• 동남아시아연구
• /
• 제24권2호
• /
• pp.127-165
• /
• 2014

This article regards the phase of political confrontations in Thailand and Burma as a prolonged and inconclusive political struggle between national revolution forces and civil revolution forces. It argues that in Thai case, anti-monarchy constitutional revolution has led to a right-wing national revolution based on state nationalism consolidating capitalist economic system by Sarit's military coup, while in Burmese case, anti-British imperialism movement in colonial era has resulted in a left-wing national revolution grounded on state nationalism associating with socialist economic system by Ne Win's military coup. It is also interesting to note that the two cases experienced state nationalism denying autonomous civil society as a process of nation-building in spite of their contrasting ideologies. In both cases, it became inevitable to have national revolution forces clinging to official nationalism and state nationalism confronting with civil revolution forces seeking popular nationalism and liberal nationalism. In particular, unlike Burmese society, Thai society, without colonial history has never experienced a civil war mobilizing anti-colonial popular nationalism including ethnic revolt. This article considers Dankwart Rustow's argument that national unity as a background condition must precede all the other phases of democratization, but that otherwise its timing is irrelevant. In this context, Thai democratization without national unity which began earlier than Burmese is taking a backward step. For the time being, there would be no solution map to overcome severe political polarization between the right-wing national revolution forces defending official nationalism cum state nationalism and the civil revolution forces trying to go beyond official nationalism towards popular nationalism cum liberal nationalism. In contrast, paradoxically belated Burmese democratization has just taken a big leap in escaping from serious and inconclusive nature of political struggle between the left-wing national revolution forces to defend official nationalism cum state nationalism and civil revolution based on popular nationalism cum liberal nationalism towards a reconciliation phase in order to seek solutions for internal conflicts. The two case studies imply that national unity is not a background condition, but a consequence of the process of political polarization and reconciliation between national revolution forces and civil revolution forces.

• 아태비즈니스연구
• /
• 제11권3호
• /
• pp.217-227
• /
• 2020

Purpose - Against the backdrop of the recent intense political conflict in Korea's political circles, it is to reveal from an economic point of view the hidden aspects behind the hostile conflict between the two political forces. Design/methodology/approach - This paper is not a normative study to find a solution to political conflict, but a positive study to reveal the mechanism of reciprocity that exists between the two parties of conflict in real politics. Therefore, the analysis is based on game theory methodology. Findings - It is shown that the ruling party should choose a level of preemptive response that is neither insufficient nor excessive if it aims to avoid radical anti-government struggles by opposition parties. We also find that even if the chances of success of the opposition's radical offensive struggle are low, the use of that strategy is not necessarily reduced. In addition, we have obtained comparative static results that do not deviate much from our intuition. What's interesting is that unlike our intuition that the choice of the method will be indifferent if the marginal effects of radical and normal methods of struggle are the same, the opposition party rather chooses the normal method of struggle more often. Research implications or Originality - In forming the analytical model, it reflected the support of the general public following the opposition's struggle against the ruling party in order to capture real politics well in the conflict between the two opposing parties.

• International Journal of Advanced Culture Technology
• /
• 제12권2호
• /
• pp.281-285
• /
• 2024

Within five years of Kim Jong-un's rise to power, North Korea conducted four nuclear tests and launched the Hwasong-15, an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), in 2017, declaring the completion of its nuclear forces. During the period when Kim Jong-un completed nuclear forces to maintain the regime, foreign policy factors of the United States, China, Russia, and South Korea drove North Korea's accelerated nuclear development. The main motivating factors were the hostile policies and external threats as security factors. The completion of nuclear forces is also the result of the interplay of domestic political factors, normative factors, and hereditary factors. North Korea has been developing nuclear weapons and missiles for the survival of its regime. To achieve lasting peace on the Korean Peninsula, a new modus vivendi must be sought. It is necessary to set the ultimate goal of North Korea's complete denuclearization and engage in strategic thinking for a realistic and effective phased approach.

