• 통상정보연구
• /
• 제12권4호
• /
• pp.235-253
• /
• 2010

The export is an important economic growth strategy in South Korea. South Korea is strongly dependant on external trades. Bilateral trade between China and South Korea has been grown rapidly in recent years. The China is now Korea's first-largest trading partner. Thus, the Korea-China Free Trade Agrement (FTA) in South Korea's trade operations is very important. A discussion of Korea-China bilateral FTA commenced in 2004 November. This paper is to recognize the phenomenon of major issued fields in the Korea-China FTA such as a manufacturing, agriculture, customs and seek a negotiation strategy that are summarized as follows. In terms of trade based on manufacturing, it is necessary to divide into a private, general reduction and priority reduction item to recognize whether it is complementary or competitive on the specific industry in the FTA negotiation by using an index regarding supplement and competition of these two countries. In particularly sensitive agricultural field, FTA should be progressed gradually after giving a certain period of time of grace period on the basis of various flexible tariff systems in order to minimize agriculture damage as a result of the rapid growth from import of Chinese agricultural goods.

• 분석과 대안
• /
• 제7권3호
• /
• pp.1-26
• /
• 2023

This article will analyze and forecast important variables and dynamics in global power politics after the war in Ukraine. It tries to use several perspectives to analyze international relations, particularly liberal internationalism and structural realism. In short, core variables are as follows; First, how is the US-led liberal international order and globalization being adjusted? Second, how will the U.S.-China strategic competition, which is the biggest and structural variable, cause changes in the international order in the future? The third variable, how stable are Sino-Russia relations in the context of a structuring U.S.-China-Russia strategic new triangle? Fourth, to what extent will third middle hedging states outside the U.S. and China be able to exercise strategic autonomy in the face of multipolarization? To summarize, the first of these four variables is the largest basic variable at the global political and economic level in terms of its impact on the international community, and it has been led by the United States. The second variable, in terms of actors, seems to be the most influential structural variable in global competition, and the US-China strategic competition is likely to be a long game. Thus the world will not be able to escape the influence of the competition between the two global powers. For South Korea, this second variable is probably the biggest external variable and dilemma. The third variable, the stability of Sino-Russia relations, determines balance of global power in the 21st century. The U.S.-China-Russia strategic new triangle, as seen in the current war in Ukraine, will operate as the greatest power variable in not only global power competition but also changes in the international order. Just as the U.S. is eager for a Sino-Russia fragmentation strategy, such as a Tito-style wedge policy to manage balance of power in the early years of the Cold War, it needs a reverse Kissinger strategy to reset the U.S.-Russia relationship, in order to push for a Sino-Russia splitting in the 21st century. But with the war in Ukraine, it seems that this fragmentation strategy has already been broken. In the context of Northeast Asia, whether or not the stability of Sino-Russia relations depends not only on the United States, but also on the Korean Peninsula. Finally, the fourth variable is a dependent variable that emerged as a result of the interaction of the above three variables, but simultaneously it remains to be seen that this variable is likely to act as the most dynamic and independent variable that can promote multilateralism, multipolarization, and pan-regionalism of the global international community in the future. Taking into account these four variables together, we can make an outlook on the change in the international order.

• Strategy21
• /
• 통권36호
• /
• pp.94-120
• /
• 2015

The Asia-Pacific Region has emerged as a arena of geopolitical competition between the U.S. and China. The Obama administration of the U.S. had laid out the concept of rebalancing strategy toward the region, concentrating its 60 percent of Naval Forces to the region till 2020 and consolidating its network of allies and partners. Whereas Chinese leader Xi Jinping also put forward the concept of new type of major power relations concerning its relations with the U.S. and a concept of 'the Asian Community of Common Destiny' aiming at a more intensified mutual relation among countries in the region. In doing so, Asia-Pacific region gradually became the arena where mutual competition and cooperation between the U.S. and China has crossfired. As a close ally to the U.S. and a partner to Japan, South Korea should develop trilateral naval cooperation by holding joint naval drill with the aim of humanitarian support and disaster relief. At the same time, Seoul also should make efforts to proceed mutual confidence building with Beijing by deepening military-to-military cooperation. These policy options will be helpful to enhance Seoul's security posture in the region.

