이미지 크게보기 앤마리 슬로터(왼쪽)미국 국무부 정책실장이 지난해 12월 워싱턴에서 열린 한 행사장에서 힐러리 클린턴 국무장관과 나란히 앉아 있다. 미 국무부 제공

앤마리 슬로터(53) 미국 국무부 정책실장은 23일 문화일보와의 인터뷰에서 대북정책에서 투트랙 기조를 유지하겠지만, 대화 재개전에 남북관계 개선 및 북한의 진정성이 확인돼야 한다고 강조했다. 그는 최근 북한의 연평도 도발 사태 등으로 인해 북한이 국무부의 우선정책으로 변화된 배경과 중국 문제 등에 대해 국무부의 현재 입장을 구체적으로 밝혔다.

[인터뷰=천영식 워싱턴 특파원]

―북한은 2010년 도발적으로 행동해왔다. 국무부 내 북한문제의 우선순위가 어떻게 되며, 한반도 상황을 어떻게 전망하는가.

“2010년 3월 천안함 침몰과 11월 연평도 포격 도발, 그리고 최근 우라늄 농축 활동의 공개 등은 유엔 안보리 결의 1718호와 1874호의 위반이자 북한에 의해 가장 최근 일어난 일련의 도발행위들이다. 이는 동북아 및 역내를 넘어 세계 평화 안정에 중대한 위협을 되고 있다. 핵무기 및 미사일의 추구, 확산 활동 그리고 도발 역사의 결과로서 북한은 국무부 핵심 외교정책 우선 순위의 하나가 됐다. 북한 핵무기 이슈를 해결하기 위한 우리의 약속은 핵이슈를 6자회담 관련국과 협력하기 위한 북한정책 특별대표인 스티븐 보즈워스 대표의 노력과 동맹국 및 파트너들과 유엔 안보리 결의의 완전하고 투명한 이행 및 북한에 대한 여타 제재를 협의하는 비핵확산·군축 특별보좌관인 로버트 아인혼의 역할로 대표되고 있다. 미 정부는 평화적 방법으로 한반도 비핵화를 추구하기 위해 완전하고 투명한 제재 이행과 북한에 관여를 통한 개방이라는 투트랙 정책을 계속 추구할 것이다. 우리는 대화를 재개하기 전에 진지한 협상을 통해 남북관계 개선과 북한으로부터 진정성(sincerity)을 확인해야 한다. 우리는 북한 내부적 진전, 특히 핵심 위치에 오른 김정은의 승진을 조심스럽게 지켜보고 있다.”

―비확산은 버락 오바마 행정부의 주요 목표다. 북한의 핵무기 역량을 어떻게 평가하나. 최근 농축 우라늄(HEU) 프로그램 공개를 감안한다면 북한을 사실상 핵무기 보유국으로 인정할 준비를 하고 있나.

“북한의 최근 농축 우라늄 프로그램 공개와 2005년과 2009년의 핵실험, 계속된 미사일 개발 노력은 국제적 비핵확산체제뿐 아니라 동북아 및 세계 평화 안정에 위협을 준다. 우리는 결코 북한을 핵무기 보유국가(nuclear weapon state)로 받아들이지 않을 것이다. 북한은 핵무기를 추구하는 한 미국과 정상적 관계를 가질 것이란 환상을 버려야 한다. 북한은 모든 핵 프로그램을 버리고 핵확산금지조약(NPT)체제 및 국제원자력기구(IAEA) 보호조치로 복귀함으로써 2005년 9·19 공동성명 약속과 유엔 안보리 1718호 및 1874호의 의무를 따라야 한다.”

―많은 사람들이 북한의 도발에 대한 중국의 대응에 실망했다. 북한에 대한 중국의 레버리지는 무엇이라고 보는가.

“세계에서 가장 폐쇄되고 고립된 국가 중 하나인 북한에 국제사회가 영향을 미치기는 어렵다. 그러나 국경을 마주하고 역사적 유대가 있으며 경제적 교류가 있는 중국은 북한에 영향을 미치기가 다른 나라보다 훨씬 좋은 위치에 있다. 예를 들면 지난해 북·중은 수많은 고위급 외교접촉뿐 아니라 김정일 북한 국방위원장과 후진타오(胡錦濤) 중국 국가주석이 직접 두 차례 회담을 했다. 북한이 한국과 대화를 촉진하는 진지한 행동(sincere action)에 나서도록 독특한 관계 및 지렛대를 사용하는 것은 중국에 도움을 주는 행위다.”