• 한국지역지리학회지
• /
• 제9권1호
• /
• pp.1-23
• /
• 2003

본 논문에서는 러시아 극동지역에 진출한 북한 노동력의 상황을 러시아 극동지역의 중국 노동력과 함께 비교 고찰한다. 먼저 러시아 극동지역에서의 북한 노동력과 중국 노동력의 과거와 현재의 상황을 살펴보았고, 그 다음으로 문헌연구를 통하여 북한 노동력과 중국 노동력에 대한 현지 러시아인들의 인종적 성향을 정치적, 경제적, 사회문화적 심리적 그리고 치안 관점에서 고찰하였다. 본 연구의 결과에 의하면 경제적 관점과 치안의 관점에서 볼 때 러시아 극동지역의 북한인과 중국인에 대한 러시아인의 태도는 거의 유사하였다. 양국 모두 러시아 극동지역내부에서 발생되는 사회문제에 빈번하게 관련됨으로서 좋은 반응을 얻지는 못하고 있다. 그러나 정치적 측면과 사회문화적 심리적 측면에서 극동지역의 북한 노동력은 중국 노동력에 비해 훨씬 선호를 받고 있다는 것을 알 수 있었다. 본 논문의 합의는 중국노동력에 대한 극동지역 러시아인의 우려를 감안했을 때, 북한 노동력의 이용으로 한국의 러시아 극동진출은 상당히 중요한 의미를 가진다는 것을 보여주는 것이다.

• 분석과 대안
• /
• 제1권2호
• /
• pp.2-12
• /
• 2017

Research on democratic transitions has relatively ignored the question of why some countries experience a regressive form of political pacts, while others do not. This paper develops a simple game-theoretic model to explain the phenomenon of collusive pacts in the process of democratization. Trasformismo is a term that refers to a system of political exchange based on informal clientelistic politics. The existing studies of the politics of trasformismo have emphasized the timing of industrialization and the tradition of strong state as conditions of the politics of trasformismo. However, not every late industrializers and not every strong states experienced some variants of collusive political pacts in their trajectories of democratization. In this paper, I contend that the politics of trasformismo is rather a generalizable pattern of political elites' behavior under particular circumstances. By developing a simple game theoretic model, this paper suggests the conditions under which political actors are likely to collude to a regressive form of political pacts. The model shows that the likelihood of collusion to a regressive form of political pacts is a function of a set of parameters. First, a higher level of incumbency advantage in electoral competition is likely to be associated with a higher probability of collusive political pacts. Second, a higher degree of the monopoly of political representation of political parties without a close link with a variety of societal forces is likely to induce collusive behavior among politicians. Third, the ruling party leader's expectations about the likelihood of a safe extrication are related to collusive political pacts. This paper then engages in a case study of the 1990 three-party merger in South Korea. The 1990 Korean case is interesting in that the ruling party created a new party after having merged with two opposition parties. This case can be considered a result of political maneuver in a context of democratization. The case study suggests the empirical relevance of the game-theoretic model. As the game of trasformismo and the case study of the 1990 three-party merger in South Korea have shown, the collusive political pact was neither determined by a certain stage of economic development nor by a particular cultural systems. Rather, it was a product of the art of trasformismo based on party leaders' rational calculations of the expected likelihood of taking governing power.

• 한국사회정책
• /
• 제24권2호
• /
• pp.181-215
• /
• 2017

본 연구는 미군정시기 분배체계에 대한 연구를 통해 현대 한국복지체제의 기원이 미군정시기의 정치와 경제질서와 매우 밀접하게 연관되어 있다는 점을 밝혔다. 1960년대 계급의 이해로부터 자유로운 개발국가의 탄생은 1945년부터 1948년까지의 미군정기를 사상하고는 상상할 수 없다. 미군정은 노동운동과 농민운동을 물리력으로 해체시키고, 좌파 정치세력에게 괴멸적 타격을 가했다. 이러한 과정을 통해 미군정은 1945년 8월 해방 당시 좌파가 지배적인 한국의 정치지형을 우파가 지배적인 정치지형으로 완전히 전환시켰다. 더욱이 조선 민중 대다수가 바라던 사회(민주)주의 대신 미국식 자본주의를 이식시키는데도 미군정의 물리력이 없었다면 불가능했을 것이다. 농지개혁을 통해 전통적 지주계급을 몰락시키고, 혁명적 농민들을 보수적인 농민으로 전환하고, 일본인이 소유했던 공장들의 배분을 통해 국가에 종속되는 새로운 자본가 계급을 탄생시켰다. 복지체제의 관점에서 미군정 시기의 가장 큰 의미는 미군정이 1960년대 계급의 이해로부터 자유로운 개발국가, 즉 노동력의 상품화에 기초한 한 복지체제가 만들어질 수 있는 토대를 만든 것이다.

