• Strategy21
• /
• s.41
• /
• pp.108-152
• /
• 2017

This paper aims to analyze hegemonic competition and the role of naval power. To this end the paper is composed of four chapters titled introduction, the role of naval power in the hegemonic competition, the role of naval power in the East Asia, and the lessons and implications for the Korean Peninsula. Since the modern era, the hegemonic competition in the East Asian region has been the intrusion and struggle process between the world system and the East Asian regional system, and the ocean between these two systems has become the goal and means of supremacy(hegemony). Currently, the hegemonic competition between the US and China consists of systemic competition at the global level and marine competition at the regional level. When South Korea is forced to make strategic choices in the course of the US-China hegemonic competition, naval power will be the first factor to be considered. The ROK is asymmetrically maintaining a deep dependency relationship with the United States in terms of security and China in relation to the economy. And while the ROK's national economic power is acquired from the ocean, the ROK's military power is imbalanced because it is centered on the ground forces. These international relations and asymmetric-unbalanced resources distribution will not be able to effectively cope with the hegemonic competition between the US and China in the future, and will limit Korea's strategic choice. Since naval power and forces are the prerequisites for the hegemonic competition or the maintenance of supremacy we must construct balanced naval forces(naval power) that are not subordinate to the ground forces at the national strategic level for the future of the country.

• International Journal of Advanced Culture Technology
• /
• v.10 no.3
• /
• pp.127-145
• /
• 2022

Vaccine diplomacy is a manifestation of competition for political influence among great powers amidst the Covid-19 pandemic's blatant illustration of ineluctable interdependency across the global community. The reinforcement of trends bolstering global polity construction intensify concomitantly with nationalist populist value and attitude expressions increasing political polarization. The interdependency graphically illustrated in the Cold War-era's mutual assured destruction incentivized competition into indirect competitive intervention in the internal politics of third actors. Indirect international influence contestations included extended, de facto challenge competitions to generate soft power on behalf of the victor, e.g., the space race. The Covid-19 pandemic has intensified this competition to offer alternative development models while intense domestic political polarization undermines the mobilizational capacities for achieving sustainable development. In contrast to multinational and multiethnic states, nation states have an inherent mobilizational advantage because of the enhanced control capabilities available to the authorities without emphasizing coercion. Control through Gramscian hegemonic mechanisms is more readily feasible in nation states through the greater feasibility of commodification of social relations by states authorities regulating and channeling social competition to encourage social mobility and creativity. The regulation of the so-called private sector serves to manage and contain social competition while channeling it to develop the institutional capacities for control and allocation of developing societal human resources. It enhances developed state control mechanisms and international influence capacities. The appeal of offers of aid and assistance to the so-called developing world becomes ever more urgent amidst Anthropocene crises including its most recent, current Covid-19 pandemic disaster.

• Journal of Space Technology and Applications
• /
• v.2 no.2
• /
• pp.146-168
• /
• 2022

Witnessing current military conflicts in South China Sea and Eastern Europe, most defense analysts evaluate one of the most serious security threat toward the US is coming from the superpower competitions with Russia and China. The main means for such super power hegemonic competitions is military power and space power is a key enabler to maximize the efficiency and effectiveness of military employment. Reflecting above circumstances, the space hegemonic competition between the Unites States and China is spreading into all aspects of national powers. Under such an environment, R.O.K needs to significantly develop national space power to preserve life and assets of people in space. On the other hand, the R.O.K has a lot of limitations in launching space assets into orbits by land-based space rockets due to its geographic locations. The limitation of rocket launching direction, the failure to secure a significant area enough to secure safety and the limitation to secure open area enough to build associated facilities are among them. On this paper, I will suggest the need to build the 2nd space rocket launching site after analyzing a lot of short-falls the current 'Naro' space center face, compared to those of advanced space powers around the world.

• Convergence Security Journal
• /
• v.18 no.2
• /
• pp.89-99
• /
• 2018

In the year 2018, South Korea faces a crucial decision with regard to reunification. Starting from inter-Korean and US-North summits held from April through June, A rough journey for North Korea's "Complete, verifiable and irreversible dismantlement" began. Although South Korea insists that North Korea's Nuclear 'CVID' is the only minimum condition in the process of peaceful reunification, North Korea and other countries who support North Korea, including China and Russia, will possibly claim that North Korea's Nuclear 'CVID' will minimize their political and military positions internationally. Despite representatives from each country agreeing to North Korea's denuclearization, it is inevitable that many challenges still need to be resolved during the process. From the perspective of the Chinese government, North Korea is not a country that stimulates international conflicts. Instead, China can utilize North Korea as their political and tactical leverage against the US in order to compete for hegemonic power in Asia. In order to reject the emerging supremacy of China and resolve uncertainties in the denuclearization agreement and implementation process, I suggest the necessity of 'Korea-Japan Security Cooperation' as a 'second alternative' to achieve the North Korea's Nuclear 'CVID'.

