• Title/Summary/Keyword: Nuclear threat

Search Result 124, Processing Time 0.018 seconds

North Korea's Cyber Attack Patterns and Behaviors : An Analysis Based on Cyber Power and Coercion Theory (북한의 대남 사이버공격 양상과 행태 : 사이버파워와 강압이론을 통한 분석)

  • Yoon, Taeyoung;Woo, Jeongmin
    • Convergence Security Journal
    • /
    • v.18 no.1
    • /
    • pp.117-128
    • /
    • 2018
  • The purpose of this paper is to analyze the behavior of North Korea's cyber attack against South Korea since 2009 based on major international security theories and suggest South Korea's policy option. For this purpose, this paper applied the behavioral domain and characteristics of 'cyber power' and 'coercion dynamics' model, which are attracting attention in international security studies. The types of cyber attacks from North Korea are classified into the following categories: power-based incarceration, leadership attacks and intrusions, military operations interference, and social anxiety and confusion. In terms of types and means of cyber power, North Korean GPS disturbance, the Ministry of Defense server hacking and EMP are hard power with high retaliation and threat and cyber money cashing and ransomware are analyzed by force in the act of persuasion and incentive in the point of robbing or asking for a large amount of money with software pawns. North Korea 's cyber attack has the character of escape from realistic sanctions based on the second nuclear test. It is important for South Korea to clearly recognize that the aggressive cyberpower of North Korea is changing in its methods and capabilities, and to ensure that North Korea's actions result in far greater losses than can be achieved. To do this, it is necessary to strengthen the cyber security and competence to simultaneously attack and defend through institutional supplement and new establishment such as cyber psychological warfare, EMP attack preparation, and enhancement of security expertise against hacking.

  • PDF

Militarization and Weaponization of Outer Space in International Law

  • Kim, Han-Taek
    • The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
    • /
    • v.33 no.1
    • /
    • pp.261-284
    • /
    • 2018
  • The current international legal system does not provide a safeguard against the militarization and the weaponization of outer space. Although the term "peaceful use of outer space" in the 1967 Outer Space Treaty(OST) appears in official government statements or in multilateral space treaties, it is still without an authoritative definition in reviewing national practices. The ambiguous ban on weapons in Article IV of the OST allows countries to loophole on the deployment of other weapons other than nuclear weapons. Meanwhile "Draft Treaty on the Prevention of the Placement of Weapon in Outer Space and of the Threat or Use of Force against Outer Space Objects(PPWT)" to Conference on Disarmament (CD) commissioned by the UN General Assembly's Special Session jointly submitted by China and Russia in 2008 and later revised in 2014, attempting to define and prohibit the proliferation of weapons in outer space and provided definitions of prohibited weapons, are opposed by the US on the grounds that currently there is no arms race in outer space. Some experts support a hard law approach in which binding laws aimed at ultimately creating integrated and binding legal instruments in all aspects of the use of outer space should be adopted to regulate the military use of space. However as a temporary measure the soft law guidelines should be developed for the non liquiet, a situation where there is no applicable law. The soft law could be used to create support for the declaration of the treaties and to create international customary law. For example, the 1963 Declaration of Legal Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space that regulates the activities of the state in the exploration and use of the universe, and the 1992 Principles Relevant to the Use of Nuclear Power Sources in Outer Space will illustrated. While substantial portions of the former was codified later in the 1967 OST, the latter which, although written in somewhat mandatory terms, have been consistently complied with by states, have arguably become part of customary international law. On November 12, 1974, the General Assembly reaffirmed that the development of international law may be reflected inter alia, by declarations and resolutions of the General Assembly which may to that extent be taken into consideration by the International Court of Justice.

