중앙아시아 역내 민족갈등 해결을 위한 다자간 협력기구 설립의 가능성 제고: 타지키스탄 내전 사례와 중견국가로서 한국의 역할을 중심으로
The Research on Possibility of the Establishment of Multinational Cooperation Organization to Solve Ethnic Conflicts in the Regions of Central Asia - According to the Case of Tajik Civil War and the Role of Korea as Middle Power
1
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The first reaction to the disintegration of the USSR by the end of 1991 was fear of an outburst of ethnic and interstate conflicts in the post-Soviet territory. in the Transcaucasus a war had broken out between Armenia and Azerbaijan; Moldova had split into two parts-Pridnestrovye and the territory loyal to Kishinyov; Ukraine faced the hazard of the Crimean Peninsula being annexed by Russia; and in the Baltic states a conflict flared up between authorities and Russian-speaking populations concerning the issues of citizenship and the state language. In those circumstances it was crucial to have a mechanism for dialogue and cooperation. Thus, in early 1992, a Commonwealth of Independent States [CIS] was created. But from the start CIS couldn't play a role to solve political and economic problems that happened in the region of Central Asia. So, the Central Asian Union [CAU] was created in 1994 because of the disappointment with the CIS, originally comprised of three states-Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan. The creation of CAU caused a certain euphoria about the prospects of regional integration, and a number of regional cooperation institutions and mechanisms were established, such as interstate presidential and prime minister-level committees, and the Central Asian Bank for Cooperation and Development. Also, at that time, relationships among the presidents could be termed friendly. But after cease-fire of Tajik Civil War Tajikistan and Uzbekistan has been unfriendly and after Kazakhstan is emerging as a new economic power in the region Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan has been unfriendly too. Consequently, at present, CAU could be considered a failure in most of its functions. Now we have to understand the conflict structure of the region in Central Asia and consider solutions to establish CAU realistically. US, China, and Russia as high-level states can't paly a role to solve the regional problems in Central Asia and recreate CAU because of representative partnership with Central Asian States. In this point we must cognize Middle Power as communicator to solve the upper problems in Central Asia. For examples, Kazakhstan can't solve the conflict with Uzbekistan by bilateral relations and high-level states hasn't exerted great efforts to improve the relationship between two states. Middle Power can play a role to solve the regional problems and discuss with high-level states. Now we consider Korea as Middle Power in Central Asia. Korean government has pushed New Asia Initiative and Central Asia is suitable region to achieve it. This paper will analyze the possibility of the establishment of multinational cooperation organization to solve the regional problems in Central Asia through the case of Tajik Civil War and the role of Korea as Middle Power.
Abstract
The first reaction to the disintegration of the USSR by the end of 1991 was fear of an outburst of ethnic and interstate conflicts in the post-Soviet territory. in the Transcaucasus a war had broken out between Armenia and Azerbaijan; Moldova had split into two parts-Pridnestrovye and the territory loyal to Kishinyov; Ukraine faced the hazard of the Crimean Peninsula being annexed by Russia; and in the Baltic states a conflict flared up between authorities and Russian-speaking populations concerning the issues of citizenship and the state language. In those circumstances it was crucial to have a mechanism for dialogue and cooperation. Thus, in early 1992, a Commonwealth of Independent States [CIS] was created. But from the start CIS couldn't play a role to solve political and economic problems that happened in the region of Central Asia. So, the Central Asian Union [CAU] was created in 1994 because of the disappointment with the CIS, originally comprised of three states-Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan. The creation of CAU caused a certain euphoria about the prospects of regional integration, and a number of regional cooperation institutions and mechanisms were established, such as interstate presidential and prime minister-level committees, and the Central Asian Bank for Cooperation and Development. Also, at that time, relationships among the presidents could be termed friendly. But after cease-fire of Tajik Civil War Tajikistan and Uzbekistan has been unfriendly and after Kazakhstan is emerging as a new economic power in the region Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan has been unfriendly too. Consequently, at present, CAU could be considered a failure in most of its functions. Now we have to understand the conflict structure of the region in Central Asia and consider solutions to establish CAU realistically. US, China, and Russia as high-level states can't paly a role to solve the regional problems in Central Asia and recreate CAU because of representative partnership with Central Asian States. In this point we must cognize Middle Power as communicator to solve the upper problems in Central Asia. For examples, Kazakhstan can't solve the conflict with Uzbekistan by bilateral relations and high-level states hasn't exerted great efforts to improve the relationship between two states. Middle Power can play a role to solve the regional problems and discuss with high-level states. Now we consider Korea as Middle Power in Central Asia. Korean government has pushed New Asia Initiative and Central Asia is suitable region to achieve it. This paper will analyze the possibility of the establishment of multinational cooperation organization to solve the regional problems in Central Asia through the case of Tajik Civil War and the role of Korea as Middle Power.
