本文以土耳其以外的三個行為者-美國、伊拉克、歐盟-作為解釋近年來土耳其政府與境內庫德族關係改變的主要因素。美國與伊拉克的衝突造成伊拉克境內庫德族處境艱難，卻造就伊拉克庫德族與美國政府站在同一陣線的機會，觸動到土耳其政府的敏感神經。相對於美國傳統的權力觀，歐盟對於其他國家的重塑力在土耳其與庫德族的關係演變中獲得了彰顯。在此錯綜複雜的多邊關係中，美國與伊拉克庫德族的共同利益以及歐盟與土耳其庫德族的共同利益交織出土耳其政府愈來愈有限的庫德族政策選項。
This article looks into the changing relationship between the Turkish government and the Kurdish population within Turkey. In explaining changes in this relationship over the past twenty years, the roles of three external actors - the U.S., the Iraqi Kurds, and the EU - are brought into consideration. The Iraqi War prompted the U.S. government to have a cozy relationship with the Iraqi Kurds, a development that alarmed the Turkish government. In contrast with the conventional approach to power by the American government, the Europeans have successfully modified the behavior of the Turkish government, with the improvement of Turkish Kurds’ human rights situation being one example. The combined effects of all these external actors on Turkey are the increasingly limited options available to the government in terms of its policy towards the Kurds within its border.
1970 年代研究三角關係的專家塔圖(Michel Tatu)指出，美、中、蘇 「三者之一欲激起另兩方同謀之必然方式，為展現過度侵略性」。本文以塔圖之分析，探討 1979 年以來美臺軍事、政治與經貿關係之演變。由過去美、中、臺三角關係之互動，可以看出以下的特性:(1)中國對臺有過度侵略性的舉止，如 1996 年臺海危機，美國主動強化美臺軍事關係，增加美臺合作的空間;(2)在中國壓力下，國際組織有過度的舉止，如 2007 年聯合國秘書長潘基文謬誤解讀臺灣地位，..
Michel Tatu, an expert on US-China-USSR relations, observed in 1970 that “the surest way for any of the three to provoke the other two into collusion is to display undue aggressiveness.” This study analyses US- Taiwan relations in light of Tatu’s assumption. The interactions of US- Taiwan-China relations since 1979 are marked by the following features: (1)When China acts with undue aggressiveness against Taiwan – as for example in the 1996 missile crisis which prompted the US to dispatch two aircraft c..
國際政治經濟學(簡稱國政經)自 70 年代開始發展以來，不僅呈現出理論(自由主義、重商主義與馬克思主義)與研究途徑(理性主義與反思主 義)的競逐，同時也有美國(American School)與不列顛學派(British School)間關於學科定位、研究議題與方法論上的差別。本文主要目的在於從三個面向來介紹及探討國政經的不列顛學派:一、為何該學派被稱為 British School?與國際關係英國學派(English School)有何差別?二、不列顛學派..
Since the 1970s, the International Political Economy(IPE)has explored various research methodologies and methods. However, the disciplinary boundary of IPE is still controversial. The main purpose of this article is to discuss the British School of IPE from three dimensions. First, why is this school called “British?” Are there differences between the British School and the English School of international relations? Secondly, British School scholars prefer to call this new discipline the” Global Political Ec..
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.