• Proceedings of the Korean Society of Marine Engineers Conference
• /
• 2006.06a
• /
• pp.133-134
• /
• 2006

Recently, despite of the effects of international Coordination and cooperation to prevent piracy, piracy is on an increasing trend every year. Such circumstances may have a bad effect on the sound development of world economy by means of trade in sea as well as treat to the safety of crews and safe operation of ships. Finally, Modern maritime piracy has become one of the major threats to safety at sea. We having Cargo-owners or Ship-owners attacked by piracy, it causes enormous economic losses. Therefore, Ship-owners and Cargo-owners insure Cargo Insurance, Hull Insurance and P&I Insurance to indemnity of losses which is caused by piracy. The Purpose of this paper was to explain the losses caused by piracy and studying the limits of the possibility of indemnity in the Cargo Insurance, Hull Insurance and P&I Insurance.

• The Southeast Asian review
• /
• v.21 no.2
• /
• pp.293-327
• /
• 2011

소말리아 해적 문제는 전례가 없는 단계에 다다랐다. 2010년 까지만 해도 445대가 넘는 선박이 해적들로부터 피해를 당했으며 1,181여명의 사람들이 몸값을 위해 인질이 되어야 했다. 그러나 소말리아만이 해적문제가 이슈화 되는 곳은 아니다. 지난 20년간 동남아시아의 해적문제도 큰 이슈가 되어 왔다. 본 논문은 해적 행위의 원인, 영향, 그리고 유형의 분류에 대한 분석을 위해 두 가지의 사례 연구를 통해 이를 살피려 한다. 각각의 해적 관련 사례가 서로 다른 특징들을 가지고 있으나현재 신문이나 인터넷 상의 보도뿐만 아니라 학문, 법률상의, 그리고 공식적 문서들에서 얻어지는 정보들을 이용해 분석한 결과 해적 행위의 원인은 대부분 육지에서 발견된다는 것으로 결론을 낼 수 있다. 본 논문을 통해 제 국가들은 경제, 안보, 지리적인 이유의 이해를 달리 하여 해적 행위를 근절하려 한다는 것을 살펴본다. 또한 현재의 해적 행위에 대한 대응적 접근은 전체론적으로 육지에서의 원인에 근거하여 다루어지는 것이 아니라 바다에서의 해양법 시행에 집중되어 있다. 이는 해적의 소탕을 위한 과정이라기보다는 여전히 문제를 내포하고 있을 수밖에 없다는 점을 지적 하고자 한다.

• Maritime Security
• /
• v.4 no.1
• /
• pp.1-56
• /
• 2022

Why has India become a key actor in the maritime-configured Indo-Pacific region? There are some external factors, but for India, its geo-strategic frontier encompassing its geopolitical and maritime interests is expanding rapidly beyond its territorial space across both the Indian and Pacific oceans amidst an increasingly arduous geopolitical and security environment. India must, therefore, acquire the ability to influence events within this strategic arena using all facets of national power, including maritime-military power. Lately, therefore, New Delhi has invested much intellectual capital to review its maritime-security strategy. India's new strategy is premised on the concept of holistic security involving the 'softer' aspects of maritime-security, and a rekindling of maritime consciousness in India, a nation that has traditionally been beset by 'sea-blindness'. The strategy adopts a region-wide, inclusive, and a more proactive approach than hitherto, as is evident in its title 'Ensuring Secure Seas: Indian Maritime Security Strategy'. While it deals with the growing concern of new non-traditional threats in the Indian littoral and the need for military deterrence and preparedness, it also addresses the imperatives for India to seek a favorable and rules-based benign environment in its immediate and extended maritime periphery, including through multi-vectored strategic partnerships dictated by its enduring principle of strategic autonomy. For a more profound and comprehensive understanding of India's maritime-security strategy, this paper examines the key unstated and implicit factors that underpin the strategy. These include India's historical and cultural evolution as a nation; its strategic geography; its geopolitical and security perceptions; and the political directions to its security forces. The paper deals specifically with India's response to maritime threats ranging from natural disasters, crime and state-sponsored terrorism to those posed by Pakistan and China, as well as the Indian Navy's envisaged security role East of the Malacca Straits. It also analyzes the aspects of organizational restructuring and force planning of India's maritime-security forces.

• Proceedings of KOSOMES biannual meeting
• /
• 2003.11a
• /
• pp.35-44
• /
• 2003

Considering possible legal and policy problems with regard to the Cheju Strait, a central issue is whether the Cheju Strait should be treated as Korean territorial sea or an international strait The claim that the strait is territorial sea has been based on the use of a straight baseline method of dermarcation With the use of straight baseline, Korea claims that the breadth of the Cheju Strait is only 20.7 miles at its narrowest point and therefore the strait becomes the territorial sea of Korea. The consideration cf marine pollution has weighed heavily in claiming the Cheju Strait as territorial sea. Pollution resulting from the accidents cf tankers caused by fire, collision, or stranding in the Cheju Strait and the Korea Strait would be enormous, affecting the entire coastal waters of the south coasts cf Korea's mainland and Japan's Tsushima Islands areas. Catastrophic pollution in the Cheju Strait could also come from the accidents cf large-size oil tankers passing through the Korea Strait from the Malacca Strait Although the Korean government considers the geographic and socioeconomic conditions sufficient to justify Korea's claim of the Cheju Strait as territorial sea, it believes that declaring it so would raise considerable legal conflicts with maritime states. In view of the legal difficulties and the need to meet the problems arising from the growing vessel traffic in the Cheju Strait, the sea lanes and traffic separation schemes may be considered an alternative to the internationalization of the Cheju Strait Even if the Korean government dose not do so, the regime of innocent passage should be applied to vessels passing through the Strait and should not suspend innocent passage through the Strait. Therefore, the Korean government needs to have a more legal, pragmatic, functional and managerial approach than a purely sovereign and selfish approach to the solution of legal matters of the Cheju strait For this purpose, the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea would serve as a guide and also self-restraint and cooperative approaches would become norms governing the resolution of the law of the sea issues in the Cheju Strait.