데탕트 혹은 냉전 에피스테메의 변전 - 1970년대 ‘평화’ 개념을 중심으로 -

Abstract

This article explores the (peaceable) unification discourses of South Korea in 1970s when a mood of international detente arose. The concept of ‘peace,’ as it originated and developed within the European context, is used as an analytical tool in this paper. It is remarkable that the concept of peace has been divided into two disparate, even contrary streams. The weaker of these expressed the ‘positive’ meanings, such as ‘rights,’ ‘friendship,’ ‘affection,’ ‘freedom’ and ‘love,’ while the ‘negative’ and passive meanings, such as ‘security’ and ‘the absence of violence,’ became dominant. As a result, the concept of peace has established a verbal usage, within the context of interactions between the nation-states, which is primarily concerned with international relations (international law) or with peace treaties (pactum pacis) intended to end wars. In terms of peace between nation-states, international detente seems to have brought about ironical results on the Korean peninsula: against the backdrop of reconciliation between China and the US, both North and South Korea established repressive dictatorships through the revision of their legal systems. Indeed, during the 1970s detente period the division of North and South Korea actually got far more solidified and internalized. This paper, in contrast, tries to expand the meaning of peace to include the positive ones which emerged in the South Korean public sphere during the 1970s. This might tentatively be called (after Duara) the project of ‘rescuing peace from the nation-state.’ To this end, the emphasis is upon the conceptual competition (albeit unequal, or even hierarchical) between the ruling powers and the critical intellectuals of the 1970s. One of the most important voices fundamentally subverting the ruling party’s concept of peace was Ham Seok-Heon, whose peace project is highlighted in this paper. Whereas the ruling power’s conception of peace was expressed within the semantic network of national security and economic development, Ham’s notion of peace was only achievable by freedom of speech. To achieve peaceful unification, Ham argues that active communication and freedom of speech are far more valuable than secretive North-South dialogue between the two governments. He regarded nation- states as an obstruction to peace, and as the major agents creating structural violence. It is therefore the people themselves [Minjung or Ssial (씨)] who should take responsibility for promoting peace, instead of governments or nation-states. During the 1970s, there was a divergence among other intellectuals, with various concepts of Minjung being discussed. The concept of the ‘third world’ also arose as an expanded meaning of people (Minjung), and this became established as one of the most powerful terms to symbolize the sprit of detente.