特朗普政府对俄罗斯的政策

特朗普赢得2016年总统选举,曾引发美国对俄罗斯政策是否会出现剧烈变化的猜测。特朗普谋求与俄罗斯缓和关系,以扭转因乌克兰危机而深陷泥潭的美俄对抗。然而,特朗普的胜选及其与俄罗斯缓和关系的意图遭到美国建制派的猛烈抨击和抵制。美国对俄政策不仅是美国政策制定者与俄罗斯的互动,更是美国政策制定者内部激烈博弈的结果。由于美国政治体制及国内政治斗争的影响,特朗普制定和实施对俄政策的总统权力受到国会及反俄势力强有力的束缚和规制。事实证明,特朗普政府的对俄政策并未出现逆转,而是延续了奥巴马执政后期对俄罗斯的对抗、遏制和威慑,并在一定程度上有所升级,导致美俄关系进一步恶化。尽管如此,美国并没有完全放弃对俄罗斯的接触。     

美国贸易协定政策评析——基于对USMCA、美韩FTA等贸易协定政策的分析

自特朗普政府以来,在"美国优先"外交政策主导下,美国将"减少双边贸易赤字"作为其贸易协定政策的直接目标,在此目标导向下实施了退出TPP、重新谈判北美自由贸易协定和美韩FTA,启动美日、美欧、美英贸易协定谈判等一系列政策活动.特朗普政府的贸易协定政策及其实施增加了全球经济政策的不确定性,扰乱了汽车及零部件等制造行业的全球价值链,加剧了国际投资环境和市场的不稳定性,对过去70多年来形成的全球贸易规则框架构成严峻威胁.拜登上任后,未对特朗普政府的全球贸易政策倾向有明显扭转,并有延续的意图.拜登政府对特朗普政府时期生效的贸易协定进行了全面审查,认可美墨加协定作为美国新政府未来贸易协定谈判模板的地位,且从其加强与友邦和盟国合作的贸易政策导向来看,拜登政府会继续推进特朗普政府时期已经生效的美墨加协定、美韩FTA 2.0、美日贸易协定和美日数字贸易协定的合作深度,大力推进美欧、美英贸易协定谈判.     

双层博弈理论视阈下特朗普政府的朝核政策

美国的朝核政策是决策者在国际层面博弈和国内层面博弈,以及这两个层面相互博弈的产物。特朗普政府朝核政策的主要特点包括:对朝鲜实行"最大限度施压"政策和"所有牌都摊在桌上"威慑战略,并未完全关闭与朝鲜谈判的大门,以及要求中国对解决朝核问题发挥最大影响力。特朗普总统主导政府朝核政策的决策,但其主要顾问起着一定的纠偏和危机时劝阻作用。美国国会一部分议员反对特朗普政府对朝进行先发制人打击,也有一些议员主张通过对华施压来迫使中国向朝鲜施加最大压力和美国在韩国重新部署战术核武器。     

特朗普政府对朝政策趋向:新一轮“战略忍耐”?

特朗普上任三年多来,对朝政策先后经历了以"极限施压"为基调的第一年、以"峰会外交"为基调的第二年,目前开始向新一轮"战略忍耐"转轨。相对于奥巴马对朝"战略忍耐",特朗普新一轮对朝"战略忍耐"既有一定的继承性,也有不少新变化。美新一轮"战略忍耐"将不再奠基于"朝鲜崩溃论",美动用武力迫朝弃核的"窗口期"也基本关闭。特朗普奉行对朝新一轮"战略忍耐"有可能打开国际社会"默认"朝鲜实际拥核国身份的窗口,一定程度上有助于缓和朝鲜半岛紧张局势;也可能诱导日、韩采取核"跟进"政策,致使东北亚出现新一波核扩散浪潮。如果是前一种态势,则朝鲜半岛及东北亚有望进入一个相对稳定时期;如果是后一种态势,则朝鲜半岛、东北亚及中国周边环境有可能更加动荡、复杂,甚至进入一个新的严峻时期。中国应认清特朗普政府对朝"新战略忍耐"的政策本质与特点以及其中所包含的复杂挑战与机遇,力推重启"六方会谈",力促朝核问题相关方达成以"双轨并进""双暂停"及以朝鲜"冻核"换取美韩放松对朝制裁等为内容的国际妥协,为实现朝鲜半岛及东北亚的和平与稳定创造条件,尤其要谨防东北亚出现新一波核扩散浪潮。     

