[미국대외정책] U.S. security policy & Role of USFK

등록일 / 수정일
페이지 / 형식
자료평가
구매가격

2010.01.29 / 2019.12.24
11페이지 / docx (MS워드 2007이상)
평가한 분이 없습니다. (구매금액의 3%지급)
1,400원

다운로드장바구니

Naver로그인

Kakao로그인

최대 20페이지까지 미리보기 서비스를 제공합니다.

자료평가하면 구매금액의 3%지급!

미국대외정책 U.S. security policy & Role of USFK-1페이지

미국대외정책 U.S. security policy & Role of USFK-2페이지

미국대외정책 U.S. security policy & Role of USFK-3페이지

미국대외정책 U.S. security policy & Role of USFK-4페이지

미국대외정책 U.S. security policy & Role of USFK-5페이지

미국대외정책 U.S. security policy & Role of USFK-6페이지

미국대외정책 U.S. security policy & Role of USFK-7페이지

미국대외정책 U.S. security policy & Role of USFK-8페이지

미국대외정책 U.S. security policy & Role of USFK-9페이지

미국대외정책 U.S. security policy & Role of USFK-10페이지

미국대외정책 U.S. security policy & Role of USFK-11페이지

추천 연관자료

목차: Introduction
Subject
Foreign policy & US Foreign Policy
US’s strategy toward Northeast Asia
1.The interest from Northeast Asia
2.The Northeast Asian Policy
1)Clinton Administration
2)Bush Administration
3)Obama Administration
3.China Threat & North Korea Threat
The USFK as the case of US strategy in East Asia
1.USFK
2.FOTA(Future ROK-US Alliance Policy Initiative) between Korea and US)
The Role of the USFK
1.Role of the Past
2.Current Role of USFK
3.Recent Changes of USFK Status
1)Relocation of USKF
2)Transfer of Wartime Operational Control (OPCON)

Conclusion

본문내용: US’s strategy toward Northeast Asia
For many centuries, international order has been moving by the West, and West-oriented. However, due to the increase of importance on the Asia-Pacific region, the international order is focusing to this region gradually. In the 21st century, this region is facing confusion from its transition period and increase of uncertainty. The reason is that, although there are efforts made to ease political tensions among nations by reconciliation between the East and the West on the surface, many countries in the area, is competing each other to have competitive edge on military interest. So, there are big change in security and strategic environment.

1. The interest from Northeast Asia
We know that all of the US’ conducts are done based on national interest. And there are three interests US seek from Northeast Asia. First, it is ‘vital’ interest. It includes the prevention from appearing of new hegemony, steady security of free trade & Political influence, and nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction. The second is ‘Important’ interest. It related to human rights norm of the West countries, settlement of Territorial disputes, and maintenance of ARF/APEC. The third is ‘Beneficial’ interest. Support actively to the Unilateral/multilateral efforts for the protection of environment can be an example of this interest.

2. The Northeast Asian Policy
1) Clinton Administration
The end of cold war made US to have more interest in Northeast Asia. During the cold war period, US held up the strategy of ‘containment and deterrence’ toward the Communist bloc and took their national security interest seriously. But after the end of cold war, they mapped out the ‘Strategy of Engagement’ and Enlargement to communist countries and placed their economic interest to priority.
This is why US couldn’t neglect Northeast Asia, where one third of the total account of US trade was occurring as U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright said. According to this recognition, US announced ‘United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region’. This strategy emphasizes deeper intervention and direct leadership toward East Asia-Pacific Region for larger interest.

2) Bush Administration
In company with the post-Cold War, US established the basic policy objectives toward Northeast Asia and they are like the conversion from a lean-to-one-side policy to the policy which guard against Russia, maintenance of US-Japan cooperative system, the provision for China, stable control of Korean military and so forth.
And they tried to carry out the role being the balancer of this region. And from this role, they wanted to achieve following things.
First, America thought Northeast Asia will be cheek by jowl with them more and more because this region is rising as the center of International policy-economy, and they have continued the strategy of forward deployment for their national interest under the recognition. On the basis of this, they expanded the comprehensive engagement strategy. As part of the strategy, they operated traditional two-countries-level security alliance, parallel with the multi-national security cooperation. However, Bush showed dual intention by maintaining Northeast Asia order under their lead by enforcing MD system and tougher stance toward North Korea and China, and so forth. By showing these actions, he made clear that he would continue the Northeast Asian policy of Clinton’s Administration in the base.
The second is to have advantage in reducing cost by sharing it with the allies. This includes the regulation of US Army alignment, adjustment for military support-cost, and so on.
Through above things, America has carried out the role of balancer and this situation will be continued.