• Strategy21
• /
• s.34
• /
• pp.26-57
• /
• 2014

Revolution of Shale gas literally brings about great changes in many spheres. In the past most academic research had been focused on the influence and innovative change in term of economic perspective. But nowadays we should more concern about the security approach and perspective as its status of the future's core energy resources. Revolution of Shale gas has an great influence on the reshaping of global and regional alliance order. There are many international political implications as follows. Contribution of energy hegemony with leading U.S.; Acting as strategic leverage on the reshaping international order; Deepening competition among major states on the construction of energy security and so on. We'd better make a good solution and systematic policies which are preparing for the Shale gas's revolution period including on the understanding about the change on the global energy structure and making a national policy agenda of energy security issues and so on. The thesis like 'to get the energy resources is to get the hegemonic power in the world' will persist. The same holds good of Shale gas case. To meet the revolution of shale gas era, we have important tasks as like making an opportunity to develope not only regional but also international prosperity.

• Journal of Contemporary Eastern Asia
• /
• v.17 no.1
• /
• pp.50-67
• /
• 2018

Heritage has entered the center stage of public diplomacy in East Asia. Competition to claim and interpret memories of World War II in East Asia has driven campaigns to list heritage items with UNESCO. State and non-state actors aim to use heritage listings to present a particular view of the war and related history to domestic and international audiences. This paper highlights the role of heritage soft power in East Asia's "memory contests" by examining the promotion of dissonant modern heritage in UNESCO's heritage programs. It conceptualizes heritage designation as a soft power resource in East Asia and presents a conceptual framework for understanding the hegemonic competition over the "memory regime" that emerged from the structural change in East Asia's regional order. It then uses this framework to analyze the processes by which state and non-state actors promote and/or object to UNESCO recognition of their sites and documents as heritage of outstanding universal value or world significance. The elements of this process are illustrated with case studies of two very different pieces of heritage, Japan's "Sites of the Meiji Industrial Revolution" and China's "Documents of Nanjing Massacre," which were enshrined as significant world heritage in 2015. While state and non-state actors in East Asia are increasingly recognizing the utility of heritage as a soft power resource for advancing specific historical narratives to an international audience, a backlash movement from civil society groups and governments in other countries prevents a purely unilateral interpretation. As a result, the utility of heritage soft power in this context must be significantly qualified.

• The Southeast Asian review
• /
• v.28 no.4
• /
• pp.197-221
• /
• 2018

The Cambodian People's Party swept all 125 assembly seats with 76.78% of the vote in 2018 general elections. The Cambodian National Rescue Party, having been dissolved by court, was excluded from the election and attempted to nullify the legitimacy of the election by demanding its supporters to boycott the election. The Cambodian People's Party launched a campaign encouraging to vote in a desperate need to thwart the boycott movement. The election then became an unprecedented kind of competition the winner of which is decided not by the percentage of the vote but by turnout. The Cambodian People's Party was the winner with the high turnout of 82.89%, securing the means to defend the legitimacy of the election. The potential supporters of the Cambodian National Rescue Party spread out with about a million voters switching to support the Cambodian People's Party. Over a half million invalid votes that unequivocally voiced opposition to the Cambodian People's Party were not sufficient to deny the legitimacy of the election. Having experienced the fierce competition in the 2013 general elections that threatened to end its rule, the Cambodian People's Party decided to secure its power in the upcoming election and executed a tactic designed to remove the rival party through legal means. Competition being removed, the Cambodian political system decayed back to hegemonic electoral authoritarianism from competitive electoral authoritarianism to which it had mad gradual progress through the general elections in the past.

