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

      • 좁혀본 항목

      • 좁혀본 항목 보기순서

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

          오늘 본 자료

          • 오늘 본 자료가 없습니다.
          더보기
          • 무료
          • 기관 내 무료
          • 유료
          • 동해 병기문제가 한미동맹에 미치는 영향

            최양선 ( Choi Yang-sun ) 한국군사학회 2019 군사논단 Vol.99 No.-

            한국과 일본은 한반도와 일본열도 사이에 위치한 바다의 국제적 공식 명칭을 둘러싸고 첨예한 논쟁을 벌이고 있다. 국제적으로, 2개국 이상이 공유한 지형에 대한 지명은 관계 당사국 간의 합의에 따라 결정하고, 합의가 불가능할 경우에는 각국에서 사용하는 지명을 병기하도록 하고 있다. 1921년에 설립된 국제수로국(IHB)은 1929년에 바다와 해양의 경계(S-23)라는 책자를 출간하였다. 출간된 이 책자에 씌여진 일본해를 바탕으로 일본해는 국제사회에서 일반적으로 널리 쓰이게 되었다. 그리고 이 S-23의 제 2판(1937년)과 제 3판(1953년)판이 순차적으로 발간되었을 때도 일본해는 지속적으로 표기되었다. 불행하게도, 한국은 이 시기에 일제강점기(1910~1945)와 6.25 전쟁(1950~1953)을 겪고 있어서 동해 바다에 대한 국제적 지명 결정에 참여할 수 없었다. 한국 정부는 1991년 유엔에 가입한 후, 1992년 유엔에서 국제사회에 동해 표기의 문제를 제기하기 시작하였다. 유엔지명표준화회의(UNCSGN)에서 북한 대표도 ‘동해' 명칭에 동의하였었다. 그 이후 지속적으로 한국 정부는 동해의 바다 이름을 되찾으려 노력해 왔다. 국제사회가 기억해야 할 한 가지는 일본이 일제강점기 기간 한국에서 동해라는 바다 이름뿐만 아니라 국가의 이름, 개인의 이름 심지어는 언어 등 수 많은 것들을 강탈했다는 것이다. 한국과 북한은 동해 명칭 회복을 위해 노력했지만, 일본은 원상회복을 원하지 않고 있다. 이러한 동해 병기문제는 단순히 한국과 일본 사이의 문제만이 아니라 역사적으로 미국도 관계되어 있다. 이 동해 병기문제는 동아시아에서 한·미·일간의 역사를 통해 탄생한 것이며, 한·미·일 3국 관계를 악화시키고 있다. 미국은 한미 동맹을 위해 일정 수준의 건설적 역할을 해야만 한다고 본다. The sea, located between the Korean peninsula and the Japanese Archipelago, is at the center of acute controversies surrounding its international official name between Korea and Japan. Internationally, it is recommended that the geographical name of the topographical feature shared with two or more countries should be decided according to the agreement of the involved parties and if impossible, names used in each country should be marked side by side. International Hydrographic Bureau(IHB), being established in 1921 and published a book, Limits of Oceans and Seas(S-23) in 1929. On the basis of this book, the Sea of Japan as a dominant appellation was commonly adopted in international society. The second(1937) and the third(1953) edition of S-23 were published in turns, still, yet the sea was recorded as Sea of Japan appellation in the books. Unfortunately, Korea was under the Japanese colonial rule(1910~1945) and went through a civil war(1950~1953) at that time, Korea was not able to take part in the decision-making progress. It was not until 1992 after entering the United Nation in 1991 that the Korean government raised the issue of East Sea appellation officially toward international society at the United Nations Conference on the Standardization of Geographical Names (UNCSGN). Also, North Korea representative concurred the ‘East Sea' at that time. From that time onward, the Korean government has kept trying to recover the sea name of the East Sea. One thing the international community should remember is that Japan took away from Korea during the colonial period not only the sea name of East Sea, but also by countless others, including its national name, individual names and even language itself. South and North Korea have tried for the recovery, but Japan did not want to restore it. This dual naming issue is related to the United States in history, and not simply a question of between Japan and Korea. This issue is created throughout the history of Korea, U.S., and Japan in North East Asia, and deteriorating the trilateral relationship. U.S. should do some constructive role for the ROK-US alliance.

          • 한국군 작전술과 디자인 발전을 위한 제언

            문권 ( Moon¸ Kwon ) 한국군사학회 2020 군사논단 Vol.104 No.-

            This monograph addresses on operational art and design in order to facilitate to discuss and discourse on that at the time when the Republic of Korea(ROK) Army must apply it. The author provides with The Design Iterativeness Model which could be applied to the ROK Army based upon what he had studied and learned on operational art and design in the School of Advanced Military Studies of the US Command and General Staff College. The main body illustrates the model with the definitions and his humble opinions on operational art and design. The descriptive details on the model locates in the body of this paper while the four characteristics of it are in the conclusion. The following three historical examples demonstrate how the model can be applied to a Korean future campaign might be. The cases are Scott's Mexico City campaign, Slim's Burma campaign, and Israel's Yom Kippur War. They all tried to continually articulate the current and future environments and identified the critical problems in his campaign. They properly exercised their operational art and designed that how the future environment would be changed toward the desired direction if they took actions. Additionally, the actions they took have changed the environmental system in the future as they desired by changing function, structure, process, and context of the campaign system.

