美國為因應後冷戰時期國際安全環境與威脅的改變，至 1996 年止已執行多次全面性的兵力結構檢討。然而，國會認為國防部僅考量維持現有規模與預算，而非依外在安全環境與威脅的改變來調整所需兵力結構。因此，國會為因應二十一世紀的威脅及確保美國國家安全利益，通過「1996 年軍力結構總檢法案」，要求國防部配合總統任期執行「四年期國防總檢」及將評估重點予以法制化。鑑於國內學術界對美國「四年期國防總檢」的論述均以報告內容為重點，故本文將從理性決策與戰略規劃面向，來評析美國..

In response to the changes of international security environment and threat in the post-Cold War era, the United States had conducted various comprehensive assessment of its force structure in 1990-1996 periods. However, the Congress pointed out the Department of Defense intended to realign the force structure just from the view of keeping forces size and defense budget and not from the changes of security environment and threat. In order to meet the threats and protect the U.S. national security interests in the twenty-first..

歐洲統合的進程在經濟、文化與推動西方普世價值方面已使得歐洲聯盟成為一個全球「公民強權」的角色，但是是否藉此轉化成為一個「軍事強權」，仍然是歐盟各會員國爭論的焦點。從馬斯垂克條約將「共同外交與安全政策」納入歐盟決策的三大支柱之一後，歐盟在外交與安全政策的合作才開始具備法律的基礎。但是一九九0年代發生於歐洲本身的區域衝突，凸顯歐盟在解決歐洲本身軍事爭端時的無力感。在一九九0年代末期發展出的「歐洲安全與防衛政策」即著眼於歐盟自主軍事力量的整合與強化，以期因應未來可能發生的區域與國際衝突。 ..

The process of the European integration in economic, cultural and universalising Western values in the past half century has reinforced EU's role as a global “civilian power”. The 1992 Maastricht Treaty founded a “Common Foreign and Security Policy ”, as one of the three pillars of EU, providing c0operation of foreign and security policies among member states with a legal basis. Nevertheless, regional conflicts in Europe of hte 90s only demonstrated that EU was not yet capable of solving military conflicts in its..

1991年蘇聯解體之後，中亞成為全球安全局勢最具挑戰的地區之一，強權在中亞的權力競逐亦日趨白熱化。對積極邁向世界強權的歐盟而言，中亞天然資源豐富又位居反恐戰略要衝地位，是兵家必爭之地，但受制於地緣政治因素，歐盟在中亞儼然還不是戰略玩家，其與中亞國家之關係迄今仍根據1999年生效的「夥伴暨合作協定」，缺乏一套完整的戰略規劃。2003年11月喬治亞爆發「玫瑰革命」，隨後又在前蘇聯地區引發連鎖效應，使歐盟在中亞的戰略再成討論議題。 本文主要係從歐盟「歐洲睦鄰政策」的面向切入，分別檢視歐..

Central Asia reemerged from the collapse of the USSR in 1991 as one of the political and security challenging regions, intensifying the struggle among competing powers. The region's natural resources and strategic importance on anti-terrorism are critical for EU striving to achieve a global great power. But restricted by geo-politics, EU has not become a strategic player in Central Asia. The only legal framework of EU-Central Asian bilateral relations was the “Partnership and Cooperation Agreement” (PCA) since 1999, lacking ..

本文主要分三大部分，首先從「新現實主義」、「新自由主義」與「善治」等三個角度，探索歐盟 (European Union/EU) 對中國政策的產出背景與運作邏輯。其次，本文將從實踐面著手，從歐盟與中國對彼此發表的八份文件，分析歐盟對中國政策的具體實踐，並檢視歐盟與中國在「軍售」、「WTO與市場經濟地位」以及「人權」三個問題上的互動與折衝。最後，本文將檢討與評估歐盟對中國政策的運作成效，以及歐盟內部成員國的立場對於歐盟對中國政策產出的影響，並展望歐盟的中國政策對其區域與全球戰略佈局的未來發展..

This article is divided into three major parts. It first explores the background and logic of EU's China policy from three aspectds : Neo-Realism, Neo-Liberalism and Good Governance. It then turns to practices and reviews EU's China policy based on eight documents issued by EU and China. It analyzes the reciprocity, negotiation, and compromise between EU and China on three issues of arms sales, WTO and market economy status, and human rights. In the final part, it reviews and evaluates the effect of EU's China policy and its mem..