• Title/Summary/Keyword: 정치동맹

Search Result 27, Processing Time 0.025 seconds

The Trend and Implications of the Publication of China's Defense and Security White Papers (중국의 국방·안보백서 발간의 추이와 함의)

  • Kim, Kang-nyeong
    • Korea and Global Affairs
    • /
    • v.3 no.1
    • /
    • pp.39-76
    • /
    • 2019
  • This paper is to analyze the trend and implications of the publication of China's defense and security white papers. To this end the paper is composed of 5 chapters titled instruction; publication details and composition of China's defense and security white paper; the gist of the white paper on national defense and security during the Chinese president Xi Jinping era; the implications of Chinese white paper on national defense and security during the Chinese president Xi Jinping era; and conclusion. The Chinese Ministry of National Defense had published seven books every two years since 1998 to 2010. In 1995, the ministry published a white paper titled 'China's arms control and disarmament' for the first time. In 2013, it published a white paper titled 'The Diversified Employment of China's Armed Forces' and 'China's Military Strategy' in 2015. All have the common characteristic of being a propaganda policy reflecting China's strategic calculations. It seems that China has began to publish defense white papers in a proactive manner, due to the following factors: (1)pressure on China to demand military transparency from neighboring countries such as the United States; (2)the erosion of the 'China threat.' and (3)confidence in the achievement of China's military modernization. The 'active defensive strategy' and the 'strong defense strategy' of Si Jinping are implied in the words "China's dream is a dream of a powerful country and dream of a strong nation is essential to construct a strong nation." His these strategies have raised security concerns for neighboring countries. We need to maintain and reinforce strong ROK-US security cooperation, and hedging strategies to harmoniously promote ROK-China economic cooperation.

Korea's Terrorist Environment and Crisis Management Plan (한국의 테러환경과 위기관리 방안)

  • Jang, Sung Jin;Kim, Young-Hyun;Shin, Seung-Cheol
    • Korean Security Journal
    • /
    • no.52
    • /
    • pp.73-91
    • /
    • 2017
  • This study is based on the political and economic standpoint of each country, Use advanced equipment to prevent new terrorism from causing widespread damage, In order to establish a countermeasures against terrorism in accordance with the reality of Korea, which is effective in responding to terrorist attacks, Korea conducted a SWOT analysis of the terrorist environment and terrorist environment through specialists. First, internal strengths of Korea 's terrorist environment include stable security situation, weakness of religious and ethnic conflicts, strong regulation and control of firearms, and counter terrorism capabilities and know - how accumulated during major international events. Second, the internal weaknesses of the terrorist environment in Korea include the insecurity of the people, the instability caused by the military confrontation with North Korea, the absence of anti-terrorism law system, the difficulty of terrorism control and management by the development of the Internet and IT technology. Third, the external opportunities for Korea 's terrorist environment are as follows: ease of supplementation and learning through cases of foreign terrorism failure, ease of increase of terrorist budget and support with higher terrorism issues, strengthening of counterterrorism through military cooperation with allied nationsRespectively. Fourth, the external threats to the terrorist environment in Korea are the increase of social dissatisfaction due to the continuous influx of defectors and foreign workers, the goal of terrorism from international terrorist organizations through alliance with the United States,Increased frequency of incidents, and increased IS coverage of terrorism around the world. In addition, the SWOT in - depth interviews on the terrorist environment of the expert group were conducted to diagnose and analyze the problems, terrorism awareness and legal system in the Korean terror environment. The results of the study are summarized as follows.First, the basic law on terrorism should be enacted.Second, the establishment of an integrated anti-terrorism organization.Third, securing and nurturing specialized personnel in response to terrorism.

