본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

선제적 자위권의 정당성에 관한 연구: 유엔헌장 제2조 4항과 제51조의 해석을 중심으로

A Study on the Legitimacy of Preemptive Strike for Self-Defense : With a Special Focus on the Article 2 (4) and the Article 51 in the UN Charter

송승종
세종연구소 (The Sejong Institute)|2015.11|국가전략 (National Strategy)|제21권 제4호|pp. 167-206|DOI 10.35390/sejong.21.4.201512.007

0

조회

0

다운로드

6

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

비례성필요성NecessityProportionalityImmediacyPreemptive StrikePreventive Strike예방적 자위권선제적 자위권예상적 자위권캐롤라인 사건임박성유엔헌장 2조 4항유엔헌장 51조Anticipatory StrikeCaroline CaseThe Article 2(4)The Article 51
주제분류정치외교학

초록

본 연구의 목적은 핵무기로 대표되는 대량살상무기의 등장, 특히 북한에 의한 핵위협의 일상화라는 시대적 상황에 유념하면서, 유엔헌장을 기초로 선제적 자위권의 정당성을 모색해 보는 것이다. 첫째, 국제법의 검토 과정에서 발생할 수도 있는 의미상의 오해를 사전에 방지하기 위하여, ‘선제’와 ‘예방’이라는 용어를 둘러싸고 빚어지고 있는 혼란의 현주소와 그 원인을 점검해 봄과 동시에, 이들 용어에 대하여 폭넓게 수용될 수 있는 정의를 제시해 보고자 한다. 둘째, 자위권의 기초가 되는 유엔헌장 제2조 4항과 제51조의 개념과 의미, 그리고 ‘Caroline호 사건’을 계기로 정착된 자위권 행사의 요건인 필요성, 비례성 및 임박성에 대한 상세한 분석을 시도할 것이다. 셋째, 선제타격의 법적 정당성이 헌장 제51조의 해석에 좌우됨에 주목하면서, 조문의 해석 결과가 선제타격의 정당성과 어떤 관련을 갖고 있는지 검토할 것이다. 끝으로, 대량살상무기의 위협 하에서 헌장 제2조 4항 및 제51조에 따라 선제적 자위권을 합법적으로 행사하기 위한 요건들이 무엇인지를 중점적으로 고찰해 보고자 한다.

Abstract

The main purpose of the article is to explore the legitimacy of the preemptive strike on the basis of self-defense related articles enshrined in the United Nations Charter, with special attention on the emergence of weapons of mass destruction, inter alia, nuclear weapons, and the routinization of provocations emanating from the nuclear threat of North Korea. Firstly, for the purpose of ruling out the unnecessary semantic misunderstandings that a series of rigorous review process on the relevant international laws might entail, it attempts to review the current status of perplexing situation revolving around the terms of “preemptive” and “preventive,” and identify its potential reasons, as well as to suggest a definition of the terms that can be regarded as an widely, though not universally, accepted criterion. Secondly, it undertakes an in-depth analysis on the concept and meaning of the Article 2 (4) and the Article 51, the locus classicus upon which the framework of the right of self-defense is founded, and on the three requirements established after the “Caroline case” in exercising the self-defense, namely necessity, proportionality and immediacy. Thirdly, noticing that the legal justification depends upon the interpretation of provisions in the United Nations Charter, it investigates how the result of interpretations on the related articles are correlated with legitimacy and legality in executing the right of preemptive strike. Lastly, it places focus on the deliberation of the conditions that are required to regally exercise the right of preventive self-defense in the face of threats from the weapons of mass destruction, in accordance with the Article 2 (4) and the Article 51.