特朗普政府对缅甸罗兴亚危机的政策

自2017年8月缅甸新一轮罗兴亚危机发生以来,特朗普政府通过一系列政策声明、情况说明、特别简报会等方式阐述美国的政策取向和立场,展开美缅双边及国际多边危机应对外交,进行紧急人道主义援助,以及对缅甸军方的追责制裁。特朗普政府积极利用罗兴亚危机推行美国的"印太战略"。总体而言,特朗普政府的罗兴亚危机政策体现出高度的现实主义和实用主义特征。特朗普政府的罗兴亚危机政策是"美国优先"国家安全战略下的外交政策产物,同时服务美国"印太战略",旨在防范和遏制中国提升在缅甸的影响力。     

布什政府对朝政策与朝核危机

本文在对冷战后美国对朝政策演变和美朝关系变化进行扼要回顾的基础上 ,着重论述了小布什政府对朝政策调整的内容及其动因 ,分析了美对朝政策趋向和朝核危机前景。文章认为 ,小布什政府对朝新政策是美政府内部两种不同对朝政策主张之间相互妥协的产物 ,但更多反映了保守派的主张。“9·11”事件后 ,在保守派的推动下 ,布什政府又逐渐形成了“鹰派接触”的对朝战略。该战略的实施导致克林顿政府后期已逐渐缓和的美朝关系骤然紧张 ,并且成为朝核危机再次发生的原因。朝核危机发生后 ,布什政府对朝核政策在保持目标不变的情况下做了策略性调整 ,但保守派主张的“鹰派接触”对朝战略意图仍没有改变 ,从而给朝核问题危机和平解决的前景带来较大的变数。     

美俄关系拟“再重启”的逻辑、领域与限度

特朗普上台后,美国新政府开始奉行新的外交理念并拟再次"重启"美俄关系,这不仅是其新外交理念的必然要求,而且是遏制中国的现实需要,同时也是与俄对抗政策失效后的不得已选择。美俄关系拟"再重启"的领域包括叙利亚问题、乌克兰问题、打击恐怖主义以及战略稳定与军备控制等。然而,虽然特朗普意欲"再重启"美俄关系的意愿明显,但美国国会、舆论界以及精英群体中明显占据优势的反俄情绪势必对其构成极大牵制;美国不可能解除对俄罗斯的制裁,双方在称霸与反霸、单极与多极、崛起与打压、遏制与反制等问题上的结构性矛盾难以消解。此外,北约与俄罗斯之间围绕"东扩"与"反东扩"的矛盾与分歧不可调和,双方军事遏制与反遏制的激烈程度也难以缓和。所有这些因素都制约了美俄关系"再重启"的限度。本轮美俄关系即使实现了"再重启",最终仍有可能"重蹈"之前的"覆辙",美俄之间竞争及对抗的关系模式难以改变。     

“特朗普冲击波”对美欧关系的影响

特朗普当选美国总统对美欧关系具有重要影响。特朗普激进的执政理念及其提出的颇具颠覆性的对外政策主张,令欧洲对未来美欧关系不确定性的增加感到担忧。在美国利益第一的原则下,特朗普将通过施压和采取"交易式"方式同欧洲在诸多领域讨价还价,寻求利己的解决方案。随着潜在分歧与摩擦的增加,美欧关系在今后一个时期可能会趋于紧张,但紧张程度仍将被控制在双方可承受的范围内。考虑到美国在欧洲的核心利益未变以及欧洲盟友对美国依然具有全球战略价值,特朗普治下的美国不可能完全撤出欧洲和北约。经过新一轮的防务资源分配调整,美欧安全防务关系仍会以稳定为主基调。特朗普对欧政策的实施将受到国内因素的一定制约,这也将有助于确保美欧关系处于正常轨道。     

