中國崛起下東亞區域各國的反應，是近年來廣受關注的議題，中國邊疆地區的反應則相對受到忽略。以人類歷史上並不罕見的多民族大帝國視角來看，曾經的外邦可以收入版圖，曾經的境內也可能叛離或喪失，控制程度的深淺時有變動，在尋求跨越時空通論解釋的國際關係理論視角下，這看似南轅北轍的古今中外不同帝國的收放之間、異族的叛服之間，共通的關鍵因素究竟為何？現實主義所聚焦，物質力量的興衰固然重要；但建構主義的脈絡中，異族對帝國有無文化認同，是否也不可忽視呢？於此，既有研究除關注西方的羅馬帝國，更聚焦於東方的清帝..

The reaction of countries in East Asia under the rise of China has been a topic of widespread concern in recent years, while the reaction of China’s border areas has been relatively ignored. For multi-nation empires throughout human history, foreign territories can be included, and owned territories may also be lost. The degree of control changes from time to time. From the perspective of international relations theories that seek general explanations over a wide range of times and spaces, what exactly are the key factors accounting f..

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..

本文的主要目的在瞭解台灣學者如何研究中國的多邊外交，研究成果展現了哪些特色，以及與國際學術界研究此一議題的連結。有關台灣學者研究成果收錄的範疇，則主要以2012年之後的著作為主。本文首先就中國官方及學術界，以及國際學術社群，針對中國多邊外交概念及理論架構的研究，以及政策與執行層面的分析，作一整理爬梳。接下來則探討台灣學者對中國多邊外交的總體性研究，作出了何種貢獻，其與國際關係中多邊外交分析傳統的關聯性如何。此外，本文也針對中國多邊外交的個案，探討台灣學者研究成果與國際學術界研究取向之異同..

The purposes of this study are to understand the approaches adopted by the Taiwanese scholars to research on China’s multilateral diplomacy, major characteristics of research results, and the linkages with the international academic society. The scope of analysis is limited to research publications after 2012. This paper first explores major theoretical concepts adopted by international and mainland Chinese academics on China’s multilateral diplomacy, followed by the analysis of research outputs on policy implementation and prac..

本文認為，「既有強權美國 vs. 崛起強權日本」(1931~1941)與「既有強權美國 vs. 崛起強權中國」(1993~2018)的比較，能為現今的美中關係提供許多建設性的思考。本文從既有強權的角度觀察其如何回應崛起強權;以Randall Schweller的歸納為基礎而建立一個相對完整的政策選擇全貌。作者發現:面對1931~1941年崛起的日本，美國先採「中立、綏靖」，後改採「制衡」，最終採「戰爭」。面對1993~2018年崛起的中國，美國以「交往」為基..

This paper argues that the comparative study of the two cases - the US dominant power vs. the Japan rising power (1931-1941) and the US dominant power vs. the China rising power (1993-2018) can provide ample constructive thinking on the contemporary US-China relations. This paper focuses on how a dominant power reacts to a rising power. An analytical framework of dominant powers’ policy options toward rising powers, based on Randall Schweller’s theories, is developed and applied to this study. This paper has found..

在解放軍發展反介入/區域拒止戰力的背景下，美國近期出現了「海空戰」作戰概念的倡議。此一作戰概念的內容堪稱完整而全面，也提出許多值得美軍採納的建議，但缺失也同樣明顯。其概念中的兩個作戰構想，深入中國大陸上空的空襲，與侵入第一島鏈之內的反潛作戰，都是執行困難且徒勞無功，更帶來沒有必要的升高風險，因而得不償失。其實，美國及其區域盟邦只要發展類似的反介入/區域拒止戰力，即可對解放軍可能的侵略與強制構成強大的抵抗力。  

People’s Liberation Army is developing its anti-access/area-denial capabilities to offset U.S. military presence in the West Pacific. In response, the operational concept of the “AirSea Battle” is currently being put forward in the United States. However, useful recommendations notwithstanding, both of its two core ideas - deep strike over Chinese mainland and anti- submarine warfare within first island chain - are difficult, futile, and contenting unnecessary risks of escalation. In fact, the United States ..