格鲁吉亚与俄罗斯关系中的美国因素

在格鲁吉亚和俄罗斯关系的发展过程中,格把对俄关系放在外交政策的第一位,同时积极与西方国家建立友好的伙伴关系。美国从格独立后便开始进入外高加索地区,直到2001年“9·11”事件发生之后,美国军事力量进入格鲁吉亚,为格培训军事人员,并开始介入阿布哈兹事务,在格俄关系中的美国因素越来越明显,而俄美在格的争夺也愈演愈烈。本文阐述苏联解体后格鲁吉亚与俄罗斯关系的变化,以及格俄关系起落中的美国因素。     

普京执政时期俄罗斯与格鲁吉亚的关系

在独联体国家关系中,俄罗斯与格鲁吉亚两国关系最为复杂.两国独立以来,由于反恐、驻军和民族问题等诸多因素,彼此间始终龃龉不断.普京执政后.对外高加索各国政策进行了相应的调整.执政初期,普京力图扭转与格鲁吉亚的关系,但由于同格矛盾较深,俄格关系始终没有得到真正好转.格鲁吉亚发生"颜色革命"亲西方的萨卡什维利担任总统后,俄格关系更是急转直下,双方剑拔弩张,几乎濒临战争边缘.如今,由于南奥塞梯冲突,俄格两国已经断交.基于两国战略欲求的背离及彼此间结构性矛盾,俄格关系短期内难有好转.     

俄格冲突的根源探析

近来俄格围绕南奥塞梯的激烈冲突绝非仅仅是涉及其双边关系的一个孤立事件,其背后隐藏着诸多复杂因素;格鲁吉亚的"亲西方"政策、俄格在阿布哈兹和南奥塞梯问题上的历史积怨、以美国为首的西方对俄罗斯的战略挤压以及俄美对里海地区能源的争夺乃是俄格冲突的根源所在;此外,俄罗斯不断提升的综合国力也是催生俄格冲突的一个因素.     

俄罗斯与格鲁吉亚关系的变化及走势

在独联体国家关系中,俄罗斯与格鲁吉亚关系最为复杂.两国独立以来,由于反恐、驻军、历史和民族问题等诸多因素,彼此间始终龃龉不断.叶利钦执政时期,因格鲁吉亚国内形势及俄格两国外交战略的变化,俄格关系起伏较大.普京执政初期,力图扭转与格关系,但由于同格矛盾较深,俄格关系始终没有得到真正好转.格鲁吉亚发生"颜色革命"后,俄格关系更是急转直下,双方剑拔弩张,几乎濒临战争边缘.梅德维杰夫执政后,双方虽均有缓和彼此关系的愿望,但基于两国关系的脆弱性,俄格关系进一步恶化,最终双方发生武装冲突,两国关系降至独立以来的历史最低点.今后,两国关系在一定时期内难有好转.     

俄格冲突的深层原因及影响

2006年9月底,俄罗斯与格鲁吉亚之间的“间谍风波”引发两国关系出现了自苏联解体后的最严重危机。俄格矛盾与冲突的背后是两国在阿布哈兹和南奥塞梯问题上的利益冲突,以及俄罗斯与西方对格鲁吉亚的地缘政治争夺。俄格关系恶化将对格国内和外高地区局势、独联体未来以及俄与西方关系产生一系列重要影响。     

俄格冲突剖析

2008年8月发生的俄格军事冲突有着复杂的历史、现实和地缘政治等多种原因，现今深层次因素是俄美在高加索和中亚地带的角力与博弈。冲突及其引起的国际反应表明，俄罗斯已有足够的政治影响力和军事实力在高加索和中亚地区发挥其传统作用。俄格冲突对独联体今后的发展、对俄格双方与北约的关系、对俄欧及俄美关系都将产生广泛而深远的影响。     

俄格关系新动向

苏联解体后，俄罗斯和格鲁吉亚两国由于历史、民族、驻军等原因，彼此之间矛盾不断。2008年俄格冲突爆发，格鲁吉亚与俄罗斯断交，随后退出独联体，俄格关系进入了冰冻期。近一年来，由于格鲁吉亚政局及外交政策发生了变化，俄格关系出现了改善趋向。     

俄美关系的新发展

"9.11"事件后,俄罗斯在反恐、战略武器等问题上全面加强同美国的合作,而美国为了回报俄罗斯的支持,也明确与俄建立"真正伙伴关系",并承诺让俄在欧洲问题上享有平等地位和发言权,俄美关系从而进入了一个新的发展阶段.但一些制约两国关系的因素和根本性问题远没有解决,俄美关系的前景并不乐观.     

