• Journal of National Security and Military Science
• /
• s.8
• /
• pp.239-270
• /
• 2010

This thesis is to make an appropriate national defense policy of Republic of Korea through studying the Hegemony Strategy of United States. I searched the theory of hegemony. The hegemony was differently defined by the point of time and region. The strong power nations with the hegemony have been making efforts to maintain their hegemony everytime. I have conclusion that the presence of hegemony once emerged, it brought regional stability in place whether it is coercive or beneficial. The stability and instability of international order IS not exclusively dependent on hegemony. Even if the safety of hegemony cannot guarantee absolute stability of international order, there IS on doubt that the hegemony has enormous impact on that. According to the hegemonic theory, the history of mankind equals to the history of rising and falling hegemony. The international order was changed as the hegemony changes. The United States has been making efforts to maintain her global hegemony during the post cold-war era as well. Taking all these into consideration, relevant military strategy direction able to pursue national interest is that to make up for the relative weakness in the strategic environment. South Korea have to prepare security policy response as following. First, South Korea should build the military force equipped with advanced weapons in military technology sector and solidify military diplomatic relation able to form cooperative relation in wartime. Second, South Korea should make solid Alliance of Korea and U.S. Third, develop and maintain multilateral security cooperation of East Asia. Forth, we could realize that there are means that can neutralize opponent's strong point by seeking one or two and more asymmetry in the aspect of strategy, tactics, and means through asymmetric strategy. Than the military force of South Korea should develop into a force that is able to overcome to the traditional North Korea's threat and new type of conflicts. And the force should have sufficient strength and be deployed to effectively defend the Korean Peninsula. So, we need to establish a denial and defense system against any hostile neighboring country. Therefore, ROK military forces preparing for the future should try to construct a future military power to gradually establish enough strength for self-defense to prepare for a uncertain security environment and when the Korean Peninsula is unified in a future.

• Journal of International Area Studies (JIAS)
• /
• v.16 no.2
• /
• pp.121-146
• /
• 2012

The purpose of this paper is to study on China's emergence and its influence on international society against the U.S. hegemony. Recently, China's influence has proliferated in Central Asia as well as East Asia at a rapid rate. China, through its soft balancing strategy, increased its influence in Central Asia in response to the U.S. power and behavior. This study analyzes the relationship among China and Central Asia with the view of soft balancing theory. In order to determine whether China's strategy on Central Asia is soft balancing, this paper presents three indicators: 1) Second-tier major power is willing to take a strategy that increase diplomatic cost of hegemony or counter the hegemony influence through using regional and global multilateral cooperation. 2) Second-tier major power is willing to not only increase its influence by strengthening regional economic cooperation, but also check the extension of the hegemony economic influence into its boundary. 3) Second-tier major power intends to prevent expanding hegemony military influence into the region through limited military cooperation and increasing military spending, and denying territory. This paper analyze China's multi-polar strategy, economic and energy cooperation with Central Asia countries, and the military and security cooperation with multilateral organizations such as SCO.

• Maritime Security
• /
• v.1 no.1
• /
• pp.1-30
• /
• 2020

The study started with the question, "Is Japan's normalization of nationalization a return to militarism?" Therefore, in order to analyze this, the characteristics of the international system after the inauguration of the Japanese Empire during World War I and World War II and the Abe's 2nd Cabinet in contemporary Japan were compared. Through this, there were some differences in the characteristics of the international system of the two periods, and as a result, it was intended to derive the differences between the two examples. During the prewar period of World War I, the militaristic Japanese Empire suffered great damage from the national pride of being the only power in Asia through the Paris Enhancement Conference, the Washington Navy Treaty, and the London Navy Treaty. However, the Western powers with colonies in Asia still existed in the region, so it was not possible to turn them into immediate power expansion. Meanwhile, World War II broke out in Europe. As a result, the Western powers had to focus on the whole of Europe, and the militaristic Japanese empire became a regional hegemony without missing the international system characteristic of "the hegemony." Unlike in the past militarism, Japan's case of pursuing common nationalization since 2012 has been carried out in the order of Northeast Asia in the composition of the "cold war" new cold war. In particular, Japan is attempting to transform itself into a normal state to strengthen the US-Japan alliance on a self-reliant level due to the lack of quantitative military power compared to the neighboring countries.

