RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색

인기 검색어

    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
    KCI우수등재

    군사전략의 정치학 = 앨리슨 모형으로 분석한 공해전(AirSea Battle)

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A100037077

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

      다운로드
    서지정보 열기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
    • 오류접수

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    This paper focuses on domestic aspect of AirSea Battle. Many studies explore ASB as military dimension of US-China relations. Their explanation is quite reasonable for explaining why ASB emerges. And then the bulk of their interest is mainly how ASB affect US-China relations, but they ignore dynamics among domestic actors and the potential for change of ASB itself. Finally, it undermines the strength of what they want to say.
    Allison model provide political implications that the previous literature has missed. In organizational politics, ASB is not a new policy about the rise of China, but an outcome of routines. Likewise, it has been a slogan to weapon introduction in situation of budget cuts, not a rational response to the A2/AD. And government politics leads ASB to an argument of how US military will use its military power in the future and which service is leading the games associated with defense budget.
    Finally, analysis of these two model on ASB suggest that ASB is still incomplete and is easily changed. This could be an important contradiction of earlier studies. Therefore what matters is not how ASB affect US-China relations, but what about ASB.
    번역하기

    This paper focuses on domestic aspect of AirSea Battle. Many studies explore ASB as military dimension of US-China relations. Their explanation is quite reasonable for explaining why ASB emerges. And then the bulk of their interest is mainly how ASB a...

    This paper focuses on domestic aspect of AirSea Battle. Many studies explore ASB as military dimension of US-China relations. Their explanation is quite reasonable for explaining why ASB emerges. And then the bulk of their interest is mainly how ASB affect US-China relations, but they ignore dynamics among domestic actors and the potential for change of ASB itself. Finally, it undermines the strength of what they want to say.
    Allison model provide political implications that the previous literature has missed. In organizational politics, ASB is not a new policy about the rise of China, but an outcome of routines. Likewise, it has been a slogan to weapon introduction in situation of budget cuts, not a rational response to the A2/AD. And government politics leads ASB to an argument of how US military will use its military power in the future and which service is leading the games associated with defense budget.
    Finally, analysis of these two model on ASB suggest that ASB is still incomplete and is easily changed. This could be an important contradiction of earlier studies. Therefore what matters is not how ASB affect US-China relations, but what about ASB.

    더보기

    참고문헌 (Reference)

    1 엄정식, "탈냉전기 군사혁신론과 오바마 행정부 시기 미 공군의 군사혁신" 국가안보전략연구원 12 (12): 25-63, 2012

    2 정호섭, "반(反)접근∙지역거부 대공∙해 전투 개념: 미∙중 패권경쟁의 서막?"

    3 남창희, "미국의 공해전투(AirSea Battle) 개념과 미일동맹" 한일군사문화학회 14 : 31-57, 2012

    4 김재엽, "미국의 공해전투(Air-Sea Battle): 주요 내용과 시사점" 한국전략문제연구소 19 (19): 187-216, 2012

    5 고봉준, "미국 안보정책의 결정요인: 국제환경과 정책합의" 한국국제정치학회 50 (50): 61-89, 2010

    6 GrahamT. Allison, "결정의 엣센스: 쿠바 미사일 사태와 세계핵전쟁의 위기" 모음북스 2004

    7 박희준, "美 함정 60% 배치될 태평양의 주력 DDG-1000"

    8 Krepinevich, Andrew, "Why Air Sea Battle?" Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments 2010

    9 Cavas, Christopher P., "USAF, U.S. Navy to Expand Cooperation: Air-Sea Will Close Gaps, Boost Strengths"

    10 Axe, David, "US Bomber Plan Questioned"

    1 엄정식, "탈냉전기 군사혁신론과 오바마 행정부 시기 미 공군의 군사혁신" 국가안보전략연구원 12 (12): 25-63, 2012

    2 정호섭, "반(反)접근∙지역거부 대공∙해 전투 개념: 미∙중 패권경쟁의 서막?"

    3 남창희, "미국의 공해전투(AirSea Battle) 개념과 미일동맹" 한일군사문화학회 14 : 31-57, 2012

    4 김재엽, "미국의 공해전투(Air-Sea Battle): 주요 내용과 시사점" 한국전략문제연구소 19 (19): 187-216, 2012

    5 고봉준, "미국 안보정책의 결정요인: 국제환경과 정책합의" 한국국제정치학회 50 (50): 61-89, 2010

    6 GrahamT. Allison, "결정의 엣센스: 쿠바 미사일 사태와 세계핵전쟁의 위기" 모음북스 2004

    7 박희준, "美 함정 60% 배치될 태평양의 주력 DDG-1000"

    8 Krepinevich, Andrew, "Why Air Sea Battle?" Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments 2010

    9 Cavas, Christopher P., "USAF, U.S. Navy to Expand Cooperation: Air-Sea Will Close Gaps, Boost Strengths"

    10 Axe, David, "US Bomber Plan Questioned"

    11 Miller, Michael A., "U.S. Air Force Bomber Sustainment and Modernization: Background and Issues for Congress" Congressional Research Service 2013

