Purpose: The purpose of this article is to analyze the constraints of defense reform of previous governments and to suggest alternatives in connection with future arms control and the peace process on the Korean Peninsula. This article aims to evaluate the history of previous governments defense reforms and traditional arms building efforts, and seek alternatives to overcome constraints in connection with the peace by analyzing EU’s successful cases of arms control. The key is how to build military power that conflicts with disarmament and a peace regime through the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, which is supported by the power, and the vision of arms control. Method: For better analysis, this article reviews the previous governments’ defense reform plan and pinpoints the limiting factors and suggests the policy options to overcome by taking a Mahoney’s path dependence theory of four actors as utilitarian, functional, power and legitimacy. In Chapter 2 analyzes ways to enhance arms control in connection with a peace regime. In Chapter 3 describes Defense Reform 2.0 key areas and future challenges. In Chapter 4 explores ways to enhance linkage among Defense reform 2.0 and Arms control, and the peace regime. In Chapter 5 suggests policy options to overcome the restricting factors in Arms reform effort of the previous governments. Results: If we pinpoint the limits of past defense reform effort are as follow. First, as an efficacy aspect, past defense reform lacks efficiency in defense reform process due to the corruption. Second, as functional aspect, past defense reform fails to provide an institutional mechanism for strengthening military space power in order to respond North Korea’s threat. Third, as power aspect, the will to reform the military command has interrupted by the changing of the political leadership. Fourth, as legitimacy aspect, national defense reform has failed to win support from the private and military circle. Conclusion: This article concluded that: First, as utilitarian aspect it should contribute to the national economy by minimizing inefficiency and maximizing efficiency through defense reform. Second, as functional aspect de-fense reform should provide an institutional mechanism for strengthening military space power at the Joint Chiefs of Staff to respond to threats from North Korea and changes in the changing operational environment. Third, as power aspect, the political will to reform the military command should be continued by the president and defense ministers. Much of Defense Reform 2.0 seeks reform in political terms, and efforts should be made to create crisis-taking shared values for national security, breaking away from the risk avoidance culture. Fourth, as legitimacy aspect, national defense reform should be carried out by due process and win support from the private and mili-tary.
2. Ways to Enhance Arms Control and Its Connectivity with a Peace Regime
3. Defense Reform 2.0 Key Areas and Future Challenges
4. Defense Reform 2.0 and Its Enhancement of the Linkage with Arms Control and the Peace Regime