Korea-Japan Fisheries Relations : Problems, Constraints, and Options for Cooperation

미우라, 히로키 The Graduate Institute of Peace Studies Kyung Hee 2002 국내박사

(The) impact of Korea-China FTA on China's FDI to Korea

최혜정 Graduate School of International Studies, Korea Un 2017 국내석사

The proliferation of FTAs since the 1990’s has effectively spurred the rise of FDI flows in that it seeks to remove trade and investment barriers. While countries in need of capital funding and knowledge and technology spillovers by foreign entities often use FTAs as a tool to attract FDIs, Korea is no exception to this trend. As the Korea-China FTA gives new momentum to investment and trade liberalization, it is expected to encourage the FDI flows from China. In light of this environment, the paper aims to investigate the impact of the Korea-China FTA on the China’s FDI to Korea. FDIs could be categorized into three groups by their underlying motives: market-seeking (horizontal), natural resource and efficiency-seeking (vertical), and export-platform and strategic asset-seeking (hybrid) FDI. More reliable investment conditions under enhanced legal protection of the Korea-China FTA contribute to boosting bilateral FDI activities. Specifically, liberalization of Korean financial service sectors to Chinese investors leads more horizontal FDIs to the Korean finance market. FDIs in the Korean manufacturing sector with competitive advantages over Chinese competitors are expected to increase as well, in accordance with the Chinese efforts to acquire strategic assets and enlarge market share in the integrated economy. Lastly, investment incentives with policies facilitating exports to third countries that the Korea-China FTA ensures would draw more export-platform FDIs from China. More negotiations for the full liberalization of investment and trade in services and Korean government’s efforts to provide a tailored service to match and support Chinese investors and Korean enterprises are required for further FDI inflows to Korea.

Critical assessment of the Korea turning argument : How shifting trade has not diminished Korea-Japan relations

Clayton Roberts 서울대학교 국제대학원 2012 국내석사

Relations between the Republic of Korea and Japan have gained much attention in the past decade, as tensions have fluctuated with increasing volatility. The question many researchers have attempted to answer is what drives the dynamics of Korea-Japan relations. Most of the answers to this question are, however, disappointing. One theory, in particular, has been promoted with increasing clamor recently. This nascent, and yet-to-be fully expressed theory holds that change in the past two decades has led to Korea turning it’s back on Japan to some extent. In detail, this theory - called the “Korea Turning” argument herein - suggests that a shift of Korea’s trade and attention away from Japan has caused Korea-Japan tensions to rise; Since Korea can increasingly rely on other trade partners, the country can increasingly assert itself on previously suppressed fractious issues. As trade data and friction levels (measured through media coverage) show, relative trade has decreased between Korea and Japan, while friction has risen. Despite the appeal, however, the findings of the Korea Turning argument are deeply flawed. After fully developing the Korea Turning argument, its strengths and weaknesses are assessed. The argument is then strongly refuted through a more sophisticated and nuanced analysis of the very data that the Korea Turning argument utilized. Furthermore, liberalist elements of peace included in the analysis are shown to have provided a fertile environment for improved relations, and actual relations are examined to show that - in spite of the friction - cooperation is gaining. The implications of these findings are significant: rather than the overwhelmingly pessimistic view espoused by the Korea Turning argument, this research’s findings leave the reader with a guarded optimism on the future of Korea-Japan relations. Care should be taken to manage specific issues, so to avoid flare-ups in relations, and ensure that peace and cooperation will continue to expand between the two erstwhile adversaries. 한일관계는 지난 10여 년 간 많은 관심을 받아왔다. 양국관계가 자주 그리고 격변하여 왔다. 학자들은 이러한 변동의 책임소재에 대한 답을 찾으려고 애썼다. 하지만 그에 대한 결과는 상당히 실망스럽다. 특히나 최근에 제기 된 바 있는 한 이론은 상당히 새롭지만 완벽하지 못하다. 이 이론에 따르면 지난20여 년 간의 변화 때문에 한국이 일본에게 등을 돌렸다고 한다. 이 이론은 "코리아 터닝" 이론 이라 불린다. 이 이론에 따르면 한국의 무역상대국 변화가 한일관계에 긴장을 고조시키는 역할을 했다고 한다. 한국의 무역상대국에서 일본이 아닌 다른 나라가 차지하는 비중이 커짐에 따라 한국이 과거에는 일본에 맞서 싸울 수 없었던 민감한 사안들을 스스로 옹호할 수 있게 되었다는 것이다. 실제 한일 양국간의 무역과 마찰의 정도가 이 이론을 뒷받침한다. 한일 양국 간에 상대적인 무역 비중이 줄어들고 있다. 동시에 마찰은 점차 커지고 있다. 이 이론은 매우 설득력이 있다. 그러나, 한국이 일본을 외면하기 시작했다는 이 이론의 결론부분은 심각한 단점을 내포하고 있다. 여기에서 "코리아 터닝" 이론는 주장은 충분히 설명되었다. 장점과 단점이 모두 평가되었으며 그에 따라 거세게 반박되기도 하였다. 마찰이 있기도 했지만 협력관계 또한 굳건해지고 있다. 이상의 발견에서 얻을 수 있는 함의는 굉장히 중요하다. 그것은 바로 우리가 결코 비관론자의 시각을 유지해서는 안 된다는 것이다. 우리는 이 사안을 긍정적으로 바라볼 수 있다. 모든 사안들은 조심스럽게 다루어지고 해결되어야 하며 그렇게 해야 양국 간에 협력과 평화가 증진될 수 있을 것이다.

