从车臣危机看俄同西方的关系

俄独立后,对外政策不断调整,俄与西方关系一波三折。 车臣危机爆发后,西方国家反应谨慎。西方担心车臣独立行为一旦蔓延,可能会使俄中央失控,动荡不定的俄罗斯必将殃及欧洲;西方也不希望欧洲东部建立一个新的伊斯兰国家,更不愿车臣危机而刺激俄与西方的紧张关系。车臣事件久拖不决,西方开始指责俄违反了它对欧洲安全承担的义务,强调它们既要维护俄的领土完整,也要尊重人权。西方在车臣问题上的政策立场,也同俄罗斯开始推行以重振世界大国地位为目标的强硬对外政策紧密相联。 今后一个时期,俄同西方的关系仍为既竞争又合作的态势。     

俄美关系中的车臣问题

对俄罗斯而言,车臣问题不仅是一个内政难题,而且还严重影响了俄罗斯与以美国为首的西方国家的关系。美国对俄罗斯政府车臣政策的牵制及对车臣分离势力的支持和袒护,使车臣问题难以解决。本文指明了车臣问题的起源,分析了美国干预车臣问题的形式及俄罗斯的反应,并论述了俄美对待车臣问题不同的政治理念。美国担心,俄罗斯政府在车臣问题上黩武主义倾向的增长将导致整个政权独裁专制倾向的加强,并进而导致在独联体事务中帝国倾向的恢复。车臣问题对俄美关系的影响是全局性的,但不是根本性的。     

普京政府与车臣问题

车臣问题是关系到俄罗斯国家统一、政治稳定、经济发展的大问题。它涉及历史、现实、国内、国际、民族、恐怖主义等一系列错综复杂的问题,解决起来相当不易。毫无疑问,车臣问题也是政治纷争的焦点之一。俄政府平息车臣叛乱,合理解决车臣问题,必能赢得民心,提高国际声望。     

浅论普京的车臣政策

车臣问题为俄罗斯体内的“毒瘤”。由于车臣的特殊地缘和经济价值，加上外部势力的介入，车臣问题已变成一个非常复杂的政治问题。普京上台后俄进行了第二次车臣战争，战后对车臣采取了政治解决、恢复经济、争取国际支持等政策，取得了一定成效。但鉴于车臣问题的复杂性，要在短期内彻底解决并非易事。     

论俄罗斯在车臣的反恐战略

前苏联解体后，车臣问题成为危及俄罗斯国家安全和国家统一的严重隐患。莫斯科人质事件说明，在“9·ll”后恐怖主义已经成为影响国际关系格局的新范式。在世界各国政府联合反恐的国际背景下，车臣民族分离主义和恐怖主义已经成为国际恐怖主义链条上的重要环节。俄车臣反恐战略应定位于瓦解民族分离的思想体系、全方位拓展车臣决策的外交空间以及建构国内反恐机制等三个层面。     

车臣,俄罗斯的难题

车臣问题关系到俄罗斯联邦国家统一、政治稳定和经济发展。它涉及一系列错综复杂的问题,解决起来相当困难。如能合理解决车臣问题,必能赢得民心,提高俄罗斯的国际声望。     

俄罗斯车臣恐怖主义产生的根源

近年来,俄罗斯境内频繁发生车臣恐怖分子的袭击事件。究其原因有5方面:1.俄、车民族结怨很深且由来已久,这使得车臣族人很容易拿起武器,随时准备着用暴力证明自己的正确;2.冷战结束以后,一部分车臣人谋求政治独立,结果遭受俄军一再打击,受害者转而寻求以武力复仇;3.车臣地区社会贫困、经济文化发展落后,使得一些车臣人迫于生活压力从事恐怖活动;4.伊斯兰教原教旨主义不断向车臣地区渗透扩张,使部分车臣青年产生了驱逐甚至消灭俄罗斯异教徒的激进思想;5.包括穆斯林国家战斗人员、本·拉登“基地”组织和前阿富汗塔利班政权在内的国际恐怖势力的公开支持以及某些国家的纵容立场,都对车臣恐怖分子起到了姑息养奸的作用。惟其如此,俄罗斯国内的恐怖主义问题不仅层出不穷,而且成了一个久治难愈的顽症。     

1999年的俄罗斯外交:挑战和对策

美国及西方盟国对俄罗斯不断采取挤压行动,使俄罗斯的安全利益和大国地位受到严峻挑战,俄与西方国家间的矛盾上升,关系倒退.针对西方的挤压行动,俄罗斯的对策是修改军事理论,积极推进多极化进程,遏制独联体的离心倾向,在车臣问题上采取强硬立场.     

