냉전 이후 미국 외교정책의 자유주의적 우위권 확보와 합법화과정
Liberal Primacy and Legitimation in American Foreign Policy after the Cold War
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
냉전이후 미국은 ‘자유주의적 우위(liberal primacy)’정책을 전면에 내세우는 외교정책을 펼침으로써 국제 사회에서 미국의 지배력을 강화하려는 전략을 구사했다. 이러한 ‘자유주의적 우위’는 냉전 이후에 독보적인 미국의 안보전략으로서 약 30년 동안 지속되었다. 본 논문에서는 미국 외교정책의 합법화(the legitimation of US foreign policy)에 초점을 맞추어 어떻게 ‘자유주의적 우위’ 정책이 생겨났으며, 그 특징은 무엇이고, 그 정책을 시행하는 과정에서 노출된 문제점과 그 결과 미국의 외교정책이 어떤 상황에 처하게 되었는지 등에 대한 논의를 전개하고자 한다. 논의 과정에서 왜 미국은 “평화를 위한 동반자 협정(PfP)”을 포기하고 나토를 확대하는 등 세계 곳곳에서 팽창주의적 전략을 구사했는지에 대한 해답도 함께 모색하고자 한다. 합리화 해석은 자유주의적 우위권이 어떻게 출현했고, 어떻게 실행되었는가에 대한 오래된 숙제에 약간의 해결의 빛을 던질 수 있다. 냉전과 냉전 이후 기간에 미국의 외교정책의 핵심적인 사항들을 합리화라는 시각으로 바라볼 때 그에 대한 이해의 폭을 넓힐 수 있는 것이다. 이러한 해석은 자유주의적인 세계 질서와 미국 우위권이라는 두 개의 모순적인 개념 사이에 존재하는 긴장이 어떻게 해소되는가를 설명할 뿐만 아니라 그것들이 어떻게 보이지 않게 덮여졌는지에 대한 설명도 가능하다. 그리고 그것은 많은 비판자들에 의해 냉전 이후에 미국 외교정책의 원죄라고 불렸던 나토의 확대가 어떻게 미국 외교정책의 문제적인 영역에서 의심의 여지가 없는 핵심적인 영역으로 신속하게 움직였는가를 명확하게 설명한다. 탈냉전 시기 미국 안보전략이 자유주의적 우위권을 합법화하는 방향으로 움직였던 것은 불가피했다. 왜냐하면 냉전 종식 이후 미국은 홀로 세계를 이끌어야 한다는 아무도 맡기지 않았던 책임감에 도취되어 있었기 때문이었다. 이러한 정책적 선택이 1990년대 초에 이루어졌다는 것은 그러한 미국의 태도에 비추어 보면 자연스러운 결과였다. 그러나 더 중요했던 것은 이러한 외교정책의 합법화 시도가 냉전 이후에 갑자기 나타난 것이 아니라 이미 제2차 세계대전과 냉전 초기부터 끊임없이 미국의 지도자들 가운데서 그 씨앗이 뿌려지고 있었다는 것이다.
Abstract
At the end of the Cold War, the United States came to pursue of foreign policy of “liberal primacy” that would maintain America’s hegemonic status in the international politics. By some account, liberal primacy has been the preeminent, and until recently unchallenged, US grand strategy in the post-Cold War world, across four presidential administrations and three decades. In this essay, I suggest that focusing on the legitimation of US foreign policy can be shed light on each of these questions. First, over the decades, how did US leaders have consistently invoked familiar liberal concepts and tropes to justify US foreign policy? Second, how did liberal legitimation make the post-Cold War strategy of primacy possible? Third, how did the liberal legitimating language of post-Cold War US foreign policy bolster the proponents of NATO expansion, tilting the rhetorical playing field in their favor? A legitimation perspective sheds light on long-standing puzzles about the nature of liberal primacy, how it emerged, and how it was implemented. A legitimation lens highlights crucial continuities in US foreign policy, from the Cold War into the post-Cold War period. It explained how the tensions between liberal world order and US primacy were not just eased, but so smoothed over as to become invisible. And it clarifies how NATO enlargement - the original sin of post-Cold War US foreign policy, according to many critics - moved rapidly from the questionable margins to the unquestioned center of US foreign policy. The post-Cold War turn to liberal primacy in US grand strategy was not inevitable. Choices made in the early 1990s certainly mattered, but even more consequential were the legitimation strategies adopted in the twilight of World War II and the dawn of the Cold War that followed.
