A Study on Measures to Conflict Resolution in Case of Stabilization Operations in North Korea

Seung Hak Na(나승학),Cheol Ho Yang(양철호) 위기관리 이론과 실천 2017 Crisisonomy Vol.13 No.6

본 연구는 현대전에서 그 중요성이 부각되고 있는 안정화작전 수행과업 중 연구가 미흡한 갈등해소 방안을 제시하고자 한다. 이를 위해 마치·사이몬(March & Simon)이 주장한 집단 갈등모형 요인인 공동의사결정의 필요성, 목표의 상이 또는 차별화, 인지의 상이 요인들을 시공간적으로 다양한 안정화작전 사례에 적용하여 집단 갈등모형 요인들의 적합성을 검증하였다. 적합성 검증결과로 공동의 사결정의 필요성, 목표의 상이 또는 차별화 요인은 적용 가능 및 적합하였지만, 인지의 상이 요인의 경우에는 국가단위에서의 적용이 제한되어 가치관 형성 요인을 추가하였다. 북한지역에서 안정화작 전시 갈등해소 방안은 공동의사결정으로 군사통합 시행, 통일한국의 국방정책과 군사전략을 설정, 가치관 형성으로 정체성 확립하는 것이다. 본 연구를 통해서 갈등해소 방안에 대한 연구 및 발전의 필요성을 인식할 수 있을 것이다. This study aims to suggest solutions for resolving conflicts in the midst of stabilization operation, which emerges as critical in modern war but has been insufficiently researched. For this purpose, various examples were applied to the factors suggested by the March and Simon’s collective conflict model, such as the need for shared decision making, goal differentiation and different cognitive factors, through which the adequacy of the factors of the collective conflict model were verified. The measures to conflict resolution in case of stabilization operations in North Korea suggested in this study include military integration based on shared decision making, promotion under the unified goal, shared common value and social norm among the society’s members, and establishment of values and identity for achieving social integration. The study helps recognize the need for research and development on conflict resolution.

러일전쟁 시기 일본의 독도 지리적 인식 고찰-군사 전략적 측면으로-

나승학 ( Seung-hak Na ) 대한정치학회 2021 大韓政治學會報 Vol.29 No.3

일본의 독도 고유 영토설을 주장하는『은주시청합기』, 『원록각서』 등의 사료를 통해서 일본의 독도 지리적 인식을 고찰하고, 러일전쟁 시기에 일본은 독도를 영유화하려고 했던 이유를 분석하였다. 연구 결과로는 첫째, 조선시대 이후 울릉도 주민 쇄환 정책으로 일본이 불법 도해하면서 일본인은 울릉도에 인식을 갖기 시작하였다. 그러나 독도에 대한 인식은 없었다. 1696년 울릉도 도해 중단으로 두 섬에 대한 지형 정보와 영토 경계 인식 부족으로 울릉도에 대한 명칭을 다케시마, 마쓰시마라는 이름으로 혼용하여 사용하였다. 둘째, 일본은 러일전쟁을 통하여 독도의 군사 전략적 가치를 인식하였다. 즉, 해상 교통로이고, 해상기지 건설이 가능한 지역으로 인식하였고, 해전에 대비하여 동해안, 울릉도, 독도에 망루, 통신선을 설치하였다. 일본은 러일전쟁 중 대마도 해전을 통해 독도에 대한 지정학적 및 군사 전략적 가치가 입증되어, 독도를 불법 편입 및 영유화하려고 하였다. 본 연구는 현재 미중 패권 경쟁이 심한 상황에서 군사 전략적 측면에서 다루었다는데 매우 중요한 의미가 있을 것으로 기대한다. The Study examined Japan’s geographical perception of Dokdo through historical documents such as Onshu Shicho Goki and Wonrokgakseo ,which claim Japan’s unique territorial theory of Dokdo, and analyzed the reasons why Japan tried to territorialize Dokdo during the Russo-Japanese War. The results of this study are as follows: First, after the Joseon Dynasty, Japanese people began to have an awareness of Ulleungdo as Japan illegally traveled to Ulleungdo due to the repatriation policy of Ulleungdo residents. However, there was no awareness of Dokdo. In 1696, due to the suspension of the Ulleungdo Island, the name of Ulleungdo was mixed with Takeshima and Matsushima for lack of geographical information and territorial boundary recognition for the two islands Second, Japan recognized the military and strategic value of Dokdo through the Russo- Japanese War. In other words, it was recognized as a maritime traffic route and an area where sea base construction was possible, and watchtowers and communication lines were installed on the east coast, Ulleungdo, and Dokdo in preparation for naval battles. Japan tried to illegally transfer and perpetuate Dokdo by proving the geopolitical and military strategic value of Dokdo through the Battle of Tsushima during the Russo-Japanese War. This study is expected to be very important in that it deals with the military strategic aspect in the situation where the US-China hegemony is currently in severe competition.

