• Strategy21
• /
• s.39
• /
• 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.

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.7 no.3
• /
• pp.213-228
• /
• 2005

China is our second largest trade partner and the biggest country of our investment. For this reason, the Korea active strategy for coping with China's changes is very critical at the current point in time due to the economic structure of Korea dependent on exports. This essay is aimed at studying the Foreign Trade Administration System of China and selecting Korea's prospective exports-imports to China. The purpose of this, essay is to help Korean trading corporation to understand the difference between Korea and China in foreign trade administration in order to promote bilateral trade between Korea and China.

• Asia-Pacific Journal of Business
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• pp.183-195
• /
• 2022

Purpose - The study attempted to analyze how the U.S.-China trade dispute affects a highly trade-dependent South Korea. Currently, major domestic and international institutions have issued a number of conflicting predictions that the trade dispute between China and the United States will have a positive and negative impact on South Korea. Accordingly, the present study attempted to analyze using actual data. Design/methodology/approach - The analysis was conducted using actual import and export data from the United States and China and actual import and export data from the United States and China from South Korea. The analysis measured the number and amount of imports and exports by year and month, and the rate of increase and decrease. We also looked at trade dispute days, import and export outcomes and what the impact was. In addition, as a result of the US-China trade dispute, the amount of change in Korea's imports and exports was analyzed. Findings - Empirical analysis shows that South Korea's exports to the United States and China have increased. The analysis results are as follows. First, exports to the United States increased by 5.65% in 2018 and 6.45% in 2019 compared to 2017. Second, exports to China surged 12.34% in 2018 compared to 2017. This increase in South Korea's exports to the United States and its mass exports to the United States shows that South Korea has benefited from the trade dispute between the United States and China. Research implications or Originality - South Korea, which is highly trade-dependent, has been heavily affected by the U.S.-China trade dispute. Various predictions are made about this. The analysis showed that South Korea's export volume has increased. In the end, the effect of the trade transition to the 3rd country did not occur. Rather, the U.S.-China trade dispute appears to have helped South Korea.

• Journal of Fisheries and Marine Sciences Education
• /
• v.27 no.4
• /
• pp.1053-1062
• /
• 2015

This research assesses the implementation of the bilateral fisheries order of the China-Japan fisheries agreement. After establishment of UNCLOS, the China-Japanese fisheries agreement has played as a basis for the fisheries order in the East China Sea. The China-Japanese fisheries agreement intends that the fisheries industries in China and Japan can utilize the renewable natural resources in the East China Sea. As the EEZ of China overlaps with that of Japanese in the East China Sea, the two countries established the China-Japan Provisional Measure Zone and Middle Zone in the Sea. Even though the three coastal States (e.g. Korea, China, and Japan) in the East China Sea are involved in managing these zones, there has been little effort to coordinate each county's management. Additionally, the Taiwan-Japan fisheries agreement, which is for the area of N $27^{\circ}$, has made costal States to establish and implement united measures to conduct effective fisheries management. Regarding access to the joint fishing zone in EEZ, Chinese fisheries regulations have been enforced in the zone because the fishing capacity of China exceeds all of other countries, reducing the number of fishing licenses and catch quotas. It turned out that a nation that has authority over fisheries resources tends to establish specific conditions of fishing operations to maximize its national interest. In the China-Japan Provisional Measure Zone, Chinese and Japanese authorities have introduced united measures to manage fisheries resources. However, in the Middle Zone between China and Japan, there is no regulation on fishing; both countries' fishing vessels can have free access to the zone. Thus, it is recommended that one should introduce an international fisheries management regime for the Middle Zone. In this regard, Korea should play a leading role in establishing the international management regime because Korea has middle position in terms of geographical standpoint, the degree of dependence on commercial fishing, and its fishing capacity.

