WTO爭端解決機制一向被譽為皇冠上之珍珠，如今上訴機構陷入停擺危機，反而成為皇冠上之荊棘。過去數年來，美國運用WTO所要求之共識，屢次反對上訴機構成員之選任案，尤其是川普政府上台後更加強杯葛之力道。根據爭端解決規則暨程序瞭解書之規定，上訴案件最少由三名成員審理並作成裁決。然而2019年12月10日之後，上訴機構已無法正常運作。長期以來美國對上訴機構提出許多批評，包括系統性、實質性與程序性問題;反之，許多WTO會員則急於補實懸缺，而疏於處理美國關切之事項。根據爭端解決規則暨程序瞭解書第3...

The dispute settlement system, often considered as the “crown jewel” of the WTO, is in a present crisis and becomes the crown of thorns. Over the past years, the United States through the use of the WTO’s consensus requirements has successfully blocked the launch of a process to select the Appellate Body members. This is carried forward by the Trump administration. With a Settlement of Disputes Understanding (DSU) requirement that appeals be heard by three AB members, with the AB membership down to zero at the present time..

國際關係學者瓦特(Stephen M. Walt)曾提出以「威脅平衡」概念為主的聯盟理論，挑戰了現實主義內部關於「權力平衡」的論點，後來又有學者提出「利益平衡」與「推卸責任」的論述加以反駁。經由本文的探討與重新檢視，這些學者爭論的焦點在於「制衡」與「扈從」概念上的界定。由於學界對於「扈從」在理論解釋與個案運用上的解讀不同，其實際上涵蓋了積極扈從(順從)與消極扈從(屈從)兩種相反的概念，吾人若僅從「制衡」與「扈從」兩種分類便欲判斷何者在國際關係中較為盛行，則易..

Stephen M. Walt proposed his theory of alliances, focusing mainly on the concept of balance-of-threat. His statement challenged the prevailing concept of balance-of-power theory of traditional realism, thereby receiving criticizisms of “balance-of-interest” and “buck-passing.” This article re- examines the debates, and finds out that the major controversy is in fact how to circumscribe “balancing” and “bandwagoning”. When using the concept of “bandwagoning”, scholars..