Korea between the U.S. and China : deployment of THAAD and its impact on the U.S.-R.O.K.-China relationship

안종화 Graduate School of International Studies, Korea Un 2018 국내석사

The deployment of THAAD in response to the North Korean nuclear threat has complicated the Northeast Asia. The divergence in the strategic interests of the stakeholders deepen the North Korean nuclear threat. In fact, the THAAD’s deployment heightened the strategic competition between the U.S. and China. Korea’s “soft balancing” and accommodation have proven ineffective towards China, while its Strategic Alliance with the United States has strategic values beyond defense capability against the North Korean regime. Korea’s hesitancy in alignment and alliance between the two great powers left a room for the U.S.-China Strategic Competition to intensify. The deployment of THAAD has only complicated the security dilemma in the Northeast Asia. This research will view the relationships among the United States, Korea, and China through the lens of neorealism, examine the alignment strategies that were employed by the stakeholders through the U.S.-Korea-China relationship, and make theoretical exploration into the impact of THAAD’s deployment on the Triangle. Furthermore, it will explore the phenomenon where Korea had failed to expect a formation of strategic rivalry between the United States and China. It has, however, yet to learn a lesson from the failure. As long as Korea aligns with the great powers by engaging security and economic interests separately, the North Korean nuclear threat will not reach a solution. A lesson must be learned from the impact of THAAD’s deployment is clear.

