• Strategy21
• /
• s.30
• /
• pp.63-98
• /
• 2012

Northeast Asia has a multi-layered security structure within which major economic and military powers both confront one another and cooperate at the same time. Major regional powers maintain mutually cooperative activities in the economic sphere while competing one another in order to secure a dominant position in the politico-military arena. The multifarious threats, posed by the North Korea's nuclear development, territorial disputes, and maritime demarcation line issues demonstrate that Northeast Asia suffers more from military conflicts and strifes than any other region in the world. Specifically, major maritime security threats include North Korea's nuclear proliferation and missile launching problems as well as military provocations nearby the Northern Limit Line(NLL) as witnessed in the Cheonan naval ship and Yeonpyong incidents. The ROK Navy has been supplementing its firm military readiness posture in consideration of North Korea's threats on the NLL. It has performed superb roles in defending the nation and establishing the Navy advanced and best picked. It also has been conducive to defend the nation from external military threats and invasion, secure the sea lanes of communications, and establish regional stability and world peace. In order to effectively cope with the strategic environment and future warfares, the ROK Navy needs to shift its military structure to one that is more information and technology intensive. In addition, it should consolidate the ROK-US alliance and extend military cooperative measures with neighboring countries in the Asia-Pacific region. Evolved steadily for the last 60 years, the ROK-US alliance format has contributed to peace and security on the Korean peninsula and in the Northeast Asian region. In conclusion, this manuscript contends that the ROK Navy should strive for the establishment of the following: (1) Construction of Jeju Naval Base; (2) Strategic Navy Equipped with War Deterrence Capabilities; (3) Korean-type of System of Systems; (4) Structure, Budget and Human Resources of the Naval Forces Similar to the Advanced Countries; and (5) Strategic Maritime Alliance and Alignment System as well as Domestic Governance Network for the Naval Families.

• Anayses & Alternatives
• /
• v.2 no.1
• /
• pp.5-29
• /
• 2018

Models of South-North Korean economic integration have the problem of circular reasoning. While many studies argue that South-North Korean economic integration would contribute to alleviate security risks in the Korean peninsular, they emphasize the success of any economic model of inter-Korean economic integration is subject to favorable geo-political and security environment. It is a failure in distinguishing between goals and constraints. After identifying three major goals of South-North Korean economic cooperation, this study shows the trilemma among the goals; they are 1) formation of a complete economic community, 2) maintaining independent sovereignty of the two Koreas, 3) promotion of mutual economic interests. The trilemma suggests that it is theoretically impossible to achieve the above three goals at the same time. Only two goals are achievable simultaneously. This study argues that the most practical option is to pursue the combination of goals 2) and 3) considering the complex political and security environment around the Korean peninsular. Recognizing that North Korea is the least developed country in the Northeast Asia region, South Korea's initiatives for inter-Korean economic cooperation should focus on assisting industrialization and integration of the North Korea economy into the Northeast Asian regional production sharing structure. In view of the 'flying geese model' of the sequential industrialization in the region, the least developed economic status of North Korea can partially be explained by its failure to participate in the production network in the region as well as lack of effective implementation of appropriate industrial policy. Therefore, promotion of industrialization of North Korea should be the immediate goal of economic cooperation between North and South Korea. It is an interesting fact that North Korea has rapidly expanded its apparel exports in recent years. It could mean that the North Korean economy is actively responding to the dynamics of international comparative advantage structure, although the production activities are limited to exports to China since the closure of the Gaesung Industrial Complex. The recent increase in apparel export is a starting point for incorporating the Easy Import Substitution fulfilling both domestic and neighboring regional demand of North Korea. It could help integrate North Korea's industry into the production network of Northeast Asia. An immediate policy implication is that the economic cooperation between the two Koreas should focus on facilitating this process and supporting North Korea's industrial policy through South Korea's contribution of capital, technology, and service intermediary inputs.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.19 no.2
• /
• pp.97-136
• /
• 2004

