베트남 학계의 남,북한 연구 동향 및 쟁점: -베트남 전쟁 시기(1954~1975년)를 중심으로

도미엔 ( Mien T. Do ) 이화사학연구소 2015 梨花史學硏究 Vol.0 No.50

Following the end of the World War II, both Vietnam and Korean peninsula ware divided. Since the 1950s, South Korea (the Republic of Korea) and SouthVietnam (the Republic of Vietnam), North Korea (the Democratic People`s Republic of Korea) and North Vietnam (the Democratic Republic of Vietnam) started to establish official diplomatic relations. The Park Chung-Hee government from 1964 sent South Korean combating troops to Vietnam War battle fields and North Korea from this moment also started its assistance for Vietnam officially. This study examines and analyzes research trends in Vietnam so far on North and South Korea during the Vietnam War, which covers: ① South Korean participation in this war; ② North Korean assistance; and ? North-South Korean relationship. Firstly, the studies in Vietnam have formed discussion issues regarding the motivation of war participation, the fighting role on the battles and the results of sending South Korean troops to Vietnam. The views of Vietnamese academia are divided into "subjective" and "objective" motivations, that is to say South Korean government`s decision to dispatch troops to Vietnam was for national interest or followed the request by the US. The latter point of view is in fact in more accordance with the official standpoint of current Vietnamese government. It at last argues that the US was the one that took greater responsibility in sending South Korean combating troops to Vietnam. In reality, this point of view reflects the characteristics of the Vietnam War, at the same time reflects the current standpoint of Vietnam that the Vietnam War was indeed the "resistance war against the Americans." On the fighting role and the importance of South Korean troops, changes of perception are happening now among Vietnamese scholars. There exists research trend that recognize the importance of South Korean troops in the battle fields based on their special fighting and operating capacity. Yet while mentioning the combating process of South Korean troops, these researches could not overlook the main leading-commanding role of the US. Studies of the results of sending troops mainly focuses on analyzing the interests that South Korean government received by participating in the war, surrounding military-economic, South Korea-South Vietnamese relations, US-South Korean relations, and politico-social aspects. Most of the studies mention the negative consequences of South Korean participation in the Vietnam War, such as strained North-South Korean relations, the anti-war movement within Korean society and all over the world which South Korean government had to face. Among the consequences that mentioned, the worst can be said the civilian massacres done by South Korean army during the Vietnam War. This has been seen leaving painful marks for Vietnam and the darkest chapters in the history of Vietnam-Korean relations. Secondly, this study analyzes the issue of assistance from North Korea during the Vietnam War, starting from the moment of formation of the solidarity community spirit between North Korea and North Vietnam. Through the books published since the 1950s, we are able to see North Vietnam`s interest in the Korean War which left lessons and experiences for Vietnam, at the same time the characteristic of North Korea-North Vietnam relationship at the moment ? the Anti-American solidarity community spirit and Socialist solidarity community spirit. It was during the period of formation of the solidarity community spirit that North Korea paid attention to the Vietnam War and started to assist North Vietnam since the mid-1960s. In Vietnam in 2000 appeared researches on the assistance of North Korea and the dispatch of its air-force to North Vietnam. It can be argued that the announcement of North Korean assistance by Vietnamese government was thanks to the improvement of North Korea-North Vietnam relationship at the moment (follows Vietnam War`s end, the relationship between the two countries was worsen). In general, researches on the assistance by North Korea to Vietnam so far remain limited. Thus, the clarification of North Korea-China-North Vietnam relations with macro-level approach, as well as digging up material sources from the Vietnam side with micro-scope approach, is truly needed. Last but not least, to be brief, the research results in Vietnam on the North-South Korean relations during the Vietnam War affirm that the opposition and complexity of North-South Korean relations was stemmed from both inside and outside factors, especially the dependence on great powers. Among the outside factors that influenced the division of the Korean peninsula, current Vietnamese point of view sees the role of the US as crucial. In fact, with the perspective that the origin of the Vietnam War was due to US containment strategy in Asia, the division of Korean peninsula was seen in the same standpoint by Vietnamese scholars. Moreover, Vietnam - whose unification was achieved after a long resistance war - is insisting that the issue of division and unification of North-South Korea could only be achieved in a peaceful way.

