Jointness is a core concept of ROK military reform plan. ROK military has pursued to transform its military organization and capability for enhancing jointness and joint operation after the 1990s. It has strengthened the organization of JCS(Joint Chief of Staffs), introduced joint education, and acquired modernized weapons and equipment proper for joint operation. The 1986 Glodwater-Nichols Act of the U.S. military and lessons of the recent war provided a good direction how ROK military should take measures to enhance jointenss. In fact, defense reform efforts for jointness has produced invaluable fruits for transforming industrial age military forces into information age one which possesses more strong combat capabilities and develops joint business for efficient defense management. Nevertheless, there are many issues ROK military should address for stepping up the jointness. This paper well analyzes practical problems and issues ROK military faces to develop jointenss and draws policy recommendations for the policy makers.

It is a commons sense that the Republic of Korea is a maritime state that depends its survival on International Trade and International Economy. Korea was a peninsula and do it can be both maritime and continental state by its choice. However, after the national division in 1945, South Korea had became a virtual island and pursue a maritime way for national development in the past 60 plus years. Now, South Korea is becoming a world's 12 th largest major trading and maritime state. South Korea has far more ships per capita than any other nations in the world and its economy is heavily depend upon the imports and exports with other nations in the world that pass through the oceans. Therefore, the Koreans regard the security of the sea lanes of communication as vital to the survival of the nation. The SLOC is the life line for Republic of Korea. Since the early 1990s, immediately after the Cold War was over, South Koreans began to recognize the importance of Sea Routes and thus began to build a navy that can handle with the new problems of the post Cold War era. However, the maritime security environments of the Republic of Korea today is shaky and dangerous. Almost every water near the Korean peninsula, some kind of international confrontations are going on. Territorial disputes on Dok do, Senkaku, Scarbrough, Shisha, Nansha and Eodo between and among Korea, Japan, China, Taiwan, Phillipines, Indonesia and Vietnam are the examples. In this essay, the author argues that the S. Korean efforts and capabilities to deal with these challenges are not enough and exhorts more efforts and more powerful navy for the Korean people.

Northeast Asia has a multi-layered security structure within which major economic and military powers both confront one another and cooperate at the same time. Major regional powers maintain mutually cooperative activities in the economic sphere while competing one another in order to secure a dominant position in the politico-military arena. The multifarious threats, posed by the North Korea's nuclear development, territorial disputes, and maritime demarcation line issues demonstrate that Northeast Asia suffers more from military conflicts and strifes than any other region in the world. Specifically, major maritime security threats include North Korea's nuclear proliferation and missile launching problems as well as military provocations nearby the Northern Limit Line(NLL) as witnessed in the Cheonan naval ship and Yeonpyong incidents. The ROK Navy has been supplementing its firm military readiness posture in consideration of North Korea's threats on the NLL. It has performed superb roles in defending the nation and establishing the Navy advanced and best picked. It also has been conducive to defend the nation from external military threats and invasion, secure the sea lanes of communications, and establish regional stability and world peace. In order to effectively cope with the strategic environment and future warfares, the ROK Navy needs to shift its military structure to one that is more information and technology intensive. In addition, it should consolidate the ROK-US alliance and extend military cooperative measures with neighboring countries in the Asia-Pacific region. Evolved steadily for the last 60 years, the ROK-US alliance format has contributed to peace and security on the Korean peninsula and in the Northeast Asian region. In conclusion, this manuscript contends that the ROK Navy should strive for the establishment of the following: (1) Construction of Jeju Naval Base; (2) Strategic Navy Equipped with War Deterrence Capabilities; (3) Korean-type of System of Systems; (4) Structure, Budget and Human Resources of the Naval Forces Similar to the Advanced Countries; and (5) Strategic Maritime Alliance and Alignment System as well as Domestic Governance Network for the Naval Families.