The Northeast Asian air cargo market has expanded tremendously as a result of the opening up of the Chinese market. The importance of the Asia-Pacific region in the global air transport has also increased. The exchange of human and material resources, services, and information in Northeast Asia, which is expected to increase in the near future, requires that the airlines operating within this region adopt a more liberalized approach. This paper introduced alternatives which can be applied to the Northeast Asian airlines industry so as to bring about the integration of regional air transport: First, this paper found a need for individual Northeast Asian nations to alter their policies towards the airlines industry. Second, each country should further liberalize their respective domestic air transport. Third, there is a need for freer air service agreements to be signed between the nations of Northeast Asia. Fourth, the strategic alliances between the airlines operating in Northeast Asia should be further strengthened. Fifth, this liberalization process should be carried out in an incremental manner, beginning with more competitive airports and routes, or with less-in-demand routes. Sixth, there is a need for a shuttle system to be put into place between the main airports in China, Korea, and Japan. Seventh, these three nations jointly develop aviation safety and security systems that are in accordance with international standards. Eighth, the liberalization process of the aviation industry should be undertaken in conjunction with other related fields. Ninth, organizations linking together civil aviation organization in the Asia-Pacific area should be formed, as should each government linking together. By doing so, these countries will be able to establish regular venues through which to exchange opinions on the integration and liberalization of the air cargo market so as to induce the gradual liberalization of the actual market. The liberalization of the air transport in Northeast Asia will prove to be a daunting task in the short term. However, if the Chinese airlines continue to exhibit continuous growth and Japanese airlines are able to complete their move towards a low-cost structure, this process could be completed earlier than expected. Over the last twenty five years the air transport has undergone tremendous changes. The most important factor behind these changes has been the increased liberalization of the market. As a result, rates have decreased while demand has increased. This has resulted in turning the air transport industry, which was long perceived as an industry in decline, into a high-growth industry. The only method of increasing regional exchanges in the air transport is to pursue further liberalization. The country which implements this liberalization process at the earliest date may very well emerge as a leading force within the air transport industry.

• Korean Security Journal
• /
• no.37
• /
• pp.29-50
• /
• 2013

With the recent global threats of terrorism as well as religious conflicts, Northeast Asian countries including South Korea, China, and Japan are experiencing particularly serious security crises as demonstrated by North Korea's threats of nuclear weapons testings and long-range missile launching as well as military provocation toward South Korea such as sinking of ROKS Cheonan and bombardment of Yeonpyeong island and the territorial dispute between China and Japan over Senkaku Islands(Diaoyu Islands). As a result, Park Geun Hye Administration of South Korea and the 2nd Abe Shinzo Cabinet of Japan, both recently established, are making efforts to improve their national security and crisis management policies. One of the key elements of such efforts is the strengthening of National Security Council(NSC) or its equivalent organization as the control tower of national security policy, modeled after the NSC of the United States. This paper compares NSC organization of Korea, the U.S., and Japan and draws policy insights focusing on the current political and national security situation South Korea is facing. Although organizational structure, function, and history of NSC of each country differs, it can be inferred from this comparison that NSC-type of organizations can play an important role as a control tower of security and emergency management policies.

• Strategy21
• /
• s.37
• /
• pp.104-143
• /
• 2015

China's new grand strategy, the "One Belt, One Road Initiative" (also Belt Road Initiative, or BRI) has two primary components: Chinese President Xi Jinping announced the "Silk Road Economic Belt" in September 2013 during a visit to Kazakhstan, and the "21^st Century Maritime Silk Route Economic Belt" in a speech to the Indonesian parliament the following month. The BRI is intended to supply China with energy and new markets, and also to integrate the countries of Central Asia, the Association of Southeast Asia Nations (ASEAN), and the Indian Ocean Region - though not Northeast Asia - into the "Chinese Dream". The project will be supported by the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), due to open in 2016 with 57 founding members from all around the world, and China has already promised US$ 50 billion in seed funding. China's vision includes networks of energy pipelines, railways, sea port facilities and logistics hubs; these will have obvious commercial benefits, but also huge geopolitical significance. China seems to have two distinct aims: externally, to restore its historical sphere of influence; and internally, to cope with income inequalities by creating middle-class jobs through enhanced trade and the broader development of its economy. In South Korea, opinion on the BRI is sharply polarized. Economic and industrial interests, including Korea Railroad Corporation (KORAIL), support South Korean involvement in the BRI and closer economic interactions with China. They see how the BRI fits nicely with President Park Geun-hye's Eurasia Initiative, and anticipate significant commercial benefits for South Korea from better connections to energy-rich Russia and the consumer markets of Europe and Central Asia. They welcome the prospect of reduced trade barriers between China and South Korea, and of improved transport infrastructure, and perceive the political risks as manageable. But some ardently pro-US pundits worry that the political risks of the BRI are too high. They cast doubt on the feasibility of implementing the BRI, and warn that although it has been portrayed primarily in economic terms, it actually reveals a crucial Chinese geopolitical strategy. They are fearful of China's growing regional dominance, and worried that the BRI is ultimately a means to supplant the prevailing US-led regional security structure and restore the Middle Kingdom order, with China as the only power that matters in the region. According to this view, once China has complete control of the regional logistics hubs and sea ports, this will severely limit the autonomy of China's neighbors, including South Korea, who will have to toe the Chinese line, both economically and politically, or risk their own peace and prosperity.