• Strategy21
• /
• 통권42호
• /
• pp.154-195
• /
• 2017

This paper is to analyse conflict between the US and China over the South China Sea and Korea's responses. To this end the paper is composed of 6 chapters titled instruction; the current status of South China Sea sovereignty disputes; changes in US and Chinese maritime security strategies and the strategic values of the South China Sea; key issues and future prospects for US-China conflicts in the South China Sea; South Korea's security and diplomatic responses; and conclusion. The recent East Asian maritime security issue has evolved into a global issue of supremacy between the US and China, beyond conflicts over territorial disputes and demarcation among the countries in the region. China is pursuing offensive ocean policy to expand economic growth. The core of the maritime order that the United States intends to pursue is the freedom of navigation in the oceans and the maintenance of maritime access. China is making artificial islands in the South China Sea, claiming the sovereignty of these islands, building strategic bases in East Asia, and securing routes. The United States has developed several "Freedom of Navigation Operations" to neutralize the declaration of the territorial sea surrounding Chinese artificial islands. We can not be free from marine conflicts in the South China Sea and the East China Sea. Regarding the South China Sea dispute, it is expected that the strategic competition and conflict between the two countries will intensify due to China's failure to make concessions of core interests and adherence to the US compliance with international norms. In the midst of conflict over the South China Sea, we need a harmonious balance between our alliance security and economic diplomacy. We must continue our efforts to strengthen the ROK-US alliance but not to make China an enemy. Considering the significant impacts of the oceans on the survival and prosperity of the nation, we must continue to develop our interest in the oceans, appropriate investments and tactical strategies.

• 국제지역연구
• /
• 제13권2호
• /
• pp.3-39
• /
• 2009

이 연구의 목적은 국제합작투자기업의 전략적 동기, 성과 목표 및 만족, 경영상 통제, 부서간 갈등, 자원 기여, 투자 환경 및 경쟁과 같은 중요한 변수들을 확인하고 베트남에 있는 한국과 일본 합작투자기업의 경영 관행상의 차이점을 비교하는 것이다. 이를 위하여 베트남 파트너와 합작기업을 하고 있는 베트남의 한국과 일본기업을 표본 분석에 사용했다. 연구결과는 베트남에 있는 한국과 일본 기업의 경영 관행상에 유의한 차이가 있다고 나타났다. 또한 베트남에 있는 이러한 국제적인 합작 기업의 성과에 관하여 모기업의 만족도에도 차이가 있다는 것을 발견하였다.

• STI Policy Review
• /
• 제8권1호
• /
• pp.87-112
• /
• 2017

This study analyzes patenting practices in the pharmaceutical industry and the impacts of sequential innovation. The main argument of the research is that strategic patenting is common in the pharmaceutical sector and it is legal within the context of patent law. However, when these practices have negative effects on the competition process post-grant, the practices that are legal under patent law may come into conflict with antitrust laws, which are not applied. The study brings into question whether sequential patenting practices characteristic of the pharmaceutical industry encourage or discourage innovation, and moreover, the overall functionality of the patent system. Ultimately, the functionality of the patent system creates market incentives that neglect consumer, i.e., patient, welfare; potential solutions to deal with the shortcomings are discussed.