A Case Study for the Protection of the South-North Tourism Agreement: Focusing on Tourism Feng Shui Storytelling

Younghoon Kim J-INSTITUTE 2022 Protection Convergence Vol.7 No.1

Purpose: This study seeks to present ways to realize tourism and unification for North and South Koreas based on the development of tourist destinations which can help link tourism to exchanges including mutual visits for the separated families of North and South Koreas, the North-South dialogue, politics, economy, culture and sports by developing tourist destinations from which politics of the two Koreas are fully excluded towards the realization of multi purposed tourism as well as the realization of mutual tourism for the two Koreans absent South Korean tourists for North Korea. Based on which, it would be possible to review, first, the development of tourist destina-tions of South Korea through which South Koreans can visit Mt. Geumgang of North Korea and North Koreans can visit tourist destinations of South Korea. Second, it would be possible to review a plan for carrying out ex-changes for the mutual visits of separated families by linking the exchanges of separated families of North and South Koreas at Mt. Geumgang of North Korea with tourist destinations of South Korea. Third, by developing tourist destinations for the purposes of tourism only which North Korea might demand, it would be possible to review alternatives for North Korea s South Korean tourist destinations in the future. Fourth, based on the afore-said, the purpose of tourism and unification may be realized and tourist exchanges may be reviewed under the premise of free travel. Methods: This study seeks to analyze changes in the tourism related conditions according to the expected changes in the North-South Korean relations and changes in tourism due to the expected changes of the North-South Korean relations via the previous data. Furthermore, through the current status of human exchanges of North Korea, the start of the North-South Korean tourism, and the performance achievements of Mt. Geumgang tourism, this study seeks to examine and understand the changes in the North-South Korean relations according to the North-South Korean summit and the tourism related feng shui storytelling intended for the North-South Korean tourism. Results: Achieving a form of tourism through the North-South Korean exchanges is the top priority. Hence, in order to achieve the purpose of feng shui tourism in the future, it would be necessary to develop the tourist destinations from which politics of North and South Koreas are completely excluded. Towards this end, it is necessary to develop a tourist program by utilizing the tomb of Kim Tae-Seo located at Mt. Moak in Jeonbuk in which the North Korean leadership expressed deep interest ever since the North-South Summit of 2000. To this end, it will be necessary to develop a program which utilizes the storytelling of tourist feng shui utilizing the simple Korean culture which goes beyond the politics, while developing tourism. Conclusion: Tourism has clear points of contact for the unification, and it will be necessary to utilize the points of contact for the North-South Korean tourism through the mutual linkage of the North-South Korean relations moving forward to achieve the purpose of tourism and expect the unification on the Korean Peninsula.

베트남 학계의 남ㆍ북한 연구 동향 및 쟁점: 베트남 전쟁 시기(1954~1975년)를 중심으로

DOTHANHTHAOMIEN 이화여자대학교 이화사학연구소 2015 梨花史學硏究 Vol.0 No.50

Following the end of the World War II, both Vietnam and Korean peninsula ware divided. Since the 1950s, South Korea (the Republic of Korea) and SouthVietnam (the Republic of Vietnam), North Korea (the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea) and North Vietnam (the Democratic Republic of Vietnam) started to establish official diplomatic relations. The Park Chung-Hee government from 1964 sent South Korean combating troops to Vietnam War battle fields and North Korea from this moment also started its assistance for Vietnam officially. This study examines and analyzes research trends in Vietnam so far on North and South Korea during the Vietnam War, which covers: ① South Korean participation in this war; ② North Korean assistance; and ➂ North-South Korean relationship. Firstly, the studies in Vietnam have formed discussion issues regarding the motivation of war participation, the fighting role on the battles and the results of sending South Korean troops to Vietnam. The views of Vietnamese academia are divided into “subjective” and “objective” motivations, that is to say South Korean government’s decision to dispatch troops to Vietnam was for national interest or followed the request by the US. The latter point of view is in fact in more accordance with the official standpoint of current Vietnamese government. It at last argues that the US was the one that took greater responsibility in sending South Korean combating troops to Vietnam. In reality, this point of view reflects the characteristics of the Vietnam War, at the same time reflects the current standpoint of Vietnam that the Vietnam War was indeed the “resistance war against the Americans.” On the fighting role and the importance of South Korean troops, changes of perception are happening now among Vietnamese scholars. There exists research trend that recognize the importance of South Korean troops in the battle fields based on their special fighting and operating capacity. Yet while mentioning the combating process of South Korean troops, these researches could not overlook the main leading-commanding role of the US. Studies of the results of sending troops mainly focuses on analyzing the interests that South Korean government received by participating in the war, surrounding military-economic, South Korea-South Vietnamese relations, US-South Korean relations, and politico-social aspects. Most of the studies mention the negative consequences of South Korean participation in the Vietnam War, such as strained North-South Korean relations, the anti-war movement within Korean society and all over the world which South Korean government had to face. Among the consequences that mentioned, the worst can be said the civilian massacres done by South Korean army during the Vietnam War. This has been seen leaving painful marks for Vietnam and the darkest chapters in the history of Vietnam-Korean relations. Secondly, this study analyzes the issue of assistance from North Korea during the Vietnam War, starting from the moment of formation of the solidarity community spirit between North Korea and North Vietnam. Through the books published since the 1950s, we are able to see North Vietnam’s interest in the Korean War which left lessons and experiences for Vietnam, at the same time the characteristic of North Korea-North Vietnam relationship at the moment – the Anti-American solidarity community spirit and Socialist solidarity community spirit. It was during the period of formation of the solidarity community spirit that North Korea paid attention to the Vietnam War and started to assist North Vietnam since the mid-1960s. In Vietnam in 2000 appeared researches on the assistance of North Korea and the dispatch of its air-force to North Vietnam. It can be argued that the announcement of North Korean assistance by Vietnamese government was thanks to the improvement of North Korea-North Vietnam relationship at the moment (follows Vietnam War’s end, the relat...

