일본의 군사전략과 우리의 대응

권태환 ( Kwon Tae Whan ) 한국군사학회 2020 군사논단 Vol.100 No.1

In recent years, Japan has continued its normal state by strengthening the US-Japan alliance based on the Indo-Pacific strategy, while promoting new military strategies such as concession of collective self-defense rights, and the distribution of marine Corps and aircraft carrier forces. These activities accelerate the arms race in the region, coupled with increased military threats such as China's 「one belt-one road」 for pursuit of regional hegemony and sea-going North Korean nuclear and missile launches. Japan is actively pursuing normal nations based on the USJapan alliance, with [active pacifism] among the rapidly changing domestic and international security environments, such as the dissolution of the Cold War. Japan, which signed the US-Japan Security Treaty in 1960, and has pursued national security that relies on the US-Japan alliance, adopts the 1976 National Defense Prom Guideline, and the 1978 US-Japan guidelines. Afterwards, the defense plan outline was revised five times in 2018, and the USJapan guideline was revised two times in 2015, and 2013 announced a national security strategy and equipped with a national security system. From this point of view, Japan's military strategy has been developed to reflect various changes, including changes in the situation, while maintaining consistency based on a stable USJapan alliance. To analyze Japan's military strategy 1) At the national security strategy level, defense plan outline, US-Japan guideline, security legislation, Japan-India-Pacific strategy. 2) Performance Deployment of Self-Defense Forces Defense Cost Management Analysis of the defense industry by land and air power evaluation. Japan's military strategy was: 1) US-Japan unification strategy; 2) future-first military strategy; 3) self-contained military strategy capable of independent remote power projection; 4) alliance network military strategy; 5) multidimensional integrated military strategy. The future prospects and challenges are: 1) changes in USChina relations, 2) accelerated arms competition in Northeast Asia, 3) changes in security awareness among Japanese people, and 4) the possibility of Korean Peninsula unification. In conclusion, if we present our response from the perspective of Korea-Japan and Korea-US-Japan security cooperation, 1) actively promote Korea-US security cooperation at the ROK-US alliance level. 2) Promote effective Korea-Japan and Korea-USJapan security cooperation in order to suppress and cope with the Korean peninsula. 3) Promote cooperation, including mutual visits by the defense ministers. 4) Expanding capacity for allied operations with the United Nations and other allies. 5) Korea-Japan national consensus spreads Korean-Japanese relations are not just created, but to be created. War guarantees victory only to those who prepare. It is hoped that the analysis of Japan's military strategy will help not only the perspective of Korea and Japan but also Korea-US-Japan security cooperation actually improve their relations in order to turn the crisis into an opportunity amid rising military tensions and uncertainties in Northeast Asia.

일본의 차세대 전투기 획득 및 개발과정을 통해 보는 미일동맹

조비연 육군사관학교 화랑대연구소 2018 한국군사학논집 Vol.74 No.3

While a “new era,” “breaking new ground,” and “deepening” have characterized the US-Japan defense alliance since the return of the Abe Cabinet in 2012, this article begins from an empirical curiosity on the extent of ‘deepening’ in their relations. Building upon the rationale that the dynamics of cooperation in high-technology sector may serve as the “microcosm of US-Japan relations” – an empirical testbed for examining the changes and continuity in their relations – this article proposes a comparative analysis on Japan’s two fighter-jets production agreements with the US – the 1980s FS-X program for F-2/F-16 production and the recent F-35A Joint Strike Fighter. Juxtaposing the recent F-35 deal to the preceding FS-X program in the 1980s, what are the empirical realities of the changes in the US-Japan alliance relations? How does the F-35 deal differ from the preceding US-Japan fighter-jet program, FS-X(F-2/F-16)? Is a ‘new era’ of cooperation imminent in the fighter-jets sector? The main findings are that the trajectory in the levels of cooperation between the US and Japan in the fighter-jets venture adheres to the general trend towards a ‘new era’ of alliance deepening under the Abe Cabinet. The shared China threat and overall changes in the strategic environment have come to construct relatively more amicable setting for the US-Japan cooperation in the sector. At the same time, this article also finds that it is important to place such deepening in a continuum of US-Japan cooperation since the 1980s FS-X program, rather than an abrupt transformation during the Abe Cabinet. Indeed, the gradual accumulation and institutionalization of dialogues and cooperation have been critical, reinforcing as complementary push for Japan’s alliance-premised fighter-jets acquisition during the Abe Cabinet. Lastly, the article takes note of the US’s continued restrictions in transferring the state-of-the-art-technologies as well as the Japan’s continued kokusanka drive and variety of preferences at home, which would work to limit the full-fledged emergence of US-Japan Inc. despite progress in the US-Japan cooperation in the fighter-jets venture.

