• Strategy21
• /
• 통권39호
• /
• pp.5-46
• /
• 2016

North Korea's 4th nuclear test on Jan. 6 and following developments once again awakened the world into seriousness of the nuclear matters on the Korean peninsula. On March 2, UNSC adopted Resolution 2270 which is complemented by Seoul government's measures such as withdrawal from the Gaesung Industrial Complex (Feb. 9) and announcement of unilateral sanction (March 8). Seoul government also strongly urged the international community to strangle North Korea's 'financial resources.' The U.S., Japan, China, and other countries have issued unilateral sanctions to complement the UNSC measure. South Korea and the U.S. conducted their annual joint military drill (Resolve-Foal Eagle) in the largest-ever scale. North Korea, however, responded with demonstration of its nuclear capabilities and announcement of de facto 'nuclear-first' politics. North Korea test-fired a variety of delivery vehicles, threatened nuclear strikes against South Korea and the U.S., and declared itself as an 'invincible nuclear power armed with hydrogen bombs' at the 7th Workers 'Party Congress held in May, 2016. Considering the circumstantial evidences, the North's 4th nuclear test may have been a successful boosted fission bomb test. North Korea, and, if allowed to go on with its nuclear programs, will become a nuclear power armed with more than 50 nuclear weapons including hydrogen bombs. The North is already conducting nuclear blackmail strategy towards South Korea, and must be developing 'nuclear use' strategies. Accordingly, the most pressing challenge for the international community is to bring the North to 'real dialogue for denuclearization through powerful and consistent sanctions. Of course, China's cooperation is the key to success. In this situation, South Korea has urgent challenges on diplomacy and security fronts. A diplomatic challenge is how to lead China, which had shown dual attitudes between 'pressure and connivance' towards the North's nuclear matters pursuant to its military relations with the U.S, to participate in the sanctions consistently. A military one is how to offset the 'nuclear shadow effects' engendered by the North's nuclear blackmail and prevent its purposeful and non-purposeful use of nuclear weapons. Though South Korea's Ministry of Defense is currently spending a large portion of defense finance on preemption (kill-chain) and missile defense, they pose 'high cost and low efficiency' problems. For a 'low cost and high efficiency' of deterrence, South Korea needs to switch to a 'retaliation-centered' deterrence strategy. Though South Korea's response to the North's nuclear threat can theoretically be boiled down into dialogue, sanction and deterrence, now is the time to concentrate on strong sanction and determined deterrence since they are an inevitable mandatory course to destroy the North' nuclear-first delusion and bring it to a 'real denuclearization dialogue.'

• 인간식물환경학회지
• /
• 제22권6호
• /
• pp.563-573
• /
• 2019

The North Korean government conducted its first nuclear test in 2006 and more recently the sixth nuclear test on September 3, 2017. In order to identify how North Korea's nuclear tests have affected the environment, a scientific approach is required. Although North Korea's nuclear tests and their environmental destruction are not a severe threat to the environment of the Korean Peninsula at this time, identifying environmental damage and taking countermeasures in advance are essential to minimize their potential threats to the environments. The purpose of this study is to study the environmental impact of North Korea's nuclear tests using Google Earth image analysis. As a method of the study, we compare Google Earth images taken before and after each nuclear test was conducted in North Korea. To overcome limitations of the suggested comparison method, we cross-checked our results with those of previous scientific research. After the 1st-3rd nuclear tests, green spaces were found to be considerably reduced. In particular, when comparing the Google Earth images before and after the second nuclear test, some ground subsidences were observed. Such subsidences can cause tunnels on the mountainsides and cracks in rocks around the mountains, leading to the release of radioactive materials and contaminating groundwater. Besides, after the 4th-6th nuclear tests, decay and deforestation were observed not in the nuclear test sites, but in their surrounding areas. Especially after the 5th and 6th nuclear tests, the topography and the forests of the surrounding areas were severely damaged. In relation to North Korea's nuclear tests and their impact on the natural environment, we need to prepare various policy measures to reduce North Korea's environmental pollution and natural environment destruction. Those policy measures include the establishment of various cooperative governance between the Korean government, the private sector, the academia, NGOs, and international organizations.

