Seoul: South Korean officials have expressed doubts over the practicality of constructing nuclear-powered submarines at a U.S. shipyard, following a high-profile announcement by U.S. President Donald Trump approving the plan. Prime Minister Kim Min-seok stated that the Philly Shipyard, linked to a South Korean-owned firm, “does not currently possess the capability” to build such advanced naval vessels. This acknowledgment highlights the technical and logistical challenges that lie between political statements and actual implementation.
The controversy emerged after President Trump tweeted his approval for South Korea to develop nuclear-powered submarines, responding to a request from South Korean President Lee Jae-myung for nuclear-fuel-capable submarines. The U.S. announcement, though widely publicized, appears to have outpaced practical feasibility assessments, prompting officials in Seoul to clarify the industrial limitations of the proposed shipyard.
South Korea’s Defense Minister, Ahn Gyu-back, meanwhile, suggested that building the submarines domestically would be “rational” given the country’s world-class shipbuilding industry. South Korean firms are known for their expertise in constructing conventional submarines and large-scale naval vessels. However, he emphasized that formal discussions between Seoul and Washington regarding production sites or technology transfer have not yet taken place.
From the U.S. perspective, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth indicated that the administration would coordinate with the State Department and the Department of Energy to honor the President’s commitment. The statement underscores the strategic intent behind the project: enhancing allied military capabilities in Northeast Asia while also navigating complex nuclear technology considerations, such as fuel supply, safety protocols, and reactor design.
Experts note that nuclear-powered submarines would dramatically boost South Korea’s naval reach and deterrence, particularly in light of regional tensions with North Korea and an assertive Chinese navy. Yet, the current gap between ambition and capability raises questions about timelines, costs, and the role of U.S. shipyards in delivering such advanced defense systems. Technology transfer, industrial readiness, and safety compliance remain major hurdles to achieving operational submarines.
The situation continues to develop, with key points to watch including whether the submarines will ultimately be built in the U.S. or South Korea, how nuclear propulsion technology and fuel supply will be managed, and the potential diplomatic and strategic ramifications in the Asia-Pacific region. Analysts emphasize that while political announcements have drawn attention, the actual implementation of nuclear submarine construction is a complex, long-term process requiring careful planning, international cooperation, and technological investment.