―중국의 부상에 맞서 미국이 어떻게 대응해야 한다고 보는가.

“오바마 대통령은 미국의 지역적 영향력을 제로섬 측면에서 바라보지 않는다고 반복적으로 말해 왔다. 우리는 국제사회에서 큰 역할을 하는 강력하고 번영되며 성공적인 중국의 부상을 환영한다. 우리는 긍정적이고 협력적이며 포괄적인 관계 발전을 추구한다. 동시에 우리는 중국과 합의 불가능한 영역에 대해 솔직하게 대화하고 있다. 우리는 양자적으로 중국에 관여하면서 중국의 부상이 국제적 규칙과 규범, 제도에 부합한다는 보장을 추구한다. 우리는 중국의 부상이 모두를 위해 안정과 안보, 번영의 원천이 되는 지역적 환경을 조성해가기를 원한다”

―세계무대에서 한국의 역할을 평가한다면.

“한국은 오늘날 세계에서 중요한 역할을 하고 있다. 즉각 떠오르는 예가 경제 영역, 특별히 주요 20개국(G20) 정상회의의 성공적 개최다. 그 회의에서 멤버들은 현재의 무역 흑자와 적자에 제한을 두는 가이드라인에 합의했다. 또 아덴만에서 해적을 물리치는 한국의 노력을 예로 들 수 있다. 한국은 세계적인 경제강국이다. 1950년대 원조를 받던 국가에서 경제협력개발기구(OECD)멤버로 점차 주요한 기부국가로 인상적인 전환을 한 것을 감안해보면, 글로벌 개발 노력에서 핵심 플레이어로 부상하고있다.”

kkachi@munhwa.com

<앤마리 슬로터 미 국무부 정책실장 인터뷰 영문 전문>

1) The Policy Planning Staff was created in 1947 by George Kennan at the request of Secretary of State George C. Marshall. Many South Koreans, however, remain unfamiliar with your office. Can you elaborate on the roles and responsibilities of the Policy Planning Staff in the Office of the Secretary of State at the Department of State in the formulation of U.S. foreign policy?

Response：
The Policy Planning Staff serves primarily as a source of independent policy analysis and advice for the Secretary of State. The Staff’s mission is to take a longer-term, strategic view of United States foreign policy and to ensure that the day-to-day activities of the Department mesh with broader policy goals. In general, the Staff performs six functions.

First is analysis. The Policy Planning Staff serves as the Secretary of State’s in-house think tank. It conceives of, develops, and promotes new policy. In this respect, the Staff can be thought of as an “idea factory.” It also assesses and critiques policy proposals developed elsewhere in the Department. The Staff examines the options put forward by others, and proposes alternatives. But we are not responsible for implementation. If a policy developed by the Staff is adopted by the Secretary, that is where the Policy Planning Staff’s role comes to an end. The job of implementing a policy proposal ? the operational aspects of foreign policy ? is left to the regional and functional bureaus of the Department and our diplomatic missions abroad.

The second principal function of the Policy Planning Staff is policy coordination. The members of the Staff work with the Department’s regional and functional bureaus on a daily basis to ensure that the foreign policy operators ? our diplomats abroad and our specialized experts in Washington, D.C. ? are in sync with the overall direction and objectives of U.S. foreign policy as established by the President and Secretary of State. This involves everything from helping to draft demarches and UN Security Council resolutions to reviewing an Assistant Secretary’s talking points for use before a multilateral forum and providing input on National Security Council decision documents.

The Staff’s third principal function is policy articulation. The Secretary of State’s Speechwriter, along with his staff, are attached to the Policy Planning Staff. The Speechwriting staff is responsible for crafting all of the Secretary’s oral and written public statements and congressional testimony. Placing them within the Policy Planning Staff permits the speechwriters to draw on the substantive expertise of Planning Staff members, ensuring accuracy in terms of both issues and policy.

