俄罗斯远东地区的中国人问题

一本世纪末俄罗斯的报刊上曾响起了“黄祸”的声音，不能不使人想起上个世纪末、本世纪初沙皇政府在远东地区同“黄种人”———主要是同中国人斗争的历史。人们由此也会记起一句有名的格言：“历史常常在重复”。按１８５８年的中俄《瑷珲条约》和１８６０年的中俄《北京条约》，黑龙江以北、乌苏里江以东地区正式划归俄国。此后，尽管沙皇政府采取了一系列鼓励欧俄臣民移居黑龙江地区的优惠政策，但由于种种原因，并未收到明显效果。从１８５９年到１８８２年，共有１４４０９人移居到这一地区，平均每年移民只有微不足道的６０２人。［１…     

俄国割占黑龙江、乌苏里江地区后当地华人商业的形成和发展

黑龙江以北、乌苏里江以东百万平方公里的土地按照中俄《瑷珲务约》和中俄《北京条约》正式划归俄国后，为了在这一新占领地区站稳脚跟，俄国政府不但对居住在这一地区的中国人采取了宽容的策略，而且极力开展没有任何限制和监控的自由贸易。于是，中国人在当地的商业开始形成规模并迅速发展。     

19世纪末至20世纪初期俄国远东地区华人探讨

沙皇俄国通过<瑷珲条约>和<中俄北京条约>割占中国领土100多万平方公里,还不包括大面积海疆.为了巩固、开发这一地区,在劳动力奇缺情况下,沙俄不得不招募数十万华人.这件事情在中国人口迁移史上占有一定地位.     

中俄边境贸易的过去、现在与未来

中国与俄罗斯的边境贸易源于1689年的《中俄尼布楚条约》,至今已有300多年的历史。虽然两国的边境贸易经历了沙皇俄国、苏联、俄罗斯联邦等不同的历史时期,但是友好往来、互通有无的良好传统一直没有中断。在当前中俄经贸合作全面展开的新态势下,中俄边境贸易仍具有巨大的发展潜力,随着中俄两国国家关系的持续良好发展,中俄边境贸易又迎来了新的历史机遇。     

大事综览

2001年7月大事,各方有如下评述: 一、《中俄睦邻友好合作条约》签署。7月15日,中国国家主席江泽民访问俄罗斯,与俄总统普京签署了《中俄睦邻友好合作条约》。这个条约是指导21世纪中俄关系发展的纲领性文件,贯穿着两国世代友好、永不为敌的和平思想,为中俄永做好邻居、好伙伴、好朋友奠定了牢固的法律基础。国际社会对条约的签订纷纷发表评论。美国务院发言人鲍彻16日说,中俄双方签署此条约对美不构成“特定威胁”,也并不意味着两国建立了联盟。条约中不含有诸如共同防御之类的条款,“我们并不认为这是一场得失所系的赌赛”。针对条约中的有关内容,鲍彻称,美国有权退出反导条约,它将不顾中俄两国的反对,继续研制和部署反弹道导弹系统。17日,国务院发言人里克评论称,中俄维持稳固的双边关系     

清代中俄恰克图边关互市始末

中俄两国贸易源远流长。早在17世纪,中俄两国就已经建立了经常性的贸易联系。频繁来华的俄国商队是那时中俄商品交流的主要媒介。1728年中俄《恰克图条约》签订后,中俄贸易形成了商队贸易和边境贸易两种形式并存的格局。从1756年起,俄国政府不再派商队来北京。到1762年在北京的商队贸易完全停止。边境贸易则成了中俄贸易的主要形式。“恰克图互市”则是根据《恰     

阿尔巴津人在中俄关系史上的地位

阿尔巴津人先是入侵中国领土的侵略者，后来变成了中国人。因为他们的存在，中俄签订了第一个平等条约——《尼布楚条约》，确立了正式的交往关系；也是因为他们的存在，俄国东正教传入了中国，并引来了俄国宗教传道团驻华240年。阿尔巴津人在中俄关系史上具有重要地位。     

远东早期开发中的外国劳工(上)

1858和1860年，沙皇俄国通过《瑷珲条约》和《北京条约》割占了中国外兴安岭以南、黑龙江以北和乌苏里江以东100多万平方公里的土地。至此，西起贝加尔湖、东至太平洋萨哈林诸岛、南起黑龙江和乌苏里江沿岸、北到北冰洋广亵的俄国远东地区疆界最终形成。面对新占领的地区，沙皇     

