جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « کره جنوبی » در نشریات گروه « علوم سیاسی »

This paper examines the cases of nuclear non-proliferation in Iran and South Korea, focusing on the Western approach toward these cases. Both Iran and South Korea were found to be non-compliant with the International Atomic Energy Agency's regulations. Although the nature and level of non-compliance were similar, the cases were resolved differently, with South Korea's case being closed shortly after the resolution of their non-compliance issues. This research aims to investigate the differing outcomes of the nuclear cases of Iran and South Korea. Specifically, this study analyzes the reports of the International Atomic Energy Agency on the non-compliance of Iran and South Korea, as well as the positions of Western countries during the conferences of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). Through this analysis, the study concludes that the primary reason for the divergent outcomes is not related to the political systems or relationships of Iran and South Korea with the West but rather to the differing approaches of the West towards these cases.

Reviewing the history of Iran's development efforts in the past 150 years shows periods of accompanying, or being ahead and behind countries. Japan and South Korea have a clear position in this field. This research examines Iran's development situation in comparison with these two countries in historical periods (1860-1926 and 1963-2010), within the framework of North, Acemoglu, and Robinson's institutional model. This approach focuses on formal rules, procedures, and organizations to explain the relationship between institutional structures and the success or failure of policies. The main question in this research is that despite the creation of political structure in Iran in the 19th century, compared to the experiences of Japan In the second half of the 19th century and South Korea in the early 20th century, why did the development program in Iran not go well and comprehensive political and economic institutional arrangements were not achieved? The obtained results show that the alignment of the government and the developing nation in Iran has not been successful due to the lack of institutional development.

The experiences of the new industrialized countries such as south Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, Malaysia in the process of industrialization , have highlighted the role of government in industrialization. But something that has been remained as a question and would be the subject for many researches is how to play that role for government.Confirming that there are many confusions about the role of government in development and industrialization in Iran ; the aim of  this article is to compare the role of government in Auto-industry in Iran and South Korea base on institutionalism approach and Evans’ pattern of developmental state (autonomy embedded in society) , and it uses the comparative method in order to find an answer for this core question : despite this fact that Iran and South Korea has established their Auto-industry almost in the same time , but why Korea has been much more succeeded than Iran in the world stand. Findings in the article has supported this hypothesis that the main reason for inefficient and backwardness of Auto-industry in Iran is unbalanced and heterogeneous roles of the government in Iran which are played in this sector of industry , in comparison to well-played developmental roles by south Korea’s government.

Studies on successful countries in economic development indicate that these governments have no choice except entering the process led by global approach. It is necessary for the government to have coordination and harmony in its national development plans and globally embedded economy; this should be accomplished by foreign policy makers in accordance with domestic politics and international environment as well. This study mainly relies on the theory of developmental states, theorized by Adrian Leftwich to analyse the role of international environment as well as foreign policy in economic development in the Republic of Korea. Moreover, this study aims to respond to a major question: what are the main features of international environment and also foreign policy in the economic development of South Korea between 1980 and 2010. The main hypothesis provided here is that there were conducive features for economic development in international environment, as well as similarities and differences in the foreign policy activism in South Korea. The data gathering method in this study is based on library resources. The method of analysis is comparative combined with regional approach which focuses on intra-country comparison in different periods of time.

This study is intended to investigate the procedure of economic development in South Korea in the 1960s to 1990s and the role of private grand companies such as Chaebols in it. The research follows a qualitative-analytical method which employs reviewing documents, secondary sources and analysis of existing scientific texts for collecting data. This study aims at investigating the causes of South Korea's economic development in the framework of Lefkovitch model of development-oriented governance. The findings indicated that South Korea's economic progress was due to the emergence of developmentalist elites, relative independence of government, strong bureaucracy, weak civil society, consolidation of government power before the rise of capitalists and favorable international conditions. This was achieved by full support of the government of Chaebols. However, eventually the South Korean economy encountered a crisis due to the lack of government oversight and control over these institutions, and the government was forced to make structural and economic reforms. The experience of the development-oriented government of South Korea in using the Chaebols to advance the economy in this country can be a suitable guide for the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the field of cooperative economy.

