日美“军事一体化”与日本“军事崛起”

5月初,美国国务卿、国防部长和日本外相、防卫厅长官再次举行“日美安全协商委员会”会议(简称“2 2会议”),就采取具体措施,强化日美同盟,明确日美军事分工合作,落实去年2月19日“2 2会议”提出的“地区与世界共同战略目标”最终达成协议。这一协议的实质是推动日本加强军事力量,实现日美“军事一体化”,进而将日本全面纳入美国全球战略体系,使之成为美国维持和加强其全球和亚太霸权地位中的“坚定的战略伙伴”。其动向直接关系到日美军事同盟与日本国家政策未来走向,导致亚太乃至世界战略格局的重组,与我国安危密切相关,值得严重关注。一…     

评美国主流学派之美日同盟观

就20世纪90年代强化后美日同盟的未来发展,美国学者提出了“维持同盟现状”、“适应日本的崛起”、“渐进主义”、“成熟的伙伴”等观点,其中对美国新政府影响最大的是“阿米蒂奇-奈报告”,这一报告呼吁美国政府基于美英特殊关系的模式提升美日双边安全关系,并确定有6个领域需要作重大调整才能创造一种成熟的伙伴关系和持久的美日同盟。这些主流思想学派存在着一个共同观点和目标,即都支持美国政府维持或加强美日同盟关系。他们都认为美日同盟对于亚太地区的长期和平与稳定,特别是两国的安全利益是至关重要的,因而必须予以维持或强化。     

美日同盟关系新透视--《美日安全同盟》介评

美日安全同盟一直是美国在亚太地区最为完整和最为牢固的军事同盟。自 2 0世纪 90年代中期以来 ,面向 2 1世纪 ,特别是在“9·11”的新背景下 ,美日军事同盟走向何处已成为亚太地区安全事务中最引人注目的关注点。由外交官特德·奥修斯撰写美国普雷格出版社于 2 0 0 2年 6月出版的新著《美日安全同盟关系 :为何重要并且如何加强同盟》①在“9·11”后的反恐背景下解读了美日安全关系的发展状况 ,并对其未来走向进行了分析。首先 ,该书对美日在东亚的利益进行了界定。一是在俄罗斯和东南亚地区。俄处于“美日防卫合作新指针”涵盖的“远东”…     

奥巴马时期日美安全合作的变化

2015年4月27日,日本、美国共同修订并发表最新版《日美防卫合作指针》(以下简称“指针”).此次日美共同修订“指针”,经过了长期的酝酿和充分的准备.早在日本民主党执政后期,2012年4月30日野田佳彦首相访问美国时,就已经开始与美探讨修订“指针”,强化并扩大日美安全合作.①但是,因日本民主党下台、政权发生更迭,“指针”修订工作暂时拖延.2012年12月安倍晋三二度上台执政后,日美强化安全合作再次被提上双方议程,双方加快了修订“指针”的进程.2013年10月,日美双边外长和防长参加的日美安全保障协议委员会(也称“2+2”会议)确定:“为提升日美同盟能力,计划于2014年内完成新一轮指针修订,于2014年10月出台中期报告.”②2014年4月,奥巴马总统访日期间,公开承诺美日安保条约第五条适用于钓鱼岛.     

美国对日政策重估及其影响

美国开始对亚太安全形势和日本作用重新评估，要求重视和加强美日同盟。美国调整对日政策可能使美日关系进一步向平等方向发展，以换取日本对美国亚太战略的支持与合作。这是近年来美国加大对亚太地区投入战略的一部分，美日双方对此都十分重视。这对今后美日关系和亚太安全形势的走向会产生影响，但不会改变中美日三角关系的基本框架。     

解读日美军事同盟的新趋势及日本的战略意图

近年来日美军事同盟出现的新变化是深化和细化军事合作的具体事项,“共同应对全球性问题”。日美同盟的发展趋势是“世界中的日美同盟”。日美同盟今后的作用是“共同保卫日本”、“共同应对周边事态”,以及“共同应对全球性问题”。日本加强日美同盟的战略意图是利用日美军事同盟,确保日本安全;依赖日美军事同盟,遏制地区危机;依靠日美军事同盟,管理国际安全。     

