• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.18 no.7
• /
• pp.577-589
• /
• 2018

The future of ROK-US alliance has not been discussed in detail by both governments since early 2000s. However, it is becoming more apparent that ROK-US alliance is facing various daunting challenges. The new administrations both in ROK and US might have different perspectives about the future of alliance. In the process of resolving outstanding North Korean nuclear issue, the alliance can face challenges to change its fundamental features such as halting joint military exercise. ROK-US governments also agreed to transfer wartime operational control as soon as possible. All those factors indicates the growing necessity to articulate the future of ROK-US alliance. ROK and US needs to facilitate to dialogue for future alliance with the possible scenarios of changing security environment such as maintaining status quo, reconciliation of North and South Korea, and entering the reunification stage. In each phase, ROK-US has to develop the goal for the alliance, military institution to implement the alliance, role of USFK, and etc. It is imperative to develop the road map for future ROK-US alliance at this stage to avoid unnecessary folly.

• 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.

• Journal of Digital Convergence
• /
• v.9 no.6
• /
• pp.153-163
• /
• 2011

This study analyzes the military and political factors that influenced the Participatory Government's resolution in Wartime Operational Control (OPCON) Transition. The research on key factors in OPCON transition firstly implemented literature research and then increased feasibility through additional use of AHP. The analysis results showed that there was a negative effect for Korean Peninsular Defense in the 'ROK-US Alliance Asymmetry' area, a positive effect to increase ROK-led Capability of Theater Operation in the 'ROK and U.S. Alliance Interdependence' area and a positive effect for Invocation of ROK Self-Defense Power in the 'Interests of Participatory Government's Liberal Regime' area respectively. After applying AHP, "ROK exercise of Self-defense" in the 'Interests of Participatory Government's Liberal Regime' area received the highest assessment, while the "Increasement of North Korea's Threat" in the 'ROK-US Alliance Asymmetry' area received the lowest assessment. This study is meaningful in that it analyzed the key military and political factors in the Participatory Government's resolution of Wartime OPCON Transition using AHP.

• Strategy21
• /
• s.42
• /
• pp.318-346
• /
• 2017

Currently, security environmental instability is getting worse than ever in the East Asia including to Republic of Korea(ROK). Unlike several conventional issues such as maritime dispute -sometimes with islands- and competitions for getting natural resources, contemporary security dilemma issues followed by arms races among states deepens the power gap between strong and weak state within the region. It is notable that the arms races is the East Asia are mainly focused on naval power. As navy is the very possible force that influences neighboring states, submarine power is usually valued for its nature of stealth, mobile and aggression. Moreover, the submarine power is believed to be one of the highest valued weapon system since it shows actual effectiveness for influencing the other states while avoiding direct military conflicts compared to surface power. As a result, all states within the region are accelerating for getting such power these days. Japan, Most of all, is one of the leading state that aims to ensure self-survival and enlarge military influences under the US-Japan alliance by decisively supporting its power to the American containment strategy against China. In this regard, such movement surely sill influence on ROK both directly and indirectly as we sue the common field, the sea. Though, it has lots of restrictions for us to confront them with military forces as such confrontations within US-led alliances is not desirable upon considering current China and nK threats. As a result, ROK needs to limit the realm of alliance within the region while maintaining ROK-US alliance for getting national interests with both legal and justice superiority against Japan. This paper, as a result, is focused on suggesting the way to utilize submarines as a mean of naval power for both current security environments and the rising maritime threats in the East Asia. I concluded to participate ROK submarines in US-led military strategy against China by dispatching them into the East-China Sea and the North-East area of the Korean peninsula to protect both national interests and justice at the same tome. It should be one of the preemptive measure for confronting with neighboring states by utilizing strategic benefits of submarines while strengthening ROK-US alliances upon participating American Containment Strategy against China.

• Strategy21
• /
• s.36
• /
• pp.180-214
• /
• 2015

The Republic of Korea navy challenged from the unexpected surprise attacks by the North Korea navy, albeit, the developments of up-to-date naval forces' technology, and the ceaseless efforts for war preparedness. My study divided into two categories. Qualitative methods used for literature review of international relations theory related to the war onset and for investigating events occurred on the Peninsula and its surrounding seas from 1968 to 2007. Quantitative method used such as the analyses of national power index of the two Koreas, the United States, and China, the uses of equation model to calculate power index of alliance, COPDAB(Conflict and Peace Data Bank) index analysis. Like Choi's study on East Asia maritime conflict, as a conclusion, considering both AT theory and maritime national power as a tool for predicting maritime conflict in the Peninsula proved significant. Based on the study, ROK navy need to prepare for the maritime conflict because the results showed North Korea would initiate maritime disputes sooner or later using fatal asymmetric forces and methods. As a policy suggestion, we are required to maintain a concrete ROK-US alliance ties and to construct naval forces due to the deterring functions of maritime national power.