The Iranian policy behavior toward the Korean Peninsula has generally remained as an anomaly to its overall pattern of foreign policymaking with regard to many other parts of the world. Both under the Pahlavi monarchy and the Islamic Republic, Iran has often kept a rather low-profile yet active approach vis-à-vis the Koreans on both sides of the peninsula, aiming to accomplish a great deal of its objectives in all political, military, economic, financial, technological, and cultural areas. Applying a pragmatist framework of analysis, this study argues that within the past several decades the Iranian orientation has been somehow persistent and effective, making it possible for Tehran to quietly pursue its various goals in the peninsula at a relatively low cost. More importantly, Iran’s approach toward the Korean Peninsula under the Islamic Republic and the lessons Tehran gleaned from its multifaceted interactions with South Korea and North Korea over a course of more than four decades could be used as an illuminating template for foreign policymaking toward some other important regions where Iran has enormous interests.

Korea's division into North Korea and South Korea was the result of the victory of the Allies in World War II in 1945 and the end of 35 years of domination of Japan over Korea until eventually became an independent Korean government. Soviet's lack of cooperation with the UN program ultimately led to the formation of a Soviet-backed communist state in the north and a pro-Western state in the south. The claim of sovereignty over the whole peninsula of Korea by both governments led to the Korean War in 1950 and temporary Peace in 1953was established with the interference of the Great Powers. Since the end of the Korean War, the aspiration for peace and the unification of the two Koreas has led to a lot of political evolutions on the Korean Peninsula. So the main question in the present paper is what was the role of the current President of South Korea, Moon Jae-in, in the Korean Peninsula Peace Initiative with regard to the context of the unification of the two Koreas?Moon Jae-in, in contrast to the policy of pervious presidents is trying to manage internal issues in Korea for trust building between two Koreas and North Korea and U.S, and fulfiling peace in Korean peninsula at the same time with Negotiations on disarmament between the United States and North Korea.This seems to be due to relating peninsula peace to nuclear disarmamnent and North Korea's concern of endangering its position in strategic rivalry with South Korea.

Changing security equations and communications in the Korean peninsula during the post-cold war era made this region a strategic feature in balance of power among the regional and international players and also an important part of the regional security dynamics. In this atmosphere, South Korea is an influential economic power which due to the North Korean threat, tries to play a more active role in enhancing its security. Besides its strategic defensive alliance with the United states, South Korea also uses some other options to enhance its economic and defensive security, one of which being membership in Multilateral Exports Control Regimes. With South Korea’s exports rising by use of industrialization of export goods, and its capability in exporting defense items and its interest in trade transactions with the world,  adopting necessary strategies for membership in Multilateral Exports Control Regimes is of great significance. Now, the question of this research is how the multilateral export control regimes affect the security of South Korea? In other words, how does joining the multilateral export control regimes affect South Korean economic and defensive security? Findings show that by joining the majority of export control regimes, South Korea keeps its affinity with the western bloc and provides itself with the security of technology transportation in the East Asian region. By use of regulations of export control regimes, It also fights against the regional threats, including North Korea.

A comparative study of the developmentlism in Sazandegi ‘s state and compare it with the developmental process of South KoreaAbstractSouth Korea and Iran, the countries that in order to achieve economical development, enterprise to developmental policy –makin., Despite the adoption of developmental policies in two countries, in practice each reached different conclusions . Less than four years after the start of economic development, Korea become one of the top economies of the world; While Iran couldn ‘t reach to the determinate goals . This study seeks to answer the question that the reasons for the success of Korea in the aftermath of the Second World War and the frustration of Sazandegi ‘s state in achieve the development what is? To response to this question, our hypothesis is that to exist a Developmental state in South Korea , and the lack of such State in the age of the Sazandegi in Iran is the main factor in the success of Korea and frustration of Iran .The method used in this study , descriptive and analytical with the use of library resources , the formal statics and documents have been made .

Among researchers in East Asia, the role of the United States Navy (OSP) and the Military-Industrial Complex (MIC) in the description of rapid industrial change has been overlooked. However, the foundations of industrialization in places like South Korea, given the strong analytical conditions of the "national-regional" and the central government, are so-called "new Weber-new" and are still insufficient. A geopolitical economic approach with a focus on the role of OSP and relations in the US MIC will shed light on the social and intellectual dimensions of Korea's industrial success during the Vietnam War, which were largely absent from the Weber-New report. . In particular, we look at the involvement of the Chang Hei Park regime in the Vietnam War and development with Korean industrial Chaibol, such as Hyundai, and argue that the success of the developing country of South Korea and Chaibol by joining the US MIC through OSP became possible.

