냉전이후 시대의 신국제질서와 북한의 미래

유찬열(Chan Yul Yoo) 덕성여자대학교 사회과학연구소 1996 사회과학연구 Vol.4 No.-

오바마 행정부와 미,중 안보관계

유찬열 ( Chan Yul Yoo ) 비교민주주의연구센터(비교민주주의학회) 2011 비교민주주의연구 Vol.7 No.2

오바마 행정부가 이끄는 미국은 아직도 국제적 주도권을 행사하고 있지만, 국내외의 어려운 상황을 고려하여 외국, 특히 중국과의 협력을 추구한다. 반면 중국은 미국이 아직도 국제적 절대우위를 보유하고 있지만 그 힘이 하락하고 있다고 인식하고, 공통의 이익에 대해서는 협력을 제공하지만 핵심적 국가 이익이 침해된다고 간주될 때에는 미국의 요구를 견제하는 정책을 구사한다. 여러 가지 안보 이슈에 관해서, 미국과 중국은 가끔은 협력하고 때로는 서로 반대하지만, 공식적으로 그 두 나라는 상당한 협력이 있어 왔다고 긍정적으로 평가한다. 이 상황에서 오바마 행정부의 안보 정책은 국제적 주도권을 가진 나라로서의 권리를 행사하고, 동시에 현재의 안보 환경을 고려하여 중국과의 협력을 추구하는 정책을 시행해야 한다. 미중 간의 어떤 제로섬 게임도 바람직하지 않다. 그럼에도 불구하고 장기적으로는, 미국은 부상하는 강대국인 중국이 도전할 수 있는 가능성을 완전히 배제하지는 말아야 한다. 이것은 오늘날 미중 양자 간에 나타나듯 협력과 견제의 반복은 조금 더 장기적인 정치적 현실주의의 관점에서 보면 경쟁의 요소일 수 있기 때문이다. The U.S., led by the Obama Administration, still holds international primacy, but in light of its difficult situation, inside and out, it seeks cooperation with foreign countries, especially with China. China admits that the U.S. still possesses international primacy although its power is declining, and presents a policy that offers cooperation for common interests but countering U.S. demands when its core national interests are involved. Regarding numerous security issues, the U.S. and China sometimes cooperate and sometimes oppose each other, but officially they affirmatively evaluate that there has been considerable progress in their collaboration. The security policy of the Obama Administration in this situation should be exercising the right of a country with international primacy, and simultaneously seeking cooperation with China considering its current security environment. Any U.S.-China zero-sum game is not desirable. Nevertheless on a longer term, the U.S. should not completely exclude the chances that China, the rising great power, could pose a challenge. This is because the alternation of cooperation and counterbalancing as occurs these days between the two countries can be an element of competition when seen from a longer-term perspective of political realism.

