중일전쟁 시기 國統區 대외무역과국민정부의 무역정책

박정현 역사교육학회 2011 역사교육논집 Vol.46 No.-

The industries in the Nationalist Zone was reduced to 10% before the Sino-Japanese war, thereby losing the basis to be self-sufficient in industrial goods. Thus, the Nationalist Zone had to depend on imported goods to make up for deficient supplies which led to the expansion of imports. However, the export had been declining in consideration of the exchange rate. After the war, America was forming an ever-greater part of the import in the Nationalist Zone, and South East Asia were beginning to represent an increasing share of the economy. But the trade with Japan was almost brought to a halt. The foreign trade structure in the Nationalist Zone had kept the wartime trade basis of importing war supplies and daily necessity and exporting agricultural and marine products. Owing to the war, it was divided into the Nationalist Zone and Japanese Occupied Territory, resulting in the change of the center of foreign trade. Shanghai which suffered a direct loss of the war was replaced by Guangzhou as the center of foreign trade. However, as Guangzhou was occupied by Japan, Shanghai recovered the role as the center foreign trade. After the Pacific War, Shanghai fell into the hands of Japanese armies and Japanese armies imposed a blockage of the coastal provinces in China, the Nationalist Zone had lost a major foreign trade route. Kunming, the only channel of foreign trade in the Nationalist Zone, served as the center of foreign trade albeit restricted,and foreign trade centers were diversified and small-scale trade was carried out there. After the Sino-Japanese war, the Nationalist Government of China suffered a tight financial situation and the foreign trade routes were restricted from a blockage of Japanese armies. The Nationalist Government of China needed desperately the expansion of foreign trade to address the tight financial situation and to secure foreign trade routes. Accordingly, the trade policy of the Nationalist Government of China was aimed at, on the one hand, stabilizing the economy of the Nationalist zone by acquiring necessary supplies and foreign exchange to continue the war against Japan and on the other hand lowering Japan's capability of conducting the war by limiting the export to Japan. The Japanese army restricted the movement of supplies to isolate the Nationalist Government of China and were committed to cutting off smuggling routes. Thus, the Nationalist Government of China made a detour of Japan's blockade or created new trade network consistently,even importing supplies from Japan. In times of the Sino-Japanese war, the controlled trade policy of the Nationalist Government were implemented inevitably to utilize effectively the limited supplies during the war. However, the controlled trade policy of the Nationalist Government was not performed only in the Nationalist zone, not the Japanese occupied area, therefore, only the exporter and importer in the Nationalist zone suffered a losses discriminatorily. In addition, the organization to manage this was not established and thereby was not performed effectively. Furthermore, inflation and the controlled policy resulted in the adverse effect of the decline in the value of the legal tender and excessive concentration of currency which placed a big burden on the Nationalist Government.

