Recent Asian origin of chytrid fungi causing global amphibian declines

O’Hanlon, Simon J.,Rieux, Adrien,Farrer, Rhys A.,Rosa, Goncalo M.,Waldman, Bruce,Bataille, Arnaud,Kosch, Tiffany A.,Murray, Kris A.,Brankovics, Balá,zs,Fumagalli, Matteo,Martin, Michael D.,Wales American Association for the Advancement of Scienc 2018 Science Vol.360 No.6389

<P>Globalized infectious diseases are causing species declines worldwide, but their source often remains elusive. We used whole-genome sequencing to solve the spatiotemporal origins of themost devastating panzootic to date, caused by the fungus Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis, a proximate driver of global amphibian declines. We traced the source of B. dendrobatidis to the Korean peninsula, where one lineage, BdASIA-1, exhibits the genetic hallmarks of an ancestral population that seeded the panzootic. We date the emergence of this pathogen to the early 20th century, coinciding with the global expansion of commercial trade in amphibians, and we show that intercontinental transmission is ongoing. Our findings point to East Asia as a geographic hotspot for B. dendrobatidis biodiversity and the original source of these lineages that now parasitize amphibians worldwide.</P>

Korea and Strategic Reassurance with China

( Michael O’hanlon ) 한국국방연구원 2014 The Korean Journal of Defense Analysis Vol.26 No.3

Korea offers not only dangers and risks, but opportunities that could be useful in contributing to a mutual concept of strategic reassurance that Beijing and Washington, along with key U.S. allies like the Republic of Korea, should attempt to introduce into their relationship in a systematic way in the years ahead. The United States has now “rebalanced” toward the Asia-Pacific. But it needs a central organizingconcept for what, together with allies, it will do in the region now that it is “back.” Coordinating with China about how to handle, cooperatively, any possible major military scenario on the Korean Peninsula as well as the aftermath of any such scenario is a good place to start.

미국의 안보전략: 확고한 제재(Resolute Restraint)와 인도-태평양 동맹

( Michael O’hanlon ) 한국국가전략연구원 2021 한국국가전략 Vol.6 No.2

확고한 제재(Resolute Restraint)의 안보전략은 종종 냉전 시대의 '억지' 독트린의 아버지라고 불리는 조지 케넌의 많은 사상들을 이어받고 있다. 케넌은 미국의 강력한 국제적 역할에 대해 확고한 믿음을 가졌다. 하지만 그의 견해에는 뉘앙스가 있었다. 종종 평가절하되었던 케넌의 세 가지 아이디어는 오늘날 미국의 안보전략 입안자들이 반드시 참고해야 한다고 생각한다. 첫째, 세계의 일부 지역은 본질적으로 다른 지역보다 전략적으로 더 중요하며, 미국의 국가 안보 정책에서 우선 순위를 두어야 한다. 둘째, 군사적 동맹이 유리할 수 있다. 하지만 군사동맹은 상당히 선택적으로 그리고 주로 핵심 전략지역을 방어하기 위해 이용되어야 한다. 셋째, 국가 안보정책을 수립하는데 있어서 국정의 경제적 수단들은 군사적 도구만큼이나 중요하다. 그래서 튼튼한 경제적 토대는 한 나라의 군사력과 장기적인 국가안보에 필수적이라고 할 수 있다. 현재 미국은 한국, 일본, 필리핀, 호주, 태국과의 양자동맹 그리고 싱가포르, 뉴질랜드, 대만, 그리고 다른 국가들과의 강력한 안보 파트너십, 현재 일본, 호주, 인도를 포함하는 '쿼드(Quad)' 그룹과 같은 인도-태평양 지역의 통합 안보 커뮤니티에 더욱 긴밀하게 협력하고 있다. 그런 안보 커뮤니티에서 기인한 활동은 현명하고 타당해 보인다. 하지만 나는 그것에 관한 내용들을 상세하게 요약하거나, 특정하고 적절한 수정 및 보완사항을 제안하기 보다는, 오히려 그들의 보다 광범위한 전략적 토대와 논리에 대해 논의하고자 한다. 이는 나의 신간 '확고한 제재(Resolute Restraint)'에서 제시된 개념을 바탕으로 하고 있다. A grand strategy of resolute restraint would seek to emulate many of the ideas of George Kennan, often called the father of Cold War “containment” doctrine. Kennan believed in a strong U.S. international role, to be sure. But his views were nuanced. His thinking included three often underappreciated ideas that should centrally inform American grand strategy today. First, some parts of the world are inherently more important strategically than others, and should be prioritized in U.S. national security policy. Second, military alliances can be advantageous. But they should be used quite selectively, and largely in defense of the key strategic regions. Third, economic instruments of statecraft are just as important as military tools in making national security policy. And strong economic foundations are essential to a nation’s military prowess and long-term national security. With its web of bilateral alliances involving the ROK, Japan, the Philippines, Australia, and Thailand, as well as strong security partnerships with Singapore, New Zealand, Taiwan, and others-and now too its support for the “quad” group that includes Japan and Australia as well as India-the United States is working with friends on a more closely integrated security community for the broader Indo-Pacific region. The resulting activities are generally smart and sound. Rather than summarize them in detail or suggest specific modest additions and improvements, I would rather make an argument about their broader strategic underpinnings and logic-building on the concept of “resolute restraint” developed in my new book.