오바마 행정부와 북핵 해결의 전망

유찬열 ( Chan Yul Yoo ) 비교민주주의연구센터(비교민주주의학회) 2010 비교민주주의연구 Vol.6 No.1

오바마 행정부는 대내외적으로 많은 도전에 직면해 있다. 국내에서는 경제 침체의 늪에서 벗어나야 하고 대외적으로는 대량살상무기의 확산, 이라크와 아프가니스탄 전쟁, 국제 테러리즘의 위협에서 아직 탈피하지 못했으며, 이란은 새로운 위협으로 떠오르고 있다. 미국에게 북한은 여러 가지 측면에서 도전을 제기하는 불량국가로서 특히 핵무기 확산과 개발에서 그러하다. 그렇지만 오바마 행정부가 북한 핵 문제를 해결할 가능성은 현재로서는 적어 보인다. 워싱턴은 다자 및 양자 대화, 유엔 안보리 제재를 포함하는 다양한 방법으로 해결책을 모색하지만, 평양이 워싱턴의 의지를 수용할 가능성은 매우 낮다. 이것은 이미 북한이 핵무기를 개발하여 최소한의 억지력을 확보했고, 더 중요하게, 떠오르는 동맹국인 중국의 외교, 군사적 보호를 받고 있기 때문이다. 결국, 시간이 가면서 한국, 미국, 일본을 비롯한 자유세계는 군사 제재를 포함하는 어려운 선택을 해야 할 시기에 이르고 그 이전까지 북한의 핵능력은 더욱 증대할 것이다. The Obama administration faces enormous challenges from within and without. Inside the country, it has yet to escape the morass of economic depression, and outside it has to subdue the dangers of international terrorism, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. North Korea, located in a remote corner of Northeast Asia, also poses a grave threat toward the U.S., especially in terms of its development of nuclear weapons. But the chances for the Obama administration to successfully resolve the North Korean nuclear dilemma seem very slim. Washington tries to mobilize all possible means including multilateral and bilateral dialogues and the sanctions by the UN Security Council, but the probability seems very low for Pyongyang to bend to Washington`s will. This is because the North has already secured a minimum level of military deterrence vis-a-vis the U.S. and, more importantly, receives strong diplomatic and military protection from its neighboring ally, the globally rising China. As long as the liberal democracies do not come up with genuinely strong measures that could invoke the fear of military clash, the North will continue to aggrandize its nuclear capabilities.

21세기 국제체제와 미국의 준비

유찬열(Yoo Chan Yul) 한국국제정치학회 2000 國際政治論叢 Vol.39 No.3

김정은 체제의 대내외 정책 평가

유찬열 ( Chan Yul Yoo ) 비교민주주의연구센터(비교민주주의학회) 2013 비교민주주의연구 Vol.9 No.1

김정은이 집권한 지 1년 반이 지난 지금, 북한 체제의 성격에 관해 많은 것이 밝혀지고 있다. 김정은이 어린 시절 스위스에서 수년간 중, 고등학교 시절을 보낸 것에 비추어 북한이 개혁, 개방으로 나갈지도 모른다는 막연한 기대감이 존재했지만, 이제 그것은 하나의 허상에 불과했다는 것이 드러나고 있다. 오늘날의 북한은 과거 김정일 시대와 그다지 다르지 않다. 정치와 사회는 스탈린식 철권통치의 양상을 보이고, 경제는 과거와 마찬가지로 참담하다. 적대적 대남정책은 아직도 한반도 적화통일을 추구하며, 핵 및 장거리 미사일 개발과 벼랑외교는 자유 민주세계에 대한 직접적 위협이다. 한국, 미국, 그리고 국제사회는 강요와 유인, 봉쇄와 개입, 압력과 대화 등 다양한 방법으로 북한의 위협에 대처해야 한다. 그럼에도 불구하고 남북한 간의 체제 경쟁, 또는 북·미, 남북한 간의 핵무기를 둘러싼 대립은 하루아침에 해소되기 어려울 것이다. As one and half years pass by since Kim Jung-un took over power, many things have been revealed about the nature of the current North Korean system. There has existed a kind of dubious and uncertain expectation that the North might care for reform and opening-up in light of the fact that Kim had spent several years of his middle-and high-school days in Switzerland, but now it has become quite clear that all that was a virtual, vain hope. Today`s North Korea is not that different from that of the Kim Jong-il era, maybe even worse. Politics and social relations exhibit the features of Stalinist hard-handed rule, and the economy is as miserable as it used to be. Hostile policy toward the South still pursues communization of the Peninsula, and the development of weapons of mass destruction and the unceasing diplomatic brinkmanship are direct threats to the welfare of the liberal world. South Korea, the United States, and the international community should block North`s intimidation by employing diverse means of containment and engagement, pressure and dialogue, and coercion and inducement. Nevertheless, the competition and rivalry of the two Koreas for eventual victory on the Peninsula or the U.S.-N. Korean confrontation revolving around the issues of WMD would not be resolved in a day.