A vision for Korea-EU relations towards the 21st Century

최정문 이화여자대학교 국제대학원 2001 국내석사

지난 몇 년간 한국과 유럽연합(EU)은 서로의 안보와 번영을 위해 그 어느 때보다 긴밀한 이해관계를 보여왔다. 경제적으로는 글로벌 시대에 발맞춰 양자간의 무역과 투자가 급증했을 뿐만 아니라 정치적으로 그 이해관계를 공유하고 있어 오늘날 양자간의 유대관계가 깊어지고 있음을 알 수 있다. 이제 한국과 유럽은 경제·정치 및 사회·통신에 이르기까지 개혁을 가속화해야 할 시점에 있다. 유럽의 급속한 통합과정과 최근 수세기 동안의 한국경제의 놀라운 성장은 지구촌 시대를 맞아 양자간의 유대관계에 변화를 가져왔다. 21세기는 세계화 시대로 나아가야 함이 자명하며 한국과 EU는 그 역사와 전통을 바탕으로 이런 세계화 흐름에 보다 적극적으로 기여해야 한다. 이 논문은 21 세기를 맞이하는 한국과 EU 가 정치, 경제, 문화 및 여러 방면에서 상호협력을 증진할 수 있도록 다음과 같은 방안을 제시하고자 한다. 첫째, 양자는 중장기적인 전망을 가지고 자유화와 시장개방을 추진해가야 한다 둘째, 한국-유럽간의 무역증진을 위해 양자는 금융안정을 조장하고 투자를 증진시켜야 한다. 마지막으로 지속적인 정치 및 안보협력을 위해 양자는 정부차원 및 민간차원에서 대화 및 협력을 조장하고 증진시켜야 한다. Over the past few years, the European Union and the Republic of Korea have shown a greater interest in each other's security, stability and prosperity than ever before. This shared interest is both economic - reflecting the significant volume of trade and investment flows between the two sides in today's globalized economy - and political, reflecting the increasing community of values between the European Union and modern Korea. It is time that Korea and Europe found themselves in the midst of an economic, political, social and communications revolutions, set to accelerate. The rapidly increasing integration of Western Europe and the formidable economic growth of Korea in recent decades have, in the context of globalization, changed the political and social contours of the two partners. While solutions to 21^(st) Century problem will often by definition be global, Korea and EU, given their history, cultural strengths and talents, must take a strong and specific contribution. This thesis suggests following vision for Korea-EU relations towards the 21st century which can boost the aim of increasing cooperation in political, economic, cultural and other fields between the two partners. First, both sides need to pursue and implement a liberalization and open market with mid-and long-term perspectives. Secondly, to enhance Korea-EU trade, both sides should cooperate for financial stability and investment. Finally, to promote political and security cooperation further between two partners, it is needed to coordinate and encourage the involvement of both governmental and non-governmental organization.

(An) analysis on the determinants for the renewal of the general security of military information agreement between South Korea and Japan

김주연 Graduate School of International Studies, Korea Un 2021 국내석사

This paper is intended to explore the determinants for the termination and re-extension of the Korea-Japan GSOMIA (General Security of Military Information Agreement). GSOMIA, the first military agreement between South Korea and Japan, has involved domestic political conflicts from the signing process to the decision to end, even though it was an international political issue directly related to South Korea's security interests. So why did the South Korean government decide to end GSOMIA despite the need for military intelligence cooperation between South Korea and Japan, and why did it withdraw its decision after three months? This paper attempts to answer this question by utilizing the linkage politics theory that explains the nexus between international and domestic political dimensions of the foreign and security policy-making. An analysis of the process from the decision to end the agreement to the extension has found that GSOMIA was initially used as a bargaining chip in response to public opinion calling for a national response to Japan's decision to control some industrial materials bound for South Korea, but the South Korean government withdrew its decision to end GSOMIA since it had apparently realized that it would affect Korea-U.S. relations, not just Korea-Japan relations. In other words, GSOMIA, which was decided to be terminated due to domestic politics, but it was extended due to the importance of the Korea-U.S. alliance, which confirms that the linkage between domestic and international dimensions was working in the process.

Korea's place in the future G-2 order

정용준 Graduate School of International Studies, Yonsei U 2012 국내석사

Korea’s geopolitical and strategic position has always been a source of constraint to her outward foreign policy. Therefore, finding a role and place in the strategic environment shaped by great power rivalry has always been a key concern to Korea. In this regard, over the years, South Korea has successfully adapted into the worldwide trend of accelerated globalization and has become one of the world’s top economic and military powers in a relatively short amount of time. Korea has also successfully elevated its horizon of diplomacy by actively engaging in multilateral arrangements and contributing to stabilizing the great power struggle in Northeast Asia. How the future of US-China relationship will project itself, however, is still unpredictable. Therefore, South Korea needs to be prepared with the future outcomes by widening its diplomatic maneuverability and implementing “smart” foreign policy orientations amid the ever expanding global network. Korea’s present G-2 policy of “strategic hedging” is an effective foreign policy and security strategy in the face of two nation-states. Hence, implementing its diplomatic resources on relations with the United States and China alone may not prove to be as cost-efficient as Korea wants. This is even more so due to worldwide trend of globalization and greater interdependencies amongst sovereign nations. In this regard, South Korea should maintain its broader strategic orientations to her relationship with the G-2 by pursuing a “soft hedging” strategy of facilitating China’s further integration into the US-built international order. Korea can also widen its diplomatic maneuverability by maintaining a strong and robust defense pact with the United States. As a middle power among great powers, South Korea can also play a pivotal role in East Asian international relations by effectively using its hard and soft power resources and her legitimate status as a historical peace power. Furthermore, Korea can become an effective global player as an “interest mediator” between the developed and developing nations in the fields of non-traditional security issues such as climate, environment, finance, free trade economy, security, human rights, and development.