    12 Odierno, Raymond T., "The U.S. Army in a Time of Transition"

    13 Economist, "The China Syndrome"

    14 U.S. Department of Defense, "Sustaining U.S. Global Leadership: Priorities for 21st Century Defense" Department of Defense 2012

    15 Scharre, Paul, "Spectrum of What?"

    16 U.S. Department of Defense, "Quadrennial Defense Review Report" Department of Defense 2014

    17 U.S. Department of Defense, "Quadrennial Defense Review Report" Department of Defense 2010

    18 Christensen, Thomas, "Posing Problems without Catching Up: China’s Rise and Challenges for U.S. Security Policy" 25 (25): 2013

    19 Bitzinger, Richard A., "Policy Brief: The AirSea Battle Debate and the Future of Conflict in East Asia" S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies 2013

    20 Axe, David, "Pointless US Plan for China?"

    21 Gunzinger, Mark, "Outside-In: Operating from Range to Defeat Iran’s Anti-Access and Area-Denial Threats" Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments 2011

    22 Stavridis, James G., "New Air Sea Battle Concept: Integrated Strike Forces" National War College 1992

    23 O’Rourke, Ronald, "Navy Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) Program: Background and Issues for Congress" Congressional Research Service 2013

    24 Stars and Stripes, "Military creates Air-Sea Battle Office" Stars and Stripes

    25 U.S. Department of Defense, "Joint Operational Access Concept" Department of Defense 2012

    26 Posen, Barry R., "Inadvertent Nuclear War?: Escalation and NATO’s Northern Flank" 7 (7): 1982

    27 Cooper, Helene, "Hagel Spars with Chinese Over Islands and Security"

    28 Cliff, Roger, "Entering the Dragon’s Lair: Chinese Antiaccess Strategies and Their Implications for the United States" RAND 2007

    29 Sweetman, Bill, "Defense Cuts? Bring Them On"

    30 Posen, Barry R., "Command of the Commons: The Military Foundation of U.S. Hegemony" 28 (28): 2003

    31 Freier, Nathan, "Challenges to American Access: The Joint Operational Access Concept and Future Military Risk" CSIS

    32 Congressional Budget Office, "Building a 600-Ship Navy: Costs, Timing, and Alternative Approaches" Congress of the United States 1982

    33 Barnett, Thomas P. M., "Big-War Thinking in a Small-War Era: The Rise of the AirSea Battle Concept" 6 (6): 2010

    34 Kline, Jeffrey E., "Between Peace and the Air-Sea Battle: A War at Sea Strategy" 65 (65): 2012

    35 Choate, Chris, "An AirSea Battle on the Potomac"

    36 Schanz, Marc V., "AirSea Battle’s Turbulent Year"

    37 Stratrisks, "AirSea Battle Simulation: Army Creates ‘Strategic Landpower Office’"

    38 Halloran, Richard, "AirSea Battle"

    39 Air-Sea Battle Office, "Air-Sea Battle: Service Collaboration to Address Anti-Access & Area Denial Challenges" Department of Defense 2013

    40 Schwartz, Norton A., "Air-Sea Battle"

    41 Van Tol, Jan, "Air Sea Battle: A Point-of-Departure Operational Concept" Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments 2010

    42 이근욱, "A Spear and a Shield: Dilemmas of the American Strategy in East Asia" 한국국방연구원 25 (25): 171-189, 2013

    더보기

    동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

    동일학술지 더보기

    더보기

    분석정보

    View

    상세정보조회

    0

    Usage

    원문다운로드

    0

    대출신청

    0

    복사신청

    0

    EDDS신청

    0

    동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

    더보기

    주제

    연도별 연구동향

    연도별 활용동향

    연관논문

    연구자 네트워크맵

    공동연구자 (7)

    유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

    인용정보 인용지수 설명보기

    학술지 이력

    학술지 이력
    연월일 이력구분 이력상세 등재구분
    2023 평가 계속평가 신청대상 (등재유지)
    2018-01-01 등재 우수등재학술지 선정 (계속평가)
    2015-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2013-03-22 학술지명변경 외국어명 : The Korean Journal of International Studies -> Korean Journal of International Relations KCI등재
    2011-01-01 등재 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
    2010-12-01 등재 학술지 분리 (기타) KCI등재후보
    2010-06-22 학술지명변경 외국어명 : The Korean Journal of International Relations -> The Korean Journal of International Studies KCI등재
    2009-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2007-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2004-01-01 등재 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
    2003-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    2002-01-01 등재 등재후보학술지 유지 (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    1999-07-01 등재 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
    더보기

    학술지 인용정보

    학술지 인용정보
    기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
    2016 0.91 0.91 1.12
    KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
    1.07 1.09 1.415 0.17
    더보기

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