• Convergence Security Journal
• /
• v.17 no.3
• /
• pp.83-93
• /
• 2017

The U.S.-China Relations could be analyzed two perspectives and their basis under major international p olitics theory-power transition with conditions: (1) North Korean's nuclear puzzle, (2) THAAD in the Kor ean Peninsula and (3) the U.S.-ROK Alliance. One perspective is the global order dominates the regional order, and then stable regional order comes out. The other is the regional order dominates the global ord er, and China wages a regional hegemonic conflict against the United States. Consequently, America's o verwhelming leadership in North Korean's nuclear, THAAD and U.S.-ROK Alliance as national power is expected to endure. But China also has expected empowerment and cooperation for the peace and stabilit y on the Korean Peninsula military problems. In this perspective, South Korea needs to pay attention to the changing power distribution and competition between the U.S. and China and needs to strengthen a balancing and harmonious diplomatic strategy, so called 'see-saw diplomacy'.

• Analyses & Alternatives
• /
• v.4 no.1
• /
• pp.63-87
• /
• 2020

This article not only theoretically explores the necessity and effect of constructive minilateralism and subregionalism in Northeast Asia, but also delves into a series of practical solutions from viewpoint of seeking common ground while reserving differences in this region. The main contents are as follows: First, the various obstacles that hinder the formation of regionalism, subregionalism and minilateralism in the Northeast Asia are discussed. That is to say, geopolitical realism, My Country First ideology, exclusive nationalism in the socio-historical context, and North Korea's latest provocations, etc. Second, this article explores the philosophy and basic principles of realizing Northeast Asia regionalism and minilateralism. Third, in the 21st century, Northeast Asia becomes the center of the world. It examines the core points, controversial focus and platform for building sub regionalism in the region. Finally, based on the institutional platform such as minilateralism and sub regionalism, the various ideas and practical plans of cross-border cooperation among major countries in Northeast Asia were discussed. Because there are a lot of obstacles, so first of all it is more appropriate to promote economic or functional minilateralism or sub regionalism than multilateral cooperation. In order to promote the formation of regionalism and minilateralism in Northeast Asia, the issues to be considered are as follows: First, for the sake of leading regional solidarity and minilateral economic cooperation, it is advisable for China, as a regional economic power, to implement a stable and responsible diplomacy. Secondly, regional solidarity based on credible politics and security should be promoted for a long time beyond the level of economic cooperation. Third, the primary prerequisite for the realization of Northeast Asian regionalism is that in the process of denuclearization of North Korea, the stability and peace mechanism of the Korean Peninsula should be established. Fourth, with the continued hegemonic competition between the United States and China in Northeast Asia, under the circumstance that countries in the region are pushed into so-called "East Asian Paradox", it is profoundly important for them to consider transition from the hostile relationship as the "Thucydides trap" to the order of "coexistence" in which competition and cooperation run side by side, and the two countries should explore a conversion plan for the foreign policy line. This mutual cooperation and peaceful coexistence of the US-China relationship will create a friendly atmosphere for the formation of regionalism in Northeast Asia. In the future, the cooperation of minilateralism in Northeast Asia will break the existing conflict between the maritime forces and the continental forces in order to promote peace. And along with the philosophy that "peace is economy", recent policies of common prosperity as the framework, such as China's "Belt and Road Initiative", North Korea's "Special Zone and Development Zone Policy", Russia's "New Eastern Policy", Japan's participation in the Belt and Road Initiative and South Korea's The "Korean Peninsula New Economy Map" are organically linked and it should promote the so-called "networked regionalism".

• Journal of the Korean association of regional geographers
• /
• v.21 no.3
• /
• pp.427-449
• /
• 2015

Network governance can be defined as collaborative process to develop a new socio-political order through civil society centered networking with government and market, and the term 'collaborative governance' can be used in a sense that the basis of governance is collaborative process. In particular, it can be stressed that collaborative governance between regions need double collaborative processes, that is, collaboration between local governments and collaboration between local government and local civil society within a region. Yet, the collaboration as a core element of collaborative governance should not be seen as a pure normativity presupposing confidence and reciprocity, but as a strategy based on competition and antagonism. The normativity implied in the concept of collaborative governance may not realized in actual process, and tends to be mobilized as a rationale for justifying neoliberal strategies. In order to overcome such limits of collaborative governance, the concept of collaborative governance should be reconstructed. This paper suggests that collaborative governance can be seen as hegemonic governing process in a Gramcian sense operating in the government plus civil society, and that, radicalizing Ostrom's concept, it also can be seen as a governing process producing polycentricity by self-regulating subjects. Finally, collaborative governance between regions needs expansion of material basis for economic complementarity and construction of infrastructure as well as a discursive process in order to enhance connectivity between them.