• Strategy21
• /
• s.31
• /
• pp.220-250
• /
• 2013

South Korean national security strategy should be developed to effectively handle and counter increasing maritime threats and challenges. There are three major maritime threats South Korea faces today; maritime disputes on the EEZ boundary and Dokdo islet issues, North Korean threats, and international maritime security. Maritime disputes in the region are getting intensified and turned into a military confrontation after 2010. Now regional countries confront each other with military and police forces and use economic leverage to coerce the others. They are very eager to create advantageous de facto situations to legitimize their territorial claims. North Korean threat is also increasing in the sea as we witnessed in the Cheonan incident and Yeonpyoung shelling in 2010. North Korea resorts to local provocations and nuclear threats to coerce South Korea in which it may enjoy asymmetric advantages. The NLL area of the west sea would be a main hot spot that North Korea may continue to make a local provocation. Also, South Korean national economy is heavily dependent upon foreign trade and national strategic resources such as oil are all imported. Without an assurance on the safety of sea routes, these economic activities cannot be maintained and expanded. This paper argues that South Korea should make national maritime strategy and enhance the strength of naval forces. As a middle power, its national security strategy needs to consider all the threats and challenges not only from North Korea but also to maritime security. This is not a matter of choice but a mandate for national survival and prosperity. This paper discusses the importance of maritime security, changing characteristics of maritime threats and challenges, regional maritime disputes and its threat to South Korea's security, and South Korea's future security strategy and ways to enhance the role of naval forces. Our national maritime strategy needs to show middle and long term policy directions on how we will protect our maritime interests. Especially, it is important to build proper naval might to carry out all the roles and missions required to the military.

• Korean Security Journal
• /
• no.39
• /
• pp.185-215
• /
• 2014

Since North Korea has used terror crime as a means of unification under communism against South Korea, South Korea has been much damaged until now. And the occurrence possibility of terror crime by North Korean authority is now higher than any other time. The North Korean terror crimes of Kim Il Sung era had been committed by the dictator's instruction with the object of securing governing fund. However, looking at the terror crimes committed for decades during Kim Jung Il authority, it is revealed that these terror crimes are expressed as a criminal behavior because of the conflict to accomplish the power and economic advantage non powerful groups target. This study focused on the power conflict in various causes of terror crimes by applying George B. Vold(1958)'s theory which explained power conflict between groups became a factor of crime, and found the aspect by ages of terror crime behavior by North Korean authority and responding plan to future North Korean terror crime. North Korean authority high-ranking officials were the Labor Party focusing on Juche Idea for decades in Kim Il Sung time. Afterwards, high-ranking officials were formed focusing on military authorities following Military First Policy at the beginning of Kim Jung Il authority, rapid power change has been done for recent 10 years. To arrange the aspect by times of terror crime following this power change, alienated party executives following the support of positive military first authority by Kim Jung Il after 1995 could not object to forcible terror crime behavior of military authority, and 1st, 2nd Yeongpyeong maritime war which happened this time was propelled by military first authority to show the power of military authority. After 2006, conservative party union enforced censorship and inspection on the trade business and foreign currency-earning of military authority while executing drastic purge. The shooting on Keumkangsan tourists that happened this time was a forcible terror crime by military authority following the pressure of conservative party. After October, 2008, first military reign union executed the launch of Gwanmyungsung No.2 long-range missile, second nuclear test, Daechung marine war, and Cheonanham attacking terror in order to highlight the importance and role of military authority. After September 2010, new reign union went through severe competition between new military authority and new mainstream and new military authority at this time executed highly professionalized terror crime such as cyber/electronic terror unlike past military authority. After July 2012, ICBM test launch, third nuclear test, cyber terror on Cheongwadae homepage of new mainstream association was the intention of Km Jung Eun to display his ability and check and adjust the power of party/military/cabinet/ public security organ, and he can attempt the unexpected terror crime in the future. North Korean terror crime has continued since 1980s when Kim Jung Il's power succession was carried out, and the power aspect by times has rapidly changed since 1994 when Kim Il Sung died and the terror crime became intense following the power combat between high-ranking officials and power conflict for right robbery. Now South Korea should install the specialized department which synthesizes and analyzes the information on North Korean high-ranking officials and reinforce the comprehensive information-collecting system through the protection and management of North Korean defectors and secret agents in order to determine the cause of North Korean terror crime and respond to it. And South Korea should participate positively in the international collaboration related to North Korean terror and make direct efforts to attract the international agreement to build the international cooperation for the response to North Korean terror crime. Also, we should try more to arrange the realistic countermeasure against North Korean cyber/electronic terror which was more diversified with the expertise terror escaping from existing forcible terror through enactment/revision of law related to cyber terror crime, organizing relevant institute and budget, training professional manpower, and technical development.

