本研究目的在建立美國傳統戰略模糊與臺灣避險策略間之理論關聯性。主要假設當臺灣從美國獲得較多且明確之安全承諾時，將可能更依賴美國安全保護傘，進而降低自身制定外交政策之自主與靈活性。過去數十年，華盛頓持續且長期的安全承諾，即有可能限制臺灣的避險策略選擇。本研究的實證證據，主要探討川普與拜登政府任內，華府戰略模糊逐漸轉變為戰略清晰下，臺北在美中兩強之間的外交政策。此外，藉由將避險的理論「模型化」，並區別避險與樞紐的關係，是本文另一個研究貢獻。

The study aims to establish a theoretical connection between strategic ambiguity and hedging policy. The assumption is that as Taiwan receives more security assurance and clarity from the United States, it may rely more on the U.S. security umbrella, reducing its autonomy and flexibility in crafting its foreign policy. Over time, consistent and prolonged security commitments from the United States could limit Taiwan’s hedging options, as it increasingly aligns with the U.S. position. The empirical evidence in this article explores how..

作為太平洋島國地區成員之一的索羅門群島，近年和美國、中國、澳洲等國家皆往來密切，成為各方積極拉攏的合作對象，其外交動向備受國際社會矚目。本文運用國際關係研究中的「避險戰略」分析索羅門群島外交政策，該戰略建議現代國家面臨利害交錯的複雜情境時，宜跳脫傳統的「平衡／扈從」二分思維，改以雙向投注作法同時迴避安全損害及利益損失風險。研究結果顯示索羅門群島雖是發展程度低落且國內情勢不穩的小型島國，卻能在美中競逐的混沌局面中靈活遊走，同步交好各方以擴大外部援助、增進國家安全並提升國際地位，其外交施政體..

As a member of the Pacific Islands region, the Solomon Islands has developed close ties with countries such as the United States, China, and Australia in recent years, making itself an actively courted partner of relevant countries, its diplomatic orientation therefore attracted the attention of the international community. This article used the “hedging strategy” in international relations studies to analyze the foreign policy of the Solomon Islands. The research of “hedging strategy” suggests modern countries shoul..

近年來國際關係理論面臨可能終結的危機，國際關係理論的三大典範：現實主義、自由主義與建構主義的發展呈現停滯的狀態，理論與政策應用之間的鴻溝也逐漸加深，以中程理論為導向的經驗研究逐漸取代了傳統國際關係理論強調通則化與系統性的分析架構。儘管國際關係理論仍有其重要性，但不論現實主義、自由主義與建構主義皆沒有預測到中國的崛起對國際政治所造成的變化，美國學界也開始反思過去對華交往政策的國際關係理論基礎。就臺灣的研究者而言，隨著從事中國大陸研究的限制增加，研究中國外交是否還能像過去那樣地依賴國際關係理..

In recent years, international relations theory has faced a potential crisis of obsolescence. The development of the three major paradigms—realism, liberalism, and constructivism—has stagnated, and the gap between theory and policy implications has widened. Empirical research guided by middle-range theories are replacing traditional international relations theory that emphasize generalization and systematic frameworks. Although international relations theory remains important, neither realism, liberalism, nor constructivism have..

近年來，隨著歐盟和北約組織的東擴與俄國的再度興起，位處西方民主國家與俄國之間「地緣斷層線」上的中東歐國家對俄國「抗衡或扈從」 的議題又再度浮上檯面。相關文獻指出，中、小國家與大國之間的利益相似程度，是決定其對該大國選擇「抗衡或扈從」關係的關鍵前提條件，據此，本文探討在這個「地緣斷層線」上16個曾具有相似背景的前「東方集團」的中東歐國家與俄國之間在外交政策利益相似程度上的變化。以近年來在各國所發生的事件為基礎，本文發現，經濟危機和民主退化的問題， 在近年來開始威脅著這些中東歐國家的傳統政黨..

Due to the eastern expansion of EU and NATO and the resurgence of Russia under Putin’s leadership, how the Central and Eastern European fault line states chose between balancing and bandwagoning toward Russia has become a salient issue in contemporary international relations studies. This article investigates changes in the degree of policy similarity between 16 former “Eastern Bloc” Central and Eastern European States and Russia. The rationale for this study is that previous studies demonstrated that this issue is the key..

美國如何操作外交政策訊號而使其政策意圖能夠被正確解讀呢?過去研究探討美國外交政策是否因「聽眾成本」大小而變得可信。但對於美國政府如何操作外交政策訊號卻未有系統性研究。本文介紹過去學界引用賽局理論所推演出的兩項假設。即在高賭注系列事件上，美國外交政策訊號呈現正反夾雜，混淆不一的現象。而在低賭注系列事件，美國政策訊號則呈現重複敘述，單調一致的現象。本文以美國在南海島礁爭議，以及其在 APEC 承諾的系列事件為例，試圖檢證上述兩項假設。本文發現就此兩系列案例，美國..

How does the U.S. manage its foreign policy signals to ensure its intentions are read correctly? Scholars have invoked the concept of ‘audience cost’ to explain credibility of leaders’ threats and policy signals. However, no systematic study has been undertaken on how the U.S. government manages its foreign policy signals. By employing two hypotheses developed by a scholar of signaling games, this paper attempts to examine how the U.S. manipulates policy signals to allow its intentions to be read correctly. ..