韓國戰爭의 展開過程과 休戰協定에 관한 硏究 = (A) study on the process of Korean war and the armistice agreement

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

As time passes by after Korean War, it seems that a lot of people are not aware of the historical significance of Korean War including the cause of Korean War and its developments. Historical truths about Korean War have not been proved yet in mostly parts. Therefore it is urgent to correct the ideological falsification and distortion about Korean War. Hence it is important to examine the questions such as "Who began the war?", "Why did the war breake out?" and to investigate the change of characteristic during Korean War. The aim of this thesis' study is to investigate general process of Korean War developments and the armistice agreement, Korean's task of peace settlement that Korean Peninsula confronts legitimacy of two Korea's governments, and the internal character about the armistice agreement itself.
After South Korea's separate election in 1948 the American military administration turned over the reins of government to Syngman Rhee's. Since then, ruled over the country Syngman Rhee's government by suppressing people's demand for democratic reform. However, people kept on making a stout resistance because Syngman Rhee's government took a physical oppression over the people instead of enforcing fundamental reforms Syngman Rhee's government sank down into economic and political bankruptcy and during these processes Syngman Rhee faced the Korean War. After North Korea established its government, it laid emphasis on the unification of a divided country by stepping up the character as a base of revolution. At that time when class conflict and political confrontation turned into confrontation between two governments unification meant the revolutionized country on a national scale. Korean War was considered as a practical method of unification. Promising to secure the peace of Korea through Acheson's address, America also expressed strongly that its will not to ignore the collapse of south Korea government.
Those acts showed America's intention to set up a anti-revolution base in Korea to stabilize it and to strengthen it. As the Korean War developed, North Korea which had brought a war to accomplish the anti-imperialistic and anti-feudalistic revolution occupied 90% of South Korea area only in a month after the War broke out. In occupied territory, North Korea put a policy like that of North Korea into practice. The Council of People's Commission was set up. The party and social organizations were restored. On the basis of that, democratic reforms such as land reform, spot tax system, enforcement of labor law, a purge against anti-revolutionist were carried out. The character of policy in occupied area was anti-imperialistic and anti-feudalistic revolution in terms of the accomplishment of Land reform and the purgery against pro-Japanist. But in spite of the character of North Korea's policy, its policy was a failure. One of the reasons were that North Korea could not gain the support from the front line and the voluntary participation because it failed to organize people's power. The second reason was that North Korea lost people's support because of massacre without control and emotional, personal revenge. Therefore the reasons why the accomplishments of revolution resulted in failure were due to not only the military but the mistakes in the process of policy realization. During the war, America intervened in the war to protect the Free World and to halt the expansion of international communism. While the Soviet Union which was not related to the war's breakout had no intention to intervene in the war. It seemed that America intervened in the war to execute a blockade policy against the Soviet Union through Japan's rearmament and, to solidify the system of "Pax Americana" through the organization of allied countries in the region and to reconstruct its economy which had been placed in unfavorable circumstance since the late 1940's. And "the restoration of the 38th parallel" was the slogan to justify America's intervention. In fact, the purpose of America's intervention was to get a bridgehead as a base of attack against the communism by subordinating Korean Peninsula to its interest. As a result, America expected that the force of Chinese revolution was weakened. America compelled the allied countries to dispatch the troops. After that, America took the right of command in Korean troops and it played a major role in Korean War by simplifying the command system. No one was dubious of America's victory and the Korea unification among the politicians of America till the allied forces was defeated in 1950. However, after the allied forced defeat, it was so difficult to gain a military victory that America changed its military goal into securing the 38th parallel. While America tried to solidify the safety of Syngman Rhee's government, it put the inhumane military operations into forces in order that North Korea could not be recovered from its destruction. The policy and the strategy of America was made without considering the demands and the interest of Korean people. Consequently, the division between two Koreas has been solidified and the degree of South Korea's subjection to America has become extreme. The fabricated ideology that Korean War was a confrontation between free South Korea and Communistic North Korea By America and the former dictatorial governments of Korea made America "the troops of Justice". Now a days, it is necessary that much more efforts should be made to investigate the Korean War and America on the basis of objective facts in terms of self-independence and unification of Korea. As America blocked the Taiwan Channel after Korean War, China blamed America's act as a line in the chain of imperialistic invasion policy and agreed with the Soviet Union's proposal of the peaceful solving in Korean conflicts.
China tried to settle the dispute between China and Twain, agreeing the Soviet Union's proposal that all foreign troops should be evacuated and the Korean problems, should be settled among the representatives of Korea and China. Since China participated in the Korean War, China had to not only solve the social and economical problems including cleaning up the anti-revolutionist land reform the affirmant of centralization of power but also reinforce the national defence power. China made a foundation of socialism in the ways of the mass movement. China attained its political aims by inspiring class consciousness into the hearts of people and organizing the people through mass assemblies. In the economic aspect, China kept on moving forward to the planned economy system of socialism. During the era of the cold war, China was isolated from America and the western countries. Even though China tried to get the Soviet Union's support and to learn from the Soviet Union, the Soviet Union was reluctant to support China and offered a loan instead of grant-type aid.