• Strategy21
• /
• 통권39호
• /
• pp.114-139
• /
• 2016

Korea and China are neighboring countries with close contacts in many areas from long time ago, and have shared interests in maintaining peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula, and in deepening economic relationship which has been mutually complementary in their nature. Therefore their bilateral relations has been developed at a remarkable pace to the extent that it can't be better than now. However, the differences in their responses to North Korean nuclear test and ensuing long-range ballistic missile test-fire and the Chinese strong concern on the possible deployment of THAAD (Terminal High Altitude Air Defence) anti-missile system in Korea show that there are some weaknesses in their relations. For example, Korea is not still confident that China would fully implement the sanction measures contained in the UNSC resolution and I argue that Chinese proposal of parallel negotiation of the denuclearization and the replacement of Korean armistice with the Peace Agreement is not much persuasive. In THAAD issue, if Korea comes to conclusion in the future that THAAD is the most effective way to counter North Korean threats, Korea should make every efforts to assure China that Korea-US alliance is not targeting China, and the THAAD is a defensive system, not damaging Chinese security. In the longer-term, deepening strategic distrust and competition between the US and China in this part of East Asia, changing nature of economic cooperation between Korea and China, and the revival of 'great country mentality' by Chinese people together with the rising nationalism in both Korea and China would cast shadow on Korea-China relation in the years ahead, unless properly handled. In this regard, I suggest that the security communications between the two countries be further strengthened, and the tri-lateral dialogue channel be established among the three countries of Korea, the US and China, particularly on North Korean issues. I also suggest the new pattern of economic cooperation be sought, considering the changing economic environment in China, while strengthening the efforts to understand each other through more interactions between the two peoples.

• Journal of Korea Trade
• /
• 제23권4호
• /
• pp.1-16
• /
• 2019

Purpose - This research empirically proves that global shipbuilding industry leadership has moved to China from Korea. Design/Methodology - Competitiveness is measured by AHP for the weights of comprehensive competitiveness, which is the output mixture of three attributive factors: shipbuilding technology, shipbuilding contract price, and export credit. Findings - China is far ahead of Korea for standard vessels such as bulkers and containerships with competitiveness weights of 0.762 and 0.612, respectively, against 0.238 and 0.388 of Korea. Korea is maintaining its competitiveness only in LNG carriers (174k CBM) with a competitiveness weight 0.621. China and Korea have similar competitiveness for chemical carriers, complex vessels with a small hull size. The sources of Chinese competitiveness are shipbuilding contract price and export credit. With the majority share of standard vessel types in the world fleet, China will hold a bigger market share than Korea in the global shipbuilding industry in the forthcoming years. Implications - The swing factors of market power are shipbuilding technology and contract price. If China fails to further develop shipbuilding technology for shipowners worried about the reliability of the Chinese-built vessels, shipowners may swing back to Korea. The rising Chinese labor cost will expedite this swing in the forthcoming competition. Originality/value - To the best of the author's knowledge, this is the first paper that quantitatively examines the competitiveness of shipbuilding between China and Korea by comparing attributive factors for competitiveness.

• KDI Journal of Economic Policy
• /
• 제38권2호
• /
• pp.45-62
• /
• 2016

This paper analyzes changes in the export potential and competitiveness of China, Japan, and Korea. The analysis of Japan's export market share reveals that in sectors where Korea's potential was strong in the early 1990s, Japan's market share diminished. This suggests the possibility that Korea was catching up with Japan, eating into Japan's market share. The same analysis of Korea's export market share in the 2000s shows, for items in which China's export potential was high, Korea's market share has declined comparatively since 2010, with the tendency growing much larger. China's export potential continues to expand in markets for Korea's key export products, making it difficult to rule out the possibility that Korea's competitiveness in key export products will be hindered, driven by the catching up of China. To respond to these challenges, it is important for Korea continuously to foster and enhance creative and core capabilities that latecomers will not easily be able to emulate.

• 아태비즈니스연구
• /
• 제14권4호
• /
• pp.431-444
• /
• 2023

Purpose - This study applies the traditional Structure-Conduct-Performance (SCP) model from industrial organization theory to investigate the relationship between market structure and performance in China's banking industry. Design/methodology/approach - For analysis, financial data from the People's Bank of China's "China Financial Stability Report" and financial reports of 6 state-owned banks and 11 joint-stock banks for the period 2010 to 2021 were collected to create a balanced panel dataset. The study employs panel fixed-effects regression analysis to assess the impact of changes in market structure and ownership structure on performance variables including return on asset, profitability, costs, and non-performing loan ratios. Findings - Empirical findings highlight significant differences in the effects of market structure between state-owned and joint-stock banks. Notably, increased market competition positively correlates with higher profits for state-owned banks and with lower costs for joint-stock banks. Research implications or Originality - State-owned banks demonstrate larger scale and stability, yet they struggle to respond effectively to market shifts. Conversely, joint-stock banks face challenges in raising profitability against competitive pressures. Additionally, the study emphasizes the importance for Chinese banks to strengthen risk management due to the increase of non-performing loans with competition. The results provide insights into reform policies for Chinese banks regarding the involvement of private sector in the context of market liberalization process in China.