논문 : 중일전쟁 시기 국통구(國統區) 대외무역과 국민정부의 무역정책

박정현 ( Jung Hyun Park ) 역사교육학회 2011 역사교육논집 Vol.46 No.-

The industries in the Nationalist Zone was reduced to 10% before the Sino-Japanese war, thereby losing the basis to be self-sufficient in industrial goods. Thus, the Nationalist Zone had to depend on imported goods to make up for deficient supplies which led to the expansion of imports. However, the export had been declining in consideration of the exchange rate. After the war, America was forming an ever-greater part of the import in the Nationalist Zone, and South East Asia were beginning to represent an increasing share of the economy. But the trade with Japan was almost brought to a halt. The foreign trade structure in the Nationalist Zone had kept the wartime trade basis of importing war supplies and daily necessity and exporting agricultural and marine products. Owing to the war, it was divided into the Nationalist Zone and Japanese Occupied Territory, resulting in the change of the center of foreign trade. Shanghai which suffered a direct loss of the war was replaced by Guangzhou as the center of foreign trade. However, as Guangzhou was occupied by Japan, Shanghai recovered the role as the center foreign trade. After the Pacific War, Shanghai fell into the hands of Japanese armies and Japanese armies imposed a blockage of the coastal provinces in China, the Nationalist Zone had lost a major foreign trade route. Kunming, the only channel of foreign trade in the Nationalist Zone, served as the center of foreign trade albeit restricted, and foreign trade centers were diversified and small-scale trade was carried out there. After the Sino-Japanese war, the Nationalist Government of China suffered a tight financial situation and the foreign trade routes were restricted from a blockage of Japanese armies. The Nationalist Government of China needed desperately the expansion of foreign trade to address the tight financial situation and to secure foreign trade routes. Accordingly, the trade policy of the Nationalist Government of China was aimed at, on the one hand, stabilizing the economy of the Nationalist zone by acquiring necessary supplies and foreign exchange to continue the war against Japan and on the other hand lowering Japan`s capability of conducting the war by limiting the export to Japan. The Japanese army restricted the movement of supplies to isolate the Nationalist Government of China and were committed to cutting off smuggling routes. Thus, the Nationalist Government of China made a detour of Japan`s blockade or created new trade network consistently, even importing supplies from Japan. In times of the Sino-Japanese war, the controlled trade policy of the Nationalist Government were implemented inevitably to utilize effectively the limited supplies during the war. However, the controlled trade policy of the Nationalist Government was not performed only in the Nationalist zone, not the Japanese occupied area, therefore, only the exporter and importer in the Nationalist zone suffered a losses discriminatorily. In addition, the organization to manage this was not established and thereby was not performed effectively. Furthermore, inflation and the controlled policy resulted in the adverse effect of the decline in the value of the legal tender and excessive concentration of currency which placed a big burden on the Nationalist Government.

A real driver of US–China trade conflict

김민형 경희대학교 글로벌 통상·금융연구원 2019 International Trade, Politics and Development Vol.3 No.1

According to the conventional wisdom, trade is not a zero-sum game, but a positive-sum game. By allowing countries to focus on producing the goods that they can produce relatively efficiently, free trade is largely beneficial for everyone involved. Then, why are the world’s two largest economies (i.e. the USA and China) currently engaged in a trade war, which is likely to hurt their own economies? What is the driving force for the trade war between the two economic giants? The purpose of this paper is to offer an explanation of the underlying cause of the US–China trade war.In an effort to make sense of the trade war between the USA and China, the paper draws the insights from the two international relations theories – i.e. hegemonic stability theory and power transition theory.As China continues to threaten US hegemony in the world in general and East Asia in particular, the Sino–US competition for hegemony will intensify over time. As a result, the trade war between the two countries may persist longer than many anticipate. Further, even if the trade war between the two superpowers ends soon, a similar type of conflict is likely to occur later as long as the Sino–US hegemonic rivalry continues.The central thesis of this paper is that “US fear” about its declining hegemony and China’s rapid rise as a challenger of US hegemony is driving a US-launched trade war with China. Since the underlying cause of the trade war between the world’s two largest economies is political (i.e. the Sino–US hegemonic rivalry) rather than economic (e.g. US attempts to improve the trade balance with China by imposing tariffs on Chinese goods), the paper contends that the full understanding of the trade war requires close attention to the importance of power competition between the two superpowers.

우크라이나 전쟁 이후 미국 통상정책 변화에 관한 연구

김희중,변재웅 한국무역통상학회 2023 무역통상학회지 Vol.23 No.4

During the Trump administration and the recent Biden administration, the U.S. trade policy has primarily focused on national interests, leading to trade sanctions against China. However, with the outbreak of the war in Ukraine, the US trade policy shifted its focus from sanctions against China to imposing economic and trade sanctions on Russia. The deterioration of U.S. relations with Russia and China has prompted the United States to strengthen ties with its traditional allies, expanding its geopolitical position. In the wake of the war in Ukraine, the United States is adopting a strategy to safeguard core technologies, which are vital for future growth, and implementing trade policies that differentiate between hostile and friendly countries. This strategy is expected to persist in the future, necessitating objective analysis by Korea to align with the evolving US trade policy trends and safeguard its national interests. This paper examines the changes in US trade policy after the Ukraine War. Chapter II analyzes the shifts in US trade policy both before and after the war, focusing on war deterrence through economic sanctions (financial sanctions, export controls on specific goods, and trade sectors), including the cancellation of most favored nation status for Russia, and the impact on sectors such as energy and agriculture. We also explore strategies such as enhancing advanced technology security and bolstering the domestic economy, which involve the enforcement of the CHIPS Act, implementation of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), strengthening cooperation with traditional allies, and promoting IPEF to secure supply chains. Chapter III highlights the differences from the pre-war US trade policy, and in the final chapter, Chapter IV, the policy implications of these changes in US trade policy for Korea are analyzed. The altered US trade policy after the Ukraine War has implications for Korea’s trade environment. Moreover, it significantly affects Korea’s cooperative reconstruction project with Poland in the aftermath of the war in Ukraine.

