Is South Korea’s Military Going Soft—or Going High-Tech? The Debate Over CCTV Night Watches and Frontline Security

 South Korea is considering a major change to one of its military’s oldest barracks traditions: the overnight soldier watch known as bulchimbang.

AI-generated image

Under a proposed revision announced by the Ministry of National Defense, military units equipped with CCTV cameras, patrol systems and other monitoring measures could stop assigning soldiers to overnight watch duty. The decision would be left to commanders at the battalion level or above, depending on each unit’s security conditions.

Supporters describe the policy as a reasonable modernization that would allow exhausted conscripts to sleep. Critics, however, see it as another sign that South Korea’s military discipline may be weakening at a time when North Korea is expanding its nuclear, missile and drone capabilities.

The debate is not really about cameras alone. It reflects a much larger question facing South Korea:

Can technology reduce unnecessary military duties without weakening readiness, discipline and the ability to respond to an emergency?

What Is Bulchimbang?

Bulchimbang can be translated as “overnight watch” or “night duty.”

In many South Korean military barracks, soldiers take turns remaining awake while other personnel sleep. The duty usually involves monitoring people entering or leaving the barracks, checking for fires or accidents and responding to unusual activity.

It is primarily an internal barracks-management duty. It should not be confused with armed patrols along the Demilitarized Zone or operational guard duties against North Korean infiltration.

Under current military guidelines, overnight watch is generally performed by a two-person team for shifts lasting between one and two hours.

The proposed revision would allow a battalion-level or higher commander to suspend the duty when CCTV cameras, patrols and other monitoring systems can perform the same basic functions.

The proposal was placed under administrative notice, with public consultation scheduled to continue until August 10, 2026. It does not automatically abolish night watch across the entire South Korean military.

Some units have already tested the idea. The Army’s 23rd Security Brigade reportedly reorganized its living quarters, installed CCTV cameras and eliminated traditional overnight watch duty on a trial basis.

Modernization or a Decline in Discipline?

There are reasonable arguments on both sides.

Supporters say waking soldiers in the middle of the night reduces sleep quality and can make them less effective during daytime training. If cameras, alarm systems and periodic patrols can provide reliable monitoring, removing repetitive night duty could improve soldiers’ health and overall combat performance.

South Korea is also facing a serious demographic challenge. The country’s low birth rate is reducing the number of young men available for compulsory military service.

With fewer soldiers, the armed forces can no longer afford to use personnel inefficiently. Technology, automation and civilian outsourcing will inevitably play larger roles in military operations.

However, critics argue that CCTV cameras can record an emergency but cannot always respond to it.

A camera cannot immediately wake sleeping soldiers during a fire, restrain an intruder, help a soldier suffering a medical emergency or make a judgment when an unexpected situation develops.

They also worry that repeatedly removing traditional military duties could gradually weaken alertness and collective responsibility.

The central issue is therefore not whether cameras are useful. It is whether every military unit has enough trained personnel and an effective response system behind those cameras.

The Controversy Over Batons at a Frontline Division

Concerns about military readiness intensified earlier in 2026 after a controversy involving the Army’s 21st Infantry Division in Yanggu, near the inter-Korean border.

A unit reportedly instructed some guards at its entrance checkpoints to carry expandable batons instead of firearms. The instruction was later withdrawn after criticism that soldiers in a frontline division were being asked to guard military facilities without guns.

Defense Minister Ahn Gyu-baek said the controversy resulted from a misunderstanding during the implementation of guidelines intended to use nonlethal equipment at facilities where armed security was considered unnecessary.

He emphasized that soldiers in areas directly facing North Korea would continue to carry firearms.

This distinction matters. The controversy concerned guards at certain military entrance gates, not a general order to disarm soldiers patrolling the DMZ.

Nevertheless, the incident created an image problem for the government. To many South Koreans, the idea of soldiers at a frontline division carrying batons instead of rifles appeared inconsistent with the continuing military threat from North Korea.

South Korea’s First Civilian Defense Minister in 64 Years

Ahn Gyu-baek took office in July 2025 as South Korea’s first defense minister in 64 years who had not built a career as a professional military officer.

Before becoming minister, Ahn was a five-term lawmaker with extensive experience on the National Assembly’s Defense Committee. His appointment was presented as an important step toward strengthening civilian control over the armed forces.

Civilian control is a core principle of democratic government. South Korea’s modern history includes decades of military-led authoritarian rule, making civilian oversight particularly significant.

Yet Ahn’s own military background has also attracted political scrutiny.

He served as a short-term conscript, commonly associated with South Korea’s former local defense-service system, rather than as a career officer. Political opponents have questioned whether he has enough direct military experience to lead the armed forces.

More seriously, allegations have resurfaced concerning his military record. A complaint filed in 2026 accused Ahn of giving false testimony about claims that he had been absent without authorization during his service decades ago.

These remain allegations. The unusual length of his service and the filing of a complaint do not by themselves prove desertion, and the issue should not be reported as an established fact without a final official finding.

Still, the controversy has become part of a broader political debate over his credibility and the direction of defense policy under President Lee Jae-myung’s administration.

South Korea Is Also Investing Heavily in New Warfare

It would be misleading to describe every recent change as military weakening.

South Korea has announced an ambitious plan to train approximately 500,000 military personnel as drone operators. The Defense Ministry wants drones to become a common battlefield tool that soldiers can use as naturally as personal firearms.

The military plans to introduce around 11,000 drones in 2026 and expand the number substantially over the following years. It is also developing counter-drone systems, including lasers, microwave weapons and artificial intelligence-based technologies.

The shift reflects lessons from Ukraine and conflicts in the Middle East, where inexpensive drones have transformed surveillance, targeting and battlefield operations.

North Korea is also improving its drone capabilities and gaining new military experience through cooperation with Russia. South Korea therefore has strong reasons to replace some labor-intensive duties with advanced technology.

The country’s military is not simply becoming less armed. In many areas, it is trying to become more automated, networked and technologically advanced.

Technology Cannot Replace Responsibility

CCTV cameras, drones and artificial intelligence can make South Korea’s military more efficient. They can reduce repetitive duties, compensate for declining troop numbers and provide commanders with information that human guards may miss.

But military technology is only effective when it supports trained people and clear command structures.

A camera that nobody monitors is not security. A drone without a skilled operator is not combat power. A nonlethal weapon issued without clear operational guidelines can create confusion rather than safety.

South Korea should therefore establish strict conditions before allowing units to eliminate overnight watch duty.

Units should have reliable camera coverage, automatic alarms, emergency response personnel, backup systems and regular inspections. Commanders should also remain accountable if reduced guard duties create preventable security failures.

Final Thoughts

South Korea’s military is not simply choosing between tradition and comfort. It is attempting to redesign a conscription-based armed force for an era of demographic decline, drones and automated surveillance.

Eliminating unnecessary overnight duties could improve sleep and make soldiers more effective during actual training. Using nonlethal weapons at appropriate facilities could also reduce the risk of accidental shootings.

However, modernization should not become an excuse for unclear orders, weaker readiness or reduced responsibility.

South Korea remains technically at war with North Korea. Its military must therefore judge every reform by a simple standard: Does this change improve the ability to detect, decide and respond during a real emergency?

Technology can reduce unnecessary burdens, but it cannot completely replace human judgment, immediate action and military discipline.

South Korea’s real challenge is not choosing between soldiers and technology. It is ensuring that modernization does not weaken readiness.

Sources: Yonhap News Agency on the CCTV night-watch proposal, Newsis on the baton controversy, Reuters on South Korea’s drone expansion