최근 일본의 안보군사 정책 변화와 한반도 안보

권태환 ( Kwon Tae Whan ) 한국군사학회 2019 군사논단 Vol.100 No.-

Recently, the US-China conflict has spread to all defenses, including trade, high technology, and diplomacy, and the security situation on the Korean peninsula is also serious. As North Korea’s denuclearization negotiations stalemate, North Korea’s continued military provocations squeeze inter-Korean relations, and the Korea government’s strategic position is narrowing. Moreover, the US-Korea relations are also facing difficulties due to sharp issues such as the transition of ROK-US OPCON and the sharing of SMA. In order to overcome these challenges and timely respond to changes in US-China security strategy, it is urgent to establish new security policies and strategies, and in particular, a plan for strengthening Korea-US-Japan security cooperation, which is likely to be cracked by the GSOMIA destruction, is required. Meanwhile, Japan government revised the US-Japan guidelines in April 2015 and entered into force in March 2016. In 2018, the National defense plan was revised and new aircraft carrier with the F-35B was introduced to prepare for future warfare, including cyber and space warfare. In particular, Japan is strengthening the joint US-Japan joint operation in preparation for the existence crisis, major impacts, and armed attacks by applying the regional emergency security legislation. Based on the changes of Japan security strategy, new plan for security cooperation between Korea-US-Japan must be derived. In conclusion, for security cooperation between Korea-Japan and Korea-US-Japan, first, it is necessary to normalize the relationship between Korea and Japan early and expand strategic dialogue channels. Second, Korea-US and Korea-US security cooperation tasks for the similar situation on the Korean Peninsula should be identified, and a practical security cooperation system should be established based on this. This will allow us to set common goals and to coordinate our mutual roles, missions and abilities. Third, efforts should be made to prepare for a substantial readiness to curb war on the Korean Peninsula, while expanding the capabilities of the United Nations and its allies based on US-Japan security cooperation. Based on this, multinational cooperation in non-traditional security areas such as coping with large-scale natural disasters and accidents, coping with pirates, and counterterrorism support will be possible. The relationship between Korea and Japan is not created, but making. And no policy or strategy can be implemented without national consensus. To this end, more practical discussions and concrete alternatives should be suggested on the realistic situation that people are concerned about, such as the Korean Peninsula crisis. In the midst of rising military tensions and uncertainties over the Korean Peninsula, there is an urgent need to improve practical relations between the two countries in order to turn the crisis into an opportunity.

The Change in US Security Role Presriptions towards Its Northeast Asian Allies at the Onset of the Post-Cold War Era

( Hee-yong Yang ) 국방대학교 안보문제연구소 2015 The Korean Journal of Security Affairs Vol.20 No.2

This paper reviews the post-Cold War transformation of the US bilateral alliances in Northeast Asia in the perspective of a national role conception model. By applying role theory to bilateral alliance, this paper analyzes the US redefinition of its bilateral security alliances-the ROK-US alliance and the US-Japan alliance-at the onset of the post-Cold War era. Scrutiny of the US security documents reveals that the US role prescriptions vis-a-vis its alliance partners in Northeast Asia were constituted as a result of close interplay between the external security environment and domestic conditions. Reduced threat perception, budget constraints, and increased demand for a peace dividend forced the US policy makers to undertake a major overhaul of defense policy and posture in Northeast Asia with emphasis on troop reduction and redefinition of security parameters. The US wanted South Korea to play a leading role in defense; the US expected Japan as an equal security partner to step up its security role, centering on the US-Japan alliance. As a result, the US alliance partnership in Northeast Asia has been gradually transformed from "an instrument of balance of power or restraint" into "a power-management (ROK-US) or power-sharing (US-Japan) instrument."

