• Strategy21
• /
• s.46
• /
• pp.239-276
• /
• 2020

The failure of early economic sanctions aimed at hurting the overall economies of targeted states called for a more sophisticated design of economic sanctions. This paved way for the advent of 'smart sanctions,' which target the supporters of the regime instead of the public mass. Despite controversies over the effectiveness of economic sanctions as a coercive tool to change the behavior of a targeted state, the transformation from 'comprehensive sanctions' to 'smart sanctions' is gaining the status of a legitimate method to impose punishment on states that do not conform to international norms, the nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction in this particular context of the paper. The five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council proved that it can come to an accord on imposing economic sanctions over adopting resolutions on waging military war with targeted states. The North Korean nuclear issue has been the biggest security threat to countries in the region, even for China out of fear that further developments of nuclear weapons in North Korea might lead to a 'domino-effect,' leading to nuclear proliferation in the Northeast Asia region. Economic sanctions had been adopted by the UNSC as early as 2006 after the first North Korean nuclear test and has continually strengthened sanctions measures at each stage of North Korean weapons development. While dubious of the effectiveness of early sanctions on North Korea, recent sanctions that limit North Korea's exports of coal and imports of oil seem to have an impact on the regime, inducing Kim Jong-un to commit to peaceful talks since 2018. The purpose of this paper is to add a variable to the factors determining the success of economic sanctions on North Korea: preventing North Korea's evasion efforts by conducting illegal transshipments at sea. I first analyze the cause of recent success in the economic sanctions that led Kim Jong-un to engage in talks and add the maritime element to the argument. There are three conditions for the success of the sanctions regime, and they are: (1) smart sanctions, targeting commodities and support groups (elites) vital to regime survival., (2) China's faithful participation in the sanctions regime, and finally, (3) preventing North Korea's maritime evasion efforts.

• Strategy21
• /
• s.43
• /
• pp.125-174
• /
• 2018

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the status of naval arms race in Northeast Asia. To this end, the scope of the research was limited to national security strategies, maritime strategies and naval strengthening of the United States, China, Russia and Japan. The major powers' active maritime strategies and naval arms race give some strategic implications to the Republic of Korea Navy as follows. First, China and Japan, unlike the past, are actively using submarines in offshore waters including the Korean Peninsula. Therefore, the ROK Navy must successfully promote the Jangbogo-III-class submarine, which is currently constructed, and get a nuclear-powered submarine and P-8 MPA capable of long-range and long-time operations to enhance ASW capability. Second, North Korea's current building submarines capable of loading SLBMs and SLBMs are a new threat to the ROK Navy. The current building KAMD, which focuses on terminal phase defense, cannot effectively respond to North Korea's SLBMs and should be converted to a multi-layered defense system including SM-3 at a mid-course phase. Third, as China militarizes the South China Sea, the instability of the South China Sea is growing. Therefore, the ROK Navy should strengthen its maritime cooperation with the regional countries such as Japan and ASEAN navies to protect SLOC. In conclusion, the ROK Navy needs to build a strong naval power to keep in mind that the 21st century naval rivalry in Northeast Asia is accelerating. The navy must do one's best to protect national strategic and vital interests by strengthening cooperation with regional countries. South Korea is also accelerating its defense reforms in accordance with the pattern of future warfare and the ROK Navy do one's best to have a balanced naval capability capable of actively operating in the offshore waters.

• Proceedings of the Korean Institute of Information and Commucation Sciences Conference
• /
• 2017.05a
• /
• pp.371-372
• /
• 2017

The United States has built a missile defense system from the Cold War era, but since the end of the Cold War era, there have been many changes in international situation and threats. The forces of power divided between the United States and the Soviet Union have become increasingly threatened by China's willingness to expand its external influence, declaration of strong Russia and North Korea and Iran's nuclear armament and advanced ballistic missile technology. In response to this threat change, the Missile Defense Agency(MDA) has established strategies and policies, but its parent law has not been revised. United States changed to the FY2017 National Defense Authorization Act (FY2017 NDAA) including changed missile defense strategy. In this paper, I check US ballistic missile defense strategies included in the FY2017 NDAA and compare what changes have been made in existing strategies.

• Convergence Security Journal
• /
• v.16 no.6_1
• /
• pp.3-13
• /
• 2016

We take it for granted that strong sides defeat weaker counterparts, while predicting the outcome of the battles. But in modern war, we can find plenty of evidence that weak sides won against the strong. This phenomenon can be understood logically by the fourth-generation war theory. the North Korean does not give up its unification strategy, which is unification by force, even though its inferior power. It is continuing various political, social and military levels of provocations toward both the international community and South Korea. Recently, North Korea did nuclear test, launched ICBM test, provoked the DMZ, and expecting to continue the provocations of the fourth-generation war level. We have to understand the nature of North Korea's fourth-generation war threats and provocations that it is focusing on. Based on this, have a new understanding of the value of the Homeland Defense Reservists as fundamental measures as the fourth-generation war threat and supplement related systems. We can firmly refuse the balance of power and power shift of the Korean Peninsula through improved Homeland Defense Reservists. As the expected North Korea's the fourth-generation war threats, our Homeland Defense Reservists is a firm will of conduct war, and political-social-economic-military means, it is possible to display as the best alternative.

