A U.S. Congress report showed that South Korea emerged as the world’s biggest arms importer last year, overtaking major Asian competitors including India, Saudi Arabia and China.

Between 2004 and 2013, the country was ranked between third and eighth in arms purchases, according to an earlier report by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.

Considering Korea’s military power, which is assessed at No. 7 in the world, along with its gross domestic product position of 11th, its arms imports of $7.8 billion in 2014 may not be a surprise.

Large purchases might be unavoidable for the country, given that geopolitical tensions on the Korean Peninsula have been on the rise.

Supporters and dissenters among South Korean citizens have been divided for decades over the arms buildup.

But irrespective of the debate, few would deny the fact that there have been ceaseless irregularities in defense industry procurement.

So news like the No. 1 weapons import ranking often produces allegations that a certain portion of taxpayers’ money might have been exploited in the form of low-key commissions or graft via irregular deals. Citizens have seen a series of kickback scandals in the industry.

Despite the military authority’s continuous efforts to take stern disciplinary measures, the local defense industry has yet to gain public trust.

It is not easy for the authority to eradicate the irregularities and reveal the figures implicated in a short period.

The state-led efforts to ensure transparency should be pushed forward on a mid- and long-term basis in close coordination with law enforcement agencies. In the past, makeshift countermeasures to soothe public anger over corruption scandals have failed to give preemptive solutions.

And at the present stage, authorities should humbly accept that the public will remain cynical about Korea’s rankings as the No. 1 arms importer and No. 7 in military strength. Public distrust could cause frustration of ordinary soldiers and tough backlash on defense taxes.

In this context, we welcome the Defense Ministry’s recent pledge to lift the percentage of civilian members on procurement boards from the current 25 percent to 35 percent.

Earlier in October, government officials, including those from the office of the prime minister, vowed to bolster sanctions against defense contractors involved in corruption, banning them from participating in bidding for arms deals for up to two years.

As a representative irregularity involving the 3,500-ton Navy salvage ship Tongyeong, an officer who fabricated the evaluation paper for its sonar system moved to a company that supplied parts to the salvage vessel after his retirement from the Defense Acquisition Program Administration.

Had he not been arrested for his involvement in the case, he would have been able to maintain the same collusive connections with his former colleagues at DAPA.