민주화이후 한국정부의 대북정책 성향 및 전략 비교

허태회(Huh, Tae-Hoi),윤황(Youn Hwang) 동아시아국제정치학회 2010 국제정치연구 Vol.13 No.2

The objective of the study is to analyze major factors having influenced the South Korean government’s policies towards North Korea since the start of the Kim Dai-jung government and find out some effective measures to ensure the institutionalization of the inter-Korean relations. The following are the findings of the analysis. Firstly, what has been the most critical influence on the advancement or change in terms of the relationship between the South and the North are external factors resulting from the changing relationship among great powers. It may also be viewed that their multilateral efforts like the six party talks have played an important role as a critical variable in such transitional relations between the two governments. Secondly, in terms of conflicting relations within the South Korean society, while such conflicts have rather fomented disunity, such conflicts have served as an internal factor in weakening the driving force of South Korea’s policies on the North. Thirdly, one of the most critical factors regarding this issue is the North Korean nuclear problem, which has remained a serious obstacle to institutionalizing the relationship between two Koreas. In particular, North Korea’s nuclear issues cannot be resolved by the South Korean government on its own, which puts the South Korean government to be stuck in the middle. Such difficulty has turned out to serve as a hindrance to the development of the relationship between South Korea and the U.S. Fourthly, given the characteristics of South Korea’s policies on North Korea and the power dynamics among great powers, much need for the South Korean government are the development of new negotiation framework so as to ensure its external policy autonomy and a common policy coordination apparatus enabling it to drive its policies on North Korea. South Korea’s future policies on North Korea must consider such various factors like international, geopolitical and ideological ones, in order to ensure the driving force of such policies. Based on this analysis of changes in the environment of its entire North Korean policies, South Korea’s policies on North Korea should be decided more meticulously and strategically by considering the geopolitical conditions of the Korean peninsula, the power dynamics among great powers and the internal conditions of the two Korean societies.

