近廿年來中俄關係已從友好的、建設性的成為戰略性的夥伴關係,進入中俄前所未有之友好高峰期。實際上,中俄戰略協作夥伴關係是中俄的權力分布共識與利益匯集於因應美國霸權的威脅,由於美國對外戰略牽動中、俄關係的發展,中俄雙邊互動也影響著大國權力平衡關係。中俄戰略協作夥伴關係的本質除了有關平衡美國霸權外,既有的雙邊共識與追求利益張力似正影響著雙邊關係的發展。隨著美國單極的鬆動與中國的崛起,中俄關係逐漸偏離傳統權力平衡的意涵,轉為更為複雜的「制度性平衡」。因此,本文結合新現實主義、新自由主義、建構主義等三大學派不同面向的建制觀──權力、利益、認知的分析折衷主義和制度性平衡,去觀察二十年來的中俄關係,更能窺知中俄戰略協作夥伴關係發展的全貌。中俄雙邊反覆多變的關係變遷,中俄戰略夥伴關係本質的變化,以及中俄雙邊將如何建構未來關係,都是本文所欲探討的課題。
In the last two decades, China-Russia relations have turned from “friendly” and “constructive,” to “strategic partnership” and reached an unprecedented peak. Indeed, the nature of the China-Russia strategic partnership is based on the consensus of power distribution in East Asia, while facing threats from the United States hegemony and bilateral economic interdependence. The diplomatic strategy of the United States not only affects the development and bilateral interaction of China-Russia relations, but also influences the balance of power among great powers of East Asia. The bilateral consensus to counterbalance U.S. hegemony and tension in pursuing state interests have deepened the China-Russia strategic partnership. With the wavering U.S. unipolar system and the rise of China as a world power, the relationship between China and Russia has gradually deviated from the traditional “balance of power” to “institutional balancing.” This paper analyzes the development of China-Russia relations in the past twenty years from an integrated model of “analytical eclecticism” and “institutional balancing” in terms of power, interest, and identity. Utilizing the perspectives of the three schools: neorealism, neo-liberal institutionalism, and social constructivism, the purpose is to understand the motives, trends and future developments of the China-Russia strategic partnership.
近 400 年來的歐洲,是主權國家平等的「西發里亞體系」,以權力平衡維繫國際秩序;近 600 年以來的東亞,則是中國為天朝而四方小國臣服的「朝貢體系」,是上下層級的國際秩序。為何會有「朝貢體系」?它為何能運作?從現實主義式的觀點來看,「朝貢體系」只是一個包裝過的權力政治,骨子裡仍是物質上的利害與效益計算,中國霸權之下區域國家抵抗無望,不得不臣服。但是,從建構主義式的觀點來看,之所以會有「朝貢體系」的國際秩序,並不只是因為中國的強大,也是因為區域國家認同中國的..
For nearly four centuries, Europe had the so-called Westphalian System of sovereign states, in which balance of power was the basis of international order. In contrast, for nearly six centuries, East Asia had the so-called “tribute system,” a hierarchical order where China was the supreme leader. Why? From a realist perspective, the tribute system was just a wrapper over power politics based on material calculations of interest and benefit: East Asian countries had no choice but submission to China’s hegemon..
本文主要分三大部分,首先從「新現實主義」、「新自由主義」與「善治」等三個角度,探索歐盟 (European Union/EU) 對中國政策的產出背景與運作邏輯。其次,本文將從實踐面著手,從歐盟與中國對彼此發表的八份文件,分析歐盟對中國政策的具體實踐,並檢視歐盟與中國在「軍售」、「WTO與市場經濟地位」以及「人權」三個問題上的互動與折衝。最後,本文將檢討與評估歐盟對中國政策的運作成效,以及歐盟內部成員國的立場對於歐盟對中國政策產出的影響,並展望歐盟的中國政策對其區域與全球戰略佈局的未來發展..
This article is divided into three major parts. It first explores the background and logic of EU's China policy from three aspectds : Neo-Realism, Neo-Liberalism and Good Governance. It then turns to practices and reviews EU's China policy based on eight documents issued by EU and China. It analyzes the reciprocity, negotiation, and compromise between EU and China on three issues of arms sales, WTO and market economy status, and human rights. In the final part, it reviews and evaluates the effect of EU's China policy and its mem..
請輸入想查詢的期刊標題、關鍵字、作者相關資訊. Please enter the journal title, keywords, and author-related information you want to query.