乌兹别克斯坦与集安组织的曲折关系

2012年6月28日,乌兹别克斯坦再次暂停集体安全条约组织成员国资格.这一决定,与近年来集安组织军事合作水平日益提高的趋势相背离,而且对俄罗斯致力于加强集安组织行动能力的努力造成了冲击.导致乌兹别克斯坦做出这一决定的原因主要有三个方面:担心集安组织决策程序的更改可能使自身主权受到限制；近年与俄罗斯关系的冷却；与西方关系取得明显改善.乌兹别克斯坦暂停集安组织成员国资格对乌自身安全和集安组织的未来发展可能会带来一定的消极影晌,而且可能加剧俄美对中亚地区影响力的争夺.     

上海合作组织未来十年发展前景

上海合作组织自2001年6月成立以来,在维护欧亚地区的安全与稳定、发展成员国各领域合作方面取得了显著成就.成员国对上合的需求和期冀持续上升,合作领域不断扩大,已由最初仅局限于边境地区的军事互信磋商,逐渐延伸到政治、安全、经济和人文等更多、更宽泛领域的合作.未来10年是上合的重要发展阶段,作为欧亚地区最具活力和影响力的国际组织,虽然它还面临诸多问题和挑战,但其发展前景依然十分广阔.     

上海合作组织框架内的中俄能源利益分析*

进入21 世纪以来，世界大国对能源的争夺加剧，欧亚大陆腹地（尤其是中亚地区）正 日益成为大国激烈角逐的竞技场。中俄作为中亚地区的两大邻国，出于商业利益、国家安全和地缘 政治关切，都对该地区极为重视，在防止其他大国插手中亚事务、维护地区安全稳定方面彼此互相 倚重。中亚地区是中俄两国未来发展不可或缺的地缘战略空间，相互竞争以及由此可能带来的负 面影响不可避免，但这也为中俄之间展开更加广泛而深入的合作创造了契机。作为地区合作与安 全架构，上海合作组织在地区内平衡的是两大强国的利益，反映了中俄两国维护欧亚大陆安全的 共同需求，并且使中亚国家能够在平等基础上与本地区大国探求促进合作与安全的途径，因此上 合组织为协调中俄在中亚地区的能源关系和加强合作构建了良好平台。     

上海合作组织十年发展回顾及思考

上海合作组织是基于互信的边境会晤机制发展成为地区性国际组织的典范。经过10年的发展,上海合作组织取得了较大成就,各领域的合作不断深化,组织机制建设不断完备,凝聚力和国际影响力稳步提升,已成为维护地区安全与发展的重要力量。未来,内外环境变化总体上将有利于上合组织的进一步发展,同时面临的新形势也会给上合组织带来诸多挑战。     

印度强化对孟加拉湾的地缘关切：战略考量与推进举措

近年来，随着孟加拉湾战略地位的日益凸显，印度不断强化对该地区的地缘关切，旨在维护其在该地区的优势地位，以区域经济合作来促进本国经济发展以及应对地区安全挑战。印度在不断提升其海上力量的基础上通过供给公共产品强化安全合作，与周边国家推动区域一体化建设、与域外国家加强海上安全合作等举措来践履其在孟加拉湾的地缘战略目标。然而，印度强化对孟加拉湾的地缘关切受到域内国家的战略警惕、自身有限的国家实力、域外大国的深度介入等因素制约。印度的孟加拉湾战略对中国参与该地区事务以及维护海上安全都有重大影响。展望将来，印度在该地区的经济与安全合作以及多边机制构建方面仍会久久为功，这将对孟加拉湾地区形势产生重大而深远的影响。     

探析中俄地区安全务实合作

中俄在许多安全领域具有共同利益，两国之间的安全合作也有较为坚实的政治、经济和历史基础。在新的安全环境下，中俄双方需共同努力，在以下方面推进务实安全合作，保证战略稳定和地区稳定：共同推动上合组织有效履行维护地区安全责任；在战略互信的基础上深入开展军事合作；加强维护地区安全方面的合作；深化在非传统安全领域的合作。     

独联体集安组织建立集体快反部队

2009年2月4—5日,在莫斯科召开的独联体集体安全条约组织(简称集安组织)成员国特别峰会上,俄罗斯、白俄罗斯、亚美尼亚、哈萨克斯坦、乌兹别克斯坦、塔吉克斯坦和吉尔吉斯斯坦七国总统签署建立集体快速反应部队的协议。快反部队的建立进一步加强了集安组织政治军事凝聚力,对该组织发展具有重大意义。     

上海合作组织框架下中国与中亚合作探析简

上海合作组织是成立于21世纪初的第一个以中国城市命名的新型区域合作组织,是中国发挥主要作用的国际性组织,是维护中国周边安全特别是中亚地区安全的组织.上海合作组织的成立与发展,对促进中国与中亚国家合作与交往,开展中国与中亚国家多边合作发挥了积极作用.在上海合作组织框架内,中国与中亚国家在安全、政治、经济、人文领域进行了一系列卓有成效的合作.这些合作拥有坚实基础,潜力巨大,前景广阔.     