美日安全合作:从地区走向全球

美日同盟是美国维持亚太秩序的重要基石,也是日本外交政策的基轴,随着中国的崛起,美日双方已然意识到原有的同盟框架难以应对来自中国的挑战。为此,美日通过制订新的《美日防卫合作指针》,强化美日同盟,加强双方在全球范围内的安全合作。然而,美日安全合作同时也面临着质疑与否定,在美日两国内,长期以来一直存在着对美日同盟的争论。未来美日安全合作将如何发展,不仅取决于日本的安全感知,更取决于美国在国内国际新形势下将会采取的战略。由于美国新任总统特朗普一以贯之的对日负面认知,使得日本政府和国民对于特朗普的对日政策不抱期待。然而,特朗普上台后并不会撤走驻日美军,更不会让美日同盟解体,同时,商人出身的特朗普并不反对自由贸易,其反对的是无法贯彻其意志的自由贸易。因此,在特朗普总统任期中,其特有的个性和自信,将会使未来美国的对日政策打上"特式"烙印,这为美日关系的发展增加了许多不确定因素,美日同盟可能面临新的危机。     

日美"2+2"会议文件与日美同盟转型

2007年5月,日美举行外长与防长"2 2"会议,发表《同盟的变革:日美安全及防卫合作进展》共同文件。该文件赋予日美同盟新的内涵,确认了几年来同盟转型的成果,详细说明了日美如何联合运用导弹防御系统为"提高整体威慑力"服务,并指明同盟的未来方向及重点。其中还有部分表述涉及中国,由此可以预料,该共同文件的落实必将对中国产生影响。     

日本民主党政权下日美同盟调整的背景及动向

2009年，日本民主党上台执政，日关同盟关系随之产生变化，日美在一系列双边及多边问题上暴露出明显的分歧和斗争，日美同盟之所以呈现出斗争的态势是基于日美双方不同甚至对立的利益考量，同时日美在应对共同的威胁时又表现出彼此拉近和合作的一面。未来，日美同盟仍将继续发展，影响东亚乃至亚太地区局势稳定和地区合作进程。     

杜特尔特执政后美菲同盟关系演变

自2016年6月菲律宾总统杜特尔特执政以来,美菲同盟关系经历了复杂的变化。奥巴马执政末期美菲同盟关系由密切变为冷淡;2017年1月美国总统特朗普上任后,美菲关系得到改善,但双方之间的矛盾犹存。尤其是2018年底菲律宾国防部长洛伦扎纳提出审查《美菲共同防御条约》,引发轩然大波。美菲同盟关系跌宕起伏的原因包括:两国领导人关系、各自利益的重心方向、国内局势需求、外交政策变化等等。目前,菲律宾提出审查《美菲共同防御条约》一事尚无结果,未来两国同盟关系的演变发展仍将充满变数,但总体是继续维系甚至有所发展。     

论当前中美俄三边关系新特征和新趋舅

国际金融危机以来,中美俄三边关系进入以合作为主的新阶段。在普京重新出任总统后,美俄能否在欧洲反导问题上形成共识,将成为影响美俄关系发展的重要因素。未来,中美俄三边关系将会是各国在争取自身战略利益的过程中不断寻求妥协,将彼此间的竞争控制在规则允许的范围内。基于美国实力相对衰弱、俄中实力上升、解决全球性和地区问题上需要合作等因素,三国关系仍可能以继续保持建设性合作的基本态势向前发展。     

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。     

＂Strategic Reassurance＂ and the Future of China-U.S. Relations

＂Strategic reassurance,＂ a new concept in Obama＇s China policy, should be fostered bilaterally by dialogue designed to highlight and reinforce the areas of common interests while addressing the sources of mistrust directly. Yet in practice it seems that U.S. strategic reassurance has contrasted all China＇s core interests. The United States and China must recognize their different social systems and asymmetrical national strength in seeking to realize strategic stability. Crisis control requires sophisticated management of both side, especially on sensitive issues like weapons sales, the Dalai Lama, and the South China Sea dispute.     

The Role of Ethnic Interest Groups in U.S. Foreign Policy: The Case of the Cuban American National Foundation

The role and range of activities of ethnic interest groups in U.S. foreign policy has received relatively little scholarly attention, though in the wake of the Cold War analysis of their activities has increased. The case of the Cuban American National Foundation (CANF) during the 1980s suggests, however, that ethnic interest group activity is not new and may be far more complex than our standard conceptualizations allow. We review the literature on the role of ethnic interest groups in U.S. foreign policy and assemble some common assumptions and arguments about their origins, roles and relations with the government, and the conditions that favor their success. Then we examine origins of CANF, its web of relationships with government even during the Cold War, and its role as a near co-executor of policy. We conclude by assessing what the CANF case suggests about standard views of the roles of at least some ethnic interest groups in the process of making U.S. foreign policy, including the need to see how the state may try to use and sponsor such groups to further its policy goals.     