The fourth function of the Staff is policy liaison. Specifically, the Policy Planning Staff is formally responsible for liaison with non-governmental organizations, the think tank community, and academia. In communicating with these entities, we seek to promote a better understanding of U.S. foreign policy principles and policies. Likewise, we look to the expertise embodied in these extra-governmental bodies as a source of new ideas and divergent viewpoints that should be considered in the development of United States foreign policy.

Fifth is the conduct of policy planning talks. The Staff holds regular dialogues, on an annual or biannual basis, with its counterpart organizations in numerous countries. These talks are conducted on either a bilateral or multilateral basis. They have proven to be a very useful venue for exploring mutual policy options that are at times less orthodox than what are usually considered in normal diplomatic channels.

The final function of the Policy Planning Staff is in the realm of special projects. The Staff is available for the Secretary of State’s use in any manner of projects that she might care to assign us. Unlike the regional and functional bureaus of the Department, the Staff has no day-to-day operational responsibilities. As such, the Staff members constitute a unique, on-call resource for the Secretary.

2) The Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review (QDDR) is a centerpiece of the State Department. What are the areas of focus under the QDDR? What challenges have you encountered in its preparation? Are you satisfied with the results?

Response：

The Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review (QDDR) is a sweeping assessment of how the Department of State and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) can become more efficient, accountable, and effective in a world in which rising powers, growing instability, and technological transformation create new threats, but also new opportunities. At its core the QDDR provides a blueprint for elevating American “civilian power” to better advance our national interests and to be a better partner to the U.S. military. Leading through civilian power means directing and coordinating the resources of all America‘s civilian agencies to prevent and resolve conflicts help countries lift themselves out of poverty into prosperous, stable, and democratic states and build global coalitions to address global problems.

In the QDDR, Secretary Clinton asks a fundamental question： “How can we do better?” Her answer is to build America’s “civilian power： the combined force of civilians working together across the U.S. government to practice diplomacy, carry out development projects, and prevent and respond to crises. Many different agencies contribute to these efforts today. But their work can be more unified, more focused, and more efficient.”

The QDDR focuses on four key areas： (1) adapting to the diplomatic landscape of the 21st century, (2) elevating and modernizing development to deliver results, (3) strengthening civilian capacity to prevent and respond to crisis and conflict, and (4) working smarter to deliver results for the American people. First, the QDDR seeks to respond to a changing diplomatic landscape by expanding America’s engagement on global systems such as economics, energy, and the environment, by enhancing our capacity to address human security issues such as civilian security, democracy and human rights and by improving our ability to reach beyond the state through direct engagement with local communities and expanded public-private partnerships. Second, the QDDR seeks to elevate development as a core pillar of American foreign policy and improve the results delivered by every development dollar invested. Third, the QDDR recognizes that state weakness and failure anywhere can be a threat to people everywhere and that America must build its civilian response capability to fragile and failing states. Finally, the QDDR seeks to allow State and USAID to work smarter through change in our human resources practices, procurement policies, and by better aligning planning to budgeting to results. In each of these areas, the QDDR proposes ambitious reforms to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of the Department of State and USAID and to ensure that we deliver results for the American people.


The QDDR was an 18-month process that drew on the work of more than five hundred people across the Department of State and USAID, at our missions in the field, from other US Government agencies, and from outside experts and think tanks. The process afforded an opportunity to look ahead at the changing global context of American foreign policy and to look within at our structures and systems. Ultimately it required Secretary Clinton’s clear vision for America’s role in the world and the tough decisions necessary for meaningful change. Over the months ahead, we will turn to implementation, ensuring that the decisions made in the QDDR lead to real change.

3) In your previous role as Professor and Dean of the Woodrow Wilson School and in your current role as Director of Policy Planning, what do you believe are the main issues that the world will confront in the next 25 years? In your view, what are the emerging new threats to global society?


Response：

I expect that we will face myriad threats over the next twenty five years. As recent events on the Korean Peninsula illustrate, we must remain vigilant against states that flaunt their international obligations and threaten regional and international security, and the United States will always stand with our allies to defend the global peace.


