《美韩自由贸易协定》的新变化及其背后的动态博弈

《美韩自由贸易协定》达成后,其进展并不顺利。经过两次追加谈判,历时四年多,最终获得美韩两国国会的批准。本文以2011年2月10日美韩双方签署的新协定为切入点,首先论述了《美韩自由贸易协定》的新变化及其实质,进而从理论和实证两方面对这种新变化背后美国国内政治的动态博弈进行了阐述。通过分析,充分再现了美国国内政治博弈对《美韩自由贸易协定》的内容和走向施加影响的过程,并由此看出,美国政治体制的掣肘已经成为美国迫使对方做出妥协或更大让步以实现自身利益最大化的筹码。     

美国亚太贸易战略新趋势:基于对《美韩自由贸易协定》的研究视角

《美韩自由贸易协定》于2012年3月15日正式实施,有力地促进了美国在亚太经济事务中扮演更重要的角色,成为美国"重返亚太"战略的标志之一。《美韩自由贸易协定》生效后,美国一方面实现了与韩国互惠互利的初衷,另一方面也在一定程度上牵制了东亚一体化进程,实现了制衡中国的战略目的。文章主要论述了《美韩自由贸易协定》对美国的经济福利、地缘利益和"新贸易政策"的影响,并进一步分析了美国"重返亚太"战略背景下《美韩自由贸易协定》与美国的APEC政策、主导TPP发展与美国国内政治博弈之间的关系,勾勒出美国新亚太贸易战略的轮廓。在此基础上,提出中国在出口受阻和影响力受限的情况下,应在加快调整经济发展方式、推动多元平衡的区域合作和积极应对美国主导TPP的发展等方面进行研判和对策选择。     

越南与欧盟缔结自贸协议的考量和影响

2019年6月30日,《越南与欧盟自由贸易协定》正式签署。本文以越欧批准签署FTA为切入点,首先论述了双方启动FTA谈判的背景,认为双方参与FTA有助于实现各自的全球对外贸易战略目标,近年来越欧日益紧密的经贸关系为双方缔结FTA创造了良好的前提条件;进而从越南视域角度分析双方缔结FTA的动机,认为越南与欧盟缔结FTA是出于对经济、政治和大国关系平衡三方面的综合考虑;最后阐述了该协定的内容及协议生效对越南、WTO多边自由贸易体制、东盟地区经济一体化以及中越经济关系产生的影响。     

“新贸易政策”对《美韩自由贸易协定》的影响

美国与韩国2007年签署的自由贸易协定至今仍未交付美国国会表决,导致这一结局的关键原因是民主党人力图推行"新贸易政策"。民主党人在2006年国会中期选举中获胜,为推行其政策主张提供了契机。对《美韩自由贸易协定》而言,"新贸易政策"既包含着利益集团因素,又体现了民主党人更高的目标追求:即重新框定美韩经济关系,打造美国对外贸易政策新范式,为今后美国参加双边和多边贸易谈判树立新"典范"。     

美韩关系中的驻韩美军地位问题

驻韩美军是影响美韩同盟关系的关键因素之一,而作为规范美军法律地位的《驻韩美军地位协定》则是美韩双方争论的焦点问题。围绕军队地位协定谈判,美韩双方的交涉持续了十几年时间,最终,随着韩国在美韩同盟关系中地位的提升,美国同韩国达成妥协,签订了军队地位协定。军队地位协定的谈判过程,一方面反映出韩国在美韩同盟中地位的变化,同时显示美国同韩国签订军队地位协定存在争取韩国支持其越南战争政策的政治目的。冷战结束后,《驻韩美军地位协定》凸显出的不平等性,引起了韩国民众强烈的反美情绪,给关韩同盟关系带来重要影响。     

韩国对1965年《韩日请求权协定》态度演变分析

自2018年10月底韩国大法院对劳工索赔案做出终审判决之后,韩日两国陷入尖锐对立,矛盾焦点便是1965年签署的《韩日请求权协定》.在日本看来,该协定的签署意味着双方的请求权问题已获得"完全且最终解决",而韩国方面则以受害劳工有权提出精神层面的补偿为由,要求涉事日本企业予以赔偿,从而引发日本方面的强烈不满.该协定是韩日关系的重要基石,维护了两国数十年的友好关系大局.冷战结束后,随着"慰安妇"问题浮出水面,韩国民间对日索赔运动风起云涌,政府对该协定的立场也随之发生动摇,主张个人请求权并未消失,支持受害者对日索赔.但冷战后历届政府出于维护韩日关系大局考虑,努力把相关争议限定在韩国国内层面,直至文在寅政府打破默契,导致韩日贸易战爆发以及韩国国内出现巨大争议.韩国政府态度的演变与其国内政党政治因素密不可分.     