Diversity Management in World Politics. Reformist China and the Future of the (Liberal) Order

Given the widely shared belief that, following a long period of crisis, the American-led liberal world order is now in transition, the question arises: what comes next? Considering China’s ‘parallel order-shaping’ project with respect to the liberal order as a harbinger of a ‘multi-order world’, it is reasonable to expect a concert-like mode of ordering, which will draw on a new common language to reach consensus among proactive stakeholders at the global level. Those interested in maintaining the liberal character of this arrangement, such as the EU, should therefore steadily engage in the process leading to its establishment in order to gain and retain full membership while enhancing their discursive power.     

Gradualism and uncertainty in international union formation: The European Community’s first enlargement

This paper introduces a new theoretical framework of international unions qua coalitions of countries adopting a common policy and common supranational institutions. I make use of a three-country spatial bargaining game of coalition formation, in order to examine the endogenous strategic considerations in the creation and enlargement of international unions. Why would we observe a gradualist approach in the formation of the grand coalition even if the latter is assumed to be weakly efficient? I propose asymmetric information about the benefits of integration as a mechanism that can generate gradual union formation in equilibrium. As it turns out, it may well be in the ‘core’ countries’ interest to delay the accession of a third, ‘peripheral’ country in order to (1) stack the institutional make-up of the initial union in their favor and (2) signal their high resolve to wait out the expansion of their bilateral subunion. A related case from the European experience provides an interesting illustration.     

The U.S. and third World Revolutionary States: Understanding the Breakdown in Relations

Although scholars focused on Soviet–American relations during the Cold War, the greatest number of conflicts for the U.S. occurred in the Third World, and most of these were with revolutionary states. Could U.S. policies toward the new revolutionary states have prevented the almost universal collapse in relations? Two dominant explanations for this breakdown are (1) American hostility toward revolutionary change and (2) Stephen Walt's variant of the spiral model. Using the comparative case approach and selecting "hard cases," this article disputes these explanations and offers a new theory based on the externalization of domestic conflict in the revolutionary states. Given their ideological goals, the radicals externalized their domestic conflicts with the moderates, who had transnational ties with the U.S., by fomenting tensions with Washington. To demonstrate that this theory can be generalized, this article varies the dependent variable and shows through a critical case that its lack of conflict can best be explained by the absence of the conditions that lead to externalization. The foreign policies of both the U.S. and revolutionary states are explained by classical realism as opposed to Walt's structural realism, which fails to account for the foreign policies of Third World states.     

Perils of parliamentarism? Political systems and the stability of democracy revisited

Parliamentary systems are generally regarded as superior to presidential ones in democratic sustenance. This article contributes to the debate on the relationship between systems of government and the survival of democracy by bringing in a new perspective and analysing the experiences of 131 democracies during 1960–2006. We argue that systems of government do matter, but their effects are indirect; they exert their influence through societies' prior democratic records. Confirming the conventional argument, our data analysis shows that uninterrupted parliamentary democracies face significantly lower risks of a first breakdown than their presidential counterparts. Contrary to the common understanding, however, we find that the risk of a democratic breakdown can be higher for parliamentary regimes than for presidential regimes among the countries whose democracy has collapsed in the past. Furthermore, the risk of a previously failed democracy falling again grows as (the risk of) government crises increase(s). Hence our study questions the common belief that parliamentary systems are categorically more conducive to democratic stability than presidential ones.     

司盟理论视角下的菲美同盟构建

美国和菲律宾是传统的盟国,早在1951年两国就缔结了共同防御条约,关菲同盟成为冷战链条上的重要一环。冷战结束后,双方的同盟关系逐渐弱化。21世纪初的几年间,为了应对全球的恐怖主义的威胁,双方的同盟关系逐渐走上了快速发展的轨道。     

Civic Fusion: Moving from Certainty through Not Knowing to Curiosity

Civic fusion occurs when people bond across passionate difference to solve a shared public problem. It requires bringing people close together under conditions that enable them to bond, even as their polarizing beliefs remain intact. In managing multiparty multi‐issue negotiations, public policy mediators help disparate, passionate parties negotiate actionable agreements. To achieve and sustain civic fusion, interested parties recognize and acknowledge confining assumptions and move through a continuum in which their certainty about each other and their presumed solutions is challenged and transforms to uncertainty and then to curiosity. They connect across common public goals and find mutual understanding and respect for the interests of others as they come to understand and accept the opportunities and limitations that are inherent to their complex situations. A steady stream of new understandings moves people beyond their long‐held perspectives to foster productive negotiations and build innovative solutions. Ultimately, the parties generate sustainable consensus agreements even as they retain their deeply held and often opposing values and beliefs.