Rawls 만민법의 국제적 관용에 대한 소고: 북한에 대한 언급과 함께

The purpose of this paper is to examine the problem of ‘internationaltoleration’ in John Rawls’s The Law of Peoples, one of the most importantphilosophical works on the subject of international law and internationalpolitics in contemporary intellectual history. Through this process theimplications of the existence of North Korea on the Korean Peninsula canbe considered in the context of the nature of the inter-Korean relationship. This paper first summarizes the essential characteristics of The Law ofPeoples and then discusses the problematic aspects of so-calledinternational toleration by liberal states of nonliberal yet ‘decent’ states, asdescribed in Rawls’s work. This paper raises the fundamental question ofwhether such liberal states’ toleration of nonliberal yet ‘decent’ states canbe compatible with the concepts outlined in The Law of Peoples, which isessentially based on political liberalism. This paper argues that such toleration of nonliberal yet decent states iscontrary to the liberalist foundations of The Law of Peoples, because thelegitimacy of their toleration should have been assessed more strictly withrespect to fundamental values, including liberal justice. Thus the argument for international toleration reached in The Law of Peoples contradicts thevery principles on which it is meant to be based. The review of the problematic aspects of international toleration in TheLaw of Peoples in this paper may present very important implications forthe nature of the inter-Korean relationship, because the constitution of theRepublic of Korea (South Korea) makes clear that the government mustpursue a reunification policy based on and driven by a liberal democraticorder. In particular, this paper pays a great deal of attention to theso-called minimalist approach with regards to the meaning of the pursuitof reunification. According to this minimalist approach, the purpose ofreunification policy is to pursue the peaceful coexistence of the two Koreason the Korean Peninsula, rather than the eventual democratization of NorthKorea. The minimalist approach has been greatly influenced by Rawls’sconcept of toleration. The minimalists maintain that even if North Korea isnot a liberal state in nature, it may be a decent state, such that SouthKorea should approach North Korea with due respect in a mannerconducive to the eventual peaceful reunification of the two Koreas. However, this paper’s author basically views North Korea as an ‘outlawstate’, characterized by gross violations of human rights of its own citizensand a notoriously totalitarian dictatorship controlled by three succeedinggenerations of the Kim dynasty, despite the official state title of the‘Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’. Liberal states cannot treat outlawstates with toleration and due respect according to Rawls’s The Law ofPeoples. Even if North Korea may be understood as the nonliberal yetdecent state with reference to The Law of Peoples, a critical examinationof the problematic aspects of toleration in this paper shows clearly that thepursuit of an inter-Korean relationship based on the ‘toleration’ of NorthKorea would be an ill-advised approach. It would be difficult to maintainoptimism about the possibility of a peaceful reunification of the Korean Peninsula without first observing fundamental changes to the nature of thepresent regime in North Korea. Given the essential nature of the NorthKorean regime, it is likely that continued tensions and a stalemate in theinter-Korean relationship will remain for some time. This will beinevitable given the incompatibility of the North Korean (totalitarian) andSouth Korean (liberal democratic) political systems.