反恐:审视美俄关系的另一种视角

"9·11"事件后反恐成为大国关系的新变量.在"9·11"事件后的最初时期,俄罗斯出于改变自己与美国和西方世界关系冷淡的局面等原因,主动对美国在阿富汗的军事行动进行了积极配合,一度大幅改善了双边关系.然而由于美俄两国之间存在着深刻的结构性战略利益的冲突,随着反恐战争的进行和美国借反恐之名实施自己的战略图谋进程的日益明显,两国在地缘政治领域的冲突趋于明显化和激烈化,同时两国反恐理念的渐行渐远也最终导致美俄关系在迅速改善后不到一年又迅速冷却,美俄双边关系在今后一段时间里继续进行传统地缘政治利益的博弈将依然是两国关系的主线.     

地缘政治的回归与九一一事件后美俄关系的嬗变--以中亚为个案的分析

2001年九一一事件后,美俄关系的一个显著特征就是地缘政治的回归.九一一事件爆发后,俄罗斯一度放弃传统地缘政治观念,与美国进行反恐合作,希望以配合美国反恐战争来换取美俄关系的全面改善.然而,局势的演变使得俄罗斯发现,美国丝毫没有因为俄罗斯的善意而改变自己在地缘上继续挤压、遏制俄罗斯战略空间的政策.地缘政治博弈重新成为美俄关系的主线,而这一点在中亚地区表现得尤为明显.在今后相当长一段时间内,美俄关系的主要内容仍将是两国传统利益,特别是地缘政治利益的继续博弈.这种矛盾冲突只有到美国认为俄罗斯已没有任何可能重新"恢复帝国",而俄罗斯也甘愿满足做一个欧亚大陆腹地的地区大国这么一个角色时才可能告一段落.     

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 EU and Ukraine: Rhetorical Entrapment?

Recently there has been a trend towards the development of two rival sets of alliances in Eurasia: in effect, one Western‐oriented alignment led by the United States and Turkey, including Israel, Georgia, and Azerbaijan. On the other hand, a group of states resisting American and Turkish influence in the Caucasus and Central Asia is developing, led by Russia and Iran, including Syria and Armenia. One of the most important questions for the development of these alignments is their expansion into Central Asia; in this context Uzbekistan's role is crucial. Uzbekistan is the only Central Asian state to pursue a proactive and independent foreign policy, as exemplified in its relations with both its neighbors and great powers. Tashkent has developed close military and security relations with NATO and for a time seemed to hedge its bets on US support, but has lately shown signs of turning back toward increasing security cooperation with Russia and China. Given the strategic value of Uzbekistan and its role as a regional player in its own right, the future course of the country's policies is of great importance to the security of Eurasia.     

Is there any unity to the Trans-Caspian Region? The economic relations between Central Asia and the Caucasus

Since the disappearance of the Soviet Union, the three states of South Caucasus or Trans-Caucasus (Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Georgia) and the five of Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan) have played up their role as intermediaries between Europe and Asia and have tried to constitute the Caspian as an entity. This new Trans-Caspian road obeys political and economic logics as the states of the South Caucasus along with those of Central Asia are interested in bypassing Russia and developing their bilateral relations to acquire new markets in Europe and in Asia. Despite the existence of sometimes divergent, sometimes convergent interests, and the non-negligible political and economic risks, none of the states of the South Caucasus, nor those of Central Asia, want to undermine the dynamic of Trans-Caspian rapprochement.     

美国新中亚战略评析（英文）

The United States' new Central Asia strategy, issued in the context of increased efforts by the US government to contain Russia and China with both elements of continuity and changes, will inevitably have an impact on the development of the Central Asian countries and major-power relations in the region. However, constrained by various factors, the new strategy will hardly yield the expected goals.     

US Policy in Central Asia and Regional Security

The article focuses on American approaches to the problems of regional security and stability in post-Soviet Central Asia since the early 1990s. It discusses the priorities of US policies in Central Asia under the Clinton and George W. Bush administrations and argues that the advancement of US interests in Central Asia requires a coherence between the region-wide and the country-level tiers of American policies. Furthermore, it is argued that since the mid-1990s the development of bilateral relations between Washington and Central Asian countries has not been accompanied by a region-wide policy aimed at reducing security risks in Central Asia. The paper also discusses implications of US activism in Central Asia for long-term regional stability.     

