• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.24 no.2
• /
• pp.211-234
• /
• 2009

North Korea conducted the launcher test, which, as North Korea claimed, belonged to the sovereign rights for the purpose of peaceful utilization and exploration of the outer space. The launching was allegedly done for the sole purpose of putting the satellite into earth orbit, while international community stressed the fact that the orbiting of satellite was not confirmed and that the technology used was not distinct from the purpose of building intercontinental ballistic missile. UN Security Council adopted the resolutions which took the effect that the launching was deemed as the missile launching, not the mere launcher test. North Korea declared the moratorium of suspending its test activity. Controversial issues have been raised regarding whether the launcher itself has the legal status of enjoying the freedom of space flight based upon the 1967 Outer Space Treaty. The resolutions, however, has put forward a binding instrument forbidding the launching. UN Security Council resolutions, however, should be read not as defining the missile test illegal, in that the language of resolutions, such as 'demand', should be considered as not formulating a sort of obligatory act or inact. On the other hand, the resolutions should be read as having binding force with respect to any activity relating to the weapons of mass destruction. The resolution 1718 is written in more specific language such as 'decides that the DPRK shall suspend all activities related to its ballistic missile programme and in this context re-establish its pre-existing commitments to a moratorium on missile launching'. Therefore, the lauching activity of the North Korea is banned by the UN Security Council resolution. It should be noted that the resolution does not include any specific provisions defining the space of activity of the North Korea as illegal. But, the legal effect of the moratorium is not denied as to its launching itself, which is corresponding to the missile test clearisibanned in accordance with the resolutions.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.31 no.1
• /
• pp.145-167
• /
• 2016

UN Security Council is entitled to power for determining the existence of the threat to the peace. Specifying the provisions adopted in accordance with the chapter 7 of the UN Charter, its resolution is deemed as document confirming its decision about the threat to the peace. In general, resolutions adopted by the Security Council acting under Chapter VII of the Charter, are considered binding, in accordance with Article 25 of the Charter. Regarding to the terms of the Resolutions to be interpreted, the word "decide" is used as to the suspension of the ballistic missile program, the word "demand" is used as to the stopping of the the launch of ballistic missile, and the word "demand" is used as to return to the missile test moratorium. These provisions may be deemed to determining specific obligations to be imposed upon the States in accordance with the 1967 Outer Space Treaty. On the other hand, the Resolutions may be limited to the decision, not leading to a sort of international legislation, the main purpose of which is to provide a legal basis for international sanctions against Northe Korea. North Korea missile test case has reminded us of continuing discussion about whether the decision of the Security Council lacks the legislative authority due to its decision process. Furthermore, having regard to the outer space and space activities, the outer space law regime would be not compatible with the Security Council decision process in that the former presupposes the agreement among all States parties, while the latter based upon the agreement between Council member States. Therefore, it is premature to consider the Security Council decision as becoming the lex specialis of the space law regime.

• Convergence Security Journal
• /
• v.19 no.3
• /
• pp.117-126
• /
• 2019

Historically, the United Nations supported the establishment of the government of the Republic of Korea after liberation and played a decisive role in defending liberal democracy and peace by sending peacekeepers during the Korean War. With the political and military support of the United Nations, the Republic of Korea was able to grow into the world's 10th largest economy today, and now it is time to fulfill its responsibilities and roles to contribute to peace and prosperity in the international community as a middle power. The international peace operations of the United Nations are comprehensive concepts encompassing conflict prevention, peacemaking, peace enforcement, peacekeeping, and peace building, and are implemented in accordance with the Security Council resolutions based on the UN Charter. In order to effectively respond to changes in the international security environment and conflict factors after the post-Cold War, the UN promoted a paradigm shift in international peace operations through the 2000 Brahim Report and the 2015 High-Level Panel Report on UN Peace Activities. Therefore, this study aims to assess the Korean military's international peace operations at a limited level, such as reconstruction assistance and humanitarian assistance, and to present development measures for more active participation as a middle power in the future. To this end, we reviewed the history and specificities of conflict, the conflicting factors after the post-Cold War, and the new paradigm of UN peace operations, focusing on the African region where a number of UN peacekeeping missions are stationed. And it also suggested ways to develop international peace operations that the Korean military should pursue in the future.