Quick Menu 설정
※ 퀵메뉴 메뉴에 대한 사용자 설정을 위해 쿠키를 사용하고 있습니다. 메뉴 체크 후 저장을 한 경우 쿠키 저장에 동의한 것으로 간주됩니다.
국민인! 국민인!!
유엔과 한국전쟁 정전연구 미국 SCI (A&HCI)급 논문출판 / 데이비드 윌리엄 김(교양대학) 교수
- 작성자 이해인
- 작성일 23.06.12
- 조회수 726
데이비드 윌리엄 김(David William Kim)교수는 오스트레일리아 시드니대학교에서 역사를 전공하고 영국 왕립역사학회(The Royal Historical Society, United Kingdom) 석학회원으로 활동하면서 최근 아시아 근대사 프로잭중에 한반도의 정전 70주년을 기념하여 유엔의 UNGA (the United Nations General Assembly)과 NNRC (Neutral Nations Repatriation Commission)가 한국전쟁 정전(Armistice)에 어떤 국제적 영향력을 미쳤는지 이승만과 중립국 인도 Jawaharlal Nehru수상의 Neutral Soft-power관점에서 재해석한 연구가 관련 정치, 군사, 인권, 포로교환, 지역학분야 학자들에게 인정받아 미국의 인문사회과학분야 저명 학술지(Humanities and Social Sciences Communications)에 출판하게 되었다. 아래는 원문의 (A South Asian neutral power in the United Nations: India’s peacekeeping mission on the Korean peninsula (1947–1955)의 일부 내용을 간략히 소개하고 있다:
The end of World War II (1939–1545) by Germany’s (May 8) and Japan’s surrender (August 15) brought a major socio-political transformation in the colonialised nations of Asia. The independence of the Korean Peninsula from the Japanese imperialism was not smoothly implemented for a peaceful settlement. Rather, the ideological camps of communism (=socialism) and democracy (=capitalism) dominated in the region, which became the hub of the Cold War in the late 1940s and the 1950s. The local citizens confronted the political conflict for the unified Korea. The US allied with the UN, turning against North Korea and its socialist allies. Meantime, India emerged in the UN for the Korean issues. Then, how did India, the new international leader, involve the process of the post-colonial unification (1948–1950) with the major powers (the US, the Soviet Union, China and the UK)? What about the position of India during the Korean War (1950–53)? How can one interpret India’s policy on the POW repatriation issue (1953–1955)?
This paper depicts that the newly minted role of the UN was an important aspect of the ideological-military solution for the war. The involvement of neutral nations brought a rational outcome for everyone engaged in the ‘Forgotten War.’ India’s role, in particular, should not be disregarded in the peacekeeping mission. The two major powers, as well as South Korea, were not always happy with the South Asian nation that promoted the neutral policy of international statesmanship, but India’s philosophy of decolonisation and anti-imperialism encouraged them to become a soft power at the UN. The non-violence policy of diplomacy was one of the political attractions by which they were able to play the role of a key decision-maker at the negotiation table of Korean issues between 1945 and 1955.
The geopolitical interest of India in the autonomous independence of the Korean peninsula was demonstrated when they participated in the United Nations Temporary Commission on Korea (UNTCOK) as an official peacekeeper. India’s efforts as the head of the UN organisation ensured the secure supervision of the national elections in post-colonial Korea (1947–50). India also lobbied for divided Korea to be merged as one nation, not two ideologically different polities. The political voice of India was not quite positive for Korea at the Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East (ECAFE) and the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), but India of the UNCOK supported UN Resolution 82 (1950) mandating that North Korea should go back to the 38th Parallel line.
The non-military dispatch of the 60th Parachute Field Ambulance (PFA) represented the neutrality of India. Sixteen UN member states militarily assisted South Korea, but India stood with Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Italy and Germany, as medical supporters. During Operation Tomahawk (Parachute operation), the ‘Forward Element’ group of Indian medics cooperated with the American military action, putting out wounded personnel. Another PFA team placed in Daegu improved the health care system of the First ROK Army Hospital by training local professionals and four female doctors, as well as providing advanced supplies of food and medicine. The medical outreach, for marginalised community members, was additionally illustrated through the cure case of isolated orphans, who have been struggling with trachoma.
The humanitarian figure of the mediator (India) was continuously identified in the voluntary commitment of the Neutral Nations Repatriation Commission (NNRC) and the Neutral Nations Supervisory Commission (NNSC), where India, through the security activity of the Custodian Force India (CFI), was the key player in supervising the controversial process of the POW Exchange Pact. Thus, this paper has attempted to prove the diplomatic nature of neutral India as the ‘third emerging power’ after the two superpowers, in the complicated Korean problem. India was not militarily strong but the new ‘leader of Asia,’ based on its population and land area, could not be ignored in the international community of the UN in the late 1940s and the 1950s. In that way, if one of the two Koreas or both, who used to cooperate only with two ideological powers, had understood the global influence of India, the end of the Korean War would have been different, perhaps a bit closer to the reality of a unified Korea.
For the full article published, see: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-023-01541-0
ⓒ 2019 Kookmin University. All Rights Reserved.
