Earticle

Divided nations, Germany and China have shown very adequate cases on intra-trade between two parties. However, the two Koreas are still division status and inter-Korea trade is completely stopped since 2016. North and South Korea have been agreed by various statements and declaration through two summit meeting between the two Koreas but it became just written and verbal agreement. In this respect, this paper is suggesting on North and South Korea CEPA. Division countries have been got benefit like zero or lower tariff system under intra-trade system, but it is getting the disputable condition because zero and lower tariff applied under agreement of free trade agreement. So, Germany had been received from GATT and surrounding nations on their intra-Germany trade and China has been agreed with Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macau under FTA regulation. So, these divided nations could get stable intra-trade condition and recognition from international organizations. So, both Koreas also need to change their preexisting intra-Korea trade system. Through this CEPA, North and South Korea need to follow to international and FTA rule. Lastly, North and South Korea need to make economic integration through CEPA.

Throughout the history of South Korean diplomacy, many different government entities have launched a wide variety of different initiatives with the goal of promoting international exchange. However, those efforts did not achieve desired results, failing to gain the support and understanding of neighboring powers with regard to the South Korean vision for a Northeast Asia peace agreement and reunification Korean peninsula. Two of these powers, The United States and The People's Republic of China, are paying close attention to the DPRK nuclear and missile development programs, as well as the Six-party talks, considering how these issues will impact their own countries. As such, South Korean foreign policy toward the United States and China—countries which are very important political and economic actors—will be foundational for laying a framework for a future unified Korean peninsula. Apart from the need to consider neighboring powers in relation to public diplomacy, there is also the practical need for a more efficient system for strategic implementation of public diplomacy efforts that will help to bring unification. To that end, this paper will explore the complex web of parties interested in the security situation on the Korean peninsula, while also asserting that Korea must create foreign and domestic public diplomacy strategies that are more effective and pragmatic toward said parties, learning from past failures. In addition, this paper will recommend that Korean diplomats develop communication objectives that go beyond simply enhancing the Korean national brand and image, to communication strategies that emphasize management of international and strategic problems in ways that articulate Korean policy positions, while also raising awareness of Korean issues and concerns.

This paper aims to consider on new directions in the ‘education for the unification’ which was based on earlier ‘education about unification.’ For this research, it was utilized two important concepts related to the peaceful unification. First perspective is ‘peaceful unification’. first term, ‘peace’ used as means and ‘unification’ used as ultimate goal. Second perspective is ‘unification peace’, second term, ‘peace’ used as ultimate goal and ‘unification’ used as intermediate goal in the way to peace. And this paper examined practical possibility for unification scenarios toward peaceful unification, suggested a new direction of education ‘for’ peaceful unification on the base of these discussions. Especially, in the development of unification education at school, this study proposed a new direction such as exploration of the future that may exist rather than existence, education for unification, paradigm shift of difference and commonality, unification sensitivity.

North Korean nuclear problems and dilemmas have been continued without regards to a process of the Agreed Framework between the US and DPRK as well as the Joint Statement by the Six-party Talks. Under the circumstances, this paper intends to focus on analyzing the Trump administration’s main principles and options remained on the table such as peaceful and diplomatic, pressure and offensive approaches. Above all, it is analyzed the US diplomatic approach, and stronger sanctions on nuclear and ballistic missile programsunder the maximum engagement and pressure policy towards North Korea. Such other options as not only the regime change but the military strike in the North are also analyzed, reviewing reality and likelihood. On the other side, Pyongyang’s counterstrategies in opposition to Trump administration’s proactive and reactive strategies are examined. All efforts are made to suggest a desirable way to lighten tension situation on the Korean Peninsula and to accomplish the ‘disarmament-for-aid’ deal.