As the war extended, the sixteen countries which had participated in the war began to consider a truce, as well as the communist side. In spite of South Korea's objection, preliminary conference between two liaison officers was held on the 8th of July in 1951. Soon after on the 10th of July in 1951, truce talks were held between the representatives of the UN forces and North Korea, China. After a lot of true talks, the armistice agreement was concluded in 1953. But the armistice agreement had many problems. Even though South Korea was the substantial government to the war and the only legitimate government in the Korean Peninsula, the government didn't sign the agreement. Which played an important role in making up the political and military relations between South and North Korea. And had influence on the peace mood in the region. But there were many inefficacious provisions in the agreement. So the armistice agreement had to be filled up or be changed.
In February 1992, the two governments exchanged the Basic Agreement between South and North Korea government adopt the Basic Agrement. That led to the mood of peace and collaboration. According to the international law, the peace treaty didn't have to coincide with the countries which signed the armistice agreement. So it didn't matter South Korea didn't sign the armistice agreement. The peace treaty can be agreed by South and North Korea. Only they have to make rules to enforce international security which can settle peace in the Peninsula, including the mutual nonaggression in peace treaty, the international observation in DMZ, the international security of an armament reduction and the denuclearization area, and the UN special committee on Korean problems.
Even if the nation was divided by outside power, We have to try to unify our nation by ourselves and peacefully.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 目次 = ⅰ
• 第1章 序論 = 1
• 第1節 硏究의 目的 = 1
• 第2節 硏究의 範圍 = 2
• 第2章 韓國戰爭의 背景 = 3
• 第1節 國內的 背景 = 3
• Ⅰ. 南韓의 狀況 = 3
• 1. 38度線의 設定 및 固着化 = 3
• 2. 分斷國家의 葛藤 構造 = 4
• 3. 5 · 30選擧와 複合的 危機 局面 = 6
• 4. 對北 情報 報告에 對한 認識 = 8
• Ⅱ. 北韓政治의 展開過程 = 8
• 1. 朝鮮民主主義 人民共和國의 出現 = 9
• 2. 南北韓의 革命 力量 統合 = 12
• 3. 人民軍의 創設 = 13
• 4. 南韓에 對한 認識 = 15
• 第2節 國際的 背景 = 16
• Ⅰ. 韓國戰爭의 國際的 背景 = 16
• 1. 戰後 國際秩序의 再構成 - 새로운 國際秩序 = 16
• 2. 冷戰의 展開 = 19
• Ⅱ. 美國의 對韓政策 = 24
• 1. 分斷의 前兆 = 24
• 2. 韓國問題의 UN으로의 移管 = 29
• 3. 美軍撤收案과 UN = 33
• Ⅲ. 韓國戰爭直前의 東北아시아 = 37
• 1. 美國의 太平洋 防衛線 = 37
• 2. 蘇聯의 韓半島 認識 = 41
• Ⅳ. 韓國戰爭 直前의 韓美關係 = 41
• 1. NSC68과 韓國 = 41
• 2. 美國의 南韓에 대한 認識 = 43
• 第3章 韓國戰爭의 展開過程 = 45
• 第1節 北韓의 南韓占領政策 = 45
• Ⅰ. 北韓의 革命路線과 戰爭觀 = 45
• 1. 北韓의 革命路線 (民主基地路線) = 45
• 2. 戰爭觀 = 47
• Ⅱ. 南韓占領政策 = 48
• 1. 南韓占領地域에 대한 政策基調 = 48
