핵심요약

• 경기도 3개 사이트에 38개의 발사대와 최대 304대의 KTSSM 배치
• KTSSM-I 미사일 사정거리 180km, 1.5m 콘크리트 관통 가능
• 전문가들 간 미사일 기지 목적에 대한 논쟁
• 양국 간 미사일 개발이 갈등 심화 요인
• 첫 발사 기지 방문 시 김명수 당시 합동참모의장, '능동적 대응' 발언

도입

한국 군부의 미사일 배치 전략이 북한의 군사적 대응을 유발할 수 있다는 우려가 제기되며, 이는 한반도 정세에 미치는 경제적 영향력을 고려할 때 투자자에게 중요한 이슈입니다. 특히 미사일 기술의 발전이 양국 간의 군사적 긴장도를 높이고 있음을 이해하는 것이 필수적입니다.

본문 1: 미사일 배치의 전략적 의도

한국 군부는 경기도에 304대의 KTSSM을 배치한 것으로 알려졌으며, 이는 북한의 장거리 포병 위협에 대한 '능동적 대응'을 위한 것으로 설명하고 있습니다. 그러나 미국 보안 전문가들은 이 미사일 기지가 선제적 공격 목적으로도 해석될 수 있다고 지적하고 있습니다. 이는 한국 정부의 공식 입장과 상충되는 부분으로, 미사일 배치의 진정한 의도를 파악하는 것이 중요합니다. 특히 미사일의 사정거리와 관통력이 북한의 주요 군사 시설에 대한 타격을 가능하게 한다는 점에서, 전략적 균형이 깨질 수 있다는 우려가 제기됩니다.

본문 2: 양국 간 군사 기술 경쟁의 경제적 영향

한국과 북한의 미사일 기술 경쟁은 군사적 긴장뿐만 아니라 경제적 영향력에도 미칠 수 있습니다. 특히 한국군의 KTSSM 배치와 같은 전략적 자산은 국방 예산 증가로 이어질 수 있으며, 이는 국가 경제의 다른 분야에 대한 자원 배분과 충돌할 수 있습니다. 또한, 국제 사회의 군사적 긴장 고조는 한국 기업들의 해외 진출과 투자에 부정적인 영향을 미칠 수 있습니다. 특히 반도체, 자동차 등 주요 수출 산업이 국제 시장에서의 경쟁력에 영향을 받을 수 있다는 점이 핵심입니다.

본문 3: 장기적 전망과 리스크 관리

장기적으로 한국과 북한의 군사 기술 경쟁은 한반도 정세의 불안정을 지속시킬 수 있습니다. 이는 투자자에게 안정적인 시장 환경이 필요한 산업, 특히 금융, 부동산 등에 부정적인 영향을 미칠 수 있습니다. 또한, 국제 사회의 군사적 긴장 고조는 한국 기업들의 글로벌 공급망에 차질을 빚을 수 있으며, 이는 생산 비용 증가로 이어질 수 있습니다. 따라서 투자자는 군사적 긴장과 경제적 리스크를 종합적으로 고려한 포트폴리오 관리 전략을 수립하는 것이 중요합니다.

결론

한국 군부의 미사일 배치 전략이 북한의 군사적 대응을 유발할 수 있다는 우려가 제기되며, 이는 한반도 정세에 미치는 경제적 영향력을 고려할 때 투자자에게 중요한 이슈입니다. 특히 미사일 기술의 발전이 양국 간의 군사적 긴장도를 높이고 있음을 이해하는 것이 필수적입니다. 향후 한국 정부의 군사 전략과 국제 사회의 반응을 주의 깊게 모니터링하는 것이 필요합니다.

