|
미국의 월스트리트저널(The
WallSteet Journal)은 18일 논평 기사를 통해 때때로 김정일이 청와대에 자문을 하고 있다고 느낄 정도라고 표현했다.
월스트리트저널은 전시작전권 환수가, 분쟁이 생겼을 경우 북한에 명확한 우위를 주게 될 만한 조치라고 우려하며
위와 같이 말했다.
이 신문은 노무현 대통령이 이달 초 연합뉴스와의 인터뷰에서 "한국이 자주국방할 때가
왔다", "우리는 능력이 있다. 국가안보에 문제가 없다. 한국의 방위능력이 너무 과소평가되어 왔다" 고 발언한 것을 거론하며 문제는 한국이
´싸울 능력이 있는가´ 가 아니라 ´싸울 의지가 있는가 하는 것´ 이라고 지적했다.
또한, 현재 미국의
군사적 협력에 있어서 노무현 대통령이 약간 오도하는 것이 있다며 전시에 미국의 4星장군이, 미군 및 65만의 강력한 한국군에게 지시하는 것은
사실이지만 기술적으로 말해서 미국이 한국군을 지휘하는 것이 아니라 공동으로 개발한 전쟁계획에 따른 전투운영을 조정한다고 보는 것이 맞을 것이라고
전했다.
신문은 한국의 모든 사람이 노무현 대통령의 계획을 좋은 생각이라고 생각하지는 않는다면서 16명의
전직 국방장관이 연합사 해체 구상에 반대해 항의집회를 연 것을 들었다. 그 이유로 한국안보에 대한 미국의 공약을 해칠 우려가 있기 때문이라고
분석했다.
그리고 이러한 집회는 한국전쟁에 대한 기억을 가지고 있는 많은 노년층에게 전시 작전통제권 환수에
대한 두려움을 증폭시켜 전시작전권환수를 덜 지지하게 만든다고 말했다.
신문은, 마지막으로 다음달 노무현
대통령이 워싱턴을 방문할 때 이 문제(전시작통권 단독행사)가 이슈로 부상될 것은 거의 의심의 여지가 없다고 예상하며 내년 대통령 선거에서도
한국에서의 미군의 역할은 이슈가 될 것이라고 전했다.
다음은 원문 전문
Seoul Control
The WallStreet Journal 2006. 8. 18 [LOOK & OUTLOOK]
Kim Jong Il may not advise Seoul´s Blue House, but some
days, it feels like he does. on Tuesday, South Korean President Roh Moo Hyun
called for Seoul to take command of Korean troops in wartime -- a move that
would split command of current forces between Seoul and Washington and give the
North Koreans a distinct edge in case of a conflict. Nevertheless, the Pentagon
is taking Mr. Roh´s proposal seriously.
For more than 50
years, the U.S., working with the South, has maintained a credible deterrent
force in South Korea. Though U.S. troop levels have fallen in recent years due
to other commitments, and a mutual interest in handing more responsibility to
South Korean troops especially along the demilitarized zone, the Pentagon still
stations nearly 30,000 GIs and advanced weaponry, including fighter jets,
surface-to-air missiles, and other apparatus belli in the democratic South.
That´s not good enough for Mr. Roh, who was elected on a
strongly anti-American, populist platform back in 2002 -- the main tenet of
which has been to appease the dictator to the North. "The time has come for
South Korea to defend itself," Mr. Roh declared in an interview with South
Korea´s Yonhap news agency earlier this month. "We have the capability. There
will be no problem with national security. South Korea´s defense capabilities
have been much underestimated."
Seoul does, indeed, have the
capability to fight a war. And in principle, it would be better if Seoul
ultimately took full control of the security of the peninsula. But the issue
isn´t whether Seoul can fight a war -- it´s whether it would have the will to do
so.
But if Mr. Roh and his predecessors´ appeasement
proclivities are any sign, that´s a questionable proposition. Seoul´s sunshine
policy, enacted by then-President Kim Dae Jung in 1998, put engagement with the
North -- with few conditions -- squarely at the forefront of the Blue House´s
agenda. The kinder, gentler approach has yielded, over the past eight years, two
North Korea missile launches, the North´s refusal to return Japanese abductees,
and Pyongyang´s development of at least one nuclear weapon. It´s estimated that
North Korea now has more than 800 missiles capable of hitting Japan and South
Korea.
Mr. Roh´s characterization of the current U.S.
military cooperation is a mite misleading, too. True, a U.S. four-star general
directs U.S. and some 650,000-strong South Korean troops in times of war. (Peace
time command was transferred to Seoul in 1994.) Technically speaking, however,
the U.S. doesn´t command South Korean forces during wartime, but rather
coordinates combat operations of a mutually developed war plan. South Korean
generals also serve as deputy commanders in the Combined Forces Command in
Seoul.
There´s a good reason for this arrangement. Splitting
command of the forces in wartime could create a strategic schism that North
Korea could exploit.
Not everyone in Seoul thinks Mr. Roh´s
plan is a good idea. Sixteen former South Korean defense ministers rallied in
protest of Mr. Roh´s proposal to dismantle the Combined Forces Command last
Friday, for fear it would erode the U.S. commitment to South Korea´s security.
That echoes the fears of many older Koreans, whose memory of the Korean War --
and U.S. liberation of the South -- makes them less likely to support a change
of command.
Mr. Roh´s split-command idea has been brewing
for awhile. It was first proposed to the U.S. during annual defense talks
between Washington and Seoul last October, we´re told, and both parties agreed
to develop a road map to transition. A senior American defense official offered
to shorten the transition period from 2012 to 2009. Next month, when Mr. Roh
visits Washington, there´s little doubt that the issue will come up. And that
comes in advance of an important annual huddle between the two countries´
defense ministers in October.
Mr. Roh has had his share of
disagreements with the Bush Administration -- on U.S. troop reductions,
six-party talks, and the North´s recent missile test. He´s not willing to help
the U.S. deter North Korea´s nuclear threat to America, yet he wants the U.S. to
defend South Korea. Talk about a mixed message.
South Korea
will hold presidential elections next year and the role of U.S. forces is sure
to be a campaign issue, including a debate on what South Korea would do in the
event of war on the peninsula. As for the U.S., the same issues deserve to be
raised there too. If Seoul doesn´t have the will to defend itself, perhaps it´s
time to consider how much longer American troops should stay in South
Korea.
|
