討論殖民議題時，有學者指出，殖民者利用多族群的對立，採取「分而治之」的政策，以達到殖民目的;也有學者以「雙重使命」的角度，認為殖民者在殖民地不僅從事破壞，也執行建設，不該遺漏或偏頗其中一項。筆者認為，這兩種對殖民政策的分析方式，容易陷入殖民論述中常見的二分法困境，將殖民者採用「分而治之」的策略，認為是殖民者掌握殖民地的族群對立之後的理性計算，或是無法加以治理族群對立而不得不的退讓，而「雙重使命」則可能合理化殖民政策與忽略不同殖民地的特性。因此，本文質疑以「分..

Of colonial topics, a lot of scholars indicate that colonizers exploited the opposition in different races and enforced the tactics of Divide-and-Rule for the colonial purposes. Another school of scholars, based on the Dual Mandate approach, indicates that colonizers not just destroy but construct the colony as well. The article considers two approaches that led to the dilemma of colonial discourses especially on dichotomy - Divide-and-Rule, which leads to either colonizers controlling the characteristic of conflicts between ..

本文探討一個認同對外交政策的影響，並以「芬蘭化」的概念為例。外交政策基本上是對「我群/我們」概念的回應，而一個政治社群諸如「我們是誰?」、「在世界上的角色和地位」對問題的回答，則大致是穩定的。爬梳一個社群對「我們」概念如「民族」與「國家」的理解與論述方式，將有助於解釋該社群之外交政策的大致走向。 「芬蘭化」(Finlandization)一詞源於 1948 年芬蘭與蘇聯之協定，意指小國在其對外行為上，主動將大國之國家利益納入考量，不做出..

This paper explores the impact of identity on foreign policy, with the idea of “Finlandization” as an empirical case. Foreign policy can be conceptualized as a response to “we” concepts, and a political community’s answers to such questions as “who we are” and “our roles and places in the world” are generally stable. It is thus helpful to grasp the general tendency of a community’s foreign policy if the ways in which it understands and organizes the basic “we&r..