한국의 對말레이시아 경제협력전략에 관한 연구

최활식 韓國外國語大學校 大學院 2012 국내박사

Korea's degree of dependence upon foreign trade is up to 98%, which ranks the most among the G20 countries. High degree of dependency does not necessarily mean a drawback, but it increases vulnerability to external economic shocks. In order to rectify this high degree of dependency, the best solution is to switch the GDP policy to a GNP growth policy. In this new policy, Korea needs to find a strategic economic partner and seek an economic co-operation. The world economy in the WTO system is based on limitless competition. As a result, economic integration has been promoted among regions, continents, and moreover among religious affiliations. This form of economic blocs raise the barrier against the non-members, which pushes Korea to find a detour. In order to counter this crises, Korea has accelerated on seeking an alternatives such as promoting Foreign Direct Investment(FDI), spurring the development of new technology, and securing new markets. After a careful examination, Indonesia has been selected as our main target for cooperation, who is the leader of ASEAN and the center for Islam culture and economics in Asia. Malaysia has a great growth potential as a center and hub for transportation and distribution, and Korea can benefit from the abundant resources and low labor costs of Malaysia. Results of SWOT analysis show that the goal of Malaysia, which carries the banner of "Vision 2020," is to reach GDP per capita of fifteen thousand dollars through various processes; Green Industry, Enlarging the knowledge-based infrastructure, Development of Technology, and Development of Finances. The Vision 2020 plan of Malaysia provides Korea with a great advantage and competitiveness over other countries. This is because Korea has a deep knowledge and experience on building knowledge-based infrastructure and a higher value-added business. Korea also have a high level of education and human resources as well as high-technology level in manufacturing area. Korea's metalwares, machinery, equipments, electronics, car industries have a great degree of competitiveness. If Korea can transfer the experiences and technologies to Malaysia, it will be beneficial for the Malaysian government in prosecuting industry diversification from labor-intensive industry and natural resource based industry; and as a result, the outcome of economic cooperation will be a great success for both countries. We can take an advantage of the excellent transportation and distribution infrastructure of Malaysian ports. Since our economy highly depends on exports and trade, retaining an outpost in the region can improve our trade effectiveness. This not only means that we are advancing to the Malaysian market, but also means that we can use Malaysia as a bridgehead for advancing into the southern Asian markets and also into the Islamic countries in the region. If we can build a positive connection with the Malaysian counterparts, who have a great influence in the area like ASEAN, and also in the Asian Islam affiliations, it will help us to advance further into the area. But in order to utilize these opportunities, Korea needs to overcome the fact that Malaysia is one of the big centers for Islamic culture. Malaysia does guarantee freedom of religion, but Islam rules over the society and economic systems of Malaysia. 12% of the total financial assets are Islamic, and the government is planing to promote the rate up to 20%. And the finance and communication industries, which are the two main driving forces of Malaysia economic growth, have a monopoly structure. This means that the companies who are planning to make business in this country ought to understand and also promote cultural exchange with the local people and companies. They would also have to learn the mechanisms of Islamic finances, and also enhance the relationship between the Islamic groups who control the grounds of these specific industries. In addition, supporting the future industry of Malaysia is another desirable solution. One of the starting point could be concentrating on the energy issue, for example nuclear power or new regeneration energy areas. We can provide the technological support and also training opportunities in these areas. This concludes that the cardinal direction for promoting economic cooperation with Malaysia is to comprehensively support the three main economic development strategy of Malaysian government : promoting Green Industry, knowledge-based infrastructure and Technology. Our strong points, such as great knowledge and experience in IT and high-technology industries, and also a friendly attitude towards their culture and people will help us to promote economic cooperations between the two countries. Moreover, the support of our government in advancing to these markets will further enhance the possibility of our success in building a mutual confidence. The Korean government should devise a program that can promote our country images. This can be achieved by providing educational support, such as building education facilities or making educational contents. It can also promote the image through providing student exchange programs as well as scholar interchanges. Only a sufficient and precise understanding of the Malaysian market as well as the people can minimize the adverse effects and lower the possibilities of misunderstandings. We also have to consider that we could have to modify various laws and regulations in order to meet the needs of the both sides and come into a successful negotiations. And we must remember that cooperation can only be reached by sincere efforts and thorough research and examinations.

