• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.22 no.1
• /
• pp.55-74
• /
• 2007

When the People's Republic of China destroyed one of its own defunct meteorological satellites, the Fengyun-1C, at an altitude of some 865 km above the earth's surface, the PRC was accused of initiating, or at the very least risking an(other) arms race in outer space also. The test also gave rise to a few legal questions as to the permissibility of this test, and the broader permissibility of using space for military and other weapon-touting activities, Whilst the test cannot be considered to constitute a direct threat to international peace and security so as to invoke relevant legal principles and consequences in terms of the UN Charter for example, it highlights the importance of such clauses in international space law as requiring international cooperation and consultation, due regard for the interests of all other countries both on earth and in outer space, and the further development of general regimes of registration and space debris-prevention. From that perspective, the PRC violated international outer space law not so much by the test itself but by the accompanying lack of information, consultation and due regard for other states', and indeed mankind's, interests.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• no.spc
• /
• pp.181-199
• /
• 2007

When the People's Republic of China destroyed one of its own defunct meteorological satellites, the Fengyun-1C, at an altitude of some 865 km above the earth's surface, the PRC was accused of initiating, or at the very least risking an(other) arms race in outer space also. The test also gave rise to a few legal questions as to the permissibility of this test, and the broader permissibility of using space for military and other weapon-touting activities, Whilst the test cannot be considered to constitute a direct threat to international peace and security so as to invoke relevant legal principles and consequences in terms of the UN Charter for example, it highlights the importance of such clauses in international space law as requiring international cooperation and consultation, due regard for the interests of all other countries both on earth and in outer space, and the further development of general regimes of registration and space debris-prevention. From that perspective, the PRC violated international outer space law not so much by the test itself but by the accompanying lack of information, consultation and due regard for other states', and indeed mankind's, interests.

• Convergence Security Journal
• /
• v.19 no.3
• /
• pp.117-126
• /
• 2019

Historically, the United Nations supported the establishment of the government of the Republic of Korea after liberation and played a decisive role in defending liberal democracy and peace by sending peacekeepers during the Korean War. With the political and military support of the United Nations, the Republic of Korea was able to grow into the world's 10th largest economy today, and now it is time to fulfill its responsibilities and roles to contribute to peace and prosperity in the international community as a middle power. The international peace operations of the United Nations are comprehensive concepts encompassing conflict prevention, peacemaking, peace enforcement, peacekeeping, and peace building, and are implemented in accordance with the Security Council resolutions based on the UN Charter. In order to effectively respond to changes in the international security environment and conflict factors after the post-Cold War, the UN promoted a paradigm shift in international peace operations through the 2000 Brahim Report and the 2015 High-Level Panel Report on UN Peace Activities. Therefore, this study aims to assess the Korean military's international peace operations at a limited level, such as reconstruction assistance and humanitarian assistance, and to present development measures for more active participation as a middle power in the future. To this end, we reviewed the history and specificities of conflict, the conflicting factors after the post-Cold War, and the new paradigm of UN peace operations, focusing on the African region where a number of UN peacekeeping missions are stationed. And it also suggested ways to develop international peace operations that the Korean military should pursue in the future.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.31 no.1
• /
• pp.145-167
• /
• 2016

UN Security Council is entitled to power for determining the existence of the threat to the peace. Specifying the provisions adopted in accordance with the chapter 7 of the UN Charter, its resolution is deemed as document confirming its decision about the threat to the peace. In general, resolutions adopted by the Security Council acting under Chapter VII of the Charter, are considered binding, in accordance with Article 25 of the Charter. Regarding to the terms of the Resolutions to be interpreted, the word "decide" is used as to the suspension of the ballistic missile program, the word "demand" is used as to the stopping of the the launch of ballistic missile, and the word "demand" is used as to return to the missile test moratorium. These provisions may be deemed to determining specific obligations to be imposed upon the States in accordance with the 1967 Outer Space Treaty. On the other hand, the Resolutions may be limited to the decision, not leading to a sort of international legislation, the main purpose of which is to provide a legal basis for international sanctions against Northe Korea. North Korea missile test case has reminded us of continuing discussion about whether the decision of the Security Council lacks the legislative authority due to its decision process. Furthermore, having regard to the outer space and space activities, the outer space law regime would be not compatible with the Security Council decision process in that the former presupposes the agreement among all States parties, while the latter based upon the agreement between Council member States. Therefore, it is premature to consider the Security Council decision as becoming the lex specialis of the space law regime.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.26 no.2
• /
• pp.3-39
• /
• 2011

People may operate unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs or drones) thousands of miles from the drone's location. Drones were first used (like balloons) for surveillance. By 2001, the United States began arming drones with missiles and using them to strike targets during combat in Afghanistan. By mid-2010, over forty states and other entities possessed drones, many with the capability of launching missiles and dropping bombs. Each new development in military weapons technology invites assessment of the relevant international law. This Insight surveys the international law applicable to the recent innovation of weaponizing drones. In determining what international law rules govern drone use, the most salient feature is not the fact that drones are unmanned. The fact drones carry no human operator may be the most important new technological breakthrough, but the key feature for international law purposes is the type of weaponry drones carry. Whether law enforcement rules govern drone use depends on the situation and not necessarily who is operating the drone. Battlefield weapons may also be lawfully used before an armed conflict in the following situations: when initiating self-defense under Article 51 of the United Nations Charter; when authorized by the UN Security Council; when a government seeks to suppress internal armed conflict; and, perhaps, when a state is invited to assist a government in suppressing internal armed conflict. The rules governing resort to force in self-defense are found in Article 51 of the UN Charter and a number of decisions by international courts and tribunals. Commentators continue to debate whether drone technology represents the next revolution in military affairs. Regardless of the answer to that question, drones have not created a revolution in legal affairs. The current rules governing battlefield launch vehicles are adequate for regulating resort to drones. More research must be undertaken, however, to understand the psychological effects of deploying unmanned vehicles and the effects on drone operators of sustained, close visual contact with the aftermath of drone attacks.

