money. If so, how much should a great weapon system be introduced at a reasonable price? Because the defense industry of the Republic of Korea provided such an answer, I think it was not possible to approach it in the end.
[앵커]
So, there are several countries exporting defense products, but the reason why I chose Korea is that Poland gave an accurate answer to Poland in some way. Is that the price?
[양욱]
Well, I can’t just say the price. Of course, price is a very important issue. As you know, almost 30 years after the last Cold War, Europe has been disarming in this period. The so-called Soviet threat was gone. So, talking about a peace dividend, we have actually greatly reduced our national defense. After all, these threats were realized through the Ukraine war. But then, in order to fill this, we have to employ a weapon system. Do you know what the biggest problem is?
First of all, Europe is free from military service, so there is little development or creation of a new weapon system. And if you did, what would the price be? It has to be very high. On the other hand, the Republic of Korea, on the other hand, has achieved so-called economies of scale as it continues to build weapon systems in this way in response to these threats.
Based on this economy of scale, there are products that are reasonably priced, that is, how can this performance come out at this price. In particular, it is not only important in terms of cost-effectiveness, but the current position is, for example, that Ukraine lost the Ukrainian war.
A security threat is very imminent. In the end, it takes more than 10 years for an original weapon system to be developed, produced, and deployed like this, and Poland does not have time to wait for that. If you leave it to Europe, you can’t pull out a lot of it, and it takes a lot of time, so it comes out slowly.
If it was just entrusted to the Republic of Korea, the required electricity would be delivered in a very short time, and the urgent electricity would be bought in Korea quickly and filled, and then the rest would be mass-produced through a local factory or something like that, which Poland wanted. I see We have provided the answer to this.
[앵커]
Some even say that Poland is a forward-looking step to import weapons a little cheaper from Western countries by showing its purchasing power and buying power through contracts with Korea.
[양욱]
In fact, since all Korean weapons are made to NATO standards, it can be said that they are Western weapons in the first place. However, what you pointed out is that this is correct. Now Poland isn’t buying all of that with their own money.
In the end, we live with NATO’s budget, NATO’s support budget, and then, of course, a large part of NATO’s support budget is also the US budget. There may be such pressure and access, but the important thing is that once we do, can we fill the budget with the necessary power at that price? If there is a change in direction, it must be 100% political and international politics.
[앵커]
Now is the time to supply the necessary electricity at the necessary price to Korea. You said this, but I think we should look into the electricity that Poland needs and its electricity. Now, you have decided to export three weapons, please explain what kind of weapon and what performance it has.
[양욱]
First, the K2 tank. Almost developed, to say the least, our 3.5th generation tank, a tank that is at the forefront of the next tank. Overseas websites or places like this pick 5 of the world’s most powerful tanks, and if you pick 4, this K-2 tank is sure to enter. That’s how great the performance is.
In particular, talking about the so-called 3.5th generation tanks, as well as the ability to fire a gun while just maneuvering, as well as targets, for example. If I saw an enemy target, I can tell you that this is a tank that has all kinds of abilities, starting with the network engagement ability that the vehicle engages in if you send this specification directly to another vehicle.
Also, something called an active defense system that hasn’t been installed on our K-2 tank yet will be installed when exporting. How about watching the Ukrainian War? If an anti-tank missile is attacked, the tank is incapacitated. However, when such an anti-tank missile flies, it will be equipped with a system that shoots the missile and catches the missile to protect the tank.
After all, there is no need for tanks in modern warfare. There are some people who say that it can be any drone, but I can say that the K-2 tank is the one that can sufficiently demonstrate the ability of a tank to take over in ground warfare. Then the K-9 self-propelled howitzer. 648 units were sold. The fact is that in Europe, perhaps England, Germany, and France, these three countries combined have less than 500 self-propelled artillery pieces.
[앵커]
Almost one country’s power.
[양욱]
So, you can think of it as exporting self-propelled artillery power for about half of Europe’s power.
[앵커]
Are Korean self-propelled artillery pieces laid out in half of Europe?