The Change in US Security Role Prescriptions towards Its Northeast Asian Allies at the Onset of the Post-Cold War Era

양희용 국방대학교 국가안전보장문제연구소 2015 The Korean Journal of Security Affairs Vol.20 No.2

This paper reviews the post-Cold War transformation of the US bilateral alliances in Northeast Asia in the perspective of a national role conception model. By applying role theory to bilateral alliance, this paper analyzes the US redefinition of its bilateral security alliances—the ROK-US alliance and the US-Japan alliance—at the onset of the post-Cold War era. Scrutiny of the US security documents reveals that the US role prescriptions vis-à-vis its alliance partners in Northeast Asia were constituted as a result of close interplay between the external security environment and domestic conditions. Reduced threat perception, budget constraints, and increased demand for a peace dividend forced the US policy makers to undertake a major overhaul of defense policy and posture in Northeast Asia with emphasis on troop reduction and redefinition of security parameters. The US wanted South Korea to play a leading role in defense; the US expected Japan as an equal security partner to step up its security role, centering on the US-Japan alliance. As a result, the US alliance partnership in Northeast Asia has been gradually transformed from “an instrument of balance of power or restraint” into “a power-management (ROK-US) or power-sharing (US-Japan) instrument.”

동아시아 영토분쟁과 한미동맹: 독도 영유권 수호를 위한 의미

배규성 한국보훈학회 2017 한국보훈논총 Vol.16 No.3

East Asia is the biggest geopolitical challenge of the 21st century. With China’s rise as superpower, strategic interests of the United States are concentrated in this region. The United States shifted its policy to rebalance in the Asia-Pacific Region or Pivot to Asia in order to constrain China’s rise and maintain its influence in the region. And the ROK-US and the US-Japan alliances are the central axes of the US policy in this region. However, Japan’s territorial disputes with neighboring countries, such as China, Russia and Korea are creating new tensions in the region. In particular, the territorial conflict over Dokdo between Korea and Japan has created a crack in the relationship between Korea and Japan, the key allies of the United States in East Asia, which have become a major obstacle to US policy. This paper will examine the positions and policies of the alliances of US with respect to Japan’s territorial disputes with neighboring countries in East Asia and examine their meanings for the defense of Korea’s sovereignty over Dokdo. In conclusion, the issues of Senkaku and Kuril Islands for the sovereignty for which Japan is struggling with China and Russia and the Dokdo conflict between Korea and Japan are completely different from the viewpoint of the US alliance. The former disputes are conflicts between the a US’s key Ally and US’s potential competitors, the latter is a conflict between Korea and Japan, key allies of the US in East Asia in response to China’s rising. Therefore, the US’s policy goals for the Korea-Japan relationship are to encourage these two allies to resolve the issue peacefully through negotiation, or at least to keep the two from engaging in actions that could aggravate the dispute without intervening arbitrarily, as traditionally. Anyway, the role of the United States in the ROK-US alliance is the key in resolving the Dokdo issue. Therefore, it is necessary to make Japan to recognize that the resolution of the Dokdo issue(recognition of Korea’s sovereignty over Dokdo) is the starting point of a future-oriented relationship between Korea and Japan for peace and prosperity in East Asia and give the United States a role and responsibility to strive for the development of this relationship. 동아시아는 21세기의 가장 큰 지정학적 도전의 장이다. 중국의 부상에 따라 미국의 전략적 이해관계가 이 지역에 집중되고, 미국은 이 지역에서 중국의 부상을 견제하고 미국의 영향력을 유지하기 위해서 아시아태평양 지역 재균형(Rebalance to the Asia-Pacific Region) 또는 아시아로의 회귀(Pivot to Asia)로 정책을 전환했다. 그리고 한미동맹과 미일동맹이 그 중심축이다. 그러나 일본과 주변국가들과의 영토분쟁은 이 지역에 새로운 긴장관계를 야기하고 있다. 특히 한국과 일본 간의 독도를 둘러싼 영토적 갈등은 미국의 동아시아 핵심 동맹국들인 한국과 일본의 관계에 균열을 야기해 미국의 정책에 커다란 걸림돌이 되고 있다. 본 논문은 일본이 동아시아 지역에서 주변국들과 벌이는 영토 분쟁과 이들 분쟁에 대한 미국의 입장, 정책, 동맹 관계를 살펴보고, 그것이 한국의 독도 영유권 수호를 위해 어떤 함의가 있는 지를 살펴볼 것이다. 결론적으로 미국의 동맹 입장에서 중국과 일본이 다투고 있는 센카쿠 문제, 러시아와 일본이 다투고 있는 쿠릴열도 문제와 한국과 일본이 갈등 중인 독도문제는 전혀 차원이 다른 문제들이다. 센카쿠 분쟁과 쿠릴열도 분쟁은 미국의 동맹국인 일본과 미국이 견제해야 하는 잠재적 경쟁국 간의 분쟁인 반면, 독도문제는 중국에 대응한 동아시아 핵심 동맹국간의 갈등인 것이다. 따라서 한일관계에 대한 미국의 정책적 목표는 전통적으로 해온 방식대로 중재도 표면적 개입도 하지 않으면서 한일 양국이 당사자 교섭을 통해 평화적으로 이 문제를 해결하거나 적어도 분쟁을 악화시킬 수 있는 행동을 억제시키는 것이다. 어쨌든 독도 문제의 해결에는 미국의 역할, 즉 한미동맹이 핵심 열쇠이다. 따라서 일본에게는 독도문제의 해결(한국의 독도 영유권 인정)이 동아시아의 평화와 번영을 위한 한일 간 미래지향적 관계의 출발점임을 인식시키고, 미국에게는 이런 한일관계의 발전을 위해 노력할 역할과 책임을 부여할 필요가 있다.

