칸트의 평화사상과 국제질서-민주평화론과 하버마스 기획을 중심으로-

Although democratic peace thesis and Habermas’ cosmopolitan project are based on Kantian peace in terms of their own theoretical origin, their argumentative contents and positions are distinct and different from each other. Kantian peace had been based on a peaceful league or union of free states, yet the membership for the union could not be understood as reserved only for narrowly defined western liberal democracies. In this regard, so-called democratic peace thesis is fundamentally problematic from the point of Kantian peace. Moreover, as possible use of force in the name of humanitarian intervention that reflected unilaterality understood moralism by some major western powers is to be recognized implicitly for democratic peace, it appears to be essentially contrary to the Kantian peace. Habermas’ version of Kantian project for the pursuit of cosmopolitan legal order in terms of constitutionalization of international law seems to be more persuasive and valid from the Kantian peace. In particular, as to the problem of humanitarian intervention, which is being regarded as one of the most difficult problems of international legal community,Habermas’ project has attained stronger argumentative position, as it may provide proper procedures and conditions for it supported by international law as a constitution of cosmopolitan community. This is because Habermas’ cosmopolitan project in which constitutionalization of intentional law is firmly established may guarantee universal protection of human rights and democratic practices without the possibility of misuse of military forces by some major powers. Having said that, Habermas’ cosmopolitan project is far from perfect. Rather,it must be accompanied by material reformative programs for international organizations, such as the UN in a fundamental way. In order for real cosmopolitan legal order to be established and developed, international institutions and organizations must be restructured from the legislative, executive and judicial perspectives. In addition, constructive roles and functions that could be played by sovereign states should also be noted for establishing cosmopolitan legal order. Only by firmly guaranteeing protection of human rights and democratic practices at the domestic level provided by sovereign states could emerge a real cosmopolitan community.