• Title/Summary/Keyword: threat of war

Search Result 97, Processing Time 0.082 seconds

A Study on the Formation and Development of Collective Security System and the Possibility of Security System Shift in East Asia (집단안보체제의 형성 및 발전요인과 동아시아 안보체제의 변화 가능성 연구)

  • Oh, Dongkeon
    • Maritime Security
    • /
    • v.7 no.1
    • /
    • pp.1-29
    • /
    • 2023
  • For the last 70 years, the U.S.-led bilateral security system, or "Hub-and-Spokes" system, has been applied to Northeast Asia, and the system has been successfully settled in terms of stability and economic achievements of the region. Given the increasing complexity of the security environment of East Asia, it is plausible to consider the possibility of a security system shift from bilateral alliances to collective security. In order to analyze the driver of collective security system, this study developed three factors of formation and development of collective security system - main threat, intensity of the threat, and confidence among countries in the system - by reviewing international political theories related to security cooperation. Comparing the formation, development, and achievements of NATO and SEATO, the study figures out that the existence of the main threat, the high intensity of the threat, and the strong confidence among countries in the security system are the primary drivers for a successful collective security system. Based on the result, the study also analyzed the possibility of a security system shift in East Asia. Considering contemporary international conflicts such as U.S.-China strategic competition, Russia-Ukraine War, and growing threats posed by North Korean nuclear and missiles, the study anticipates that the necessity of a collective security system that will replace the current security system of the region would arise. Still, although some issues between countries should be overcome, the growing intensity of the threats will promote cooperation among countries by improving their confidence.

  • PDF

The lesson From Korean War (한국전쟁의 교훈과 대비 -병력수(兵力數) 및 부대수(部隊數)를 중심으로-)

