• 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.

• Strategy21
• /
• s.38
• /
• pp.287-320
• /
• 2015

On October 27, 2015, USS Lassen(DDG82), a 9,200 ton class Aegis destroyer of the United States Navy, began its operations within 12 nautical miles of Subi Reef, one of the seven artificial islands that China has built and claimed sovereignty over. The maneuver was joined by anti-submarine patrol airplanes such as P-8A and P-3. The White House press secretary mentioned that the President of the United States approved the operation. In response, China announced that it warned the US Navy ship about the 'illegal violation' by sending two destroyers(PLAN Lanzhou and Taizhou). This event represents a close call case where tension between the United States and China in the South China Sea might have been elevated to a conflict between the two navies. Moreover, considering that this happened only one month after Chinese president Xi's state visit to the United States, the event shows that the positions of the two countries have become starkly different to the extent that they are so hard to be reconciled. The United States' position is different from those of Vietnam and the Philippines. Countries like Vietnam and the Philippines have been directly involved in disputes with regard to sovereignty claims across the waters in the South China sea. As for the United States, being a third party in the disputes, it still cannot be a by-stander watching the whole waters in the region fall under the influence of China. Accordingly, the United States maintains that all countries bear the rights of innocent passage and military operations in the Exclusive Economic Zones(EEZ) as stipulated by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea(UNCLOS). In contrast, China claims that, historically, the South China sea has been part of China's territorial waters, and that foreign countries are not allowed to conduct military operations within the waters. It strongly accuses that such military operations are illegal. Against this background, this paper tracks the different positions of the United States and China on the issues regarding the South China sea. It also carefully looks at the possibility that, in the process of dealing with the issues, the two countries may get into an armed conflict as the phrase 'Thucydides Trap' predicts.

• Strategy21
• /
• s.33
• /
• pp.5-36
• /
• 2014

This article aims to analyze the diplomatic challenges currently facing China as well as the foreign policy the Xi Jinping administration is adopting to address them. With these purposes in mind, it will look into three areas: first, diplomatic tasks confronting the Xi leadership; second, foreign policy that the Xi administration has implemented since the 18th Party Congress in 2012; and third, the prospects for China's foreign policy under the Xi leadership. As the Xi Jinping administration entered into office, it has encountered two major diplomatic challenges. One is the searching for a new foreign policy, and the other the restructuring of the existing foreign affairs and national security systems. The Xi administration, during its first year in office, has responded actively to tackle these issues. To begin with, it has attempted to make some adjustments on foreign policy while maintaining the Deng Xiaoping line of foreign policy. One of these modifications is placing emphasis on national "core interest," as illustrated by changes in guideline for maritime conflicts, pushing for building maritime power, and proclamation of Air Defense Identification Zone in the East China Sea. Second is the decision on the new guideline for peripheral diplomacy. That is, the administration regarded creating peaceful and stable environments to realize "Chinese Dream" as an important goal of foreign policy, and proposed such new guiding ideology as "familiarity, integrity, benefit, and accommodation." In additoin, the Xi administration restructured the existing foreign affairs and national security systems. Establishing the Central State Security Committee and the Internet Leading Small Group (LSG) are cases in point. As comprehensive organizations for policy coordination that encompass party, government, and military, the two LSGs are in charge of enacting related policies and fine-tuning policy implementation, based upon leadership consisting of chiefs of each relevant organs. Moreover, since Xi himself became the chief of these two newly-found organs, the conditions under which these LSGs could demonstrate unified leadership and adjusting role in its implementation of military, diplomatic, and security policies were developed. The future Chinese diplomacy will be characterized with three main trends. First, peripheral diplomacy will be reinforced. The peripheral diplomacy has become far more important since the Work Conference on Peripheral Diplomacy in October 2013. Second, economic diplomacy will be strengthened with an eye on reducing the "China Threat Theory," which still exists in Asia. Third, the policies to isolate the Philippines and Japan will continue in regard to maritime disputes. All in all, Chinese diplomacy in the Xi Jinping era is likely to feature practical diplomacy which combines both hard and soft approaches to best realize Chinese national interest.

• Journal of Navigation and Port Research
• /
• v.39 no.1
• /
• pp.55-60
• /
• 2015

The purpose of this study is to suggest a major strategy to become effective for each port in Northeast Asia by analyzing the relative efficiency of each port to determine the current level of efficiency, efficient harbors plan. Individual port of the major 16 ports in Northeast Asia was analysed targeting efficiency and relative efficiency. In this study, DEA technique was used. Of the DEA model, CCR (constant returns to scale) models and BCC (variable return to scale) model was applied to analyze the efficiency and effectiveness of the port. Then the efficiency measured through CCR model is again compared with the efficiency measured by the BCC model. In this way, the empirical analysis includes the input factors of the operating ports such as the number of berths, wharf, depth, total area of the pier, C / C numbers and output elements includes the container throughput. The results of the study show that most of the ports in China is efficient whereas those in Korea and Japan are relatively inefficient. There are some pairs of ports which has the similar input factors, like Busan port and Shanghai port, Lianyungang port and Incheon port, Dalian port and Gwangyang port, but the container throughput of them has a huge difference.

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.16 no.4
• /
• pp.191-225
• /
• 2014

Most of all, this paper analyzes the current situation of EU(European Union) and ascertain EU's economic condition in terms of tariff lines and non-tariff barriers. and the purpose of this article is to find out the problems of EU's tariff lines and non-tariff barriers. Next, We suggest some future direction of export promotion from Korea to EU more largely for our companies. First, this paper describes the characteristics and outline of EU. The EU is a politico-economic union of 28 member states that are primarily located in Europe. The EU traces its origins from the European Coal and Steel Community(ECSC) and the European Economic Community(EEC), formed by the Inner Six countries in 1951 and 1958, respectively. After that, The Maastricht Treaty established the European Union under its current name in 1993. The latest major amendment to the constitutional basis of the EU, the Treaty of Lisbon, came into force in 2009. There are a combined population of over 500 million inhabitants and generated a nominal gross domestic product(GDP) of 16.692 trillion US dollars in EU. The results are as follows ; First of all, In terms of tariff lines and customs duties, Our companies have to know precisely EU's real tariff lines and other customs duties, and such as value added tax and exercise tax, corporate tax regulated by EU commission and EU's 28 members. second, our companies have to confirm EU's non-tariff barriers. such as RoHS, WEEE, REACH. These non-tariff barriers could be hindrances or obstacles to trade with foreign companies in other countries. We perceive all companies exporting to EU are related with these Technical Barriers to Trade irrespective of their nationality. So, Our companies fulfill the requirements of EU Commission concerning safety, health, environment etc. Also, Our companies choose market-driven strategy to export more largely than before in the field of marketing and logistics.