The threat of global terrorist groups and violent extremism will remain with us. Violent extremist ideologies easily take root in fragile states, and the increasingly interconnected nature of the globe allows an individual to spread terror across national borders. Nuclear proliferation is a particular concern, given the extreme danger of nuclear materials.

We face unprecedented environmental risks, particularly the impact of a changing climate?which can alter patterns of rainfall, agriculture, and sea levels. If left unaddressed, changes in our climate could cause humanitarian disasters like flooding and famines, ignite conflicts, and displace populations.

There are also a number of threats that emerge in large part as consequence of our increasingly interconnected world. The global economy is a force for growth, but it also means that financial crisis in one part of the world can shock distant economies. The same technologies like the internet that promote global prosperity and the free flow of information also create new vulnerabilities, and nations must work together to develop ways to defend against attacks through cyberspace. Global communications allow for long-distance telemedicine, but global transport means that all deadly viruses can jump continents in 24 hours.

While we face these emerging challenges, we must also focus on the unprecedented opportunities we have. Profound economic transformations will mark the next 25 years. Korea has led this trend, transforming itself from a developing country into an advanced industrial state in little more than a human generation. We are witnessing similarly rapid development in China, India, Brazil, and many other countries, lifting hundreds of millions out of poverty, creating wealth on a scale unknown in human history, and offering new ways to collaborate to achieve shared goals. As these countries develop themselves, they will seek to elevate development itself as a global political issue?just as Korea has become a leader in supporting development globally.


We are seeing changes in the way that nations interact, a development that will play as great a role in shaping foreign policy as the challenges we face. At the Woodrow Wilson School I studied the ways informal networks of policymakers from different countries collaborate to solve shared governance problems. In government, I see the ways in which nongovernmental actors?from NGOs to universities to multinational corporations?both shape and advance our foreign policy. For people in much of the world, their experience of the United States is not just President Obama and Secretary Clinton it is Google, the Gates Foundation, CARE, Boeing, or the American exchange student in the next desk. As governments, we need to understand and leverage these resources and interactions. We also need to focus on empowering people to solve their own challenges. For example, through Secretary Clinton’s 21st Century Statecraft agenda, we’re harnessing new technologies like mobile phones and online resources so that people around the globe can organize themselves to facilitate development and promote good governance. I am confident that we will be prepared to meet the challenges we face.

4) I understand that the Director of the Policy Planning Staff manages the State Department’s Dissent Channel. Can you explain what this role entails and how it works?

Response：

The Secretary of State recognizes the important role of constructive dissent in the policy formulation process. She realizes that all of the Department’s Foreign Service Officers and Washington, D.C.-based personnel must be able to express alternative or dissenting views on substantive issues of policy, in a manner that will receive serious, high-level consideration. To ensure that this is so, the Department has a well-established dissent channel mechanism by which Foreign Service Officers at home and abroad, along with their civil service counterparts, may put forward dissenting or differing views on issues of United States foreign policy for consideration by the senior leadership of the Department.

This dissent channel is managed by the Secretary’s Director of Policy Planning. All dissent channel messages are transmitted without delay to the Director of Policy Planning, who in turn shares them directly with the Secretary, the Deputy Secretaries, the Under Secretary for Political Affairs, and the Department’s Executive Secretary. With due regard for the sensitivity of the message and the wishes of the dissenting officer, other senior Department officials also may be shown the dissent channel message. This entire process is handled in such a fashion as to protect the confidentiality of the dissenting official to the greatest extent possible.

In this manner, all issues related to the development and conduct of United States foreign policy are open to the expression of differing or dissenting views and the high-level consideration of those views through the dissent channel.

5) North Korea, as you know, has behaved provocatively in 2010. How much priority do North Korean issues have for your office? How does your office view future developments on the Korean peninsula?

