• Strategy21
• /
• 통권36호
• /
• pp.5-32
• /
• 2015

Geopolitics or Political Geography is an essential academic field that should be studied carefully for a more comprehensive analysis of international security relations. However, because of its tarnished image as an ideology that supported the NAZI German expansion and aggression, geopolitics has not been regarded as a pure academic field and was rejected and expelled from the academic communities starting from the Cold War years in 1945. During the Cold War, ideology, rather than geography, was considered more important in conducting and analyzing international relations. However, after the end of the Cold War and with the beginning of a new era in which territorial and religious confrontations are taking place among nations - including sub national tribal political organizations such as the Al Quaeda and other terrorist organizations - geopolitical analysis again is in vogue among the scholars and analysts on international security affairs. Most of the conflicts in international relations that is occurring now in the post-Cold War years can be explained more effectively with geopolitical concepts. The post - Cold War international relations among East Asian countries are especially better explained with geopolitical concepts. Unlike Europe, where peaceful development took place after the Cold War, China, Japan, Korea, the United States, Taiwan and Vietnam are feeling more insecure in the post-Cold War years. Most of the East Asian nations' economies have burgeoned during the Cold War years under the protection of the international security structure provided by the two superpowers. However, after the Cold War years, the international security structure has not been stable in East Asia and thus most of the East Asian nations began to build up stronger military forces of their own. Because most of the East Asian nations' national security and economy depend on the oceans, these nations desire to obtain more powerful navies and try to occupy islands, islets, or even rocks that may seem like a strategic asset for their economy and security. In this regard, the western Pacific Ocean is becoming a place of confrontation among the East Asian nations. As Robert Kaplan, an eminent international analyst, mentioned, East Asia is a Seascape while Europe is a Landscape. The possibility of international conflict on the waters of East Asia is higher than in any other period in East Asia's international history.

• 해양안보
• /
• 제7권1호
• /
• pp.1-29
• /
• 2023

동북아시아에서는 '바큇살 구조'라 불리우는 미국 중심의 양자동맹체제가 지속되고 있다. 그러나 최근 급변하는 동아시아의 국제정세와 이에 대응하기 위해 국가들 간 다각도로 협력하는 양상들을 보았을 때, 이러한 동맹체제의 변화 가능성에 대해서 진단해 볼 필요성이 제기되었다. 따라서 본 연구에서는 주 위협, 위협의 강도, 국가 간 신뢰도라는 요인을 바탕으로, 유럽과 동남아시아의 집단안보체제에 관한 사례연구 및 비교분석을 통해 이에 대한 영향을 분석하였다. 본 연구는 이를 바탕으로 동북아에서의 안보체제 변화 가능성에 대해서 연구를 진행하였으며, 현재의 갈등이 지속적으로 악화된다면 동북아를 넘어 동아시아 전반에서의 집단안보체제가 형성될 가능성이 분명히 존재한다고 보았다.

• 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
• /
• 통권40호
• /
• pp.162-189
• /
• 2016

This research deals with the PLAN's capabilities and its implication for regional security, and suggests some measures for maritime security cooperation among regional states. China has began to focus its national strategy more on 'rising as a new maritime power' since the 18th Party Convention in November 2012. Chinese new strategy aims at building a strong navy, contributing economic prosperity and national security, and thus elevating its prestige in international society. Most of all, building a strong navy is the foremost task at this time, and that is why the PLAN has the priority for military modernization. Chinese new maritime strategy could cause naval arms race in East Asia and aggravate maritime territorial disputes among concerned parties. It is the time for regional states to discuss some measures to build confidence, such as arms control of naval weapons, establishment of multilateral maritime security mechanism, and foundation of regional security regime, thus enhancing regional maritime cooperation.

