現有國際關係研究對於霸權主導國際制度已有一定之發現,不過對崛起強權參與建構國際制度的行為傾向,則附屬於霸權的相關討論,而未獲得一定之重視。霸權論一般認為,崛起強權在未發生霸權戰爭前,只能被迫遵循霸權主導 下的國際制度,唯有在崛起強權取得霸權地位之後,方能展示是創建國際制度的領導能力。霸權論由相對物質權力層面探索的崛起強權描述,僅能凸顯霸權戰爭的爆發,未必能勾勒出崛起強權的全面行為,亦未能解釋霸權繼承者的條件。
發生霸權更迭之前,並非沒有發生崛起強權參與建構國際制度的案例,例如德意志帝國在 1878 年主持柏林公會,解決東歐巴爾幹問題,更於 1885 年的柏林會議中達成列強瓜分非洲的行為準則;美國在 1922 年主導華盛頓會議,成功地就列強的海軍軍備管制與列強在亞太努力範圍問題,達成協議。
探索崛起強權參與國際制度建構過程的歷史實踐後發現,國際制度是崛起強權與霸權之間的權力競合場域,霸權並不擁有主導國際制度創建過程的專利,面臨其他競爭者的壓力,崛起強權亦能透過策略結盟,成就是創建國際制度的主 導性地位。
The exploration of the rising power has been subordinated to the arguments of hegemony and revisionist states. The Hegemonic Stability Theory and Power Transfer Theory have argued that the rising power has to follow international instructions set according to the hegemonic interests before the break out of hegemony war through which the rising power revolts the status quo hegemon. This approach might describe the reasons of hegemonic war; however, it might not be able to explain the overall behavior patterns of rising power in the construction of international institutions.
It is evident that before the hegemonic transition, there are cases that the rising power has participated actively in the construction of international institutions. For example, the 1878 Berlin Congress, the 1885 Berlin Conference on the West-African Question, and the 1922 Washington Conference.
This article argues that the international institutions are the arenas of power competition among the hegemon and the rising power. Relative to the hegemonic war, the domination of the international institutions construction is a more suitable beacon to clarify the final winner of the hegemonic status competition in which rising powers participate.
國際關係理論是與現實的國際政治高度聯結的,此一現象在當今表現地極為明顯。美國與中國的戰略競爭召喚著能夠掌握與回應現況的國關理論,其中尤以「權力轉移」和「歷史與國關」兩類文獻最具有解釋力與發展性。本文從權力轉移理論的核心論點與適用的範圍條件切入,接著聚焦於此一理論的兩個關鍵變項:權力差距與挑戰者對現狀的滿意程度,並延伸到戰爭的爆發條件與對理論的挑戰,最後是討論崛起國與支配性強權的新興理論框架。在這一部份又分為三個部分:崛起國對支配性強權的策略選擇、支配型強權對於崛起國的策略選擇,和崛起國與..
International relations theories are always closely connected to real world international politics. This connection between theory and reality is particularly pronounced in today’s world. The strategic competition between the US and the PRC stimulates IR theories that can grasp and respond to the international reality. Among those the “Power Transition Theory” and “History and IR approach” are of the greatest explanatory potential. This paper begins with the core arguments and applications of the power transiti..
近 400 年來的歐洲,是主權國家平等的「西發里亞體系」,以權力平衡維繫國際秩序;近 600 年以來的東亞,則是中國為天朝而四方小國臣服的「朝貢體系」,是上下層級的國際秩序。為何會有「朝貢體系」?它為何能運作?從現實主義式的觀點來看,「朝貢體系」只是一個包裝過的權力政治,骨子裡仍是物質上的利害與效益計算,中國霸權之下區域國家抵抗無望,不得不臣服。但是,從建構主義式的觀點來看,之所以會有「朝貢體系」的國際秩序,並不只是因為中國的強大,也是因為區域國家認同中國的..
For nearly four centuries, Europe had the so-called Westphalian System of sovereign states, in which balance of power was the basis of international order. In contrast, for nearly six centuries, East Asia had the so-called “tribute system,” a hierarchical order where China was the supreme leader. Why? From a realist perspective, the tribute system was just a wrapper over power politics based on material calculations of interest and benefit: East Asian countries had no choice but submission to China’s hegemon..
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.