  • Yoon, Il-Young
    • Journal of National Security and Military Science
    • /
    • s.8
    • /
    • pp.49-168
    • /
    • 2010
  • Just before the Korean War, the total number of the North Korean troops was 198,380, while that of the ROK(Republic of Korea) army troops 105,752. That is, the total number of the ROK army troops at that time was 53.3% of the total number of the North Korean army. As of December 2008, the total number of the North Korean troops is estimated to be 1,190,000, while that of the ROK troops is 655,000, so the ROK army maintains 55.04% of the total number of the North Korean troops. If the ROK army continues to reduce its troops according to [Military Reform Plan 2020], the total number of its troops will be 517,000 m 2020. If North Korea maintains the current status(l,190,000 troops), the number of the ROK troops will be 43.4% of the North Korean army. In terms of units, just before the Korean War, the number of the ROK army divisions and regiments was 80% and 44.8% of North Korean army. As of December 2008, North Korea maintains 86 divisions and 69 regiments. Compared to the North Korean army, the ROK army maintains 46 Divisions (53.4% of North Korean army) and 15 regiments (21.3% of North Korean army). If the ROK army continue to reduce the military units according to [Military Reform Plan 2020], the number of ROK army divisions will be 28(13 Active Division, 4 Mobilization Divisions and 11 Local Reserve Divisions), while that of the North Korean army will be 86 in 2020. In that case, the number of divisions of the ROK army will be 32.5% of North Korean army. During the Korean war, North Korea suddenly invaded the Republic of Korea and occupied its capital 3 days after the war began. At that time, the ROK army maintained 80% of army divisions, compared to the North Korean army. The lesson to be learned from this is that, if the ROK army is forced to disperse its divisions because of the simultaneous invasion of North Korea and attack of guerrillas in home front areas, the Republic of Korea can be in a serious military danger, even though it maintains 80% of military divisions of North Korea. If the ROK army promotes the plans in [Military Reform Plan 2020], the number of military units of the ROK army will be 32.5% of that of the North Korean army. This ratio is 2.4 times lower than that of the time when the Korean war began, and in this case, 90% of total military power should be placed in the DMZ area. If 90% of military power is placed in the DMZ area, few troops will be left for the defense of home front. In addition, if the ROK army continues to reduce the troops, it can allow North Korea to have asymmetrical superiority in military force and it will eventually exert negative influence on the stability and peace of the Korean peninsular. On the other hand, it should be reminded that, during the Korean War, the Republic of Korea was attacked by North Korea, though it kept 53.3% of troops, compared to North Korea. It should also be reminded that, as of 2008, the ROK army is defending its territory with the troops 55.04% of North Korea. Moreover, the national defense is assisted by 25,120 troops of the US Forces in Korea. In case the total number of the ROK troops falls below 43.4% of the North Korean army, it may cause social unrest about the national security and may lead North Korea's misjudgement. Besides, according to Lanchester strategy, the party with weaker military power (60% compared to the party with stronger military power) has the 4.1% of winning possibility. Therefore, if we consider the fact that the total number of the ROK army troops is 55.04% of that of the North Korean army, the winning possibility of the ROK army is not higher than 4.1%. If the total number of ROK troops is reduced to 43.4% of that of North Korea, the winning possibility will be lower and the military operations will be in critically difficult situation. [Military Reform Plan 2020] rums at the reduction of troops and units of the ground forces under the policy of 'select few'. However, the problem is that the financial support to achieve this goal is not secured. Therefore, the promotion of [Military Reform Plan 2020] may cause the weakening of military defence power in 2020. Some advanced countries such as Japan, UK, Germany, and France have promoted the policy of 'select few'. However, what is to be noted is that the national security situation of those countries is much different from that of Korea. With the collapse of the Soviet Unions and European communist countries, the military threat of those European advanced countries has almost disappeared. In addition, the threats those advanced countries are facing are not wars in national level, but terrorism in international level. To cope with the threats like terrorism, large scaled army trops would not be necessary. So those advanced European countries can promote the policy of 'select few'. In line with this, those European countries put their focuses on the development of military sections that deal with non-military operations and protection from unspecified enemies. That is, those countries are promoting the policy of 'select few', because they found that the policy is suitable for their national security environment. Moreover, since they are pursuing common interest under the European Union(EU) and they can form an allied force under NATO, it is natural that they are pursing the 'select few' policy. At present, NATO maintains the larger number of troops(2,446,000) than Russia(l,027,000) to prepare for the potential threat of Russia. The situation of japan is also much different from that of Korea. As a country composed of islands, its prime military focus is put on the maritime defense. Accordingly, the development of ground force is given secondary focus. The japanese government promotes the policy to develop technology-concentrated small size navy and air-forces, instead of maintaining large-scaled ground force. In addition, because of the 'Peace Constitution' that was enacted just after the end of World War II, japan cannot maintain troops more than 240,000. With the limited number of troops (240,000), japan has no choice but to promote the policy of 'select few'. However, the situation of Korea is much different from the situations of those countries. The Republic of Korea is facing the threat of the North Korean Army that aims at keeping a large-scale military force. In