지속가능한 남북관계 구축을 위한 남북합의서 체결 방안

김현귀 법무부 2021 統一과 法律 Vol.- No.48

South and North Korea can conclude a bilateral treaty on the premise that they are partners in peaceful unification. However, the South-North Korean agreement is a special treaty concluded in a provisional and special relationship with the goal of unification. Since South-North Korean agreements can be concluded in a variety of intentions and contexts, the signing procedure alone cannot prove that it is a treaty by itself. If a South-North Korean agreement meets the requirements of a treaty both in terms of procedure and content, it has domestic legal effect as a treaty. However, the theory of the domestic legal effect of existing typical treaties cannot be directly applied to the South-North Korean agreement. A South-North Korean agreement is an agreement concluded by a representative of the government through negotiations with North Korea according to the external decision-making of the state. The legal effect of such an agreement is, in principle, valid between the parties. Beyond this, it is important to give legal effect that directly applies to ordinary citizens who are members of the state. In particular, if the state has to directly restrict the freedom and rights of the people due to the provisions of the South-North Korean agreement, it is desirable to ensure that the implementation is ensured through a law prepared by the legislator rather than giving direct effect. If a South-North Korean agreement, which is not legally binding, is concluded and promulgated in accordance with Articles 21 and 22 of the Development of Inter-Korean Relations Act, it will be difficult to stably grant legal effect to the South-North Korean agreement. Even if it is a legally binding South-North Korean agreement, if the freedom and rights of the people are to be restricted for its implementation, it is more appropriate to pass through the legislation of the National Assembly than through the provisions of the South-North Korean agreement. 남한과 북한은 평화적 통일의 상대방이라는 전제로 양자조약을 체결할 수 있다. 그러나 남북합의서는 통일을 지향하는 잠정적이고 특수한 관계에서 맺어지는 특수한 조약이다. 그리고 남북합의서는 다양한 의도와 맥락에서 체결될 수 있으므로, 그 체결절차만으로 스스로 조약임을 입증할 수 없다. 물론 남북합의서가 절차적으로도 내용적으로도 조약의 요건을 갖춘다면, 조약으로서 국내법적 효력을 가진다. 그러나 기존의 전형적인 조약의 국내법적 효력에 관한 이론을 남북합의서에 그대로 적용할 수 없다. 남북합의서는 국가의 대외적 의사결정에 따라 정부의 대표가 북한과 교섭하여 맺는 합의이다. 이런 합의의 법적 효력은 원칙적으로 당사자 사이에서 유효하다. 이를 넘어서서 국가의 구성원인 일반 국민에게도 직접 적용되는 법적 효력을 부여하는 것은 중요한 의미가 있다. 특히 남북합의서의 규정으로 국가가 국민의 자유와 권리를 직접 제한해야 하는 경우에는 직접효력을 부여하는 것보다는 입법자가 마련하는 법률을 통해 그 이행이 확보되도록 하는 것이 바람직하다. 법적 구속력이 없는 남북합의서를 남북관계발전법 제21조와 제22조에 따라 체결·공포하면, 남북합의서에 대해 법적 효력을 안정적으로 부여하기 어려워진다. 법적 구속력이 있는 남북합의서라고 하더라도, 그 이행을 위하여 국민의 자유와 권리가 제한되어야 한다면 남북합의서 규정을 통하는 것보다 국회의 입법을 통하는 것이 더 적절하다.

Russian Influence on North Korea: Views of Former South Korean Ambassadors to Russia

( Doug J Kim ) 한국국방연구원 2012 The Korean Journal of Defense Analysis Vol.24 No.3

Russia and North Korea have a historical relationship dating back to the beginning of the Pyongyang regime. The former Soviet Union had participated in the Korean War and its Air Force supported the communist forces on the ground. Moscow was the major donor in the reconstruction of postwar North Korea. The North Korean nuclear program had been initiated with Soviet equipment and training of nuclear scientists. Russia is a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council. All of these factors make Russia one of the countries with the most influence over North Korea. However, after Moscow had established diplomatic relations with the Republic of Korea in 1990, there were ups and downs in the relations between Russia and North Korea. First, the period from 1990 to 1995was the worst time for Russia-North Korea relations. Second, Russia`s influence was regained after the new treaty on Friendship, Good-Neighborly Relations and Cooperation with the North was signed. Moreover, the first trip for a Russian leader, Vladimir Putin, to North Korea was made in 2000. Third, since the beginning of the second North Korean nuclear crisis in 2002, Russia became an active participant in the Six-Party Talks. Russia realized that a balanced diplomacy toward the two Koreas works better for the interests of Russia rather than the pro-South Korean stance in the first few years of the early 1990s. In the 2000s, the overall relationship between Moscow and Pyongyang has improved. The railway connections of the TSR and TKR, and the construction of oil and gas pipelines through the Korean peninsula have been under discussion among Russia, North Korea, and South Korea. However, the process has been slow. The author has inter viewed the former South Korean ambassadors to Russia in order to gain first-hand knowledge of Russia-North Korean relations. As to the overall Moscow-Pyongyang relations, the author shares the same views as the Russian experts about South Korea. However, they emphasized one particular point. North Korea`s debt to Russia. This was an issue that was rarely discussed in South Korea. In June 2012, Russia announced that 90 percent of the North Korean debt could possibly be written off. If the Russian initiative is approved, North Korea could join and initiate new projects with Russia. The Seoul government should be able to join the trilateral cooperation among Russia, North Korea, and South Korea. The Ambassadors` advice needs to be taken seriously.