Standards of Protection in Investment Arbitration for Upcoming Climate Change Cases (기후변화 관련 사건에 적용되는 국제투자중재의 투자자 보호 기준)

  • Kim, Dae-Jung
    • Journal of Arbitration Studies
    • /
    • v.24 no.2
    • /
    • pp.33-52
    • /
    • 2014
  • Although climate change is a global scale question, some concerns have been raised that principles of investment arbitration may not adequately address the domestic implementation of climate change measures. A recent ICSID investment arbitration of Vattenfall v. Germany with regard to the investor's alleged damages from the phase-out of nuclear plants is a salient climate change case. The 2005 Kyoto Protocol was made to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and it provides a number of flexible mechanisms such as Joint Implementation (JI) and Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). Implementation of the Kyoto Protocol allows dispute settlement through investor-state arbitration. Any initiation of stricter emission standards can violate the prohibition on expropriations in investment agreements, regardless of the measures created to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The effect-based expropriation doctrine can charge changes to existing emission standards as interference with the use of property that goes against the legitimate expectation of a foreign investor. In regulatory chill, threat of investor claims against the host state may preclude the strengthening of climate change measures. Stabilization clauses also have a freezing effect on the hosting state's regulation and a new law applicable to the investment. In the fair and equitable standard, basic expectations of investors when entering into earlier carbon-intensive operations can be affected by a regulation seeking to change into a low-carbon approach. As seen in the Methanex tribunal, a non-discriminatory and public purpose of environmental protection measures should be considered as non-expropriation in the arbitral tribunal unless its decision would intentionally impede a foreign investor's investment.

  • PDF

A Study on the Meaning of Outer Space Treaty in International Law (우주조약의 국제법적 의미에 관한 연구)

  • Kim, Han-Taek
    • The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
    • /
    • v.28 no.2
    • /
    • pp.223-258
    • /
    • 2013
  • 1967 Outer Space Treaty(Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies; OST) is a treaty that forms the basis of international space law. OST is based on the 1963 Declaration of Legal Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space announced by UNGA resolution. As of May 2013, 102 countries are states parties to OST, while another 27 have signed the treaty but have not completed ratification. OST explicitly claimed that the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies are the province of all mankind. Art. II of OST states that "outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means", thereby establishing res extra commercium in outer space like high seas. However 1979 Moon Agreement stipulates that "the moon and its natural resources are the Common Heritage of Mankind(CHM)." Because of the number of the parties to the Moon Agreement(13 parties) it does not affect OST. OST also established its specific treaties as a complementary means such as 1968 Rescue Agreement, 1972 Liability Convention, 1975 Registration Convention. OST bars states party to the treaty from placing nuclear weapons or any other weapons of mass destruction in orbit of Earth, installing them on the Moon or any other celestial body, or to otherwise station them in outer space. It exclusively limits the use of the Moon and other celestial bodies to peaceful purposes and expressly prohibits their use for testing weapons of any kind, conducting military maneuvers, or establishing military bases, installations, and fortifications. However OST does not prohibit the placement of conventional weapons in orbit. China and Russia submitted Draft Treaty on the Prevention of the Placement of Weapon in Outer Space and of the Threat or Use of Force against Outer Space Objects(PPWT) on the Conference on Disarmament in 2008. USA disregarded PPWT on the ground that there are no arms race in outer space. OST does not have some articles in relation to current problems such as space debris, mechanisms of the settlement of dispute arising from state activities in outer space in specific way. COPUOS established "UN Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines" based on "IADC Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines" and ILA proposed "International Instrument on the Protection of the Environment from Damage Caused by Space Debris" for space debris problems and Permanent Court of Arbitration(PCA) established "Optional Rules for Arbitration of Disputes Relating to Outer Space Activities" and ILA proposed "1998 Taipei Draft Convention on the Settlement of Space Law Dispute" for the settlement of dispute problems. Although OST has shortcomings in some articles, it is very meaningful in international law in considering the establishment of basic principles governing the activities of States in the exploration and use of outer space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies. OST established the principles governing the activities of states in the exploration and use of outer space as customary law and jus cogens in international law as follows; the exploration and use of outer space shall be carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries and shall be the province of all mankind; outer space shall be free for exploration and use by all States; outer space is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means. The principles of global public interest in outer space imposes international obligations erga omnes applicable to all States. This principles find significant support in legal norms dealing with following points: space activities as the "province of all mankind"; obligation to cooperate; astronauts as envoys of mankind; avoidance of harmful contamination; space activities by States, private entities and intergovernmental organisations; absolute liability for damage cauesd by certain space objects; prohibition of weapons in space and militarization of the celestial bodies; duty of openness and transparency; universal application of the international space regime.

  • PDF