아태지역 다자안보협력 제고를 위한 한국의 역할

한국의 역대 정부는 지역차원의 다자안보협력을 위한 노력을 끊임없이 전개해 왔다. 세계 10위권의 경제역량을 가진 한국에게 있어 다자안보협력은 한반도에서 전개되는 북한의 위협과 긴장, 동북아에서 전개되는 미중경쟁을 넘어설 수 있는 외교적 기회로 인식되어 왔다. 그러나 한국은 그간 참여해 온 모든 다자안보협력에서 적지 않은 한계를 확인해 왔다. 동아시아나 아시아 태평양 차원의 광역 다자협력의 경우 한국의 역할이 제한되었다. 동북아시아를 대상으로 한 소지역 다자안보협력의 경우에도 북한 문제나 중일 간 영토분쟁 등 협력이 필요한 영역이 존재하였음에도 불구하고 별다른 진전을 보지 못했다. 또한 과거 한국 정부가 추진해 왔던 지역 개념도 다양하여 특정 지역을 대상으로한 장기간의 정책이 이루어지지 못했다.

Successive South Korean administrations have made persistent efforts at forging and promoting multilateral cooperation at the regional level.With its economic prowess ranked among the top 10 global economies, South Korea has perceived multilateral cooperation as diplomatic opportunities to offset the fallout from tensions emanating from Pyongyang's threats, and the US-China rivalry played out in Northeast Asia. Unfortunately, however, South Korea’s efforts made for multilateral cooperation have met a substantial number of obstacles over the last years. For instance, it turned out that South Korea can play only a limited role in multilateral cooperation in a broader region spanning East Asia and the Asia-Pacific. And even after the scope of multilateral cooperation is narrowed down to Northeast Asia, little progress has been made in tackling various regional issues that require multilateral cooperation for resolution such as the North Korean issue and territorial disputes between China and Japan. Moreover, each of the past South Korean administrations differed in defining the size and scope of regional cooperation, which resulted in inconsistent policies delivered on targeted regions. Indeed, bilateral cooperation has revealed limitations in leading the confidence-building process and alleviating tension on the Korean peninsula, Northeast Asia, and across the entire East Asia region. Therefore, for South Korea, multilateral cooperation would be a plausible alternative that could lead to tangible benefits. Needless to say, at the top of South Korea’s list of foreign policy priorities are the North Korean nuclear issues, especially the North Korean nuclear issue, followed by the ROK-US alliance issue, the ROK-China relations, and its relations with neighboring states including Japan and Russia. Considering this, it would be an overstretch to say that promoting multilateral cooperation in the Asia-Pacific region is South Korea’s first priority to be pursued in crafting its foreign policy strategies. Notwithstanding, by working toward multilateral cooperation, South Korea will be able to be on a revitalized diplomatic track in exploring new opportunities in the years ahead. Since how multilateral cooperation is envisioned and what approach is adopted will be a deciding factor for its success, it is imperative that Seoul should take a proactive approach in mapping out its future efforts at multilateral cooperation at the regional level. After taking office, the Moon Jae-in administration is propelling its drive to create a “Responsible Northeast Asia plus Community,” which was unveiled as one of its policy tasks. The detailed nature of multilateral cooperation beyond Northeast Asia has yet to be mapped out, and would require refurbishments in the coming years. In a broader context, however, multilateral security cooperation in Northeast Asia should be pursued in a consistent manner. And given that there are numerous existing multilateral organizations for regional cooperation in the Asia-Pacific region, it appears unnecessary to create a new organization for regional cooperation. Therefore, South Korea should endeavor to weave closer ties with APEC, ASEAN+3, EAS, and ARF members. Along the way, it is advised that Seoul well-calibrate its role within the framework of multilateral cooperation in the region. It should explore ways to serve as a catalyst for facilitating multilateral cooperation rather than taking the lead and seeking control over all issue areas. With regard to reaching consensus on its way of cooperation, the Moon administration should work for competence development of the private sector aside from its efforts made at the government level, in order to maximize synergy between public and private sectors.