• 안보군사학연구
• /
• 통권8호
• /
• pp.239-270
• /
• 2010

This thesis is to make an appropriate national defense policy of Republic of Korea through studying the Hegemony Strategy of United States. I searched the theory of hegemony. The hegemony was differently defined by the point of time and region. The strong power nations with the hegemony have been making efforts to maintain their hegemony everytime. I have conclusion that the presence of hegemony once emerged, it brought regional stability in place whether it is coercive or beneficial. The stability and instability of international order IS not exclusively dependent on hegemony. Even if the safety of hegemony cannot guarantee absolute stability of international order, there IS on doubt that the hegemony has enormous impact on that. According to the hegemonic theory, the history of mankind equals to the history of rising and falling hegemony. The international order was changed as the hegemony changes. The United States has been making efforts to maintain her global hegemony during the post cold-war era as well. Taking all these into consideration, relevant military strategy direction able to pursue national interest is that to make up for the relative weakness in the strategic environment. South Korea have to prepare security policy response as following. First, South Korea should build the military force equipped with advanced weapons in military technology sector and solidify military diplomatic relation able to form cooperative relation in wartime. Second, South Korea should make solid Alliance of Korea and U.S. Third, develop and maintain multilateral security cooperation of East Asia. Forth, we could realize that there are means that can neutralize opponent's strong point by seeking one or two and more asymmetry in the aspect of strategy, tactics, and means through asymmetric strategy. Than the military force of South Korea should develop into a force that is able to overcome to the traditional North Korea's threat and new type of conflicts. And the force should have sufficient strength and be deployed to effectively defend the Korean Peninsula. So, we need to establish a denial and defense system against any hostile neighboring country. Therefore, ROK military forces preparing for the future should try to construct a future military power to gradually establish enough strength for self-defense to prepare for a uncertain security environment and when the Korean Peninsula is unified in a future.

• Strategy21
• /
• 통권42호
• /
• pp.224-257
• /
• 2017

As the Trump administration withdraws the Paris Climate Agreement and shows its antipathy toward free trade, the U.S.'s soft power is most likely to weaken and its behaviors could be perceived as acts to surrender the U.S. hegemonic leadership in the world stage. Hegemonic stability theory notes that the existence of a hegemonic power contributes to international stability in the sense that it provides international public goods. A lack of the U.S's leadership in international politics, however, could be recognized as its denial of a hegemonic status. Is it intentional or accidental? The U.S's denial of hegemonic roles is the byproduct of the Trump administration's "American First" policy, not the showcase of its intention to transit hegemony to others. What is noteworthy is that China targets a niche market of hegemony as the U.S. denies its roles as the international leader. Put it another way, China attempts to ride hegemony for free when the U.S. denies its hegemonic roles accidentally. Faced with a niche market of hegemony, China has begun to accelerate its national strategy to make "Chinese Dream" come true. To that end, China promised again to keep the Paris Climate Agreement and attempts to play more active its roles in Shanghai Cooperation Organization(SCO), Asia Infra Investment Bank(AIIB), and "One Belt, One Road". Despite all these efforts, the U.S. is most likely to withdraw its denial of hegemony any time soon. The U.S's resumption of Freedom of Navigation Operations(FONOPs) could be a precursor of the return to a hegemonic power's willingness. In this vein, it is noteworthy that the South China Sea serves as a quasi-war zone for hegemonic conflict.

• 한국콘텐츠학회논문지
• /
• 제6권7호
• /
• pp.79-89
• /
• 2006

본 논문은 국제기구의 형성 및 역할에 대한 이론적 고찰을 시도한 것이다. 본 논문에서 필자는 국제기구의 형성 및 역할에 대해 상이한 입장을 보이고 있는 현실주의와 자유주의 패러다임의 논점을 바탕으로 IAEA의 형성 및 역할에 대한 경험적 사례를 검토하였다. 본 논문의 연구결과 국제기구의 형성 및 역할은 국제기구의 기능상 장점, 게임의 법칙, 상호의존 이익, 역할의 독립성 등 자유주의 패러다임의 이론적 가정만으로 설명되지 않는 부분들이 많았다. IAEA의 형성 및 운영 사례에서도 보듯 국제기구는 강대국간 기득권 보장이 주된 형성동기가 되고 있으며, 국제기구 역할 역사 이해 당사국 상호간의 정책 목표에 따라 가변성을 띠고 있다. 이러한 점에서 국제기구는 그 역할의 독립성이나 효율성이 엄격히 지켜진다고 볼 수 없다. 따라서 국제기구의 형성 및 역할은 현실주의적 패권 안정론이 이를 설명하는데 유용하다.