참고문헌 (83)

  1. 강임구, "선제공격의 정당성 확보 모델 연구", 조선대학교 군사발전연구, 3(1), pp.35~64 (2009)
  2. 권태영, "북한 핵보유 상황 대비 자위적 선제공격론의 개념과 전략적 선택방향", 전략연구, 18(51), pp.7~47 (2011), 한국전략문제연구소
  3. 김대순, "국제법론(17판)" (2013), 삼영사
  4. 박휘락, "북한 핵무기 사용 위협 시 선제타격(Preemptive Strike)대안 분석", 의정논총, 8(1), pp.261~286 (2013), 한국의정연구회
  5. 정인섭, "신국제법" (2013), 박영사
  6. "Case Concerning Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America)", International Court of Justice, June 27, General List No. 70, 1986 I.C.J, ~ (1986)
  7. Eritrea Ethiopia Claims Commission, "Partial Award, Jus ad Bellum, Ethiopia’s Claims 1–8", ~ (2005)
  8. Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion, , I.C.J, ~ (1996)
  9. Addendum - Eighth Report on State Responsibility By the Internationally Wrongful Act of the State, Source of International Responsibility (part 1), Vol. II, "Ago, Roberto", ~, pp.UN Document A (1980), CN.4[DOI]
  10. Armstrong, David, "International Law and International Relations" (2007), Cambridge University Press
  11. Asrat, B., "Prohibition of Force Under the United Nations Charter: A Study of Art 2(4)", A&W Internat, ~ (1991)
  12. Aust, Anthony, "Handbook of International Law Paperback" (2010), Cambridge University Press
  13. Betts, Richard K., "Nuclear Blackmail and Nuclear Balance" (1987), The Brookings Institution
  14. Bobbitt, Philip, "Waging War Against Terror: An Essay for Sandy Levinson", Georgia Law Review, 40(3), pp.753~778 (2006)
  15. Bowett, D. W., "Self-Defense in International Law" (2009), The Lawbook Exchange
  16. Brierly James L., "The Law of Nations: An Introduction to the International Law of Peace" (1978), Oxford University Press
  17. Brownlie, Ian, "International Law and the Use of Force by States" (1963), Clarendon Press
  18. Brunnée Jutta, "The Use of Force: International Law after Iraq", International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 53(4), pp.785~806 (2004)
  19. Bush, George W., "Remarks by the President at 2002 Graduation Exercises of the United States Military Academy, West Point, New York", ~ (2002)
  20. Byers, Michael, "War Law: Understanding International Law and Armed Conflict" (2005), Grove Press
  21. Cassese, Antonio, "International Law in a Divided World" (1986), Clarendon Press
  22. Cassese, Antonio, "Terrorism is Also Disrupting Some Crucial Legal Categories of International Law", European Journal of International Law, 12(5), pp.993~1002 (2001)
  23. Coppieters, Bruno, "Moral Constraints on War" (2002), Lexington Books
  24. Corten, Olivier, "The Law Against War: The Prohibition on the Use of Force in Contemporary International Law" (2010), Hart
  25. Crawford, Neta, "The Slippery Slope to Preventive War", Ethics and International Affairs, 17(1), pp.30~36 (2003)
  26. D’Amato, Anthony, "Israel’s Air Strike Against the Osiraq Reactor: A Retrospective", Temple International and Comparative Law Journal, 10(1), pp.259~264 (1996)
  27. Dinstein, Yoram, "War, Aggression and Self-Defence" (2005), Cambridge University Press
  28. Doyle, Michael W., "Striking First" (2008), Princeton University Press
  29. Eichensehr, Kristen E, "Targeting Tehran: Assessing the Lawfulness of Preemptive Strikes Against Nuclear Facilities (Comment)", UCLA Journal of International Law and Foreign Affairs, 11(1), pp.59~98 (2006)
  30. Enriquez, Arnel B., "The U.S. National Security Strategy of 2002: A New Use-of-Force Doctrine?" (2003), Air University Press
  31. Erickson, R. J., "Legitimate Use of Military Force Against State-Sponsored International Terrorism" (1989), US Government Printing
  32. Ferencz, Benjamin B., "Defining International Aggression : the Search for World Peace" (1975), Oceana Pub
  33. Franck, Thomas M., "Recourse to Force" (2002), Cambridge University Press
  34. Franck, Thomas M., "What Happens Now? The United Nations After Iraq", American Journal of International Law, 97(3), pp.607~620 (2003)
  35. Freedman, Lawrence, "Prevention, Not Preemption", The Washington Quarterly, 26(2), pp.105~114 (2003)
  36. Freedman, Lawrence, "Deterrence" (2004), Polity Press
  37. Gaddis, John Lewis, "Surprise, Security, and the American Experience" (2004), Harvard University Press
  38. Gardam, Judith G, "Proportionality and Force in International Law", American Journal of International Law, 87(3), pp.391~413 (1993)
  39. Gardam, Judith G., "Necessity, Proportionality and the Use of Force by States" (2004), Cambridge Press
  40. Glennon, Michael J., "Preempting Terrorism: The Case for Anticipatory Self-Defense", Weekly Standard (2002)
  41. Gray, Christine, "International Law and the Use of Force" (2004), Oxford University Press
  42. Gray, Colin S., "The Implications of Preemptive and Preventive War Doctrine:A Reconsideration" (2007), Strategic Studies Institute
  43. Green, James A., "Docking the Caroline: Understanding the Relevance of the Formula in Contemporary Customary International Law Concerning Self-Defense", Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law, 14(2), pp.429~480 (2006)