• Journal of Agricultural Extension & Community Development
• /
• v.25 no.2
• /
• pp.71-83
• /
• 2018

This study aims to analyze the competitiveness of agricultural products in Korea, China and Japan and the effect of increasing imports from Korea and China. and then we discussed how to cooperate in the agricultural trade field between the three countries. The results are summarized as follows. First, The intra-industry trade of agricultural products was the most active in Korea and China, followed by the intra-industry trade index between Korea and Japan. The intra-industry trade between China and Japan were the lowest. Second, The mutual complementarity of agricultural products trade between Korea, China and Japan is mostly high. Among them, Korea and Japan are the highest, while Japan and China have the lowest complementarity. Third, it was found that in tariff elimination, imports of rice and meat products increased the most, while the import growth rate of green tea, meat products and ginseng increased the most. Finally, the three countries in Korea, China, and Japan can consider the way to increase the trade of agricultural products in the region by internalizing the trade of complementary items while maintaining a constant level of production of mutually competitive products.

• Journal of Korean language education
• /
• v.23 no.1
• /
• pp.47-75
• /
• 2012

Korean Studies in China is centered on Korean language program and is very successful, creating and instilling positive images of Korea. In China, Korean Studies means both North Korea and South Korea and is called "Korean Studies," "Chosun Studies," "Peninsula Studies" or "Chosun Peninsula Studies." Korean Studies includes international economics, South Korea-North Korea relations, Korea-China relations, centering on international relations as well as domestic issues of South Korea and North Korea. It has continued to develop despite limitations due to South and North Koreas' domestic political situations. However, changing in Korea-China relations is an important factor in expansion of Korean Studies. According to the time period, subjects and the areas of studies vary, significantly affecting the results. Despite the fact that Korean Studies in China has experienced identity crisis, it continues to maintain Chinese perspective, endeavoring to form Chinese Studies School. It is developing to promote friendship and cooperation between the two countries as well as to enhance economic ties. Presently researching on Korean Studies and Korean language education in China is influenced by practical motives and needs, rather than pure academic purposes. This study analyzes what Korean Studies in China means and how it has progressed. After examining Chinese scholars' identities and differences in their approaches, I plan to propose the direction for Korean Studies in China.

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.14 no.1
• /
• pp.171-195
• /
• 2012

This paper is aimed to prepare some policy-measures which is helpful for China Money FDI in Korea by analysing FDI-related data and political strength and weakness between the two countries and studying fundamental preconditions required for Korea's China Money FDI strategies. As the result of research, key preconditions found out can be summarized as follows; First, because China-Korea economic relationship is largely insufficient in a complementary view as well as in a cooperative state level, Korea should remove the threats in advance that could lead two countries to unlimited competition, and then expand to a relationship of trust between China and Korea. Second, Korea, at least from the perspective of China, may not be an attractive investment destination. Therefore, it is necessary to take advantage of Korea's FTA-expansion-strategy opportunities such as Korea-US FTA which has entered into force recently. Third, because China always has a lot of alternative investment opportunities among world instead of Korea, so Korea should not overlook the fact that China has the bargaining power in large part related on the investment conditions in Korea, such as investment field, investment size, how to invest China Money to Korea, etc. Fourth, if Korea's FDI policy is trapped in the existing rules of the political frame, and moreover Korea can not have the role of rule breaker, it will be difficult to expect Korea's China Money FDI results compared to those efforts. Fifth, if Korea will execute China Money FDI strategies in the context of overestimating the China Power or China Money, it should be noted that Korea may have unexpected losses lead to a national by reason of outward and quantitative investment or bad investment.

