共识与分歧：美国和土耳其对伊朗核问题认知研究

进入新世纪以来,伊朗核问题一直是国际社会关注的热点。美国出于防止出现地区主导性大国挑战美在中东的核心利益,主张以遏制、制裁甚至军事打击、政权更迭的方式迫使伊朗弃核;土耳其则出于伊朗问题是否会在土及周边引发战争以及土伊经济关系的考量,与美在解决伊核问题的目标、方式上存在分歧。然而,美土不会因伊核问题上的分歧而从根本上动摇它们之间的盟友关系,况且土也绝不希望伊朗拥有核武器而打破中东地区大国平衡的格局。     

试析日本安倍政府在美伊间的调停外交

自2018年5月美国退出"伊核协议"后,美伊关系持续紧张,导致中东局势动荡不定。对此,日本安倍政府基于保障日本的能源安全和经济利益、提高日本国际声誉与推动国内修宪进程等多重战略考量,决定在美伊间开展调停外交。美伊两国对调停者的需求、伊朗对日本的信任以及欧洲国家调停者身份的削弱,也为安倍政府实施调停外交提供了可行条件。安倍政府调停外交的实施路径主要包括日伊首脑互访、日伊高层会谈、日美密切沟通以及游说中东国家等,但其成效受到日本自身局限性、美伊矛盾复杂性、调停策略表面性、调停进程不确定性等因素制约,难以促使美伊关系得到实质性缓和。     

美国对伊朗政策调整的动因及其空间

当前美国国内学界普遍呼吁美国政府全面反思和调整对伊朗政策,奥巴马第二任期能否为美伊关系按下“重启键”令人关注.美国对伊朗政策的调整受中东局势演变、奥巴马是否掌握对伊政策主导权以及伊朗在核问题上的进退表现等多重因素影响.美国正在重新评估伊朗核威胁,抬高对伊朗动武的门槛,着手平衡“双轨”政策,加大对伊朗的“软攻势”,未来很难排除美伊开展地区合作的政策选项.然而,美伊之间存在结构性矛盾,且2013年6月伊朗大选为美伊关系注入新的不确定因素,美伊缓和关系的内外条件仍不成熟.     

俄罗斯与伊朗核问题

俄罗斯是唯一与伊朗保持核合作的国家,但俄伊核合作并不是引发近年来伊朗核危机的问题所在.俄罗斯支持伊朗发展核能,反对使用武力解决伊核问题,但并不鼓励伊朗发展核武器.俄对伊核问题的政策受到俄伊关系、俄美关系及俄中东战略的影响.俄处理伊核问题的态度充分反映出俄伊关系的复杂性.     

美国与伊朗关系缓和：神话还是现实？

美国是当今唯一超级大国，伊朗则是中东屈指可数的地区性大国，两国自1979年伊朗伊斯兰革命后长期敌对，由此极大影响了中东格局的塑造和结构。近年来不断升温的伊朗核危机，实际就是美伊关系敌对的产物。但2013年6月哈桑·鲁哈尼当选伊朗总统以来，美国与伊朗频繁互释善意，冻结34年的美伊关系出现了破冰迹象。     

伊朗问题的走向分析

美伊交恶已久,近来因伊朗核开发问题更是剑拔弩张。然而,伊朗核问题和平解决的可能性依旧存在,其中有美国中东政策的重点是否转移、伊朗利用核能的界限是否突破、国际社会的牵制作用以及美伊仍有互相妥协的余地等因素。但如果伊朗不能适时调整强硬政策,美国对伊动武的可能就会增大。     

伊朗人质危机起因再析

伊朗人质危机是伊斯兰革命后美国和伊朗之间的首次外交交锋,它终结了长达25的美伊亲密关系,开启了两国矛盾和斗争的新篇章。伊斯兰革命后,伊朗国内存在着强烈的反美、恐美社会情绪,在美、伊两国国内政治的影响和推动下,1979年内双边外交关系连续出现失误,导致矛盾不断升级,最终引发了伊朗人质危机。     

