유라시아 다자협력기구의 한계: SCO와 CSTO를 중심으로
The Limit of Multilateral Cooperation Organization in Eurasia: in the Context of SCO and CSTO
0
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
SCO(Shanghai Cooperation Organization), which consists of China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, was established to resolve boundary issues after the collapse of the Soviet Union. CSTO(Collective Security Treaty Organization), which consists of Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Tajikistan was established to prevent a security vacuum in the CIS after the USSR collapsed. The former is of great importance in the context of a new world order, particularly in which China is emerging as one of the G2. The latter is highly estimated by the international community as a threatening organization. In particular, the CSTO has an RRF(Rapid Reaction Forces) and peacekeeping role. Overall, SCO and CSTO have been underestimated by international society in contrast to these expectations. We are able to infer the cause of these evaluations from two incomprehensible cases. First, According to the charter and treaty of CSTO, when a nonmember state attacks a member state of CSTO, it is obliged to take quick action against the nonmember state. But when Georgia attacked Russia in 2008, CSTO didn’t intervene in this conflict. Second, when an ethnic dispute between a Kirghiz and an Uzbek faction occured in Kyrgyzstan in 2010, interim president Roza Otunbayeva called for intervention of CSTO. But Dmitry Medvedev, the Russian president, turned down her request. The SCO rejected involvement in Kyrgyzstan too. Actually SCO and CSTO have had no experiences in a disputed area until now. The purpose of this research is to analyze the reasons why SCO and CSTO didn’t intervene in the two situations outlined above.
Abstract
SCO(Shanghai Cooperation Organization), which consists of China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, was established to resolve boundary issues after the collapse of the Soviet Union. CSTO(Collective Security Treaty Organization), which consists of Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Tajikistan was established to prevent a security vacuum in the CIS after the USSR collapsed. The former is of great importance in the context of a new world order, particularly in which China is emerging as one of the G2. The latter is highly estimated by the international community as a threatening organization. In particular, the CSTO has an RRF(Rapid Reaction Forces) and peacekeeping role. Overall, SCO and CSTO have been underestimated by international society in contrast to these expectations. We are able to infer the cause of these evaluations from two incomprehensible cases. First, According to the charter and treaty of CSTO, when a nonmember state attacks a member state of CSTO, it is obliged to take quick action against the nonmember state. But when Georgia attacked Russia in 2008, CSTO didn’t intervene in this conflict. Second, when an ethnic dispute between a Kirghiz and an Uzbek faction occured in Kyrgyzstan in 2010, interim president Roza Otunbayeva called for intervention of CSTO. But Dmitry Medvedev, the Russian president, turned down her request. The SCO rejected involvement in Kyrgyzstan too. Actually SCO and CSTO have had no experiences in a disputed area until now. The purpose of this research is to analyze the reasons why SCO and CSTO didn’t intervene in the two situations outlined above.
참고문헌 (36)
- 강봉구, "중앙아시아 나린강", 시르다리야강의 국제 수자원 정치, 2009, pp.27(3), 221~246[DOI]
- 김성진, "러시아 외교정책의 성격: 상하이 협력기구에 대한 정책을 중심으로", 중소연구, 32(2), pp.149~178 (2008), 아태지역연구센터
- 두진호, "푸틴 집권 시기 러시아의 안보정책 평가와 전망: 경로의존성을 중심으로", 군사논단, 70 (2012), 한국군사학회
- 신범식, "러시아-중국 안보 군사협력 관계의 변화와 전망", 중소연구, 30(4), pp.63~90 (2007), 아태지역연구센터
- 이호령, "미국의 대중앙아시아 정책 분석", 평화연구, 11(2) (2003), 고려대학교 평화와민주주의연구소
- "중앙아시아 지역협력체 현황"[URL]
- 즈비그뉴 브레진스키, "거대한 체스판" (2000), 삼인
- "美, 키르기스內 미군기지 계속 사용"[URL]
- Gordon, A., "중소 국경분쟁 조정에 관한 고찰", 중소연구, 19(3) (1995), 한양대학교아태지역연구센터
- Giragosian, R., "The Strategic Central Asian Arena", China and Eurasia Forum Quarterly, 4(1) (2006)
- Grodsky, B., "Direct Pressures for Human Right in Uzbekistan: Understanding the US Bargaining Position", Central Asian Survey, 23(3-4) (2004), Routledge
- Kim, Y. K., "Same Bed, Different Dreams: China’s peaceful rise’ and Sino–Russian rivalry in Central Asia", The Journal of Contemporary China, 22(83) (2013), Routledge
- Nichol, J., "The April 2010 Coup in Kyrgyzstan and its Aftermath: Context and Implications for U.S. Interests", Congressional Research Service, 7(5700) (2010)
- Matveeva, A., "Russia’s changing security role in Central Asia, In European Security" (2013), Routledge
- Rutland, P., "Russia’s Response to U.S. Regional Influence", NBR ANALYSIS, 14(1) (2003)
- Sheives, K., "China Turns West: Beijing’s Contemporary Strategy Towards Central Asia", Pacific Affairs, 79(2) (2006), Univ. of British Columbia
- "Asia-Pacific China ends Kazakh border dispute"[URL]
- "Axis of Evil Shaping Against Moscow"[URL]
- Finding Balance: The Foreign Policies of Central Asia’s States, "Cornell, E. S.", ~, pp.Strategic Asia 2007-08: Domestic Political Change and Grand Strategy (2007)
- "Kyrgyzstan tests Russia’s regional commitments"[URL]
- "Kyrgyz Official Criticizes Foreign Partners"[URL]
- "CSTO stages first peacekeeping exercise"[URL]
- "Russia-Led Group to Beef Up Tajik-Afghan Border Security"[URL]
- "China’s Reaction to Kyrgyzstan’s ‘Tulip Revolution"[URL]
- "China and its Neighbours: troubled relations"[URL]
- "SCO members, let’s talk about economic ties"[URL]
- "Kyrgyzstan’s border riddle"[URL]
- "Uzbekistan and Belarus reveal serious disagreement within the CSTO"[URL]
- "Medvedev says Moscow backed by CSTO over Russian-Georgian conflict"[URL]
- "Russia Offers to Replace Austria as UN Golan Peacekeepers"[URL]
- "47% - Китаю и 53% - нам?"[URL]