          • 학술논문3 : 공, 해전투(Air-Sea Battle) 개념의 한국군 적용방안 -이어도 분쟁 시나리오 연구 중심으로-

            송성권 ( Sung Gwun Song ), 이현철 ( Hyun Cheol ) 한국군사학회 2014 군사논단 Vol.78 No.-

            The Air-Sea Battle Concept, as a US countermeasure to China`s A2/AD concept, provides a critical standard as option that may be adopted by ROK as its military response strategy against China, considering the prospect of a ROK ? China conflict being gradually materialized with China`s recent declaration of its ADIZ that included leodo island. This paper examines the content of US ASB Concept and taking into account the ROK military strategic environment, it analyzes the expected scenarios as well as the type of joint operation that would take form as a result of applying the ABS Concept. Based on each central premise of US ASB Concept ? Logistics, Network, Integration, and Attack-in-Depth - ROK military`s joint operation examined ROK forces` inadequacies and matters requiring supplementation for each area. In terms of In terms of network, explanation for how each services` interoperability and network connectivity must be considered in procuring weapon systems for conducting joint air ? naval operations was given. Moreover, in integration, an explanation is given on how joint operation must be directed by an integrated commander on site and how the on-site commander must be well-versed in each respective force`s features and operations. Lastly, in terms of depth-in-attack, in order to prevent escalation by limiting the parameters to the Ieodo area, Paralyzing China`s war fighting capabilities in this region by first attacking the enemy`s network systems and C41SR targets in space ? cyber domains has been proposed. This thesis carries much significance in that it has contributed to the concept development providing logic for construction development of future ROK military power, specifically in relation to the fact that for the last 60 some years, ROK has only experienced preparing for war against NK and failed stand in preparedness against conflicts with neighboring states.

          • 급조폭발물(IED)과 한국군 대응체계의 효율성 제고방안 고찰 -전·평시 軍의 예방·대응 체계를 중심으로-

            김성진 ( Kim Sung-jin ) 한국군사학회 2019 군사논단 Vol.97 No.-

            Conventional terrorism was a means of propaganda, incitement and mass destruction to achieve political and religious purposes, but new terrorism is indiscriminately executed to an unspecified number of people. Especially, Korea has been designated as a terrorist target country by boosting the anti - Korean sentiment of international terrorists due to the activities of international peacekeeping forces. 10 out of 3,119 domestic incidents were caused by IED. The purpose of this article is to redefine the perception of the IED, which made the US, which has state-of-the-art equipment, strongest army, and professional staff, struggling in the war on terrorism. In addition, by comparing and analyzing the response system of major countries, it is necessary to enhance the effectiveness of prevention and response by recognizing the necessity of reinforcing detection, identification, discovery, elimination ability, education and training system, and integrated response system for IED. The scope of the study is to grasp the concept of IED terror and its actual situation and to raise a practical countermeasure. In this paper, IED is used as an independent variable, the Korean response system is used as a dependent variable, recognition, response strategy, response organization and mission performance system, As a parameter. It is saddened that IED-related research has been in a state of rampant since it began in 2008. Therefore, we intend to re-emphasize the strategic and operational concepts of IED in terms of contents and to give consciousness and collaboration of relevant functions by specifying areas that need improvement and reinforcement. Of course, it can not be overlooked that this study can not represent the whole and there are realistic limitations. Military precaution and response activities are roused. It has bright prospect that the mutual consensus among the related organizations (functions) will spread and the organic cooperation and co-operation will be strengthened.