Withe increased North Korea's security threats, the South Korean navy has been faced with deteriorating security environment. While North Korea has increased asymmetric forces in the maritime and underwater with the development of nuclear weapons, and China and Japan have made a large investment in the buildup of naval forces, the power of the Pacific fleet of the US, a key ally is expected to be weakened. The biggest threat comes from China's intervention in case of full-scale war with North Korea, but low-density conflict issues are also serious problems. North Korea has violated the Armistice Agreement 2,660 times since the end of Korean War, among which the number of marine provocations reaches 1,430 times, and the tension over the NLL issue has been intensifying. With tension mounting between Korea and Japan over the Dokdo issue and conflict escalating with China over Ieo do Islet, the US Navy has confronted situation where it cannot fully concentrate on the security of the Korean peninsula, which leads to need for strengthening of South Korea's naval forces. Let's look at naval forces of neighboring countries. North Korea is threatening South Korean navy with its increased asymmetric forces, including submarines. China has achieved the remarkable development of naval forces since the promotion of 3-step plan to strengthen naval power from 1989, and it now retains highly modernized naval forces. Japan makes an investment in the construction of stat of the art warship every year. Since Japan's warship boasts of its advanced performance, Japan's Maritime Self Defense Force is evaluated the second most powerful behind the US Navy on the assumption that submarine power is not included in the naval forces. In this situation, naval power construction of South Korean navy should be done in phases, focusing on the followings; First, military strength to repel the energy warship quickly without any damage in case of battle with North Korea needs to be secured. Second, it is necessary to develop abilities to discourage the use of nuclear weapons of North Korea and attack its nuclear facilities in case of emergency. Third, construction of military power to suppress armed provocations from China and Japan is required. Based on the above naval power construction methods, the direction of power construction is suggested as follows. The sea fleet needs to build up its war potential to defeat the naval forces of North Korea quickly and participate in anti-submarine operations in response to North Korea's provocations. The task fleet should be composed of 3 task flotilla and retain the power to support the sea fleet and suppress the occurrence of maritime disputes with neighboring countries. In addition, it is necessary to expand submarine power, a high value power asset in preparation for establishment of submarine headquarters in 2015, develop anti-submarine helicopter and load SLAM-ER missile onto P-3C patrol aircraft. In case of maine corps, division class military force should be able to conduct landing operations. It takes more than 10 years to construct a new warship. Accordingly, it is necessary to establish plans for naval power construction carefully in consideration of reality and future. For the naval forces to safeguard maritime sovereignty and contribute to national security, the acquisition of a huge budget and buildup of military power is required. In this regard, enhancement of naval power can be achieved only through national, political and military understanding and agreement. It is necessary to let the nation know that modern naval forces with improved weapon system can serve as comprehensive armed forces to secure the command of the sea, perform defense of territory and territorial sky and attack the enemy's strategic facilities and budget inputted in the naval forces is the essential source for early end of the war and minimization of damage to the people. If the naval power construction is not realized, we can be faced with a national disgrace of usurpation of national sovereignty of 100 years ago. Accordingly, the strengthening of naval forces must be realized.

We are witnessing the growing maritime tension on the East Asian sea these days. Each naval powers in the region are competing each other to acquire more advanced naval capabilities. Based upon the rapid economic development, China is actively beefing up its naval capabilities and expand its boundary of naval activities all over the East Asian region. Chinese Navy already unveiled its expansive naval strategy replacing the traditional concept of 'Near-Sea Defense' with the new concept of 'Far-Sea Defense' strategy. In response to potential rival's naval build up, the U.S. is redeploying its naval forces focusing on the Asia-Pacific region. The U.S. enhances its joint naval exercises with the countries in the region, such as Japan, India, Australia and so on. In addition, Washington is devising new naval strategy under the concept of 'Air-Sea Battle' to deter Peking's so-called 'Anti-Access/ Area Denial(A2AD)' strategy. As a close ally of the U.S., Japan also disclosed its clear intention to strengthen the Maritime Self Defense Force(MSDF)'s capabilities by introducing the new concept of 'Dynamic Defense Force' in 2011. Under the new concept, JMSDF is pursuing the additional acquisition of submarines, quasi-aircraft carriers, Aegis-equipped destroyers, etc. Under the new president's strong leadership, Russia is also invigorating the naval build-up. Especially, Russia is fortifying the Pacific Fleet's naval assets by deploying new-type of naval ships such as the Mistral which was imported from France. In the midst of competitive naval build-up among the major naval powers in the region, we are observing the growing maritime conflicts on the East China Sea as well as South China Sea. Those naval conflicts can pose severe threats to our national interests. Maritime conflicts on the East or South China Sea can imperil our sea lanes which will be indispensible for national economic development. Neighboring countries' maritime conflicts also will cast an uncertainty on the path to mobilize international cooperation to resolve the North Korean issues. We should contribute to ease the maritime tension in the region by various ways. First, we should actively galvanize the bilateral maritime dialogue among the major naval powers in the region. Second, we also should take the lead to form a multilateral maritime cooperation mechanism in the region. Above all, we should set the aim to be a peaceful maritime power who can contribute to a building of stable maritime order in the region with a considerable naval power.