The US-China Trade War and the Korean Economy’s Risk Mitigating Strategies

Eun-Young Nam,Sok-Tae Kim 한국무역연구원 2020 무역연구 Vol.16 No.1

Purpose- The objective of this study is to examine the risk effects of the US-China Trade war and to derive risk mitigating strategies for the Korean economy. Design/methodology/approach- This study examines and compares the US-Japan and US-China trade war to find out the real aspects of the US-China trade war. Then it attempts to assess the risks of the Korean economy which is affected by the trade war. Considering the complexity of the trade war, numerous research materials in various fields such as geopolitics, strategic trade issues, global value chains and internalization theory are examined and discussed for the study to derive effective risk mitigating strategies. Findings- The Korean economy, which heavily relies on both markets, should take an effective strategy not only to minimize the adverse effects but also to take advantage of the trade war. In the short term, Korea should diversify the markets which are less affected by the trade war. Also, it should take a active stance for joining the RCEP and CPTTP. In the long term, Korea should reinforce its value chain by enhancing the low ratio of technology export-import ratio. In order to mitigate the increasing protectionism, more FDI’s in the United States and other strategic regions are recommended. Research implications or Originality- This research offers the risk mitigating strategies for the Korean economy which is at stake in the middle of two largest trade partners. This study attempts to offer a comprehensive short term and long term risk mitigating strategies for the Korean economy in the risk management framework.

The Influence of Sino-US Trade War on China-ROK Relations

Wu Jinfeng(Jinfeng Wu) 아시아사회과학학회 2023 Jornal of Asia Social Science Vol.10 No.1

For China and the United States, South Korea is an important trading partner, and it is also highly concerned about the Sino-US trade war. Because South Korea's economy relies heavily on the external environment, it has also been impacted to a certain extent by the Sino-US trade war. Although some studies believe that the Sino-US trade war has brought new development opportunities to South Korea, from a practical perspective, South Korea's gross domestic product, export trade, and stock market have been greatly impacted, especially by the intensified competition among big countries and the reshaping of global value chains brought about by the Sino-US trade war. With the intensification of the Sino-US trade war, both China and South Korea should think about how to reduce the influence of Sino-US relations and maintain the stability of Sino-Korean relations. Therefore, South Korea needs to actively adjust its economic policies, speed up the upgrading of its economic cooperation with China, take the initiative to seize the American market, and play a certain role in promoting regional multilateral economic cooperation and economic and trade diversification, especially avoiding taking sides between China and the United States. China, on the other hand, should strengthen its economic and political cooperation with South Korea so as to alleviate other countries' worries about Sino-US competition and the rise of China and thus realise the stable, healthy, and sustainable development of China-South Korea relations.

Global Productivity and Market Structure Implications of the US-China Trade War: A CGE Modeling Approach

Jaewon Jung 한국무역학회 2020 Journal of Korea trade Vol.24 No.8

Purpose – As the US-China trade war intensifies and lasts long time, there is growing concern about its potential effects on the global economy. In particular, for the countries like Korea that have a large economic dependence on the economy of the two countries, the US-China trade war may have a great repercussion in many ways. The aim of this paper is to investigate the global productivity and market structure implications of the US-China trade war for Korea, as well as for other surrounding countries and regions. Design/methodology – In this paper, we develop a full multi-country/region multi-sector computable general equilibrium (CGE) model of global trade incorporating heterogeneous workers and firms in individual skill levels and used technologies. We then calibrate the model using a global Social Accounting Matrix (SAM) dataset extracted from the recently released GTAP 10 Database, and assess the potential effects of the US-China trade war on the aggregate real productivity and the market structure for Korea, as well as for other surrounding countries and regions. Findings – We show that the US-China trade war may largely affect the aggregate productivity in each sector in each country/region, as well as the global market structure through entry and exit of firms, which results finally in considerable changes in the industrial comparative advantage of each country/region. Though the effects are diverse sector by sector, the results show that Korea may also be affected significantly: concerning the real productivity implications, it is shown that the machinery industry may be affected the most negatively; on the other hand, it is shown that the number of exporting firms may decrease the most in the other transports industry. Originality/value – As the US-China trade war intensifies, many studies have tried to estimate the possible implications, and for this usually the CGE models have largely been used as the standard tool for evaluating the impacts of changes in trade policies. Standard CGE models, however, cannot be used to assess the global productivity and market structure implications due to the symmetric and simplified base assumptions. This paper is the first to analyze and quantify the possible impacts of the US-China trade war on the aggregate productivity and global market structure using a CGE model incorporating endogenous skill-technology assignment of heterogeneous workers and firms.