南海地区安全：打击海盗与反恐合作

南海地区不仅具有重要的战略地位，而且是世界上最繁忙的国际航道之一，其安全正面临着海盗与恐怖分子的威胁。随着国际海事局有关海盗定义的修订，要维护南海地区的安全仅依靠南海周边国家的力量是不够的，特别是马六甲海峡。因此，海峡沿岸国要求海峡使用国共同分摊维护安全的经费负担，并提供有关培训、设备和信息情报等援助。这种情况说明，维护南海地区安全必须由南海周边国家及南海航道使用国共同合作，只有通过密切的国际合作，才能有效地打击海盗与恐怖主义活动，真正地维护南海地区的安全。     

上海合作组织安全合作的理念基础与转型

上海合作组织是欧亚地区重要的多边安全组织,在传统安全威胁并未消失的形势下,上合还要面对全球化进程带来的非传统安全的多重影响。国际社会安全体系出现新的特征,要求上合组织必须在已有的安全合作精神的基础上,实现合作的理念创新和转型。本文总结上合组织互信机制的基础和安全合作理念的基本因素,强调安全合作转型必须以"上海精神"为重要基石,以中俄全面战略协作伙伴关系为主要动力,以"新安全观"为核心精神,在"丝绸之路经济带"思想的指导下,通过经济合作转型带动安全合作的全面综合转型。     

Collective Security and Non-State Actors in Eurasia

International security cooperation usually takes one of two forms. A classical collective security organization is designed to promote international security through regulating the behavior of its member states. A defensive security organization is designed to protect a group of states from threats emanating from a challenging state or group of states. Both forms of security cooperation bind states to act in concert with respect to threats presented by other states. The emergence of non-state actors such as terrorist or extremist organizations challenges traditional forms of collective security. Threats from political extremism, terrorism, and outlaw organizations have grown in visibility during the past decade in the countries of Eurasia. The terrorist attacks of September 11 and the ensuing global war on terrorism have given added impetus to the Eurasian inter-state cooperation in confronting non-traditional threats and challenges from non-state actors. Bearing in mind the theory of collective security, this article analyzes threats posed by non-state actors with respect to Eurasian collective security organizations including the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the Conference on Interaction and Confidence Building Measures, and the CIS Collective Security Treaty Organization. The article concludes that the effectiveness of these organizations at achieving stated objectives depends upon their capacity to adopt new criteria of effectiveness.     

上合组织为何不足以支撑中国西北周边安全战略

中国西北周边的安全形势是形成中国西北周边安全战略的现实基础。当前，中国西北周边地区在国际政治舞台上的地位和价值不断提升，对中国的影响也越来越广泛而深刻。中国西北周边安全形势相对平稳，但也出现了很多新情况，呈现出新形势。基于理论和现实的需要，中国西北周边安全战略成为当下值得探讨的问题。上海合作组织成立以来，在维护区域安全和促进区域合作方面取得了积极成果，同时也存在着一些局限性。上海合作组织具有安全功能，其成立和发展一定程度上适应了中国西北周边安全战略需求，可以将其作为中国区域安全战略的支撑平台之一，但不能作为中国西北周边安全战略的独立支撑平台。这是由中国西北周边安全战略需求、中国西北周边安全形势以及上海合作组织自身状况和多边机制特点所决定的。中国在与周边国家打交道时，如果需要各国共同协作才能解决的问题，就在多边机制下进行合作；如果在双边条件下更有利于解决的问题，就拿到双边机制上来解决。为了更好地构建中国西北周边安全环境，应该以更高、更广的视野观察中国西北周边安全局势，以更加开阔的战略思维来思考应对策略。     

上海合作组织安全合作：成就、启示和未来深化路径（英文）

Since its establishment, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization has achieved fruitful security cooperation. In SCO security cooperation, common security challenges are the essential thrust, shared aspirations for stability and development are the driving force, and the leading role of China and Russia is the core support for its upgrading. In the future, SCO member states need a stronger sense of security community and more security cooperation to build an SCO community of security for all.     

阿富汗变局后的中亚安全:大国博弈与地区合作

阿富汗与中亚有着非常密切的历史文化联系,同时阿富汗问题对中亚安全构成了直接威胁.随着2021年美国仓促撤军、塔利班重新夺取政权,中亚战略地位的特殊性引发大国为争夺地区安全和经济主导权展开新一轮地缘政治竞争,中亚地区的和平与稳定又遭遇新的挑战.本文通过对新形势下中亚地区安全的新特征、新变化的梳理和分析,发现阿富汗变局后中...     