• Strategy21
• /
• 통권43호
• /
• pp.175-199
• /
• 2018

Recent marine territorial disputes in the East China Sea and the South China Sea have come to us as a great threat. China, which has recently established the China Coast Guard and has rapidly developed maritime security forces, is trying to overcome the various conflict countries with its power. Japan is also strengthening intensively its maritime security forces. Since Korea, China, and Japan are geographically neighboring and sharing maritime space in Northeast Asia, there is no conflict between maritime jurisdiction and territorial rights among the countries. The struggle for initiative in the ocean is fierce among the three coastal nations in Northeast Asia. therefore, Korea needs more thorough preparation and response to protect the marine sovereignty. As the superpowers of China and Japan are confronted and the United States is involved in the balance of power in strategic purposes, the East Asian sea area is a place where tension and conflict environment exist. China's illegal fishing boats are constantly invading our waters, and they even threaten the lives of our police officers. The issue of delimiting maritime boundaries between Korea and China has yet to be solved, and is underway in both countries, and there is a possibility that the exploration activities of the continental shelf resources may collide as the agreement on the continental shelf will expire between Korea and Japan. On the other hand, conflicts in the maritime jurisdictions of the three countries in Korea, China and Japan are leading to the enhancement of maritime security forces to secure deterrence rather than military confrontation. In the situation where the unresolved sovereignty and jurisdiction conflicts of Korea, China and Japan continue, and the competition for the strengthening of the maritime powers of China and Japan becomes fierce, there is a urgent need for stabilization and enhancement of the maritime forces in our country. It is necessary to establish a new long-term strategy for enhancing the maritime security force and to carry out it. It is expected that the Korean Coast Guard, which once said that it was a model for the establishment of China's Coast Guard as a powerful force for the enforcement of the maritime law, firmly establishes itself as a key force to protect our oceans with the Navy and keeps our maritime sovereignty firmly.

