본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기
국회도서관 홈으로 정보검색 소장정보 검색

결과 내 검색

동의어 포함

초록보기

지난 몇 년간 유럽과 미국 내에서 동아시아 지역에서의 EU와 미국 간 안보협력의 가능성에 대한 논의가 본격화되기 시작했다. EU는 지난 수십 년간 외교안보방위 분야에서의 전반적인 역량 결여와 강대국 간 힘의 관계에 의해 규정된 동아시아 국제체제의 속성으로 인해 이 지역 안보질서의 방관자 혹은 존재감이 거의 전무한 주변적인 안보행위자로 간주되어왔다. 이 글에서 저자는 미-중 세력균형의 대규모 조정, 동아시아 지역주의의 강화 그리고 외교안보방위 분야에서의 EU의 성장 등 일련의 변화가 이 지역에서의 EU의 안보역할 강화에 긍정적으로 작용하고 있다고 주장한다. 해적퇴치작전, 대량살상무기의 비확산, 사이버 안보, 대테러협력, 분쟁지역에서의 평화유지와 법치강화, 각종 재난에서의 인도적 구조 등 많은 영역에서 EU는 동아시아 안보에 중요한 역할을 할 수 있을 정도의 충분한 역량을 갖춘 것으로 평가된다. 특히 동아시아 내 지역협력과 통합을 지원함으로써 이 지역 국제질서의 안정적이며 평화로운 전환에 매우 중요한 역할을 수행할 수 있을 것으로 간주된다. 이러한 시각에서 저자는 향후 EU-미국 간 바람직한 동아시아 질서에 대한 공감대가 형성되고, 양측이 갖고 있는 각종 안보역량과 잠재력이 효과적으로 결합될 경우, 북한의 급변사태를 비롯한 한반도와 동아시아에서의 각종 안보 불안요인을 해결하고 새로운 안보질서를 형성하는데 기여할 수 있을 것으로 전망한다.

In the last few years, there have been increasingly more active discussions in Europe and the US about the possibility of an increased EU-US security cooperation in East Asia. The EU has long remained an outside observer or, at best, a very peripheral actor in East Asian security dynamics. It was due primarily to the EU’s low profile and lack of capacity in the field of foreign, security and defence policy and to the nature of East Asia’s regional system that has usually been predominated by such world-class powers as the US and the former Soviet Union. In this paper, the author articulates that the shifting balance of power between the US and China, surging East Asian regionalism and the growth of the EU’s foreign and security policy capacities will likely contribute to strengthening the EU’s security role in the region. He suggests such fields as counter-piracy, nuclear non-proliferation, counter-terrorism, peace-keeping and law enforcement in the disputed areas and humanitarian assistance as appropriate missions for the EU to carry out in the coming future. In addition, the EU will be able to play a more significant role in the Korean Peninsula and Northeast Asia in case of North Korea’s regime collapse, which is likely to generate enormous uncertainties and risks in the regional security environment. In view of the positive aspects of the EU’s active engagement in East Asian security, the US and other regional countries may have to consider developing closer cooperative relationships with the EU in the coming years.

참고문헌 (27건) : 자료제공( 네이버학술정보 )

