准联盟中安全和主权的冲突

Q2 Arts and Humanities European Journal of East Asian Studies Pub Date : 2021-04-13 DOI:10.1163/15700615-20211013
Kil-joo Ban
{"title":"准联盟中安全和主权的冲突","authors":"Kil-joo Ban","doi":"10.1163/15700615-20211013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Which is needed more: sovereignty or security? The autonomy–security trade-off model sees this as a trade-off between a client and a patron. A client surrenders some measure of autonomy to a patron and, in turn, receives security. This paper explores whether the underlying logic is applicable to quasi-alliances between a state and a multinational regime, such as the United Nations Command (UNC). South Korea has maintained a quasi-alliance with the UNC since the outbreak of the Korean War in 1950. The level of trade-off between South Korea and the UNC, however, has been changing over time, particularly while being affected by the power growth of South Korea, a client, and the preference changes of the US, the most important actor of the UNC, a patron. This paper attempts to explain why South Korea is much more enthusiastic in seeking full sovereignty and more autonomy in the 2018–2019 détente era.","PeriodicalId":35205,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of East Asian Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Clash of Security and Sovereignty in Quasi-Alliance\",\"authors\":\"Kil-joo Ban\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/15700615-20211013\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Which is needed more: sovereignty or security? The autonomy–security trade-off model sees this as a trade-off between a client and a patron. A client surrenders some measure of autonomy to a patron and, in turn, receives security. This paper explores whether the underlying logic is applicable to quasi-alliances between a state and a multinational regime, such as the United Nations Command (UNC). South Korea has maintained a quasi-alliance with the UNC since the outbreak of the Korean War in 1950. The level of trade-off between South Korea and the UNC, however, has been changing over time, particularly while being affected by the power growth of South Korea, a client, and the preference changes of the US, the most important actor of the UNC, a patron. This paper attempts to explain why South Korea is much more enthusiastic in seeking full sovereignty and more autonomy in the 2018–2019 détente era.\",\"PeriodicalId\":35205,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of East Asian Studies\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-04-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of East Asian Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/15700615-20211013\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of East Asian Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15700615-20211013","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

更需要哪一个:主权还是安全?自治-安全权衡模型将此视为客户和赞助人之间的权衡。客户将一定程度的自主权交给赞助人,进而获得安全保障。本文探讨了基本逻辑是否适用于一个国家与多国政权(如联合国军司令部)之间的准联盟。自1950年朝鲜战争爆发以来,韩国一直与北卡罗来纳大学保持着准联盟关系。然而,随着时间的推移,韩国和联合国军司令部之间的权衡水平一直在变化,尤其是在受到客户韩国的实力增长和联合国军司令部最重要的参与者美国的偏好变化的影响时。本文试图解释为什么韩国在2018-2019年的缓和时期更热衷于寻求完全主权和更多自治。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Clash of Security and Sovereignty in Quasi-Alliance
Which is needed more: sovereignty or security? The autonomy–security trade-off model sees this as a trade-off between a client and a patron. A client surrenders some measure of autonomy to a patron and, in turn, receives security. This paper explores whether the underlying logic is applicable to quasi-alliances between a state and a multinational regime, such as the United Nations Command (UNC). South Korea has maintained a quasi-alliance with the UNC since the outbreak of the Korean War in 1950. The level of trade-off between South Korea and the UNC, however, has been changing over time, particularly while being affected by the power growth of South Korea, a client, and the preference changes of the US, the most important actor of the UNC, a patron. This paper attempts to explain why South Korea is much more enthusiastic in seeking full sovereignty and more autonomy in the 2018–2019 détente era.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
European Journal of East Asian Studies
European Journal of East Asian Studies Arts and Humanities-History
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Health Law focuses on the development of health law in Europe: national, comparative and international. The exchange of views between health lawyers in Europe is encouraged. The Journal publishes information on the activities of European and other international organizations in the field of health law. Discussions about ethical questions with legal implications are welcome. National legislation, court decisions and other relevant national material with international implications are also dealt with. Each issue of the European Journal of Health Law contains articles (with abstracts), selected legislation, judicial decisions, a chronicle of events, and book reviews.
期刊最新文献
Simultaneous Recruitment of New Graduates (SRoNG) Review of the Research on the Belt and Road Initiative in Myanmar Sociability of ‘Selfishness’ and Individualism in Chinese Modern Thought and Society Habsburgs Going Global. The Austro-Hungarian Concession in Tientsin/Tianjin in China (1901–1917), by Michael Falser Civil Society Perspectives on Rights and Freedoms in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1