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..

當美中兩大強權在東亞仍然維持既競爭又合作的態勢時，避險(hedging)遂成為亞太國家一個務實且富有彈性的外交政策選擇。本文認為，中國的「夥伴關係」外交在學理與實務上確實與傳統軍事聯盟存有差異。中國在後冷戰時期國際社會缺少意識形態對抗的背景下推動「夥伴關係」外交，透過改善對外關係而拉攏國際支持，進而使得周邊國家享有更多採取避險戰略的空間。南韓作為美國的亞太盟國，在美中之間的避險即為一項例證。本文認為，除非國際情勢與國際結構有明顯變化，短期之內中國應該不至於放..

As the United States and China have remained the competition and cooperation in East Asia, hedging has become a pragmatic foreign policy object for the secondary states in the region. This article explores the differences between China’s “partnership” and traditional military alliances, attempting to explain the lack of a clear ideology in the post-Cold War era and its impacts on states’ hedging. Due to the strategy of “partnership” rather than the traditional military alliance, it has prov..