3) Obama Administration
Then, how about Obama Administration? Since this is his first year, we have to see some more to know how things will shape up, but the movement so far, says that he supports the Republican Party, and the Republican Party consider China as a strategic competitor. So, according to the change of the US’ attitude for China, East Asia will become more important than before.

3. China Threat & North Korea Threat
We can’t skip the ‘China Threat’ and ‘North Korea Threat’ in dealing with US’s strategy toward Northeast Asia. China Threat has risen to the surface after Bush Administration. And the objective is ‘policy switch toward East Asia’ and ‘readjustment of US forces in East Asia’. Especially, ‘U.S.-China Security Review’ points to their fear for China openly. Under this situation, US have many plans like forward deployment of air power/naval power and G

자료평가

아직 평가한 내용이 없습니다.

회원 추천자료

[경제학] Glossary 번역 과제

of one good for another without intermediation of money.물물교환: 한 상품을 돈의 매개 없이 다른 것과 교환하는 것 Base year : The year relative to which other years prices, gross national products, etc, are measured기본 연도: 다른 연도의 가격과 비교했을 때 전체 국내 생산과 기타 등등이 측정된 연도Beggar-thy-neighbor policies : Trade policies designed to improve a countrys macroeconomic performance at the expense of its trade partners economies.빈자-이웃 정책: 무역상대국의 경제에서 한 국가의 거시경제적 상

중국의 부상과 미국의 대외정치(영문)

of USFPPARTHistorical Overview0201 Introduction03 Economy issue04 Security issue 05 Conclusion02OverviewUS relationship with China19481972197819891991~ingSecurity and conflictSecurity cooperationDualcooperationBill Clinton George W. Bush Barack Obama01 Introduction03 Economy issue04 Security issue 05 Conclusion02Overview1. 1948-1972 : Security and conflict Period of Cold War - offers various possibilities to 3rd countries China1) hostile2) collaborative3) neutralUSUSSRthe bipolar axis system- important role of hostileideology01 Introduction03 Econom

중국의 부상과 미국의 대외정치(영문)

U.S. and China are strategic partners of the existing mutual recognition thus maintains.ReferenceBaker, james A. 1991/1992 “America in asia : emerging architecture for a pacific community” foreign affairs.Bergten, fred C. 2008. “A partnership for Equals” foreign affairs.China-US Joint Communique. 1972.http://www.china-embassy.org/eng/zmgx/zywj/t36255.htmGoodfriend, Marvin and Eswar Prasad. 2008. “China’s Currency Crunch.” ForeignPolicy. 164, January/February.김종완. 냉전 이후 미국 대외정책의 변화. 2003.이범준. 미국외교정책. 박영사 2009요옹

[북한학, 북한정치체제론, 북한이데올로기론] 선군정치의 의미, 역사적 발생배경과 특징

미국의 북한문제연구소인 노틸러스연구소(Nautilus Institute) 는 2003년 12월 11일 빈(오스트리아)대학교 뤼디거 프랑크 초빙교수의 기고문을 통해 “선군정치는 이제 정책을 지칭하는 차원을 넘어 점차 이데올로기란 용어로 사용되고 있다(The North Koreans use not only the term Seongun Jeongchi, which refers to a policy, but increasingly employ Seongun Sasang (ideology).”는 평가를 하고 있다.(Ruediger Frank, Visiting Professor, University of Vienna,. “The End of Socialism and a Wedding Gift for the Groom? The T

[정치외교] 미국의 외교정책 결정요인과 결정과정

미국의 외교정책 결정요인과 결정과정FOREIGN POLICY목차1. 외교정책 결정요인2. 외교정책 결정과정3. 미국의 외교정책 전망4. 미국의 동북아 외교정책전망과 함의1. 미국 외교정책 결정요인주관적 요인1) 정책 결정자의 가치관클링턴 행정정부 / 부시 행정부 / 오바마 행정부2) 이데올로기미국 우월주의인종차별주의급진적 개혁에 대한 두려움FOREIGN POLICY1. 미국 외교정책 결정요인1) 정책 결정자의 가치관가치관 sense of value , 價値觀 인간이

오늘 본 자료 더보기

오늘 본 자료가 없습니다.

최근 판매 자료

Naver 로그인

Kakao 로그인