아프카니스탄 전쟁을 총괄한다

오한론, 마이겔 한국민족연구원 2003 민족연구 Vol.0 No.10

Keep US Forces in Korea after Reunification

( Michael O Hanlon ) 한국국방연구원 1998 The Korean Journal of Defense Analysis Vol.10 No.1

Today`s US force posture in Korea has a simple purpose: helping stop, and if need be reverse and retaliate against, an attack by the Democratic People`s Republic of Korea (DPRK). If that mission becomes obsolete, either because of Korean reunification or a major reduction in the magnitude of the military competition between North and South, any continuing US military presence on the peninsula would require a fundamentally new rationale. This paper develops such a rationale, and considers various options for corresponding US force postures. My principal conclusions are that a continued and substantial US military presence on the peninsula makes sense for the United States, Korea, and the region as a whole. It might consist of roughly 20,000 to 30,000 troops, and be oriented to a broad range of security tasks including nontraditional missions such as counterterrorism and peace operations. The US presence would ideally consist of fewer army forces than are now based in the Republic of Korea today, but potentially more marines and navy sailors. In short, this proposal might be termed a "liberal vision" for the US-Korea alliance. It envisages an alliance that focuses less on traditional deterrence of nearby major powers-without abandoning that mission-but that emphasizes a much broader array of security goals as well. Pursuit of those other goals could potentially allow for the inclusion of other countries, perhaps someday even China, in a broader collective security framework. Strong arguments for this type of approach can be found in international relations theory, in post-World War I1 history, and in the specific security needs of the northeast Asia region today.

US Military Force Structure After Korean Reunification

( Michael O Hanlon ) 한국국방연구원 2001 The Korean Journal of Defense Analysis Vol.13 No.1

국내정책, 외교정책, 그리고 안보전략: 바이든은 어디를 향해 가고 있고 어디로 가야 하는가?

마이클오핸런 ( Michael O’hanlon ) 한국국가전략연구원 2021 한국국가전략 Vol.6 No.1

바이든 대통령이 오바마 행정부 당시 베테랑들과 몇몇 새로운 인물들을 내세워 외교 및 국내 정책팀을 구성한 가운데, 다음과 같은 여러 의문들이 나오고 있다. ㆍ오바마 시대와 근본적으로 어떻게, 어디에서 차이가 날까? 사실상 오바마 3.0이 될 것인가? 아니면, 내 동료 톰 라이트 프레임을 인용하자면, 바이든 대통령 접근법은 팀에서 복원가들에게 유리할까, 아니면 개혁가들과 재창조자들에게 유리할까? ㆍ역사상 가장 나이가 많은 미국 대통령이자 거의 반세기 가까이 워싱턴 D.C.에서 베테랑으로 활동했던 바이든이 자신의 지도력에 어떻게 새로운 아이디어를 적용시킬 수 있을 것인가? ㆍ오늘날 세계의 요구와 제한에 맞추기 위해 외교 및 국내 정책과 우선순위를 어떻게 수립할 것인가? ㆍ바이든의 아시아 정책에서 주요 변수는 무엇이 될 것인가? ㆍ바이든은 공화당으로부터 의미 있는 협력을 이끌어 낼 수 있을까? ㆍ바이든 대통령은 Covid-19 백신접종뿐만 아니라 2024년 트럼프 재출마 가능성과 트럼프주의에 대한 처방책도 갖고 있는가? 이 글에선 위와 같은 질문들에 대한 답변을 시도한다. 이 글은 곧 예일대학교에서 출판할 예정인 저자의 "평화의 시대에 전쟁의 기술: 미국의 안보전략과 단호한 규제"라는 책에서 제시된 몇 가지 아이디어를 소개하고 있다. As President Joe Biden continues to build a foreign and domestic policy team drawing largely on Obama administration veterans, along with several new faces, several questions are taking shape: ■How and where will this administration differ from its Obama-era roots? Will it be, in effect, Obama 3.0? Or, to use my colleague Tom Wright’s framing, will the approach favor the restorationists on the team, or will it favor the reformers and re-imaginers? ■How can Joe Biden, the oldest U.S. president in history and a nearly half-century veteran of Washington, D.C., interject new ideas into his leadership? ■How can foreign and domestic policies and priorities be established to comport with the demands, and constraints, of today’s world? ■What will be the main parameters of Biden’s Asia policy? ■Will Biden be able to develop any meaningful cooperation with Republicans? ■Will Biden be able to inoculate the country not only against Covid-19 but also against the possibility of a Trump reelection campaign in 2024, and Trumpism more generally? This essay attempts to cast some light on these kinds of questions. It draws on several ideas from my forthcoming Yale University Press book, The Art of War in an Age of Peace: U.S. Grand Strategy and Resolute Restraint.

한국인의 영어 능력 평가에 관하여

F A O' Hanlon 한국교육과정평가원 2002 교육광장 Vol.12 No.-

한국인의 영어 능력 평가에 관하여(2)

F A O' Hanlon 한국교육과정평가원 2002 교육광장 Vol.13 No.-