http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
- 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
- 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
RISS 인기검색어
- 검색키워드
- 저자 : 최영종 (검색결과 126 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
-
최영종 고려대학교 일민국제관계연구원 2007 국제관계연구 Vol.12 No.1
A peace regime on the Korean peninsula is becoming a reality. At present, the two Koreas, the United States, and China are seriously pondering about official talks to create a peace regime on the Korean Peninsula. It is, however, still unclear what a peace regime exactly is and whether and how much peace it can bring to the Korean peninsula. Euphoria runs high in Korea while a long road is ahead of a stable peace, not to mention full reconciliation or peaceful reunification. This paper has two aims: one is to run a reality check on the peace regime by examining it from diverse theoretical perspectives; and the other is to provide a clue on how to design it rationally. A peace regime, like other international institutions, can work properly upon such conditions as a stable power distribution and proper reflection of power differentials (realism); strong domestic clients in support of it (liberalism), and common identity or feelings of "we-ness" (constructivism). The Two Koreas fail to meet any of these conditions. The surest way to keep the peace is to spread democracy and freedom through out the Peninsula. A peace regime is only a step in that direction. Short of mutual trust and convergence of national interests, a peace regime on the Peninsula needs to be buttressed by the support of the United States as well as a multilateral support system. As the recent study of "rational design of international institutions" shows, institutions vary in terms of membership rules, scope of issues covered, centralization of tasks, rules for controlling the institution, and flexibility of arrangements. The variation in institutional design is determined by distribution problems, enforcement problems, number of actors and the asymmetries among them, uncertainty about behavior, the state of the world, and others' preferences. A rational design for a peace regime on the Korean peninsula needs to take into account North Korea's concern for losing, its long history of opportunistic behavior, disparities in the power, financial capacity, and interests of rather complex, asymmetrical members. and thick clouds over North Korea's intention and behavior. Such a peace regime has to be the one among a limited number of countries dedicated to peace on the Peninsula and financially willing and able to support it, with a substantial level of authority over its members, along with strong commitments of the US and Chinese governments. A degree of flexibility will guarantee the participation of reluctant members.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
An Emerging Security Community in East Asia and the Role of Middle Powers
최영종 고려대학교 일민국제관계연구원 2012 국제관계연구 Vol.17 No.2
In the face of China’s growing assertiveness regarding territorial issues, this paper argues after reviewing the case of the South China Sea disputes that East Asia needs a new security structure to deal with security issues in general, including territorial issues. This paper suggests that such a security architecture has to be a brand new one, among East Asian countries only, to be pursued as part of a comprehensive community building process, on the basis of the APT, with the mission to impose a golden straitjacket upon all members. This claim is founded on China’s strong unwillingness towards working with the US in an institutional setting. After reviewing materials on regionalism and middle power diplomacy, this paper suggests that successful security multilateralism in East Asia requires (1) an abusive (or potentially abusive) regional hegemon; (2) an effective middle power leadership; and (3) general acceptance of institutional lock-in by regional members. As China’s growing assertiveness is setting the stage for regional security cooperation, the remaining job is to promote region-wide willingness to accept the golden straitjacket of a regional security community. This duty falls largely on South Korea’s middle power diplomacy. The experience of other middle powers suggests that South Korea’s regional strategy should be founded on a solid cooperation with the US, commitment to binding multilateralism, and close cooperation with other middle and small countries in the region.
-
최영종 한국세계지역학회 2019 世界地域硏究論叢 Vol.37 No.2
This study explores the relationship between Sino-Japanese relations and East Asian regionalism. The region is currently witnessing the rapid power transition from Japan to China, as well as the stagnation of regionalism, once vibrant in the aftermath of the economic crisis of 1997-8. Following the logic of power transition theory, this paper assumes that Japan and China have become gradually more sensitive to relative status, particularly on the part of China who suffered historical humiliation and feeling of relative deprivation afflicted by Japan. The status-competition between China and Japan drove them to put acquiring status markers ahead of promoting mutual cooperation and problem-solving capacities of regional institutions. As a result, East Asian regionalism is losing relevance in spite of the plethora of regional cooperation initiatives. 본 연구는 중-일 간 세력전이의 급속한 진전과 동아시아 지역주의의 정체란 두 현상에주목하면서, 동아시아 지역주의와 중-일 간 지위경쟁 사이의 상관관계를 밝히려는 시도이다. 중-일 관계는 양국 간 세력배분의 변화에 따라 기본적인 성격은 물론이고 양국 간의 지위경쟁의양상과 강도가 변했다. 동아시아 지역주의는 양국 간의 상대적 지위를 평가받는 유용한 장이었으며, 양국 간 세력배분이 균형 상태로 전이됨에 따라 지위 배분 경쟁이 치열해졌다. 동아시아지역주의에 대한 개괄적인 관찰은 양국 간의 협력과 경쟁이 동아시아 지역주의의 발전과정체를 가져왔음을 보여줬다. 뒤이은 통화스왑협정, APT 제도화, 동아시아 자유무역지대에대한 사례 연구는 중-일 간의 지위경쟁이 제도화를 통한 협력증진보다는 외양적인 지위에보다 관심을 갖도록 했으며, 외양적인 주도권 확보를 위한 경쟁으로 양국을 이끌었다. 중국이일본에 대해 우위를 점했다고 인식하기 시작하면서부터, 지역제도 내의 지위 확보 경쟁보다는중국 자신이 실질적으로 지배 가능한 제도에 더 관심을 갖게 됐다. 본 연구는 양국 간 지위경쟁이 동아시아 지역주의의 침체를 가져왔다고 결론짓는다.
KCI연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