Response：

The March 2010 sinking of the Cheonan, the November 2010 shelling of Yeonpyong Island, and the recently-disclosed uranium enrichment activities that violate UN Security Council Resolutions (UNSCRs) 1718 and 1874 are the latest in a litany of provocations by the DPRK that pose a significant threat to peace and stability in Northeast Asia and beyond. As a result of its pursuit of nuclear weapons and missiles, its proliferation activities, and its history of provocations, North Korea is one of the State Department’s key foreign policy priorities. Our commitment to resolving the DPRK nuclear issue is demonstrated by the efforts of Special Representative for North Korea Policy Stephen Bosworth to coordinate with other members of the Six-Party Talks on the North Korea nuclear issue and Special Advisor for Non-Proliferation and Arms Control Robert Einhorn’s work with our allies and partners to fully and transparently implement UNSCRs 1718 and 1874 and other international sanctions on North Korea.

The U.S. government will continue to pursue a two-track policy of openness to engagement with the DPRK on denuclearization and full and transparent implementation of sanctions in pursuit of the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula in a peaceful manner. We must see improvement in North-South relations and sincerity from the DPRK to engage in serious negotiations before restarting Talks. We are carefully watching internal developments, particularly the promotion of heir apparent, Kim Jong-un, to key government positions.

6) Nonproliferation is a principal goal of this administration. How does your office assess the capabilities of the North Korean nuclear program? Given its recent declaration of its HEU program, are you prepared to accept North Korea as a de facto nuclear state?

Response：

North Korea’s recently-disclosed uranium enrichment program, its announced 2005 and 2009 nuclear tests, and its continued missile development efforts post threats to peace and stability in Northeast Asia and globally, as well as the global non-proliferation regime. We will never accept North Korea as a nuclear weapon state, and the DPRK should be under no illusion that it will ever have normal relations with the United States as long as it pursues the development of nuclear weapons. North Korea should fulfill its own commitments under the September 2005 Joint Statement of the Six-Party Talks and its obligations under UNSCRs 1718 and 1874 by abandoning all of its nuclear programs and returning to the Treat on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and to IAEA safeguards. Irreversible denuclearization remains the core focus of our engagement with North Korea.


7) You deal with your South Korean counterpart often. What sorts of issues are discussed at the US-ROK bi-lateral meetings?
Response：
I have always had excellent working relationships with my South Korean counterparts and have engaged in many bilateral consultations as well as consultations through Policy Planning Talks and the multilateral Strategic Policy Planning Dialogue. We have discussed a range of issues at these meetings, including global governance, development, G-20 issues, Afghanistan-Pakistan, China, Russia, Iran and the Middle East, North Korea, etc.

8) What is your evaluation of the performance of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton? What distinguishes her tenure as Secretary of State compared to her predecessors?

Response：
Secretary Clinton is a visionary secretary of state. She understands that the challenges that the United States and the world faces in the 21st century must be met not only through negotiations, cooperation, and even confrontation between states, but also through changing the conditions on the ground that shape or distort the lives of ordinary people around the world. That is why she is determined to elevate development alongside diplomacy. The Republic of Korea can play the constructive role that it does today on the global stage because it took care of its own people, lifting them out of poverty, educating them, and offering them a better future. It has enfranchised and empowered its women ? half of its population. It has charted a path of national pride focused on participating in global events and taking responsibility for helping to solve global problems. To help other nations to follow the RoK’s path and to address challenges from global economic instability to violent extremism to climate change, the United States and other nations must integrate development issues and initiatives fully into their foreign policy. Successful development, in turn, requires guaranteeing the rights and dignity of all citizens and ensuring the ability of all citizens to hold their governments accountable. There too Secretary Clinton has charted a strong course. It has been a great honor to be able to serve as her Director of Policy Planning.


9) What are your views on how the US needs to respond to the rise of China? Are you sympathetic to the integration-school of thought or the insurance-school of thought, as outlined by Joseph Nye?

Response：
President Obama has stated repeatedly that the United States does not view regional influence in zero-sum terms. We welcome the rise of a strong, prosperous and successful China that plays a greater role in world affairs, and we seek to develop a positive, cooperative, and comprehensive relationship. At the same time, we are talking candidly with China about our areas of disagreement. As we engage China bilaterally, we also seek to ensure that China’s emergence is consistent with global rules, norms and institutions. We also want to shape a regional environment in which China’s emergence is a source of stability, security and prosperity for all.