• Current Industrial and Technological Trends in Aerospace
• /
• v.6 no.1
• /
• pp.44-55
• /
• 2008

Catalyzed by the recent development of space technology, various kinds of spacecrafts were launched and utilized with purposes in many developed countries. In case of emergency such as natural disasters, proper satellite images are required in order to help to mitigate and assess the effects of disasters on human life and property. Since there are limitations for a nation to single-handedly operate a satellite and fulfill complete demands, a development need of international cooperation organization to share satellite images among the member countries has risen. In this paper, preestablished four international organizations' background, objectives, and operating system, and their principal characteristics were analyzed and compared. Especially, the paper has focused on the analysis of on-going operating procedures and its cases for International Charter, UN SPIDER's development of local supporting network to support NFP, establishment of Web-GIS by Sentinel Asia under the goal of 'Digital Asia', and the utilization of GEO that is widely applied in natural disaster fields.

• Journal of the Korea Convergence Society
• /
• v.13 no.5
• /
• pp.195-200
• /
• 2022

It was in the 1990s that the human rights of persons with disabilities began to be discussed in our society. Based on the Declaration on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1975, the Charter on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities was adopted on December 8, 1988. The human rights of persons with disabilities explains the important meaning of not being discriminated against just because they are persons with disabilities, the basics of human rights that all human beings have. The human rights of persons with disabilities are universal values, a basic right, and a declaration to protect the socially disadvantaged. Human rights are an important ideology that deals with the dignity and worth of human beings. In our society, people with disabilities should not be discriminated against for any reason. Persons with disabilities should be the center in matters related to the Anti-Discrimination Act and Human Rights. In addition, it can be said that it is necessary to develop and operate a system suitable for the local government for the disabled in the local community.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.30 no.1
• /
• pp.303-325
• /
• 2015

The latest slogan put forth by the international space community is the safety, security, and sustainability of outer space activities. The security of outer space activities, in particular, would be defined as the secure state from space-based threats. The latter comprises passive threats (such as collision with other satellites and space debris) and aggressive threats (such as electromagnetic interference, arms race on the earth or in outer space, and military attacks). Has outer space been used for military purposes in practice? If so, does international law regulate the military space activities it? The use of outer space for military purposes is referred to as space militarization and space weaponisation. Satellites has been used in Gulf War, Kosovo War, and Afghan War, recently, and research and development on space weapons are under way. Since only the placement of weapons of mass destruction on orbit around the earth is prohibited in accordance with 1967 Outer Space Treaty, it may be asked whether other weapons may be placed on orbit. It will be necessary to analyze the stance of on the above question, by studying UN space-related treaties including UN Charter. New international space norms represented by PPWT, ICoC, and UN GGE Report are at the center of progressive development of international law. In conclusion, the author will signpost the various points on international norms to be codified on the use of outer space for military purposes.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.19 no.2
• /
• pp.27-47
• /
• 2009

Concepts of mediation and conciliation as alternative dispute resolutions are often confusingly used. As to what is meant by mediation and conciliation, there is no uniform legal definition. However, there has been a distinction between two methods of dispute settlement under the international law (UN Charter, WTO DSU, NAFTA, EU mediation directive, WIPO Mediation Rules) although there is no clear definition on the terms of mediation and conciliation. And also under the domestic law such as U.K, France, Germany, a clear distinction has been made between two terms. Mediation means a facilitated negotiation between two parties through the intervention of a third party. A third and neutral party (mediator) help the parties in dispute to find their solution by managing a certain mediation protocol and facilitating communication between the parties while in conciliation, a third party evaluative the case and can suggest the parties a legally non-binding solution. Once the parties accept it, it becomes binding between them. However, in the U.S,, it seems that there is no practical use of distinguishing mediation and conciliation. The term of mediation is more commonly used than the term of conciliation and it has two kinds of mediation such as facilitative and evaluative mediation. Korea's conciliation system is close to conciliation or evaluative mediation. In conclusion, what is distinct between mediation and conciliation is the role of third party. If a neutral third party takes a role of advisor or facilitator, then he or she may employ a proper protocol to help the parties to find themselves their solution (mediation) while if a neutral person plays a role of evaluator, then he or she listens to the parties and suggest a solution to them (conciliation).

• Maritime Security
• /
• v.3 no.1
• /
• pp.1-44
• /
• 2021

China's new Maritime Policy Law (MPL) purports to regulate the duties of China's maritime police agencies, including the China Coast Guard, and safeguard China's sovereignty, security, and rights and interest. The MPL has potentially far-reaching application, as China claims extensive maritime areas off its mainland and in the South China Sea. This expansive application of maritime law enforcement jurisdiction is problematic given that most of China's maritime claims are inconsistent with international law. To the extent that the MPL purports to assert jurisdiction over foreign flagged vessels in disputed areas or on the high seas, it contravenes international law. Numerous provisions of the MPL regarding the use of force are also inconsistent with international rules and standards governing the use of maritime law enforcement jurisdiction, as well as the UN Charter's prohibition on the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state. China could use the MPL as a subterfuge to advance its illegal territorial and maritime claims in the South and East China Seas and interfere with coastal State resource rights in their respective exclusive economic zone.