美军撤离后的美伊关系发展

2011年12月美军从伊拉克撤离后，美国对伊的掌控有所松动。伊拉克国内的民族、教派矛盾迅速浮现和激化。伊朗乘机加大对伊拉克的渗透，沙特也积极支持伊国内逊尼派势力对抗伊朗。这在一定程度上影响到美国深化与伊拉克的关系。但鉴于美国在中东地区仍驻有相当规模的威慑力量和美伊之间签署了《战略框架协议》，美国对伊拉克局势的主导权并未动摇，两国伙伴关系已显雏形。未来制约美伊关系深入发展的最大障碍在于伊能否实现民族教派和解，推动国家重建发展进程。从目前趋势看，伊拉克国内形势在相当长时间内难有根本性好转。同时，不排除美利用伊拉克干预叙利亚危机和遏制伊朗的可能。从长远看，美伊的战略伙伴关系效益将日趋显现，值得进一步观察和研究。     

伊朗"核问题"与美国对伊政策

"9·11事件"后,美国将伊朗列为"邪恶轴心",并对伊朗施加强大压力逼其放弃核项目.由此,伊朗"核争端"逐渐浮出水面.伊朗为了自身国家利益与美国展开了针锋相对的外交斗争.可以说,是两国各自战略意图的冲突导致了这场核争端.本文在分析美伊不同战略意图的基础上,探讨了美国对伊政策的基本走向.     

强制外交与伊朗核问题

强制外交是西方国家经常采用的通过和平手段解决国际危机的一种战略。在伊朗核 问题上，以美欧为首的西方国家一直力图使用强制外交和平解决伊核问题。然而，从2003 年至今， 伊核问题不断反复，持续升温，目前已发展成为潜在的冲突爆发点。究其原因，西方国家强制外交战 略谋划不够清晰、设定强制期限约束力不足、存在“后续成本”以及伊朗国内政局变化等因素，导致 了西方国家对伊朗实施强制外交始终难以奏效。未来很难断言美欧强制外交能否成功，而可以肯 定的是中东地区的和平与稳定符合各方利益，伊核问题的和平解决还需要国际社会的共同努力。     

Nuclear Weapons and Intergenerational Exploitation

Nuclear weapons' defenders claim that they lower the risk of war, at the price of devastation if war breaks out. Sooner or later, however, on a realist analysis, catastrophic nuclear war is sure to come. Nuclear deterrence thus buys us a better chance of dying in bed, while each post-holocaust generation will have to pick up the pieces. If the nuclear optimists are wrong, hoping to spread or perpetuate nuclear deterrence is foolish; but if they are right, it is exploitative. Like big cars and cheap flights, nuclear deterrence benefits us at the expense of future generations. States that do not already have the bomb should not get it. Britain and France should consider disarmament, while Russia and the United States should slash their arsenals. Minimum deterrence should be equally stable, but most nuclear optimists, being neorealists who hold that war will continue, should want deep cuts even if it is not.     

The Cuban Missile Crisis after Sixty Years

The sixtieth anniversary of the Cuban missile crisis is an appropriate time to review the events—arguably the closest the world has come to nuclear war—from the perspective of 2022. Growing tensions between Moscow and Washington and increasing Cuba emphasis in US domestic politics preceded the confrontation. Analysts differ on motives for placing long-range missiles in Cuba; Soviet officials consistently emphasized the defense of the island. We know now that nuclear war was even closer than realized at the time. This article is a revision of one that appeared in the Winter 2013 issue.     

伊朗核问题走向与中国安全

伊朗研发核技术的决心(包括能力)与美欧阻遏伊朗拥核的立场严重对立。美国不能容忍伊朗拥核坐大,但能够采取的手段有限,而伊朗问题又涉及诸多大国利益。伊朗核问题将使中东局势乃至大国关系更加复杂,包括对中国的国家安全产生影响。     

The Sturdy Child vs. the Sword of Damocles: Nuclear Weapons and the Expected Cost of War

Abstract

Is the world better off with nuclear weapons or without? Nuclear pessimists point to the potentially devastating costs of a nuclear war. Nuclear optimists argue that nuclear weapons reduce the likelihood of war and are thus beneficial. This debate is inconclusive in part because it misses an important conceptual point. We should care both about the cost of war and the likelihood of war, as they combine to form the expected cost of war, which is the product of the two. I discuss five implications of focusing on expected costs. Three support the pessimists: (1) nuclear weapons raise the upper limit on how destructive wars can be; (2) there may be a floor on how low the likelihood of war can go; and (3) risk aversion over damage will raise the expected cost of nuclear war. The remaining two support the optimists: (4) strategic models exhibit a declining expected cost of war; and (5) casualty data show that the expected cost of war is declining over its observed range in the past two hundred years.     

