• Convergence Security Journal
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• pp.133-141
• /
• 2013

After Presidential Declaration of Korea's Rights in the Surrounding Seas(Lee, Seung-Man Line), Japanese government objected to the Korean government's Declaration of the Peace Line. Japan didn't agree with Korean's ownership of Dokdo and has tried to develop the Dokdo issue into an international dispute and solved it by resorting the International Court of Justice(ICJ) since 1954. As mentioned before, ICJ doesn'thave the right of compulsory jurisdiction of ownership of Dokdo between Korea and Japan. Therefore, we don'thave to agree with Japan's suggestion of bringing a case to ICJ to solve the Dokdo issue. It is not the best way to maintain the international peace judging by ICJ as well. When Japan try to institute case unilaterally, We should remember that it is possible to give the expanding jurisdiction to the ICJ. It is the best way that solving the dispute of Dokdo is to establish the sovereignty over Dokdo while strengthen the control the Dokdo effectively. In conclusion, no matter how Japan claims ownership of Dokdo, it cannot be subject to negotiation.

• Strategy21
• /
• s.33
• /
• pp.222-252
• /
• 2014

이 논문의 주요 목적은 중국의 남중국해에 대한 정책을 평가하는 것이며, 해양갈등 및 위기 상황과 관련된 사건을 관리하기 위한 중국의 접근을 분석하는 것이다. 주된 핵심은 중국의 남중국해에 대한 영유권 주장, 중국과 남중국해 인접국과의 분쟁 그리고 중국과 베트남 간 사례를 통해 분석된 분쟁 관리에 있어 중국의 행태, 접근방식 그리고 시각이다. 중국과 베트남과 같은 양자간 분쟁에 있어 남중국해 통킹만에서의 분쟁해결 사례는 강조될 수 있는 사례이며, 이는 중국이 인접국과의 분쟁을 공식적으로 해결한 첫 번째 사례였다. 결국 이 논문은 이를 근간으로 향후 중국이 어떻게 남중국해 현황을 관리할 것인가에 대해 넓은 논쟁을 결론으로 제시하고 있다.

• Proceedings of KOSOMES biannual meeting
• /
• 2017.04a
• /
• pp.80-80
• /
• 2017

• Strategy21
• /
• s.33
• /
• pp.253-269
• /
• 2014

중국의 남중국해의 분쟁 도서 및 이에 속하는 배타적 경제수역과 대륙사면에 대한 주권과 '역사적 권리' 주장이 동아시아를 격변의 시기로 몰고 있다. 지난 수 십 년간의 중국의 놀라운 경제성장은 100년의 굴욕을 벗어나 '세계 강대국 복귀'라는 중국의 자부심 제고에 크게 기여했다. 그러나, 중국 정부는 지속적인 경제성장과 사회적 만족 유지에 필요한 자원 부족이 잃어버린 중국의 영광을 되찾는데 심각한 위협이 될 수 있음을 염려하고 있으며, 외국자원에 대한 의존성 증가를 그들의 사회적이며 경제적 안정과 자원안보의 심각한 도전으로 인식하고 있다. 2010년 이후 중국은 수차례에 걸쳐 남중국해를 중국의 "핵심 가치"라고 주장하고 있으며, 자원 부족이 중국에게 강압적 남중국해 전략 추진을 강요하고 있다. 본 논문은 자원부족이 중국에게 강압적인 남중국해 전략을 추진하도록 종용하고 있는 전략 환경에 끼친 영향을 분석해 보았으며, 또한 중국정부가 염려하고 있는 중국의 안정에 미치는 영향을 살펴보았다. 그리고, 중국의 자원부족과 이에 따른 강압정책이 중국, 동아시아 및 국제 사회에 미친 전략적 영향을 고찰해 보았다.

