International Herald Tribune, October 18, 2013
“Saudi Arabia Rejects U.N. Security Council Seat in Protest Move” By Robert F. Worth

---

사우디아라비아는 시리아와 이란에 대한 서방의 유보적 태도에 불만을 표하며 전례없이 비상임이사국 자리를 거부했다. 사우디아라비아는 시리아와 이란과 종교적, 지역적 갈등관계를 조성하고 있는데, 이 국가들에 대한 UN이 유보적 태도를 취하는 것에 불만이 있었다. 시리아에서는 화학무기사용에 대한 국제공조가 제대로 이루어지지 못하였고, 이란에 대해서는 로하니 대통령의 핵협상 움직임에 대한 서방세계가 유화적으로 접근한다는 비판이다. 러시아와 중국이 veto를 활용해서 UN의 행동을 무효화한다고 주장한다. 사우디아라비아 내부에서도 예상하지 못한 듯한 반응이 나오고 있다. 사우디의 외교부 장관은 지난 목요일 트위터에 비상임이사국 선정을 축하하는 글을 올렸었다. 사우디아라비아가 자신의 결정을 번복할 가능성은 낮으며, 추가적으로 비상임이사국을 선출할 것인가에 대한 합의도 이루어지지 않고 있다.

사우디아라비아의 이러한 태도는 1차 북핵위기 당시에 동아시아에서 대한민국의 행보와 유사한 측면이 있다고 보여진다. 당시 한국은 북핵문제에 대해 미국이 북한에 유화적으로 대하는 것을 극렬하게 반대하였다. 한국의 동맹국인 미국이 북한과 교류하여 자신들이 배제되는 것을 경계한 것이다. 사우디아라비아도 한국과 마찬가지로 분쟁지역에서 미국과의 전통적 동맹으로 중동에서의 문제에서 자신들이 고립되는 것을 경계하고 있다.

시리아에 대해서 먼저 살펴보면, 시리아의 화학무기 사용에 대한 제제를 소련의 반대로 안보리에서 결의하지 못하고, 미국의 개입또한 오바마가 의회에 공을 넘겨서 불투명해진 상태이다. 따라서 사우디의 반군(수니파)을 지지하는 사우디아라비아는 서방세력, 특히 미국에 대해 불신하게 되었다. 이란은 로하니 대통령이 선출되고 나서 핵협상의 가능성을 타진하였는데, 미국이 이에 긍정적으로 반응하고 있는 상황이다. 이 또한 시아파이면서 페르시아계열인 이란을 라이벌로 여기는 수니파-아랍계 사우디아라비아는 좌시할 수 없는 입장이다. 한국도 김영삼 당선에 따라 남북관계가 악화된 상황이었다. 당시도 마찬가지로 핵문제가 걸려 있었고, 미국을 위시한 서방은 북한에 대해 외교적으로 해결하려 했었으며, 한국은 이에 불만을 표했다. 그래도 한국은 북한 한 문제였지만, 사우디는 이 두 가지 문제가 복합적으로 상승작용하여 비상임이사를 거부하는 사태에 까지 이르렀다.

사우디 외무장관의 트위터 발언에서 봤을 때, 이번 사안을 결정함에 있어서 정부부처간 소통 혹은 적어도 정부와 사우디왕가와의 소통이 원활하지 않았음을 엿볼 수 있다. 1차북핵위기 당시에도 유사한 일이 있었는데, 김영삼은 한-미 실무진이 이미 소통한 사안이었음에도 불구하고 자신의 감정적인 측면과 여론의 흐름에 따른 경솔한 행동을 함으로써 국제관계를 경색시키는데 일조하였었다. 하지만 사우디아라비아의 이런 행동은 오히려 국제기구에서의 자신의 영향력을 악화시킬뿐더러, 미국의 친 이란정책으로의 전환을 가속화시킬 위험성이 있다는 측면에서 그리 현명하지는 못했다고 평가할 수 있다.

---

자료정리

Saudi Arabia Rejects U.N. Security Council Seat in Protest Move
By ROBERT F. WORTH
Published: October 18, 2013
WASHINGTON — Saudi Arabia stunned the United Nations and even some of its own diplomats on Friday by rejecting a highly coveted seat on the Security Council, a decision that underscored the depth of Saudi anger over what the monarchy sees as weak and conciliatory Western stances toward Syria and Iran, Saudi Arabia’s regional rival. 시리아와 이란에 대한 서방의 유보적 태도에 반대해서 비상임이사국 자리 비승인.

The Saudi decision, which could have been made only with King Abdullah’s approval, came a day after it had won a Security Council seat for the first time, and it appeared to be unprecedented. 전례없는 일.

The Saudi Foreign Ministry released a statement rejecting the seat just hours after the kingdom’s own diplomats — both at the United Nations and in Riyadh, the Saudi capital — were celebrating their new seat, the product of two years of work to assemble a crack diplomatic team in New York. Some analysts said the sudden turnabout gave the impression of a self-destructive temper tantrum.

But one Saudi diplomat said the decision came after weeks of high-level debate about the usefulness of a seat on the Security Council, where Russia and China have repeatedly drawn Saudi anger by blocking all attempts to pressure Syria’s president, Bashar al-Assad. Abdullah has voiced rising frustration with the continuing violence in Syria, a fellow Muslim-majority nation where one of his wives was born. He is said to have been deeply disappointed when President Obama decided against airstrikes on Syria’s military in September in favor of a Russian-proposed agreement to secure Syria’s chemical weapons. 러시아와 중국이 시리아에 대한 압력을 모두 쓸모없게 해버림. 미국의 주저하는 자세에 불만.