叶利钦与普京的车臣政策比较

俄罗斯独立后先后发生两次车臣战争,反映了两任总统叶利钦、普京在车臣政策上的差异,表现出车臣问题具有长期性、艰巨性和复杂性的特点。     

浅析日本的回归亚洲战略

日本在坚持“西方一员”的同时,开始执行“脱美入亚”的战略。其着眼点是:实现政治大国的目标;亚洲经济迅猛发展,日本回归亚洲,才能在全球站稳脚根;在同美欧经济争夺战中占据有利地位。 日本回归亚洲的主要对策有,对美国既联合又争夺;解决历史遗留问题;以经济技术手段主导亚洲;借助国际组织和国际会议。 日本“脱美入亚”的战略引起世界各国特别是亚洲邻国的关注。     

美国的介入对格鲁吉亚与俄罗斯关系的影响

冷战结束以来,格鲁吉亚与俄、美保持着紧密而复杂的政治经济关系,俄美也都表现出对格的争夺之意。尤其是"9.11"事件后,美以反恐为名进军中亚,俄罗斯不能置地缘战略安全利益于不顾,奋力与美角逐格鲁吉亚,维护俄南部局势的稳定和传统的势力范围,而美亦不会停止反恐的脚步,与俄争夺格鲁吉亚和中亚国家的控制权。因此,传统的格俄关系发展方向存在极大的不确定性和不稳定性,除去两国自身因素,美国是对二者关系产生影响的重要因素之一。     

The Al Qaeda Brand: The Strategic Use of the “Terrorist” Label

Al Qaeda leaders have consistently praised the Chechen insurgents as an exemplary front of global jihad. Ayman al-Zawahiri recently applauded the steadfastness of the Chechen rebels and indicated that their resolve for jihad is worthy of emulation. Ever since the world found out about a war going on in the Muslim republic in the North Caucasus, Al Qaeda leadership has attempted to represent the Chechen struggle as one of its own battlefields. In turn, the Russian government has tried to justify its policies in the North Caucasus through demonstrating to the world that the Kremlin is fighting nothing less than Osama bin Laden’s agents in Chechnya. The North Caucasus insurgents in turn have embraced some of Al Qaeda’s narratives. While such narratives have proliferated, the factual evidence to show the direct links between the North Caucasus insurgents and Al Qaeda is still lacking. The article examines how terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda use framing for strategic ends. The evidence discussed here suggests that Al Qaeda, the North Caucasus insurgents, and the Russian government have adopted similar narratives. However, the lack of evidence to back up such narratives indicates the differences in reasons driving the convergence of the narratives.     

Military professionalism in post‐communist Hungary and Poland: An analysis and assessment

Abstract

This article discusses Russian perceptions of and attitudes toward the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Russia has historically disliked and mistrusted NATO, seeing it as the primary threat to its international aspirations; in practice Russia pursues a dual policy. Its harsh condemnation of NATO has not stopped it from cooperating in selected areas of mutual interest. The most important among them is support for NATO's military operations in Afghanistan. The recent rejuvenation of relations between the west and Moscow is known as the strategic ‘reset’, meaning a return to diplomatic contacts and limited cooperation regardless of disagreements over the invasion of Georgia and Moscow's other recent international transgressions. The reset in NATO–Russia relations has only tactical significance, however. Cooperation will take place on a limited basis, but a genuine reset in mutual relations must wait for a reset in Russia's political and strategic priorities.     

