지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
This thesis explores the Republic of Korea’s(ROK) Defense Reform(reform ’12~’30) to determine the relevant actors between the reform and their effect on the decision-making process, with a focus on the roles of ‘dominant power centers’ in the policy-making. This study also exposes the undercurrents of policy materials to the process of executing the national defense reform.
During these phases, ‘dominant power centers’ emerged and took lead the debate forward, allowing for the decision-making process to bear fruit. Dispute between the navy and air force occurred from the initial stage of reform ’12~’30-the dissension eventually was resolved by the minister of national defense, who was delegated authority to do so by the president. However, the legislation process at the National Assembly faced strong opposition from both the members of the National Defense Committee and the naval and air force veteran associations and reserve organizations.
Overall, the analysis reveals the following key actors and their impact on the defense reform processes. First, the president’s preference directly impacted the policy-making process. Second, the ROK Navy (ROKN) and ROK Air Force (ROKAF), as individual organizations, had direct and marginal impact on policy-making process. Third, National Defense Committee members’ differences in power and expertise impacted the process. Fourth, the direction of the reform was decided by the ‘dominant power centers’ with exclusive expertise. Fifth, the chairman of the National Defense Committee, representatives of both ruling and opposition parties, and the president were requested to exercise political power upon the legislation process. Lastly, the influence of groups that shape public opinion (such as retired military officers) increased.
During these phases, ‘dominant power centers’ emerged and took lead the debate forward, allowing for the decision-making process to bear fruit. Dispute between the navy and air force occurred from the initial stage of reform ’12~’30-the dissension eventually was resolved by the minister of national defense, who was delegated authority to do so by the president. However, the legislation process at the National Assembly faced strong opposition from both the members of the National Defense Committee and the naval and air force veteran associations and reserve organizations.
Overall, the analysis reveals the following key actors and their impact on the defense reform processes. First, the president’s preference directly impacted the policy-making process. Second, the ROK Navy (ROKN) and ROK Air Force (ROKAF), as individual organizations, had direct and marginal impact on policy-making process. Third, National Defense Committee members’ differences in power and expertise impacted the process. Fourth, the direction of the reform was decided by the ‘dominant power centers’ with exclusive expertise. Fifth, the chairman of the National Defense Committee, representatives of both ruling and opposition parties, and the president were requested to exercise political power upon the legislation process. Lastly, the influence of groups that shape public opinion (such as retired military officers) increased.
목차
1. 서론
2. 이명박 정부의 국방개혁 배경
3. 국방개혁정책 구상과 이해집단의 반향
4. 국방개혁정책에 대한 논쟁과 지배적 권력중추의 역할
5. 결론
〈ABSTRACT〉
참고문헌 (42)
참고문헌 신청
노훈 / 2011 / 군 상부구조 개편 : 동기와 구현방향 / 전략연구 18(51):48~67
이규열 / 2006 / 한미동맹체제의 발전방향과 국방개혁의 추진 / 국방정책연구 22(2):9~36
박휘락 / 2012 / “국방개혁 2020”과 미군 “변혁”(Transformation)의 비교와 교훈 : 변화방식을 중심으로 / 평화학연구 13(3):151~178
김동한 / 2008 / 노무현 정부의 국방개혁정책 결정과정 연구:군 구조 개편과 법제화의 정치과정을 중심으로 / 군사논단 (제53)
이근욱 / 2008 / 한국 국방개혁 2020의 문제점: 미래에 대한 전망과 안보 / 신아세아 15(4):93~114
이규열 / 2006 / 한미동맹체제의 발전방향과 국방개혁의 추진 / 국방정책연구 22(2):9~36
박휘락 / 2012 / “국방개혁 2020”과 미군 “변혁”(Transformation)의 비교와 교훈 : 변화방식을 중심으로 / 평화학연구 13(3):151~178
김동한 / 2008 / 노무현 정부의 국방개혁정책 결정과정 연구:군 구조 개편과 법제화의 정치과정을 중심으로 / 군사논단 (제53)
이근욱 / 2008 / 한국 국방개혁 2020의 문제점: 미래에 대한 전망과 안보 / 신아세아 15(4):93~114
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2016-390-001812975