• Strategy21
• /
• 통권44호
• /
• pp.254-290
• /
• 2018

Why did Kim Jong Un turn his foreign policy upside down in a sudden? US naval blockade became one of candidates for the reason since it had been threatened by Trump administration for the first time in December 2017. Has the blockades worked well like that in the international politic history? This paper reveals the effectiveness of naval blockade on sanctioning in the peacetime. This research analyzes three hypothetical arguments about the naval blockade based on the result of empirical tests with TIES Dataset. First, sanctions by blockading are more effective in gaining political benefits than the other economic sanctions. It was ranked the 4th effective way of sanction out of 9. And 56.3% of pacific naval blockades without packaged economic sanctions were succeeded, whereas the possibility of success increase up to 61.2% when blockade has been imposed in accordance with the other type of economic sanctions. Second, blockades deter military collisions, even war. When it comes to military provocation issue, blockading sanctions gain political interest far more than the other type of economic sanctions. The possibility of the success reaches up to 74%. Also, there wasn't any historical cases of war incurred by blockading sanctions within 5 years after the blockade end. Third, policy makers just need 1.2 years on average to see the end of sanctions when they choose the naval blockade as the method of imposing sanction on the adversary. It is impressively short span of time in achieving political goal compared to the other types of sanctions which are need 9 years on average. North East Asia sea could be the next stage for a naval blockade sooner or later. Because China and Japan not only possess capabilities of blockade but also have will to impose blockades to the others if conditions are set. And even the North Korea with lots of submerging forces could be a blockading threat in the specific area. So, the Republic of Korea has to pay more attention and be prepared for naval blockading sanction.

• 해양안보
• /
• 제5권1호
• /
• pp.85-112
• /
• 2022

전쟁에 있어서 해상봉쇄는 결정적인 전투행위를 담당하지는 않아도 적의 해상수송을 마비시키는 역할을 통해 경제전을 위한 가교 역할을 담당한다는 점에서 오랜시간 동안 전쟁의 수단으로 활용되어왔고, 한국전쟁에서도 유엔군은 클라크 라인을 통한 제한적 해상봉쇄로 전쟁에서 상당한 효과를 거두었다. 하지만 해상봉쇄의 중요성에도 불구하고 중국이 강력한 해군력을 바탕으로 해양강대국으로 부상한 현 상황을 고려할 때 한반도에서 다시금 전쟁이 발발한다면 어떻게 봉쇄선을 설정하여 해상활동을 차단할 것인지, 특히 중립국 선박이나 전시금제품을 수송하는 선박에 대해 어떻게 대응할 것인지에 대한 검토가 부족하다. 또한 봉쇄는 중립국과의 이해관계가 존재한다는 점에서 예민하고 융통성 있는 해군력 투사 수단으로 활용되어야 하므로 봉쇄의 합법성을 보장하기 위한 원칙을 고려하여 신중하고 합리적인 판단을 통해 활용될 때에만 그 목적을 달성할 수 있다는 점에서 그 실행에 앞서 신중한 검토가 필요하다. 따라서 본 연구에서는 해상봉쇄법 적용의 변천 과정을 재조명하고, 이를 통해 해상봉쇄의 합법성을 보장하는 기본원칙을 도출하고자 한다. 그리고 전시 한반도 근해에서 이러한 기본원칙의 적용방안과 함께 중립국 선박과 전시금제품 운반선박에 대해서는 어떤 대응이 필요한지를 검토함으로서 연구질문에 대한 답을 제시하고, 우리에게 주는 함의를 고찰하였다.

• Strategy21
• /
• 통권30호
• /
• pp.236-262
• /
• 2012

Morgenthau claims that in international relations, there are the economic, political, and military powers that enable a nation to achieve its political and diplomatic goals. This paper explores the possibility of resolving international conflicts with naval power. First, the theoretical and historical perspective, naval power was used as a final resort to force a nation's political or diplomatic objective on an enemy nation when negotiations failed, and this was done through the physical and psychological destruction of the enemy by naval power. But as the use of military power has decreased because of the invention of the nuclear weapon, the existence of a large and capable navy deterrent has become one of the most useful military options among a nation's diplomatic measures. In other words, he focused on the political usefulness of naval power as a deterrent and coercive diplomatic tool for persuading other nations to acquiesce, rather than using naval power and actual military action as a final resort. The reason for this is that compared to army and air force, navy's flexibility, continuity, and the ability to deter are greater. The navy provides excellent accessibility through its wide mobility on the sea, and it has been shown through research that the navy possesses a political usefulness that facilitates the solution of conflicts through presence, naval intervention, and naval blockade. On the other hand, among the factors that could improve the influence of the navy are alliance relations, a reliable and powerful navy, carrots and sticks that it would have to deal with in the case of successful or unsuccessful negotiations, and support from international opinion. On this paper I introduce E.N.Luttwak's naval suasion theory. By the his theory, there are two mode of naval suasion. One is latent naval suasion the other is active suasion. Latent suasion there are deterrent mode and supportive mode. Active naval suasion there are coercive mode and supportive mode. Coercive mode has positive and negative. The limitations of naval suasion have been identified as follows. First, because the objective of the use of naval power is persuading enemy nations, the results are unpredictable. Second, the leaders of all countries possess limited understanding on the complexities of naval power and therefore lack understanding of the usefulness of naval power when choosing options. Third, in case of failure through naval suasion, prestige and reputation of a nation can be damaged. Finally, the following are additional possible research topic. First, a research on the decision making process of choosing naval power as a measure to resolve conflicts is needed. Lastly, research on the size of the navy and types of ships required for efficient naval suasion is needed. Today's world requires cooperative security regime so that middle class navy also requires political use of naval power in solving international conflicts. Therefore, additional research on this topic is needed.