RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

예시)
  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      검색결과 좁혀 보기

      선택해제
      • 좁혀본 항목 보기순서

        • 원문유무
        • 원문제공처
          펼치기
        • 등재정보
          펼치기
        • 학술지명
          펼치기
        • 주제분류
          펼치기
        • 발행연도
          펼치기
        • 작성언어
        • 저자
          펼치기

      오늘 본 자료

      • 오늘 본 자료가 없습니다.
      더보기
      • 무료
      • 기관 내 무료
      • 유료
      • KCI등재

        구소련해체후 미중관계와 향후전망

        안병준 한국전략문제연구소 1997 전략연구 Vol.4 No.1

        After communism and the Cold War ended in 1989 and the Soviet Union itself collapsed in 1991, Sino-American relations began to be strained and eventually came to a confrontation in the Taiwan Strait in March 1996. Why did the Sino-American rapprochement reached in the 1970's and 1980's turn into confrontation? How did this change take place and what have been the most salient issues in dispute? And what are the prospects for their resolution? How these issues will impact on the Korean peninsula and what should South Korea be doing about them? These are some of the questions this study is addressing here. The fundamental reason why Sino-American detente has turned into confrontation is that their common enemy has disappeared since the Soviet Union demised. Now that they have no longer a strategic adversary, their bilateral relations are bound to reflect demands of their domestic politics and events of power rivalry. As a results of conflicts between a pluralist political system and a communist one party dictatorship, and between the only super power and a rising new power, Sino-American relations have contained more conflicts and confrontation. Further exacerbating these conflicts is weak leadership and the rise of democratization and independence movements in Taiwan. Sino-American relations have to be redefined in this changing internal and external situation by exploring areas of common interests. Details of these issues will be analyzed below. For better understanding, several core contents are summarized here : First, Sino-American relations began to sour when the U.S. launched its criticism of the human rights situation in China after Beijing cracked down on the democratization movement during the Tienanmen incident while Mikhail Gorvachev was visiting China in June 1989. But they really came to a confrontation When Washington issues a visit to President Li Denghui in June 1995. Second, differences over such issues as human rights, trade, nonprolifer-ation and Taiwan deepened. Further reinforcing them was fact that the military was rising in profile in China, that the Republican Party controlled the Congress, and that the Kuomintang government in Taiwan was seeking independence and international recognition by all means at its disposal. Much more important was the change that the U.S as the only superpower was defending the status quo while China as a rising power was challenging the U.S. led world order. There has been no consensus about the proper role of China in the international system that is undergoing profound transformation. Third, the prospects for Sino-American relations depend on what kinds of change take place in China's domestic and foreign policy. As of now two diverging imperatives are emerging. Political imperatives are working toward sovereignty, nationalism and balance power but economic imperatives are working toward reform, opening and interdependence. Suppose that the military prevails in upholding political imperatives while enhancing military power and economic growth, the communist one party system will reveal hegemonism in its foreign policy. In contrast, if a basic transformation is accomplished in China by undertaking democratization and privatization, such reformed and open system may well accommodate some form of multi-lateral security talks or a concert of powers by cooperating with the U.S. on regional and bilateral issues. Or China can sustain an authoritarian system involving a one party regime and an market economy, her foreign policy will reveal continuing efforts at balance of power to play off one power against the other in the ancient tradition of "using barbarians to control barbarians." Given the current trend that China basically subscribes to realism and has a great deal of suspicions about the U.S., the third scenario is highly likely to take place. In this case, Sino-American relations are destined to have conflicts and cooperation depending on issues and personalities. Fourth, from the standpoint of South Korea, better Sino-American relations are in the interest of peace and stability, and unification on the Korean peninsula.. While coordinating their respective policies toward China, South Korea needs to develop its independent bilateral relations by promoting military, security, economic dialogues and cooperation with China so that China can be engaged in the peace and the unification process. It is important for Koreans to correctly understand the dynamics of Sino-American and Sino-Korean relations as far as the peninsula is concerned. More than anything else, we should have realistic and strategic perspectives in coordinating our policies. South Korea shares more security and political interests with the U.S. On the other hand, China's cooperation is crucial in achieving peace and stability, and eventual unification. It is unrealistic for South Korea to practice "an equidistance diplomacy" or mediation between the U.S. and China. What we can do realistically is to build bridges and confidence by first maintaining a regional alliance with the U.S. for unification and stability while trying to minimize China's opposition and negative act. It is time for us to make serious efforts to formulate a national strategy towards these goals and to implement a proactive diplomacy to achieve them.

