scholarly journals Realities and Strategies in Managing North Korea’s Nuclear Challenge

2016 ◽  
Vol 02 (04) ◽  
pp. 465-484
Author(s):  
Chung Kyung-Young
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
South Korea ◽  
The United States ◽  
United Nations Security Council ◽  
The Status ◽  
High Altitude Area ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Nuclear Warfare ◽  
The Military ◽  
The U.S

The nuclear program is arguably Kim Jong-un’s strategic fantasy and core asset for breaking the status quo in order to achieve a unified Korea. To cope with North Korea’s grave nuclear and missile threats, the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system needs to be deployed in South Korea for deterrence by denial. In the meantime, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) should not exclude the military option in the event of any further nuclear test and Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) launch experiment by North Korea. The U.S. government should consider redeploying tactical nuclear warheads to South Korea in order to make the extended deterrence more effective. The South Korean government should make it clear that the Republic of Korea (ROK) does not seek to join, nor will it be incorporated into, the U.S.-led missile defense system. The United States and China should cooperate with South Korea to take the lead in achieving a norm-oriented, nuclear-free, and unified Korea. In particular, ROK-U.S.-China strategic cooperation is essential to preventing any potential nuclear warfare and maintaining peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula. South Korea, the United States and China should propose restructured negotiations on important issues that provide genuine incentives for Pyongyang, culminating in complete and verifiable denuclearization and a treaty that will end the tensions on the Peninsula. In addition, the trilateral cooperation needs to adopt a more proactive engagement policy to facilitate North Korea’s lasting transformation.

scholarly journals Military cooperation between the United States of America and the Republic of Vietnam (1969-1973)

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. first
Author(s):  
Le Thi Nhuong
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Vietnam War ◽  
The United States ◽  
Military Cooperation ◽  
Internal Security ◽  
Military Forces ◽  
South Vietnam ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Military ◽  
The U.S

President M. Richard Nixon took office in the context that the United States was being crisis and deeply divided by the Vietnam war. Ending the war became the new administration's top priority. The top priority of the new government was to get the American out of the war. But if the American got out of the war and the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) fell, the honor and and prestige of the U.S will be effected. Nixon government wanted to conclude American involvement honorably. It means that the U.S forces could be returned to the U.S, but still maintaining the RVN government in South Vietnam. To accomplish this goal, Nixon government implemented linkage diplomacy, negotiated with the Democratic Republic of Vietnam (DRV) in Paris and implemented "Vietnamization" strategy. The aim of the Vietnamization was to train and provide equipments for the RVN's military forces that gradually replace the U.S. troops, take responsibility in self-guarantee for their own security. By analyzing the military cooperation between the United States and the RVN in the implementation of "Vietnamization", the paper aims to clarify the nature of the "allied relationship" between the U.S and the RVN. It also proves that the goal of Nixon's Vietnamization was not to help the RVN "reach to a strong government with a wealthy economy, a powerful internal security and military forces", served the policy of withdrawing American troops from the war that the U.S could not win militarily, solving internal problems but still preserving the honor of the United States.

Procedury karne w stosunku do żołnierzy sił zbrojnych Stanów Zjednoczonych oraz członków ich personelu cywilnego przebywających na terytorium Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej

2019 ◽  
pp. 209-222
Author(s):  
Marek Centkowski
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
The United States ◽  
Law Enforcement Agencies ◽  
Criminal Jurisdiction ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Military

The subject of this work is to clarify the issues of criminal jurisdiction set forth in articles 13-15 of the Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Poland and the Government of the United States of America regarding the status of the armed forces of the United States of America on the territory of the Republic of Poland of December 11, 2009 in Warsaw. The author simultaneously conducts analysis of the provisions in article VII NATO SOFA, a supplemental agreement between the Governments of Poland and the United States. In addition, memorandum of Understanding between the Minister of Justice of the Republic of Poland and the Command of the Armed Forces of the United States of America in Europe regarding foreign criminal jurisdiction, signed on October 23, 2014 in Warsaw is discussed. The memorandum specifies the provisions of the above-mentioned two international agreements, describing, among other things, how to proceed with American soldiers and members of their civilian staff as perpetrators of prohibited acts. Furthermore, this document contains templates for letters addressed to US military authorities, and Polish judicial authorities with respect to the priority of jurisdiction, as well as arrangements related to the performance of official duties by the perpetrator at the time of committing a prohibited act. The authorities that supervise or conduct preparatory proceedings against members of the United States forces and their civilian personnel are military prosecutors of the regional or the district prosecutor’s offices. The Police, on the other hand and Military Police are law enforcement agencies carrying out procedural activities at the scene and carryingout activities commissioned by the military prosecutor.

