近年來國際關係理論面臨可能終結的危機,國際關係理論的三大典範:現實主義、自由主義與建構主義的發展呈現停滯的狀態,理論與政策應用之間的鴻溝也逐漸加深,以中程理論為導向的經驗研究逐漸取代了傳統國際關係理論強調通則化與系統性的分析架構。儘管國際關係理論仍有其重要性,但不論現實主義、自由主義與建構主義皆沒有預測到中國的崛起對國際政治所造成的變化,美國學界也開始反思過去對華交往政策的國際關係理論基礎。就臺灣的研究者而言,隨著從事中國大陸研究的限制增加,研究中國外交是否還能像過去那樣地依賴國際關係理論?本文提出四種研究途徑作為中國外交研究者除了傳統國際關係理論以外的選擇,分別是歷史研究途徑、跨國比較途徑、經驗研究以及中程理論。
In recent years, international relations theory has faced a potential crisis of obsolescence. The development of the three major paradigms—realism, liberalism, and constructivism—has stagnated, and the gap between theory and policy implications has widened. Empirical research guided by middle-range theories are replacing traditional international relations theory that emphasize generalization and systematic frameworks. Although international relations theory remains important, neither realism, liberalism, nor constructivism have predicted correctly the influence of China’s rise on international politics. Against this backdrop, the American academic community also reflects on the theoretical foundations of the policy of engaging China. As obstacles to study China for researchers in Taiwan have increased, can we still rely on international relations theory to study Chinese foreign policy? This paper proposes four alternatives: historical approach, cross-national comparative approach, empirical research, and middle-range theory.
在解放軍發展反介入/區域拒止戰力的背景下,美國近期出現了「海空戰」作戰概念的倡議。此一作戰概念的內容堪稱完整而全面,也提出許多值得美軍採納的建議,但缺失也同樣明顯。其概念中的兩個作戰構想,深入中國大陸上空的空襲,與侵入第一島鏈之內的反潛作戰,都是執行困難且徒勞無功,更帶來沒有必要的升高風險,因而得不償失。其實,美國及其區域盟邦只要發展類似的反介入/區域拒止戰力,即可對解放軍可能的侵略與強制構成強大的抵抗力。
People’s Liberation Army is developing its anti-access/area-denial capabilities to offset U.S. military presence in the West Pacific. In response, the operational concept of the “AirSea Battle” is currently being put forward in the United States. However, useful recommendations notwithstanding, both of its two core ideas - deep strike over Chinese mainland and anti- submarine warfare within first island chain - are difficult, futile, and contenting unnecessary risks of escalation. In fact, the United States ..
當前國際關係理論研究現正面臨著「物質轉向」、「物質主義轉向」、「新物質主義轉向」及「複雜轉向」的風潮,重新掀起國際關係理論的「心-物」、「心-身」、「社會世界-自然世界」、「行為主體性-結構」的爭論,乃至「人類中心-非人類中心」的新爭論。國際關係學者藉由「新物質主義」的哲學觀點提供了實用的哲學基礎而使國際關係或國際系統的本體論爭議迴避或拒絕二元對立觀點,呈現出新的「中間道路」(via media)吸納雙方觀點發展出「不只人類」的觀點,以及物質性也不是僅僅無生..
The field of international relations is facing the fashions of “material turn”, “materialism turn,” “new materialism turn,” and “complexity turn,” which re- raises the new debates of ideal-material, mind-body, social world-natural world, agency-structure, and anthropocentrism-nonanthropocentrism in international relations. With the New Materialism offering a practical philosophical founda- tion, the ontological debates of international relations or international systems could av..
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.