---

원문 링크: https://news.google.com/rss/articles/CBMi2wFBVV95cUxOM0lFcFM1NXo0OHN0cS11QnFxY0VVVXJaaGh0RU5NWEtRTTI1QngycTlFNWxnTjZwOEZ0V3dmRktWWUxHRjlNRG9ENjZvbVNscTVKQTQ3T0VNZDNvbE5Fdnl5NUszcFRVZHp0aFpReVIzbmV4dlMxSlVXY3UtbTJZUVV6aWdXOEMwOE9yMFA0bVFNV3J6YnphLVphcUlqOWlmLXp3R0IzWDltU1NOMUNsNk5ONC1SLTJSc1pDZmV1M0haZmRSWlh6NXcwSHZReU9Nb1hoeTNNcmdBd3PSAeABQVVfeXFMTnI4OTRXcE1qem45TUxsVk5qZk5KTEo0VmRZMldXblVPTE9wLVJvcnQzaXBGXzdvR1ZTWWZ3NFpWZkt0Q3pQYm80RnozazNMWk5Dcjg3N2VDdnNCNE9aY0otWGh3R3N6Zm4xNnAtYXdmRUE4cG4xUzI1VndGMkJCLVZ0aEVmSUdac2VDaFRtTzZqSFowRDhTLXNORHltaGxLV29leUw0OHhFMTZBLS1DVVc2WlBzR0JoU2NDZVdoTnBicklUdFJKczVqUERmanZWZWdFNzV4a3ZueHdPNVV5Qlc?oc=5

Why some experts fear S. Korean missile sites could incentivize N. Korean strikes - The Korea Times