국민정부 대북정책의 구조와 한계

유찬열 德成女子大學校 1999 德成女大論文集 Vol.30 No.-

This procedure and the final outcome of the North Korea policy of the Kim Dae-jung Administration Sunshine Policy, Engagement Policy, and the dissolution of the cold War structure is an object of enormous curiosity in light of its unusual nature. It is unknown yet whether the policy that consistently conducts exchange and cooperation with an old enemy , North Korea, on the one hand, and decisively confronts its military provocation on the other, can achieve the declared and more ultimate goals the rapprochement of the two Koreas and the incorporation of Norch Korea into the international society. This policy is, in a sense, a great gamble. Nevertheless, the intermediate results of the S-N dialigues for the past two years suggest the necessity of policy on the part of South Korea. While the positive accomplishments of the policy need to be enlarged, their temporary nature and future uncertainty have to be removed. For that purpose, the engagement policy should employ the measures of stick beyond mere appeacement unilateral provision of carrots. To freeze the development of the weapons of mass destruction, the promises with North Korea construcrion of light water reactor and the relaxation of economic sanctions have to be kept, but South Korea and its strategic parterners should force Norch Korea to reform and open door. Coercion is the priviledge of the great powers. The reason why South Korea, the United States, and Japan cannot induce enough change of north Korea is that they do not effectively take advantage of their superiority. Liberal democracy in North Korea is not to be acquired that easily. The precious values of individual liberty, rule of law, fair competition, and humas rights would be possible only when persistent coercion is practiced toward the anachronistic regime beyond simple enticement.

냉정이후 시대의 신국제질서와 북한의 미래

유찬열 덕성여자대학교 사회과학연구소 1996 사회과학연구 Vol.4 No.-

The New International Order in the Post-Cold War era has several characteristics, the most representative of which are American world hegemony and the formation of great power relations single-handedly managed by the United State. The United States, currently as the sole superpower, mobilizes every possible means to expand its power and interests beyond the horizon of ideology. Russia and Eastern European countries are indoctrinated by the superiority of the Western democracy, and Western Europe is not immune from American political intervention. Japan is strongly balanced by the entity of trans-Pacific alliance, and most of the countries in the world can not oppose the will of the resilient international leader. Only China is inclined to challenge the intention of the world leader, but it simultaneously professes the policy of cooperation as long as its critical interests are not infringed. In this international order, North Korea's future is dismal. It neither can stem the tough international currents nor generate the ability of self-cure. The international system is not formed in a favorable fashion for the rebirth of North Korea, nor is the North's intrinsic nature sufficiently flexible for necessary evolution. North Korean has long taken a peculiar form of development based on Juche ideology. Once its system of thought seemed fancy, and at another time its economy looked flourishing. Our time its military looked mighty, and an another moment its culture seemd to extol the pride of national Marxism. But now everything is changing. North Korea is standing on the verge of total collapse. It's future is to either violently collapse or to slowly perish through incremental reform. It has no other alternatives, but the choice is not easy. In this situation. South Korea has to be wise enough to be the eventual victor in the competition. What South Korea new needs is a balanced sense of the relative gravity of its policy alternatives.

21세기 한국 외교안보의 과제

유찬열 德成女子大學校 2000 德成女大論文集 Vol.31 No.-

The tasks that South Korea should pay most attention in the 21st century would probably be unification because only the Koreans tragically continue ideological confrontation on the globe maintaining a divided political system. The policy toward North Korea in that case would be rational if it takes the feature of current Engagement Policy because it is expected to be more helpful than the strict reciprocity in introducing and maintaining tension reduction, peaceful coexistence, and cooperation as an intermediate road to the eventual unification. In the midst, South Korea should improve diplomatic relations with the surrounding four great powers and should upgrade military readiness. In light of that North Korea does not weaken its alliance with China, South Korea should strengthen its counter-alliance by wisely resolving the pending agenda and should introduce a strong military based on high technology.