Value, credibility, dignity, soft power, advantage, profit, power and ... are attached to the name of the country with the positive image. The value of the perceptual image of the nation and the country is like the invisible golden. One of the important facts about that is the competition between citizens and ordinary people in the world, for access to the name and passport of a credible country. Nowadays, South Korea's name along with an industrial product or cultural production gives the valuable power to that production. Accordingly, the main question of the present research is that what is the most important factor in the success of the Korea's nation branding and Korea's positive image around the world? This paper tries to explain and conceptualization of the nation branding field and then examines the construction and policy of nation branding spread of Korea by Korean wave. This paper emphasizes that the most important factor in the success of Korea's global image and management of its reputation is the strategic institutionalization.

Although Iran has begun the formulation of the development plan 8 years earlier than Japan, 14 years earlier than South Korea and 5 years earlier than China, some of the most important objectives of development has not been fulfilled.The paper tries to examine shortly content research of development programs in three countries Japan,South Korea and China in order to show what the main approach of the development plan in these countries is.This level of analysis with showing the main axis of successful programming for development helps to understand the second step of the analysis the case research content of the Iran’s Fifth Development Plan.In the second step the article 150 of the fifth development plan of Iran will be analyzed and pathology because it is one of the most important of the Fifth Development Plan.For systematic pathology,first we’ll search the footprint of the provisions of article 150 of the Fifth Plan in the Sixth Plan,the second we will compare this article with the same articles in Development Plan of some successful countries such as Japan,South Korea and China and the third we’ll refer to some practical suggestions.

The Eurasia Initiative (EAI) was launched in 2013 by the South Korean President immediately following Chinese Belt - Road Initiative and was reaffirmed in 2017 by the current President of Korea announcing the new Northern policy. The Korean idea which seeks to link Seoul with Eurasian energy resources and markets has been formulated independent from the priorities and objectives of the Belt - Road Initiative, but South Korea's involvement in BRI is probably the country's only chance to implement its Eurasian Initiative.Examining Central Asia’s geopolitical and geostrategic position and role in EAI and BRI, the present paper discusses the potentialities for convergence between these two initiatives and South Korea's participation in BRI for achieving its Eurasian perspectives. The authors try to find an answer for the following questions: to what factors does the implementation of the EAI depend; and what is Central Asia’s role in this regard? The hypothesis tested is that Seoul’s joining to BRI is the only real chance to implement EAI, and since Central Asia is a joint chapter of both initiatives, Beijing and Seoul’s shared focus can be effective in developing both initiatives. The methodology this paper applies is descriptive-analytical and the library resources are used. The findings also confirm the validity of the research hypothesis.

Islamic Republic of Iran is among the very few states which has established strong amicable relations with both North and South Korea and maintains these relationships over the years despite all of the difficulties. On the other hand, intensification of crisis in Korean peninsula and the continuing debates on its reunification can deeply affect the national interests of Islamic Republic of Iran due to the uncertainty of Korean peninsula future and the power relations in it. The authors believe that, Korean reunification will bring about both opportunities and challenges for Islamic Republic of Iran as well as the global and regional powers; however, there is a great possibility that fulfillment of this reunification restricts our national interest in the peninsula, rather than its reinforcement. In this regard, the present essay in addition to reviewing the background of Islamic Republic of Iran's relations with both North and South Korea, will evaluate the most likely and significant scenarios of Korean reunification, and thus, it will consider the probable impacts of this event on the national interests of Islamic Republic of Iran.