CIVIL-MILITARY RELATIONS IN RUSSIA AFTER 9–11

Can military reform in Russia become a reality, or is it doomed forever to the status of oxymoron? The answer to this question will have as much to do with US-Russian relations as with internal Russian politics and finance. Despite a warm personal friendship between Presidents Putin and Bush, polls show the Russian people remain highly ambivalent about US policies and intentions toward Russia and the CIS. Many inside and outside the military believe the United States will use the war in Afghanistan and its foothold in Central Asia to encircle and weaken Russia. This thinking has spilled over into attacks on Putin for his attempts at military reform, particularly his decision to de-emphasize the strategic nuclear forces. While Putin has made some courageous moves to stem corruption and bring the military to heel, in other cases he has been forced to back off in order to avoid a political backlash. As a result, military reform continues to proceed in fits and starts, still more oxymoron than reality.     

Russian–Japanese relations after the Russo-Japanese war in the context of world politics

Abstract

The Treaty of Portsmouth could not solve all the diplomatic problems between Russia and Japan, and dissenting voices were heard in both countries. Nevertheless, Russo-Japanese relations went in the direction of not only normalization, but also building an alliance. That radical change from hostility has not often happened in history and needs careful research, in particular the early stages of this process after the conclusion of the Treaty of Portsmouth. The construction of an alliance was not the primary goal at the beginning of Russo-Japanese negotiations after the war between the two nations. This goal appeared during the process of solving different problems, and so the international situation is extremely important to understand changes in Russo-Japanese relations. This process had several facets. First, there was the deterioration in Anglo-German relations with a corresponding realignment of British policy towards Russia. Second was the resolution of problems in Central Asia between Russia and Great Britain. Third, there was the mutual interests Japan and Russia had in China, in particular rail interests, which were related to the organic unity of the northern part of the Russian railroad in China. Finally, Russia had the desire to keep relations with France as a corner-stone of foreign policy.     

欧亚主义与俄罗斯对外战略取向

欧亚主义是介于西方派和斯拉夫派之间的一种思潮,认为"俄罗斯既非欧洲国家,也非亚洲国家,而是处于欧亚之间,是连接欧亚文明的桥梁"。俄罗斯从17世纪开始就成为地跨欧亚的国家,因此,在相当长的历史时期内受到来自东西方两种不同文化的影响,并不断吸收不同民族的特点,形成了具有自身特色的文明,即欧亚文明。普京的外交战略思想,注重俄罗斯的历史和传统因素,特别是对欧亚主义的继承。俄罗斯外交呈现出以欧美为主、以亚太地区为补充和辅助的倾向。外交战略的选择,对于未来俄罗斯对外关系的层次和范围无疑将产生巨大影响。     

Competing perspectives on democracy and democratization: assessing alternative models of democracy promoted in Central Asian states

This study examines alternative understandings of democracy and democracy promotion advanced by the US, EU, Russia and China in Central Asia using frame analysis. In the context of this study, ‘frames’ refer to the relatively cohesive sets of beliefs, categories and value judgements as well as specific ways in which these ideas are packaged for the targets of international democratization. The study assesses the implications of alternative representations of democracy promotion and competing models of governance for the prospects of democratization in Central Asia. It concludes that the substance of US and EU democracy promotion in Central Asia has neglected the cultural and political contexts of these states, while the Russian and Chinese models of governance and development have provided a better match to the interests of the ruling elites.     

俄罗斯亚太战略的利益、合作方向与前景

进入新世纪,在俄罗斯的外交战略中亚太地区的地位在不断上升。俄罗斯大部分国土位于亚洲,所以在利用外交手段维护国家领土安全,并为本国东部地区的经济发展创造有利外部条件的同时,提升俄罗斯在亚太地区的影响力,是俄罗斯实施亚太战略的主要目标与利益所在。目前,俄罗斯与亚太地区的合作主要体现在能源、交通运输、粮食和安全保障等领域。但由于受俄罗斯东部地区的经济发展水平,以及俄罗斯参与亚太合作的矛盾心理,特别是与区域内各大国之间的关系等多方面因素的影响,俄罗斯与亚太关系的发展缺乏稳固的基础,进一步发展面临制约。