미중 무역전쟁 연구 : 트럼프정부의 보호무역정책 요인분석을 중심으로

김관옥(Kim, Kwanok) 동아시아국제정치학회 2018 국제정치연구 Vol.21 No.1

As China is strongly resisting the Trump administration`s unprecedented retaliatory trade policy toward China, the trade conflict between the two countries goes beyond the level of trade conflict and deteriorated into a `trade war`. Why has the Trump administration initiated a trade war by imposing a large tariff on China? Why has China strongly resisted against the pressure and demand of the U.S., not like Japan did in the past? To what extent does the trade war between the U.S. and China develop and ultimately turn into a protectionist international trade order? The study results showed that the US-China trade disputes resulted from both the United States` protective trade policy and China`s strong retaliatory measures toward each other were more than just aimed at creating a favorable trade balance. It was confirmed that the trade war between the U.S. and China showed signs of economic power competition, technological competition and production competition as part of the hegemony competition. In other words, the trade war between the U.S. and China is a competition to secure superior economic power, which is the condition of the hegemonic power, as the hegemonic stabilization approach argued. The declining U.S. has pushed for a mercantilist trade policy to protect its industries and increase exports in order to regain its dominant economic power, on the other side, China has to secure control over capital, market and technology in order to emerge as a hegemonic power.

디지털 시대 전쟁과 무역보험 -여러 불가항력 사유들을 포함하여-

성승제 한국기업법학회 2022 企業法硏究 Vol.36 No.4

In the field of marine insurance, most of the terms and conditions used in England have been adopted. Internationally adopted laws and regulations relating to marine insurance often have a limited interpretation of the scope of compensation in case of war. This is because of problems relating to the calculation of the insurer's profit or risk related to the scope of the UK shipowner's liability limitations. On the other hand, the Trade Insurance Act does not require a limited interpretation of the risk of war. Depending on the contract concluded, a war risk security contract is possible. The Trade Insurance Act requires a public role to protect trade from various risks for national sustainability. On the other hand, the scope of today's war is expanding in various ways. In addition to traditional on-the-ground armed conflict or combat, there is armed surprise, ambush, and intimidation. In addition, as a hybrid war, computers, internet technology, and artificial satellites are utilized, and public psychology manipulation due to propaganda warfare is also included. In the ongoing Ukrainian-Russian war, different views and various opinions are being expressed about war responsibility. If the public now thinks that a particular party is responsible, it is unknown what the consequences will be if the conclusion is reversed. In the case of an insured contract under the Trade Insurance Act and a special contract for war security pursuant to it, it is also necessary to consider what conclusions will be made for today's wars with a wide spectrum. On the other hand, if it is requested to put more weight on the role of the Trade Insurance Act, it may be considered to order an expanded role at the national economic level. In terms of reducing market failure as much as possible under the current capitalist system, it is not desirable if there is only one large pension organization such as the National Pension Service. In this respect, there is a demand for public institutions to review ways to expand their operations in a mutually cooperative manner. 해상보험 분야에서 대부분 영국에서 사용되는 약관들이 채택되고 있다. 해상보험에 관련된 국제적으로 채택되는 법규들은 전쟁의 경우 보상의 범위를 제한적으로 해석하는 경우가 많다. 영국의 선주책임제한의 범위와 관련된 보험자의 이익 또는 위험산정과 관련된 문제 때문이다. 반면 무역보험법은 전쟁의 위험을 제한적으로 해석할 필요가 없다. 체결된 계약에 따라 전쟁위험 담보부 계약이 가능하다. 무역보험법은 국가의 지속가능성을 위하여 무역을 여러 위험으로부터 보호하여야 하는 공적 역할을 필요로 한다. 한편 오늘날 전쟁의 범위가 다양하게 확장하고 있다. 전통적인 현장에서의 무력충돌이나 전투 외에도, 무력적 기습, 엄습, 협박 등이 있다. 그 밖에도 하이브리드 전쟁으로서, 컴퓨터나 인터넷 기술이나 인공위성도 활용되고, 선전선동전으로 인한 대중심리조작까지 포섭되고 있다. 현재 진행중인 우크라이나-러시아 전쟁에서 전쟁책임에 대하여 서로 다른 시각과 다양한 의견이 표출되고 있다. 만일 현재 대중들이 특정한 당사자가 책임을 부담하는 것으로 생각했는데, 반대로 결론이 날 경우에는 어떤 결과가 초래될 것인지 알 수 없는 상황이다. 무역보험법 및 그에 따른 전쟁담보부 특약이 체결된 부보계약의 경우에는, 다양한 스펙트럼을 가진 오늘날의 전쟁의 형태들에 대하여 어떠한 결론으로 이행할 것인지도 고려할 필요가 있다. 한편 무역보험법의 역할에 더 무게를 싣도록 요청한다면, 국민경제적 차원에서 확장된 역할을 주문할 것을 검토할 수도 있다. 자본주의 현 시스템 아래에서는 가급적 시장실패를 감소시켜야 한다는 측면에서, 국민연금과 같은 거대 연금단체 한 개만 존재한다면 바람직하지 않다. 그러한 점에서 공공기관들이 상호협조적 차원에서 운영을 확장하는 방안도 검토할 수요가 있다.