[양욱]
you’re right. So, in the past, it was actually a crab, so Poland had a self-propelled gun with a British turret and the chassis of our K-9, but they gave it all to Ukraine. And it all comes down to K-9.
[앵커]
Are you planning to apply for Ukraine now and fill that void with K-9?
[양욱]
I want to fill it all out. There must have been a sense of disappointment with the British-made equipment that had been developed in the past. It means that I have faith in the K-9. Very long-haired. So, I can say that it is a self-propelled artillery that can engage, for example, up to 40 km.
In fact, if you look at any country in the world, South Korea is the only country that currently produces and owns nearly 2,000 self-propelled artillery. That’s why we’re joking around saying that we’re gunbangbu, but it has such powerful firepower, and it was used well in practice, and even when we bombard Yeonpyeong Island, we were very good at counter-fire. Of course, it has to be a reliable system. It is also a self-propelled artillery that achieved economies of scale from self-propelled artillery. 70% of the world’s self-propelled artillery will be K-9, I can tell you.
[앵커]
And then there’s the light attack aircraft. Even in the case of the FA-50 light attack aircraft, it was said that it was sold a lot because of compatibility with the attack aircraft in Poland.
[양욱]
It’s more than that. Originally, it was known that Poland would buy F-16 fighters, but in fact, F-16 is the end of the story now. Because new aircraft like the F-35 are coming out. In fact, the F-16 fighter itself is a model that Lockheed Martin also exports, and the production line is very limited.
So Poland can’t get K-16 for example at the time it wants. But in the case of the FA-50, in fact, I am the brother of the F-16. I can say that they are brothers. I’ll tell you about this later. In any case, it is much smaller than the F-16 and the price is slightly lower than that of the F-16.
But then why buy it? Not only can you buy it out of the box and put it into operation, but if you incorporate something like the AIM-9X Ciderwinder missile that you can helmet mount and turn to engage the bandit, you can still use it for superior combat. Then, all of the maneuverability of the F-16 is realized here.
In fact, isn’t there a trainer that is armed with the FA-50 called the T-50 and just flies without all these things? I was originally going to sell the T-50 to Poland, but I lost to an Italian company. When Poland took an Italian product and tried to operate it, it was useless.
So, I think it can be said that they imported Korean products, and felt that they felt limited in terms of European products rather than Korea being the best. So, with all the so-called NATO specifications, in fact, it was almost the size of the F-16, but it was almost the same performance while quickly filling the gap in this aircraft and aviation power, so in the end, the FA-50 was not optimal . In fact, the price is also half the price of the F-16.
[앵커]
Even if it’s that much, it’s more than that in terms of performance.
[양욱]
Yes. What is the difference, for example, in the case of an F-16, the payload, that is, the bomb, fuel, and all of this is about 7.7 to 7.8 tons, but it is 4.5 tons, which is slightly higher than half that. So, the payload, cruising range, and mission range may be slightly limited, but nevertheless, it was decided that it could sufficiently cover the operation required by Poland, so I think that the model was eventually introduced.
[앵커]
In this way, there are so many three-piece sets, and an export contract with a scale of 20 trillion won has been signed now, and the basic contract has been signed, but the specific period and contract conditions are still being coordinated. Are there any remaining tasks to fully complete the contract?
[양욱]
Of course there is. Because basically, in fact, all 1,000 of those tanks are produced in Korea, and almost 1,000, eight hundred, or even dozens of tanks cannot all be produced and sent in Korea. After that, you will have to build a factory locally and make it. The same goes for the K-9.
Then, in the case of the K-2, for example, they are even talking about a plan to build the next tank based on it. If so, how much technology will you transfer in the end? After that, there are piles of issues that need to be discussed, from which facilities to provide, how to provide support, and what to do with each other, and then how to provide logistics support. So, one by one, we will work out the shape of the contract.
[앵커]
A lot of people say that we are that much when it comes to K-Defense. Some of you may even think like this, but please explain to what extent it is a global defense power and to what level it has risen.