• Analyses & Alternatives
• /
• v.7 no.3
• /
• pp.115-144
• /
• 2023

Under the Trump administration, the U.S. has made clear that "China is America's strategic competitor, revisionist power and a major challenge to America's prosperity and security." The Biden administration has largely inherited this perception of China. China has also responded without backing down. Therefore, the U.S.-China strategic competition has become the most important background factor in the international system and has a great impact on the security situation in Northeast Asia. Nevertheless, if you look at the recent process of establishing trilateral security cooperation among ROK, the U.S. and Japan, we can find that ROK's foreign strategy adjustment has played a key role. This is because establishing trilateral security cooperation among ROK, the U.S. and Japan depends on improving ROK-Japan relations. And the Yoon Suk Yeol government is pushing for rapid improvement in ROK-Japan relations regardless of domestic political constraints. The trilateral summit at Camp David laid the groundwork for future cooperation among ROK, the U.S. and Japan in security and other broader areas. China is strongly dissatisfied with the formation of trilateral security cooperation among ROK, the U.S. and Japan. However, this paper argues that although ROK agrees to form trilateral security cooperation with the U.S. and Japan, ROK's strategic objectives are not exactly the same as those of the U.S. and Japan. For example, looking back at the development of the U.S.-Japan alliance after the end of the Cold War, both the U.S. and Japan share similar views and perceptions of China's rise. The real goal of the strengthening of the U.S.-Japan alliance in recent years is also how to cope with China's rise. On the other hand, ROK's previous administrations have been negative about trilateral security cooperation with the U.S. and Japan. This is because ROK's main strategic goal is to reduce or eliminate threats from DPRK rather than respond to China. Faced with increasing DPRK's provocations and threats, more than half of South Koreans are in favor of reinforcing trilateral security cooperation with the U.S. and Japan to contain or mitigate threats from DPRK. As a result, if North Korea's nuclear and missile threats to ROK continue, then ROK's foreign strategy is likely to be to strengthen trilateral security cooperation between the U.S. and Japan to ensure its own safety and survival. If China wants to reduce the strategic pressure from the trilateral security cooperation among ROK, the U.S. and Japan, the best way is to reduce DPRK's provocations and threats to ROK and play a more substantive role in getting DPRK to give up its nuclear program.

• Strategy21
• /
• s.43
• /
• pp.57-88
• /
• 2018

Security situations are fundamentally and rapidly changing on the Korean Peninsula. Above all, as North Korea(NK) is heightening its nuclear and missile capabilities, Republic of Korea(ROK) is facing an existential threat. At the same time, as China's economic, diplomatic and military power is quickly rising, the balance of power is shifting and strategic competition between the Unite States(US) and China is accelerating in the Asia-Pacific region. Under the pressure of development of these situations, ROK seems to face allegedly the most serious crisis in its national security since the end of the Korean War. In the current grim geopolitical situation, maritime security may become the most difficult security challenge for ROK in the years to come. The purpose of this paper is to compare major changes in maritime security affairs of the ROK during last twenty years from 1998 until now(2018). 1998 was when this journal 『Strategy 21』 was published for the first time by the Korea Institute for Maritime Strategy. Then, this paper tries to identify challenges and risks with which this country has to deal for its survival and prosperity, and to propose some recommendations for the government, the Navy, and the Coast Guard as they are responsible for the maritime security of the country. The recommendations of this paper are as follows: strengthen ROK-US alliance and expand security cooperation with regional powers in support of the maintenance of the current security order in the region; building-up of maritime security capacity in preparation for crisis on the maritime domain with the navy targeting to acquire 'a non-nuclear, balance-of-terror capability, to improve interoperability with the Coast Guard based on 'a national fleet,' and to actively pursue innovation in naval science and technology. Finally, this paper proposes that naval capability the country needs in another twenty years depends on how effectively and rigorously the navy put its utmost efforts towards building 'a strongest navy' today.

• Korean Security Journal
• /
• no.26
• /
• pp.29-58
• /
• 2011

Since 11 September 2001, warnings of risk in the nexus of terrorism and nuclear weapons and materials which poses one of the gravest threats to the international community have continued. The purpose of this study is to analyze the aim, principles, characteristics, activities, impediments to progress and developmental recommendation of the Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism(GICNT). In addition, it suggests implications of the GICNT for the ROK policy. International community will need a comprehensive strategy with four key elements to accomplish the GICNT: (1) securing and reducing nuclear stockpiles around the world, (2) countering terrorist nuclear plots, (3) preventing and deterring state transfers of nuclear weapons or materials to terrorists, (4) interdicting nuclear smuggling. Moreover, other steps should be taken to build the needed sense of urgency, including: (1) analysis and assessment through joint threat briefing for real nuclear threat possibility, (2) nuclear terrorism exercises, (3) fast-paced nuclear security reviews, (4) realistic testing of nuclear security performance to defeat insider or outsider threats, (5) preparing shared database of threats and incidents. As for the ROK, main concerns are transfer of North Korea's nuclear weapons, materials and technology to international terror groups and attacks on nuclear facilities and uses of nuclear devices. As the 5th nuclear country, the ROK has strengthened systems of physical protection and nuclear counterterrorism based on the international conventions. In order to comprehensive and effective prevention of nuclear terrorism, the ROK has to strengthen nuclear detection instruments and mobile radiation monitoring system in airports, ports, road networks, and national critical infrastructures. Furthermore, it has to draw up effective crisis management manual and prepare nuclear counterterrorism exercises and operational postures. The fundamental key to the prevention, detection and response to nuclear terrorism which leads to catastrophic impacts is to establish not only domestic law, institution and systems, but also strengthen international cooperation.