A new model of Asian regionalism: does the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation have more potential than ASEAN?

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is an established player in Southeast Asia, while the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) is an emergent force in Central Asia. This article comparatively assesses ASEAN and SCO to investigate the nature of each organization's model of cooperation and their utility in the contemporary political landscape in Asia. It argues that SCO differs from ASEAN on a few significant points: its composition and level of institutionalization. At the same time, both organizations have similar agendas and models of cooperation, emphasizing a common spirit, flexibility and a focus on regime security. The paper concludes that ASEAN's model of cooperation continues to be relevant to the contemporary Asian landscape, and its brand of loosely codified, informal and norm driven multilateralism continues to be durable and robust.     

“上海合作组织”框架下的中国与中亚国家金融合作目标及途径

金融合作是“上海合作组织”各国经济合作的重要领域,也是实现区域经济一体化的前提条件。在金融合作尚处于初级阶段的情况下,确定合理科学的金融合作目标,探索切实可行的金融合作途径,对于推动“上海合作组织”的金融合作进程具有十分重要的意义。根据《上海合作组织成员国多边经贸合作纲要》的原则,“上海合作组织”框架下的金融合作应分阶段进行,目标规划也应该划分为近期、中期和远期三个阶段。当前的工作重点是,积极推动成员国之间双边或多边的功能性金融合作。合作的具体进程要采取“双轮驱动”策略:既要开展以银行业务和功能完善为特征的金融合作;又要开展以金融组织和机制创新为特征的金融合作。     

Are non-traditional security challenges leading regional organizations towards greater convergence?

How are regional organizations responding to the emergence of non-traditional security (NTS) challenges? Are they engaging in more cooperative efforts to meet new threats? Or, on the contrary, do they react in different manners according to their distinctive values, principles and internal structures? This article attempts to investigate how the threats posed by NTS are compelling different regional organizations to reconsider their security thinking and to find new innovative ways of cooperation. This is done by comparing two diverse regional organizations, the EU and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), whose models of security cooperation have significantly varied reflecting the preference for different security approaches. The EU's security system has been more formalized and institutionalized; conversely, the "ASEAN way" has traditionally been rooted in the principles of informality and consensus. It is argued, however, that the emergence of NTS threats is acting as a catalyst behind a normative and operational shift of the modus operandi of both organizations. In so doing, this empirical analysis will try to shed light on the effects of exogenous factors on the emergence of patterns of convergence within the security sphere of distinctive regional processes.     

Security governance in a comparative regional perspective

This article aims to explore the relationship between domestic economic and political conditions and the performance of 14 regional organizations over a range of security provisions. It argues that the willingness of member states to increase the range of security provisions of a regional organization is influenced by the combination of high levels of economic and political development and low levels of dispersion among the members of a regional organization. In order to evaluate this assumption, two aspects of regional organizations are explored. The first is to examine the development of security governance provisions of 14 regional organizations as well as the levels of empowerment or autonomy of those organizations. The second is to analyze how six economic and political variables influence the range of security provisions and the degree of empowerment of regional organizations. The final part of the article examines how regional organizations play a significant role in stimulating and reproducing regional governance orders.     

The global standardization of regional disaster risk management

Natural disasters have become a heightened security issue in the last decade. Mitigating and responding to disasters, such as the 2004 tsunami in Southeast Asia and the 2011 earthquake in Japan, reflect a new security agenda that has spread across the globe and infiltrated most regional organizations. At first glance, the creation of regional programmes on disaster risk management (DRM) appears to be driven by the functional preferences of states. However, a comparison of ten regional organizations reveals some curious ambiguities. Despite different threat perceptions, financial budgets and geographical environments of regional organizations, a majority of states have formed DRM programmes that exhibit highly standardized features in terms of language, the referent points of protection and the apparent motivations for cooperation. World society theory is used to explain these striking similarities with reference to the global cultural system. This article also illustrates the analytical purchase of world society theory in understanding cooperation through regional organizations.     

Regional collective security in Europe: Past patterns and future prospects

NATO's entry into the Balkan war raised salient questions about the alliance's broader mission and, more generally, about Europe's security architecture. This article confronts these questions by revisiting the debate about collective defense versus collective security as organizing principles for alliances. NATO is viewed as serving a hybrid role of promoting collective defense and regional collective security. This latter, under‐valued function relates to NATO's role in promoting internal cohesion among its members and is crucial to understanding the alliance's evolution and its persistance long after the Cold War.