[양욱]
In fact, there are a lot of expectations for K-Defense and defense industries, but in fact, a few companies are attracting them. I won’t tell you the company name. But it’s just this. So, what is the amount of sales we have and we are in the top 10 in the world, we are 8th, we are 9th, etc. There are cumulative figures like this, etc. More important than that, after all, this is also a weapon system, after all, it is a product.
And, of course, they have different personalities. The only things you can buy are products that can only be bought in the country. If that’s the case, there are a lot of factors involved. In other words, the relationship between the country, the relationship between the country and the country, hostility or friendship, and then how much technology transfer is possible overall, because these issues are very complicatedly intertwined, it is necessarily the best performance, so it sells well. Neither does it mean that it is not sold just because it has very low performance. So, I’m not saying that our products have low performance, but that is, depending on each situation, whether or not we can deliver the desired level of products at the desired time and at the desired time is very important.
Finally, I can say that we are getting closer to those things. So, in fact, Israel is a country that sells weapons systems very well compared to the size of the country. Israel is on the table now, but isn’t it coming out in the top 10 in the world? But if you look at Israel over there, a lot of defense companies are going out with a lot of focus on R&D and things like that.
Almost 20% of its income is invested in R&D, developing new weapon systems. So, why don’t we create weapons systems like the Iron Dome that we’ve been talking about a lot in Israel?
Likewise, in the case of the Republic of Korea, it can be seen that it depends on how well it shows such capabilities to the world by presenting weapons systems that only South Korea can present in the face of various security threats. In terms of level, it has risen to a level that is basically on par with advanced European countries and advanced European defense countries. But when it comes to technology, we need to put in a little more effort.
Because we still lack a little bit of technical skills in aerospace and things like that, and we have no choice but to do those things through cooperation or something like that. For example, even if you sell the FA-50, the engine will eventually have to be equipped with an American-made engine.
That such problems exist. And then it’s clear that there are things that we can’t make, not just the core parts, but also parts like accessories that actually require very high precision. So, the opportunity to develop all these aspects comprehensively like this is inevitable when exporting more and more and making more. Isn’t that what market dominance is in the first place?
[앵커]
There are many such tasks, but K-Defense, which has risen to a position comparable to that of advanced European countries, somehow, geopolitical characteristics and climatic characteristics of Korea’s defense industry also played a role to some extent. How can you explain it?
[양욱]
In the end, when it comes to geopolitics, we have shown that we have responded with such an overwhelming and precise conventional weapon system to the security threats facing the Republic of Korea and, ultimately, the North Korean threat. As a result, compared to other countries, we have a lot of high-tech conventional weapons.
So, by supporting and accomplishing such things, the Korean defense industry is ultimately of a high standard. In the end, how much power can a weapon system exhibit in actual combat? In other words, whether you can defend the country with this or not, and whether you can annihilate the enemy or not, is the deciding factor. In a way, I can say that it is ironic that the grim reality that the Republic of Korea is confronting North Korea itself is the power of defense exports.
[앵커]
Since you said that it usually takes more than 10 years to develop weapons, how much K-Defense has come up to this point through the efforts of the past 10 years, and what do you expect the next 10 years to be?
[양욱]
The truth is, perhaps now, the more advanced weapon systems are made, the more failures and errors are bound to happen. Actually, what I want to say is that when it comes to the defense industry, from the point of view of the Korean people, there is some kind of corruption or is there something wrong with the defense corruption frame?
In fact, rather than that, there were of course corruption among the things that our past governments investigated as defense corruption, but in fact, development failed, because we tried it for the first time, and it did not work well, or the procedure did not work well because we were not familiar with these things. That said, there were also many. In the end, if that’s the case, failures and these things keep turning into corruption, and if you do it, you won’t be able to develop in the future, you won’t be able to do that, and there’s no possibility of development at all.
So, I can tell you that the most important thing is to have such patience and support, to go up to a new level based on what you get from repeatedly trying and failing with such diligence. Then, as I mentioned earlier, almost 20% of the money earned in Israel is just poured back into development, and such passionate R&D is also very important. I can tell you this.
[앵커]
Let’s hear it here. So far, we have talked with Yangwook Yang, Associate Research Fellow at the Asan Institute for Policy Studies. Thank you for your words today.