• 한국과 국제사회
• /
• 제2권1호
• /
• pp.69-92
• /
• 2018

북한은 2006년 1차 핵실험을 시작으로 2017년 9월까지 총 6차례의 핵실험을 감행하였다. 북한은 미국의 대북적대시 정책에 대응하기 위한 일환으로 체제수호와 방어적 차원에서 핵무장력 담보 전략을 전개하고 있다. 그러나 북한 핵실험의 전략적 목표가 북미협상을 통해 북한체제 위기를 극복하고 그들의 한반도 사회주의통일을 위한 핵무장력을 완성하는 데 있음은 주지의 사실이다. 북한의 계속된 핵실험은 한반도평화를 위협하는 직접적인 요인이 되고 있으며, 동북아안보 역학구도에 간접적인 요인으로 작용하고 있다. 유엔안보리는 이러한 북한의 무모한 핵실험에 대해 지난 10년 이상 6차례의 유엔안보리 결의로 대북제재조치를 단행해 왔다. 그러나 북한 김정은 정권은 유엔과 미국 등 국제사회의 대북제재 조치에도 불구하고 핵 경제병진노선을 고수하겠다는 입장이다. 유엔과 미국의 대북제재조치가 북한에 대한 효과적인 영향을 주지 못한 것은 북한이 강도높은 핵실험으로 격상시키는데 요인으로 분석된다. 2017년 미국의 트럼프 행정부가 대북제재 조치 수단 가운데 하나인 대북 군사옵션은 한반도에서의 전면전과 국지전 양상으로 예상된다. 미 트럼프 행정부는 이전의 미국 행정부의 대북제재 조치 양상과는 다르게 세컨더리 보이콧이라는 외교압박전술을 시도하고 있다. 그럼에도 불구하고 북한은 유엔과 미국의 대북제재조치에 대해 북 미 간 전면적인 군사대결 입장을 밝히며 '벼랑끝 전술'로 맞서고 있다. 북한은 당분간 체제생존차원에서 핵 경제병진노선을 추진할 것으로 판단된다. 북한체제는 미 중 간의 현실주의적 국가전략 추진으로 체제붕괴 변수가 나타날 수 있다는 점에서 북한의 전략적 선택의 폭은 좁아진다.

• Strategy21
• /
• 통권39호
• /
• pp.47-81
• /
• 2016

This paper has attempted to examine the political and operational contexts within which North Korea's latest acts of nuclear blackmail, its test-firing of an SLBM on April 23rd 2016 and its fourth nuclear test on January 6^th 2016, should be understood. Analysis of the KN-11 SLBM and the Sinpo-class SSB is based on official South Korean, US and others sources, especially the ROK MND, as well as other resources from South Korea, US and others. Unfortunately, the results of this exploration are inconclusive: there is simply not enough evidence available at present to either confirm or refute the existence of a functional North Korean SLBM and SSB. Nevertheless, the North Korean determination to possess such assets should not be taken lightly. But even accepting North Korea's claims about its SLBMs at face value, which is undermined by news of apparently unsuccessful follow-up test-firings in November, and probably December 2015, there is little proof that North Korea has yet succeeded in miniaturizing its nuclear warhead, so the most extravagant fears are not yet justified. Taken together with North Korea's latest announcement of a supposed successful SLBM ejection-test, on March 23^th 2016, the KN-11 SLBM claims should probably be seen as primarily about proving North Korea's status as a nuclear power, both to exert external political pressure and to bolster internal political support for Kim Jong-un's rule. In conclusion, this paper recommends formulating a preemptive anti-access strategy for the ROKN, proposes acquiring an ASW CV and SSNs to implement submarine strategic deterrent patrols, and urges extending the existing limited AORs to facilitate the preemptive anti-access strategy. Other deterrence options may be suggested, but it is surely significant that the ROKN has recently publically referred to the deployment of an ASW CV and SSNs for the first time.