한중 접경지역의 경계 형성과 상인의 활동: 조선의 만상과 중국의 진상을 중심으로

나승학 ( Na Seung-hak ) 한국접경지역통일학회 2017 접경지역통일연구 Vol.1 No.1

본 논문은 중국의 민간 자유 상인으로서 최대의 상인 집단인 진상(晉商)과 조선의 의주 만상(灣商)을 중심으로 접경지역에서의 역사적 의미에 대한 史的 연구다. 중국과 조선의 두 집단 상인들은 접경지대에서 국경의 경계를 넘어 교역활동을 하였다. 명나라의 진상은 상인으로서 조정에 경제적인 지원과 접경지역에 주둔하는 군사들에게 군수물자를 조달하였다. 그러나 조선의 만상은 상인으로서의 역할만 하였다. 역사적 교훈에서 보면 각 시대의 사회적 맥락에 따라 국경을 바라보는 시선은 상반되어 왔지만 접경지대의 국경은 국제 무역의 활성화와 같이 단순히 물리적 국경에 머물지 않고 기능적으로 확장되는 차원으로 발전하는 것이 바람직하다. This paper is about historical significance on the border area, centering on Jin Shang, the greatest merchant group as China`s free civilian trader, and Mansang in Joseon Dynasty`s Uiju. The period of the research is the Ming·Qing and Joseon Dynasty, when Jin Shang and Mansang were active. And the main topic is the activities of two merchant groups, especially focusing on international trade which were cross the boundary of region and people, and how they formed boundary and worked as a merchant. As the results of the study, both merchant groups in China and Joseon traded beyond the boundary on the border area. Ming`s Jin Shang provided financial aids to Royal court, and procured military supplies to the military of border area as a merchant, while Joseon`s Mansang acted only as a merchant. Looking back upon history, the view of the borders has been contradictory according to the social contexts of each era. However, the boundary of border area is not the farthest point from the center of Korea, but should be a starting point for the development of international trade and procuring provisions and military materials to the military camp near the border area. The implication of the research is that border area should be the extended ideational boundary, not physical boundary.

임진왜란 전후 조선 수군의 군사체제 비교 연구

나승학(Na Seung-hak) 국방부 군사편찬연구소 2015 군사 Vol.- No.97

The organization and military training of the Navy before and after the Imjin Japanese Invasion have been compared and studied in order to take a look at the military systems of Joseon in the same period of that dynasty. The Navy of Joseon dynasty prior to the Imjin Japanese Invasion was organized by limiting the jurisdiction in the coastal regions, an action that was done in the 7th year of King Tae-jo. This was necessary, since it became harder for the coastal people to take the burden of military service upon themselves locally. It was subsequently changed into a nationwide general military category in order not to impose a harsh burden on locals. In addition to that, the number of the navy troops were increased, and military shipbuilding and improvement had been developed during the era of King Jeong-jong. However, the contradiction and weaknesses of the effectiveness of the Navy in Joseon Period had been displayed. Existing tactics were far inferior to match a proper response to the Japanese forces, so the Joseon military forces had to go through a process of overhauling maintenance and revision of the Joseon"s military strategies and tactics. The overall findings in this study indicate that the military system of the Joseon Navy went through significant changes. In particular, the strategy was highly organized with a change in organizational formation, and there was specialization in military training aspects. A lesson can be learned by comparing the military system of the Joseon Navy before and after the Imjin Japanese Invasion, namely, that the Korean society makes incessant changes, and strategic tactics have to be newly established in order to meet the changes of times and in society. That is to say, it is essential to correctly understand the demand of the environmental changes, in order to establish and apply strategic tactics for appropriate organizational formulation and military training.

한미동맹의 지속요인에 관한 연구

나승학(Na, Seung Hak) 동아시아국제정치학회 2016 국제정치연구 Vol.19 No.2

Formed in 1953, the Alliance between Korea and the U.S. has continued until today through the post-cold war periods. It has continued going through changes in conflicts and has contributed to maintain peace in the Korean peninsula and in Northeast Asia. However, since September 11, 2011, the United States has adopted a military transformation strategy to address a new security environment. Its security directions have become a new variable to the alliance. The Korean government showed a different opinion on the U.S." security policies considering threats to North Korea, implications on domestic politics, identity and security culture. This is why the author finds it incumbent to study and investigate factors that have continued in the midst of changes in the alliance between the two countries during the cold war and the post-cold war periods and what have made different and similar factors persist by periods. The results of this study suggest that as for differentiation among continued factors, the North Korean nuclear issue was a factor that made the continuity of the alliance during the cold war. Factors similar both in the cold war and the post-cold war are domestic political influences, reliability preservation, hegemonic leadership, and institutionalization. Such continued factors have made the alliance continue relatively without troubles during the cold war, whereas during the post-cold war, there have been a series of conflicts in accordance with the changes in paradigms, which made the alliance policies selectively accept policies under the securities environments of the two countries. It is expected that the alliance between Korea and the U.S. will continue considering environments surrounding securities and the two countries will selectively accept, adjust, and develop the alliance.