참고문헌 (34)
- 김대성, "소련 해체 이후 강대국의 대 중앙아시아 지역패권주의 정책과 국제질서: 타지키스탄과 투르크메니스탄의 일반개황", 한국중동학회논총, 20(1)
- 장병옥, "타지키스탄 내전과 평화과정에 대한 연구", 중동연구, 27(2), pp.147~174 (2008), 중동연구소
- "우즈베크 대외관계", 우즈베키스탄주재 한국대사관, ~ (2008)
- 윤성학, "글로벌 금융위기 이후 한국의 대중앙아시아 진출 전략", 대외경제 정책연구원, ~ (2009)
- Abdullo, R., "Politics of compromise: the Tajikistan peace process" (2010), Conciliation Resources
- Akiner, S., "Conflict and post-conflict Tajikisatan: a case study" (2005), International Peace Academy
- Akiner, S., "Conflict, causality and conceptualization of the Tajik civil war, In Lessons of the Tajik peace process for Afghanistan: compendium of studies" (2007), University of Peace
- Anderson, M., "Do no harm: how aid can support peace or war" (1999), Lynne Rienner
- Arabov, Oumar, "A note on Sufism in Tajikistan: What does it look like?", Central Asian Survey, 23(3)
- Asadullaev, I., "The Tajikistan government, In Politics of compromise: the Tajikistan peace process" (2001), Conciliation Resources
- Blakkisrud, Helge, "History writing and nation building in postindependence Tajikistan", Nationalities Papers, 38(2)
- Collins, K., "The logic of clan politics: evidence from the Central Asian trajectories", World Politics, 56
- Dudoignon, S.A., "Political parties and forces in Tajikistan, 1989-1993, In Tajikistan: the trials of independence" (1997), St. Martin's Press
- Dudoignon, S.A., "From ambivalence to ambiguity? Some paradigms of policy making in Tajikistan, In Tajikistan at a crossroad: the politics of decentralization" (2004), Cimera
- Farkhad Tolipov, "Uzbekistan's recent gestures and foreign policy formulation problem", the Central Asia-Caucasus Analyst (2008)
- Foroughi, Payam, "Tajikistan: Nationalism, Ethnicity, Conflict, and Socio-economic Disparities-Sources and Solutions", Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs, 22(1)
- Fukuyama, F., "The imperative of state-building", Journal of Democracy, 14(2)
- Gleason, Gregory, "Why Russia is in Tajikistan'", Comparative Strategy, 20(1)
- Gretsky, S., "Civil war in Tajikistan: causes, developments and prospects for peace, In Central Asia: conflict, resolution, and change" (1995), The Eisenhower Institute
- Heathershaw, John, "Peacebuilding as Practice: Discourses from Post-conflict Tajikistan", International Peacekeeping, 14(2)
- Iji, Tetsuro, "Cooperation, coordination and complementarity in international peacemaking: the Tajikistan experience", International Peacekeeping, 12(2)
- Lynch, Dov, "The Tajik civil war and peace process", Civil Wars, 4(4)
- Nakaya, Sumie, "Aid and transition from a war economy to an oligarchy in post-war Tajikistan", Central Asian Survey, 28(3)
- Nagzibekova, Mehrinisso, "Language and Education Policies in Tajikistan", International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 11(3)
- Regional surveys of the world, "Eastern Europe, Russia and Central Asia 2004" (2003), Europa Publications
- Roy, O., "Inter-regional dynamics of war, In Politics of compromise: the Tajikistan peace process" (2004), Conciliation Resources
- Rubin, B., "Russian hegemony and state breakdown in the periphery: causes and consequences of thecivil war in Tajikistan, In Post-Soviet political order: conflict and state building" (1998), Routledge
- Shahram Akbarzadeh, "Why did nationalism fail in Tajikistan?", Europe-Asia Studies, 48(7)