냉전기 한국의 팔레스타인정책

Abstract

Utilizing primary sources, this study analyzes the process of and main reasons for the Republic of Korea’s (ROK) de facto recognition of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) in 1980. In 1979, the ROK government prepared to recognize the PLO, which represented a significant departure from its previous Israel-centered Middle East policy and could have clashed with the US diplomatic posture. At a time of high uncertainty in US-Arab relations, ROK’s policy shift was understood in terms of strengthening the independence of ROK’s diplomacy. Although the ROK government confirmed the US and Japanese stance of disapproval of the PLO, it considered both explicit recognition, which would have the effect of approval, and unilateral declaration, which would lower the burden on the ROK in PLO relations. After the PLO recognition, the US government used economic support as a lever to pressure the ROK. Facing this expected friction with the US, the ROK’s pursuit of independent diplomacy was based on the following factors. First, on the economic front, the steady supply of oil and the expansion of the construction market were considered, and, indeed, South Korea’s exports to the Middle East reached a peak after the PLO recognition. Second, regarding the political aspect, the comprehensive diplomatic strategy, which sought to improve relations with the Arab states as a whole, was based on Park Chung-hee’s perception of independence, with the aim of gaining the upper hand in the diplomatic confrontation with North Korea. Third, with respect to the international aspect, in the 1970s, Europe no longer followed the US-centered policy in the Middle East, and the ties between the Communist bloc and the PLO were loosening. Overall, the ROK’s recognition of the PLO was an attempt at independent diplomacy and an important example of harnessing international currents. However, it was limited by the confusion of ROK’s diplomatic tones between Israel and the Palestinians and by the overemphasis on external economic gains.