• 안보군사학연구
• /
• 통권13호
• /
• pp.687-738
• /
• 2016

To prepare for the complicated international relationship regarding Korean Peninsula after reunification, this thesis started off with the awareness that Unified Korea should build its international posture and national security at an early stage by determining its appropriate military strength for independent defense and military strategies that Unified Korea should aim. The main theme of this thesis is 'The research on appropriate military strength of the Unified Korean military'. To derive appropriate military strength of Unified Korea, this research focuses on conflict scenario and relative balance strategy based on potential threats posed by neighboring countries, and this is the part that differentiates this research from other researches. First of all, the main objective of the research is to decide appropriate military strength for Unified Korea to secure defense sufficiency. For this, this research will decide efficient military strategy that Unified Korea should aim. Than by presuming the most possible military conflict scenario, this research will judge the most appropriate military strength for Unified Korea to overcome the dispute. Second, after deciding appropriate military strength, this research will suggest how to operate presumed military strength in each armed force. The result of this thesis is as in the following. First, Unified Korea should aim 'relative balance strategy'. 'Relative balance strategy' is a military strategy which Unified Korea can independently secure defense sufficiency by maintaining relative balance when conflicts occur between neighboring countries. This strategy deters conflicts in advance by relative balance of power in certain time and place. Even if conflict occurs inevitably, this strategy secures initiative. Second, when analyzing neighboring countries interest and strategic environment after unification, the possibility of all-out war will be low in the Korean Peninsula because no other nation wants the Korean Peninsula to be subordinated to one single country. Therefore appropriate military strength of the Unified Korean military would be enough when Unified Korea can achieve relative balance in regional war or limited war. Third, Northeast Asia is a region where economic power and military strength is concentrated. Despite increasing mutual cooperation in the region, conflicts and competition to expand each countries influence is inherent. Japan is constantly enhancing their military strength as they aim for normal statehood. China is modernizing their military strength as they aspire to become global central nation. Russia is also enhancing their military strength in order to hold on to their past glory of Soviet Union as a world power. As a result, both in quality and quantity, the gap between military strength of Unified Korea and each neighboring countries is enlarged at an alarming rate. Especially in the field of air-sea power, arms race is occurring between each nation. Therefore Unified Korea should be equipped with appropriate military strength in order to achieve relative balance with each threats posed by neighboring countries. Fourth, the most possible conflicts between Unified Korea and neighboring countries could be summarized into four, which are Dokdo territorial dispute with Japan, Leodo jurisdictional dispute with China, territorial dispute concerning northern part of the Korea Peninsula with China and disputes regarding marine resources and sea routes with Russia. Based on those conflict scenarios, appropriate military strength for Unified Korea is as in the following. When conflict occurs with Japan regarding Dokdo, Japan is expected to put JMSDF Escort Flotilla 3, one out of four of its Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force Escort Fleet, which is based in Maizuru and JMSDF Maizuru District. To counterbalance this military strength, Unified Korea needs one task fleet, comprised with three task flotilla. In case of jurisdictional conflict with China concerning Leodo, China is expected to dispatch its North Sea fleet, one out of three of its naval fleet, which is in charge of the Yellow Sea. To response to this military action, Unified Korea needs one task fleet, comprised with three task flotilla. In case of territorial dispute concerning northern part of the Korean Peninsula with China, it is estimated that out of seven Military Region troops, China will dispatch two Military Region troops, including three Army Groups from Shenyang Military Region, where it faces boarder with the Korean Peninsula. To handle with this military strength, Unified Korea needs six corps size ground force strength, including three corps of ground forces, two operational reserve corps(maneuver corps), and one strategic reserve corps(maneuver corps). When conflict occurs with Russia regarding marine resources and sea routes, Russia is expected to send a warfare group of a size that includes two destroyers, which is part of the Pacific Fleet. In order to balance this strength, Unified Korea naval power requires one warfare group including two destroyers. Fifth, management direction for the Unified Korean military is as in the following. Regarding the ground force management, it would be most efficient to deploy troops in the border area with china for regional and counter-amphibious defense. For the defense except the border line with china, the most efficient form of force management would be maintaining strategic reserve corps. The naval force should achieve relative balance with neighboring countries when there is maritime dispute and build 'task fleet' which can independently handle long-range maritime mission. Of the three 'task fleet', one task fleet should be deployed at Jeju base to prepare for Dokdo territorial dispute and Leodo jurisdictional dispute. Also in case of regional conflict with china, one task fleet should be positioned at Yellow Sea and for regional conflict with Japan and Russia, one task fleet should be deployed at East Sea. Realistically, Unified Korea cannot possess an air force equal to neither Japan nor China in quantity. Therefore, although Unified Korea's air force might be inferior in quantity, they should possess the systematic level which Japan or China has. For this Unified Korea should build air base in island areas like Jeju Island or Ullenong Island to increase combat radius. Also to block off infiltration of enemy attack plane, air force needs to build and manage air bases near coastal areas. For landing operation forces, Marine Corps should be managed in the size of two divisions. For island defense force, which is in charge of Jeju Island, Ulleung Island, Dokdo Island and five northwestern boarder island defenses, it should be in the size of one brigade. Also for standing international peace keeping operation, it requires one brigade. Therefore Marine Corps should be organized into three divisions. The result of the research yields a few policy implications when building appropriate military strength for Unified Korea. First, Unified Korea requires lower number of ground troops compared to that of current ROK(Republic of Korea) force. Second, air-sea forces should be drastically reinforced. Third, appropriate military strength of the Unified Korean military should be based on current ROK military system. Forth, building appropriate military strength for Unified Korea should start from today, not after reunification. Because of this, South Korea should build a military power that can simultaneously prepare for current North Korea's provocations and future threats from neighboring countries after reunification. The core of this research is to decide appropriate military strength for Unified Korea to realize relative balance that will ensure defense sufficiency from neighboring countries threats. In other words, this research should precisely be aware of threats posed by neighboring countries and decide minimum level of military strength that could realize relative balance in conflict situation. Moreover this research will show the path for building appropriate military strength in each armed force.

