• Journal of International Area Studies (JIAS)
• /
• v.15 no.2
• /
• pp.51-68
• /
• 2011

The purpose of this paper is to review China's perception on the U.S. power after the global financial crisis. Although economic power of U.S. was declined by the global financial crisis, U.S. hegemony in the international order still maintains. Gap of national power between U.S. and China may be narrow because of decline of U.S. economic power. It can be predicted China will push a policy that secures an initiative of reform in the global monetary system and is going to take a more cooperative policy without U.S. hegemony power harming China's core interests.

• The Korean Publising Journal, Monthly
• /
• s.215
• /
• pp.8-8
• /
• 1997

• Daejeon Development Forum
• /
• s.30
• /
• pp.28-39
• /
• 2009

• Korea Petroleum Association Journal
• /
• no.9 s.115
• /
• pp.68-69
• /
• 1990

• Journal of International Area Studies (JIAS)
• /
• v.16 no.2
• /
• pp.121-146
• /
• 2012

The purpose of this paper is to study on China's emergence and its influence on international society against the U.S. hegemony. Recently, China's influence has proliferated in Central Asia as well as East Asia at a rapid rate. China, through its soft balancing strategy, increased its influence in Central Asia in response to the U.S. power and behavior. This study analyzes the relationship among China and Central Asia with the view of soft balancing theory. In order to determine whether China's strategy on Central Asia is soft balancing, this paper presents three indicators: 1) Second-tier major power is willing to take a strategy that increase diplomatic cost of hegemony or counter the hegemony influence through using regional and global multilateral cooperation. 2) Second-tier major power is willing to not only increase its influence by strengthening regional economic cooperation, but also check the extension of the hegemony economic influence into its boundary. 3) Second-tier major power intends to prevent expanding hegemony military influence into the region through limited military cooperation and increasing military spending, and denying territory. This paper analyze China's multi-polar strategy, economic and energy cooperation with Central Asia countries, and the military and security cooperation with multilateral organizations such as SCO.

• Maritime Security
• /
• v.1 no.1
• /
• pp.1-30
• /
• 2020

The study started with the question, "Is Japan's normalization of nationalization a return to militarism?" Therefore, in order to analyze this, the characteristics of the international system after the inauguration of the Japanese Empire during World War I and World War II and the Abe's 2nd Cabinet in contemporary Japan were compared. Through this, there were some differences in the characteristics of the international system of the two periods, and as a result, it was intended to derive the differences between the two examples. During the prewar period of World War I, the militaristic Japanese Empire suffered great damage from the national pride of being the only power in Asia through the Paris Enhancement Conference, the Washington Navy Treaty, and the London Navy Treaty. However, the Western powers with colonies in Asia still existed in the region, so it was not possible to turn them into immediate power expansion. Meanwhile, World War II broke out in Europe. As a result, the Western powers had to focus on the whole of Europe, and the militaristic Japanese empire became a regional hegemony without missing the international system characteristic of "the hegemony." Unlike in the past militarism, Japan's case of pursuing common nationalization since 2012 has been carried out in the order of Northeast Asia in the composition of the "cold war" new cold war. In particular, Japan is attempting to transform itself into a normal state to strengthen the US-Japan alliance on a self-reliant level due to the lack of quantitative military power compared to the neighboring countries.

• Journal of International Area Studies (JIAS)
• /
• v.14 no.2
• /
• pp.477-498
• /
• 2010

The Reasons which Rose Revolution, Orange Revolution, and Lemon Revolution had been much argued in international society are as follows: Firstly, the important fact was that authoritarian governments in Georgia, Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan were collapsed not by physical violences and military forces, but by unblooded civil movements, so called Civil Revolution. And it is also called as Colorful Revolution. Secondly, during the advance of three Civil Revolution, hegemony conflicts between Russia and western powers including US appeared. In fact, tensions between the two countries, Russia and US had already occurred in Post-soviet region after dissolution of Soviet Union. Thirdly, as a result of three Civil Revolution, there were built up fullest attentions in international societies about the possibilities of other civil revolutions, that is to say, 'Colorful Revolution' among the countries which were the republics of former USSR. In this respect, in this investigation of Lemon Revolution in Kyrgyzstan as like Rose Revolution in Georgia and Orange Revolution in Ukraine, this article examined the roles and supports toward NGOs of Western powers including US. To my opinion, it is likely that NGOs, with powerful sponsors, become political bodies working through networks and media rather than being rooted in civil society and acting on behalf of citizens. And that powerful sponsors, directly or indirectly financed by outside governments, become involved in political activities. So NGOs have been important roles in promoting civil revolution as political agencies and more political instruments of foreign governments. In the long run, through the Colorful Revolution, it is better to understand that hegemony struggle is beginning between external concerned superpowers including US and Russia, rather than hegemony struggle having directly broke out.

• Proceedings of KOSOMES biannual meeting
• /
• 2017.04a
• /
• pp.276-276
• /
• 2017

• Defense and Technology
• /
• no.7 s.161
• /
• pp.14-21
• /
• 1992

이제 세계적인 대세는 군축이요, 평화이면서 지역적으로는 군사력 확장과 갈등이 더 심화되고 있는 국면을 맞고 있습니다. 이러한 시기에 한국의 과학기술과 방위기술, 방위산업과 한국산업 전반이 갈 길은 기술(dual-Technology)을 중심으로 한 부가가치 높은 기술산업쪽으로 가야겠다는 것입니다. 군사기술과 민생기술이 공생할수 있는 과학기술의 개발, 산업개발쪽으로 가야겠다는 것이 결론입니다.

• Journal of Scientific & Technological Knowledge Infrastructure
• /
• s.12
• /
• pp.74-77
• /
• 2003

현대 사회에서 정보력은 그 국가의 경제력을 의미한다. 선진국에서는 정보화, 표준적인 정보 관리 등에 대한 연구가 진행되어 왔으며, 현재 구축 및 개발된 정보 기술을 바탕으로 정보의 식민지화를 통한 자국의 경제 발전을 도모하고 있다. 국가간 거래의 자유화 및 경제의 지역화가 점차 심화되고 있는 상황속에서, 이러한 선진국의 계획적.전략적 정보기술 패권주의는 우리에게 심각한 위기상황으로 다가와 있다