754 읽음
핵 시대 자강론 한계, 한미동맹은 전쟁 억제 필수
최보식의언론
0
The problem, however, is that this view oversimplifies the nature of war. The moment war is reduced to a comparison of conventional forces, only half of the Korean Peninsula’s reality is visible. The other half exists in an entirely different dimension. North Korea has already abandoned conventional parity and concentrated on asymmetric capabilities—above all, nuclear weapons. This single fact changes every assessment. Once nuclear weapons enter the equation, war is no longer about whether it can be won. The very objective of war is transformed. While conventional war revolves around fronts and military targets, nuclear war targets the state itself. Even a single nuclear detonation would extend damage far beyond military facilities—into cities, industrial infrastructure, and the entire social system. In a densely populated region like the Seoul metropolitan area, the consequences would not merely be destruction, but the collapse of national functionality. At this stage, the size of forces or superiority of equipment loses decisive significance.
This is why nuclear weapons cannot be deterred by conventional means. Nuclear weapons are deterred only by nuclear capabilities. Deterrence emerges when an adversary is certain that any nuclear use will result in comparable devastation in return. Here, the essence of security becomes clear: it is not the magnitude of power, but the structure within which that power is embedded that matters.
The armistice system on the Korean Peninsula must also be understood through this lens. The Korean War Armistice Agreement of 1953 did not end the war; it merely halted it. Legally, the two Koreas remain in a state of war, with only active hostilities suspended. The reason this fragile condition has endured for more than seventy years is not peace, but deterrence.
A central pillar of that deterrence is the United States Forces Korea (USFK). USFK is not merely a military presence. It serves as a tripwire guaranteeing U.S. involvement in the event of war, and as a conduit linking South Korea to the U.S. nuclear deterrent. As long as this structure exists, North Korea cannot realistically contemplate using nuclear weapons solely against South Korea. Any such action would immediately escalate beyond the peninsula. Deterrence derives precisely from this certainty of escalation.
Therefore, the question “why feel anxious?” misses the point. Anxiety is not an emotion—it is the result of outcomes. In a standalone defense framework, limited conflicts or localized provocations remain viable options. In a U.S.–ROK integrated structure, those options are structurally constrained. This is not about psychology; it is about strategy.
The analysis must go further. Security on the Korean Peninsula is no longer determined solely within its borders. It is shaped within the broader U.S.-led Indo-Pacific strategy and the global order. The United States is not merely a military power, but an architect of global order built through alliances and networks—exemplified by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (QUAD), and Australia-United Kingdom-United States Security Partnership (AUKUS).
The defining feature of this order is clear: deterrence is generated not by a single nation’s strength, but by interconnected alliance structures. At the center of this structure still stands the United States. Even looking toward 2050, the world may appear multipolar on the surface, but in operational terms it is likely to remain an alliance-based unipolar order centered on the U.S.
Within this framework, the significance of the Korean Peninsula becomes even clearer. South Korea is not merely a participant—it is a critical node in the Indo-Pacific order. USFK functions not only for Korea’s defense, but as part of this broader strategic architecture.
Therefore, approaching self-reliant defense as a substitute for alliance is not simply a military misjudgment—it is a choice about the structure of order itself. Self-reliant defense is necessary. A strong military and independent defense capability are fundamental to any state. But they cannot replace an alliance. Self-reliant defense is the capacity to fight a war; an alliance is the structure that prevents war from occurring. These are not substitutes—they are complementary.
The reality of the Korean Peninsula remains a “suspended war.” The war has not ended; it has merely been paused. And what sustains this pause is not will, but deterrence. In the face of a nuclear-armed adversary, security is not a matter of resolve. It depends on a clear outcome: what will be lost if aggression occurs, and how certain that cost will be. Only when that cost is unmistakable does war stop. In the nuclear age, security is not built on emotion. It is the outcome of cold judgment operating through deterrence.
#Deterrence #USROKAlliance #NuclearStrategy