참고문헌 (60)
- "Address Before a Joint Session of Congress" (1990)[URL]
- Craig. Whitney, "France Presses for a Power Independence of the United States", New York Times, ~ (1999)
- "Deputy Secretary’s Meeting in Warsaw with President Walesa", Clinton Presidential Records, NSC Cables, Jan. 1993-Dec. 1994, OA, 1994
- George W. Bush, "First Inaugural Address", ~ (2001)
- Kupchan, Charles, "Expand NATO and Split Europe", New York Times, ~ (1994)
- "Remarks to the 48th Session of the United Nations General Assembly in New York City", ~ (1993)
- US Embassy Moscow to US Secretary of State, "Presidential Aide Says Yeltsin Angered Over Mishandling of NATO Expansion, Mar. 21, 1995", Clinton Presidential Records, NSC Cables, Jan. 1995-Dec. 1996, OA, 1995
- Asmus, Ronald, "Opening NATO’s Door" (2002), Columbia University Press
- Betts, Richard, "Is Strategy an Illusion?", International Security, 25(2) (2000)
- Boucoyannis, Deborah, "The International Wandering of a Liberal Idea, or Why Liberals Can Learn to Stop Worrying and Love the Balance of Power", Perspectives on Politics, 5(4) (2007)
- Brands, Hal, "Making the Unipolar Moment: US Foreign Policy and the Rise of the Post-Cold War Order" (2016), Cornell University Press
- Bukovansky, Mlada, "Legitimacy and Power Politics" (2002), Prince-ton University Press
- 9 to 9, "America Between the Wars:from 11", pp.Public Affairs Books, 11
- Desch, Michael, "America’s Liberal Illiberalism", International Secu-rity, 32(3) (2007)
- Deudney, Daniel, "The Nature and Sources of the Liberal International Order", Review of International Studies (1999)
- Dueck, Colin, "Ideas and Alternatives in American Grand Strategy, 2000-2004", Review of International Studies, 30(4) (2004)
- Finnemore, Martha, "Legitimacy, Hypocrisy, and the Social Structure of Unipolarity: Why Being a Unipole Isn’t All It’s Cracked Up to Be", World Politics, 61(1) (2009)
- Freeman, Samuel, "Illiberal Libertarians", Philosophy and Public Affairs, 30(2) (2001)
- Glaser, Charles, "A Flawed Framework: Why the Liberal International Or-der Concept is Misguided", International Security, 43 (2019)
- Goddard, Stacie, "Rhetoric, Legitimation, and Grand Strategy", Security Studies, 24(1) (2015)
- Goddard, Stacie, "When Right Makes Might: Rising Powers and World Order" (2018), Cornell University Press
- Goldgeier, James, "Not Whether but When: The US Decision to En-large NATO" (1999), Brookings Institution Press
- Hartz, Louis, "The Liberal Tradition of America" (1955), Harcourt
- Ikenberry, G. John, "After Victory: Institutions, Strategic Restraint, and the Rebuilding of Order After Major Wars" (2001), Princeton University Press
- Jackson, Patrick T, "Civilizing the Enemy : German Reconstruction and the Invention of the West" (2006), University of Michigan Press
- Kennedy, Paul, "Grand Strategies in War and Peace" (1991), Yale University Press
- Klare, Michael, "Rogue States and Nuclear Outlaws" (1995), Macmillan
- Krebs, Ronald R., "Narrative and the Making of US National Security" (2015), Cambridge University Press
- Lissner, Rebecca, "What Is Grand Strategy? Sweeping a Conceptual Minefield", Texas National Security Review, 2(1) (2018)
- Mastanduno, Michael, "Preserving the Unipolar Moment: Realist Theories and US Grand Strategy After and Cold War", International Security vol, 21(4) (1997)
- Mearsheimer, John J., "Bound to Fail: The Rise and Fall of the Liberal International Order", International Security, 43(4) (2019)
- Miles, Alex, "US Foreign Policy and the Rogue State Doctrine" (2013), Rout-ledge
- Monteiro, Nuno P., "Unrest Assured Why Unipolarity Is not Peaceful", In-ternational Security, 46(3) (2011)
- Muravchik, Joshua, "The Imperative of American Leadership: A Challenge to Neo-Isolationism" (1996), American Enterprise Institute
- Murphy, Craig N., "What the Third World Wants: An Interpretation of the Development and Meaning of the New International Economic Order Ideology", International Studies Quarterly, 27(1) (1983)
- Narlikar, Amrita, "Fairness in International Trade Negotiations: Developing Countries in the GATT and WTO", The World Economy, 29(8) (2006)
- Porter, Patrick, "Why America’s Grand Strategy Has Not Changed: Power, Habit, and the US Foreign Policy Establishment", International Secu-rity, 42(4) (2018)
- Posen, Barry, "Restraint: A new Foundation for US Grand Strategy" (2014), Cornell University Press
- Posen, Barry, "Competing Visions for US Grand Strat-egy", International Security, 21(3) (1997)
- Reus-Smit, Christian, "American Power and World Order" (2004), Polity Press
- Sarotte, Elise, "How to Enlarge NATO: The Debate Inside the Clinton Administration, 1993-95", International Security, 44(1) (2020)
- Shifrinson, Joshua, "NATO Enlargement and US Foreign Policy: The Origins, Durability and Impact of an Idea", International Politics, 57 (2020)
- Shifrinson, Joshua, "Eastbound and Down: The United States, NATO En-largement, and Supressing the Soviet and Western European Alterna-tives, 1990-1992", Journal of Strategic Studies, 43(6) (2020)
- Silove, Nina, "Beyond the Buzzword: Three Meanings of ‘Grand Strategy,’", Security Studies, 27(1) (2018)
- Slobodian, Quinn, "Globalists: The End of Empire and the Birth of Neo-liberalism" (2018), Harvard University Press
- Stein, Arthur, "Peace, Prosperity, and Politics" (2000), Westview Press
- Talbott, Strobe, "The Russian Hand : A Memoir of Presidential Diploma-cy" (2002), Random House
- Wagner, Wolfgang, "Deviance in International Re-lations" (2014), Palgrave
- Walker, Martin, "Present at the Solution: Madeleine Albright’s Ambitious Foreign Policy", World Policy Journal, 14(1) (1997)
- Walt, Stephen M, "The Hell of Good Intentions: America’s Foreign Policy Elite and the Decline of US Primacy" (2018), Farrar, Straus and Giroux
- Walt, Stephen M., "Alliance Formation and the Balance of World Power", International Security, 9(4) (1985)
- Walt, Stephen M, "In the National Interest: A New Grand Strategy for American Foreign Policy", Boston Review, 30(1) (2005)
- Weaver, Catherine, "Hypocrisy Trap: The World Bank and the Prob-lem of Reform" (2008), Princeton University Press
- Weldes, Jutta, "Hypocrisy Trap: The World Bank and the Problem of Re-form" (1996), Princeton University Press