Misguided merger
-Academy integration could hurt each service's distinct expertise-

The government and the ruling party agreed on July 16 to establish the Korean Armed Forces Academy by integrating the Military, Naval and Air Force academies and locating the new institution at Jaundae, a military education and training complex in Daejeon, about 140 kilometers south of Seoul.

The Ministry of National Defense's primary justification for integrating the three service academies is to strengthen camaraderie or interservice cooperation.

No matter how much modern warfare comes to center on joint operations as warfare evolves with artificial intelligence, drones, space and other emerging technologies, the specialized expertise required for each service's distinct operational domain must not be overlooked.

If cadets graduate from an integrated military academy, they will still have to serve in one of the three services — the Army, Navy or Air Force. If they devote a significant amount of time to integrated education for all three services, then instruction in the tactics, doctrine and weapons systems unique to each service will inevitably receive less attention. If they have not fully mastered land, sea and air warfare, the effectiveness of joint operations will inevitably suffer.

The Naval Academy in Jinhae, South Gyeongsang Province, is adjacent to a naval base. Its cadets are molded into officers in an environment surrounded by the sea and naval vessels. Moving them to Jaundae would mean training future naval officers at an inland location. It is hard to understand why they should be trained that way in a country surrounded by the sea on three sides.

The Air Force Academy faces a similar situation. Located in Cheongju, North Chungcheong Province, it has an affiliated flight training airfield on campus. However, Jaundae does not have a runway where cadets can experience flying fighter jets.

The ministry claims that the issue can be adequately resolved by sending cadets to nearby military ports or airfields for practical training during designated periods. Yet a deterioration in the quality of professional training is plainly inevitable.

The expectation that camaraderie will be strengthened by bringing Army, Navy and Air Force cadets together under one roof is ill-conceived. There are virtually no examples for this anywhere in the world. The United States, home to the world's strongest military, maintains separate academies for its three services and fosters camaraderie through joint exercises after cadets receive their commissions. South Korea's military camaraderie is likely to be enhanced, in particular, through expanded combined exercises with an ally that has built up extensive experience in this field.

The ministry did not go through a proper process of gathering opinions before unveiling the integration plan. The government says it will hold public hearings and policy briefings to seek public input, but it has put the cart before the horse. The criticism that the government is engaging in hasty and closed-door policymaking is only natural, as it has made its decision first and sought public opinion afterward.

The joint alumni association of the Army, Navy and Air Force academies fiercely opposes the plan, calling it "a scheme to sever the identities, histories and traditions of each service." Various opinion polls have shown that well over half of respondents oppose the integration of the academies.

The integration of military education institutions and the strengthening of camaraderie are part of President Lee Jae Myung's campaign pledges under the banner of "overcoming insurrection and restoring democracy."

The ministry launched a special advisory committee in September 2025, tasking it with reviewing whether to merge the military academies. The committee submitted its recommendation on integration to the ministry in January.

It is questionable whether the integration of the military academies is being pursued as part of a political decision to hold those involved in the Dec. 3, 2024 martial law declaration accountable.

As a majority of the public opposes the integration plan, there is no reason to rush the implementation of the campaign pledge. The government should take the time to reassess the plan from the ground up.
(END)