The disintegration of the Korean peninsula after the World War II, and its consolidation after the bloody war between the two Koreas, have created two totally different governments and consequently, two different nations on either side of the Korean Peninsula. On one hand, South Korea has used its reliance and alliance with the U.S. and has created a liberal and developmental government. On the contrary, North Korea has developed a socialist government based on its so called Juche ideology which significantly relies on the personality of its great leader of communist party and has prioritized its defense capability development based on nuclear and missile deterrence over economic development. Despite the fundamental and structural difference between the two governments and their political strategies, Korean Reunification remains an integral part of their constitution and the ultimate goals of the leaders of the two countries, which has resulted in unification models provided by both sides in order to achieve this mutual goal. With the knowledge of its weaker position, North Korea has introduced a confederative model based on a country, two governments system, indicating its priority for survival and preventing its probable deterioration by the dynamic economy of South Korea. In return, South Korea has taken a gradual approach toward unification, with hope to face reforms in North Korea which tries to keep pace and avoid a sudden unification with high costs for South Korea. It indicates that South Korea while preparing for the collapse of North Korea or the occurrence of Unification, tries to spread its democratic system and liberal economy throughout the peninsula.

Contrary to many of the current challenges in the world, the crisis between North Korea and the United States is completely different in the 21th century, and its performance is similar to the Cold War era. Hence, distrust and uncertainty determine the perceptions of the United States and North Korea towards each other. In this context, the United States insists on stopping North Korea from achieving a complete cycle of nuclear deterrent, and defeats the country through multilateral sanctions and military threats. North Korea is also insists on moving towards development of nuclear deterrence and survival, and is willing to make an agreement with regard to security and its interests, at least in the freezing position of the conflict. Meanwhile, a range of issues such as potential threats, different commitments, changes in the priorities of the two countries, domestic policies and trans-regional events, one after another, has only increased the scope of conflict and uncertainty. In this regard, the question is what final conclusion can be perceived for this dispute in view of uncertainties about true intentions of North Korea, and on the other hand, the United States under Trump administration ? The present article seeks to consider the dimensions and consequences of the crisis between the two countries in a descriptive-analytical way by using the Bayesian theory and military scenarios.

The East Asian region includes countries that mostly became independent after the Second World War and were established as newborn countries. Although the traditions of governance in most of these countries are as long as history, these nation-states have followed the policies of political development as a part of their developmental policies in general during the last decades. While the Western models of development offered a typical pattern for developing political institutions, the East Asian countries, however, have applied their own models of political development in the political structures of their societies. These models are mostly rooted in the Oriental traditions of governance, and they construct a political identity for the citizens, agents and political elites based on cultural and social values.
The main purpose of this research is to analyze the model of political development of the state in South Korea based on political development theories. The question is how South Korean policy-makers have made a unique model of development based on cultural, social, economic and political heritages of this country.
Design/Methodology/Approach: The author will also examine the level of political development of the state in this country based on the criteria of classical theories of political development, such as the role of political elites, urbanization, literacy level, sociocultural features, the economic situation, foreign pressures and the like.
Findings: One of the most important elements that played a key role in shaping the political structure of government in South Korea is regionalization of politics in this country. The author has tried to explain the impact of this phenomenon in the process of political development of the state in South Korea.
Another factor, which has a certain degree of influence on the political culture of the South Korean society, especially among political activists and policy-makers, is the teachings of Confucius. As the mentor of millions of East Asian people, Confucius argues that people should obey the governors and the rules must be responsible for bringing peace and stability to the society. This idea was accepted by many rulers throughout history and prepared a suitable ground for creating semi-authoritarian states ruling over this region for centuries. Still, we can witness the impact of such an approach on the South Korean society. In fact, the influence of the political traditions of governance in the South Korean society is undeniable.
The impression of political competitions between the East and the West blocs during the Cold War and the South Korean tendency toward the Western bloc is also evident in the political development policies of the state in this country.
Value: Regarding the above-mentioned elements, the author argues that the historical features and political culture of the South Korean society have played an important role in the foundation of the structure of political development of the state in this country.

One of the controversial in territorial integrity of countries, territorial disputes and border issues. In South-East Asia, Most countries disagree with China over many islands; among these countries, South Korea and Japan. With the discovery of oil and gas within islands trying to solve this conflict has remained unresolved. Because countries like South Korea have not the ability to deal with China, So with the help of U.S, Led to its influence in the region and the arms race to be high and this leads to instability in the region. Nevertheless, the main question raised in this paper is that, tensions between Japan and South Korea and China over disputed islands in the East Asia had what effect on regional stability? It seems that tensions between the countries over disputed islands increase the arms race and instability on the other hand causes major powers, including the US influence in the region. The method used in this paper, in terms of data gathering is historical and documentary and in terms of analysis, is analytical explanation.