Korean Tactical Surface to Surface Missile deployed for operation, Feb. 18, 2025 / Courtesy of Joint Chiefs of Staff South Korea’s military appears to have deployed more than 300 short-range ballistic missiles in fixed concrete bunkers near Seoul, an arrangement that suggests it could be used as a first-strike weapon against North Korea, two U.S. security analysts have assessed. But some South Korean experts contend that the missile bases are aimed at rapidly responding to a North Korean attack rather than preemptive strikes, highlighting a debate about how the two Koreas’ development of increasingly precise missile systems exacerbates escalation risks. According to a study published in Survival, a bimonthly journal by the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), the three South Korean sites for the fixed concrete blockhouses in Gyeonggi Province collectively field 38 launch bays capable of housing up to 304 Korean Tactical Surface-to-Surface Missiles (KTSSM). The study was written by Decker Eveleth, an associate research analyst at the Center for Naval Analyses, and Jeffrey Lewis, a scholar of global security at Middlebury College. The authors geolocated the sites after the Joint Chiefs of Staff released photographs of then-Chairman Adm. Kim Myung-soo visiting one of the KTSSM operating bases on April 24, 2025, roughly a year after construction of the blockhouses began. At the time, Kim said the location allowed South Korea to “proactively respond” to the North Korean long-range artillery threat. Eveleth and Lewis said the phrase “functions as an elastic euphemism deliberately crafted to allow it to be interpreted either as a statement of capability for prompt retaliation or as a claim of justification for a preemptive attack.” The KTSSM-I missiles reportedly deployed at the sites have a range of 180 kilometers (112 miles) and carry a warhead capable of penetrating 1.5 meters (5 feet) of concrete. The system was developed following North Korea’s Nov. 2010 shelling of Yeonpyeong Island to neutralize Pyongyang’s hardened artillery positions and tunnel facilities near the inter-Korean border. Operational deployment began under the Army's strategic missile command in early 2025. South Korea’s Defense Acquisition Program Administration is separately developing the longer-range KTSSM-II, reportedly capable of reaching targets up to 300 kilometers away. Then Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Kim Myung-soo inspects one of the KTSSM operating bases, April 24, 2025. Courtesy of Joint Chiefs of Staff A break from past practice? The heart of the study’s findings rests on how Seoul chose to base the KTSSMs and how sharply that choice departs from the South Korean military’s decades-long precedent. Eveleth and Lewis wrote that every South Korean missile system, from the Hyunmoo-1 in the 1990s to the current Hyunmoo-4, had been deployed on mobile launchers that would roll out from hardened bunkers to protected launch positions with revetments, then disperse in a crisis. The KTSSM blockhouses are the sole exception. By choosing fixed, above-ground structures instead, Seoul “has traded survivability for immediacy,” the authors wrote. “Forgoing those options for the KTSSM missiles implies that South Korea intends to fire the entire force of 300-plus missiles preemptively, before North Korea can target the sites with nuclear weapons,” the study said. The sites are adequately hardened against conventional attack — a single conventionally armed North Korean missile would have a 1 percent chance of destroying a single launch bay, according to the study. But the structures are highly vulnerable to nuclear weapons. A single 10-kiloton warhead delivered by a North Korean KN-23 or KN-24 missile would “almost certainly” destroy all three blockhouses at a given site with a 99.9 percent probability, the authors calculated. That vulnerability creates what the authors described a “first-mover dilemma.” The arrangement “exacerbates existing strategic instability on the peninsula by presenting North Korea with a strategic target set that is easy to destroy, but only if North Korea escalates to nuclear first use,” the study said. The authors acknowledged it is possible that South Korea’s military believes Pyongyang will not target the sites with nuclear weapons because the KTSSM-Is can reach North Korean conventional artillery threatening Seoul but not its missiles, command-and-control assets, or leadership. But they argued that North Korea is unable to make that distinction with confidence. The DPRK “probably cannot distinguish among variants of the KTSSM with different ranges, and it certainly cannot count on the missiles being aimed exclusively at its conventional artillery,” the authors wrote, noting that Seoul chose to censor the markings on the launcher that identifies the production number and type of missile. If the blockhouses were upgraded with the planned KTSSM-II, all of Pyongyang — “including national leaders, other command-and-control assets and many operational missile units” — would be in range, “giving South Korea an attractive option for decapitating the North Korean leadership,” the study said. “North Korean military planners would likely assume the worst and find it necessary to target the KTSSM sites preemptively in any conflict — conventional or nuclear.” Seoul, in turn, faces the choice of using the missiles before North Korea can disperse its forces and strike the sites. “Overall, South Korea appears to be embracing a deterrent posture that functions only if it has the opportunity to act preemptively,” the authors concluded. The result is a “textbook crisis instability” in which “both South Korea and North Korea have strong incentives to act first in a conflict, but only one will be able to do so,” they added. This composite photo shows President Lee Jae Myung, left, saluting while riding in a parade vehicle during the Armed Forces Day ceremony marking the 77th anniversary of the founding of South Korea's military held at the Gyeryongdae Military Base in Gyeryong, South Chungcheong Province, Oct. 1, 2025, and Hyunmoo-5 ballistic missile. Courtesy of Cheong Wa Dae, Presidential Office Archives A different look South Korean defense analysts acknowledged that the fixed positions introduced trade-offs between survivability and rapid response capabilities, but disputed the suggestion that the missiles’ position was necessarily centered on preemptive strikes. Yang Uk, a military analyst at the Asan Institute for Policy Studies, agreed that fixed launch sites are inherently more vulnerable than mobile systems but noted the deployment appeared to be driven more by operational requirements tied to countering artillery than a broader first-strike doctrine. “It’s not about moving mobile units around, deploying them, and then firing; it’s about seeing the signs and firing instantly to suppress them,” Yang told NK News. “The facilities aren’t meant to be a survivable retaliatory force; rather, they are systems designed to respond instantly the moment the ‘go’ signal is given.” Yang said the South Korean military likely employs additional protective measures, including decoys, and noted that the KTSSM-I can integrate with the K239 Chunmoo multiple-launch rocket system, which is also operated by Poland, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. Seoul could also shift a large portion of the KTSSM force toward a mobile deployment in the future, which suggests the current arrangement may represent an interim configuration rather than a permanent one. Shin Seung-ki, a research fellow at the Korea Institute for Defense Analyses, similarly argued the KTSSM was developed primarily to neutralize North Korean tunnel-based artillery systems during the early stages of a conflict, rather than to support a preemptive strike. “South Korea’s broader posture remains centered on deterrence,” he said. “If deterrence fails, we use them to rapidly neutralize North Korea’s major nuclear-capable missiles and forces that can attack us; we do not approach this from a preemptive strike standpoint.” Shin also questioned whether Pyongyang would necessarily regard the current KTSSM-I deployments as a major threat to its strategic nuclear forces, many of which are believed to be stationed further north and outside the missile’s present range. The expert suggested that if concerns about strategic stability are warranted, they may apply more toward longer-range and higher-yield systems like the Hyunmoo series rather than the comparatively short-range KTSSM. Seoul announced mass production of its newest Hyunmoo-5 ground-to-ground ballistic “monster missile” in Oct. 2025 and began deployment to frontline units in December. The missiles are expected to be fully operational during President Lee Jae Myung’s tenure by 2030. The South Korean military is also developing next-generation missiles as part of its three-axis deterrence system. Read the article at NK News.

Source: https://news.google.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?oc=5