scholarly journals South Korea and the U.S. Strategy of Free and Open Indo-Pacific

2021 ◽  
Vol 65 (8) ◽  
pp. 31-40
Author(s):  
O. Davydov
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
South Korea ◽  
The United States ◽  
Strategic Partnership ◽  
Republic Of Korea ◽  
Asian Countries ◽  
Regional Strategies ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right ◽  
The U.S

The advancement and promoting by the United States of its concept of Free and Open Indo-Pacific (FOIP) has shaped many of political discussions in Asian countries in recent years. The Republic of Korea is no exception. From this perspective, the article reviews the basic aspects of the evolution of South Korea’s foreign policy course as well as new priorities in that area which have been forged with the advent of President Moon Jae-in administration. The paper shows that the complex fluctuations of the South Korea’s external policy have been defined by the need to maintain the focus on the United States, on one side, and desire to nurture strategic partnership with China, on the other side. However, finding the right balance in that political equation has been significantly complicated due to the growing confrontation between the two global powers. Special attention is given to the role and place of South Korea in the U. S. Free and Open Indo-Pacific Strategy. The article examines the main directions, some of the outcomes and the prospects of cooperation between Washington and Seoul aimed at harmonizing their regional strategies in view of the factors facilitating those interactions as well as those hampering them. President Trump highlighted that the United States – the Republic of Korea alliance remains a linchpin for security, stability and prosperity in the Indo-Pacific. However, the dialogue between the two partners has not revealed the willingness of South Korea to collaborate with the United States on that theme beyond a narrow framework of purely economic coordination. Particularly, South Korea has consistently rejected the attempts of its ally to involve the country into the activities of Quad for fear of a possible adverse effect for the Korea–China relationships. All of those questions are examined in the article in linkage with a number of bilateral problems prevailing in the ROK–USA alliance which have complicated the collaboration between the two countries on regional issues in recent times.

Securing Asia for Asians

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simeon Man
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
World War Ii ◽  
South Korea ◽  
East Asia ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
The United States ◽  
Unintended Consequences ◽  
World War ◽  
The Military ◽  
The U.S

This chapter describes the U.S. buildup of the armed forces of allied nations in East Asia immediately following World War II, focusing in particular on South Korea. The United States justified militarization in the name of teaching Asians how to defend their newly acquired freedom from communism, and, more broadly, of building an Asia for Asians. The chapter argues that this effort carried unintended consequences, as the attempt to incorporate “free Asians” into the U.S. military empire simultaneously heightened the specter of subversive Asians within the military and in the United States in the 1950s.

Korea: What the Generals Want

Worldview ◽  
1980 ◽  
Vol 23 (8) ◽  
pp. 13-15
Author(s):  
Edward A. Olsen
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
South Korea ◽  
The United States ◽  
Republic Of Korea ◽  
Sufficient Evidence ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Military

Observers of Korea have recently received a surfeit of facts about the military takeover, riots, civil insurgency in Cholla province, widespread arrests, and abuse of prisoners. What we lack is a firm sense of what all these events mean for South Korea and the United States. Though it is still early, sufficient evidence exists to warrant a preliminary judgment about the new leadership of post-Park Korea and what may be ahead for the Republic of Korea.

Implications of OPA 90 in General and Its Effect on the T-AO 187 Class Oilers in Particular

1994 ◽  
Vol 31 (03) ◽  
pp. 175-182
Author(s):  
Hans Hofmann ◽  
George Kapsilis ◽  
Eric Smith ◽  
Robert Wasalaski
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Structural Changes ◽  
Oil Pollution ◽  
The United States ◽  
Coast Guard ◽  
International Maritime Organization ◽  
The Status ◽  
Oil Tankers ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Hull Construction

The Oil Pollution Act of 1990 has mandated that by the year 2015 all oil tankers operating in waters subject to jurisdiction of the United States must have double hulls. This paper examines the Act and the status of regulatory initiatives it has generated. Guidance for new hull construction and retrofit of existing vessels is outlined, and both IMO (International Maritime Organization) and U.S. Coast Guard requirements are discussed. Finally, the structural changes necessary to convert the U.S. Navy's T-AO Class oil tankers to meet the requirements of the Act are specified and illustrated.

scholarly journals Power Transition Theory Revisited: When Rising China Meets Dissatisfied United States

2019 ◽  
Vol 05 (03) ◽  
pp. 317-341
Author(s):  
Serafettin Yilmaz ◽  
Wang Xiangyu
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Status Quo ◽  
Transition Theory ◽  
Power Transition ◽  
Economic Implications ◽  
Power Transition Theory ◽  
The Status ◽  
Rising Power ◽  
The U.S