• Acta Via Serica
• /
• 제5권1호
• /
• pp.121-152
• /
• 2020

The article is a critical examination of the political developments in Armenia since the 'Velvet Revolution' of April-May 2018, when, on the wave of massive protests against the ruling regime, new young forces came to power raising amongst broad segments of population enormous enthusiasm and hopes about radical reforms that would lead to profound transformations in the political and socio-economic spheres. It contains a thorough analysis of underlying political processes in the country in an attempt to answer a number of topical questions, so important to get a deeper understanding of the situation in Armenia and in the South Caucasus region. Based on the analysis of the new authorities' performance against the acknowledged benchmarks and standards of democracy consolidation, such as: separation of powers, independence of the judiciary, good governance, transitional justice the author comes to the conclusion that they failed to achieve any breakthrough in the above-mentioned fields. On the contrary, as demonstrated by concrete examples, what occurred in Armenia was not a revolution but a mere regime change under the leadership of Prime Minister Pashinyan, who gradually has concentrated in his hands executive, legislative, and quasi-totality of the judicial branch of power.

• 한국국방경영분석학회지
• /
• 제17권2호
• /
• pp.1-15
• /
• 1991

If one were to say that war is political in its nature, then war could be one of the several ways of achieving political goals. Thus, the aspect of wars will, in certainty, be altered by the changes in political environment. Wars in the past broke out mainly due to ideological differences that ran to extremes and were of high intensity. However, wars today show such restraints as controlling them beforehand or during the war in anticipation of the post-war situation. The trend of ideas to actualize such wars in the effective operation of airpower is on the rise. Airpower normally possesses speed and operative flexibility as well as capability of destruction, so it is possible to destroy the politically declared targets clearly. Previous airpower was merely employed as means of helping to vertically detouring the spatial obstacle that the ground forces encountered. Over the years, due to the speedy improvement of aviation technology and of ideas concerning wars in space, more advanced application has been developed. but they also were nothing more than an auxiliary role to facilotate the ground forces, that needed a longer effective range of firepower and did not become forces with the right of self-determination, that is, the fact of decisive war that makes its outcome. However, under transitional strategic environment like that of the present, Airpower possesses not only the capability to operate as a decisive means of war but also as theories to support it. The advancement in air technology has enabled supremacy over targets in depth, and the development of electronic technology has empowered the improvement of degree of destruction but also triumphant war by means of an overwhelming supremacy in a relatively short period. Thus, the method of systematic destruction that accomplishes the stated goals while rejecting the damage of accumulative destruction has been realized. The progress of such a concept has also proved that the counter-force strategy that has been developed in nuclear strategy is useful in conventional warfare as well. Therefore, it can be said that the under today's strategic environment airpower is an outstanding means of military strategy that can deeply affect to achieve the national objectives.

• Asian Journal for Public Opinion Research
• /
• 제3권4호
• /
• pp.176-197
• /
• 2016

Despite being a key concept of International Relations theory, there is no consensus about what the national interest is. It is almost impossible for political leaders of democratic states to make a crucial decision in foreign policies when considering only the national interest without public support. Rather, we are unable to imagine the national interest without public opinion. In general, international crises galvanize people who held different opinions and unify social cleavages, such as secular-religious identities, into a nation that acts in its national interest. The author proposes a method to operationalize the key concept and describes a relationship between the national interest and religious identities in a democratic state. The selected case is the state of Israel. It is believed that Israel is a good example to think about the association between foreign affairs and political attitudes since it is characterized as a socio-religious divided society and has often waged war against Arab military forces.

• Acta Via Serica
• /
• 제7권1호
• /
• pp.105-130
• /
• 2022

This paper argues that the war in Syria is partly the result of a global Islamist wave that contributed to fuelling conflict across large regions of Asia and Africa. Of course, the war that has consumed Syria since 2011 most certainly has multiple interrelated causes and driving forces, and any attempt to isolate one or even two or three runs the risk of advancing an overly simplistic interpretation of history. This essay, therefore, does not aim to offer an appraisal of the multiple variables that contributed to the war in Syria. Instead, it zeroes in on how political Islam came to impact Syria and its people. In doing so, it demonstrates how competing varieties of political Islam represented leading causes of conflict. Indeed, different Islamist movements contributed to the outbreak of the war in 2011, fuelled the conflict for years on end, and to this day represent major obstacles to the achievement of sustainable peace. Four broad Islamist currents are especially relevant to the case of Syria: the Muslim Brotherhood; the Shia revivalist movement at the nexus of the alliance between Iran, Hezbollah, and Syria; Salafi jihadism and its volatile and fractious underworld of competing armed groups, from Al-Qaeda to the Islamic State; and Recep Tayyip Erdoğan's market-friendly Islamism, which induced Turkey to intervene in Syria's civil war.