선조 말~광해군대 대명무역의 전개

이재경 진단학회 2022 진단학보 Vol.- No.139

This article aimed to track the development of Joseon-Ming trade from the end of Imjin War (1592-1598) to the final years of King Gwanghaegun (r.1608-1623). Main focus of the research is to reveal the structure and scale of the trade between the two countries. In the 16th century, Joseon was an important channel through which Japanese silver was exported to Ming China. However, as the inflow of Japanese silver was stopped due to the Imjin War, Joseon had to find other goods to export to the Ming market. Fortunately, the demand for ginseng drastically increased in China. Simultaneously, pasam, the newly introduced ginseng processing method, facilitated Joseon’s mass export of ginseng. Therefore, during the late years of King Seonjo’s reign, Joseon exported ginseng and fur through tributary missions, the Junggang market, and smuggling. The size of tributary trade gradually recovered the level before the Imjin War. Also, it is estimated that goods equivalent of tens of thousands taels in silver were traded annually through the Junggang market, another thousands through smuggling. During the reign of King Gwanghaegun, Joseon-Ming trade was solely conducted by tributary missions. On the other hand, the size of trade increased significantly. With the restoration of trade with Japan in 1609, Joseon began exporting of Japanese silver and Korean ginseng to the Ming dynasty, and imported silk in return. In the late Gwanghagun period, Joseon’s trade with Ming was worth more than 100,000 taels in silver, which seems to have surpassed the scale of Korean-Sino trade before 1592. One of the main factors which facilitated the expansion of Joseon’s trade with the Ming dynasty was that the inflow of Japanese silver resumed as Joseon restored its diplomatic relation with Japan in 1609. Also, the abolition of the Junggang market in 1613 stimulated the growth of Joseon’s tributary trade. Furthermore, the attitude of King Gwanghaegun, who actively spent large expenses in his diplomacy with the Ming China, carried out official trade for the construction of royal palaces, and generally looked other way on the wrongdoings of tributary missions, was another background of the rapid increase of Korean-Sino trade at the time. With the revitalization of Joseon’s tributary trade, the interpreters, envoys, and other personnel in the tributary missions actively pursued economic gains through trade. In the process, problems such as delays in official diplomatic schedule, smuggling of illegal goods, and misapporiation of government funds went rampant. Moreover, Ming officials preyed on Joseon’s tributary missions. Side effects of tributary trade had existed long before the Imjin war. However, as the scale of trade increased and the regulations loosened, the degree of wrongdoings became more serious than ever.