The Cyber Threat to Nuclear Stability

The thesis of this article is that cyber war technologies are spilling over into precision strike and nuclear mission areas. The result will transform deterrence and arms race stability and lead to other significant changes. The driver behind this is a combination of long standing problems with mobile missiles along with new technologies not usually factored into strategic assessments: big data analytics, computer vision, and related information systems. When combined with drones and precision strike, the hunt for mobile missiles is becoming faster, cheaper, and better. The implications of this finding vary by country, but will shape major power nuclear modernization, crisis stability among secondary powers, and conventional attack of nuclear deterrents.     

“9·11”事件与东北亚地区间的大国关系

恐怖主义在世纪交替之际成为国际政治舞台上的一个突出现象,“ 9·11”事件引发的美国反恐怖主义战争,从本质上来说带有“宗教战争”的色彩,这就注定了要铲除国际恐怖主义的根源不是一朝一夕所能完成的。“ 9·11”事件引发的东北亚地区间大国关系的调整以及对该地区政局的影响,可以被看作是全球政治舞台上大国关系调整的一个缩影。     

South Korea's Faustian Attitude: The Republic of Korea's Decision to Send Troops to Iraq Revisited

South Korea sent troops to Iraq not because of any perceived threat from an Iraqi nuclear programme, but to seek influence over American foreign policy towards North Korea. At no point did the general public support the American invasion and war in Iraq; most South Koreans also opposed sending troops to Iraq. However, the government chose to send first non-combat and later combat troops to Iraq, and the public approved of the former choice and support was growing for the latter. The liberal President Roh Moo-Hyun had to persuade the public on this issue, even in opposition to his core supporters, risking political isolation. What the public and the President aimed at was a peaceful resolution of the North Korean nuclear issue and business opportunities. The national interest that South Korea pursued in sending troops to Iraq was policy influence over the US guarantee not to use military power against North Korea.     

美朝核风波的实质与六方会谈的出路

美朝核风波再起的实质是美国霸权与朝鲜生存权的又一次政治博弈,美朝核风波的实质看成是生存权与霸权的政治博弈。进而为此展开的六方会谈框架又成为一组多方政治博弈平台。在美朝核风波愈演愈烈、几近战争临界值之际,中国从维护地区安全出发,积极出面斡旋,经三方会谈而达成了六方会谈框架。六方会谈的达成意义重大,舒解了“战争临界”;彰显了“中国作用”;取得了可视化成果。不应否认,六方会谈框架存在某种不足,却仍是解决朝核问题的最现实、最可行的方式。     

A Long War in the East: Doctrine,Diplomacy, and the Prospects for a Protracted Sino-American Conflict

Increasing diplomatic tension between China and the United States has led to concerns about military conflict, possibly including rapid nuclear escalation. Scholars have spent less time considering the opposite scenario: protracted conventional war. This analysis explains why a combination of politics, geography, and technology may conspire to produce such a war, despite the fact that both sides are planning for a short, high-intensity fight. It shows how the Peloponnesian War, an ancient conflict fought with ancient weapons, nonetheless provides a warning of what might happen in the present. It also describes a grim trade off that American policy-makers will face in the event of war. Washington can take steps to reduce the chance of nuclear escalation, but in so doing will make a long war more likely. The conclusion describes the diplomatic challenge of war termination in a protracted conflict where neither side can compel the other to back down.     

论苏联解体后的“核遗产”及核扩散危机

苏联解体后其庞大的核武库也一分为四,在核武器系统、核材料、核科学家及核技术等三个层次都出现了失控的核扩散危机。以美国为首的国际社会从各个方面给予了大力援助,使前苏联庞大的"核遗产"得到了妥善的处理。因苏联解体而一度出现的核国家增多的问题得以解决,核扩散危机也基本得到消除。这不仅有效地捍卫了国际核不扩散体制,而且在实践上也是对国际核不扩散机制的补充和发展,对人类社会的和平与安全也是重大的贡献。当朝鲜和伊朗核问题屡成危机而长期困扰国际社会时,我们重温这段历史,也具有深刻的现实意义。