다국적 군사작전 시 교전규칙의 상호운용성 확보를 위한 법·정책적 검토
A Legal Policy-Based Review of Interoperability of Rules of Engagement in Multinational Military Operations
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
‘다국적 작전’(multinational operations)의 본질, 즉 다국적성은 그 구성과 운영에 상당한 법적 도전과제를 야기한다. 다국적군을 구성하는 모든 회원국들은 고유한국제법 및 국내법적 의무와 정책을 보유하고 있으며 이는 다른 회원국들의 법 또는 정책과 상이할 수밖에 없다. 다국적군이 서로 상이한 입장을 조율할 수 있는 수단이 없다면 다국적군의 다양한 법과 정책은 공동의 작전계획이나 교전규칙과 같은 다국적 군사작전의 기본 운영체계 수립을 방해할 가능성이 높다. 특히 교전규칙(Rules of Engagement: ROE)은 군대가 무력을 사용함에 있어서 적용하는 메커니즘으로서 중요한 지휘통제 수단이므로, 다국적군의 통일된 행동을 보장함으로써 임무의 성공을 견인하기 위해서는 교전규칙의 상호운용성이 확보되어야 한다. 교전규칙의 상호운용성을 확보하기 위해서는 첫째, 다국적군 구성 초기부터 회원국들의 국가제한사항을 공유하고 다국적사령부 차원에서 이를 추적·관리할 수 있는 기제를 마련하는 방안, 둘째, 자위 교전규칙과 임무수행 교전규칙을 분리하여 임무와 과업에 따라 다국적 군사작전을 조정하는 방안, 셋째, 교전규칙의 내용 일부를 공개하거나필수 정보를 교환하는 절차를 제도화하는 방안, 넷째, 각국의 교전규칙을 고려하여 지리적으로 또는 임무에 따라 회원국을 분리 운용하고 교전규칙 적용에 관한 훈련 및 연습을 강화하는 방안 등을 고려할 수 있다. 이와 같은 논의는 한·미 연합방위체제에서연합사 교전규칙과 한국의 교전규칙이 상충하는 경우 교전규칙의 상호운용성 확보를위한 이론적 기초를 제공할 수 있다.
Abstract
The very nature of "multinational operations," i.e., their multi-nationality, presents significant legal challenges to their organization and operation. Every member state of a multinational force has its own international and domestic legal obligations and policies, which will inevitably differ from the laws or policies of other members. Without a means for multinational forces to reconcile their differing positions, the diversity of laws and policies in a multinational force is likely to prevent the establishment of basic operational frameworks for multinational military operations, such as a common operational plan or rules of engagement. Rules of engagement, in particular, are an important means of command and control as they are the mechanism by which forces apply force, and therefore interoperability of rules of engagement is essential to ensure unified behavior of multinational forces to drive mission success. To ensure interoperability of rules of engagement, first, establish a mechanism to share national caveats among member states from the beginning of the multinational force and track and manage them at the multinational command level; second, separate self-defence rules of engagement and mission accomplishment rules of engagement to tailor multinational military operations according to mission and task, third, institutionalizing procedures for disclosing portions of the rules of engagement or exchanging essential information; and fourth, separating member states geographically or by the mission, taking into account their respective rules of engagement, and enhancing training and exercises on the application of the rules of engagement. These discussions can provide a theoretical basis for ensuring the interoperability of rules of engagement in the event of conflicts between the rules of engagement of the ROK-US Combined Forces Command (CFC) and the rules of engagement of the ROK in the U.S.-ROK joint defense system.