• Strategy21
• /
• s.44
• /
• pp.54-78
• /
• 2018

The core of the current constitutional amendment pursued by the Abe administration depends on the status of the Japanese Self-Defense Forces, which include the right to engage in war, in the legal and regular military positions. This is an important turning point for the Abe administration, which aims to become a normal country for Japan, and it is a series of steps that followed in the revision of the U.S. and Japan guidelines in 2015 and the overhaul of the security law in 2016. In this paper, we propose building "A navy Attractive to Alliances" as a way to secure Korea's maritime security under the current security environment. The term "attraction" refers to the alliance "first priority" especially in the United States. The way to do this is to transform the paradigm of the ROK-U.S. alliance into a naval hub in the vast seas, which will allow us to strengthen our national defense and even deter threats from neighboring countries. To this end, our navy needs to have a more active approach to U.S. East Asian strategy. If we can convince the United States to be a nation that contributes more to its East Asian strategy, it will only lead to a strengthening of the status of its alliance and expansion of its unilateral support and military capability against Japan, thus minimizing Japan's influence.

• Convergence Security Journal
• /
• v.17 no.3
• /
• pp.83-93
• /
• 2017

The U.S.-China Relations could be analyzed two perspectives and their basis under major international p olitics theory-power transition with conditions: (1) North Korean's nuclear puzzle, (2) THAAD in the Kor ean Peninsula and (3) the U.S.-ROK Alliance. One perspective is the global order dominates the regional order, and then stable regional order comes out. The other is the regional order dominates the global ord er, and China wages a regional hegemonic conflict against the United States. Consequently, America's o verwhelming leadership in North Korean's nuclear, THAAD and U.S.-ROK Alliance as national power is expected to endure. But China also has expected empowerment and cooperation for the peace and stabilit y on the Korean Peninsula military problems. In this perspective, South Korea needs to pay attention to the changing power distribution and competition between the U.S. and China and needs to strengthen a balancing and harmonious diplomatic strategy, so called 'see-saw diplomacy'.

• Strategy21
• /
• s.34
• /
• pp.5-25
• /
• 2014

On July 3~4, 2014, the Chinese President Xi Jinping's state visit to Seoul might be seen as a step on the path toward strategic outcomes for both country. For South Korea, Seoul shrewdly retains some degree of self-reliance by balancing between ROK-China strategic cooperative partnership relationship and ROK-US alliance. For China, Beijing appears to put its interests on the Korean Peninsula increasingly within China's larger geopolitical influence. To what extent can ROK-China relationship maintain futuristic strategic cooperative partnership between them? As we observed joint press communiques of the Chinese President Xi Jinping's state visit on July 3, 2014, four agendas of bilateral relationship between Seoul and Beijing can be identified: intractable rivalry between the two great powers, North Korea nuclear issues, disparities of their displeasure with Japan denying the past wrongdoing and enhancing its military capabilities and Chinese imposing of its core interests on its Korea policy. With these evolving strategic environments, however, China and the ROK appear justifiably be pleased with the state of their relations: their strategic cooperative partnership is the cornerstone of peace and prosperity in the Asia-Pacific or Indo-Pacific region and continues to grow broader and deeper.

• Strategy21
• /
• s.34
• /
• pp.236-261
• /
• 2014

The future role of nuclear extended deterrence in the security alliance between the United States and the Republic of Korea is currently a central concern. The gradually lessening role of reliance on nuclear weapons in US security policies broadly, combined with increasing North Korean nuclear capabilities and belligerence, raise fresh questions about the sufficiency of the "nuclear umbrella" as a pillar of the US-ROK defense posture. This article addresses the current and future role of nuclear extended deterrence in Korea in this dynamic context. The article reviews the longstanding trend toward reducing the overall size of the US nuclear arsenal, and assesses developments in US-ROK outlooks toward extended deterrence in response to the Obama administration's nuclear policies and North Korea's recent smaller-scale aggressions. The analysis finds that the challenges of deterrence credibility and allied reassurance are difficult and long-term. The analysis explains how these challenges emerge less from a shrinking US numerical arsenal size than from the sufficiency of specific nuclear and non-nuclear capabilities to meet emerging smaller-scale threats. The analysis also highlights the importance of broader strategic and political interaction in sustaining allied confidence in any joint security posture. The evaluation concludes that a strong US-ROK alliance relationship can be maintained while the size of the US nuclear arsenal continues to decline, in part because nuclear weapons in any deployment configuration are relatively ineffective means for deterring smaller-scale aggression. Nevertheless, continuing adjustment of the US-ROK extended deterrence posture to the evolving, complex and uncertain Korean peninsula security environment will remain an ongoing challenge. Finally, the article encourages further examination of the potential specific role ROK maritime forces might serve in enhancing deterrence of smaller-scale threats while minimizing risks of conflict escalation.

• Strategy21
• /
• s.42
• /
• 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.