평양 무인기 사건의 전략적 모호성 평가: 이론적 정합성과 정책적 합리성 = Assessing Strategic Ambiguity in the Pyongyang Drone Incident: Theoretical Coherence and Policy Rationality

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This study analyzes the South Korean government’s response to North Korea’s claim of a drone intrusion over Pyongyang in October 2024 through the lens of strategic ambiguity. The central question is whether the government’s position of being “unable to confirm the facts” functioned as a genuine strategy of ambiguity. To this end, the study evaluates the theoretical coherence and policy rationality of the response. Drawing on existing debates on strategic ambiguity, the research identifies five theoretical requirements—credibility of threats, clarity of strategic preference, opponent’s calculability, message control, and audience acceptance—and applies them to this case. The analysis finds that South Korea’s response did not fully satisfy these requirements. Rather than representing a coherent strategy of ambiguity, it functioned as an ad hoc measure to avoid the binary choice between admission and denial. While the response had limited policy rationality in managing the crisis in the short term, it was incomplete from a long-term perspective, as it carried the risks of undermining international credibility, fueling domestic political distrust, and weakening national identity. The study makes two contributions. Theoretically, it systematizes the conditions of strategic ambiguity into an evaluative framework and applies them to a military incident, thereby extending the concept beyond its traditional focus on nuclear and diplomatic contexts. Policy-wise, it suggests that strategic ambiguity can serve as a sustainable strategy only if supported by institutional mechanisms, prior coordination, and clear termination criteria.