참고문헌 (34)
- 안준형, "UN헌장 제51조상의‘무력공격’에 이르지 않는 소규모 적대행위에 대한 무력대응 가능성과 그 국제법적 한계 -‘부대자위권’의 개념정립을 위한 시론 -", 국제법학회논총, 64(4), pp.127~168 (2019), 대한국제법학회[DOI]
- 합동참모본부, "합동교범 10-2: 합동·연합작전 군사용어사전" (2014), 합동참모본부
- 합동참모본부, "합동교범 10-2 : 합동·연합작전 군사용어사전" (2020), 합동참모본부
- 합동참모본부, "합동교범 3-0: 합동작전", 합동참모본부, ~ (2015)
- Clausewitz, Carl von, "On War" (1976), Princeton University Press
- Cole, Ronald H., "Operation Just Cause : The Planning and Execution of Joint Operations in Panama" (1995), Joint History Office
- Department of the Army, "Multinational Force Interoperability, Army Regulation 34-1", Department of the Army, ~ (2015)
- ICRC, "International Humanitarian Law and the Challenges of Contemporary Armed Conflicts", ICRC, ~ (2011)
- National Security Law Department, "Operational Law Handbook" (2022), The Judge Advocate General's Legal Center & School
- NATO, "Allied Joint Doctrine for the Planning of Operations", NATO Standardization Office, ~ (2019)
- NATO, "Allied Joint Doctrine(AJP-01)", NATO Standardization Office, ~ (2022)
- NATO, "Military Decision on MC 362", 1-NATO Rules of Engagement, 2003
- NATO, "NATO Glossary of Terms and Definitions", NATO Standardization Office, ~ (2021)
- Oliver, Kendrick, "The My Lai Massacre in American History and Memory" (2006), Manchester University Press
- Pearlman, Michael D., "Truman and MacArthur: Policy, Politics, and the Hunger for Honor and Renown" (2008), Indiana University Press
- The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center & School, "Multinational Legal Interoperability", U. S. Army, ~ (2021)
- The White House, "National Security Strategy", The White House, ~ (2022)
- Report of the DoD Commission on Beirut International Airport Terrorist Act, "U.S. Department of Defense", U.S. Department of Defesne, ~ (1983)
- U. S. Department of the Army, "Multinaional Force Interoperability", Department of the Army, ~ (2015)
- U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, "Standing Rules of Engagement for US Forces, CJCSI 3121.01", Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction, ~ (1994)
- U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, "Standing Rules of Engagement", Standing Rules for the Use of Force for US Forces, CJCSI 3121.01B, 2005
- U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, "Joint Operation, JP 3-0", Joint Chiefs of Staff, ~ (2018)
- U.S. Joint Chief of Staffs, "Department of Defense Dictionary of Military ans Associated Terms, JP 1-02", Joint Chiefs of Staff, ~ (2021)
- Baron, Wiebe, "Command Responsibility in a Multinational Setting:How to Deal with Different Interpretations of International (Humanitarian) Law. Some Experiences from Practice", Military Law and Law of War Review, 44(3-4) (2005)
- Corn, Gary P., "Should the Best Offense Ever Be a Good Defense? The Public Authority to Use Force in Military Operations : Recalibrating the Use of Force Rules in the Standing Rules of Engagement", Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, 49(1) (2016)
- ICTY, "Prosecutor v. Gotovina et al., ICTY, Judgement of Appeals Chamber, 16 November 2012, Case No. IT-06-90-A", ~ (2012)
- Murphy, Raymond, "United Nations Peacekeeping and the Use of Force- the Failure to Protect in Kosovo", Baltic Yearbook of International Law, 5(1) (2005)
- NATO Parliamentary Assembly, "Resolution 336 on Reducing National Caveats", ~ (2005)
- Noetzel, Timo, "Germany’s Small War in Afghanistan : Military Learning amid Politico-Strategic Inertia", Contemporary Security Policy, 31(3) (2010)
- Parks, W Hays, "Deadly Force is Authorized", Naval Institute Proceedings, 127(1) (2001)
- Porch, Douglas, "No Bad Stories : The American Media-Military Relationship", Naval War College Review, 55(1) (2002)
- Roach, J. Ashley, "Rules of Engagement", Naval War College Review, 36(1) (1983)
- Rowe, Peter, "The Rules of Engagement in Occupied Territory : Should They Be Published?", Melbourne Journal of International Law, 8(2) (2007)
- Williams, Winston S., "Multinational Rules of Engagement : Caveats and Friction" (2013), The Army Lawyer