As is generally known, the sovereignty dispute over the Senkaku Islands between China/Taiwan and Japan was triggered by a report commissioned by the UN in 1968, which reported the possibility of a substantial amount of petroleum and natural gas buried in the South China Sea. When the administrative authority over the Ryukyu Islands was transferred from the US to Japan in 1972, jurisdiction over the Senkaku Islands was also transferred. A dispute ensued between China (Taiwan) and Japan over the Senkaku Islands except during the period in which formal relations were established between the two states. This paper will take a look particularly at the events that occurred in the 2000's and discuss their recent trends and aspects of the dispute. Though China and Japan agreed to joint resource development in 2008, the agreed zone was a very small area adjacent to the Korea-Japan Joint Continental Shelf Development Zone, and the points of agreement have not been implemented. China has been developing four oil fields including Chunxiao in its waters adjacent to the median line asserted by Japan. However, China also has been excluding the participation of Japan, while Japan has been strongly objecting to the unilateral development of oil fields by China. If indeed the oil fields on China's side are connected past the median line asserted by Japan, then China's unilateral development will infringe upon the potential sovereign rights of Japan, thereby violating international law.

Over the past few years, due to the climate change of the earth, the Arctic's sea ice cover is undergoing a historic transformation - thinning, extent reduction in all seasons, and mitigation in the area of multi-year ice in the central Arctic Ocean. These changes allow for increases in maritime access throughout the Arctic Ocean and for potential longer seasons of navigation and possibly transarctic voyage in the summer. These changes also allow more exploration for oil, gas, and other minerals. The Arctic is now an archetype of the complex, multi-dimensional global problems of the twenty-first century. Military security, environmental security, and economic security interact. The potentially enormous economic stakes, sufficient to change the strategic balance among the states of the region, set off competitive pressures for national advantage. Korea, which is heavily dependent upon the sea lane in terms of transportation of its exports and imports, is very much interested in the Arctic sea routes. Korea believes that the Artic sea route, particularly the Northern Sea Route (NSR), could serve as a new useful sea lane, which will enable shorter times between East Asia and Europe, thus resulting in substantial cost saving for ship operators. In addition to shipping, Korea is interested in other Arctic-related maritime industries. Korea, as a leading shipbuilder in the global market, is interested in building ice breakers, drill ships, and other vessels which can contribute to safe operation in Arctic resource development and exploration. Korea, as one of the future stakeholders in Arctic maritime activities, should be ready to foster international cooperation in the region.

Morgenthau claims that in international relations, there are the economic, political, and military powers that enable a nation to achieve its political and diplomatic goals. This paper explores the possibility of resolving international conflicts with naval power. First, the theoretical and historical perspective, naval power was used as a final resort to force a nation's political or diplomatic objective on an enemy nation when negotiations failed, and this was done through the physical and psychological destruction of the enemy by naval power. But as the use of military power has decreased because of the invention of the nuclear weapon, the existence of a large and capable navy deterrent has become one of the most useful military options among a nation's diplomatic measures. In other words, he focused on the political usefulness of naval power as a deterrent and coercive diplomatic tool for persuading other nations to acquiesce, rather than using naval power and actual military action as a final resort. The reason for this is that compared to army and air force, navy's flexibility, continuity, and the ability to deter are greater. The navy provides excellent accessibility through its wide mobility on the sea, and it has been shown through research that the navy possesses a political usefulness that facilitates the solution of conflicts through presence, naval intervention, and naval blockade. On the other hand, among the factors that could improve the influence of the navy are alliance relations, a reliable and powerful navy, carrots and sticks that it would have to deal with in the case of successful or unsuccessful negotiations, and support from international opinion. On this paper I introduce E.N.Luttwak's naval suasion theory. By the his theory, there are two mode of naval suasion. One is latent naval suasion the other is active suasion. Latent suasion there are deterrent mode and supportive mode. Active naval suasion there are coercive mode and supportive mode. Coercive mode has positive and negative. The limitations of naval suasion have been identified as follows. First, because the objective of the use of naval power is persuading enemy nations, the results are unpredictable. Second, the leaders of all countries possess limited understanding on the complexities of naval power and therefore lack understanding of the usefulness of naval power when choosing options. Third, in case of failure through naval suasion, prestige and reputation of a nation can be damaged. Finally, the following are additional possible research topic. First, a research on the decision making process of choosing naval power as a measure to resolve conflicts is needed. Lastly, research on the size of the navy and types of ships required for efficient naval suasion is needed. Today's world requires cooperative security regime so that middle class navy also requires political use of naval power in solving international conflicts. Therefore, additional research on this topic is needed.

