본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

Towards Gendering Northeast Asian Traditional Security: The Cases of the USS Pueblo and Juche Policy

0

조회

0

다운로드

0

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

초록

Since the conclusion of the uneasy armistice that halted the Korean War in 1953,security on the Korean Peninsula has remained unsettled. This has negativelyimpacted regional security dynamics, too. A major problem has been North Koreanmilitary provocations. South Korean and U.S. responses to such maneuvers havefurther contributed to regional instability. Using the case of the 1968 Pueblo Incident,the paper examines the context of military provocation and reaction with the focuson a suspected gender-bias in regional security affairs. The paper investigatesPyongyang’s motivation for initiating a crisis and Washington’s and Seoul’sresponses to the provocation and applies a branch of International Relations Theory,Gender Studies, as its analytical framework. The conclusion is that all actorsinvolved in the 1968 Pueblo Incident, especially North Korea’s leadership, initiatedor preferred actions that were heavily gender-biased. Demonstrations of strength,independence, and victory were seen as the only ones appropriate, while alternativepolicies were seen as weak and defeatist. In 1968, conflict and conflict resolutioncan be properly explained as heavily gender-biased, which sheds new light on ourunderstanding of North Korea’s motivation for the provocation, and South Koreanand American responses.

Abstract

Since the conclusion of the uneasy armistice that halted the Korean War in 1953,security on the Korean Peninsula has remained unsettled. This has negativelyimpacted regional security dynamics, too. A major problem has been North Koreanmilitary provocations. South Korean and U.S. responses to such maneuvers havefurther contributed to regional instability. Using the case of the 1968 Pueblo Incident,the paper examines the context of military provocation and reaction with the focuson a suspected gender-bias in regional security affairs. The paper investigatesPyongyang’s motivation for initiating a crisis and Washington’s and Seoul’sresponses to the provocation and applies a branch of International Relations Theory,Gender Studies, as its analytical framework. The conclusion is that all actorsinvolved in the 1968 Pueblo Incident, especially North Korea’s leadership, initiatedor preferred actions that were heavily gender-biased. Demonstrations of strength,independence, and victory were seen as the only ones appropriate, while alternativepolicies were seen as weak and defeatist. In 1968, conflict and conflict resolutioncan be properly explained as heavily gender-biased, which sheds new light on ourunderstanding of North Korea’s motivation for the provocation, and South Koreanand American responses.

참고문헌 (49)

