1950년대 미국의 대한원조에서 저개발국 ‘개발(development)’의 의미 : 미국계 컨소시엄, 스미스 힌치맨 앤 그릴스의 ‘기술원조’를 중심으로

Abstract

We need to re-thinking ‘development’ in the context of US Aid to the Korea during 1950’s. There are three reason why we should do that; Recovering Technical Cooperation in Mutual Defense Security Law, To understand What EBASCO did with Korean Government, The role of the ‘Smith, Hinchman & Grylls, Inc.’.BR First, We need to analyze the US’s MSA Law during 1950’s free from old review. Most of people used to quote of the Hong seog yoo’s view without such a concept which care technical cooperation. Actually the Technical Cooperation was a key logic doing US AID under less countries such as South Korea. Nevertheless, ‘Engineering Contract’ have not focused on so far.BR Then, if we want to understand what the ‘development’ means, we need to check out three historical subjects; US Government, ROK Government, and The ‘Engineering Firm’ such as EBASCO, or Smith, Hinchman & Grylls, Inc. The Failure of EBASCO Contract between ROK and EBASCO shows what happen actually. EBASCO didn’t care about the vision of ROK.BR Finally, Smith, Hinchman & Grylls, Inc. had success to contract ‘engineering service contract’ with ROK. SH&G had to do three main tasks for contract; writing a seasonal reports, making ‘task order’, and making ‘work order’. But There were a lot of variable to complies missions. For example, SH&G couldn’t catch up the dead line occasionally. It wasn’t expected part by ROK. So it caused the crack on the development plan of ROK.BR In conclusion, it is not a simple question what the real meaning of ‘development’ in the context of US AID during 1950’s. Especially the technical cooperation under MSA Law did important thing such as ‘Engineering Contract’. But, That is why we need to focus on what the engineering firm did actually.