러시아 문서보관소 사료로 본 소련의 대 북한 정책, 1945~47년 = North Korean Policy of the Soviet Union during 1945~1947 represented in the Documents of Russian Archives

국문 초록 (Abstract)

본 글은 해방 후 소련의 대북한 정책을 러시아문서보관소 소재 자료들을 토대로 개관한 것이다. 해방직후 소련은 열강들의 합의에 의한 한반도 문제 해결 및 북한지역의 ‘부르주아민주주의 정권 수립 방침에 따라 민․공 연립의 권력 구도를 추진하였다. 그에 따라 조만식을 비롯한 민족주의자들을 권력기관에 끌어들이고 친일 혐의가 있는 인사들조차 상당수 등용하였다. 모스크바 결정은 미․소간 타협의 산물이었지만 소련은 애초 가장 예민했던 신탁통치 문제에 대해 현지 정서를 고려하여 소극적인 태도를 취했다. 그러나 탁치정국에서 반탁 입장을 보인 조만식 그룹은 결정적으로 북한의 정치무대를 떠나야 했고, 북조선임시인민위원회는 소련과 공산당 지도부의 의도가 맞아떨어진 결과로 탄생하였다. 계속해서 실시된 토지개혁은 북한을 강화시키려는 ‘민주기지적’발상에서 나왔으며, 이는 소련군이 진주한 동유럽 지역보다도 훨씬 더 급진적으로 진행되었다. 1946～7년 두 차례에 걸친 미소공동위원회를 통해 소련은 조선임시정부 수립에 대한 강력한 집착에도 불구하고 반탁세력 수용이라는 근본적인 양보를 하지않았다. 미소합의에 의한 한국임시정부의 수립이 실패로 돌아가자 소련지도부는 마지막으로 미소양군 철수안을 제의함으로써 한국문제의 해결을 모색하였다. 남한이 단독정부 수립으로 나아가자 그 뒤를 이어 북한도 동일한 전철을 밟게 되었다. 북한에 분단정부가 수립되는데 대해 소련측과 북한지도부는 만족하지 못한 공통된 입장을 보였지만 결과적으로 소련은 이를 극복하려는 적극적인 의지를 보이지 않았다.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This article investigated major aspects of the Soviet policy with the Korean Peninsula after liberation.
The Soviet Union intended to establish the left-wing leading government(the friendly related government to the Soviet Union) in the Korean peninsular so that Korea was not influenced by other world powers. Immediately after Korean liberation, the Soviet Army had set as its direct goal the establishment of “bourgeoise democratic” authority in North Korea, but not its Sovietization. The formation of the coalition authority of Communists and nationalists, which was being continued up to the publication of the Moscow Decision about
Korea, expressed the basic direction of the policy of Moscow and Korean Communists. The official keynote of Soviet Union's policy toward the North Korea was to transfer the power to the Council of people's commission and offer the support to the development of Korea. This policy was gradually applied in economic and administrative field. One of the negative results of the Moscow Decision consisted in the fact that it created the division between two parts of Korea. The Soviet side even did not mention about the establishment of
trusteeship above Korea in its first project, considering the extended information about the negative relation in Korea to the idea of trusteeship. The work of Joint Soviet-American Commission displayed basic differences in the views of USSR and USA. Although the main reason of the disruption of Joint Commission, even that more deepened the division of Korea, was due to the position of the USA, which did not put into practice the Moscow Decision about Korea, it is necessary to recognize the intentions of Soviet side to weaken the positions of the
United States and their South Korean allies by the exception of organizations “anti-trusteeship” from the consultations with the Joint Commission. The disruption of the work of Joint Soviet-American Commission
forced Soviet leadership to forego the initial “bourgeoise democratic” course. The policy of the USSR in North Korea in many respects led to create the independent political system on the North. This did not
indicate the intentions of establishment of separate regime the very beginning, but more lately its foundation was formed in proportion to the development of the “Cold War” between USSR and USA and the aggravation of the contradictions of the right and left-wing forces of Korea. North Korea was under the control of the Soviet Army in the period from August 1945 through December 1948. There is no doubt that entire policy on the north in these years was finally asserted by Soviet Union. Certainly, during the above-indicated period Soviet
side gradually transferred his authorities to Koreans, but the highest authority nevertheless remained in its hands.(삭제)

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 머리말
• Ⅱ. 해방 직후 한반도 구상과 대북한정책의 전개
• Ⅲ. 북한 정치체제 형성에 대한 영향
• Ⅳ. 맺음말