아베 정권의 아시아 안보전략과 한미일 동맹구도의 변화 전망

박병철,주인석 한국통일전략학회 2016 통일전략 Vol.16 No.1

본 연구의 목적은 아베 정권의 아시아 안보전략에 따른 한·미·일 동맹구도가 어떠한 방향으로 변화할 것인지를 전망하고자 한다. 2012년 말 아베 정권이 등장한 이후 일본의 안보전략은 ‘적극적 평화주의’를 바탕으로 보통국가화를 지향하고 있다. 아베 정권의 보통국가화는 우경화의 산물로 집단적 자위권을 확보하여 정상적인 군대의 운용을 도모하는 것이다. 이러한 움직임에는 미국의 아시아 안보전략의 변화가 일정한 역할을 하고 있다. 미국은 부상하는 중국을 견제하기 위해 미․일동맹을 강화와 일본의 군비확장을 지지하고 있기 때문이다. 일본은 미국의 대중국 견제와 미일동맹 강화에 ‘적극적으로 편승’하여 국제적 영향력을 강화하는 것과 동시에 보통국가화를 추구하고 있다. 아베정권의 아시아 안보전략은 미국의 아시아 안보전략과 맥을 같이 함으로써 새로운 지역질서의 변화를 예고하고 있다. 오바마 행정부의 재균형전략은 동맹네트워크 강화를 바탕으로 중국의 군사력 증강과 패권추구, 북한의 핵과 미사일 개발에 대처한다는 것이며, 이는 일본으로 하여금 보통국가화로 나아갈 수 있는 명분을 제공하고 있다. 이러한 미국과 일본의 지역 안보전략의 설정은 한국에 있어 안보전략의 자율성을 제약하고 있다. 한·미·일 동맹구도에 있어서도 변화가 감지되고 있다. 새로운 도전요인들이 한·미·일 삼국 간에 등장하고 있다. 중국의 군사력 증강과 패권추구에 대한 미국의 아시아 재균형 전략은 한국과 일본의 동맹 확대를 요구하고 있다. 이러한 추세에 일본은 미국의 이러한 전략에 부흥하여 동맹 확대에 적극적으로 순응하고 있는 반면, 한국은 현재 미중 간의 관계에서 오는 딜레마에서 벗어나지 못하고, 소극적인 대응으로 일관하고 있다. 최근 북한의 제4차 핵실험으로 인해 미중 간에는 북한제재와 관련하여 첨예한 갈등이 전개되고 있다. 또한 북한 핵위협에 대한 대응의 일환으로 제기된 한반도의 사드배치 여부로 논란이 가중되고 있다. 이런 상황에서 한국의 동맹전략은 새로운 시험대에 직면하고 있다. 한국은 한·중 경제협력과 중국의 대북제재 지원을 고려하면서도, 동시에 한·미·일 삼각동맹 구도의 변화 속에서 안보전략적 자율성을 새롭게 정립해야 하는 과제를 안고 있는 상황이다. 특히 최근에 한·미·일 삼각동맹의 축이 미·일 중심으로 재편되어 가면서 한국의 전략적 고민은 더욱 깊어지고 있다. The purpose of this research is to forecast which direction the trilateral alliance between Korea, Japan and the U.S. will turn to depending on the Asia security strategy of the Abe administration. Since the inauguration of the Abe administraion in the end of 2012, the security strategy of Japan has aimed at establishing a common state on the basis of 'positive pacificism.' The normalization policy of the Abe administration is a result of its shift to the right in order to secure collective self-defense and promote a normal military maneuver. In this move, the change of the US's security strategy in Asia plays a significant role. The United States of America supports the consolidation of US-Japan alliance and expansion of armaments of Japan with a view to keeping China from rising. Japan tries to both reinforce its international influence and pursue a normal nation at the same time by actively 'jumping on the bandwagon' of the US's check on China and US-Japan alliance consolidation. The Asia security strategy of the Abe administration in accordance with American security strategy of Asia predicts a new change in the regional order. The 'Rebalancing' strategy of the Obama government is to cope with China's military reinforcement and pursuit of hegemony as well as with North Korea's nuclear weapons and missile development on the basis of the consolidation of the given alliance network. And this provides a path for Japan to prepare for the normal nation. This regional security strategy set by the United States and Japan limits the autonomy of Korea in its own security policy. A change in the framework of Korea, U.S and Japan alliance is detected, too. New challenges appear in the trilateral ties between Korea, the United States and Japan. In other words, the US's 'Rebalace to Asia' strategy towards China's military buildup and pursuit of hegemony requires an expansion of Korea-Japan tie. In this trend, Japan positively complies with the alliance consolidation by following American strategy. On the other hand, Korea consistently takes passive actions as it doesn't overcome a dilemma over the relationship between the United States and China. Recently, because of the fourth nuclear weapons testing of North Korea, the United States and China undergo an acute conflict over international sanctions against North Korea. In addition, the controversy grows bigger and bigger over Terminal High Altitude Area Defense(THAAD) missile deployment in the Korean Peninsula as a way to defend against the nuclear threat of North Korea. In this situation, Korean alliance strategy is facing a new test. Korea must consider Korea-China economic cooperation and China's support for international sanctions against North Korea while facing the task of establishing an autonomy in the security strategy within the alliance of Korea, US and Japan. Especially, as the axis of the triple alliance of Korea, US and Japan is recently being reshaped into US-Japan centered tie, Korea is deeply in trouble over its strategies.