  44. Green, James A., "The Threat of Force as an Action in Self-Defense Under International Law", Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, 44, pp.285~329 (2011)
  45. Grotius, Hugo., "Classics of International Law, Vol. 3" (1995), William S. Hein & Co
  46. Gwertzman, Bernard, "US Says Air Strike May Violate Accord", New York Times, ~ (1981)
  47. Henkin, Louis, "How Nations Behave: Law and Foreign Policy" (1979), Columbia University Press
  48. Henkin, Louis, "International Law: Politics, Values and Functions" (1990), Brill
  49. Higgins, Rosalyn, "British Year Book of International Law 37", pp.269~319 (1961)
  50. Jennings, Robert Y., "The Caroline and McLeod Cases", American Journal of International Law, 32(1), pp.82~99 (1938)
  51. Jervis, R, "Understanding the Bush Doctrine", Political Science Quarterly, 118(3), pp.365~388 (2003)
  52. Jessup, Philip C. A., "Modern Law of Nations" (2007), Macmillan Co
  53. Joint Chiefs of Staff, "Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms" (2004), Joint Chiefs of Staff
  54. Keller, William W., "Preemption, Prevention, Prevarication", Working Paper presented at Ridgway Working Group on Preemptive and Preventive Military Intervention (2006)
  55. Kenny, K. C., "United Nations: Law, Policies and Practice, II" (1995), V. O. Beck
  56. Kretzmer, David, "The Inherent Right to Self-Defence and Proportionality in Jus Ad Bellum", The European Journal of International Law, 24(1), pp.235~282 (2013)
  57. Levy, Jack S, "Preventive War and Democratic Politics", International Studies Quarterly, 52(1), pp.1~24 (2008)
  58. Lund, Matthew, "The Eighty Percent and Twenty Percent Solutions to Nuclear Proliferation", BYU Law Review, 741(3), pp.741~782 (2009)
  59. Maggs, Gregory E, "How the United States Might Justify a Preemptive Strike on a Rogue Nation’s Nuclear Weapon Development Facilities Under the UN Charter", Syracuse Law Review, 57(3), pp.465~496 (2007)
  60. 11 and the State of Permanent Legal Emergency, "Post 9", pp.2012, Masferrer, Aniceto
  61. McDougal, Myres S., "Law and Minimum World Public Order" (1961), Yale University Press
  62. Mueller, Karl P., "Striking First" (2006), RAND
  63. Murphy, Sean D, "The Doctrine of Preemptive Self-Defense", Villanova Law Review, 50(3), pp.699~748 (2005)
  64. Nabati, Mikael, "International Law at a Crossroads: Self-defense, Global Terrorism, and Preemption", Transnational Law and Contemporary Problems, 13(2), pp.771~802 (2003)
  65. Randelzhofer, Albrecht, "The Charter of the United Nations: A Commentary. Vol. I" (2002), Oxford University Press
  66. Reisman, W. Michael, "The Past and Future of the Claim of Preemptive Self-Defense", American Journal of International Law, 100, pp.525~550 (2006)
  67. Roberts, Guy B, "Counterproliferation Self-Help Paradigm: A Legal Regime for Enforcing the Norm Prohibiting the Proliferation of WMD", Denver Journal of International Law and Policy, 27(3), pp.483~540 (1999)
  68. Roosevelt, Franklin, "XXXII President of the United States: 1933-1945, 100 –Fireside Chat", ~ (1941)
  69. Root, Elihu, "The Real Monroe Doctrine", American Journal of International Law, 8(3), pp.427~442 (1914)
  70. Prepared Testimony of U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld before the House and Senate Armed Services Committees Regarding Iraq (transcript), "Rumsfeld, Donald", ~ (2002)
  71. Schachter, Oscar, "The Right of States to Use Armed Force", Michigan Law Review, 82(5, pp.6) (1984), 1620~1646
  72. Schachter, Oscar, "In Defense of International Rules on the Use of Force", University of Chicago Law Review, 53(1), pp.113~146 (1986)
  73. Schachter, Oscar, "International Law in Theory and Practice" (1991), Springer
  74. Schlesinger, Arthur M., "War and the American Presidency" (2004), Norton
  75. Schmitt, Michael N., "Counter-terrorism and the Use of Force in International Law" (2002), George C. Marshall ECSS
  76. Shannon, Don., "U.N. Council Condemns Israel’s Attack in Tunisia", LA Times, ~ (1985)
  77. Shipler, David K., "Pride and Punishment : Iraelis Insist Air Raid on Iraqis Was Justified", New York Times, ~ (1981)
  78. 11, "The One Percent Doctrine: Deep Inside America’s Pursuit of Its Enemies since 9", pp.2006, Suskind, Ron.
  79. The National Security Strategy of the United States of America, "The White House", The White House, ~ (2002)
  80. Vattel, Emmerich de., "The Law of Nations" (2011), CU Press
  81. Walzer, Michael, "Just and Unjust Wars: A Moral Argument With Historical Illustrations" (1977), Basic Books
  82. Wedgwood, Ruth, "Proportionality and Necessity in American National Security Decision Making", Proceedings of the Annual Meeting (American Society of International Law), 86, pp.58~67 (1992)
  83. Williams, Geoffrey L., "Crisis in European Defence:The Next Ten Years" (1974), Charles Knight & Co