• 2. 占領政策의 課題와 內容 = 49
• 3. 黨의 復舊 = 49
• 4. 人民委員會의 復舊 = 51
• 5. 社會 · 經濟的 改革 = 53
• Ⅲ. 戰爭勝利를 爲한 戰線援護政策 = 57
• 1. 政治的 肅淸 = 57
• 2. 軍事的 動員化 = 58
• 3. 後方攪亂 活動과 第2戰線 = 66
• 第2節 美國의 戰爭政策 = 61
• Ⅰ. 美國의 介入과 UN = 61
• 1. 美國의 全面 介入과 UN 安全保障理事會의 決議 = 61
• 2. 美軍의 作戰地揮權 掌握 = 66
• Ⅱ. 38線 北進과 占領政策 = 67
• 1. 38線 北進政策의 意味 = 67
• 2. 38線 北進과 擴戰 = 69
• 3. 美軍의 北韓 占領政策 = 72
• Ⅲ. 戰勢의 逆戰과 制限戰爭前略 = 81
• 1. 擴戰과 制限戰 論爭 = 81
• 2. 戰線의 安定과 制限戰爭政策 = 86
• Ⅳ. 美國의 終戰政策과 UN = 89
• 1. 韓國戰爭과 美國의 對外政策 = 89
• 2. 美國의 終戰政策과 消耗戰의 持續 = 92
• 3. 休戰協定의 締結 = 97
• 第3節 中國의 參戰背景 · 要因 및 影響 = 105
• Ⅰ. 韓國戰爭 勃發 直後 中國의 對應 = 105
• 1. 中國의 外交的 對應 = 105
• 2. 中國의 軍事的 對應 = 107
• Ⅱ. 中國의 介入過程 = 110
• 1. 中國의 參戰背景과 原因 = 110
• 2. 中國의 介入決定過程 = 111
• Ⅲ. 中國軍의 參戰과 戰爭의 展開 = 112
• 1. 中國軍의 參戰과 새로운 戰爭 = 112
• 2. 中國軍의 38線 突破攻勢 = 115
• Ⅳ. 韓國戰爭이 中國에 미친 影響 = 118
• 1. 莫大한 人命損失 = 118
• 2. 中國의 國際的 地位 向上 = 119
• 3. 中國의 政治 · 經濟에 미친 影響 = 119
• 4. 中國軍의 近代化(中國軍의 武器와 裝備의 近代化 및 軍事制度 ) = 121
• 5. 中 · 蘇間의 關係 = 122
• 第4章 休戰協定 = 124
• 第1節 休戰協定의 締結過程 = 124
• Ⅰ. 休戰의 提議 = 124
• 1. UN의 決議 = 124
• 2. J. Malik의 休戰 提議 = 125
• Ⅱ. 休戰會談의 進行 = 126
• 1. 豫備會談의 進行 = 126
• 2. 本會談의 進行 = 127
• 3. 休戰協定의 調印 = 128
• Ⅲ. Geneva 政治會談 = 128
• 1. Geneva 政治會談의 開催 = 128
• 2. 板門占 豫備會談과 Berlin 外相會談 = 129
• 3. Geneva 政治會談에 임하는 兩側의 基本立場 = 131
• 4. Geneva 政治會談의 意義 = 132
• 第2節 休戰協定의 內容 = 132
• Ⅰ. 休戰協定의 構成 = 132
• Ⅱ. 休戰協定의 主要內容 = 133
• 1. 軍事分界線과 非武裝地帶 = 133
• 2. 停戰 및 停戰의 具體的 措置 = 134
• 3. 戰爭捕虜에 關한 措置 = 137
• 4. 雙方 關係政府들에의 建議 = 138
• 第3節 休戰協定의 當事者 = 138
• Ⅰ. 當事者 問題의 理論的 根據 = 139
• Ⅱ. UN側의 當事者 = 141
• 1. 當事者로서의 UN = 141
• 2. 非當事者로서의 大韓民國 = 143
• Ⅲ. 共産側의 當事者 = 145
• 1. 北韓 = 145
• 2. 中國 = 145
• 第4節 休戰協定의 意義 및 補完에 關한 檢討 = 146
• Ⅰ. 休戰協定의 意義 및 問題點 = 146
• 1. 南北分斷의 固着化 = 146
• 2. 國際冷戰時代의 所産 = 146
• 3. 韓國安保의 重要性 = 147
• 4. 休戰協定의 問題點 = 147
• Ⅱ. 休戰協定의 補完에 關한 檢討 = 148
• 1. UN軍 司令部 解體와 駐韓美軍撤收問題 = 148
• 2. 休戰協定의 當事者의 代替 = 150
• 3. 休戰協定의 施行機關의 代替 = 153
• 4. 休戰協定 內容의 代替 = 157
• 第5章 平和條約 = 160
• 제1절 平和條約의 槪念 및 代替의 必要性 = 160
• Ⅰ. 平和條約의 槪念 = 160
• Ⅱ. 休戰協定의 平和條約으로의 代替의 必要性 = 160
• 1. 南北當事者 問題의 整理 = 160
• 2. 敵對行爲의 再發防止 = 161
• 3. 休戰協定의 缺陷補完 = 162
• 4. 統一基盤의 造成 = 163
• 第2節 休戰協定의 平和條約으로의 代替에 關한 南北間의 提議 = 163
• Ⅰ. 北韓의 南北 平和協定締結의 提議 = 163
• Ⅱ. 北韓의 對美平和協定締結의 提議 = 164
• Ⅲ. 大韓民國의 不可侵協定締結의 提議 = 165
• Ⅳ. 北韓의 不可侵宣言 採擇의 提議 = 166
• Ⅴ. 南北基本合意書에서의 提議 = 166
• Ⅵ. 最近의 平和協定締結 提議 = 168
• 第3節 休戰協定의 平和條約으로의 代替方案 = 170
• Ⅰ. 韓國平和條約의 形成과 內容 = 170
• Ⅱ. 韓國平和條約의 當事者 = 171
• 第4節 平和條約締結의 效果와 諸問題 및 北韓의 再武力的 攻擊 = 173
• Ⅰ. 平和條約의 效果 = 173
• 1. 狀態에 對한 效果 = 173
• 2. 地位에 對한 效果 = 174
• Ⅱ. 平和條約締結의 諸問題 = 175
• 1. UN軍 司令部의 解體 = 175
• 2. 作戰地揮權의 還收 = 178
• 3. 應戰北進의 根據 喪失 = 181
• Ⅲ. 平和條約 締結 後 北韓의 武力的 攻擊 = 184
• 1. 法的 性格과 戰爭法의 適用 = 184
• 2. 美國과 UN의 參戰 = 186
• 第6章 結論 = 191
• * 참고문헌 * = 195
• ABSTRACT = 209