Characteristics and restrictiveness of rules of origin in the Korea-Australia FTA : an empirical analysis

Kang, Narae Korea University 2017 국내석사

Rules of origin (RoO) are necessary and important in free trade agreements (FTAs), given the fact that their function is to prevent trade deflection. However, with the proliferation of FTAs over the last two decades, diverse RoO among the different FTAs have resulted in increases in the cost of complying with the complex requirement of RoO. In other words, RoO can play a role as trade barriers. Thus, it is critical to find out how demanding RoO are, in order not to limit exporters’ opportunities for more markets. On this ground, this paper analyzed the restrictiveness of RoO, which can be hidden protection, with the example of the bilateral FTA between Korea and Australia, using a method proposed by Estevadeordal (2000). It revealed that the restrictiveness index of the Korea-Australia FTA is 4.26, lower than those of the Korea-China FTA (4.43), the Korea-EFTA FTA (4.53), the Korea-ASEAN FTA (4.59), and the Korea-Chile FTA (4.82). This low restrictiveness index of the Korea-Australia FTA can be explained mainly by the complementary industrial and trade structure and significant amount of trade volume between the two countries. Then, examining restrictiveness of RoO for nineteen sectors, it is found that the agricultural and animal sector is the most restrictive among all the sectors, whereas the chemical and electrical equipment sectors are less restrictive. In addition, the analysis has shown that the restrictiveness of RoO in major five sectors in the Korea-Australia FTA lies between those of the China-Australia FTA and the Japan-Australia FTA. Given the results of this research, even though RoO in the Korea-Australia FTA are less restrictive than those of Korea’s other FTAs, Korea should adopt a more strategic approach to trade policy, considering the restrictiveness of RoO and Korea’s position in the Australian market vis-à-vis China and Japan. Furthermore, the Korean government needs to review these factors for renegotiation of the Korea-Australia FTA in the future.

A Study on the Korea-China Trade Cooperation Focusing on the Korea-China FTA

GuodongLiu 고려대학교 국제대학원 2017 국내석사

In the 21st century, global trade has become a key factor in boosting a country’s economy. After several years’ negotiation, the Korea-China FTA was finally signed on December 20, 2015. This marks a further trade liberalization between Korea and China. Both trade in goods and trade in service between Korea and China grew dramatically in the past decade. Historically, Korea primarily exported intermediate goods such as electronic devices to China. China will do the assembly work. Since 1990s, Korea has gained a large trade surplus with China. The Korea-China FTA is estimated to boost South Korea-China trade to over US$300 billion a year. On the other hand, some scholars possess negative views. If Korea doesn’t take certain action to protect its agricultural industry, the agricultural industry would have to face a worse future. The trade intensity index and the revealed comparative advantage index suggest that Korea should not worry too much about China’s agricultural influence. The regional trade cooperation will provide more benefits than potential costs for Korean economy. If Korea effectively utilizes these benefits, it could also be a business hub that connects the United States and European countries to Asian economies.