관련 논문AI추천

북한 도발 억제를 위한 자위권 적용에 대한 연구: 북핵 위협에 대응위한 선제적 자위권 적용을 중심으로이성훈세종연구소 · 국가전략2014 · 제20권 제2호북핵 고도화와 대응방안 모색 : 선제공격 제한성의 극복방안을 중심으로김한규, 이성훈국가안보전략연구원 · 국가안보와 전략2017 · 제17권 제1호유엔의 자위권 해석과 군사적 개입 — 자위권에 기반한 공격을 중심으로 —전수미안암법학회 · 안암법학2018 · 제57호선제공격의 제한성 및 선결조건에 관한 연구김태성한국국방연구원 · 국방정책연구2015 · 제31권 제2호‘선제적 자위’의 역사적 이해와 북한 핵위협 대비 선제공격의 정당성에 대한 연구기석호국방부군사편찬연구소 · 군사2015 · 제96호Study of Concordance between Constitution and Activating Right of SELF-DEFENSE in KOREANoh Dong-young동북아학술저널연합 · International Journal of Military Affairs2018 · 제3권 제2호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (7건)

일본 자원외교의 해석과 평가: 일본국회의사록에 나타난 쟁점과 과제, 1990-2010박홍영pp. 5-28일본 방위산업의 기술성과에 관한 연구: 일본 방산기업의 특허취득을 중심으로송정현, 김진기pp. 29-50한국 정치학계의 북한문제 인식과 대응(2000-2012): 『국제정치논총』·『한국정치학회보』를 중심으로양일국, 남궁영pp. 51-78북한 인터넷 개방의 정치적 영향: 선험적 사례를 통한 분석과 전망고경민pp. 79-104카터 행정부의 주한미군 철수결정에 대한 한국 정부의 대응에 관한 연구: 카터 대통령 취임부터 10차 한미연례안보회의까지의 과정을 중심으로조관행pp. 105-138
원문 보기