• East Asian Economic Review
• /
• v.26 no.1
• /
• pp.49-91
• /
• 2022

Recent years have witnessed renewed interest in Africa and public diplomacy has emerged as the vital tool being used to cultivate these relations. China has been leading in pursuing stronger economic partnership with Africa while middle powers such as Korea are also intensifying engagement with the continent. While previous studies have analyzed the implications of China's activities in Africa on advanced powers, none has examined them from the paradigm of middle powers. This study fills this gap by assessing China's activities in Africa, their economic engagement and implications for Korea's interest in Africa. The analysis is qualitative based on secondary data from various sources and literature. The study shows that China's public diplomacy strategy involves a high degree of innovation and has evolved to encompass new tools and audiences. China has institutionalized a cooperative model that permeates many aspects of governance institutions in Africa, enabling it to strengthen their relations. This could also be helping China to adjust faster leadership transitions in Africa. Whereas the US is still the most influential country in Africa, China is influential in economic policies and has outstripped the US in infrastructure diplomacy. This could be because African policy makers align more with China's economic model than the US' mainstream economics. Chinese aid to Africa has been diversified to social sectors that are more responsive to the needs of Africa. Trade and investment relations between China and Africa have deepened, but so does trade imbalance since 2010. China mainly imports natural resources and raw materials from Africa. But this product portfolio is not different from Korea and the US. China's energetic insertion in Africa using various strategies has significant implications for countries with ambitions in Africa. Korea can achieve its ambitions in Africa by focusing resources in areas it can leverage its core strengths-such as education and vocational training, environmental policy and development cooperation.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.38
• /
• pp.303-325
• /
• 2008

China's "Foreign Trade law" 16.4 revised in 2004 like "Foreign Trade law" 16.2 in 1994 is still stipulated resource restriction to protect domestic resources and it does not satisfy the introduction of article 20 and section (g) of GATT 1994. Through an interpretation of related regulations and China-EU cokes dispute, the paper points out that China's "Foreign Trade law" 16.4 has no validity of the introduction of article 20 and section (g) of GATT 1994. Comparing China's "Foreign Trade law" 16.4 to GATT 1994 20(g), China's "Foreign Trade law" 16.4 does not include important conditions of GATT 1994 20 introduction such as not being arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination and disguised restriction on international trade. For example, based upon China's "Foreign Trade law" , if she restricts or prohibits important natural resources that Korea mainly relies on China, it will effects not only trade between two countries but also our lives and securities. Hence, it is highly time to analyze China's the Validity of the China's Resource Export-Quota Restrictive Measures under the GATT/WTO. In the process of resolving China-EU cokes dispute in 2004, ministry of Commerce of China shows well its characteristics of dispute settlement and also we can find out EU's logical countermeasures. Therefore, because of the high possibility of disputes between Korea and China in the area of natural resources, Korea needs to pay attention to the China's resource protecting policies, and if it violates GATT 1994 20 introduction and (g), we should consider to sue China to WTO. The paper believes that it will play an important role as an aggressive demand and effect on amendment of China's "Foreign Trade law" in the long term.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.29 no.2
• /
• pp.161-199
• /
• 2019

As international trades between Korea and China increase, the number of civil disputes also increases. The civil dispute settlement system and the court system in China are distinctive from those of Korea. China has its own court systems which are characterized by the Chinese Communist System. Due to the influence of the decentralized local autonomy tradition, the case laws of each Province in China are not unified throughout the China. This is partly because only two instances are provided in China, and the parties cannot appeal to the Supreme People's Court of China unless there is a special reason. In Korea, three instances are provided and parties can appeal to the Supreme Court if a party so chooses. In addition, there are many differences in the judicial environment of China compared to Korea. Therefore, if there is a dispute between a Korean party and a Chinese party, arbitration is recommended rather than court litigation. This article examines the points to be considered for interim measures in China during arbitration. Where the seat of arbitration is Korea, interim measures cannot be taken by the order of the Chinese court in the middle of or before arbitration procedures. On the other hand, it is possible to take interim measures through the Chinese court in the middle of or before the arbitration procedure in China or Hong Kong. It also reviews the points to be noted in case of the enforcement of arbitration awards in China where permission from the upper Court is required to revoke or to deny the recognition or enforcement of a foreign-related or foreign arbitration award.