• Convergence Security Journal
• /
• v.18 no.1
• /
• pp.117-128
• /
• 2018

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the behavior of North Korea's cyber attack against South Korea since 2009 based on major international security theories and suggest South Korea's policy option. For this purpose, this paper applied the behavioral domain and characteristics of 'cyber power' and 'coercion dynamics' model, which are attracting attention in international security studies. The types of cyber attacks from North Korea are classified into the following categories: power-based incarceration, leadership attacks and intrusions, military operations interference, and social anxiety and confusion. In terms of types and means of cyber power, North Korean GPS disturbance, the Ministry of Defense server hacking and EMP are hard power with high retaliation and threat and cyber money cashing and ransomware are analyzed by force in the act of persuasion and incentive in the point of robbing or asking for a large amount of money with software pawns. North Korea 's cyber attack has the character of escape from realistic sanctions based on the second nuclear test. It is important for South Korea to clearly recognize that the aggressive cyberpower of North Korea is changing in its methods and capabilities, and to ensure that North Korea's actions result in far greater losses than can be achieved. To do this, it is necessary to strengthen the cyber security and competence to simultaneously attack and defend through institutional supplement and new establishment such as cyber psychological warfare, EMP attack preparation, and enhancement of security expertise against hacking.

• Journal of the Korean Geographical Society
• /
• v.50 no.4
• /
• pp.407-430
• /
• 2015

The purpose of this study is to prove double faced heterotopiatic placeness of North Korea which can be highlighted to one aspect through priming test. Korean-Americans are found to have a perception of North Korea as a closed society where political leader cult is practiced, Pyongyang as a display city. They have Christian nostalgia toward it as a place where Christianity was first introduced to. North Korea's heterotopiatic placeness is sharing the 5,000 years of history of the Korea peninsula on the one hand and being a closed dictatorship place on the other. North Korea is kept isolated and closed but has had a liminal space through the intentional open system like special economic zone. Pyongyang is the city for specific class where it shows the heterotopiatic character. Priming is found effective in Yeongbyun, a place of extreme mixtures placeness as being the hometown of the beloved Korean poet Kim So-Wol and the site of nuclear weapon experiment but Korean-Americans have not found any priming effect regarding the Geumgang mountain tour. As to the Arirang performance, a man-made landscape expressing North Korea's sense of value and ideology, priming resulted in preference. This study raises the needs for understanding North Korea as a multifaced placeness and it can purposely be emphasized and changed to contribute the two Korea's unification.

• Strategy21
• /
• s.42
• /
• pp.5-52
• /
• 2017

Debates about introducing nuclear submarines have been a main issue in Korea. The highest officials and the government has started to think seriously about the issue. Yet there were no certain decision to this issue or any agreements with US but it is still necessary to review about introducing nuclear submarines, the technologies and about the business. The reason for such issues are the highest officials of Korea to build nuclear submarine, nK's nuclear development and SLBM launching. ROKN's nuclear submarine's necessity will be to attack(capacity to revenge), defend(anti-SSBN Operation) and to respond against neighboring nation's threat(Russia, Japan, China). Among these nations, US, Russia (Soviet Union), Britain, France had built their submarines in a short term of time due to their industrial foundation regarding with nuclear propulsion submarines. However China and India have started their business without their industrial foundation prepared and took a long time to build their submarines. Current technology level of Korea have reached almost up to US, Russia, Britain and France when they first built their nuclear propulsion submarines since we have almost completed the business for the Changbogo-I,II and almost up to complete building the Changbogo-III which Korea have self designed/developed. Furthermore Korea have reached the level where we can self design large nuclear reactors and the integrated SMART reactor which we can call ourselves a nation with worldwide technologies. If introducing the nuclear submarine to the Korea gets decided, first of all we would have to review the technological problems and also introduce the foreign technologies when needed. The methods for the introduction will be developments after loans from the foreign, productions with technological cooperations, and individual production. The most significant thing will be that changes are continuous and new instances are keep showing up so that it is important to only have a simple reference to a current instances and have a review on every methods with many possibilities. Also developing all of the technologies for the nuclear propulsion submarines may be not possible and give financial damages so there may be a need to partially introduce foreign technologies. For the introduction of nuclear propulsion submarines, there must be a resolution of the international regulations together with the international/domestics resistances and the technological problems to work out for. Also there may be problem for the requirement fees to solve for and other tough problems to solve for. However nuclear submarines are powerful weapon system to risk everything above. This is an international/domestically a serious agenda. Therefore rather than having debates based on false facts, there must be a need to have an investigations and debates regarding the nation's benefits and national security.

