한국 국제평화활동의 양분화 고찰 유엔 PKO vs. 다국적군 파병

Abstract

International peacekeeping operations consist of UN-led PKO(UNPKOs) and non-UN-led ones. UNPKOs are directly deployed and financed by the United Nations with the approval of the Security Council, while non-UN PKOs, also known as multinational peacekeeping force(MNF), are an international military group consisting of forces from different countries. The latter also requires the Security Council’s consent, but their activities are financially and administratively sponsored by participating countries, usually with a lead nation. As MNF operations are often claimed to be more effective and successful than UN-led PKOs, western (and powerful) countries, which have operational and financial resources with strong combat capabilities, tend to prefer it over UNPKOs. In the case of Korea, however, there has been a gap, what I call “PKO divide,” where the public, policy makers and national assembly men have little objection to dispatching UNPKO forces whereas showing strong reservation or resistance in sending MNF, especially when the U.S. makes a request. As a consequence, the law on UNPKO participation was passed at the National Assembly in 2009, but this law is not applicable to the cases of MNF dispatchment. This paper examines the changing development of international peacekeeping activities and evaluates the role of Korean PKOs, both UN-led and non-UN-led. Then the paper discusses why the PKO divide occurs in Korea and seek institutional and legal solutions to reduce the gap.