• 아태비즈니스연구
• /
• 제13권3호
• /
• pp.463-473
• /
• 2022

Purpose - The purpose of this study is to examine the effect of the North Korea's net export to China and Liaoning on the North Korean economic growth. Design/methodology/approach - This study collects the data on the net export of North Korea to China and Liaoing from General Administration of Customs, People's Republic of China. Vector Autoregression(VAR) is also employed for the analysis. Findings - First, North Korea's net export to all of China and Liaoning gives the positive effect on North Korean economic growth. Second, the nuclear test of North Korea gives the negative effect on the North Korean economic growth. Third, the net export to China and Liaoning granger causes the North Korean economic growth. Lastly, the nuclear test of North Korea also granger causes the North Korean economic growth. Research implications or Originality - The estimation results show the net export of North Korea to China as well as Liaoning is important to the economic growth. Therefore, we need to examine North Korea's trades with specific region as well as all of China in order to enhance the North Korean economic growth.

• 기술사
• /
• 제42권3호
• /
• pp.35-40
• /
• 2009

After the yield of North Korea conducted underground the first nuclear test in 2006, which was less than a kiloton, it launched a vehicle on this April 9 again, which is believed to be a Taepo-dong 2 missile, defying international warnings that the move would violate U.N. resolutions, from Musudan-ni, North Korea. Its development and proliferation of ballistic missile and nuclear bomb technology pose a threat to the northeast Asian region and to international peace and security. In the other launching the missile, a newspaper reported that "While the launch was dubbed a failure by the U.S., it was an improvement over the North Koreans' July 2006 test of the Taepodong-2, said Green of the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "It was definitely better than last time, but it's still not an operational system," Green said.

• 국제지역연구
• /
• 제13권4호
• /
• pp.3-22
• /
• 2010

본 연구의 목적은 제2차 북한의 핵 위기 특히 2006년 10월 북한의 핵실험 이후 중국의 대북 정책이 왜 압박과 유인 정책간의 혼선을 보이고 있는지를 분석하는데 있다. 본 연구는 혼선을 보이고 있는 중국의 대북 정책의 근본적인 원인이 북한에 대해 중국이 갖고 있는 두 가지 목표 즉 한반도와 동북아시아의 안정 그리고 한반도의 비핵화간에 존재하는 딜레마로 인한 것이라고 주장한다. 북한이 핵개발 의도를 가시화하고 중국 역시 자국 안보의 위협으로 중재자의 역할을 자처하게 되면서 북한에 대한 중국의 목표는 상호 모순적인 상황에 처하게 되었다. 중국이 북한에 대해 갖고 있는 두 가지 목표는 1978년 개혁개방 이후부터 중국의 기본노선인 '경제발전'을 이룩하기 위해 추구해온 주변 지역 안정과 직결되기 때문에 중국의 대북 목표 전환은 그리 쉽지 않다. 따라서 북한이 비핵화에 대한 노력을 기울이지 않고 중국이 북한에 대해 한반도 평화와 비핵화라는 두 가지 목표를 지속한다면, 북한에 대한 중국 정책의 혼선은 앞으로도 지속될 것으로 전망할 수 있다.

• Strategy21
• /
• 통권39호
• /
• pp.82-113
• /
• 2016

This paper analyzes the contents and the effects of the UNSC 2270, and its implications to South Korea's defense strategy and navy. The UN Security Council passed strong sanctions against North Korea which punish North Korea's 4^th nuclear test. The sanctions compared to the previous ones require international society to take practical actions such as comprehensive trade bans as well as diplomatic isolation which will put significant pains on North Korea. Especially, these measures would greatly hamper economic development policy of Kim Joung-un regime. Because Kim Jung-un regime has inherent legitimacy problems which stems from the third family succession of the power, economic difficulties may play an important cause on the regime instability in the long term. In fact, the United States sees this possibility as an option to coerce North Korea in which North Korea choose denuclearization for its regime survival. Nevertheless, the prospects of the UN sanctions are not so optimistic. Considering North Korea's willingness for nuclear development and its level of nuclear technology, North Korea will try to play a gambit with the US and South Korea by exploiting its strategic advantages. North Korea's response will have three following strategies. First, it would actively pursue political and economic survival strategy by using China's support for the regime, strengthening its power grip in the name of countering US hostile policy, and enhancing peace propaganda. Second, North Korea will accelerate efforts to position its status as a nuclear de facto state. For this purpose, it could create nuclear crisis on the peninsula. Third, it would exploit local provocations as an exit strategy to get over the current situation. In order to counter North Korea's actions and punish North Korea's behavior strongly, South Korea needs following strategies and efforts. It should first make all the efforts to implement the UN sanctions. Strong and practical nuclear deterrence strategy and capability with the U.S. should be developed. Effective strategy and capabilities for the prevention and deterrence of North Korea's provocation should be prepared. For this purpose, North Korea's provocation strategy should be thoroughly reviewed. Active international cooperation is needed to punish and coerce North Korea's behavior. Finally, South Korea should prepare for the possible occurrence of North Korea's contingency and make use of the situation as an opportunity to achieve unification. All these strategies and efforts demand the more active roles and missions of South Korea's navy and thus, nullify North Korea's intention militarily.