Due to the complexity and prolongation, combined with the continued inability of world powers to come to a mutual consensus, the Syrian war has become one of the biggest political challenges of the early 21st century. The war started in May 2011 with Bashar Hafez al-Assad regime’s oppression of local demonstrators. From the very beginning of the conflict, the EU expressed its unwillingness to tolerate Assad’s crimes. EU thus severed ties with Assad by terminating all bilateral agreements and imposing sanctions. A dramatic turn in EU – Syrian relations took place in August 2011 when the EU announced that president Assad has lost the legitimacy to lead the Syrian people due to the violence committed against civilians. Subsequently, another development took place on November 2012 when the EU recognized the Syrian opposition as the legal representative of the Syrian people. Apart from the canceling of bilateral agreements, imposing of sanctions and support given to the “legitimate opposition’’, the EU made notable efforts to convince the United Nations (UN) to adopt sanctions against Syria and to therefore bring about a peaceful resolution to the conflict. Even though the EU has been engaging in the Syrian crisis though only non-militarily means – such as the application of diplomatic force and sanctions to seek a peaceful transition of power in Syria - it has tried to keep its interests on equal footing with countries which are directly militarily involved in the conflict. The purpose of study is to examine the reasons behind EU’s engagement in the Syrian crisis and the resulting relations among them – including the degree of importance of each reason for the EU. Furthermore, this paper seeks to evaluate the effectiveness of the EU’s engagement in respect to its motives. This paper finds that the reasons of the EU’s engagement and its priorities in dealing with Syria are as follows: First, migration wave and terrorism; second, energy interests; and third, humanitarian reasons and the maintaining of peace in the surrounding region. In terms of the effectiveness of the applied measures to solve or alleviate the reasons, EU measures have been partially effective in mitigating the first and third problems, but ineffective with regard the second problem.

Since the end of the Cold War, the United Kingdom (UK) has intervened militarily in a number of security crises, engaging in so-called wars of choice and it seems likely that the future will see more operations such as Kosovo, Sierra Leone and Afghanistan.In 2003, the UK participated in the US-ledcoalition that invaded Iraq and quickly overthrew the Ba’ath Party and captured Saddam Hussein. Despite the successes of the initial combat operations in Iraq, the drawn-out anti-insurgency campaign that followed has proved challenging and unfruitful in restabilising the state. The 2011 withdrawal of forces left a fractured state that necessitated re-intervention as early as 2014. The unresolved instability of Iraq to date demonstrates the failures of the coalition to institute peace and to transition the state out of war. This paper, with a focus on British Defence Doctrine, explores the approaches that contributed to both the success and the failures of the post-conflict stabilization of Iraq.It concludes that, as a result of the military predominance within the strategic planning process, the focus on destruction of strategic centres of gravity does not contribute positively to the successful transition from war-fighting to peace-restoration operations. An earlier focus must be placed upon rebuilding campaigns and a holistic approach must pay more consideration to stabilization in order that the greater political aims of a campaign are ensured. This paper proposes three alternative approaches in which operations focus not on the destruction of the old order but the creation of a new one.

The so-called ‘refugee crisis’ of 2015-2016 poses a substantial challenge to European migration policies and ignited a new debate on migration across Europe. Germany, in particular, has seen a massive influx of migrants, yet a culture of welcome prevailed and the support for anti-migration groups remains lower than in neighboring countries. The paper explores the changing framingof refuge and (im)migrationin Germanyduring the refugee crisis. While in the past the image of a refugee deserving asylum was clearly defined on political grounds, the increasing number of economic migrants challenges the perception of refuge among Germans. The framing of migrants became more nuanced, shifting from a collective to an individual notion. Following negative incidents, frames for specific groups shifted further, prompting politicians to introduce some policy changes that tightened access. Using a framework of deservingness, the paper looks at the framing ofdifferent migrant groups and subsequent changes of perceptions of deservingness among citizens. Three key criteria of deservingness are studied, the personal responsibility for one’s situation, the level of need, and the identity of recipients.Such analysis contributes to a deeper understanding of changes in public opinion, supplementing quantitative work.

Tanzania, Uganda and Kenya have been receiving larger amount of official development assistance (ODA) compared to the rest of the East African Community countries. Therefore this study aims at assessing the impact of ODA on economic growth for to those three East African Community countries for the last 35 years from 1980-2014. The study employed the autoregressive distribution lag (ARDL) approach geared by Eviews9 application software for all estimations with the inclusion of other important independent variables like terms of trade, foreign direct investment, education and health. All countries’ ODA estimated results confirmed to have positive and significant effect on their economic growth. Just in the short run, ODA flowing to Kenya and Uganda proved to have a negative significant effect on the economic growth. However in the long run both countries’ ODA effects were positive. Tanzania had a significant positive effect for short and long run. In line with ODA, education and health found to have positive significant short and long run effects on the economic growth of East African countries. However in the previous years the human development factors were negatively affecting the growth, therefore the reverse suggested signs of improvements in the human development.