• Strategy21
• /
• 통권38호
• /
• pp.250-286
• /
• 2015

The main purpose of this article is to provide an understanding on current maritime issues in the Northeast Asia, and thereby help formulating the right strategy for our national security. The article summarizes core arguments in the recently published 『The 21^st Century Maritime Strategies in the Northeast Asia: Dilemma between Competition and Cooperation』. It will help readers to comprehend historical backgrounds as well as recent updates related to maritime issues and strategies in the region. Also, readers may find guidance to conceive their own maritime strategies for the Republic of Korea. Currently, the U.S. is shifting its focus from Atlantic to Pacific, and increasing its naval presence in Asia-Pacific region. Meanwhile, the 21^st century China views the maritime interests as the top priority in its national security and prosperity. PLA Navy's offensive maritime strategies and naval building such as aircraft carriers and nuclear submarines are unprecedented. Japan is another naval power in the region. During the Cold War JMSDF faithfully fulfilled the mission of deterring Soviet navy, and now it is doing its job against China. Lastly, Putin has been emphasizing to build the strong Russia since 2000, and putting further efforts to reinforce current naval capabilities of Pacific Fleet. The keyword in the naval and maritime relations among these powers can be summarized with "competition and cooperation." The recent security developments in the South China Sea(SCS) clearly represent each state's strategic motivations and movements. China shows clear and strong intention to nationalize the islands in SCS by building artificial facilities - possibly military purpose. Obviously, the U.S. strongly opposes China by insisting the freedom of navigation(FON) in international waters as recent USS-Lassen's FON operation indicate. The conflict between China and the U.S. surrounding the SCS seems to be heading towards climax as Russia and Japan are searching for their own national interests within the conflict. Also, the neighboring small and middle powers are calculating their own economic and security interests. This is no exception for us in establishing timely strategies to maximize our own national security. Hopefully, this article leads the readers to the right direction.

• 한국과 국제사회
• /
• 제2권2호
• /
• pp.89-130
• /
• 2018

본 논문은 '미중관계의 전개와 현안문제 및 시사점을 분석하기 위한 것이다. 초기 및 적대적 대결기의 미중관계, 미중접근 관계정상화기 및 1980~90년대 미중관계, G2시대 개막후 2010년대 중반까지의 미중관계, 트럼프-시진핑시대의 미중관계와 주요현안과 시사점을 살펴본 후 결론을 도출해본 것이다. 지난 30여 년간의 중국의 급속한 성장은 기존의 미국중심의 단극적 국제질서를 변화시키며 양국간의 경쟁을 촉발시키고 있다. 미국과 중국은 전략 경제대화'를 정기적으로 개최하는 유일한 국가가 되었고, 주제 역시 양자간의 관계뿐만 아니라 글로벌 이슈까지 논의하는 나라로 발전해왔다. 미중협력 갈등의 현안문제는 양국관계는 물론 글로벌 이슈를 망라하고 있다. 예컨대 남중국해, 북핵과 사드, 통상 금융질서, 대만문제 등이 바로 그것이다. 미중갈등은 남의 일이 아니라 한국의 외교 안보 경제에도 직결되는 문제이다. 우리는 미중관계에 있어서 '코리아 패싱(Korea passing)'이 나오지 않도록 튼튼한 한 미 안보공조관계를 유지 강화해 나가는 한편, 한 중 경제협력관계도 조화롭게 추진해 나가는 헤징전략이 요구된다.

• 분석과 대안
• /
• 제7권1호
• /
• pp.83-114
• /
• 2023

제1차 세계대전을 다루는 국제정치에 대한 이전의 연구들은 주로 세력균형과 동맹 문제를 전쟁의 원인으로 지목했다. 이러한 시각들은 전쟁의 직접적인 원인인 사라예보 암살을 단순한 계기로 보았다. 결과적으로, 이러한 연구들은 '무엇이 전쟁을 피할 수 없게 만들었는지'를 설명할 수 있지만, 여전히 '왜 전쟁이 발칸 반도에서 시작되었고, 어떻게 유럽 전역으로 퍼졌는지'를 완전히 설명하지 못했다. 이러한 선행연구들의 한계를 보완하기 위해 본 연구는 독일-오스트리아와 러시아-세르비아의 갈등으로 시작된 발칸반도의 맥락에서 1차 세계대전의 기원을 찾는 것을 목표로 한다. 이를 위해 본 연구는 슈메이커와 스파니에의 국가 간 후견-피후견 관계와 위기 조작의 개념을 통해 발칸 위기의 역사적 배경과 위기의 전개를 분석하였다. 그 결과, 러시아와 독일의 경쟁과 그들의 피후견국들의 위기 조종 시도가 반드시 전쟁으로 이어지지는 않았음을 확인하였다. 그러나 위기 조종은 잠재적으로 그리고 누적적으로 나타날 후견국의 경쟁적 사고방식을 심어주었다. 이후 예상치 못한 위기가 발생했고, 경쟁 후견국들은 상대가 대전략적 음모와 도전을 계획하고 있다고 의심했다. 그 결과 그들은 피후견국들에 의한 위기 조작에 취약해졌다. 이러한 상황은 발칸의 후견-피후견 관계의 맥락에서 제1차 세계 대전의 발발 원인이 되었다.