韩国FTA政策与东亚区域主义的未来

本文首先阐述了韩国过去与现在的贸易政策,以及韩国FTA政策从区域内向区域外的转变,并分别从国际、地区和国内三个层面详细分析了这一转变的原因。在此基础上,探讨了韩国跨区域自由贸易协定对东亚区域主义的影响。随着更多的亚洲国家签订自由贸易协定,将对东亚区域经济一体化产生积极影响。东亚跨区域自由贸易协定面临的最大挑战是,东亚各国是否有能力来共同协调相互间的利益。     

美韩网络安全制度化合作及发展态势

随着国际信息化的程度日益加深,网络作为美韩互联互通的核心渠道,将对美韩同盟乃至美国东北亚同盟体系的运转效率产生巨大影响,双方在这一维度具有重大利益契合。美韩网络安全合作以通过国际制度凝聚基础共识为着力点,通过军事领域进一步深化合作,最终实现＂整体国家＂层面的力量凝聚。当前,美韩网络安全合作呈现出聚焦技术交流研发、重视人...     

论20世纪前期中苏建交问题

十月革命后,苏俄和中国北京政府出自双方各自需要进行了建交谈判。双方围绕中东路和外蒙古两个核心问题的解决进行了多次交涉。《中苏解决悬案大纲协定》的签署从原则上奠定了两国关系的基础,却未解决中东路和外蒙古两个核心问题。协定内容与实际执行上的差距令人深思。     

走向“贸易新世界”的美欧关系——“跨大西洋贸易与投资伙伴关系协定”的政治经济学分析

资本驱动下的经济全球化要求发达国家启动"新一代"自由贸易协定,美欧"跨大西洋贸易与投资伙伴关系协定"是其中的代表性案例。美欧经济相互依赖度高,它们之间的贸易和投资受到的非关税壁垒的困扰要超过关税壁垒的困扰,因此协调和统一各自市场规制成为谈判的核心内容。但社会抗议和政治文化的差异同时作用于美欧内部政治层面,阻碍了"跨大西洋贸易与投资伙伴关系协定"的谈判迅速地达成协议。由于"跨大西洋贸易与投资伙伴关系协定"涉及对风险的认定和市场经济模式的调整,美欧双方因历史而形成的社会权利、环境标准、政商关系等领域的差异使它们在这两个问题上很难保持一致。资本与社会的政治博弈决定了"跨大西洋贸易与投资伙伴关系协定"的结果。     

CAPITALISM,THE KOREA–U.S. FREE TRADE AGREEMENT,AND RESISTANCE

Free trade agreements (FTAs) have become an essential part of the corporate effort to establish a global infrastructure suitable to its contemporary accumulation dynamics. Because they establish and reinforce patterns of economic activity that are destructive of majority interests, they should be opposed. This article scrutinizes one agreement: the Korea–U.S. FTA. It examines the motivations that led to its negotiation, the content of the agreement, and the arguments U.S. government officials and institutions have made in support of its ratification. It concludes with a critical evaluation of the efforts of U.S. and Korean opponents of its ratification and a call for a new organizing strategy.     

U.S. responses to the Tiananmen and Kwangju incidents: American relations with China and Korea

This article focuses upon American relations with China and Korea through a comparative exploration of U.S. responses to the 1989 Tiananmen and 1980 Kwangju incidents. The thesis contends that U.S. policy towards both countries was founded primarily upon security and economic interests and was often obscured by a lack of understanding of these nations’ internal affairs, history, and culture. Although these factors exist in U.S. relations with the two countries, the United States places greater importance upon China than Korea, a situation that does not necessarily benefit Americans.     

The coming decade of change on the Korean peninsula: Implications for Northeast Asia and the United States

The next decade on the Korean peninsula will be one of dramatic change. With a nearly nonexistent economy and its people facing severe famine, the DPRK has no choice but to move away from its self-reliance policies towards another course of action—most likely leading to reunification of the peninsula. However it plays out, the changes in Korea will have important regional implications and impact U.S. military presence in Northeast Asia. Policy makers must formulate plans now for U.S. forces in the region during, and after, Korean reunification. Despite being in shambles internally, North Korea remains a hermit kingdom standing steadfastly against the tides of change and pressures from the outside world to become part of the international community. The Korean peninsula remains a potential, and very likely, international flashpoint as no formal peace treaty was signed after the Korean War—only an armistice agreement keeps the peninsula in a fragile military stalemate. With a badly broken economy, its people continuing to face famine, the threat to resume its nuclear program, and the recent missile firings over Japan, North Korea will likely be an international flashpoint sooner rather than later. Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the United States Air Force, Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government.     