特朗普政府的对台政策及其影响

特朗普执政期间修正了美国国家安全战略,将中国定位为首要战略竞争对手。在中美战略竞争加剧与新冠肺炎疫情相叠加的背景下,特朗普政府调整了对台政策,打"台湾牌"的力度加大,触及到美国涉台政策的传统支柱("一个中国政策""战略模糊""双轨策略"),并加快推动美台"官方关系"和"准同盟关系"。特朗普政府对台政策的调整,是美国遏华战略驱动、两岸关系形势变化、美国战略界保守势力推动等因素相互作用的结果,对台海局势产生了复杂影响。     

中美战略竞争、美国“地位焦虑”与特朗普政府对华战略调整

21世纪以来,随着中国实力快速崛起及美国实力的相对衰落,中美两国在经济、安全及国际制度等领域展开了具有战略博弈性质的竞争。对此,美国倍感焦虑,担心经济影响在亚洲消退、海权优势在西太平洋地区受到挑战、科技优势丧失及制度威望受到冲击。美国的"地位焦虑",在奥巴马执政时期已经若隐若现,特朗普执政后,显著加剧。特朗普政府不仅对美国对华接触政策提出质疑,还明确将中国界定为战略竞争对手,在经贸、人文、两岸关系等方面采取了一系列新政策举措,强化对华制衡与牵制。对于特朗普政府的对华战略调整,我们一方面要积极采取应对措施,另一方面要保持战略清醒与战略定力,防止中美关系走向全面对抗。     

Dealing with North Korea: The case of the agreed framework

The “Agreed Framework,” a deal that the United States and the DPRK cut in Geneva in October 1994 on the North Korean nuclear issue, now approaches the first of its check points to pass a test as to whether it really has a chance to survive. The United States is required to secure by April 21, 1995, a “supply contract” for the provision to North Korea of a light water reactor project as a quid pro quo for North Korea’s eventual dismantlement of its suspected nuclear weapons program over a period of ten or more years. With the reactor issue looming as but the tip of the iceberg that results from the many “ambiguities” and “omissions” of the Agreed Framework, the United States now enters a stage where it will have to brace for another wave of North Korea’s “diplomatic brinkmanship” featured again by threats of reneging on the Agreed Framework and involving the United States in a renewed military conflict on the Korean peninsula.     

Economic Interdependence and Security on the Korean Peninsula: The Impact of North Korean Special Economic Zones

Abstract

Given North Korea’s desire to maintain nuclear weapons—and barring its unexpected collapse—how can the US and its allies establish and maintain a peaceful Northeast Asia? Current US policy alternatives do not offer an effective means for removing North Korean nuclear weapons without creating many more serious problems that jeopardize a stable future for Northeast Asia. However, by engaging in foreign direct investment (FDI) through North Korea’s special economic zones, the United States and other nations can engage North Koreans at all levels of society and build a future environment of cooperation and stability. Such a long-term engagement policy will prove more successful than isolation, sanctions, or military force, and will bolster regional actors’ efforts to develop additional stability-inducing policies.     

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.     

U.S.-VIETNAM RELATIONS IN THE TRUMP ERA

This paper seeks to examine U.S.-Vietnam relations under the Trump administration. It will concentrate on the political, economic and security dimensions of the relationship. It will demonstrate that the Trump administration's policy towards Vietnam has many elements of Obama's policy towards Vietnam. Though President Trump has focused on the trade deficit with Vietnam, the Trump administration has worked closely with the Vietnamese government to intensify the partnership with Vietnam. It should be noted that in the context of China's growing assertiveness in the South China Sea, Hanoi and Washington see that it is in their mutual interests to advance their security cooperation. The last two years have witnessed the increasing partnership between Vietnam and the United States.     

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.     