addition, the countries surrounding Korea are also super powers containing strong military forces. Therefore, to cope with the actual threat of present and unspecified threat of future, the importance of maintaining a carefully calculated large-scale military force cannot be denied. Furthermore, when considering the fact that Korea is in a peninsular, the Republic of Korea must take it into consideration the tradition of continental countries' to maintain large-scale military powers. Since the Korean War, the ROK army has developed the technology-force combined military system, maintaining proper number of troops and units and pursuing 'select few' policy at the same time. This has been promoted with the consideration of military situation in the Koran peninsular and the cooperation of ROK-US combined forces. This kind of unique military system that cannot be found in other countries can be said to be an insightful one for the preparation for the actual threat of North Korea and the conflicts between continental countries and maritime countries. In addition, this kind of technology-force combined military system has enabled us to keep peace in Korea. Therefore, it would be desirable to maintain this technology-force combined military system until the reunification of the Korean peninsular. Furthermore, it is to be pointed out that blindly following the 'select few' policy of advanced countries is not a good option, because it is ignoring the military strategic situation of the Korean peninsular. If the Republic of Korea pursues the reduction of troops and units radically without consideration of the threat of North Korea and surrounding countries, it could be a significant strategic mistake. In addition, the ROK army should keep an eye on the fact the European advanced countries and Japan that are not facing direct military threats are spending more defense expenditures than Korea. If the ROK army reduces military power without proper alternatives, it would exert a negative effect on the stable economic development of Korea and peaceful reunification of the Korean peninsular. Therefore, the desirable option would be to focus on the development of quality of forces, maintaining proper size and number of troops and units under the technology-force combined military system. The tableau above shows that the advanced countries like the UK, Germany, Italy, and Austria spend more defense expenditure per person than the Republic of Korea, although they do not face actual military threats, and that they keep achieving better economic progress than the countries that spend less defense expenditure. Therefore, it would be necessary to adopt the merits of the defense systems of those advanced countries. As we have examined, it would be desirable to maintain the current size and number of troops and units, to promote 'select few' policy with increased defense expenditure, and to strengthen the technology-force combined military system. On the basis of firm national security, the Republic of Korea can develop efficient policies for reunification and prosperity, and jump into the status of advanced countries. Therefore, the plans to reduce troops and units in [Military Reform Plan 2020] should be reexamined. If it is difficult for the ROK army to maintain its size of 655,000 troops because of low birth rate, the plans to establish the prompt mobilization force or to adopt drafting system should be considered for the maintenance of proper number of troops and units. From now on, the Republic of Korean government should develop plans to keep peace as well as to prepare unexpected changes in the Korean peninsular. For the achievement of these missions, some options can be considered. The first one is to maintain the same size of military troops and units as North Korea. The second one is to maintain the same level of military power as North Korea in terms of military force index. The third one is to maintain the same level of military power as North Korea, with the combination of the prompt mobilization force and the troops in active service under the system of technology-force combined military system. At present, it would be not possible for the ROK army to maintain such a large-size military force as North Korea (1,190,000 troops and 86 units). So it would be rational to maintain almost the same level of military force as North Korea with the combination of the troops on the active list and the prompt mobilization forces. In other words, with the combination of the troops in active service (60%) and the prompt mobilization force (40%), the ROK army should develop the strategies to harmonize technology and forces. The Korean government should also be prepared for the strategic flexibility of USFK, the possibility of American policy change about the location of foreign army, radical unexpected changes in North Korea, the emergence of potential threat, surrounding countries' demand for Korean force for the maintenance of regional stability, and demand for international cooperation against terrorism. For this, it is necessary to develop new approaches toward the proper number and size of troops and units. For instance, to prepare for radical unexpected political or military changes in North Korea, the Republic of Korea should have plans to protect a large number of refugees, to control arms and people, to maintain social security, and to keep orders in North Korea. From the experiences of other countries, it is estimated that 115,000 to 230,000 troops, plus ten thousands of police are required to stabilize the North Korean society, in the case radical unexpected military or political change happens in North Korea. In addition, if the Republic of Korea should perform the release of hostages, control of mass destruction weapons, and suppress the internal wars in North Korea, it should send 460,000 troops to North Korea. Moreover, if the Republic of Korea wants to stop the attack of North Korea and flow of refugees in DMZ area, at least 600,000 troops would be required. In sum, even if the ROK army maintains 600,000 troops, it may need additional 460,000 troops to prepare for unexpected radical changes in North Korea. For this, it is necessary to establish the prompt mobilization force whose size and number are almost the same as the troops in active service. In case the ROK army keeps 650,000 troops, the proper number of the prompt mobilization force would be 460,000 to 500,000.