• Strategy21
• /
• s.41
• /
• pp.108-152
• /
• 2017

This paper aims to analyze hegemonic competition and the role of naval power. To this end the paper is composed of four chapters titled introduction, the role of naval power in the hegemonic competition, the role of naval power in the East Asia, and the lessons and implications for the Korean Peninsula. Since the modern era, the hegemonic competition in the East Asian region has been the intrusion and struggle process between the world system and the East Asian regional system, and the ocean between these two systems has become the goal and means of supremacy(hegemony). Currently, the hegemonic competition between the US and China consists of systemic competition at the global level and marine competition at the regional level. When South Korea is forced to make strategic choices in the course of the US-China hegemonic competition, naval power will be the first factor to be considered. The ROK is asymmetrically maintaining a deep dependency relationship with the United States in terms of security and China in relation to the economy. And while the ROK's national economic power is acquired from the ocean, the ROK's military power is imbalanced because it is centered on the ground forces. These international relations and asymmetric-unbalanced resources distribution will not be able to effectively cope with the hegemonic competition between the US and China in the future, and will limit Korea's strategic choice. Since naval power and forces are the prerequisites for the hegemonic competition or the maintenance of supremacy we must construct balanced naval forces(naval power) that are not subordinate to the ground forces at the national strategic level for the future of the country.

• Strategy21
• /
• s.34
• /
• pp.26-57
• /
• 2014

Revolution of Shale gas literally brings about great changes in many spheres. In the past most academic research had been focused on the influence and innovative change in term of economic perspective. But nowadays we should more concern about the security approach and perspective as its status of the future's core energy resources. Revolution of Shale gas has an great influence on the reshaping of global and regional alliance order. There are many international political implications as follows. Contribution of energy hegemony with leading U.S.; Acting as strategic leverage on the reshaping international order; Deepening competition among major states on the construction of energy security and so on. We'd better make a good solution and systematic policies which are preparing for the Shale gas's revolution period including on the understanding about the change on the global energy structure and making a national policy agenda of energy security issues and so on. The thesis like 'to get the energy resources is to get the hegemonic power in the world' will persist. The same holds good of Shale gas case. To meet the revolution of shale gas era, we have important tasks as like making an opportunity to develope not only regional but also international prosperity.

• Acta Via Serica
• /
• v.3 no.2
• /
• pp.161-180
• /
• 2018

Pax Sinica is a historiographical term, modeled after the original phrase Pax Romana. It refers, in Latin, to a Chinese-provided peace which in turn is used to describe an era of peace in East Asia sustained by Chinese hegemony. In historical terms, both the Pax Sinica of the Eastern hemisphere through Han China and the Pax Romana of the Western hemisphere through Rome signified a trans-regional order based on rules and regulations. This orderly world of the Pax Sinica generated a number of positive results such as the intensification of travel, ever-expanding trade relations, an increase in the overall living standards of the populace, the proliferation of cities, and a demographic upsurge in Eurasia along the ancient Silk Road. During this period, China was the dominant civilization not only in the Eastern hemisphere but also in the Middle hemisphere due to its political, economic, military and cultural influence. This paper aims to reintroduce this historiographical term to elucidate the recent Chinese initiatives in Eurasia along the Silk Road to facilitate the integration and connectivity of the continent.

• Journal of the Korean association of regional geographers
• /
• v.10 no.2
• /
• pp.267-285
• /
• 2004

Globalization has been the buzzword during the past couple of decades, embroiling humankind into the inescapable maelstrom of homogenization. Some critics identify the globalization process undergoing in the realms of politics, economy, culture and ecology with Americanization which entails Neoconservatives' scheme to stretch out the hegemony of the United States. The top-down transcontinental movement, however, deems to confront localization or a reasoned resistance from the local driven by the spiritual attachment to places and, in that sense, regional identity. What is needed to cope with this complex circumstance of glocalization is to be acquainted with beth the global sense of the local and the localized sense of the global at once. For this, it seems indispensible to do justice to area studies. As far as American studies are concerned, this research field has so far been tainted by an overdose of politics, economics, business administration, law and sociology. Regional analysis which constitutes the reason d'etre of the discipline of geography has remained marginal to the political economic mainstream. It is the mounting concerns about America and enhanced research caliber that raises the regional geographical studies of America on the right track. Particularly, a number of articles have been published since the mid-1990s owing to the combined efforts of practitioners, institutions and periodicals. It is expected that systematic training of new generation of American specialists, advance in research infrastructure, and generous funding will stimulate geographical investigation of America in the coming future.