• Maritime Security
• /
• v.2 no.1
• /
• pp.1-42
• /
• 2021

Controversy continues over the offensive nature of China's naval strategy to become a maritime power. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to identify the characteristics of China's naval strategy to become a maritime power by using the three elements of strategy and predict China's military actions in the future. For this purpose, research was conducted by considering the three elements of strategy and the distinct characteristics of naval strategy, and it was found that China's naval strategy was overall aggressive, but there was an imbalance in the pursuit of aggression between each strategic element. Offensive nature was prominent in terms of the methods, but there were limitations in the goals and means, such as the need to cooperate with neighboring countries to become a maritime power and the lack of military technology and operational continuity. The prospects for China's future military actions derived from the imbalance between these strategic elements are as follows. ① The risk of all-out military conflict with the US is low for now. ② China may use its naval power to force or cause limited military clashes against neighboring countries within the first island chain. ③ Accidental military conflicts with the US and neighboring countries may occur over naval confrontation over territorial disputes.

• Ocean and Polar Research
• /
• v.36 no.3
• /
• pp.255-276
• /
• 2014

The dispute between China and Japan regarding $Di\grave{a}oy\acute{u}t\acute{a}i$ is believed to be quite similar to the controversy surrounding Dokdo in terms of historical and post-war processes except for the point that the phenomena of occupation is different with regard to Dokdo. China's claim to $Di\grave{a}oy\acute{u}t\acute{a}i$ is based on historical title and continuous use while the basis of Japan's claim is summarized as preoccupancy of ownerless land. Even though Japan acknowledges that China discovered $Di\grave{a}oy\acute{u}t\acute{a}i$, Japan claims that the act to establish sovereignty over the island from the standpoint of International Law was not taken by China. However, at that time, effective occupation was not an essential prerequisite for the acquisition of a territory. That is to say, from a legal perspective, the legal right for an area could be established based on the discovery of the land, and so it is thought that Japan is applying the current criteria of International Law in a manner that is inappropriate. When we review the post-war process, the San Francisco Peace Treaty does not directly mention $Di\grave{a}oy\acute{u}t\acute{a}i$. But based on the said treaty, we can note that Japan gave up all rights for the southern area that is north of the boundary line that equates to latitude $29^{\circ}$ and that includes the Ryuku Islands and $Di\grave{a}oy\acute{u}t\acute{a}i$. Of course, the provisions for the territory in the San Francisco Peace Treaty and its disposal are not the final factor for the judgment regarding dominium of $Di\grave{a}oy\acute{u}t\acute{a}i$. However, it seems clear that Japan's attitude and interpretation regarding the issues of $Di\grave{a}oy\acute{u}t\acute{a}i$, the Kuril Islands and Dokdo is problematic.

• Convergence Security Journal
• /
• v.18 no.3
• /
• pp.105-112
• /
• 2018

South Korea and Vietnam have been engaged in extensive political, economic and cultural exchanges since the establishment of diplomaticties in 1992. In March 2018, Moon Jae-in, President of South Korea, made an official visit to Vietnam, a key partner of the New Southern Policy and discussed comprehensive cooperation measures, including expanding trade volume and measures to establish peace on the Korean Peninsula. At the defense ministers' meeting held in April 2018, the two countries signed a joint defense and defense cooperation statement, which included promotion of maritime security, defense cooperation, UN PKO activities, excavation of remains, and joint military cooperation. Currently, Vietnam is facing territorial disputes with China over the South China Sea, and is stepping up military modernization and military buildup to counter this. In particular, Vietnam is strengthening its external military cooperation beyond ideology with the U.S., Russia, India and France to strengthen its maritime power. Against this backdrop, the bilateral cooperation between South Korea and Vietnam needs to expand beyond the traditional economic and cultural exchanges to military cooperation. The study aims to review the relationship between South Korea and Vietnam on the 26th anniversary of the normalization of diplomaticties and seek ways to develop military cooperation with Vietnam, which has grown to the next China. To that end, it analyzed Vietnam's security environment and military strategy and presented strategies for promoting military cooperation focusing on defense areas.