National Strategy Vol. 29 No. 2 (Summer)
Abstract Summary
A Proposal for a Coalition of Extended Deterrence by Non-nuclear States in Indo-Pacific Region: Focusing on the Similarity of Nuclear Policy between South Korea and Japan
Young-June Park
South Korea and Japan have pursued non-nuclear policy dependent on the pledge of extended deterrence by the U.S. for a long time. However, propelled by North Korea’s plural nuclear tests and China’s gradual increase in its nuclear capability, other nuclear options have been discussed in Seoul and Tokyo worrying about the credibility of America’s commitment of extended deterrence. This paper, shedding light on the current debates on nuclear policy in South Korea, propose a coalition of extended deterrence and furthermore formation of Americacentered nuclear sharing group including South Korea, Japan and Australia.
Keywords: Nuclear Policy, South Korea, Japan, Nuclear Deterrence, Nuclear Sharing
Determinants of the U.S. Lawmakers’ Voting Behavior on Foreign Policy against China
Jongkon Lee
Since the 2010s, China has grown rapidly politically and economically, and the US government has begun enacting various policies to check China in the 117th and 118th Congresses. As many bills to check China were passed in Congress, it has been believed that U.S. lawmakers have been actively cooperating to contain China as a concrete team. In reality, however, there are internal divisions within the Republican Party and the Democratic Party in establishing policies to check China. In the Republican Party, lawmakers with far-right ideologies or the members of the House Freedom Caucus tended to oppose using government budgets to contain China. Even in the Democratic Party, far-left lawmakers and the members of the Congressional Progressive Coalition often voted against measures that heavily contain China. However, unlike the Republican Party, some Democratic Party legislators showed opposition to the bill to contain China depending on their political identities and the political and economic characteristics of their districts.
Keywords: U.S.-China relations, U.S. Congress, Congressional Vote, Party Factions, China Select Committee
The U.S.-China Strategic Competition and China’s Historical Analogy: “Century of Humiliation” and “War to Resist US Aggression and Aid Korea”
Jungmi Cha
With the recent intensification of the U.S.-China rivalry, historical analogies are often used to analyze and predict the future of the U.S.-China rivalry, both in academia and among policymakers. Some analyzed the U.S.-China rivalry by comparing it to the U.S.-Soviet relationship during the Cold War, while others predicted the future of U.S.-China relations through the Thucydidesian trap of the war between Athens and Sparta. In this way, history is used as a major source of reasoning in analyzing and predicting today's U.S.-China relations, and provides lessons and evidence for policymakers. Despite the various historical analogy debates in the U.S.-China relationship, it is hard to see the research and attention to Chinese historical analogies in the U.S.-China relationship. Therefore, this study analyzes how China uses its past history to interpret and respond to U.S.-China relations in an environment of U.S.-China competition and intensifying Western anti-China approach, focusing on China's historical analogy in the era of U.S.-China competition. In particular, this study analyzes China's historical analogy in the context of U.S.-China relations, focusing on two histories that have been strategically utilized in supporting the China's assertive attitude toward the United States, Chinese domestic cohesion with loyalty to the Chinese Communist Party, and the promotion of patriotism and self-confidence: “Century of Humiliation” after the Opium War and the “War to Resist US Aggression and
Aid Korea(抗美元朝戰爭, Korean War).”
Keywords: US-China Competition, Historical Analogy, Century of Humiliation(bainianguoqu), War to Resist US Aggression and Aid Korea(kangmeiyuanchaozhanzheng)
A Comparative Study on the Korea and Japan’s Ocean Security Strategies and the China Factor: Moon Jae-In Government’s ‘Wait-and-See Defense’ vs. Abe Cabinet’s ‘Offensive Defense’
Cai Jie ･ Chang-Gun Park
The purpose of this study is to examine how the ocean security strategies of Korea and Japan are changing. The focus of the discussion is to shed light on how China’s maritime strategy is affecting both Korea and Japan in East China Sea. Above all, this study focuses on comparing and analyzing how the Moon Jae-In’s government and the Abe cabinet’s ocean security strategy are developing in the realistic dynamics of strengthening China’s maritime power during the post-Cold War period. The key concepts of comparative analysis are the Moon Jae-In government’s “wait-and-see defense” and the Abe cabinet’s “offensive defense.” In the case of South Korea, due to changes in the perception of de-Cold War threats toward China and North Korean factors, ocean security strategies toward China is expressed in the form of a “wait-and-see defense.” On the other hand, in the case of Japan, ocean security strategies toward China is being revealed in the form of an “offensive defense” due to changes in the perception of threats toward China and changes in the security environment during the post-Cold War period. However, the ocean security strategies toward China between Korea and Japan is limited. This is because Korea and Japan must secure their strategic space amid intensifying competition between the U.S. and China, and at the same time, internal and external strategies must be sought in various ways. In this context, maritime cooperation between Korea, China, and Japan
should be promoted so that the ocean security strategies of Korea and Japan do not negatively affect China. In other words, the three countries need institutionalized cooperation to prevent the preemptive competition from escalating
into unintentional military clashes and to build maritime trust at the Northeast Asian level beyond security dilemmas.
Keywords: Ocean Security Strategy, Moon Jae-In Regime, Abe Cabinet, Wait-And-See Defense, Offensive Defense, China Factor
A Study on Measures to Secure Health and Medical Resources under the Kim Jong Un Regime
Ju Hyun Um
During the more than 10 years of Kim Jong-un's regime, the healthcare system has been scrutinized, specifically healthcare resources, facilities, medicines, and personnel. Since the early days of his rule, the construction of a specialized hospital in Pyongyang signaled the desire to modernize healthcare facilities nationwide, but the intended modernization did not materialize as planned. However, following the failed North Korea-U.S. diplomatic efforts in 2019 and the outbreak of COVID-19 in 2020, there emerged a need for actual improvement and an opportunity to create an environment conducive to it. As a result, there have been changes in the names of healthcare facilities throughout the country. In terms of medicines, the introduction of the socialist responsibility system led to the production of medicines in pharmaceutical factories and their sales through pharmacies. Additionally, the legal sale of medicines was ensured through the revision of the pharmaceutical law, which will take effect in 2022. Regarding healthcare personnel, the regime encourages the use of advanced medical technology while emphasizing the importance of diligence and dedication. The shortage of funding for healthcare services continues to be offset by the passion of healthcare workers.
Keywords: North Korea, Kim Jong Un, Health Care, Health Care Resources