The Paradox of South Korea’s Unification Diplomacy: Moving beyond a State-Centric Approach
1
조회
0
다운로드
5
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Successive South Korean governments have made every effort to build the foundation for the peaceful unification of the Korean Peninsula. The Park Geun-hye administration has also emphasized the importance of laying the foundation for peaceful unification and presented it as one of four administrative priorities. However, regardless of which administration assumes office, a state-centric approach has been taken towards the issue of unification. Whoever governs in South Korea, unification diplomacy targeting the four great powers has been their foremost priority. Such a state-centric approach may perhaps be an inevitable strategy to achieve Korean unification, particularly given the history of the division of the two Koreas and international relations around the Korean Peninsula. German unification in 1990 was made possible due to the interaction and cooperation among neighboring powers in the process of the Cold War’s collapse. Therefore the roles and influences ofthe four great powers in the process of Korean unification cannot be understated. However, Korean unification has not yet been realized despite many efforts through the state-centric approach. On the contrary,it is debatable whether the state-centric approach focusing on the great powers has made unification rather difficult due to the serious conflicts of interest among those powers regarding Korean unification. This isthe paradox of unification diplomacy in building the foundation for peaceful unification on the Korean Peninsula. In this context, it becomes necessary to recognize the weaknesses of a state-centric approach in the case of Korean unification and to search for new possibilities that non-state actors can provide.
Abstract
Successive South Korean governments have made every effort to build the foundation for the peaceful unification of the Korean Peninsula. The Park Geun-hye administration has also emphasized the importance of laying the foundation for peaceful unification and presented it as one of four administrative priorities. However, regardless of which administration assumes office, a state-centric approach has been taken towards the issue of unification. Whoever governs in South Korea, unification diplomacy targeting the four great powers has been their foremost priority. Such a state-centric approach may perhaps be an inevitable strategy to achieve Korean unification, particularly given the history of the division of the two Koreas and international relations around the Korean Peninsula. German unification in 1990 was made possible due to the interaction and cooperation among neighboring powers in the process of the Cold War’s collapse. Therefore the roles and influences ofthe four great powers in the process of Korean unification cannot be understated. However, Korean unification has not yet been realized despite many efforts through the state-centric approach. On the contrary,it is debatable whether the state-centric approach focusing on the great powers has made unification rather difficult due to the serious conflicts of interest among those powers regarding Korean unification. This isthe paradox of unification diplomacy in building the foundation for peaceful unification on the Korean Peninsula. In this context, it becomes necessary to recognize the weaknesses of a state-centric approach in the case of Korean unification and to search for new possibilities that non-state actors can provide.
참고문헌 (30)
- Bader, Jeffrey A., "Obama and China’s Rise: An Insider’s Account of America’s Asia Strategy" (2012), Brookings Institution Press
- Bae, Jung-Ho, "Korean Unification and the Positions and Roles of the Four Neighboring Powers" (2011), KINU
- Blank, Stephen, "The Significance of Russia’s Frustration with North Korea", The Diplomat (2013)
- Brooks, Stephen G, "Don’t Come Home, America: The Case against Retrenchment", International Security, 37(3) (2013)
- Cliff, Roger, "Entering the Dragon’s Lair: Chinese Antiaccess Strategies and Their Implications for the United States" (2007), RAND Corporation
- Keeping an Eye on an Unruly Neighbor: Chinese Views of Economic Reform and Stability in North Korea, "Glaser, Bonnie", U.S. Institute of Peace, ~, pp.United States Institute of Peace Working Paper (2008)
- Goldstein, Avery, "First Things First: The Pressing Danger of Crisis Instability in U.S.-China Relations", International Security, 37(4) (2013)
- Ha, Young-Sun, "North Korea 2032: The Evolution Strategy towards the Advancement" (2010), East Asia Institute
- Haggard, Stephen, "Engaging North Korea: The Role of Economic Statecraft", Policy Studies, 59 (2011)
- Haggard, Stephen, "Sanctioning North Korea: The Political Economy of Denuclearization and Proliferation", Asian Survey, 50(3) (2010)
- 황지환, "김정은 시대 북한의 대외전략: 지속과 변화의 '병진노선'", 한국과 국제정치, 30(1), pp.187~221 (2014), 극동문제연구소
- 황지환, "The Two Koreas after U.S. Unipolarity: In Search of a New North Korea Policy", JIAS, 20(1), pp.77~88 (2013), 국제학연구소
- Iain Johnston, Alastair, "How New and Assertive is China’s New Assertiveness?", International Security, 37(4) (2013)
- Kim, Hanna, "Social Networks and Ideological Orientation of South Korean NGOs Involved in the Unification Issues of the Korean Peninsula", Asian Survey, 51(5) (2011)
- Kim, Jangho, "The Second Term Obama Administration’ Policy towardss the Korean Peninsula" (2012), KINU
- Koo, Kab-Woo, "Civil Society and the Unificiation Movement in South Korea:Issues and Challenges", Journal of Peace and Unification, 1(1) (2011)
- Macdonald, Paul K, "Graceful Decline? The Surprising Success of Great Power Retrenchment", International Security, 35(4) (2011)
- 문성민, "The Effects of Inter-Korean Integration Type on Economic Performance: The Role of Wage Policy", International Economic Journal, 26(3), pp.447~470 (2012), 한국국제경제학회
- Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China 2013. Annual Report to Congress, "Office of the Secretary of Defense", ~ (2013)
- Park, Geun-hye, "A New Kind of Korea: Building Trust between Seoul and Pyongyand", Foreign Affairs, 90(5) (2011)
- Park, Jae-Jeok, "The Outlook for the North Korean Situation & Prospects for U.S.-ROK Cooperation After the Death of Kim Jong-il" (2012), Center for Unification Policy Studies
- The Direction of Inter-Korean Cooperation Fund Based on ODA Standard, "Park, Jin", ~, pp.KDI School of Public Policy and Management Paper. No. 11-05 (2011)
- Park, John, "The Outlook for the North Korean Situation & Prospects for U.S.-ROK Cooperation After the Death of Kim Jong-il" (2012), Center for Unification Policy Studies
- Pollack, Jonathan, "Preparing for Korean Unification; Scenarios &Implications" (1999), RAND
- Lukin, Alexander, "Russian Strategic Thinking Regarding North Korea", The Asan Forum (2013)
- Selinger, Bernhard, "Financing Unification in Germany and Korea: Is a Unification Tax Necessary?", East Asia: Comparative Perspective, 9(2) (2010)
- Snyder, Scott, "U.S. Policy Towards the Korean Peninsula" (2010), Council on Foreign Relations Press
- Scott Snyder, "Prospects for Sino-American Policy Coordination toward North Korea", International Journal of Korean Unification Studies, 21(1), pp.21~44 (2012), 통일연구원[DOI]
- Non-Governmental Organizations’ Activities in North Korea, "Taylor, Mi Ae", ~, pp.Congressional Research Service, R4174 (2011)
- Zelikow, Philip, "Germany Unified and Europe Transformed:A Study in Statecraft" (1995), Harvard University Press