• 제목/요약/키워드: Ground collapse

검색결과 322건 처리시간 0.018초

한국전쟁의 교훈과 대비 -병력수(兵力數) 및 부대수(部隊數)를 중심으로- (The lesson From Korean War)

  • 윤일영
    • 안보군사학연구
    • /
    • 통권8호
    • /
    • pp.49-168
    • /
    • 2010
  • Just before the Korean War, the total number of the North Korean troops was 198,380, while that of the ROK(Republic of Korea) army troops 105,752. That is, the total number of the ROK army troops at that time was 53.3% of the total number of the North Korean army. As of December 2008, the total number of the North Korean troops is estimated to be 1,190,000, while that of the ROK troops is 655,000, so the ROK army maintains 55.04% of the total number of the North Korean troops. If the ROK army continues to reduce its troops according to [Military Reform Plan 2020], the total number of its troops will be 517,000 m 2020. If North Korea maintains the current status(l,190,000 troops), the number of the ROK troops will be 43.4% of the North Korean army. In terms of units, just before the Korean War, the number of the ROK army divisions and regiments was 80% and 44.8% of North Korean army. As of December 2008, North Korea maintains 86 divisions and 69 regiments. Compared to the North Korean army, the ROK army maintains 46 Divisions (53.4% of North Korean army) and 15 regiments (21.3% of North Korean army). If the ROK army continue to reduce the military units according to [Military Reform Plan 2020], the number of ROK army divisions will be 28(13 Active Division, 4 Mobilization Divisions and 11 Local Reserve Divisions), while that of the North Korean army will be 86 in 2020. In that case, the number of divisions of the ROK army will be 32.5% of North Korean army. During the Korean war, North Korea suddenly invaded the Republic of Korea and occupied its capital 3 days after the war began. At that time, the ROK army maintained 80% of army divisions, compared to the North Korean army. The lesson to be learned from this is that, if the ROK army is forced to disperse its divisions because of the simultaneous invasion of North Korea and attack of guerrillas in home front areas, the Republic of Korea can be in a serious military danger, even though it maintains 80% of military divisions of North Korea. If the ROK army promotes the plans in [Military Reform Plan 2020], the number of military units of the ROK army will be 32.5% of that of the North Korean army. This ratio is 2.4 times lower than that of the time when the Korean war began, and in this case, 90% of total military power should be placed in the DMZ area. If 90% of military power is placed in the DMZ area, few troops will be left for the defense of home front. In addition, if the ROK army continues to reduce the troops, it can allow North Korea to have asymmetrical superiority in military force and it will eventually exert negative influence on the stability and peace of the Korean peninsular. On the other hand, it should be reminded that, during the Korean War, the Republic of Korea was attacked by North Korea, though it kept 53.3% of troops, compared to North Korea. It should also be reminded that, as of 2008, the ROK army is defending its territory with the troops 55.04% of North Korea. Moreover, the national defense is assisted by 25,120 troops of the US Forces in Korea. In case the total number of the ROK troops falls below 43.4% of the North Korean army, it may cause social unrest about the national security and may lead North Korea's misjudgement. Besides, according to Lanchester strategy, the party with weaker military power (60% compared to the party with stronger military power) has the 4.1% of winning possibility. Therefore, if we consider the fact that the total number of the ROK army troops is 55.04% of that of the North Korean army, the winning possibility of the ROK army is not higher than 4.1%. If the total number of ROK troops is reduced to 43.4% of that of North Korea, the winning possibility will be lower and the military operations will be in critically difficult situation. [Military Reform Plan 2020] rums at the reduction of troops and units of the ground forces under the policy of 'select few'. However, the problem is that the financial support to achieve this goal is not secured. Therefore, the promotion of [Military Reform Plan 2020] may cause the weakening of military defence power in 2020. Some advanced countries such as Japan, UK, Germany, and France have promoted the policy of 'select few'. However, what is to be noted is that the national security situation of those countries is much different from that of Korea. With the collapse of the Soviet Unions and European communist countries, the military threat of those European advanced countries has almost disappeared. In addition, the threats those advanced countries are facing are not wars in national level, but terrorism in international level. To cope with the threats like terrorism, large scaled army trops would not be necessary. So those advanced European countries can promote the policy of 'select few'. In line with this, those European countries put their focuses on the development of military sections that deal with non-military operations and protection from unspecified enemies. That is, those countries are promoting the policy of 'select few', because they found that the policy is suitable for their national security environment. Moreover, since they are pursuing common interest under the European Union(EU) and they can form an allied force under NATO, it is natural that they are pursing the 'select few' policy. At present, NATO maintains the larger number of troops(2,446,000) than Russia(l,027,000) to prepare for the potential threat of Russia. The situation of japan is also much different from that of Korea. As a country composed of islands, its prime military focus is put on the maritime defense. Accordingly, the development of ground force is given secondary focus. The japanese government promotes the policy to develop technology-concentrated small size navy and air-forces, instead of maintaining large-scaled ground force. In addition, because of the 'Peace Constitution' that was enacted just after the end of World War II, japan cannot maintain troops more than 240,000. With the limited number of troops (240,000), japan has no choice but to promote the policy of 'select few'. However, the situation of Korea is much different from the situations of those countries. The Republic of Korea is facing the threat of the North Korean Army that aims at keeping