  • PDF

A Study on the Patterns of New Terrorism through the Comparative Analysis with Conventional Terrorism (고전적 테러리즘과의 비교 분석을 통한 뉴 테러리즘 양상에 대한 연구)

  • Song, Jae-Hyeong
    • Journal of National Security and Military Science
    • /
    • s.1
    • /
    • pp.113-154
    • /
    • 2003
  • We can feel the fear through the reports of outbreaking centers of terror. Also, we noticed through "the 9.11 terror" that there exists no safety zone from terrorism. However, we should question ourselves whether we are relaxing attention or ceasing anxiety too much in the perimeter, as in the peninsula of Korea. Through "the 9.11 terror", the vulnerability of the United State's homeland security has been exposed, giving a serious damage to the national pride. President Bush started the war against terror to strengthen global joints of anti-terrorism, identify terrorists and contribute to the global peace, adopting offensive realism including preemptive attack concept which means to remove the threat preemptively. In today's reality of international politics, where the inhuman, indiscriminate, and anti-civilizational international terror became greater, extending to the stage of war, the international societies' agony and focus lies on how to banish it. The 9.11 terrorism, which is a new form of terrorism, is being distinguished from conventional terrorism into new terrorism. New terrorism is a new form of terrorism meaning that you do not know the enemy, the goal does not exist and they conscientiously use the weapons of mass destruction. This paper is a work meant to help understanding new terrorism, the new form, by a comparative analysis with the conventional terrorism. Therefore the origin, concept and general characteristics new terrorism is picked out and the representative forms of it, which are suicide bombing, cyber, biochemical and nuclear terrorism, are analyzed in detail in theoretical manner.

  • PDF

A Change of U.S. Ballistic Missile Defense Strategy (미국 탄도미사일방어 전략의 변화)

  • Park, Tae-Yong
    • Proceedings of the Korean Institute of Information and Commucation Sciences Conference
    • /
    • 2017.05a
    • /
    • pp.371-372
    • /
    • 2017
  • The United States has built a missile defense system from the Cold War era, but since the end of the Cold War era, there have been many changes in international situation and threats. The forces of power divided between the United States and the Soviet Union have become increasingly threatened by China's willingness to expand its external influence, declaration of strong Russia and North Korea and Iran's nuclear armament and advanced ballistic missile technology. In response to this threat change, the Missile Defense Agency(MDA) has established strategies and policies, but its parent law has not been revised. United States changed to the FY2017 National Defense Authorization Act (FY2017 NDAA) including changed missile defense strategy. In this paper, I check US ballistic missile defense strategies included in the FY2017 NDAA and compare what changes have been made in existing strategies.

  • PDF

A Study on the Threat of Biological Terrorism in modern society (현대사회의 환경변화에 따른 Bio-Terror의 위협요인 연구)

  • Kang, young-sook;Kim, Tae-hwan
    • Journal of the Society of Disaster Information
    • /
    • v.1 no.1
    • /
    • pp.3-26
    • /
    • 2005
  • In recent years, there is growing concern about the potential use of biological agents in war or acts of terrorism accompanied an increased realization that rapid preparedness and response are needed to prevent or treat the human damage that can be caused by these agents. The threat is indeed serious, and the potential for devastating numbers of casualties is high. The use of agents as weapons, even on a small scale, has the potential for huge social and economic disruption and massive diversion of regional and national resources to combat the threat, to treat primary disease, and to clean up environmental contamination. Biological weapons are one of weapons of mass destruction (or mass casualty weapons, to be precise. since they do not damage non-living entities) that are based on bacteria, viruses, rickettsia, fungi or toxins produced by these organisms. Biological weapons are known to be easy and cheap to produce and can be used to selectively target humans, animals, or plants. Theses agents can cause large numbers of casualties with minimal logistical requirements (in wide area). The spread of disease cannot be controlled until there is awareness of the signs of infection followed by identification of agents; and if the organism is easily spread from person to person, as in the case of smallpox, the number of casualties could run into the tens of thousands. Biological weapons could be used covertly, there can be a lot of different deployment scenarios. A lot of different agents could be used in biological weapons. And, there are a lot of different techniques to manufacture biological weapons. Terrorist acts that make use of Biological Agents differ in a number of ways from those involving chemicals. The distinction between terrorist and military use of Biological Weapon is increasingly problematic. The stealthy qualities of biological weapons further complicate the distinction between terrorism and war. In reality, all biological attacks are likely to require an integrated response involving both military and civilian communities. The basic considerations when public health agencies establish national defence plan against bioterrorism must be 1) arraying various laws and regulations to meet the realistic needs, 2)education for public health personnels and support of concerned academic society, 3)information collection and cooperative project with other countries, 4)Detection and surveillance(Early detection is essential for ensuring a prompt response to biological or chemical attack, including the provision of prophylactic medicines, chemical antidotes, or vaccines) and 5) Response(A comprehensive public health response to a biological or chemical terrorist event involves epidemiologic investigation, medical treatment and prophylaxis for affacted persons, and the initiation of disease prevention or environmental decontamination measures). The purpose of this paper is providing basic material of preparedness and response for biological terrorism in modern society.

