| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
134180
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In this paper, we argue that the two Koreas' intentions and actions on the cyber front point toward the possibility that they have engaged in cyber warfare against each other. From South Korea's standpoint, a key concern has been North Korea's advanced cyber warfare capabilities and alleged involvement of its substantial workforce in the Internet's dark side activities. These issues need to be looked at the backdrop of the North's nuclear and ballistic missile capabilities. This paper draws principally upon theories and concepts from military strategy and warfare to examine the contexts, mechanisms, and processes associated with the cyber warfare in the Korean peninsula. We also compare the two Koreas in terms of various forms of asymmetries in cyber warfare and cyber attacks. Also highlighted in the paper are South Korea's recent initiatives and actions to enhance cyber-offense and cyber-defense capabilities.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
135056
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The conclusion of the World Trade Organization’s (wto) ninth ministerial meeting – held in Bali 3–7 December 2013 – is at one and the same time momentous, marginal and business-as-usual. It is momentous because it marks the first multilateral agreement reached in the wto since the organisation began operations on 1 January 1995; it is marginal because the deal reached will have only a limited impact on the global trading system; and it is business as usual because the Bali package will be of disproportionally greater value to the industrial states than to their developing and least developed counterparts. We examine what happened in Bali, covering the principal issues at stake and the content of the outcome, what this means for the wto and for the Doha Development Agenda (dda), and why it all matters. We argue that, while the Bali ministerial is significant and the agreements reached important, the conclusion of the meeting and the package agreed represent only a limited movement forward in addressing the fundamental problems and inequities of the wto system.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|