a large-scale military force. In addition, the countries surrounding Korea are also super powers containing strong military forces. Therefore, to cope with the actual threat of present and unspecified threat of future, the importance of maintaining a carefully calculated large-scale military force cannot be denied. Furthermore, when considering the fact that Korea is in a peninsular, the Republic of Korea must take it into consideration the tradition of continental countries' to maintain large-scale military powers. Since the Korean War, the ROK army has developed the technology-force combined military system, maintaining proper number of troops and units and pursuing 'select few' policy at the same time. This has been promoted with the consideration of military situation in the Koran peninsular and the cooperation of ROK-US combined forces. This kind of unique military system that cannot be found in other countries can be said to be an insightful one for the preparation for the actual threat of North Korea and the conflicts between continental countries and maritime countries. In addition, this kind of technology-force combined military system has enabled us to keep peace in Korea. Therefore, it would be desirable to maintain this technology-force combined military system until the reunification of the Korean peninsular. Furthermore, it is to be pointed out that blindly following the 'select few' policy of advanced countries is not a good option, because it is ignoring the military strategic situation of the Korean peninsular. If the Republic of Korea pursues the reduction of troops and units radically without consideration of the threat of North Korea and surrounding countries, it could be a significant strategic mistake. In addition, the ROK army should keep an eye on the fact the European advanced countries and Japan that are not facing direct military threats are spending more defense expenditures than Korea. If the ROK army reduces military power without proper alternatives, it would exert a negative effect on the stable economic development of Korea and peaceful reunification of the Korean peninsular. Therefore, the desirable option would be to focus on the development of quality of forces, maintaining proper size and number of troops and units under the technology-force combined military system. The tableau above shows that the advanced countries like the UK, Germany, Italy, and Austria spend more defense expenditure per person than the Republic of Korea, although they do not face actual military threats, and that they keep achieving better economic progress than the countries that spend less defense expenditure. Therefore, it would be necessary to adopt the merits of the defense systems of those advanced countries. As we have examined, it would be desirable to maintain the current size and number of troops and units, to promote 'select few' policy with increased defense expenditure, and to strengthen the technology-force combined military system. On the basis of firm national security, the Republic of Korea can develop efficient policies for reunification and prosperity, and jump into the status of advanced countries. Therefore, the plans to reduce troops and units in [Military Reform Plan 2020] should be reexamined. If it is difficult for the ROK army to maintain its size of 655,000 troops because of low birth rate, the plans to establish the prompt mobilization force or to adopt drafting system should be considered for the maintenance of proper number of troops and units. From now on, the Republic of Korean government should develop plans to keep peace as well as to prepare unexpected changes in the Korean peninsular. For the achievement of these missions, some options can be considered. The first one is to maintain the same size of military troops and units as North Korea. The second one is to maintain the same level of military power as North Korea in terms of military force index. The third one is to maintain the same level of military power as North Korea, with the combination of the prompt mobilization force and the troops in active service under the system of technology-force combined military system. At present, it would be not possible for the ROK army to maintain such a large-size military force as North Korea (1,190,000 troops and 86 units). So it would be rational to maintain almost the same level of military force as North Korea with the combination of the troops on the active list and the prompt mobilization forces. In other words, with the combination of the troops in active service (60%) and the prompt mobilization force (40%), the ROK army should develop the strategies to harmonize technology and forces. The Korean government should also be prepared for the strategic flexibility of USFK, the possibility of American policy change about the location of foreign army, radical unexpected changes in North Korea, the emergence of potential threat, surrounding countries' demand for Korean force for the maintenance of regional stability, and demand for international cooperation against terrorism. For this, it is necessary to develop new approaches toward the proper number and size of troops and units. For instance, to prepare for radical unexpected political or military changes in North Korea, the Republic of Korea should have plans to protect a large number of refugees, to control arms and people, to maintain social security, and to keep orders in North Korea. From the experiences of other countries, it is estimated that 115,000 to 230,000 troops, plus ten thousands of police are required to stabilize the North Korean society, in the case radical unexpected military or political change happens in North Korea. In addition, if the Republic of Korea should perform the release of hostages, control of mass destruction weapons, and suppress the internal wars in North Korea, it should send 460,000 troops to North Korea. Moreover, if the Republic of Korea wants to stop the attack of North Korea and flow of refugees in DMZ area, at least 600,000 troops would be required. In sum, even if the ROK army maintains 600,000 troops, it may need additional 460,000 troops to prepare for unexpected radical changes in North Korea. For this, it is necessary to establish the prompt mobilization force whose size and number are almost the same as the troops in active service. In case the ROK army keeps 650,000 troops, the proper number of the prompt mobilization force would be 460,000 to 500,000.