      • KCI등재

        미·북관계의 전개 : 쟁점과 전망 Issues and Prospects

        안병준 한국전략문제연구소 1998 전략연구 Vol.5 No.1

        U.S.-North Korean relations are turning from confrontation to normalization after the end of the Cold War. Now that the Soviet Union is gone and the Cold War over, North Korea is no longer a direct threat to the U.S.. On the other hand, the U.S. has become the only superpower that can ensure the survival and development of North Korea. The overall direction of U.S.-North Korean relations will develop toward normalization but when and how this will be realized will be subject to constraints of North-South Korean relations and U.S.-North Korean relations. As of October 1997. they are at the stage of opening their bilateral negotiation. Whether they will go beyond this level will depends on how North Korea undergoes under Kim Jong 11 who has just assumed the post relationship with South Korea. Major issues at stake in these relations include the Geneva Framework Agreement, negotiation on missile and U.S. soldiers missed in action. establishing liaison offices, and resuming four-party of North-South Korean and U.S.-South Korean relations is the most thorny issue of all the North's refusal to talk with the South while trying to negotiate a peace agreement with the U.S. ostensibly to replace the armistice has been the most important obstacle to improving U.S. relations with the North. North Korea has succeeded in improving its relations with the U.S. by resorting to a diplomacy of brinkmanship especially in dealing with nuclear issues so that the U.S. can ensure its survival and legitimacy. The U.S. in turn, has come to negotiate with the North to achieve global nuclear nonproliferation and some results in missile exports and MIA issues. Since these enabled the North to negotiate with the U.S. while refusing to do so with the South, North-South Korean relations have worsened. The prospects for U.S.-North Korean relations will depend on what change takes place in the North and in North-South Korean relations in the years to come. In order for the U.S. and South Korea to facilitate U.S.-North Korean relations in harmony and in parallel with North-South Korean relations. they must sustain their common agenda for the peace and unification process by redefining their bilateral alliance against war into a regional alliance for unification in the peninsula and stability in Northeast Asia. To do so, they also need to build public support and to engage China in the process.

      • KCI등재
      • SCOPUSKCI등재

        Epidermophyton floccosum의 최근 22년간 (1976~1997년)동향에 대한 고찰

        안병준,김동석,김상원,서순봉 대한의진균학회 1999 대한의진균학회지 Vol.4 No.1

        Background: E. floccosum was known to be the frequent dermatophyte of tinea cruris and fourth causative agent of dermatophytosis in Korea. However, its incidence has been decreasing. Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate epidemiologic aspects of E. floccosum. Method: We performed the epidemiologic study on 900 patients with E. floccosum infections in from January 1976 to December 1997. Results and Conclusion: The incidence of dermatophytosis was 16.5fe out of a total of 614,139 outpatients, and that of E. floccosum was 0.9% out of a total of 101,314 dermatophytosis. Among the age groups, the incidence rate was high in the first decade (29.4%) and second decade (41.7%). The ratio of male to female patients was 6.6:1. The prevalence of the month was high in the August, September and October. Involved sites were groin (85.8%), foot (6.2%), trunk (3.7%), hand (1.3%), leg (1.0%), toenail (0.8%), face (0.7%) and arm (0.6%) in decreasing order of frequency. We found that the incidence of E. floccosum had been markedly decreasing since 1986.

      • KCI등재

      연관 검색어 추천

      이 검색어로 많이 본 자료

      활용도 높은 자료

      해외이동버튼