Comparative Study on the Distinctive Strategies and Factors of China’s Negotiation with Taiwan and South Korea’s Negotiation with North Korea: Focusing on the ECFA and GIC

IF 0.1 Q4 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Wonwoo Shin
{"title":"Comparative Study on the Distinctive Strategies and Factors of China’s Negotiation with Taiwan and South Korea’s Negotiation with North Korea: Focusing on the ECFA and GIC","authors":"Wonwoo Shin","doi":"10.14731/kjis.2019.12.17.3.267","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this study is to compare the aspects of China’s negotiation with Taiwan and South Korea’s negotiation with North Korea around the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement(ECFA) and Gaeseong Industrial Complex (GIC) negotiation cases, and to derive implications from the aspects of China’s negotiation with Taiwan on the Inter-Korean relations, in a situation of a division. Con- clusions drawn from this study are as follows. First, both China’s negotiation with Taiwan and South Korea’s negotiation with North Korea are emphasizing practical interests. Second, in terms of military security, South Korea should adjust its critical point in the engagement strategy toward North Korea to the level of China’s critical point in the engagement strategy toward Taiwan. Third, South Korea should incorporate the organization responsible for Inter-Korean negotiations into the institutional system to hold the negotiation on a regular basis and also should seek for ways to grant the Inter-Korean agreement a legal status. Fourth, South Korea should minimize the changes in its North Korea policy arising from the change in the political camp and ruling party. Fifth, continuous efforts should be made to raise awareness among the South Korean people that the Inter-Korean economic cooperation project is not a means to provide a dispensational aid, but a part of investment to pursue mutual benefits. Lastly, the US influence on the Inter-Korean economic negotiations needs to be curtailed so that the negotiations are carried out in the framework of a bilateral negotiation.","PeriodicalId":41543,"journal":{"name":"Korean Journal of International Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korean Journal of International Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14731/kjis.2019.12.17.3.267","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to compare the aspects of China’s negotiation with Taiwan and South Korea’s negotiation with North Korea around the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement(ECFA) and Gaeseong Industrial Complex (GIC) negotiation cases, and to derive implications from the aspects of China’s negotiation with Taiwan on the Inter-Korean relations, in a situation of a division. Con- clusions drawn from this study are as follows. First, both China’s negotiation with Taiwan and South Korea’s negotiation with North Korea are emphasizing practical interests. Second, in terms of military security, South Korea should adjust its critical point in the engagement strategy toward North Korea to the level of China’s critical point in the engagement strategy toward Taiwan. Third, South Korea should incorporate the organization responsible for Inter-Korean negotiations into the institutional system to hold the negotiation on a regular basis and also should seek for ways to grant the Inter-Korean agreement a legal status. Fourth, South Korea should minimize the changes in its North Korea policy arising from the change in the political camp and ruling party. Fifth, continuous efforts should be made to raise awareness among the South Korean people that the Inter-Korean economic cooperation project is not a means to provide a dispensational aid, but a part of investment to pursue mutual benefits. Lastly, the US influence on the Inter-Korean economic negotiations needs to be curtailed so that the negotiations are carried out in the framework of a bilateral negotiation.
中国对台湾谈判与韩国对朝谈判的独特策略与因素比较研究——以ECFA和GIC为中心
本研究的目的是比较中国与台湾的谈判和韩国与朝鲜围绕经济合作框架协议(ECFA)和盖城工业综合体(GIC)谈判案例的谈判,并从中国与台湾的谈判中得出分裂情况下两国间关系的启示。本研究得出的结论如下。第一,中国与台湾的谈判和韩国与朝鲜的谈判都强调实际利益。第二,在军事安全方面,韩国应将其在对朝交战战略中的关键点调整到中国在对台湾交战战略中关键点的水平。第三,韩国应将负责朝韩谈判的组织纳入定期举行谈判的体制体系,并应寻求赋予朝韩协议法律地位的方法。第四,韩国应尽量减少因政治阵营和执政党的变化而导致的对朝政策变化。第五,应不断努力提高韩国人民的认识,即朝韩经济合作项目不是提供可有可无的援助的手段,而是追求互利的投资的一部分。最后,需要减少美国对朝韩经济谈判的影响,以便在双边谈判的框架内进行谈判。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Korean Journal of International Studies
Korean Journal of International Studies INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS-
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信