이론의 임계점에서: 전성기 ‘탈민족주의’와 통일 담론의 조우

Abstract

This article examines the discourse on reunification prevalent in the mid-2000s and seeks to reposition these discussions from the perspective of “post-nationalism,” a global trend aimed at rethinking the nation-state and experimenting with possible forms of resistance. In the South Korean public sphere, the reunification of the North and South is often viewed as the culmination of a delayed nation-state and the “zenith” of an incomplete modern project. However, this article posits that the various discussions on the future of North and South Korea presented since the June 15th Joint Declaration of 2000 contain far more “post-modern” elements than generally presumed. Based on this premise, the article specifically examines the debates between Ahn Byung-jik and Paik Nak-chung; the views on reunification of historian Im Ji-hyun, a leading critic of nationalism based on postmodern theories; and the arguments of political scientist Koo Kab-woo, who proposed the theory of a “peace state” grounded in postmodern thought. Firstly, Ahn Byung-jik’s discussions, while actively embracing the epochal changes of the post-Cold War era, paradoxically demonstrated a regression to pre-Cold War ideological positions. His theory, which emphasizes statehood, may be termed post-nationalist but is difficult to categorize as postmodernist. In contrast, Im Ji-hyun, who also advocated for post-nationalism, vividly demonstrated the characteristics of postmodernism by attempting a comprehensive critique of the form and existence of the historical nation-state. However, his critique was mostly limited to acknowledging the current Cold War-like order in East Asia. On the other hand, Paik Nak-chung’s discussion broke away from the fixed notion of reunification as a unitary nation-state, advocating for the recognition of the North and South as independent, separate states; this reflects an aspect of “post-national” experimentation. Nevertheless, his argument was still perceived as aiming for an incomplete reunified state centered around the concept of a single nation, and he himself seemed to prefer the term “overcoming modernity” over “postmodern.” Koo Kab-woo’s argument, while inheriting Paik Nak-chung’s concept of a confederation, moves beyond the security discourse of the modern nation-state to propose a “peace state” theory, thus displaying a clearer postmodern orientation. The global trend of post-nationalism has involved a transformation in geopolitical and regional imaginations surrounding the nation-state in the post-Cold War era. However, in South Korea, the discussion tends to converge around criticisms of nationalism. This article critically analyzes how the post-nationalist discourse of the 2000s not only acknowledges the Cold War origins of East Asian nation-states but also fails to critically engage with the recent regression to a “new Cold War.”