後冷戰時期波蘭外交政策之轉變可謂歐洲政治發展過程中一個相當明顯且重要的變化，本文以外交ˋ政策分析架構來檢視波蘭後冷戰時期加入北約、歐盟以及美伊戰爭後的外交政策變化，這些政策變化的主要動力來自對權力追求的強度、對合乎國家利益的理性考量、心理因素如何影響外交政策制定以及探討歷史思維在政策制定過程中扮演之角色等。 本文認為波蘭外交政策變化之因在於 : 第一，加入北約是為了滿足對外部安全環境的需求，以外交政策調整發誓獲得安全保證，決策者透過實質理性判斷，滿足加入北約的心理與歷史需求。第二..

The shift in foreign policy of Poland during the post-Cold war period can be considered as a significant process in the development of the European politics. This study focuses on the changes of foreign policy structure of Poland after the joining of NATO, EU and the US-lead war on Iraq. The changes are motivated by the strength on pursuit of power, rationality of the state interest, and the ideological and historical influence on the foreign policy making. This analysis draws the conclusion to the cause in Polish foreign policy change...

2004年10月，第五屆亞歐會議在越南河內舉行，本屆亞歐會議可以視為歐洲與亞洲兩大區域的結合。亞歐會議雖然確立了「政治對話、經濟合作和文化交流」三大領域的合作關係，但是到目前卻仍然停留在相互對話及磨合的階段，連最初步的雙方共組自由貿易區都無法達成共識; 另外，不論從經濟面向或是政治面向來檢視，亞太地區仍然是東亞國家主要貿易往來的主體，同時亞太地區已經存在著亞太經合會的對話管道，甚至東亞地區的東協加三也正在逐漸成形，成為東北亞與東南亞的主要交流管道，因此，在沒有共同經濟利益的基礎之下，亞歐..

The 5th ASEM took place on October 2004 in Hanoi, Vietnam. Although ASEM is an informal forum, it was one of the most important cross-continental regime. Though the forum establishes the structure of “political dialogue, economical cooperation, and culture interflow”, the process still lodges on dialogues of two sides, even in the free trade area that was co-established, consensus is rare.  In addition, from both political and economical aspect, the Asian-pacific region still is the mainframe of East Asian trades; the A..

本文所要探討的是一個尚未回答的問題，也就是歐盟的法律地位問題，換句話說，歐盟在法律上屬於哪一類型的政治組織? 很顯然的，以傳統法律術語裡面所定義的聯邦去定位歐盟並不合適。目前的歐盟，既不是聯邦，也不應視為聯邦。當然，她也不能被稱為一個國家，因為她並沒有也不願爭取做為一個國家所必須具備的最高決策權力。根據歐盟憲法條約草案第一條第十一項第二款的規定，歐盟任何一種權力的取得以歐盟成員國的個別授權為限。因此，如何定義歐盟，至今還沒有人給過一個大家都能接受的答案。 筆者認為，給予歐..

The article deals with an unanswered question of how the legal status of the European Union may be characterized. In other words: What kind of political community the EU belongs to? It is rather easy to demonstrate that the juridical terms, which were used traditionally to define federally organized political units, are not appropriate to characterize the European Union. It may not be treated as a confederation of soveregin states nor as a federal state, and the EU itself resists being called a state at all. It is because that the EU do..