• Strategy21
• /
• 통권33호
• /
• pp.148-177
• /
• 2014

The regional security and stability in Northeast Asia has become more complicated because of a sudden establishment of China's Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) on 23 November 2013. One dimensional conflicts on the territorial sovereignty over the islands between the regional States has developed into the two dimensional conflicts like maritime delimitations among the States concerned since they have all ratified the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea which adopts the 200 nautical mile Exclusive Economic Zone regime. Moreover, due to the notion of the outer limit of the continental shelf, the conflicts have developed into three dimensional ones in order to acquire more natural resources even in the seabed. To make matters worse, such three dimensional conflicts have expanded to the airspace as well. The paper will analyze what implications the sudden declaration of China's ADIZ have for the regional security in Northeast Asia from the perspectives of public international law. To this end, the paper 1) starts with the debates on the legal nature of the ADIZ, 2) identifies the Chinese government's political motives for the establishment of the ADIZ over the East China Sea, 3) assesses the responses of the regional States and the USA to the China's establishment of the ADIZ, and then 4) discuss what implications the overlapped ADIZ of the three key States in the region have for the regional security and stability.

• 한국정보통신학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 한국정보통신학회 2012년도 추계학술대회
• /
• pp.214-218
• /
• 2012

중국이 명실상부한 세계적 강대국으로 부상하고 있다. 2011년 현재 보편적 국력으로 보았을 때 중국은 미국 다음으로 강한 국력을 가진 국가로 아시아를 넘어 세계적인 패권국으로 성장하고 있다. 중국이 이와 같은 강대국으로 부상하면서 동아시아에서 미국중심의 국제정치질서가 도전받고 있으며, 특히 동아시아 해양패권을 놓고 기존의 패권국인 미국과 경쟁이 본격화 되고 있다. 이러한 중국과 미국과의 경쟁은 동아시아의 해양을 무대로 진행되고 있어 해양을 통해 국가의 안전과 번영을 유지하고 있는 해양국가인 한국의 안보에 직접적인 영향을 미치고 있다. 중국의 부상에 따른 동아시아 해양에서의 미-중 군사경쟁 배경과 현황, 그리고 이러한 경쟁이 동아시아와 한국안보에 미치는 영향과 대책을 모색해 본다.

• Strategy21
• /
• 통권42호
• /
• pp.154-195
• /
• 2017

This paper is to analyse conflict between the US and China over the South China Sea and Korea's responses. To this end the paper is composed of 6 chapters titled instruction; the current status of South China Sea sovereignty disputes; changes in US and Chinese maritime security strategies and the strategic values of the South China Sea; key issues and future prospects for US-China conflicts in the South China Sea; South Korea's security and diplomatic responses; and conclusion. The recent East Asian maritime security issue has evolved into a global issue of supremacy between the US and China, beyond conflicts over territorial disputes and demarcation among the countries in the region. China is pursuing offensive ocean policy to expand economic growth. The core of the maritime order that the United States intends to pursue is the freedom of navigation in the oceans and the maintenance of maritime access. China is making artificial islands in the South China Sea, claiming the sovereignty of these islands, building strategic bases in East Asia, and securing routes. The United States has developed several "Freedom of Navigation Operations" to neutralize the declaration of the territorial sea surrounding Chinese artificial islands. We can not be free from marine conflicts in the South China Sea and the East China Sea. Regarding the South China Sea dispute, it is expected that the strategic competition and conflict between the two countries will intensify due to China's failure to make concessions of core interests and adherence to the US compliance with international norms. In the midst of conflict over the South China Sea, we need a harmonious balance between our alliance security and economic diplomacy. We must continue our efforts to strengthen the ROK-US alliance but not to make China an enemy. Considering the significant impacts of the oceans on the survival and prosperity of the nation, we must continue to develop our interest in the oceans, appropriate investments and tactical strategies.

