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,本文結合新現實主義、新自由主義、建構主義等三大學派不同面向的建制觀──權力、利益、認知的分析折衷主義和制度性平衡,去觀察二十年來的中俄關係,更能窺知中俄戰略協作夥伴關係發展的全貌。中俄雙邊反覆多變的關係變遷,中俄戰略夥伴關係本質的變化,以及中俄雙邊將如何建構未來關係,都是本文所欲探討的課題。
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 relations, but also influences the balance of power among great powers of East Asia. The bilateral consensus to counterbalance U.S. hegemony and tension in pursuing state interests have deepened the China-Russia strategic partnership. With the wavering U.S. unipolar system and the rise of China as a world power, the relationship between China and Russia has gradually deviated from the traditional “balance of power” to “institutional balancing.” This paper analyzes the development of China-Russia relations in the past twenty years from an integrated model of “analytical eclecticism” and “institutional balancing” in terms of power, interest, and identity. Utilizing the perspectives of the three schools: neorealism, neo-liberal institutionalism, and social constructivism, the purpose is to understand the motives, trends and future developments of the China-Russia strategic partnership.
本文主要研究問題是:中國大陸對於衝突預防的原則性立場與態度為何?在身為當事國與第三方行為者兩種不同身分時,其在實踐上有何不同?本文藉由南蘇丹危機與南海衝突兩個案例分析中國大陸在衝突預防實踐上,面對事關自身主權與國家利益以及與自身主權無關之衝突事件時,在衝突預防作為上有何差異?其宣示與實際作為有何落差?此外,為何中 國大陸在南海議題上,會由堅持雙邊對話,轉變為也同意透過多邊機制,作為處理南海主權爭議途徑的立場與作為?在這樣的雙邊與多邊機制下,呈現出怎樣的「中國..
The main research questions of the paper are as follow: first of all, what are China’s position, attitude, and actions in conflict prevention, second question is what is the difference between China’s action and statement on the issue of the South China Sea dispute and the South Sudan Crisis when China is one of the parties who faces sovereignty and national interest, and as a third- party in the practice of conflict prevention. Third question is why China is willing to change her position from insisting bilateral..
觀察歐盟統合,歐盟 2004 年東擴是一項重要事件,因為透過東擴,歐盟將原屬於共產集團的中東歐國家納入歐盟會員國,並將歐盟價值規範與制度運作融入了中東歐新會員國的政治、經濟與社會生活之中,這一項成就讓歐洲大陸的和平與穩定局面大步向前;歐盟東擴後,歐盟對外關係研究主軸擴散到歐盟與鄰近國家交往,以歐盟睦鄰政策作為主要政策工具。歐盟的基本假定是,如果歐盟東擴取得豐碩成果,歐盟應該繼續複製東擴經驗、以誘因方式繼續向東擴散歐盟的理念與制度。但實際觀察睦鄰政策推動過程,..
The studies of EU’s Incentive Policy in its eastern and southern area have gained prominence in the literature. These findings suggest that the top- down/ bottom-up norms diffusion and adaptive learning process are helpful for the spread of democratization in new member and acceding states. More recently, after the completion of EU’s eastern enlargement, increasing studies are expanded to Eastern European countries; Ukraine and other eastern partners become the focal points of methodological objectives. The advent..
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.