The Trump-Kim Summit,Future Scenarios,and Japan’s Policy toward the Korean Peninsula

On June 12, 2018, U.S. President Donald Trump and Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (hereafter DPRK or North Korea) leader Kim Jong Un, Chairman of the State Affairs Commission, met in Singapore for the first time. The two men signed a joint declaration and pledged to work toward denuclearizing the Korean Peninsula and improving bilateral relations. These developments raise several questions. What impact will this summit meeting between the two leaders have on regional security? What sorts of opportunities and risks will that impact produce for Japan? How should Japan deal with this fluid regional situation?     

Introduction

Abstract

“The only thing that convinces people like Kim II Sung is the threat of force and extinction,” blasted U.S. senator John McCain as the nuclear crisis in Korea neared the flashpoint in early June 1994. His words rang out as the multilateral tension surrounding North Korea's nuclear program escalated after more than a year of rapid policy vacillations and fluctuating rhetoric. The United States threatened to seek sanctions in the U.N. Security Council, and North Korea vowed to treat any international aggression as an act of war. What is remarkable about McCain's war yearnings, however, is not their aberrance in the otherwise cool-headed world of international diplomacy, but their similarity to imperial declarations toward North Korea since the battles of the Korean War. It is a sentiment routinely echoed by the mainstream Western press.     

“单边”到“多边”——布什政府对奥巴马政府对朝政策的影响

美国布什政府对朝政策有其产生的根源和国内外的制约因素,形成了"单边"到"多边"的对朝政策转变过程并表现出特有的规律。对此认真分析和研究,有助于我们对布什政府的"单边"到"多边"的对朝政策进行整体和宏观把握,厘清布什政府对奥巴马政府对朝政策的影响。     

Trends in North Korean foreign policy

North Korea’s foreign policy track record in the post-cold war era is mixed. Most notable setbacks are the diplomatic normalization between the Soviet Union (now Russia) and South Korea; the reversal of its UN policy that paved the way for the simultaneous admission of the two Korean states to the world organization; and the diplomatic normalization between China and South Korea. On the credit side of Pyongyang’s diplomatic ledger are changes in its relations with Tokyo and Washington. While tangible results have yet to materialize, particularly in North Korea-Japan relations, the groundwork has nonetheless been laid for significant improvement. North Korea’s suspected nuclear weapons development program has played a major role in the unfolding of its relations with the United States. Conceptually, North Korean foreign policy can be explained in terms of its quest for three interrelated goals: security, legitimacy, and development. In the post-cold war era security appears to have emerged as the most important of the three goals. North Korea is at a crossroads. The choices it makes in foreign policy will determine not only the direction of its domestic policy but, ultimately, the survival of the regime itself. The external players in Seoul, Washington, Tokyo, Beijing, Moscow, and Vienna (the IAEA) have varying degrees of leverage over Pyongyang’s policy as well.     

俄罗斯与美欧关系变化及对中国的影响

2014年初乌克兰危机爆发后,俄罗斯与美欧关系降到冷战结束后的最低点。但是,具有战略忍耐力的俄罗斯调整对外政策,先是在叙利亚战场打开局面,接着在2019年与美欧的关系也出现缓和。俄美领导人举行会晤,两国外长互访,两国开始就是否延长《新削减战略武器条约》进行谈判。同时,俄美在军备竞赛、地区冲突、人文限制等领域的争斗依旧激烈。随着2020年美国总统大选临近,"通俄门"阴影是否可能再度影响俄美关系,存在较大的不确定性。俄与欧盟关系相对来说比较稳定,双方都有改善关系、加强合作的愿望。乌克兰问题是影响俄欧关系的重要因素之一,2019年乌克兰总统选举后乌俄关系出现某些松动与对话端倪,这将使俄欧关系在2020年继续朝着缓和与合作的方向发展。美国对俄政策调整对俄中关系也许会产生某种影响,但是对整个俄中关系不会发生大的作用。俄乌关系打破僵局、俄欧加强合作则符合中国的立场和利益,中国乐观其成。