History, demonstrating convincingly that pirates have arisen continuously for a lengthy period of time throughout the world, is able to become a cooperative study of international law in terms of pirates matters ; Viking pirates. There are beneficial topics for the study of true nature of viking activities and the settlement of present pirates matters ; How were the pirates activities of Vikings, What sort of relations do they have between Vikings and other pirates which have arisen in world history, What are the differences compared to present concept of pirates. There were active pirates activities in the coast and waters of Scandinavia even before the period of the Migration Age because of geographical condition. With those experiences, Vikings began to ambush Britain Islands sailing across the North Sea since the late 8C, ages of migration in earnest. They ambushed all coasts of the European Continent expending boundary until the late of 11C. Pirate activities in a sort of guerrilla operations were operated when they encountered Islams in the Iberian Peninsula and the coast of North Africa. They showed twofold attitudes ; if the defence of the region and sea was weak, they plundered, or if strong, traded. In plundered europeans' position, Vikings were pirates with cruelty and barbarians. In vikings position, they were normal human beings who did a pirate activity to lead a better life. Viking pirates showed different characteristics in terms of three aspects ; area and aspect of action, activity after piracy. Meanwhile, Viking pirates showed several differences with pirates defined in terms of modern international law. Among the satisfying conditions of pirates, required by the international law of the sea, Vikings fulfilled animus furandi, desire for gain, activities for hatred and revenge, and private ends. Other conditions including attacking authority of the vessels, activities toward private ships, activities in the coast and the land, and illegal terroristic activities toward ships are found in viking pirates. However, Viking pirates do not show the activities in high seas and in the outside of a State's jurisdiction. In addition, it cannot be excluded that they pirated with vessels of regional leaders and the Sovereign, not private ships. Contrary to the definition of concept in terms of modern international law toward pirates, Viking invaded foreign waters, came on shore to foreign land and island, went up-stream the rivers to the back of interior, and attacked churches and abbeys. Strangely, they sometimes settled down in the places where they had pirated. Today, pirates appearing in history and defined in international law exist simultaneously and separately. It means, the historical nature and the nature under the international law are turning up differently. Historical cases of pirates should be reflected to modern international law. If so, it seems that the clue to solve pirate problems can be arranged. History is the immortal living thing, which not just existed as a past but reflects present.

한국은 세계 유일의 분단국가로서 대륙으로는 북한과 대치 중에 있으며, 해양으로는 세계 강대국인 중국, 일본, 러시아 등에 의해서 둘러 쌓여 있다. 이러한 안보환경에서 최근 북한은 김정은 후계세습을 위해 천안함 피격사건과 연평도 포격도발 사건을 감행하였으며, 이러한 북한의 도발위협은 김정일 사후 지속되고 있다. 그러나 한국은 북한이라는 현존 위협에 대비함과 동시에 주변국으로 상정할 수 있는 잠재적 위협에도 대비해야 한다. 특히 잠재적 위협의 경우 해상에서 한국과 국가이익이 상충되고 있으며, 이들 모두 한국보다 강한 해군력을 보유하고 있을 뿐만 아니라 최근 들어 해군력을 강화하고 있다. 따라서 최근의 안보정세는 한국해군이 향후 어떠한 해양전략을 추구해야 하는지에 대한 재정립을 요구하고 있다고 할 수 있다. 본 논문은 한국의 잠재적 위협인 러시아와 일본 간에 발생한 러일전쟁을 통해 미래 위협에 대비한 최정예해군(Post modern navy)으로 도약하기 위한 한국해군의 발전방향을 도출하고, 이를 달성하기 위한 4가지 핵심개념을 제시하였다. 구체적으로 이는 최정예해군으로서 해양통제와 거부를 균형적으로 갖추고, 원정작전 수행능력을 보유하며, 해양경찰과 결속력이 있는 유대관계를 형성 및 북한의 비대칭전력에 대한 대응능력을 갖춘 해군이라고 설명할 수 있다. 결국 한국해군은 대륙세력인 북한의 위협에 대비하고 동시에 미래 잠재적 위협에 대비함과 동시에 해양에서의 국가이익을 보호해야 한다고 할 수 있다. 한국은 해양국가이다. 한국은 결코 바다를 포기할 수 없으며, 한국해군이 추구하는 해양전략은 국가의 운명을 결정짓는다고 해도 과언이 아닐 것이다. 이러한 측면에서 본 논문은 향후 한국해군이 어떠한 해양전략을 추구해야 하는지에 대해 하나의 방향을 제시하고 있다.