現有國際關係研究對於霸權主導國際制度已有一定之發現,不過對崛起強權參與建構國際制度的行為傾向,則附屬於霸權的相關討論,而未獲得一定之重視。霸權論一般認為,崛起強權在未發生霸權戰爭前,只能被迫遵循霸權主導 下的國際制度,唯有在崛起強權取得霸權地位之後,方能展示是創建國際制度的領導能力。霸權論由相對物質權力層面探索的崛起強權描述,僅能凸顯霸權戰爭的爆發,未必能勾勒出崛起強權的全面行為,亦未能解釋霸權繼承者的條件。
發生霸權更迭之前,並非沒有發生崛起強權參與建構國際制度的案例,例如德意志帝國在 1878 年主持柏林公會,解決東歐巴爾幹問題,更於 1885 年的柏林會議中達成列強瓜分非洲的行為準則;美國在 1922 年主導華盛頓會議,成功地就列強的海軍軍備管制與列強在亞太努力範圍問題,達成協議。
探索崛起強權參與國際制度建構過程的歷史實踐後發現,國際制度是崛起強權與霸權之間的權力競合場域,霸權並不擁有主導國際制度創建過程的專利,面臨其他競爭者的壓力,崛起強權亦能透過策略結盟,成就是創建國際制度的主 導性地位。
The exploration of the rising power has been subordinated to the arguments of hegemony and revisionist states. The Hegemonic Stability Theory and Power Transfer Theory have argued that the rising power has to follow international instructions set according to the hegemonic interests before the break out of hegemony war through which the rising power revolts the status quo hegemon. This approach might describe the reasons of hegemonic war; however, it might not be able to explain the overall behavior patterns of rising power in the construction of international institutions.
It is evident that before the hegemonic transition, there are cases that the rising power has participated actively in the construction of international institutions. For example, the 1878 Berlin Congress, the 1885 Berlin Conference on the West-African Question, and the 1922 Washington Conference.
This article argues that the international institutions are the arenas of power competition among the hegemon and the rising power. Relative to the hegemonic war, the domination of the international institutions construction is a more suitable beacon to clarify the final winner of the hegemonic status competition in which rising powers participate.
傳統國際關係研究在討論霸權的相關課題時,多是探索霸權相對權力優勢的消長,認為失去權力優勢的霸權,將難逃新興國家的挑戰,霸權交替萌起於無可避免的霸權戰爭。國關學界依順國際政治是一種權力競爭的思路,多是以物質權力作為評量霸權的基準,相對忽視權威暨治理正當性等因素在構成霸業的作用,進而忽略霸權領導的治理權威,霸權如何維繫霸業的討論,更限縮在有限的強制宰制,忽視正當性對強化霸權統御的作用。 本文試圖檢驗權威在霸權治理過程中所扮演的角色與作用,以..
IR studies on hegemony have paid much attention on the relative decline and uprising of powers, which has constituted the perspective that the factors of uneven-growth will cause the downfall of hegemony and the rising power will replace the old one after the former poses great challenges to the declining hegemon and wins the hegemonic war. Though the term of hegemony has deeply implied the characters of leadership, IR generally defines the hegemony as an international order within which one state constitute her dominance wit..
由於提供數位經濟服務的跨國公司不須在市場國建立恆久據點,導致利潤來源地政府無法適用傳統的常設機構原則進行課稅。面對此項國際稅收分配的挑戰,經濟暨合作發展組織(Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, OECD)在2013年公告「防止稅基侵蝕與利潤移轉計畫」 (BEPS),試圖建立一致的課稅替代方案。然而,部分國家後續卻自行開徵數位服務稅,美國川普政府對這些國家威脅使用301條款並發起關稅報復,直到2021年美國拜登政府支..
Host countries cannot tax digital multinational corporations (MNCs) based on the traditional permanent establishment principle because digital services are intangible. To address this challenge, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) initiated the “Base Erosion and Profit Shifting” (BEPS) multilateral regime in 2013. Nonetheless, several host countries hunting for revenue unilaterally adopted digital service taxes, and the US Trump administration responded with Section 301 tariff retaliation from 2019 t..
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.