2011 年 5 月 2 日美國特種部隊攻擊賓拉登(Osama bin Laden)之住處並且結束長達十年對於頭號國際恐怖分子的追擊，在此之後，各國對於此事件的反應呈現出不同的面貌。本文將以實證方法研究美國與各國的外交關係、各國對賓拉登事件的反應、主要媒體評論之間的互動關連，整理出支持與不支持美國的總表。本研究亦將思考:在採取爭議性的方法達成其國家利益的同時，美國霸權是否可以在未來持盈保泰?本研究所採取的新聞分析方法，是否能夠提供外交政策研究更多的可能性? ..

As the U.S. special forces thundered into Bin Laden’s compound and terminated the decade long chase of the most wanted terrorist on May 2, 2011, the global reaction to this incident presented diverse versions for interpretation. This empirical study answers the questions: can the U.S. identify those who support or oppose its foreign policy by their reactions to the Bin Laden incident? By probing into the governmental archives and major media in selected countries, this research answers two more important questions: has ..

本文檢視在後冷戰時代石油美元機制對美國霸權之影響，並關注美國領導地位在 1991 年波灣、2003 年伊拉克與 2011 年利比亞等戰爭中的角色。在處理國際事務中，美國霸權逐漸採行單邊行動，因而產生合法性危機之質疑。因此自 1990 年以來，美國便宣稱願意承擔昂貴之經濟成本與犧牲其國家之利益，以便與他國建立聯盟共同對抗流氓國家之威脅。美國能以維繫穩定之國際經濟秩序，與贏得反恐作戰之合法性名義發動先制戰爭。為了理解這一看似非理性之行為，根基於 Pierre B..

This paper explores the impact of petrodollar mechanism on the hegemony of the United States in the post-Cold War era. It particularly focuses on the two wars against Iraq respectively in 1991 and in 2003 and the Libyan war in 2011, all under the leadership of the U.S. The U.S. hegemony has been experiencing a legitimacy crisis caused by its increasing tendency towards unilateral actions in international affairs. In order to form alliances among Western nations to confront the rogue states, the U.S. government has demonstrate..

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..

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 construct..

全球化帶來了生活意識的同化以及空間一體化的現象，使得美國能夠藉此散播其意識形態，而美國也確實藉由全球化的機制增強了其在國際事務上的影響力，並在全球相互依賴的網絡下贏得了主導的位置。本文嘗試以霸權國作為研究的核心，藉由垂直(vertical)與水平(horizontal)社會化兩種國際社會化(International Socialization)的方式來說明霸權國如何利用除了傳統的軍事武力之外的社會化途徑來影響其他國家，成為維持其霸權體制的另一種柔性力量。 ..

Globalization leads to assimilation of life consciousness and space integration. Thus enables the U.S. to spread ideology, reinforces international influence, and gains possession of the leading status under this global interdependence network. This article attempts to use horizontal and vertical socialization approaches to explain how hegemonic states utilize their soft powers to maintain dominance and exert influence on other states without the use of military force.  

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..