In 1972, the Republic of Korea Armed Forces departed from its heavy reliance on US military aid by establishing a Defense Acquisition Management System for the first time. In the past 40 years, starting with the Yul-Gok project, the Republic of Korea Armed Forces have made significant changes to the...
In 1972, the Republic of Korea Armed Forces departed from its heavy reliance on US military aid by establishing a Defense Acquisition Management System for the first time. In the past 40 years, starting with the Yul-Gok project, the Republic of Korea Armed Forces have made significant changes to the Defense Acquisition Management System; 19 different minor and major modifications have been made to the system and different titles have been given to various projects such as the Force Development Project and the Defense Capability Improvement Project.
Amongst the aforementioned and numerous changes that took place, the most significant achievement to date would be the creation of the Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA), a Central Administrative Agency that specializes on acquisition, in 2006. DAPA has made significant progress in areas such as improving transparency and increasing exports; however, criticisms have been made that by overemphasizing the autonomous character of the acquisition sector, DAPA has hindered an effective buildup of military capability, which requires close coordination between the various acquisition processes including requirement planning, acquisition management and operation maintenance.
Therefore the Republic of Korea government has made efforts on various fronts to appropriately respond to the changing environment and modify the current system to improve the system’s limitations. However, the fundamental problem of the current Defense Acquisition Management System is that acquisition and operation maintenance is managed by two different organizations, a problem created when DAPA was established in 2006 to manage and improve transparency in weapons acquisitions.
The United States, which encountered this problem earlier than the Republic of Korea, has tackled this problem by improving its TLCSM system which methodically manages the entire life cycle of a weapons system from its initial development to disposal with emphasis on being effective and economic. Other developed nations such as the United Kingdom and France have also made significant effort to solve problems of similar nature.
The following are policy recommendations to incorporate the TLCSM system into the Republic of Korea Armed Forces.
First, to solve the problem of having seperate organizations for acquisition and operation maintenance, the government structure is to be reorganized to place DAPA within the Ministry of National Defense(MND). For practical reasons, this reorganization should take place in 3 different phases.
1st Phase, establish a “Control Tower” structure regarding the Total Life Cycle and integrateurgent common tasks. 2nd Phase, a gradual establishment of an integrated system takes place and the Logistics Command of the various armed forces are to be reorganized as the Life Cycle Management Command(LCMC), integrating the Integrated Program Team(IPT) of DAPA and the Integrated Project Team(IPT) of the Logistics Commands. 3rd Phase, a complete TLCSM is established and DAPA becomes an internal organization within the MND. The MND creates a post of Vice Minister for acquisition and following the concept of TLCSM, take s overall control of Defense Acquisitions.
In pursuit of effective execution of the defense budget, DAPA currently compiles the mid-term Defense Plan and executes the annual budget. However, because formulating the budget is a major policy tool of the MND, this function should be delegated to the MND. Also, to solve the problems that arise from the defense budget being divided into Defense Capability Improvement Cost and Force Operation Cost, projects that involve both of the aforementioned costs should be compiled into a separate 3rd category under the title of “Common Project Cost”.
Finally, because experts need to be trained and managed urgently to firmly establish the above mentioned Total Life Cycle Systems, a National Defense Acquisition University and a Quadripartite Life Cycle Management Consultation Committee (tentative title) composed of representatives from the military, industry, academia and research institutions should be established.
In 1972, the Republic of Korea Armed Forces departed from its heavy reliance on US military aid by establishing a Defense Acquisition Management System for the first time. In the past 40 years, starting with the Yul-Gok project, the Republic of Korea Armed Forces have made significant changes to the Defense Acquisition Management System; 19 different minor and major modifications have been made to the system and different titles have been given to various projects such as the Force Development Project and the Defense Capability Improvement Project.
Amongst the aforementioned and numerous changes that took place, the most significant achievement to date would be the creation of the Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA), a Central Administrative Agency that specializes on acquisition, in 2006. DAPA has made significant progress in areas such as improving transparency and increasing exports; however, criticisms have been made that by overemphasizing the autonomous character of the acquisition sector, DAPA has hindered an effective buildup of military capability, which requires close coordination between the various acquisition processes including requirement planning, acquisition management and operation maintenance.
Therefore the Republic of Korea government has made efforts on various fronts to appropriately respond to the changing environment and modify the current system to improve the system’s limitations. However, the fundamental problem of the current Defense Acquisition Management System is that acquisition and operation maintenance is managed by two different organizations, a problem created when DAPA was established in 2006 to manage and improve transparency in weapons acquisitions.
The United States, which encountered this problem earlier than the Republic of Korea, has tackled this problem by improving its TLCSM system which methodically manages the entire life cycle of a weapons system from its initial development to disposal with emphasis on being effective and economic. Other developed nations such as the United Kingdom and France have also made significant effort to solve problems of similar nature.
The following are policy recommendations to incorporate the TLCSM system into the Republic of Korea Armed Forces.
First, to solve the problem of having seperate organizations for acquisition and operation maintenance, the government structure is to be reorganized to place DAPA within the Ministry of National Defense(MND). For practical reasons, this reorganization should take place in 3 different phases.
1st Phase, establish a “Control Tower” structure regarding the Total Life Cycle and integrateurgent common tasks. 2nd Phase, a gradual establishment of an integrated system takes place and the Logistics Command of the various armed forces are to be reorganized as the Life Cycle Management Command(LCMC), integrating the Integrated Program Team(IPT) of DAPA and the Integrated Project Team(IPT) of the Logistics Commands. 3rd Phase, a complete TLCSM is established and DAPA becomes an internal organization within the MND. The MND creates a post of Vice Minister for acquisition and following the concept of TLCSM, take s overall control of Defense Acquisitions.
In pursuit of effective execution of the defense budget, DAPA currently compiles the mid-term Defense Plan and executes the annual budget. However, because formulating the budget is a major policy tool of the MND, this function should be delegated to the MND. Also, to solve the problems that arise from the defense budget being divided into Defense Capability Improvement Cost and Force Operation Cost, projects that involve both of the aforementioned costs should be compiled into a separate 3rd category under the title of “Common Project Cost”.
Finally, because experts need to be trained and managed urgently to firmly establish the above mentioned Total Life Cycle Systems, a National Defense Acquisition University and a Quadripartite Life Cycle Management Consultation Committee (tentative title) composed of representatives from the military, industry, academia and research institutions should be established.
주제어
#국방획득체계
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.