  • PDF

A Study on the Influence of the Balkan Conflict in the Outbreak of World War I: Focusing on Perspective of Patron-Client Relationship between states (제1차 세계대전 발발에서 발칸분쟁의 영향에 관한 연구 :국가 간 후견-피후견 관계의 관점을 중심으로)

  • Lee Young Soo;Park Sang Nam
    • Analyses & Alternatives
    • /
    • v.7 no.1
    • /
    • pp.83-114
    • /
    • 2023
  • Previous studies on international politics dealing with World War I mainly pointed to the balance of power and alliance issues as the causes of war. This view saw the assassination of Sarajevo, the direct cause of the war, as a simple opportunity. As a result, these studies can explain 'what made war inevitable' but still need to fully explain 'why the war started in the Balkans and how it spread throughout Europe.' To compensate for the limitations of these preceding studies, this study aim to find the origin of World War 1 in the context of the Balkan, which began with the conflict between Germany-Austria and Russia-Serbia. To this end, this study analyzed the historical background of the Balkan crisis and the development of the crisis through the concept of Shoemaker and Spanier's patron-client relationship between states and crisis manipulation. As a result, it confirmed that competition between Russia and Germany and crisis manipulation attempts by their client states did not necessarily lead to war. But crisis manipulation has instilled a competitive mindset in patron states that will potentially and cumulatively work. Since then, unexpected crises have occurred, and rival patrons have suspected that their opponents are planning grand strategic conspiracies and challenges. As a result, they have become vulnerable to crisis manipulation by the clients. This situation was the cause of the outbreak of World War I in the context of the Balkans' patron-client relationship.

Eurasian Naval Power on Display: Sino-Russian Naval Exercises under Presidents Xi and Putin (유라시아 지역의 해군 전력 과시: 시진핑 주석과 푸틴 대통령 체제 하에 펼쳐지는 중러 해상합동훈련)

  • Richard Weitz
    • Maritime Security
    • /
    • v.5 no.1
    • /
    • pp.1-53
    • /
    • 2022
  • One manifestation of the contemporary era of renewed great power competition has been the deepening relationship between China and Russia. Their strengthening military ties, notwithstanding their lack of a formal defense alliance, have been especially striking. Since China and Russia deploy two of the world's most powerful navies, their growing maritime cooperation has been one of the most significant international security developments of recent years. The Sino-Russian naval exercises, involving varying platforms and locations, have built on years of high-level personnel exchanges, large Russian weapons sales to China, the Sino-Russia Treaty of Friendship, and other forms of cooperation. Though the joint Sino-Russian naval drills began soon after Beijing and Moscow ended their Cold War confrontation, these exercises have become much more important during the last decade, essentially becoming a core pillar of their expanding defense partnership. China and Russia now conduct more naval exercises in more places and with more types of weapons systems than ever before. In the future, Chinese and Russian maritime drills will likely encompass new locations, capabilities, and partners-including possibly the Arctic, hypersonic delivery systems, and novel African, Asian, and Middle East partners-as well as continue such recent innovations as conducting joint naval patrols and combined arms maritime drills. China and Russia pursue several objectives through their bilateral naval cooperation. The Treaty of Good-Neighborliness and Friendly Cooperation Between the People's Republic of China and the Russian Federation lacks a mutual defense clause, but does provide for consultations about common threats. The naval exercises, which rehearse non-traditional along with traditional missions (e.g., counter-piracy and humanitarian relief as well as with high-end warfighting), provide a means to enhance their response to such mutual challenges through coordinated military activities. Though the exercises may not realize substantial interoperability gains regarding combat capabilities, the drills do highlight to foreign audiences the Sino-Russian capacity to project coordinated naval power globally. This messaging is important given the reliance of China and Russia on the world's oceans for trade and the two countries' maritime territorial disputes with other countries. The exercises can also improve their national military capabilities as well as help them learn more about the tactics, techniques, and procedures of each other. The rising Chinese Navy especially benefits from working with the Russian armed forces, which have more experience conducting maritime missions, particularly in combat operations involving multiple combat arms, than the People's Liberation Army (PLA). On the negative side, these exercises, by enhancing their combat capabilities, may make Chinese and Russian policymakers more willing to employ military force or run escalatory risks in confrontations with other states. All these impacts are amplified in Northeast Asia, where the Chinese and Russian navies conduct most of their joint exercises. Northeast Asia has become an area of intensifying maritime confrontations involving China and Russia against the United States and Japan, with South Korea situated uneasily between them. The growing ties between the Chinese and Russian navies have complicated South Korean-U.S. military planning, diverted resources from concentrating against North Korea, and worsened the regional security environment. Naval planners in the United States, South Korea, and Japan will increasingly need to consider scenarios involving both the Chinese and Russian navies. For example, South Korean and U.S. policymakers need to prepare for situations in which coordinated Chinese and Russian military aggression overtaxes the Pentagon, obligating the South Korean Navy to rapidly backfill for any U.S.-allied security gaps that arise on the Korean Peninsula. Potentially reinforcing Chinese and Russian naval support to North Korea in a maritime confrontation with South Korea and its allies would present another serious challenge. Building on the commitment of Japan and South Korea to strengthen security ties, future exercises involving Japan, South Korea, and the United States should expand to consider these potential contingencies.