  • PDF

대순진리회의 효 윤리에 나타난 종교성 연구 (A Study on the Religiosity of Filial Piety Ethics in Daesoonjinrihoe)

  • 차선근
    • 대순사상논총
    • /
    • 제27집
    • /
    • pp.171-200
    • /
    • 2016
  • 이 글은 전통 효(Filial Piety) 윤리와 대순진리회(Daesoonjinrihoe)의 효 윤리를 비교의 지평에서 분석한 것이다. 그동안 한국의 전통 효 윤리는 현대와 맞지 않는다는 이유로 변화를 요구받아 왔고, 그 핵심은 부모와 자식 간의 관계가 수직적·일방적인 게 아닌 수평적·상호 호혜적이어야 한다는 것이었다. 하지만 이에 대한 구체적인 이념과 대안에 대한 깊이 있는 연구는 거의 없었다. 이런 측면에서 한국의 대표적인 민족종교인 대순진리회가 근대화 이후에 전통과 현대의 충돌을 경험하면서 성장해 왔다는 점을 감안하면, 그 교리체계에서 효 윤리가 어떻게 구축되어 있는지를 관찰하는 작업은 전통 효가 현대적 감각에 맞게 어떻게 윤색될 수 있는지를 살피게 하는 하나의 좋은 사례를 제공해줄 수 있으리라 본다. 이것을 요약하면, 첫째, 유교와 대순진리회는 봉친(奉親)을 효 윤리로 삼지만, 유교는 가부장적인 봉건성에 입각하여 아랫사람의 일방적·맹목적 희생을 강조하고, 대순진리회는 어느 한쪽의 일방적인 희생을 지양하며 부모와 자식 사이의 상생(mutual beneficence)을 도모하고 있다. 이러한 차이는 유교적 효가 봉건질서를 추구하는 이념 속에서, 대순진리회 효가 새로운 종교적 세계인 후천 신세계의 원리인 보은상생과 인존(Respect For Man)의 이념 속에서 구축된 결과로 나타난 것이다. 둘째, 불교와 도교의 효는 부모 생전에 수복(壽福)을 누릴 것을 기원하고 사후에는 천도를 위해 발원하는 소극적·수동적인 것이다. 대순진리회의 효 역시 그러한 관념을 일부 포함하지만, 거기에 그치지 않고 부모 스스로가 죄를 벗고 앞길을 닦아나가도록 유도하는 것까지 효의 범주를 더 넓게 잡는다. 부모와 자식의 수행을 동시에 요구하는 이런 효 윤리는, 자식이 수행 끝에 종교적 목표를 이룬 연후 받게 되는 복록을 부모도 동시에 누릴 수 있게 하고자 하는 대순진리회 세계관 때문에 성립된다. 셋째, 유교와 대순진리회는 선령향화를 효 윤리로 삼지만, 무속적 사고를 배제한 본래 유교(성리학)적 세계관 속의 효는 향화의 대상을 비인격적 존재로, 대순진리회는 인격적 존재로 상정한다. 따라서 유교에 비해 대순진리회의 선령향화는 관념에 치우치지 않는다는 점에서 보다 현실적이다. 넷째, 유교와 대순진리회는 모두 조상들의 은혜를 갚고자 하나 그 은혜의 내용과 보은에 차이가 있다. 유교에서는 조상들이 생명을 준 존재이기에 그에 대한 감사로써 향화를 올리는 것만으로 효가 성립되지만, 대순진리회에서는 조상신들이 자손의 도성덕립을 목적으로 60년 적공(積功)으로써 생명을 주면서 동시에 수도를 하도록 독려하는 존재로 설정되어 있기 때문에 향화를 올리는 것과 더불어 수도까지 해야 효가 성립된다. 다섯째, 유교에서는 세속에서의 출세를 의미하는 입신양명이 효이지만, 대순진리회에서는 그 보다는 수도를 성공시켜 종교적 목표를 달성시키는 것이 더 큰 효로 규정된다. 여섯째, 유불도는 모두 도덕에 기반한 가족윤리로 효를 규정한다. 대순진리회 역시 그러하지만, 그 외에도 효에 종교적 구원을 위한 필수 윤리라는 위상을 더 부여한다. 왜냐하면 효의 부재는 세상을 병들게 하고 멸망케 하는 직접적인 원인이면서, 동시에 60년 동안 적공(積功)을 한 조상신들과 직접적으로 생명을 준 부모들의 은혜를 저버리는 배은이 개벽시대에는 용납되지 않는다고 보기 때문이다. 이러한 사실들로부터, 대순진리회는 자신의 독특한 사상을 바탕으로 하여 유불도의 전통 효 윤리들을 일부는 수용하고 일부는 재해석과 재창조 과정을 거쳐 윤색해 두고 있음을 살필 수 있다. 즉 대순진리회의 효는 인간 존중의 이념, 구체적으로는 보은상생과 인존(Respect For Man)사상 위에서 정립된 윤리 규정이며, 인격 완성과 도통이라는 종교적 목표에 도달하기 위한 나 자신의 수행이자 복록을 더불어 누리기 위한 부모의 일정한 수행까지 요구하는 개념으로 이해되고, 개벽시대에 구원을 받기 위한 필수 윤리라는 대단히 강화된 종교적 색채를 띠고 있는 것이라고 크게 그려 볼 수 있다는 말이다.