  • PDF

Research on System Architecture and Simulation Environment for Cyber Warrior Training (사이버전사의 훈련을 위한 시스템 구축 방안 연구)

  • Ahn, Myung Kil;Kim, Yong Hyun
    • Journal of the Korea Institute of Information Security & Cryptology
    • /
    • v.26 no.2
    • /
    • pp.533-540
    • /
    • 2016
  • It is important to establish the environment for cyber warrior training, testing support and effectiveness analysis in order to cope with sharply increasing cyber threat. However, those practices cannot be easily performed in real world and are followed with many constraints. In this paper, we propose a live/virtual M&S-based system for training/testing and constructive M&S-based system for effectiveness analysis to provide an environment similar to real world. These can be utilized to strengthen the capability to carry out cyber war and analyze the impact of cyber threat under the large-scale networks.

Methodology for estimating the damage rate of equipment mounted on the warship (해상 플랫폼 탑재장비 손실률 산정 방법 - 워게임모델 적용을 중심으로 -)

  • Jeong Kwan, Yang;Bong Seok, Kim;Ji Hoon, Kyung;Hyun Shik, Oh
    • Journal of the Korean Society of Systems Engineering
    • /
    • v.18 no.2
    • /
    • pp.108-116
    • /
    • 2022
  • Accurately predicting wartime resources requirements and preparing war supplies in peacetime is an important task that can determine the outcome of the war by guaranteeing the duration of the operation. The wartime warship damage rate is a measure of estimating the battle damage of our warships in the process of performing battles to achieve the war goal. In the previously studied wartime warship damage rate estimation method, when damage occurs, long-term repair is required due to the complexity and specificity of the ship structure. Only the case of a complete defeat at the level of sinking was defined as a damage, and even if it was impossible to perform a maritime operation mission, it was not estimated as a damage if the level of sinking was not reached. Therefore, in order to improve the reliability of the wartime warship damage rate, the equipment damage assessment level can be estimated based on the warhead weight of the threat weapon system, the vulnerability rate of the warship's equipment, and the warship's hull. In the future, it is expected that the estimation methodology proposed in this study will be used as a simulation logic when developing a model for analyzing the wartime resources requirements for the warship's equipment and hull.

Following the Cold War, both the United States' military operational concept and the Republic of Korea Army's developmental study (탈냉전기 미국의 군사작전 개념과 한국군 발전방향 연구-합동작전을 중심으로)