• 한국언론정보학보
• /
• 제56권
• /
• pp.175-193
• /
• 2011

북한 핵실험 사태에 대한 국내 신문의 보도는 이데올로기적 성향이나 정파성에 관계없이 대체적으로 부정적인 기류가 강했다. 국내 신문은 북한 핵실험이 국내 안보위협과 국내정치 사안에 미칠 영향에 주목했다. 특히 2차 핵실험에 대한 보도에서는 과거 북핵문제에서는 크게 강조되지 않았던 경제적 피해와 연결 지어 보도한 점이 특이하다. 북핵문제를 단순히 안보문제나 국내외 정세와 관련된 이슈로 인식하는 데서 경제적 이슈로 이해하기 시작했다고 볼 수 있다. 북핵문제에 대한 남한의 언론 보도는 그러나 매체의 이데올로기적 성향에 따라 상당한 시각차를 드러냈다. 보수매체인 조선일보와 동아일보는 북핵문제의 원인을 북한체제 모순에서 찾은 반면, 진보매체인 한겨레와 경향신문은 남한의 내부 정치문제에서 귀인하는 보도태도를 보였다. 또 북핵문제 해결에 대한 방식에서도 보수매체인 조선일보와 동아일보는 대북제제와 안보강화를 강조한 반면, 한겨레와 경향신문은 6자 회담과 같은 국제사회 공조를 통한 해결 방식을 제시했다. 북핵문제의 전망에 대해서는 진보신문이 상대적으로 덜 부정적으로 평가하는 경향을 보였다. 토론에서는 북핵문제에 대한 문제의 원인과 해법에 대한 이해방식이 이념에 따라 특정한 지향성과 시각을 갖고 있다는 점을 논의했다.

• 융합보안논문지
• /
• 제16권3_2호
• /
• pp.13-23
• /
• 2016

북한은 최근 4차 핵실험과 대륙간탄도미사일 발사 실험을 실시하며, 한반도와 국제사회를 대상으로 핵 도발을 감행하였다. 북한에서 진행 중인 핵과 미사일 실험은 핵전력의 기술적 수준에 있어서 표준화, 경량화, 다종화의 완성단계에 도달하였다고 판단된다. 이에 북한은 한반도와 국제사회를 대상으로 조만간 핵도발이 현실이 될 것이라는 예상된다. 핵폭탄은 그 엄청난 파괴력으로 인하여 상대방의 제1격을 허용한 다음에 반격을 하겠다는 논리가 적용될 수 없는 절대무기이다. 따라서 핵을 보유하게 된 북한을 상대로 하는 우리는 최소한의 생존권을 보장하기 위해서 '선제적 자위권' 행사는 선택이 아닌 필수적인 대응개념일 수밖에 없다. 조만간 북한의 핵도발이 예상되는 현시점에서 선제타격 시행에 대한 국민적 공감대를 형성하여 도발의 원점지역을 타격할 있는 역량을 구비해야 한다. 또한 향후 예상되는 북한의 5차 핵실험에 대비하여 '핵무장 선택권' 확보할 수 있도록 국가적 역량을 결집해야 한다.