북미관계와 한반도 평화체제: 역사적 고찰

신욱희 한국정치외교사학회 2012 한국정치외교사논총 Vol.33 No.2

This paper explores historical cases in which official or substantial attempts to improve North Korean-US relations were made, and tries to find their relevance in terms of the discussion of a peace system on the Korean peninsula. These cases include 1) North Korea’s proposal of a North Korean-US peace treaty in 1974; 2) The US proposal of trilateral (South Korea-North Korea-the US) talks in 1979; 3) North Korea’s proposal of trilateral talks in 1984; 4) the consideration of crossrecognition within the Northern Policy in 1989; 4) the attempt to improve North Korean-US relations through the Geneva Accord in 1994; 5) North Korean-US talks during the Perry process in 1999. The main questions of the paper are as follows: Under what conditions and intentions were the contacts made?; What were the factors progressing or regressing the talks?; What roles South Korea’s policies towards the US and North Korea played?; How were North Korean-US relations related to peace system issues? The main variables in the analysis are the connection with US-China relations, North-South Korean relations, and South Korean-US relations; the problems of real party rules and US troops in South Korea; the domestic politics of North Korea, the US and South Korea; the matter of threat perception; and the prediction of North Korean regime survival. The paper deals with six cases under the consideration of these questions and variables, and concludes with implications these historical/comparative examination could provide for the present situation and South Korea’s policy decisions. 이 논문은 북미관계의 개선이 형식적, 혹은 실질적으로 모색되었던 역사적 사례에 대한 고찰을 통해서 그것이 한반도 평화체제의 논의에 주는 시사점을 찾아보는 것을 그 목적으로 한다. 다루어지는 사례는 1) 1974년 북한의 북미평화협정 제의; 2) 1979년 미국의 3자(남북미)회담 제의; 3) 1984년 북한의 3자회담 제의; 4) 1989년 북방정책 추진 시 교차승인 고려; 5)1994년 제네바 합의 시 북미관계 개선 모색; 6) 1999년 페리 프로세스 추진 시 북미대화 등의 여섯 사례이다. 논문에서 제기되는 핵심 질문은 다음과 같다. 어떠한 조건과 의도에서접촉이 이루어졌는가? 대화와 협상의 진전과 교착 원인은 무엇이었는가?한국의 대북/대미정책은 어떠한 역할을 하였는가? 북미관계와 평화체제의문제는 어떻게 연결되고 있는가? 이와 관련된 주요 요인으로는 미중관계,남북한 관계, 한미관계와의 연관성, 당사자 원칙과 주한미군 문제, 북한,미국, 한국의 국내정치적 변화, 위협인식에 대한 논의, 냉전 이후 북한정권의 생존에 대한 예측의 문제 등이 있다. 본론에서는 이와 같은 질문과 관련요인을 바탕으로 각 사례에 대한 서술과 분석이 행해지며, 결론에서는 이러한 역사적/비교적 검토가 현재의 한반도 상황과 한국의 정책적 선택의문제에 주는 의미에 대한 고찰이 이루어진다.

South Korea’s Progressives and North Korean Human Rights

Suh, Bo Hyuk Ewha Institute of Unification Studies 2012 Journal of peace and unification Vol.2 No.2

It is necessary to clarify the reality and misunderstandings of South Korea’s progressive groups’ silence on North Korean human rights for a precise evaluation of the human rights policy of South Korea. It is a fact that some of the pro-North nationalist groups have interpreted the concern for North Korean human rights issue as a political offensive and have been silent. However, it is a misunderstanding that all of the progressive forces are negligent on the North Korean human rights issue, and a rather unfair criticism. Excluding the extreme faction, the pro-North National Liberation (NL) group, South Korea’s progressive forces have continuously recognized the seriousness of the North Korean human rights situation, the North Korean government’s responsibility, and the constructive role of South Korea’s progressive forces. The progressive forces therefore have a lot to do. For this, South Korea’s progressives have to 1) recognize in the universal perspective that North Korean human rights is part of the human rights situation on the Korean Peninsula, 2) construct a realistic North Korean human rights improvement roadmap taking into consideration the situation in North Korea and the changing South-North Korean relations, and 3) actively develop international cooperation.