A FAREWELL TO THE GREAT GAME? PROSPECTS FOR RUSSIAN-AMERICAN SECURITY COOPERATION IN CENTRAL ASIA

Long before 9–11, Russia and the United States found common ground in their efforts to undermine the Taliban government in Afghanistan, despite serious disagreements over policy in other parts of the world. The events of 9–11, however, changed Russian foreign and security policy drastically. One of the most fundamental and controversial shifts came when President Putin chose not to interfere in US negotiations with the Central Asian states to use their airbases for the US war against al Qaeda in Afghanistan. Putin also offered to use Russia’s oil reserves as a means to stabilize jittery world markets. In return, Russia gained US support for its bid to pipe Caspian Sea oil over Russian territory. More importantly, the US government gave Russia essentially a free hand in its war against separatist Chechnya. While there are many potential scenarios in highly unstable Central Asia that could serve to sour relations once again, Russia and the United States have an unprecedented opportunity to build trust and cooperation through peacekeeping and problem solving in the region.     

The Russian case for military intervention in Georgia: international law,norms and political calculation

Abstract

The Russian military intervention in Georgia in August 2008 has raised significant questions about Russian thinking and practice on the legitimate use of military force abroad, especially in relation to neighbour states. The arguments advanced by Russia to justify this campaign show how Russian interpretations of customary international law as well as norms related to the use of force have served as an instrument of state policy, rather than being rooted in any broader international consensus. The Russian discourse in this context about sovereignty, self-determination and the legitimacy of recognising South Ossetia and Abkhazia as states appears similarly to be strongly influenced by political self-interest and Russian views about its entitlement within the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) region. Among Russian claims, Moscow's commitment to support its ‘citizens’ abroad has been particularly controversial. This article examines these issues and also the possibility that, through its justifications for waging war against Georgia, Russia is more broadly contesting the interpretation of certain international norms, that it regards as essentially constructed by Western states. Some potential implications of these legal and normative arguments for future Russian policy in the CIS region, including Ukraine, are also examined.     

俄罗斯政治经济形势及外交走向

本文论述了普京执政以来的俄罗斯政治经济形势及外交走向.政治形势趋向稳定,经济形势有所好转,外交走向日益明朗.俄罗斯开始进入一个由乱转治的历史转折新时期.在政治方面俄罗斯实现了新旧政权的平稳过渡,调整了政权结构,打击了车臣分裂主义势力,缓解了社会矛盾,维护了国家统一;在经济方面修正了经济改革路线,调整了经济政策,治理并改善了经营和投资环境,促进了经济增长;在外交方面维护了叶利钦后期外交政策的连续性,寻找了自己在世界多极化新格局中的位置,以本民族利益为中心调整了外交政策,加强了与独联体国家的联系,改善了同西方大国的关系,推进了与东方国家的关系.但是,由于普京的内外政策尚未完全定型,改革的道路崎岖不平,经济缺乏增长的坚实基础,此外,国力锐减又限制了与西方大国外交活动的空间,所以俄罗斯的社会经济发展仍会遇到一定的阻力与困难.     

Correction to: Frankenstein in Grozny: vertical and horizontal cracks in the foundation of Kadyrov’s rule

Asia Europe Journal - Many scholars have suggested that organized violence in Chechnya has ended, and that Russia’s Chechenization policy and Ramzan Kadyrov’s presidency deserve the...     

俄罗斯远东地区与亚太各国多方合作的基础设施

俄罗斯的石油、天然气、电能非常丰富．而东北亚各国,主要是中国、日本和韩国资源有限．不能满足经济发展的需要。这就为俄罗斯与亚太地区各国。特别是上述３国进行资源合作提供了可能。俄罗斯不仅可以出口石油、天然气、电能、还可以与各国合作开发资源。可以想象。这必然会促进亚太和东北亚地区根本的、长期的国际合作。     

国际制度视角下“一带一路”与大欧亚伙伴关系的对接

中俄所提出的两大倡议分别代表了各自在国际制度竞争有所加剧背景下的本国利益需求。二者都以拓宽欧亚经济合作渠道为首要目标,但是它们在原则、方向、手段等方面的差异是相互关系的不利因素。为了协调国际规则的制定,中俄确定对接两大倡议。一方面,中俄两国希望通过制度合作制衡美国霸权;另一方面,中俄在欧亚地区的一致性和冲突性并存,双方需要一个协调关系的制度框架。中俄两国既有以制度合作在国际体系层面应对美国压力的意图,也希望在地区范围内协调彼此关系。两大倡议的对接将增强国际社会新兴力量在国际制度体系构建和全球治理中的影响力,同时也能化解中俄双方潜在的矛盾,推动欧亚区域合作的进程。