          • 미국의 공세적 인도·태평양 전략 관점에서 본 미·중 패권경쟁과 한국의 대응전략

            김덕기 ( Duk Ki Kim ) 한국군사학회 2020 군사논단 Vol.100 No.1

            본 논문은 미국의 공세적 인도·태평양 전략 관점에서 미·중 패권경쟁을 분석하고 한국의 대응전략을 제시하는데 있다. 미국 오바마 행정부의 아시아 중시정책에 이어 트럼프 행정부의 ‘미국 최우선 정책'에 바탕을 둔 인도·태평양전략과 ‘중국 민족주의(中華思想)'를 앞세운 시진핑 주석이 과거 ‘일양(一洋: 태평양)전략'에서 인도양으로 촉수를 뻗치는 ‘양양(兩洋: 태평양과 인도양)전략'을 추진하면서 패권경쟁의 장(場)이 태평양을 넘어 인도양으로 확대되고 있다. 한편 미국이 인도·태평양전략을 실현하기 위해 일본·호주·인도와 협력관계를 강화하자 중국은 러시아와의 군사협력을 바탕으로 미국에 도전하고 있다. 미국과 중국의 패권경쟁은 해양을 넘어 우주·핵무기 경쟁 등으로 확대되는 중이다. 특히 2020년대에는 미국의 인도·태평양전략과 시진핑 주석이 2013년에 발표한 일대일로전략의 경쟁으로 남중국해를 포함한 인도양에서의 충돌이 불가피할 것으로 보인다. 중국은 ‘강국몽(强國夢)' 실현을 군사적으로 뒷받침하기 위해 해군력을 중심으로 ‘강군몽(强軍夢)'을 추진 중이다. 중국의 해군력 강화를 위한 해양굴기전략으로 해외기지 확보는 물론, 서해를 포함한 남중국해의 내해화(內海化)를 통한 해양주권 확대를 포함한다. 그러므로 미·중 패권경쟁은 중국이 인공섬을 건설하고 군사기지화를 추진 중인 남중국해에서 점화될 가능성이 높다. 그러나 한국은 이러한 미·중의 패권경쟁 속에서 견고한 한·미 동맹을 바탕으로 굳건한 안보유지와 북핵문제 해결을 위해 모든 역량을 집중해야 한다. 그리고 문재인 정부의 신남방 및 신북방정책이 성공하기 위해서는 UN대북제재에도 불구하고 북한을 지원하고 있는 중국과 러시아가 비핵화에 적극적으로 동참할 수 있도록 외교 역량을 강화하면서, 인도는 물론 아세안 국가들과도 적극적인 협력을 다져 나가야 한다. The aim of this study is to analyze US-China hegemony competition on the basis of the US offensive Indo-Pacific Strategy and provide policy directions for ROK to promote Moon Jae-In Administration's ‘New Southern and Northern Policies.' Following the Obama administration's ‘Pivot to Asia' policy, President Trump administration's ‘India-Pacific Strategy' based on ‘American First Policy' and President Xi Jinping's ‘Two Oceans (二洋: Pacific and Indian Oceans)' strategy originally changed from ‘One Ocean (一 洋: Pacific Ocean)' are competing. And thus, the field of hegemony competition will be expanding beyond the Pacific Ocean to the Indian Ocean. Meanwhile, as the United States strengthens its cooperation with Japan, Australia, and India to accomplish the India-Pacific strategy, China is challenging the United States based on military cooperation with Russia and enhancing bilateral relations with the Middle East Asian countries such as Iran. The US-China hegemony competition is expanding beyond the ocean to space and the nuclear arms race. In particular, the US India-Pacific Strategy and China's ‘One Belt One Road' are highly likely to ignite in the South Sea and the Indian Ocean in the 2020s. China is strengthening its naval forces to militarily support the ‘China Dream.' China's maritime excavation strategy to strengthen its naval power includes securing overseas bases and expanding maritime sovereignty through the nationalization of the South China Sea, including the West Sea. Therefore, the US-China hegemony competition is likely to ignite in the South China Sea, where China is constructing artificial islands and promoting military bases. On balance, in the midst of US-China hegemony competition, South Korea should focus on all its capabilities to resolve the North Korean nuclear issue under strong security based on a solid ROKUS alliance. In addition, in order for the Moon Jae-in administration to succeed in its ‘New Southern and Northern' policies, it must strengthen diplomatic capabilities with China and Russia, which are supporting North Korea directly and indirectly despite UN sanctions against North Korea, to make them actively participate in denuclearization. In addition, Seoul needs to cooperate actively with ASEAN countries and India.

          • The Evolution of Korea's Deterrence Strategy: Focused on Establishing “Three-Axis” System

            KimJong-Ha ( 김종하 ), KimJae-Yeop ( 김재엽 ) 한국군사학회 2019 군사논단 Vol.100 No.-

            핵무기와 탄도미사일을 비롯한 북한의 대량살상무기 위협은 지난 수십년 동안 한반도에서 지속되어 온 전쟁 억지 태세에 중대한 도전으로 작용하고 있다. 이에 한국은 2010년대에 들어서 3축 체계로 불리는, 비핵 전력에 기반을 둔 독자적인 억지 전략을 발전시키고 있다. 3축 체계는 초기에 킬 체인, KAMD로 대표되는 ‘거부에 의한 억지' 능력을 추구했다. 이후 KMPR을 통한 ‘보복에 의한 억지'가 추가되면서,3축 체계는 그 유효성이 보다 강화될 수 있게 되었다. 3축 체계의 구축은 한국이 북한의 대량살상무기 위협을 억지하기 위한 정치·군사적 재량권을 강화하고, 북한의 비핵화를 위한 외교적 노력을 뒷받침하는 역할을 해야 한다.

          맨 위로 스크롤 이동