• 분석과 대안
• /
• 제1권1호
• /
• pp.44-64
• /
• 2017

Russia's push in the Asia-Pacific region stems from its interests that have the national, regional and global dimensions. In their turn, the aims of this policy are civilizational, geopolitical, economic and prospective, with a long-term outlook. In the course of their achievement, cooperation with Northeast Asia's countries will play one of the key roles owing to the factors of geographic proximity, Northeast Asia's economic potential, risk hedging and a growing influence Northeast Asia exerts upon the global development. A new cooperation paradigm between Russia and the states of Northeast Asia should be based upon establishing and cementing self-reproducing ties. This is the central aim of Russian initiatives in relations, with Japan, the Republic of Korea, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Mongolia and China. However, numerous obstacles ranging from Russia's absence in the regional free trade agreements and supply-production chains of value-added production to the permanent international instability generated by Pyongyang's missile-nuclear developments hamper the practical implementation of this task. Realizing the necessity to give an additional impetus to this new cooperative paradigm, Russia has to develop directions with an apparent consolidating effect. The most promising may be the establishment of a permanent security forum based upon Northeast Asia Peace and Security Mechanism chaired by the Russian Federation. The urgency of this measure and its expected support stem from the necessity to strengthen security in Northeast Asia, a task neither the US-led hub-and-spoke system nor ASE-AN-led multilateral dialogue venues have been able to resolve. The issues addressed at the security forum must include the unification of approaches to North Korean nuclear issue and producing a document specifying actions of the claimants on the disputed maritime territories in the "direct contact" situations. At the expert level, Russia has elaborated on the idea to establish such a forum outlining the spectrum of the key directions of cooperation. With the urgency in the establishment of this dialogue venue, its agenda has to be coordinated with the agendas of the existing security systems presented by the US alliances and the ASE-AN-led multilateral negotiations. The practical implementation of this initiative will strengthen security in Northeast Asia as its challenges will be resolved in the pre-emptive way based on coordinated approaches. Therefore, Russia as the Eurasian state will be one of the role players in the advent of the Asian century.

• 한국정보통신학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 한국정보통신학회 2015년도 추계학술대회
• /
• pp.445-447
• /
• 2015

동북아시아의 정세는 일본, 중국, 필리핀, 베트남 등 동중국해 연안 국가 간 영토 분쟁, 북한의 연이은 핵실험 및 장거리 탄도미사일 발사 시험, 중국의 랴오닝급 항공모함 건조 등으로 인해 급변하고 있다. 특히 불안정한 북한의 상황, 중국의 해군력 증강을 통한 A2/AD(Anti-Access/Area Denial, 반접근/지역거부) 전략 등으로 인해 미국의 아시아 태평양 지역 안보 전략의 재검토가 불가피하게 되었다. 본 논문에서는 변경된 미국의 아시아 태평양 안보 전략과 미 해군 전력의 재배치 계획에 대해 조사 및 분석하고, 변화된 주변 환경이 우리의 안보에 미치는 영향에 대해 분석하였다.

• Strategy21
• /
• 통권40호
• /
• pp.131-143
• /
• 2016

On 12 July 2016, China's maritime claim to most of the South China Sea (SCS) based on the so-called nine-dash line was rejected by the Arbitral Tribunal, constituted under Annex VII to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) concerning issues in the South China Sea including the legality of the so-called "nine-dashed line", the status of certain maritime features and their corresponding maritime entitlements, together with the lawfulness of certain actions by China which the Philppines, in a case brought in 2013, alleged were violations. As having the Tribunal determined that China's claim had no legal grounds in UNCLOS, thus undermining China's claims, and establishing that China has no exclusive legal rights to control the area roughly the size of India. There are some major implications from the Tribunal's ruling in the Arbitration award. These include implications on: how to delimit the maritime boundary in disputed waters, how to promote maritime confidence-building measures, how to safeguard maritime safety and security, and how to promote the rule of law in the SCS. Since its application of UNCLOS in East Asia, it has been obvious that the only way to resolve maritime disputes in the region is to build strong maritime cooperative partnerships under the auspices of the rule of law.