This study examines how T & uuml;rkiye has employed symbolic expressions and phrases in the formulation and implementation of its foreign policy since the establishment of the Republic, using them as implicit representations of its vision and strategic objectives. Colin Flint conceptualized such deliberate constructions-through which a state legitimizes and garners support for its policy goals and strategies-as a "Geopolitical Code." T & uuml;rkiye offers a compelling case of this phenomenon. Whenever facing rapid geopolitical shifts or crises, T & uuml;rkiye has persistently designed and articulated new Geopolitical Codes to present its evolving grand strategy and political vision. Using the concept of the Geopolitical Code as a theoretical framework, this paper traces how T & uuml;rkiye has constructed and utilized these Codes in response to changes in its geopolitical environment, and analyzes the meanings embedded in each phase. To achieve this, the study conducts a secondary data analysis of official government documents and relevant secondary sources. The analysis reveals thatT & uuml;rkiye's foreign policy cannot be explained solely by material power or structural constraints. More crucial is understanding how the state defines its national interests, identifies allies and adversaries, and constructs symbolic narratives to justify strategic behavior. Continuous examination of these processes not only aids in forecasting T & uuml;rkiye's future diplomatic and strategic trajectories, but also contributes to the scholarly understanding of the discursive dimension of foreign policy analysis.

This study examines South Korea's veterans diplomacy, a foreign aid strategy shaped by historical memory. Focusing on Ethiopia, a key participant in the Korean War, it argues that South Korea's aid policies are driven not only by political or economic factors but also by a sense of gratitude toward past benefactors. By analyzing South Korea's multifaceted assistance to Ethiopia, this research highlights how historical experiences influence contemporary foreign policy, particularly in benefactor-beneficiary relationships. The findings contribute to broader discussions on the role of collective memory in shaping international cooperation beyond conventional strategic and material interests.

This study explores the consequences of nationalist governing elites for states' territorial behaviours. We argue that political elites who promote nationalist ideologies and stoke nationalistic fervour are often more inclined to initiate or escalate territorial disputes with other nations. They are likely to perceive greater values of territory, while they underestimate the perceived costs associated with territorial disputes. Analysing all territorial claims from 1901 to 2001, our research reveals compelling evidence that nationalistic political elites are more likely to initiate territorial disputes and less likely to seek peaceful resolutions, particularly when the contested territory possesses intangible salience.

In the midst of an intensifying US-China competition, China has adopted various policies to deal with the expanding US-led security network encircling it. As one endeavour, China has implemented a wedge strategy to weaken the US-led security coalition. This study focuses on one case of China's wedging against South Korea to disturb the US-South Korea alliance. This wedging strategy against the Park Geun-hye Administration was composed of two distinct approaches: a reward-based general wedging to prevent South Korea from tilting toward the US, and a coercion-based issue-specific wedging to divide them primarily by disturbing the deployment of THAAD in Korea.

오늘날 수자원은 국가들 간의 갈등과 분쟁의 원인 중 하나로 지목되고 있다. 기후변화 현상 등으로 인해 물이 부족하게 되면서 국가들은 수자원 확보를 위한 경쟁에 나서고 있다. 그중 수자원의 원천 중 하나로 꼽히는 공유하천을 둘러싼 국가들 간의 갈등이 빈번하게 나타나고 있는데, 한국 역시 그러한 갈등과 분쟁에서 자유롭지 않다. 특히 공유하천을 둘러싼 남북한 간의 갈등은 쉽게 해소되지 않고 있으며, 법적 해결의 가능성 역시 고려해야하는 상황이 발생할 수 있다. 그렇다면 국제법적 해결을 위해 한국은 어떻게 접근해야 하는가? 기존 공유하천을 둘러싼 세 가지의 분쟁 사례와 국제사법재판소(ICJ)의 판결 분석을 통해 본 연구는 향후 남북한 공유하천 문제가 법적 다툼을 벌이게될 경우 한국에 대한 함의를 찾고자 한다.

East Asia has become more salient on the international stage, economically and strategically. Considering its significance, many scholars have paid attention to the regional security environment. They consider East Asia a peaceful region because there has been no inter???state war, and attempt to explore factors preventing wars in East Asia. We believe that the focus on the absence of war would not only fail to provide a whole picture of the current East Asian security condition but also give a false impression that this region is stable and secure. Accordingly, we attempt to provide a detailed descriptive look at the current security environment of East Asia by focusing on various aspects of the security environment. We show that East Asia suffers from intense tensions, while it has avoided serious interstate conflict. By drawing on various perspectives, we attempt to explain the seemingly contradictory phenomenon in this region, a co-existence of intense hostility and negative peace. The U.S.???China competition, territorial disputes, and the ineffectiveness of regional institutions have intensified intra???regional tension, undermining potentials for developing security cooperation. Nevertheless, the security role of the United States and a high level of intra???regional economic integration have prevented the occurrence of serious militarized conflict.