• 한국지리정보학회지
• /
• 제11권4호
• /
• pp.41-50
• /
• 2008

육상자원에 대한 치열한 경쟁 속에 많은 나라들이 바다(해양자원)로 눈을 돌리고 있다. 따라서 세계 각국의 배타적경제수역(EEZ)과 대륙붕의 경계를 명확하게 하기위해 첨예하게 대립하고 있다. 1982년 해양법 협약(UNCLOS)이후, 한국과 일본, 한국과 중국의 인접수역이 400해리 미만으로 한국은 일본 중국과 해양경계획정 회담을 해오고 있다. 본 연구는 해양법과 기술지침서 IHO-51을 통해 해상경계의 획정을 위해 가장 중요한 법률과 기술을 검토하고 주변국과의 해양경계 협상에 효과적인 해양경계 GIS DB를 정의하였다. 영해기점과 영해기선의 정의는 해양의 경계를 획정하기위해 가장 중요한 개념으로 국가 간 협의과정과 협상에 임하기 위해서 정책결정자들은 해양법 협약을 바탕으로 자국에 이익을 최대화 할 수 있는 해상 경계를 획정할 준비가 되어 있어야 한다. 협상 전략과 원칙은 해양경계 결정과 관련된 요소들의 신뢰할 수 있는 데이터베이스를 통해 구체적으로 만들어 진다. 따라서 협상에 대한 효율적이고 신속정확한 의사결정은 해상경계 결정을 위한 GIS DB를 근거하여 만들어 질수 있다.

• 한국지역지리학회지
• /
• 제17권5호
• /
• pp.568-581
• /
• 2011

1997년 국제 외환위기를 거치면서 한국정부는 미래의 새로운 경제적 활로를 모색하게 되었는데, 이미 경제적으로 괄목할만한 성과를 거둔 영국의 세계도시 전략과 창조산업이 주요한 본보기가 되었다. 한국의 중앙정부는 경제적 효과를 극대화하기 위해 창조산업을 한국의 사회적 환경에 맞도록 변용하였는데 이로부터 문화콘텐츠산업이 탄생하게 되었고, 이를 정책적 차원에서 적극적으로 지원하였다. 한국의 고유한 문화전통을 기반으로 세계적인 문화산업으로 육성하기 위해 시작된 문화콘텐츠 진흥정책으로 인해 다양한 문화전통을 간직하고 있는 안동은 재발견되었다. 안동 지방정부와 대학과 유림가문을 중심으로 한 지역 주도층들은 이 진흥정책이 침체된 안동의 지역경제를 활성화하는데 새로운 전기가 될 뿐만 아니라 지역의 고루한 이미지를 탈피하는데 도움을 준다고 판단하였기 때문에 문화콘텐츠산업을 적극적으로 수용하고 진흥하였다. 문화콘텐츠 산업이 주목한 안동의 문화전통은 유교뿐만 아니라 기층문화로 여겨지던 무속이나 불교 등이었다. 이로부터 상대적으로 안동 지역민 사이에는 다양한 문화전통들 중에서 어떤 것을 지역의 진정한 전통문화로 선택할 것인지에 대해 이견이 발생했다. 서로 결이 다른 지역 정체성들이 전략적으로 타협되면서 공존하게 되는데, 이는 문화적 다양성이 관광의 활성화를 통해 지역경제를 되살리는데 중요할 뿐만 아니라 제한된 자원을 둘러싼 다른 지역들과의 경쟁에서 우월적 지위를 차지하는데 도움을 주었기 때문이다.