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 Bourdieu 關於象徵性資本之概念上,我們提出「炫耀性利他主義」以解釋美國與其盟國採取昂貴成本行動背後的原由。此外,我們更進一步指出傳遞此種「炫耀性利他主義」信息之目的,在於維繫「石油美元」此一能捍衛美元信用的系統。如此,透過作為全球儲備貨幣之美元,美國將能提升其霸權地位。
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 demonstrated its willingness to bear economic losses and sacrifice its national interests ever since the 1990s. The United States was engaged in preemptive wars on terrorism to regain its legitimacy of maintaining a stable international economic order. The victories proved to be costly. To analyze such seemingly irrational behaviors, we propose the concept of “conspicuous altruism,” based on Pierre Bourdieu’s notion of symbolic capital, to find the rationale underlying the costly military actions taken by the U.S. and its allies. We further argue that the “conspicuous altruism” signals the U.S. intention to maintain the petrodollar system, which then secures the credibility of the dollars. The U.S. can reaffirm the Dollar’s status as a global reserve currency, thereby enhancing its hegemonic status.
霸權擁有生產高附加價值與高科技商品的獨佔地位,加之次等國單方依賴霸權商品,塑成霸權使用非暴力的經濟脅迫(economic coercion)措施,施壓目標國,以達到「不戰而屈人之兵」的戰略、政治與經貿目標。鴉片戰爭前,清帝國多次採取「封關」等貿易脅迫措施,禁絕茶葉出口,迫使英國等互市外夷屈服讓步,強化清帝國的經濟脅迫習慣(habit)。國際關係與外交決策的觀點,多批判清政府決策菁英的自大無知,或是強調滿清政權的朝貢制度天朝思維,而少有省思,清政府採取「封關」脅迫措施的決策過程,以及造成清..
Hegemons possess a monopolistic position in producing high-value-addedand high-tech goods, coupled with the unilateral dependence of subordinate states on these products. This dynamic enables hegemons to employ non-violent economic coercion to pressure target states, achieving strategic, political, andeconomic objectives aligned with the principle of “winning without fighting”. Before the Opium War, the Qing Empire frequently adopted trade coercion measures, such as “closing borders”, to ban tea exports and force..
請輸入想查詢的期刊標題、關鍵字、作者相關資訊. Please enter the journal title, keywords, and author-related information you want to query.