한국의 대테러 발전방향에 관한 연구

Abstract

As the dangers of terrorist attacks have continued to increase in South Korea, there has arisen a pressing need to plan out specific measures for preparing against terrorist-attack scenarios and for gradually rooting out terrorist threats themselves. This present study examines post-Korean-War terrorist attacks committed against South Korea by North Korea and analyzes several distinguishing features of those attacks. Furthermore, it examines both current and possible future connections between North Korea and international terrorist organizations. Lastly it scrutinizes current security preparations being made against terrorist threats, analyzes their problems, and explores complementary measures as well as possible fine-tunings of relevant laws and statutes. It has become all but clear that the recent surprise discharge of Hwang-gang Dam, which took the lives of six innocent Korean citizensin the early morning of September 6th, 2009, was a deliberate inundation attack by North Korean authorities. North Korea chose to discharge only one tenth of the dam’s total reservoir at the time, but if it had collapsed the entire dam the results would imaginably have been catastrophic. Not to mention heavy civilian casualties, the damage of the troops at the frontline would not have ended with just one tank sunk as it did. The above is just one example of how North Korea has been hiking up the intensity of its military threats against South Korea. On November 10th, 2009, three days after the North's defeat at the Dae-Chung Naval Battle, North Korea’s representative for the South-North general-level military conference threatened the South Korean party that there follow “a merciless military countermeasure” by North Korea. North Korean representatives also went back to its old argument that it will not accept the Northern Limit Line (NLL). On November 11th, one day after the battle, Worker’s Party of North Korea, the country’s highest political body, insisted that “South Korea’s military forces have falsely cast the responsibility for the battle to us. The unified policy of North Korea’s military is to answer provocation with a firm reprisal.” WPNK stated that South Korea “first started the fire” and will “pay dearly for it.” Given such words and circumstance, the possibility cannot be ruled out that North Korea, with its pride trampled, might actually follow up its threats with real military provocation. That North Korea incited its naval provocation in the face of warming relations betrays the fact that North Korea is merely playing a two-faced game against the world. Just this past August, former US president Bill Clinton visited North Korea and most recently a special envoy team from the North met with President Lee Myung Bak in what has been called by some as "an indirect summit." That North Korea refuses to stop its military threats betrays that North Korea’s ultimate aim to communize South Korea has not changed at all, providing grounds for predicting that North Korea will continue on in the future to threaten South Korea with terrorist tactics just as it is doing so now. The distinguishing feature of North Korea’s terrorism is that it is a state-organized activity being guided by one single dictator. North Korea uses terrorism to control by indirect release the level of its inner unrest and disaffection. It also uses terrorist tactics to provoke South Korea's response and in doing so increase its people’s animosity against South Korea. The direct target of North Korea’s terrorism has so far been limited to South Korea only, though in the process it has continued to export violence internationally via arms and other contraband trades. It is known to be connected to around 60 international organizations spread out over 35 countries. While North Korea continues with its terrorist campaign, the overall pattern of international terrorist tactics has been transforming itself recently, especially with the rapid increase in the use of IEDs (Improvised Explosive Device), which has accounted for, among others, 41% of American deaths in wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Because there is strong evidence that North Korea is also developing ways to incorporate IED tactics in its war scheme, countermeasures against this new threat must be researched and incorporated into South Korea’s evolving CGMP(Civillian, Government, Military, Police)-integrated defense policy. Given the weakness in South Korea’s social structure that allows for quick mobilization of anti-government and pro-socialist demonstrations, as well as the continuing threats of North Korea’s military aim, it is becoming all the more pressing to prepare a viable response scheme. It is especially imperative that the so-called “anti-terrorist laws” that have recently become the point of controversy in public debates not merely remain a political talk but be swiftly given real power to deal with the increasing dangers of terrorism against South Korea. This paper analyzes possible grounds for human rights violations that might arise from invoking these “anti-terrorist laws” currently under debate. It also analyzes types of terrorist attacks that could occur in Korea, what measures are currently in place to address these threats, and what possible steps could be taken to enhance the current defense policy. Terrorism is no longer a regional problem, but it has now become the common enemy of humanity. It has gone on from small-scale kidnappings, hijackings, assassinations, and explosive blasts to today's large-scale organized movements that threaten to topple nations. In an age when the possibility of battles erupting in between states has significantly decreased, terrorism has more or less become “the War of the 21st Century.” Wars in the past were about armed troops facing each other over battle fronts, but in the 21st century wars have changed in their meaning and are now pitting forces for international security against shrewd and vicious invisible enemies.