10) Many South Koreans were disappointed by China‘s reaction to recent North Korean actions (e.g. Yeonpyoung attack). What is your view of China’s leverage over North Korea?

Response：
As one of the world’s most closed, isolated countries, it is difficult for the international community to influence North Korea. However, with a shared border, historical ties, and economic exchanges between China and North Korea, China is better positioned than any other country to influence North Korea. For example, over the last year, there have been two meetings between DPRK leader Kim Jong-il and Chinese President Hu Jintao, as well as many other high-level DPRK-PRC diplomatic contacts.

It is in China’s interests to use its unique relationship and leverage with North Korea to encourage it to take sincere actions to facilitate the opening of dialogue with South Korea, to take irreversible steps on denuclearization, and to refrain from further provocative behavior. The United States and China will continue to work together to achieve our shared goals of peace and stability in Northeast Asia and the verifiable denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula in a peaceful manner.


11)What is your assessment of South Korea‘s role in the global world order? What does SK need to do to become a global power in the next 25 years?

Response：
South Korea plays an important role in today’s world and it does so on multiple fronts. One example that immediately comes to mind is in the economic realm, specifically, its successful hosting of the G20 summit where members agreed to work on guidelines for setting limits for current account surpluses and deficits as well as reaching consensus on guidelines and principles to improve economic growth and reduce poverty in less developed nations. In addition to its role on the world’s economic stage, South Korea does much to promote regional and global security. Take for instance South Korea’s efforts to combat piracy in the Gulf of Aden. Since April 2009, the South Korean navy has been an active participant in the multinational task force to protect shipping, improve maritime security, and counter terrorism in that part of the world. It has provided invaluable assistance to stabilize Iraq and has stood up a provincial reconstruction team (PRT) in Afghanistan to assist with international efforts there. And of course South Korea is playing a critical role in efforts to reduce tensions and ultimately denuclearize the Korean peninsula.

As the 15th largest economy in the world, South Korea is also an international economic force. Given the country’s impressive turnaround from an aid recipient in the 1950s to a member of the OECD that is becoming an increasingly important donor country, it is now emerging as a key player in global development efforts. South Korea already has an established reputation as a proficient peacekeeper and is only reinforcing that status through its latest contribution to the U.N. peacekeeping effort in Lebanon.

South Korea can play an even more influential role by gradually assuming greater global responsibility and making the difficult decisions that are incumbent on a responsible power. Along with other members of the international community including Canada, Japan, the European Union, and the United States, South Korea embarked upon the path to pursue sanctions on Iran with the understanding that such a move will contain Iran’s nuclear weapons ambitions. It continues to play a critical role in East Asia’s political and economic security through its participation in APEC, the East Asia Summit, and its engagement with ASEAN. And it will step onto the world stage once again by bringing nations together to address the challenges of strengthening nuclear security by hosting the 2012 Nuclear Security Summit.


12) What is your view of the potential prospects and problems with the US-ROK partnership in the years ahead?

Response：
In all, healthy, bilateral relations, there will be times when countries will not see eye-to-eye on issues however, in the case of the U.S.-ROK relationship, I see a tremendous amount of opportunity. We have enjoyed a very productive and constructive bilateral relationship, one of the strongest in the world. We share common values with regard to democracy and human rights. The military alliance is robust. Our two nations enjoy a fruitful economic relationship which should blossom even further with ratification of the KORUS FTA. People-to-people exchanges have been increasing as a result of Korea’s membership into the U.S. Visa Waiver Program.

With this foundation, there is tremendous potential to advance our increasingly shared objectives of enhancing security and stability, expanding economic opportunity and growth, and fostering democracy and human rights in the East Asia and Pacific region through its architecture of organizations. I also see our two nations deepening the relationship in order to confront the global challenges of today and tomorrow. There is incredible potential to harmonize our two countries’ efforts to enhance global health. We can leverage the intellectual capital and resources of our two nations to combat climate change and promote energy security. There are still many areas of collaboration in the realm of science and technology where our joint efforts can transform the global landscape. And we can further our political and military cooperation to counter violent extremism, enhance nuclear and conventional non-proliferation efforts, and prevent the emergence of conflict and crises.