• Strategy21
• /
• s.44
• /
• pp.142-176
• /
• 2018

So far, the main threat to South Korea was North Korea. That is why South Korea established a strategy based on the threat of North Korea and most of the budget on defense was used to deter North Korea. Even though the neighboring countries(China, Japan, and Russia) are growing as a real threat with abilities and intentions based on their powerful naval forces, South Korea has not yet been able to establish a strategy that regards neighboring countries as a threat. But the decades-old structural mechanism of the Korean security environment is undergoing a radical change on April 27, 2018, through the South-North summit and the Panmunjom Declaration. Under the changing security environment, South Korea was placed in a complicated dilemma that had to deal with threats of two axes(China), three axes(China, Japan), and four axes(Japan, Russia). If the one axis threat(North Korea) is dominated by land threats, the second, third and fourth axis threats are threats from the sea. This paper analyzed the maritime strategy of Korea within the framework of maritime-geopolitics, in other words recognition and expansion of the sphere of maritime. I have designed that the maritime defense space that we can deny from threats is divided into three lines of defense: 1 line (radius 3,000km), 2 lines (2,000km), and 3 lines (1,000km). The three defense zones of the three lines were defined as an active defense(1 line), defensive offense(2 line), active offense(3 line). The three defense zones of the three lines were defined as the sphere of core maritime, As a power to deny the sphere of core maritime, it was analyzed as a maneuvering unit, a nuclear-powered submarine, the establishment of missile strategy, and the fortification of islands station. The marine strategy of South Korea with these concepts and means was defined as 'Offensive Maritime Denial Strategy'.

• Nuclear Engineering and Technology
• /
• v.33 no.3
• /
• pp.349-354
• /
• 2001

While the United Nations UN) agencies work to restrict the manufacture, sale, and use of land-mines worldwide, a massive clean-up effort is needed to find and destroy the estimated 100 million land-mines still buried around the world. Land-mines left behind from wars worldwide are one of the past century＇s main unsolved problems of war and remain the focus of humanitarian land-mine detection and removal primarily in Europe, Africa, Asia and Central and South America. For example, approximately 1 million anti-personnel mines and other various kinds which have been buried in the 249.4 km (155 miles) demilitarized zone (DMZ) of the Korean peninsular should be completely removed in historical process of the peaceful unification between South and North Korea. In this regard, the current trends of technologies linked to land-mine detection systems are surveyed.

• Strategy21
• /
• s.39
• /
• pp.163-197
• /
• 2016

The completion of Jeju Naval Base on February 2016 made the Republic of Korea Navy(ROKN) review the size and role of the Maritime Task Flotilla(MTF). The new strategic environment for the 12st century and the new challenges require the Navy to counter North Korea's provocations and prevent potential enemy's threat. The Navy is also required to take part in the variety of international roles and missions commensurated with Korea's global status to maximize the national interest. Despite these changes, Korea's military construction concept is still unable to break away from the old paradigm of the North Korean threat largely centered. In order to develop the current MTF into the Task Group with the construction of Jeju Naval Base, the Navy must newly not only establish new force development plan and fleet management concepts but also go to persuade and convince policy decision makers. To this end, the following efforts should be promoted. First, the ROK Navy steps up efforts in order to share with the Task Group's vision and strategy. The Navy should also provide the size and structure as well as the missions and roles of the Task Group to react to new maritime security environment. Second, the Navy analyse the MTF's ability and what is required and necessary to perform its duty. After that, it must set out the direction of the Task Group's force development. Third, the current missions and roles of the MTF should be re-established to respond various threats. Finally, accommodating of new technology to the MTF should intensify its strengths. The ROK Navy has a mixed force structure consisting of three fixed- base fleets and a MTF. The fixed base fleet has a passive force to defend and protect its own sea areas, but the MTF should actively not only counter North Korea's threats, including ballistic missiles, but also fight potential threats and takes international missions as a primary task force. However, the MTF has a limited capability to accomplish given missions and long-range operations, and thus, the ROK Navy is strongly required to construct the Task Group.

• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.18 no.7
• /
• pp.577-589
• /
• 2018

The future of ROK-US alliance has not been discussed in detail by both governments since early 2000s. However, it is becoming more apparent that ROK-US alliance is facing various daunting challenges. The new administrations both in ROK and US might have different perspectives about the future of alliance. In the process of resolving outstanding North Korean nuclear issue, the alliance can face challenges to change its fundamental features such as halting joint military exercise. ROK-US governments also agreed to transfer wartime operational control as soon as possible. All those factors indicates the growing necessity to articulate the future of ROK-US alliance. ROK and US needs to facilitate to dialogue for future alliance with the possible scenarios of changing security environment such as maintaining status quo, reconciliation of North and South Korea, and entering the reunification stage. In each phase, ROK-US has to develop the goal for the alliance, military institution to implement the alliance, role of USFK, and etc. It is imperative to develop the road map for future ROK-US alliance at this stage to avoid unnecessary folly.

• Proceedings of the Korean Institute of Information and Commucation Sciences Conference
• /
• 2015.10a
• /
• pp.445-447
• /
• 2015

The situation in Northeast Asia is rapidly changed because of the territorial dispute between neighboring countries near the East China Sea, North Korean nuclear bomb tests, long-range ballistic missile launching tests frequently and deployment of Chinese Liaoning class aircraft carrier. Especially, unstable political situation of North Korea and Chinese A2/AD strategy by strengthening naval forces are the cause of replanning Asia-Pacific security strategy of Unites States. In this paper, it is surveyed and analyzed that changed Asia-Pacific security strategy of U.S. and rearrangement plan of U.S. Naval forces. And changed environmental situation influence on our security is analyzed.