  1. J. Ann Tickner, "Hans Morgenthau’s Principles of Political Realism: A Feminist Reformulation", Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 17(3) (1988)
  2. Jill Steans, "Gender and International Relations, an Introduction" (1998), Rutgers UP
  3. Jennifer Heeg Maruska, "Gender in International Security, Feminist Perspective" (2010), Routledge
  4. Narushige Michishita, "North Korea’s Military-Diplomatic Campaigns, 1966–2008, Routledge Security in Asia-Pacific Series" (2009), Routledge
  5. Laura McEnaney, "Major Problems in American Foreign Relations: Documents and Essays" (2006), Houghton Mifflin
  6. Rebecca Grant, "Gender and International Relations", pp.5~ (1991), Open University Press in association with Millennium
  7. Jean Bethke Elshtain, "New Thinking in International Relations Theory", pp.79~ (1997), Westview Press
  8. J. Ann Tickner, "Gendering World Politics, Issues and Approaches in the Post-Cold War Era" (2001), Columbia UP
  9. Jeffrey A. Bader, "Obama and China’s Rise: An Insider’s Account of America’s Asia Strategy" (2012), Brookings Institution Press
  10. Kenneth B. Pyle, "Japan Rising: The Resurgence of Japanese Power and Purpose, 1st ed" (2007), Public Affairs
  11. Richard J. Samuels, "New Fighting Power!’Japan’s Growing Maritime Capabilities and East Asian Security", International Security, 32(3) (2007)
  12. Samuel S. Kim, "North Korean Foreign Relations in the Post-Cold War World", pp.2007, Strategic Studies Institute
  13. Samuel S. Kim, "The International Relations of Northeast Asia, Asia in World Politics" (2004), Rowman &Littlefield Publishers
  14. Victor D. Cha, "Nuclear North Korea: A Debate on Engagement Strategies" (2003), Columbia University Press
  15. Byung-kook Kim, "Power and Security in Northeast Asia: Shifting Strategies" (2007), Lynne Rienner
  16. Gerald Segal, "North-East Asia: Common Security or À La Carte?", International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs), 67(4) (1991)
  17. Lee Lai To, "East Asian Assessments of China’s Security Policy", International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs), 73(2) (1997)
  18. Jörg Friedrichs, "East Asian Regional Security", Asian Survey, 52(4) (2012)
  19. 남창희, "Northeast Asia and the two Koreas" (2008), Yonsei University Press
  20. Andrew O’Neil, "Nuclear Proliferation in Northeast Asia: The Quest for Security" (2007), Palgrave
  21. Jim Rolfe, "Regional Security for the Asia-Pacific: Ends and Means", Contemporary Southeast Asia, 30(1) (2008)
  22. 전혜원, "Security cooperation in Northeast Asia" (2012), Routledge
  23. Simon Duke, "Northeast Asia and Regional Security", The Journal of East Asian Affairs, 9(2) (1995)
  24. Park Min-Hyoung, "A Cooperative Security System in Northeast Asia: The ROK’s Strategic Choices", The Journal of East Asian Affairs, 25(1) (2011)
  25. Mel Gurtov, "Common Security in North Korea: Quest for a New Paradigm in Inter-Korean Relations", Asian Survey, 42(3) (2002)
  26. Lee Min-yong, "Building Security Regimes in Northeast Asia", The Journal of East Asian Affairs, 9(1) (1995)
  27. Kent E. Calder, "The Making of Northeast Asia" (2010), Stanford UP
  28. 남창희, "Northeast Asia and the two Koreas", pp.339~ (2008), Yonsei University Press
  29. Robert L. Jr. Pfaltzgraff, "Contending Theories of International Relations. A Comprehensive Survey, 5 eds", pp.170~ (2001), Longman
  30. Jacqui True, "The Oxford Handbook of International Relations", pp.414~ (2008), Oxford University Press
  31. Nicole Detraz, "International Security and Gender" (2012), Polity
  32. J. Ann Tickner, "Gender in International Relations, Feminist Perspectives on Achieving Global Security" (1992), Columbia UP
  33. Laura Sjoberg, "Gender, Structure, and War: What Waltz Couldn’t See", International Theory, 4(1) (2012)
  34. Tickner, "Feminist Perspectives on International Relations" (2002), Sage
  35. Laura Sjoberg, "Gender and International Security, Feminist Perspectives, Routledge Critical Security Studies" (2010), Routledge
  36. Wendy Brown, "Manhood and Politics", pp.ix~ (1988), Rowman & Littlefield
  37. Jennifer Anne Sterling-Folker, "Making Sense of International Relations Theory", pp.345~ (2006), Lynne Rienner Publishers
  38. Francis Fukuyama, "The Origins of Political Order: From Prehuman Times to the French Revolution, 1st ed", pp.438~441 (2011), Farrar, Straus and Giroux
  39. Thomas Hobbes, "Leviathan" (1983), Dent
  40. Rebecca Grant, "Gender and International Relations" (1991), Open University Press in association with Millennium
  41. Tickner, "International Theory: Critical Investigations" (1995), New York University Press
  42. Raewyn Connell, "Gender and Power: Society, the Person, and Sexual Politics", pp.183~188 (1987), Stanford University Press
  43. J. Ann Tickner, "The Globalization of World Politics, an Introduction to International Relations", pp.269~270 (2008), Oxford UP
  44. Kristin L. Hoganson, "Fighting for American Manhood : How Gender Politics Provoked the Spanish-American and Philippine-American Wars, Yale Historical Publications" (1998), Yale University Press
  45. Mitchell B. Lerner, "The Pueblo Incident, a Spy Ship and the Failure of American Foreign Policy, Modern War Studies series", UP of Kansas (2002)
  46. Charles K. Armstrong, "Tyranny of the Weak: North Korea and the World, 1950–1992" (2013), Cornell UP
  47. 15, Winter 2003–Spring 2004, "Cold War International History Project Bulletin, New Evidence on North Korea, vol. Issue 14", pp.2003, Christian Friedrich Ostermann
  48. Paul French, "North Korea, the Paranoid Peninsula — a Modern History", pp.30~47 (2005), Zed Books
  49. Charles K. Armstrong, "The Koreas, Globalizing Regions", Routledge, pp.57~59 (2007)

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (7건)