참고문헌 목록에 대한 테이블로 번호, 참고문헌, 국회도서관 소장유무로 구성되어 있습니다.
번호 참고문헌 국회도서관 소장유무
1 온대원. “NATO의 신전략개념과 글로벌 파트너쉽.” 『유럽연구』. 제31호 (2013년 2월), pp. 83-110. 미소장
2 Archick, Kristin. “US-EU Cooperation Against Terrorism.” Washington, Congressional Research Service, CRS Report for Congress. May 21, 2012. 미소장
3 Bendick, Annegret. “At the Limits of the Rule of Law: EU-US Counter-Terrorism Cooperation.” SWP Research Paper. April 2011. http://www.swp-berlin.org/fileadmin/contents/products/research_papers/2011_RP05_bdk_ks.pdf (2014년 4월 28일 검색). 미소장
4 Bennett, Bruce. Preparing for the Possibility of a North Korean Collapse. Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2013. 미소장
5 Conference on EU-US Relations. "Mapping the Future of the EU-US Strategic Partnership: Policy and Research Perspectives." Organized by the European Commission in cooperation with the Spanish EU Presidency. 25-26 January 2010. Brussels. European Commission. Berlaymont Building,. rue de la Loi 200. http://ec.europa.eu/research/social-sciences/events-89_en.html (2014년 5월 1일 검색). 미소장
6 Cossa, Ralph and Glosserman, Brad. “Regional Overview: US Rebalances As Others Squabble.” Comparative Connections. Vol. 14, No. 2(September 2012). pp. 1-16. 미소장
7 Csernatoni, Raluca. “The Common Security and Defense Policy – The Treaty of Lisbon and the EU’s Defense Dimension.” http://isiseurope.wordpress.com/2014/05/14/csdp-treaty-of-lisbon/ (2014년 5월 26일 검색). 미소장
8 Council of the European Union. “EU-NATO: The Framework for Permanent Relations and Berlin Plus.” http://www/consilium.europa.eu (2014년 5월 16일 검색). 미소장
9 Council of the European Union.“Helsinki Headline Goal,” 2003. http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cmsUpload/Helsinki%20Headline%20Goal.pdf (2014년 5월 1일 검색). 미소장
10 Dyson, Tom. “The Reluctance of German Politicians to Take a Strong Line on Defence Policy Poses a Security Risk for Europe.” 5 September 2013. http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2013/09/05/the-reluctance-ofgerman-politicians-to-take-a-strong-line-on-defence-policyposes-a-security-risk-for-europe/ (2014년 4월 28일 검색). 미소장
11 European Commission. “Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee of the Regions: Towards a More Competitive and Efficient Defence and Security Sector.” Brussels. COM(2013) 542 final, 24. 7. 2013. 미소장
12 European External Action Service. “CSDP: On-going Missions and Operations.” http://www.eeas.europa.eu/csdp/missions-and-operations/ (2014년 4월 16일 검색). 미소장
13 Howarth, Jolyon. “From Security to Defence: The Evolution of the CFSP.” Hill, Christopher and Smith, Michael (eds.). International Relations of the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005. 미소장
14 International Institute for Strategic Studies. The Military Balance 2011. London: Routledge for IISS, 2011. 미소장
15 Manyin, Mark E. (Coordinator). “Pivot to the Pacific? The Obama Administration’s “Rebalancing” Toward Asia.” CRS Report. US Congressional Research Service. 28 March 2012. 미소장
16 McGuire, Steven and Smith, Michael. The EU and the US: Competitions and Convergence in the Global Arena. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008. 미소장
17 Menon, Anand. “Defence Policy and Integration in Western Europe.” 1 January 1999. pp. 5-9. http://www.academia.edu/473360/Defence_Policy_and_Integration_in_Western_Europe (2014년 1월 31일 검색). 미소장
18 North Atlantic Treaty Organization. “Berlin Plus Agreement.” June 21, 2006. 미소장
19 Ohn, Daewon and Richey, Mason. “A Thought Experiment: What Role Could Europe Play in the Case of a Sudden Regime Collapse in North Korea?” European Geostrategy. June 2014. http://www.europeangeostrategy.org/2014/06/thought-experimentrole-europe-play-case-sudden-regime-collapse-north-korea/ (2014년 6월 6일 검색). 미소장
20 Panetta, Leon . Speech at the IISS Asia Security Summit “Shangri-La Dialogue” Singapore. 2 June 2012. 미소장
21 Park, Jeanne. “European Foreign Policy and the Euro Crisis.” Council on Foreign Relations. 20 November 2012. http://www.cfr.org/eu/european-foreign-policy-euro-crisis/p29511 (2014년 3월 6일 검색). 미소장
22 Shah, Sabir. “US Wars in Afghanistan, Iraq to Cost $6 trillion.” Centre for Research on Globalization. http://www.globalresearch.ca/us-wars-in-afghanistan-iraq-to-cost-6-trillion/5350789 (2014년 5월 21일 검색). 미소장
23 Sloan, Stanley R. NATO, the European Union, and the Atlantic Community: The Transatlantic Bargain Reconsidered. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield, 2003. 미소장
24 US Congressional Budget Office. “Long-Term Implications of the 2012 Future Years Defense Program” (Statement of David Mosher, Assistant Director for National Security: Testimony before the Committee on the budget, US House of Representatives, 2011. April 2011. 미소장
25 US Department of Defense. National Defense Budget Estimates for 2012. Washington, DC, 2011. 미소장
26 US Department of Defense. “Sustaining US Global Leadership: Priorities for 21st Century Defense.” January 5, 2012. 미소장
27 Williams, Brock R. “Trans-Pacific Partnership Countries: Comparative Trade and Economic Analysis.” Congressional Research Service. 10 June 2013. 미소장