  • PDF

The Mutual Assistance System and Cooperation between South Korea, the U.S. and China for the North Korean Nuclear Issue and Unification of the Korean Peninsula (북핵과 한반도 통일에 대한 한·미·중 3국 공조체제와 협력)

  • Kim, Joo-Sam
    • Korea and Global Affairs
    • /
    • v.1 no.1
    • /
    • pp.71-96
    • /
    • 2017
  • This study speculates on responses to the nuclear threats of North Korea and mutual assistance and cooperation between South Korea, the U.S. and China for the unification of the Korean Peninsula. As for the North Koreas nuclear issue and unification of the Korean Peninsula, South Korea is the subject of national division, the U.S. is a responsible country in international issues and does not have diplomatic ties with North Korea. China is a traditional socialist nation and a supporter of North Korea. As North Korea's strategic weapons including nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles are international issues, to defend against Kim Jung-Eun's unexpected acts, the three countries should actively cooperate with each other and develop countermeasures. However, with respect to the road map of the North Koreas issue, there are subtle differences between the U.S. and China in recognition of and sanctions against North Korea as a resolution of the U..N. Security Council. The U.S. has continued a deterrence policy and sanctions against North Korea based on joint threats between South Korea and the U.S. while China has showed a negative position in the process of solving the North Korean nuclear issue because of the unstable security derived from the U.S. 's intervention in the Korean peninsula. North Korea should change its diplomatic policy in a more concrete way towards world peace although it has continued trade of strategic weapons with Middle Eastern countries to maintain its political system. For example, to restart the summit talks and open multilateral security channels. Although the issue of unification of the Korean peninsula should be resolved by South and North Korea themselves, it is strange that South and North Korea depend on the logic of powerful countries for the resolution of a national problem. As for North Koreas nuclear and the Unification issues, peaceful solutions presented by South Korea seem more persuasive than the solution presented by North Korea which did not secure any international support. However, South Korea, the U.S. and China need to develop uni-directional two-tract strategies for sanctions against North Korea and talks with North Korea for peace on the Korean peninsula, and should continue to support the economic independence of North Korea.

Direction of Arms Control to Establish Foundation for Peaceful Reunification in Korean Peninsula (한반도 평화통일 기반구축을 위한 군비통제 추진방향)