Dissatisfaction is a major concept in power transition theory, which postulates that a rapidly rising power tends to be dissatisfied with the international system and would thus attempt to reform or replace it, whereas the hegemonic power would, by default, be satisfied with and work to maintain the status quo. This paper, however, offers an alternative outlook on the reigning-rising power dynamics by examining the conditions for and implications of hegemonic dissatisfaction and rising power satisfaction. It argues that although China, as a potential systemic challenger harboring grievances against the existing global regimes, has been a recurrent subject for studies, it is the United States, the established hegemon, that appears increasingly dissatisfied with the status quo. The U.S. dissatisfaction is informed by a set of internal and external factors often justified with a reference to China as a challenger, and is manifested in a number of anti-system strategies, including unconventional diplomatic rhetoric, as well as withdrawal from various international institutions or attempts to undermine them. The U.S. discontent, as contrasted with China’s satisfaction as a rising power, has a number of potential geopolitical and economic implications at the bilateral, regional, and global levels, endangering the viability and sustainability of the universally accepted political and economic regimes.

Santa Anna and His Legacy

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Will Fowler
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Mexican War ◽  
Early National Period ◽  
The Public ◽  
Early National ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Alamo ◽  
The U.S

Antonio López de Santa Anna (b. Xalapa, February 21, 1794; d. Mexico City, June 21, 1876) was one of the most notorious military caudillos of 19th-century Mexico. He was involved in just about every major event of the early national period and served as president on six different occasions (1833–1835, 1839, 1841–1843, 1843–1844, 1846–1847, and 1853–1855). U.S. Minister Plenipotentiary Waddy Thompson during the 1840s would come to the conclusion that: “No history of his country for that period can be written without constant mention of his name.”1 For much of the 1820s to 1850s he proved immensely popular; the public celebrated him as “Liberator of Veracruz,” the “Founder of the Republic,” and the “Hero of Tampico” who repulsed a Spanish attempt to reconquer Mexico in 1829. Even though he lost his leg defending Veracruz from a French incursion in 1838, many still regarded him as the only general who would be able to save Mexico from the U.S. intervention of 1846–1848. However, Mexicans, eventually, would remember him more for his defeats than his victories. Having won the battle of the Alamo, he lost the battle of San Jacinto which resulted in Texas becoming independent from Mexico in 1836. Although he recovered from this setback, many subsequently blamed him for Mexico’s traumatic defeat in the U.S.-Mexican War, which ended with Mexico ceding half of its territory to the United States. His corruption paired with the fact that he aligned himself with competing factions at different junctures contributed to the accusation that he was an unprincipled opportunist. Moreover, because he authorized the sale of La Mesilla Valley to the United States (in present-day southern Arizona) in the 1853 Gadsden Purchase, he was labeled a vendepatrias (“fatherland-seller”). The repressive dictatorship he led donning the title of “His Serene Highness” in 1853–1855, also gave way to him being presented thereafter as a bloodthirsty tyrant, even though his previous terms in office were not dictatorial. Albeit feted as a national hero during much of his lifetime, historians have since depicted Santa Anna as a cynical turncoat, a ruthless dictator, and the traitor who lost the U.S.-Mexican War on purpose. However, recent scholarship has led to a significant revision of this interpretation. The aim of this article is to recast our understanding of Santa Anna and his legacy bearing in mind the latest findings. In the process it demonstrates how important it is to engage with the complexities of the multilayered regional and national contexts of the time in order to understand the politics of Independent Mexico.

“Mourning a Loss: Conservative Support for Ngo Dinh Diem”

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 257-284
Author(s):  
Seth Offenbach
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Vietnam War ◽  
20Th Century ◽  
The United States ◽  
Conservative Movement ◽  
Great Hope ◽  
The Vietnam War ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Ngo Dinh Diem ◽  
The U.S

The U.S. conservative movement in the mid-20th Century argued that the United States needed to continuously get tougher in the fight against communism worldwide. It remained supportive of U.S. efforts throughout the Vietnam War. However, in the period immediately preceding Americanization of the war in 1965, conservatives were uncertain about the outcome of any fighting in Vietnam. Specifically, they claimed that optimism for the Republic of Vietnam was lost with the assassination of President Ngo Dinh Diem in 1963. Without Diem, conservatives claimed, the Vietnam War was likely lost before it began. This article discusses how Diem went from a barely talked-about anti-Communist ally prior to his death to becoming posthumously the last great hope for Southeast Asia. Conservatives argued that without Diem, the only way the United States would be able to stop Communist expansion in Indochina would be to engage in a massive aerial bombing campaign and find a regional partner to deploy troops. Had he survived, this might not have been necessary. Learning why and how conservatives supported Diem after his death helps us better understand how conservatives reacted to the Vietnam War once Americanization began in 1965.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document