• Acta Via Serica
• /
• v.6 no.1
• /
• pp.55-90
• /
• 2021

In the last several decades, and especially since the Chinese launching of the Belt and Road (BRI) initiative in 2013, the Chinese presence in Central Asia has intensified. Russia and Chinese leaders deny that there is any conflict of interests between them, while the standard narrative has been that the two states adhere to a functional division of tasks in which China concentrates on economic activity while Russia acts as the security guarantor for the region. This article argues that the professed equanimity between the Russian and Chinese leaderships masks the emergence of widening cracks in their relationship with regard to Central Asia. The convenient narrative of a functional division of tasks between the two states is called into question by China's increasingly active presence in the military and security sector in the region, but China's influence is growing throughout the Central Asian economic, political, and social order. China's movement into Central Asia challenges Russia's claim to act as an equal partner of China, as well as its pretensions to regional hegemony. This development reflects the widening disparity between the two states with respect to their power capabilities but it also exposes the interactions between Russia and China in Central Asia as the most vulnerable aspect of their relationship. In Central Asia, a defensive Russia encounters an ascendant China.

• SUVANNABHUMI
• /
• v.8 no.1
• /
• pp.17-53
• /
• 2016

Debates continue to multiply on the definition and rationale of Southeast Asia as a region and on the utility of the multidisciplinary field of area studies. However, we have now entered a post-colonialist, post-Orientalist, post-structuralist stage of reflection and re-orientation in the era of globalization, and a strong tendency on the part of insiders to pose these issues in terms of an insider-outsider dichotomy. On the one hand, the study of Southeast Asia for researchers from outside the region has become fragmented. This is for very obvious reasons: the strengthening and re-energizing of academic disciplines, the increasing popularity of other non-regional multidisciplinary studies, and the entry of globalization studies into our field of vision. On the other hand, how has the local Southeast Asian academy addressed these major issues of change in conceptualizing the region from an insider perspective? In filling in and giving substance to an outsider, primarily Euro-American-Australian-centric definition and vision of Southeast Asia, some local academics have recently been inclined to construct Southeast Asia in terms of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN): a nation-state-based, institutional definition of what a region comprises. Others continue to operate at a localized level exploring small-scale communities and territories, while a modest number focus on sub-regional issues (the Malay-Indonesian world or the Mekong sub-region are examples). However, further reflections suggest that the Euro-American-Australian hegemony is a thing of the past and the ground has shifted to a much greater emphasis on academic activity within the region. Southeast Asia-based academics are also finding it much more important to network within the region and to capture, understand, and analyze what Chinese, Japanese, and Korean scholars are saying about Southeast Asia, its present circumstances and trajectories, and their increasingly close involvement with the region within a greater Asia-Pacific rim. The paper argues that the insider-outsider dichotomy requires considerable qualification. It is a neat way of dramatizing the aftermath of colonialism and Orientalism and of reasserting local priorities, agendas, and interests. But there might be a way forward in resolving at least some of these apparently opposed positions with recourse to the concepts of culture and identity in order to address Southeast Asian diversities, movements, encounters, hybridization, and hierarchies.

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.14 no.3
• /
• pp.75-96
• /
• 2012

China will replace the global governance of the 21st century in 2050. The rise of China provide the Chinese development model to other developing countries. There are positive element and disability element in China's 'peaceful rise' strategy at the same time. Success of the reform and opening up, market liberalization, economic interdependency, economic globalization, stability of ruling power, consolidation of one-party rule and soft power increase are the promotions of peaceful rise. China's rise as a power nation begins by regaining the superpower status in East Asia. East Asia is a lebensraum assuring a continuing growth to China. For this lebensraum, China shows an interest in institutionalization of regional economic cooperation. The core values of ASEAN, namely the mutual respect, harmonious coexistence, co-prosperity, egalitarianism and pluralism are in conform to China's policy of harmonious world and peaceful coexistence. Through this common value the tension in East Asia will be alleviated. By the regional hegemony strategy based on soft power and economic success, China will try to regain the past glorious position. Attaining status as a coordinator of the world rule will be based on the success of the East Asian strategy. Korea and other neighboring countries will be the best beneficiary countries of the China's rise strategy. China's rising strategy will have a profound effect on neighboring countries especially, Korea. The scale of the movement of goods, labor, and capital between the two countries will become much larger than present. Through regional trade agreements, economic interdependency between Korea and China will increase.