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文化,中國於是才有了領導的正當性。究竟這兩種觀點孰是孰非?本研究嘗試以歷來與中國朝貢關係最密切的朝鮮為案例,實際從其 1618 至 1637 年 間,在明朝與清朝之間選擇的決策過程,檢驗他決定服從中國的真實理由,以進一步了解東亞「朝貢體系」的國際秩序。本文從中發現,建構主義式的論點獲得驗證。
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 hegemony. However, from a constructivist perspective, the tribute system was not just caused by China’s hegemony. The shared sino-centric culture in the region was equally important. China gained the legitimacy of leadership due to its cultural achievements. Which of these two arguments is valid? This study attempts to answer this question by exploring China’s closest tributary country, Korea. By tracing Korea’s decision-making processes from 1618 to 1637 in detail, this study can uncover the true logic behind Korea’s submissiveness to China and thus improve our understanding toward the East Asian tribute system. In the end, constructivist perspective is confirmed.
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..
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 r..
近代日本思想界總是企圖避免採用會凸顯日本的概念,一方面是對日本身在世界面前缺乏信心,二方面是身在亞洲面前會引發鄰國的猜忌。然而,在日本無法整合亞洲,但又對歐美強權追求和平的誠意與能力感到不足的時候,以日本作為一種有別於西方的和平主義身分,並不會引起亞洲的反彈或西方的排斥。本文以下刻意違反日本思想史習慣而提出的日本主義,其內涵是繞過亞洲,直接以日本作為世界性的國家,貢獻於世界性的形成,並以日本是世界上最有資格談和平與中立的民族,來反思西方、亞洲乃至於中國所代表..
Modern history of Japanese thought always avoids the notion of “Japan” as thinkers do not consider Japan a valid identity to be presented to the world led by European civilizations. If Japan were to participate, it could only participate with confidence in the name of Asia. However, this Asia approach resulted in notorious expansionist war in history. After Cold War was over, Japan’s equal partnership in the world alongside European countries has appeared certain. On the other hand, Europeanness has not achi..
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.