在一個以美國為首的後冷戰單極國際體系中,次級強權與美國之間的動態性權力安排,將直接影響單及體系是否得以續存。傳統國際關係理論主張「權力平衡」是維持國際社會與區域安全的穩定要素,但該理論針對的是強權間為維持軍事戰略利益,所採取以軍事力量作為手段的平衡關係,對於後冷戰時期美國與其他次級強權的互動,似乎缺乏解釋的效力。在這些次級強權當中,歐洲聯盟扮演一個非常特殊的角色。歐洲與美國同享重要的文化與宗教價值,但在具戰略意義的議題上,兩者的歧見卻益形明顯。歐盟在重大國際議題上與美國的背道而馳,已形成對於此一超強的抗衡作用,但是傳統強調軍事力量的「硬性平衡」概念,無法有效解釋歐盟所發揮以軍事以外手段進行對美國的平衡。本文試圖提出「柔性平衡」的相對概念,亦即次級強權試圖以軍事力量以外的手段,獲致抗衡超強達成其戰略利益的目的,並以此來檢驗歐洲與美國在後冷戰時期的關係,是否存在系統性的柔性平衡。本文首先強調傳統權力平衡理論再解釋後冷戰時期單極體系的不足,並提出以柔性平衡的論述做為補充;在實際的個案方面,本文特別著重在歐洲聯盟於後冷戰時期與美國在重要國際議題上的歧異,並因此檢驗是否形成對美國的柔性平衡策略;本文在結論部分,除了試圖在理論的層次,提出柔性平衡對於權力平衡理論的適用與補充之外,也期待在政策方面,提出次級強權的個別或連可能藉由柔性平權方式,產生對於新時期國際體系可能轉換的影響。
In a U.S.-dominated post-Cold War unipolar international system, the possible power shifts between the second-tier great powers and the Americans, such as a systemic balance, will have great impacts on the existence and endurance of the current international system. According to the Realist theses, “balance of power” is a stabilizing factor that contributes to international security and regional stability as the great powers endeavor to prevent concentration of capabilities in one or a few nations through the process of distribution of power. However, it seems questionable when the conventional “balance of power" thesis, focusing exclusively on military balancing as a means to maintain military and strategic interests among the great powers, is applied to the interrelationship between the U.S. and its junior counterparts in the post-Cold War era. Among the post-Cold War second-tier great powers, the European Union plays a very special role. Despite the fact that the Europeans share key cultural and religious values with the Americans, the EU has gradually developed its own global strategic status by expanding the multiple dimensions of power, including its adherence to multilateralism that places the EU in opposition to the U.S when dealing with crucial global affairs. While the Europeans might place in harmony with the Americans on some global issues in the Cold War era, their differences over major disputes appear much more unbridgeable than ever before. The fact that the EU and the U.S. have been divergent on key international issues indicates that some form of balance may be emerging Yet, the conventional “hard balancing" theory cannot explain the non-military balancing exercised by the EU vis-à-vis the U.S. This article attempts to propose the “soft balancing” thesis, referring to a means used by the second-tier great powers that take non-military measures to achieve strategic interests by balancing the super power. The paper’s main purpose is to examine relations between the EU and the U.S. in the post-Cold War era in order to understand whether a soft balancing relationship between the two exists. This article begins by discussing the major theses proposed by the Realist “balance of power” theory, followed by the counter-proposal of “soft balancing” put forward in the post-Cold War era. It then examines some key international issues where the EU and the U.S. have had divergent positions, with an aim at finding the pattern of EU’s soft balancing vis-à-vis the U.S. The article concludes by proposing the applicability of the “soft balancing” thesis on the theoretic level, as well as its implications for policy-making concerning the impacts that the emerging soft balancing in an individual or a collective manner would have on the international system as a whole.
歐洲聯盟 2004 年 5 月以及 2007 年 1 月的東擴之舉係 1950 年代以來歐洲統合過程中重要的發展過程。這不僅是使得中東歐地區國家加入歐盟,更重要的意義在於將不同地區文化與結構透過改革的轉軌過程中融入了歐盟的價值。因此,在歐盟未來的主要擴大議程中也包含了土耳其、克羅埃西亞以及西巴爾半島地區國家。對於歐盟而言,加強並保障有關區域和平、穩定、 繁榮、民主、人權以及歐洲法治的理念價值是相當重要的。 對土耳其而言,與歐盟的關係已歷..
The Eastern Enlargement of the European Union in the year of 2004 and 2007 is one of the most significant developments in the process of European Integration since the 1950s. And with Turkey and the Western Balkan States, enlargement will continue to be one of the major issues on the political agendas. More recently, the EU has inspired tremendous reforms in Turkey, Croatia and the Western Balkans. It is vitally important for the EU to ensure a carefully managed enlargement process that extends peace, stability, prosperity, d..
本文所要探討的是一個尚未回答的問題,也就是歐盟的法律地位問題,換句話說,歐盟在法律上屬於哪一類型的政治組織? 很顯然的,以傳統法律術語裡面所定義的聯邦去定位歐盟並不合適。目前的歐盟,既不是聯邦,也不應視為聯邦。當然,她也不能被稱為一個國家,因為她並沒有也不願爭取做為一個國家所必須具備的最高決策權力。根據歐盟憲法條約草案第一條第十一項第二款的規定,歐盟任何一種權力的取得以歐盟成員國的個別授權為限。因此,如何定義歐盟,至今還沒有人給過一個大家都能接受的答案。 筆者認為,給予歐..
The article deals with an unanswered question of how the legal status of the European Union may be characterized. In other words: What kind of political community the EU belongs to? It is rather easy to demonstrate that the juridical terms, which were used traditionally to define federally organized political units, are not appropriate to characterize the European Union. It may not be treated as a confederation of soveregin states nor as a federal state, and the EU itself resists being called a state at all. It is because that the EU do..
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.