本文旨在釐清學界對於「權力平衡狀態」與「權力平衡體系」的內涵混淆，透過對「權力平衡體系」進行嚴謹的定義，推進權力平衡理論的解釋力。 學界一直對「權力平衡」的理解有許多誤解與偏見，其中，誤將「狀態」等同於「體系」是最常見的問題。本文先回顧華爾茲（Kenneth Waltz）對於體系的界定，指出其中的不足之處，並借用建構主義溫特（Alexander Wendt）的理論來補充。描繪出我們對於權力平衡體系的文化、結構與邏輯等論點。 藉由對體系進行嚴謹的定義，不但使得「權力平衡狀態..

This article aims to clarify the confusion among academic circles about the connotations of “Balance of Power Situation” and “Balance of Power System” and to advance the explanatory power of BOP theory through a rigorous definition of “Balance of Power System.” There have always been many misunderstandings and deviations in “Balance of Power.” Mistaking “situation” with “system” is the most common problem. This article first reviews the definition of “system&r..

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..