• Strategy21
• /
• 통권43호
• /
• pp.175-199
• /
• 2018

Recent marine territorial disputes in the East China Sea and the South China Sea have come to us as a great threat. China, which has recently established the China Coast Guard and has rapidly developed maritime security forces, is trying to overcome the various conflict countries with its power. Japan is also strengthening intensively its maritime security forces. Since Korea, China, and Japan are geographically neighboring and sharing maritime space in Northeast Asia, there is no conflict between maritime jurisdiction and territorial rights among the countries. The struggle for initiative in the ocean is fierce among the three coastal nations in Northeast Asia. therefore, Korea needs more thorough preparation and response to protect the marine sovereignty. As the superpowers of China and Japan are confronted and the United States is involved in the balance of power in strategic purposes, the East Asian sea area is a place where tension and conflict environment exist. China's illegal fishing boats are constantly invading our waters, and they even threaten the lives of our police officers. The issue of delimiting maritime boundaries between Korea and China has yet to be solved, and is underway in both countries, and there is a possibility that the exploration activities of the continental shelf resources may collide as the agreement on the continental shelf will expire between Korea and Japan. On the other hand, conflicts in the maritime jurisdictions of the three countries in Korea, China and Japan are leading to the enhancement of maritime security forces to secure deterrence rather than military confrontation. In the situation where the unresolved sovereignty and jurisdiction conflicts of Korea, China and Japan continue, and the competition for the strengthening of the maritime powers of China and Japan becomes fierce, there is a urgent need for stabilization and enhancement of the maritime forces in our country. It is necessary to establish a new long-term strategy for enhancing the maritime security force and to carry out it. It is expected that the Korean Coast Guard, which once said that it was a model for the establishment of China's Coast Guard as a powerful force for the enforcement of the maritime law, firmly establishes itself as a key force to protect our oceans with the Navy and keeps our maritime sovereignty firmly.

• Strategy21
• /
• 통권38호
• /
• pp.250-286
• /
• 2015

The main purpose of this article is to provide an understanding on current maritime issues in the Northeast Asia, and thereby help formulating the right strategy for our national security. The article summarizes core arguments in the recently published 『The 21^st Century Maritime Strategies in the Northeast Asia: Dilemma between Competition and Cooperation』. It will help readers to comprehend historical backgrounds as well as recent updates related to maritime issues and strategies in the region. Also, readers may find guidance to conceive their own maritime strategies for the Republic of Korea. Currently, the U.S. is shifting its focus from Atlantic to Pacific, and increasing its naval presence in Asia-Pacific region. Meanwhile, the 21^st century China views the maritime interests as the top priority in its national security and prosperity. PLA Navy's offensive maritime strategies and naval building such as aircraft carriers and nuclear submarines are unprecedented. Japan is another naval power in the region. During the Cold War JMSDF faithfully fulfilled the mission of deterring Soviet navy, and now it is doing its job against China. Lastly, Putin has been emphasizing to build the strong Russia since 2000, and putting further efforts to reinforce current naval capabilities of Pacific Fleet. The keyword in the naval and maritime relations among these powers can be summarized with "competition and cooperation." The recent security developments in the South China Sea(SCS) clearly represent each state's strategic motivations and movements. China shows clear and strong intention to nationalize the islands in SCS by building artificial facilities - possibly military purpose. Obviously, the U.S. strongly opposes China by insisting the freedom of navigation(FON) in international waters as recent USS-Lassen's FON operation indicate. The conflict between China and the U.S. surrounding the SCS seems to be heading towards climax as Russia and Japan are searching for their own national interests within the conflict. Also, the neighboring small and middle powers are calculating their own economic and security interests. This is no exception for us in establishing timely strategies to maximize our own national security. Hopefully, this article leads the readers to the right direction.

• KDI Journal of Economic Policy
• /
• 제26권2호
• /
• pp.249-280
• /
• 2004

1990년대의 한국경제는 여러 가지 극적인 변화를 경험하였다. 가장 극적이었던 경제위기와 그로부터의 회복에 가려지기 쉽지만, 우리 경제가 겪은 가장 중요한 변화 중의 하나는 총요소생산성이 산업성장의 주요 동력으로 자리매김한 것이다. 본 연구는 이 기간 동안의 산업성장동력의 변화가 무역성과에 미친 영향을 특히 한국-중국-일본의 구도 속에서 분석한다. 무역성과의 분석을 위해서는 산업별 수출성과, CEPII 현시비교우위지수, 경합도 등이 사용되었다. 분석결과, 한국이 거의 모든 산업, 특히 노동집약적인 분야에서는 중국의 추격을 허용한 반면, 자본집약적이거나 기술집약적인 부문, 즉 총요소생산성의 증가가 성장을 주도한 산업에서는 일본을 극히 제한된 부문에서만 따라 잡는 것으로 나타나, 저간에 회자되는 'nut-cracking'의 우려가 1990년대부터 발생하였음을 보이고, 이로부터 벗어나는 것이 더 이상 미룰 수 없는 심각하고 시급한 과제임을 역설한다.