중국에 대한 일본의 위협인식과 미⋅일 동맹: ‘위협균형론’을 중심으로

엄광용,남궁영 한국세계지역학회 2020 世界地域硏究論叢 Vol.38 No.1

This thesis identifies the factors that influence changes of the US-Japan alliance after the post-Cold War. For the purpose of this research, I assume the research problem based on the balance of threat theory that states tend to balance against their most threatening state. The balance of threat theory argues that threats consist of four factors: aggregate power, geographic proximity, offensive power, and offensive intentions. Therefore, I empirically measure the degree of Japan’s threat perception against China based on the factors suggested by the theory. Then, I track the changing process of the US-Japan alliance. As a result, Japan’s threat perception against China steadily has been strengthened since the end of the Cold War. China’s aggregate power, geographical proximity between China and Japan, China’s offensive power, China’s offensive intentions have an impact on Japan’s threat perception against China. And the more Japan’s threat perception to China increases, the more the US-Japan alliance consolidates. To present a theoretical implications based on the result of the analysis, it is as follows. First, the balance of threat theory was verified. This thesis shows that threat perceptions against other countries are factors affecting the formation and change of the alliance. Second, it tries to empirically verify the balance of threat theory. Since the abstract concept of threat perception is defined as measurable variables, it enhances the theoretical explanatory power of the balance of threat theory. Third, by providing theoretical explanation to the relationship between China and Japan, it can more appropriately explain and predict the phenomena between the two countries. 본 연구의 목적은 탈냉전 이후 미⋅일 동맹의 변화과정에 영향을 미친 요인을 밝히는것이다. 이를 위해서 본 연구는 국가는 자국에 가장 위협적인 국가에 대항하여 균형을 이루려는경향이 있다고 보는 위협균형론에 기초하여 연구문제를 상정한다. 위협균형론은 위협이 총체적국력, 지리적 근접성, 공격적 군사력, 공격적 의도라는 네 가지 요인으로 이뤄져 있다고주장한다. 그러므로 본 연구는 위협균형론이 제시한 네 가지 요인에 기초하여 일본의 대중국위협인식이 어느 정도 인지를 실증적으로 측정한다. 그리고 미⋅일 동맹의 변화과정을 추적함으로써 두 변수 간의 인과적 관계를 규명한다. 연구결과, 일본의 대중국 위협인식은 냉전이종식된 이후 현재까지 꾸준히 강화되는 양상을 보였다. 중국의 총체적 국력, 중국과 일본간의 지리적 근접성, 중국의 공격적 군사력, 중국의 공격적 의도가 일본의 대중국 위협인식에영향을 미쳤다. 그리고 일본의 대중국 위협인식이 높아짐에 따라 미⋅일 동맹도 점점 더공고화되었다. 본 연구의 결과가 함의하는 바는 세 가지이다. 첫째, 위협균형론을 검증했다는것이다. 이 연구는 다른 국가에 대한 위협인식이 동맹의 형성과 변화과정에 영향을 미치는요인이라는 것을 보여준다. 둘째, 위협균형론에 대한 실증적인 검증을 시도했다는 것이다. 위협인식이라는 추상적인 개념을 측정 가능한 변수로 정의하였기 때문에 이론의 설명력을높였다고 할 수 있다. 셋째, 중국과 일본의 관계에 이론적 설명력을 부여함으로써 양국 간의현상을 보다 적절하게 설명하고 예측할 수 있다는 점이다.