  • Lee, Se-Han
    • Journal of National Security and Military Science
    • /
    • s.2
    • /
    • pp.121-163
    • /
    • 2004
  • Science technique development expanded into, not only land, sea, and air operations but also those of airspace, and cyber battle spaces. It is generally accepted at this time that space centric operations currently cannot be effectively divided from air operations. However, science and technology advancements make it possible to integrate Army, Navy, Airforce, and Marine forces into effective operations as never before. The Republic of Korea Armed Forces needs to establish a more effective joint concept. The US military, considered by many experts as the most effective in the world, understands the necessity of joint operations and accordingly has highly developed its own concept of joint operations. The US joint operational concepts demonstrated their effectiveness during the Iraqi War by dominating the battlefield through effective use of all combat and non-combat power. Following the US Iraqi War experience, the US Department of Defense continued to enhance Joint Capability through the acceleration of US Military Transformation involving all components. The future national security of the Republic of Korea, faced with the peculiarity of communist threat in the form of North Korea, and the conflicting interest of four strong powers; the United States, China, Japan, and Russia, depends on small but strong armed forces employing all available combat power through effective National and Military Strategy, and considering domestic and international constraints. In order to succeed in future wars, military operations following joint operational concepts must effectively employ all available combat power in a timely manner. The Republic of Korea Armed Forces must establish a joint forces concept in order to integrate all available combat power during employment. Therefore we must establish military operations that develop the military structure and organization, doctrine, weapon systems, training and education of our armed forces based on the key concept of joint operations.

  • PDF

US, China and the Russo-Ukraine War: The Conditions for Generating a Mutually Perceived Hurting Stalemate and Consequent Ceasefire In Moscow and Kyiv

  • Benedict E. DeDominicis
    • International Journal of Advanced Culture Technology
    • /
    • v.11 no.4
    • /
    • pp.177-192
    • /
    • 2023
  • A prerequisite for a lasting ceasefire is the emergence of a prevailing view in Moscow and Kyiv that the fighting has reached a hurting stalemate. In sum, they both lose more through continuing warfare than by a ceasefire. This study applies social identity dynamics of nationalism to this escalatory conflict. It generates findings that imply that China as a third-party great power intervening mediator can potentially play a pivotal role. Shifting the respective prevailing views in Moscow and Kyiv of their interaction from a zero-sum foundation requires proffering powerful economic and political third-party incentives. Effective inducement would facilitate national defense, development and prestige for Moscow as well as Kyiv. China arguably has the underutilized potential power capabilities necessary to alter the respective prevailing views of strategic relationships among the great powers within Moscow, Brussels and Washington. A prerequisite for success in striving effectively towards this strategic goal is cooperation with the Beijing despite skepticism from Washington. This study utilizes a process tracing methodological approach. It highlights that the foundations of the Russo-Ukraine war lie in the institutionalization within Euro-Atlantic integration of the Cold War assumption that the USSR was an imperialist revisionist actor. Russia is the USSR's successor state. Moscow's prevailing view is that Russian national self-determination was unjustly circumscribed in the multinational Soviet totalitarian Communist system. The Euro-Atlantic community is perceived as a neocolonial imperial threat by allying with post-1991 Ukrainian nationalism at Russia's expense. The study finds that acknowledging Eurasian regional multipolarity is necessary, if not sufficient, to coopt Beijing into a global political stabilization strategy. It functionally aims to promote international balancing to lessen potentials for horizontal as well as vertical escalation of the Russo-Ukrainian conflict.

How can the post-war reconstruction project be carried out in a stable manner? - terrorism prediction using a Bayesian hierarchical model (전후 재건사업을 안정적으로 진행하려면? - 베이지안 계층모형을 이용한 테러 예측)

  • Eom, Seunghyun;Jang, Woncheol
    • The Korean Journal of Applied Statistics
    • /
    • v.35 no.5
    • /
    • pp.603-617
    • /
    • 2022
  • Following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, the United States declared war on terror and invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, winning quickly. However, interest in analyzing terrorist activities has developed as a result of a significant amount of time being spent on the post-war stabilization effort, which failed to minimize the number of terrorist activities that occurred later. Based on terrorist data from 2003 to 2010, this study utilized a Bayesian hierarchical model to forecast the terrorist threat in 2011. The model depicts spatiotemporal dependence with predictors such as population and religion by autonomous district. The military commander in charge of the region can utilize the forecast value based on the our model to prevent terrorism by deploying forces efficiently.