  • Kim, Jae Chul
    • Convergence Security Journal
    • /
    • v.15 no.6_1
    • /
    • pp.79-92
    • /
    • 2015
  • It is required to expand area of inter-Korean economic cooperation, being limited to non-military field, to military field and then, to positively promote arms control in order to establish foundation for peaceful reunification in Korean peninsula. Reasons why arms control has not been promoted between South and North Korea in the meantime were such original factors as follows; (1) limit of confidence building between the South and the North, (2) functional limit of arms control itself, (3) institutional structural limit between the South and the North, (4) environmental limit at home and abroad. It is necessary to get out from existing frame and to seek a new paradigm in order to overcome above factors and to realize arms control between the South and the North. First, it is required to have prior political dialog at the South-North high-level talks in order to promote arms control and to exercise 'strategic flexibility' during negotiation and promotion process. For this, 'flexible reciprocity' has to be adopted in compliance with situation and conditions. Second, it is necessary to get out from existing principle of 'confidence building in advance and arms reduction later' but to seek the 'simultaneous driving principle of confidence building and arms reduction' as an eclectic approach. Namely, based on reasonable sufficiency, it is required to promote military confidence building and limited arms reduction in parallel, which is a lower level of arms control. Third, as an advisory body of Prime Minister's Office, it is necessary to install an organization exclusively responsible for arms control and to positively handle arms control issue from the standpoint of national policy strategy. If the South-North high-level talks take place, it is necessary to organize and operate 'South-North Joint Arms Control Promotion Board (tentative name)'. Fourth, it is required to exercise more active diplomatic competence in order to create national consensus on necessity of arms control for peaceful reunification and to form more favorable international environment. Especially, it is necessary to think about how to solve nuclear issue of North Korea together in collaboration with international society and how to maintain balance between ROK-US alliance and Sino-Korean cooperation relations.

The Study of Establishing the Multi-pass Eurasian Railroads (유라시아 철도의 다중경로 구축에 관한 연구)

  • Hahm, Beom-Hee;Huh, Nam-Kyun;Hurr, Hee-Young
    • Korean Business Review
    • /
    • v.21 no.2
    • /
    • pp.137-170
    • /
    • 2008
  • This study is presenting the logistics strategy in the international logistics markets which makes competition and corporation among north-east Asian countries to establishing the multi-pass Eurasian railroads. The countries located in north-east area of Eurasia like China, Japan, Russia and Korea are paying higher costs and disutility to the transportations and communications due to repeated conflicts and confrontations causes from the politic problems. They are being used surface transportation for most of all logistics between Europe and Asia except special merchandises because of characteristic of cargo to be air, the Silk Road remains vestige only which was main logistic passage to this area since BC. So far the Trans-Siberian Railway is being used by Russia mostly as north of Eurasian transport because of difficulties of service. The Trans-China Railway built in 1992 is not accomplishing as a international logistic passages. It is expected to take a long lead time because of characteristic of resource development and poor logistic infrastructure to the countries like Uzbekistan, double landlocked country, Mongolia and Azerbaijan, the countries do not be adjacent to the sea, even they have great economic jump-up plans through the development of their own resources. The Shanghai Cooperation Organization(SCO) start to sail officially in 2001 is constructed with China, Russia, Tadzhikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan as regular members of 6 countries and Mongolia, India, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran as observers 5 countries. It is started as a military alliance to protect terror, but now, it is expended to cooperate with the traffic, transportation, trade and share of energies. The Russia is doing their best to activate TSR as a government target to developnorth area equivalently, and economic develop of far-east Siberia. And also it is agreed provisionally to improve and repair of rail road between Nahjin and Hassan to connect TSR and TKR( Trans-Korea Railroad) by Russia, North Korea and South Korea with Russian's aggressive efforts. The development plan of this area is over lapped with GTI(Greater Tumen Initiative) promoted by UNDP, and is a cooperated project by 5 countries of South Korea, Mongolia, China, Russia and North Korea, subject to review the appropriation of energy, tour, environment, rail road connection between Mongolia and China and establishing a ferry route to north-east Asia. It is Japanese situation to pay attention to Russia and China even they have been supplying large-scope of infrastructure in Mongol area without any charges, target to get East Asia Main Rail Road to connect Mongolia and Zalubino of Russia. In case of the program for the Denuclearization of North Korea is not creeping, it will be accelerated to connect the TKR and TSR, TKR and TCR by somehow attending United States, including developing program promoted by UN ESCAP. As the result, Korean peninsular will continue the central role of competition and cooperation as in the past, now and future of north-east Asia, as of geographical-economics and geographical-politics whether it is requested or not wanted by neighbor countries.

  • PDF