The Possibilities and Limitations of North-South Korean Arms Control and Future Action Plans

구본학 국방대학교 국가안전보장문제연구소 2010 The Korean Journal of Security Affairs Vol.15 No.2

On September 15, 2010, North Korea proposed a military working-level talks to discuss cross-border dissemination of anti-North Korean leaflets by South Korean civic groups and disputes over the Northern Limit Line (NLL) in the West Sea. This proposal expected to ease heightened military tension on the Korean peninsula which was caused by the Cheonan Incident in March 2010. Nevertheless, it is doubtful that the talks will lead to confidence-building and arms control between the North and the South. North and South Korea launched a dialogue in the late 1980s, and adopted a “Basic Agreement” and Protocol on Non-aggression in 1992 which includes various measures for confidence-building and arms control. North Korea, however, refused to implement the Basic Agreement and the Protocol. In June 2000, the North and the South held first Summit Talks and launched military talks at various levels. Inter-Korean military talks produced many agreements to prevent accidental naval clashes in the West Sea and to cease propaganda activities near the DMZ. They also agreed on assuring free transit, allowing the use of the Internet and wired/wireless communications, and simplifying the customs process for the operation of Gaesung Industrial Complex. Despite these confidence-building measures between the two Koreas, there is no complete reconciliation and cooperation based on mutual trust and confidence between them. North Korean arms control proposals mainly deal with troop reduction measures, whereas South Korean proposals deal with political and military confidencebuilding, operational arms control and structural arms control measures in gradual and phased manner. North Korean proposals were political propaganda to withdraw US military forces stationed in South Korea and to hinder South Korea’s military modernization program. Moreover, a strategic disparity, ideological confrontation, and experience of war between the two Koreas, political status of the North Korean military, diplomatic isolation of the North, and the North Korean nuclear issue restricts opportunity of arms control dialogue between the North and the South. Inter-Korean arms control can be successful only if it is based on mutual trust and confidence. With a gradual and phased approach, North and South Korea must implement political and military confidence measures at the first phase, measures to reduce accidental armed clashes at the second phase, verifiable arms control measures at the third phase, and measures to institutionalize a peace regime on the Korean peninsula at the last phase. In order to implement these measures successfully, South Korea must exert every effort to reform and open the North Korea regime.

한·중 관계의 발전추세와 전망: 바람직한 중국정책을 위한 시론(試論)

조영남 서울대학교 국제학연구소 2011 국제지역연구 Vol.20 No.1

This article aims at analyzing the past two decades’ development of Sino-South Korean relations and its prospect, with a purpose of proposing a South Korea's China policy. To this end, it firstly investigates the evolving trends of Sino-South Korean relations. Then, it delves into major contentious issues between the two countries in political, military and security, and social areas. Based on these analyses, South Korea's China policy is presented. Since the 1992 diplomatic normalization, Sino-South Korean relations have witnessed four distinctive trends: first, rapid increases of agents and areas in the relations between the two countries; second, acceleration of uneven development of the relations; third, the increasing disparity between official descriptions and their actual relations; fourth, increase of the asymmetry between the two countries in state capabilities. In addition, Sino-South Korean relations will face challenges in the future pertaining to three issues, such as Sino-North Korean alliance and North Korean problems, U.S.-South Korean alliance and its preparation for China's rise, and conflicts or confrontations between the two countries on norms and values. Finally, to achieve a more solid development of the Sino-South Korean relations in the future, South Korea needs to pursue a ‘policy trio' toward China, composed of engagement policy, hedging strategy, and East Asian multilateral policy. In this policy trio, South-North Korean relations are the center of gravity, which is closely related with all three policies. This relationship also seriously affects whether the three individual policies are implemented well or not. 이 논문은 지난 20년 동안의 한·중 관계 및 향후 전망을 분석하고, 한국의 바람직한 중국정책을 제시하는 것을 목적으로 한다. 이를 위해 먼저, 한·중 관계의 과거 발전추세와 과제를 분석한다. 또한, 정치, 군사·안보, 사회 등 주요 영역에서 나타나는 한·중 관계의 주요 쟁점을 분석한다. 이를 기반으로 이 논문은 한국의 바람직한 중국정책을 제시한다. 1992년 수교 이후 한·중 관계는 교류 주체와 영역의 급속한 확대, 영역별 불균등 발전의 심화, 공식규정과 실제관계의 괴리, 양국 간의 국력격차와 비대칭성의 확대라는 특징을 보여주었다. 또한, 미래의 한·중 관계는 북·중동맹과 남북관계, 한·미동맹과 중국의 부상 대응, 사회·문화 영역에서의 규범 및 가치관 충돌에 큰 영향을 받을 것이다. 마지막으로, 한국은 중국에 대해 관여정책, 위험분산 전략, 동(東)아시아 다자주의 정책으로 구성된 ‘정책 삼중주’를 추진해야 한다. 남북관계는 세 정책 모두와 밀접히 연결되고 각각의 정책에 큰 영향을 미치는 정책 삼중주의 보이지 않는 중심이다.