美国思想库对美韩同盟的研究——以CSIS、CNAS、CATO为中心

美国思想库普遍认为,在美国实力下降的大趋势下,获得韩国的支持是维系美国霸权的必然之举。韩美同盟有助于遏制朝鲜,更有利于围堵中国,也有益于解决非传统安全问题。总之,美国必须因应国际形势的变化来改造韩美同盟,劝服韩国为己所用。当然,也有个别思想库学者认为韩美同盟是个两败俱伤的同盟,理应放弃。     

Trade,policy, and Korea-United States relations

Trade friction in recent years between Korea and the United States has imperiled a century of friendship and threatens to undo strong ties established since 1945. Interest therefore focuses on reasons for friction and policies to ameliorate friction. The article examines Korea’s trade and payments, U.S. and Korean trade policies, and multilateral and bilateral policy options.     

China and Korea: The godfather,part three

This article challenges the conventional wisdom that the People’s Republic of China, in dealing with the situation on the Korean peninsula, rules out North Korea’s imminent collapse and continues to stabilize the Kim Chong-il regime as a buffer against U.S. and South Korean advances. It suggests that Beijing has started to view short- or medium-term reunification on Seoul’s terms as a realist scenario and has been trying to influence the accompanying shift in the Northeast Asian power equation to its advantage. If this strategy succeeds, reunification would be brought about under Chinese auspices, with anti-Japanese or anti-American sentiments in both Koreas being purposely or automatically activated so as to promote a sense of national identity.     

POLICIES OF LAST RESORT FOR DEALING WITH NORTH KOREA’S NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAMME

This paper analyzes the policy remedies for dealing with North Korea's nuclear weapons and missile programs. After six nuclear tests and three recent successful ICBM tests, North Korea is close to miniaturizing nuclear warheads and establishing a reliable delivery system, thus achieving a much-feared nuclear weapons capability. In defiance of the extraordinarily tough U.N. Security Council resolutions, Pyongyang persists in developing nuclear weapons. North Korea's nuclear weapons program already has exceeded the strategic patience, of the U.S.-ROK alliance. Harsher policy options to deal with the DPRK nuclear weapons are imperative. Several drastic options, including severe sanctions, preventive bombing, nuclear armament of South Korea, are evaluated in the final round of engagement policy on guaranteeing nonaggression and a peace agreement with Pyongyang.     

Introduction to the supplement

Abstract

Today the American press focuses on what might be called the domestic consequences of United States policy toward Korea. We read about the troop withdrawal issue, the unfolding Korea Lobby scandal, and, perhaps, Korean Central Intelligence Agency (KCIA) activities within the U.S. The following supplement, however, reminds us of the far worse consequences of American and Korean policies for those who remain within Korea. It was the U.S. CIA which helped to set up the KCIA, thereby providing to the diffuse authoritarianism of the Rhee regime period (1948–1960) an organizational weapon which has kept Park in power through sixteen years of Korean dissent and upheaval: it is the south Korean people who continue to suffer the consequences. It was the Johnson and Nixon administrations which sanctioned what amounted to bribery, first to get the south Koreans to commit troops in the Vietnam War, and then to keep them there as Nixon and Kissinger prolonged the war. It was the Nixon administration which kept a conspicuous silence when Park in 1972 ripped up the old constitution, did away with even the fiction of procedural democracy, and instituted a frankly authoritarian regime.     

浅析奥巴马政府的对朝政策

在应对处理朝鲜半岛危机中,美国一直扮演着一个关键的角色。奥巴马上台后,朝鲜半岛危机出现了急剧的变化,这也让人们对奥巴马政府的对朝政策更加关注。实际上,在2009年春美国国务卿希拉里访问亚洲后,奥巴马政府的对朝政策就产生了很大的变化。朝鲜半岛不断升级的紧张局势,使得美国有机会重振其世界领袖的雄风,重新确立美日韩在东亚的铁三角同盟关系,并通过不断的联合军事演习对朝鲜施加了除军事动武以外的巨大压力,同时也侧面敲击和缓解了中国力量在亚太地区伸展的势头。奥巴马的外交理念是做一个实际的理想主义者和一个有理想的现实主义者,其对朝政策的核心策略就是软的更软,硬的更硬,以硬逼软。     

LIMITED WAR,UNLIMITED TARGETS

In the early days of the Korean War, the U.S. Air Force (USAF) had a policy of precision bombing military targets only. Policy-makers in Washington, D.C., formulated this policy to ensure the protection of Korean civilians and to increase the effectiveness of their air operations. Senior USAF officers in Korea, however, were unhappy about the limitations placed on them by Washington. In their strategic air operations against targets in North Korea USAF officers followed Washington's precision bombing policy, but they insisted that USAF bombers be permitted to use incendiary bombs against population centers in North Korea. China's entry into the war in November 1950 led to a drastic change in the precision bombing policy. On 5 November 1950, when the UN forces began suffering defeat after defeat in battles with the new enemy, General Douglas MacArthur designated cities and villages in North Korea as “main bombing targets” and permitted the use of incendiary bombs, which had been used in attacks against Japanese cities during World War II. From that point until the end of the war, the USAF regarded North Korean cities and villages as their crucial targets as political and military occasion demanded.