And Saudi officials made no secret of their fear that a nuclear deal between Iran and the West, the subject of multilateral talks this week in Geneva with another round scheduled for early November, could come at their expense, leaving them more exposed to their greatest regional rival. 이란과 서방의 핵deal을 두려워함.

The Saudi decision may also reflect a broader debate within the Saudi ruling elite about how to wield influence: the Saudis have long resisted taking a seat on the Security Council, believing it would hamper their discreet diplomatic style. 상임위에서의 자리를 얻는 것이 신중한 외교 스타일을 위협하리라는 걱정을 해 왔었음.

Still, the sudden about-face came across as a slap to the United Nations and the United States, one of Saudi Arabia’s strongest Western allies. On Thursday evening, the American ambassador to the United Nations, Samantha Power, had issued a statement congratulating the five new nonpermanent members — Chad, Chile, Lithuania, Nigeria and Saudi Arabia. Officials at the United States Mission to the United Nations had no immediate comment. 미국에 대한 공격적인 행동임.

Russia was sharply critical of the Saudi gesture. “We are surprised by Saudi Arabia’s unprecedented decision,” the Foreign Ministry said in a statement from Moscow carried by news agencies. “The kingdom’s arguments arouse bewilderment and the criticism of the U.N. Security Council in the context of the Syria conflict is particularly strange.” 러시아는 사우디 비난.

There was shock and dismay in Riyadh, too, where the Saudi political elite had seemed thrilled at the prospect of a shift to a more public and assertive diplomatic stance. 사우디 내부에서도 충격이라는 반응이 나오고있음.

Late on Thursday, the spokesman for the Saudi Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Osama Nugali, forwarded a message on his Twitter account celebrating the kingdom’s election to the Security Council. The message was written by Jamal Khashoggi, a journalist with links to the ruling elite. Many other prominent Saudis also forwarded the message, which congratulated the kingdom for winning a seat it had “sought for more than two years with the help of a team of the best Saudi diplomats to represent the kingdom.” 상임위 선정을 축하하는 발언을 했었음.

Many experts had assumed that Saudi Arabia’s pursuit of a Security Council seat signaled a new desire to be more public and assertive in its stances toward the Syrian civil war and the Arab-Israeli conflict. The Saudi ambassador to the United Nations, Abdallah Y. al-Mouallimi, was clearly elated after the General Assembly vote on Thursday.

“We take this election very seriously as a responsibility to be able to contribute to this very important forum to peace and security of the world,” he told reporters. “Our election today is a reflection of a longstanding policy in support of moderation and in support of resolving disputes by peaceful means.”

The statement on Friday struck a far different tone, calling for changes to enhance the Security Council’s contribution to peace. It did not say what those should entail.

“Allowing the ruling regime in Syria to kill and burn its people by the chemical weapons, while the world stands idly, without applying deterrent sanctions against the Damascus regime, is also irrefutable evidence and proof of the inability of the Security Council to carry out its duties and responsibilities,” the statement said.

The statement accused the Security Council of failing to find a “just and lasting solution” to the Israel-Palestinian conflict, and of failing to free the Middle East of “all weapons of mass destruction,” an apparent reference to Israel’s presumed nuclear arsenal.

“This is very bad for the image of the country,” said one Saudi political insider, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the decision was assumed to be by the king, whose judgment is rarely questioned in public. “It’s as if someone woke up in the night and made this decision.”

But some others in Riyadh said they were not entirely surprised, given the kingdom’s long ambivalence about assuming a position that would strain friendships and alliances, particularly against the backdrop of the high profile and volatility of the Security Council’s recent decisions.

The kingdom has seen its reputation suffer in some quarters in recent years, in part because of the perception that it was combating the democratic aspirations of the 2011 Arab uprisings. On Thursday, the Pew Research Center released a poll indicating that Saudi Arabia’s popularity had declined in several Middle Eastern countries since 2007.

“The Saudis no doubt quickly realized that being on the U.N.S.C. would mean they could no longer pursue their traditional back seat and low-key policies and therefore decided to give it up,” said Bernard Haykel, a professor of Middle East studies at Princeton University and an authority on Saudi Arabia.

“Regardless of the short-term costs, a seat on the U.N.S.C. may have also meant that Saudi Arabia would be more constrained in backing the Syrian opposition,” Mr. Haykel said.

Diplomats at the United Nations said they did not believe the Saudi decision would be reversed, given its unequivocal and accusatory language. It also was unclear when the 193-member General Assembly would take a vote on a replacement. 뒤집진 않을 듯. 재선출을 실행할지도 잘 모름.

As of late Friday, the Saudis had not officially notified the United Nations of their decision. Afaf Konja, a spokeswoman for John W. Ashe, the ambassador for Antigua and Barbuda, who is the current president of the General Assembly, said he had not received formal notification nor had held any meetings with Saudi representatives. Given the nature of the Saudi announcement, the spokeswoman said in an e-mail, “the next steps are yet to be determined and will be based on formal language from Saudi Arabia.”

The council has met before without a full membership. Diplomats recalled that in 1950, the Soviet Union refused to sit at the council table, though it did not repudiate its seat. 소련의 예를 떠올림.