Abstract In the contemporary world order, one of the most attention-getting issues is the recent consolidation of defense and strategic engagement between China and Russia, specifically since the early 2010s. Throughout a critical juncture angle, this study attempts to explain what led to the reinforcement of these China–Russia relations, and how their strategic ties have evolved. This study argues that the three critical junctures driven by the USA – the US Pivot to Asia, the Ukraine Crisis and the US-led sanctions against Russia, and the US THAAD deployment to Korea – aggravated China and Russia's perception of threat from the USA, which contributed to the incremental China–Russia strategic and defense ties.

21세기 들어 미국과 중국이라는 두 강대국 간의 경쟁이 다양한 영역에서 심화되고 있다. 특히 미국은 중국의 부상을 억제하고 전략적으로 압박하기 위해 미국을 지지하고 지원해줄 우방국들을 포섭해 반중 안보네트워크를 적극적으로 확대하고 있다. 그리고 반중 안보네트워크가 강화·확대됨에 따라 중국에게는 안보·전략적으로 불리한 환경이 조성되고 있다. 이러한 상황 속에서 중국은 어떠한 조치를 취하고 있는가? 여기서는 미국과 아시아 국가들 간의 반중국 안보네트워크가 강화되고 있는 상황에서 중국이 어떻게 대응하고 있는지를 분석한다. 본 연구는 중국이 반중국 안보네트워크를 약화시키기 위해 미국의 오랜 동맹국 중 하나인 태국을 겨냥해 적극적인 쐐기전략을 구사하고 있으며, 이러한 중국의 노력은 태국에 대한 전방위적 지원 확대외 협력 강화를 통해 나타나고 있음을 주장한다.

중국의 부상은 아시아 안보환경에 지대한 영향을 끼쳤을 뿐만 아니라 그곳에서의 세력균형구조를 변화시켰다. 중국의 부상에 직면해 다른 아시아 국가들도 자국의 안보를 위해 각자의 대중국 정책을 추진했다. 이들 중 특히 중국의 지역 라이벌이라 할 수 있는 일본과 인도의 반응은 많은 이들의 주목을 받아왔다. 이들 두 국가들은 중국의 부상에 대해 어떻게 대처하고 있는가? 본 연구는 특히 일본과 인도 간의 군사·전략적 관계 강화 움직임에 주목하여 이러한 현상을 이끈 요인과 양자 관계 강화의 상황을 살펴보는 것을 목적으로 한다. 이를 위해 본 연구는 중국의 부상과 그 결과 일본, 인도에 대한 위협 요인들을 사례들을 통해 분석한다. 분석 결과 본 연구는 신현실주의 이론에 근거해 중국의 부상에 따른 상대적 힘의 배분 상태의 변화와 두 국가가 공유하는 대중국 위협인식이 일본-인도 군사·전략적 관계 증진의 주요인임을 주장한다.

Since the late 2000s, China's growing naval power and maritime assertiveness has resulted in a security environment unfavorable to Australia. Facing this situation, how has Australia responded? This study sheds light on Australia's recent balancing strategies against China. It analyzes Australia's recent China policy and argues that there have been growing balancing elements in that policy, including Australia's active military build‐up, enhancement of its alliance with the United States, and diversification of its strategic and defense partnerships with other regional powers.

Since 2010 China, with its increasing economic power and influence, has adopted significantly aggressive policies toward its neighboring countries that adopt policies that could infringe upon China's national interests. This study aims primarily to answer the following question: What have been the impacts on itself of China's use of economic retaliation? In other words, what effects have China's economic sanctions had on its overall ability to influence other countries? After examining three remarkable cases of China's imposition of economic pressures on its neighbors since 2010—Japan in 2010 and 2012 and South Korea since 2016—the author finds that China's use of economic coercion can have significantly negative impacts on China itself and can also be very costly in political and strategic terms.

Before the late 2000s, China employed a diplomatic "next generation" approach to its territorial disputes in the South China Sea (SCS).Beginning in the late 2000s, however, China has assumed threatening attitudes, and taken a strong stand against other disputants.Why has China recently shown its assertiveness when dealing with the South China Sea issue?This study argues that two factors-China's growing naval capabilities and the growing presence of China's strategic rivals around the South China Sea-led China to adopt a more assertive policy regarding the South China Sea issue.

Since the 1990s, the rise of China has become realized. China has shown dramatic economic, and expanded its political influences at both regional and international levels. More importantly, it has accelerated its military build-up since the 1990s, and widened a gap between military capabilities of China and those of neighboring countries. In response to China’s strengthening military power and capability, India, one of the most potential competitors for regional hegemony, is at a crossroads. How has India perceived China’s remarkable military build-up? And, based on India’s perception, how has it responded? This article argues that, relying on the logic of neorealism, India has seen China’s military build-up as a significant threat to its national interest and security. After exploring India’s strategies in response to China’s strengthening military power, empirical analysis reveals that, facing a threat from China’s growing military power, India’s response could be characterized as internal and external balancing against China.