미국의 국방기획과 미일동맹

김종훈 한일군사문화학회 2010 한일군사문화연구 Vol.9 No.-

US-Japan alliance of 60-years history has played an important role in security of East Asia region. However, the alliance is worried by a recent exposed discord between two countries, U.S. and Japan, in connection with the USFJ base relocation. It is anticipated that Japanese political circumstances may exert an influence on both countries` bilateral relation based on US-Japan alliance. It is a purpose of this paper that the US-Japan alliance is reviewed with U.S. defense planning perspective. An aspect of military cooperation between two countries is also forecasted. Even many security issues are left unsettled due to Japanese government`s effort to resolve economic problems first, existing relation between two countries is expected to be continued. The U.S. regards that the US-Japan alliance is not radically changed in East Asia region from geopolitical view. The status quo is predicted to be maintained. An action strategy to specify an agenda of future-oriented relation between both countries. Supposing that a great deal of changes in US-Japan alliance is not foreseen, we need to reflect a present status of US-Japan alliance to a role change of ROK-US one in a sense of strategic flexibility.

ROK-Japan Defense and Security Cooperation in the US-ROK-Japan “Virtual Alliance” : Evolution and Prospects

사카다 야스오(Yasuyo Sakata)(阪田恭代) 신아시아연구소(구 신아세아질서연구회) 2017 신아세아 Vol.24 No.3

최근 몇 년간, 한·미·일, 한·일 안보 협력체제는 냉전 이후 확산된 이른바 “유사동맹(類似同盟)”이라는 개념 하에 크게 발전한 바 있다. 이에 본고에서는 지난 수십 년간 진화해온 한·일 국방·안보 협력체제에 대한 고찰을 통해 “유사동맹” 개념을 재조명해보고자 한다. 그간 “유사동맹” 협력체제는 수많은 난관에도 불구, 영향력 있는 민간 전문가들(예를 들면, K-J Shuttle)의 노력으로 우리가 흔히 인식하는 것보다 질적으로 개선될 수 있었지만, 국내정치 및 전략적 운용 측면에서는 여전히 취약한 모습을 나타내고 있다. 따라서 “유사동맹” 개념을 국가안보전략으로 상정하고 이에 따른 제도화 과정을 추진하는 동시에, 민주주의 국가로서 양국의 가치 및 정체성을 상호 폭넓게 교류한다면 보다 탄력적인 한·일 관계가 형성될 수 있다. In recent years, US-ROK-Japan and ROK-Japan defense cooperation have substantially progressed to what can be called a “virtual alliance”(an informal alliance sharing a common ally, the United States) --- a concept developed in the post-Cold War era. This article revisits the “virtual alliance” concept and traces the evolution of ROK-Japan security and defense cooperation in the past decades. It argues that, despite many setbacks, cooperation has made more progress than is generally perceived, due to efforts by track-two actors (e.g., the K-J Shuttle) that have impacted official relations. The relationship is still vulnerable to domestic politics as well as strategic challenges, however. Thus, embedding the “virtual alliance” into national security strategies, exploring further institutionalization, and addressing value and identity issues as two democracies are tasks to build a more resilient relationship.