庆祝《中俄睦邻友好合作条约》签署十五周年研讨会

正6月7日,我院与中俄友好、和平与发展委员会联合举办的"中俄战略协作与国际秩序构建——庆祝《中俄睦邻友好合作条约》签署十五周年"学术研讨会在京召开。中俄友好、和平与发展委员会主席戴秉国作主旨发言。苏格院长主持开幕式。与会专家就《中俄睦邻友好合作条约》签署的重大历史意义、欧亚地缘政治格局走势以及深化中俄务实合作的优先方向等议题进行了深入探讨。     

19世纪中叶朝鲜人向俄国远东移民原因探析

19世纪60年代,俄国远东地区出现了第一批朝鲜移民。朝鲜人向俄国移民的初期,移民得到积极安置,此后每年都有大批朝鲜人迁入俄国,他们逐渐成为俄国远东地区的主要劳动力。朝鲜人向俄国远东地区移民,不仅受东北亚国际关系的影响,更取决于俄国、朝鲜乃至中国的国内状况,它是在国内外综合因素作用下所引发的一种国际移民现象。     

The U. S. -Russian Dispute on the Implementation of the INF Treaty and Future Trend北大核心CSSCISSCI

In July 2014, the U. S. State Department, in its arms-control annual report, accused Russia of violating the INF Treaty signed by the U.S. and the USSR in 1987, triggering a new round of diplomatic confrontation between the two countries. The reasons for the frequent U. S. -Russia disputes on the INF Treaty are multiple, including historical roots, security concerns and realistic political factors of the both sides. The future of the INF Treaty will depend on the dynamic evolution of both U.S. and Russian politics and its impact on the security environment of the two countries. In the short term, the U.S. and Russia will continue to focus on solving the problems of implementing the treaty; in the long term, the U.S. and Russia are likely to transform the INFT into a multilateral treaty.     

Triad of terror: post-START reductions in broader context

Abstract

This paper considers the present condition and future prospects for post-Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (post-START) nuclear arms reductions in the following sequence. First, we review the essential features of the agreement between Obama and Russian President Dmitri Medvedev in July 2009, for a START follow-on agreement. Second, we discuss the larger political and military-strategic contexts within which these post-START negotiations will play out. Third, we perform an analysis to determine whether the START follow-on guidelines would meet prospective requirements for mutual deterrence and, in addition, whether US–Russian reductions could safely go even lower. Fourth, we take a specific look at the estimated impact of defenses on deterrence stability under post-START reductions. Fifth, pertinent conclusions are summarized.     

Russian policies on central and eastern Europe: An overview

After the collapse of both the Warsaw Treaty Organisation and the Council of Mutual Economic Assistance in 1990—91 Russia has lost highly effective instruments of (repressive) control of the East European countries and has been left without any significant influence on the economic, political and military developments in the region ever since. This can partly be explained by the deep distrust and emotional reserve vis‐à‐vis Russia on behalf of the new ruling elites in the region. A very important additional factor, however, has been the lack of a clear and coherent Russian strategy on the region in the early years of independent Russian statehood. After the initial loss of importance the region has regained prominence only indirectly as a crucial variable in Russian relations with Western countries and institutions such as NATO, the WEU, and the EU. Though deeper economic and trade relations between Russia and the region seem mutually advantageous, a major rapprochement seems to be blocked by political reservations and considerations.     

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.     

《中导条约》与全球战略稳定论析

《中导条约》是冷战期间美苏达成的一项重要军控条约,是全球战略稳定的支柱之一。2019年8月,美俄相继退约,引发国际社会极大关注。人们担心,条约退场将冲击全球战略稳定,刺激军备竞赛,影响欧亚安全形势,削弱国际军控体系。中国是美国退约重要借口之一,条约作废势必深刻影响中国外部安全环境。《中导条约》从诞生、发展到消亡,有着深刻的国际、国内和个人三个层面的演变动因,归根结底起决定性作用的是国际格局变迁。20世纪80年代,苏美攻守异势促成了《中导条约》的诞生;进入21世纪后,北约对俄的挤压以及中导技术扩散促使俄罗斯抛出条约全球化倡议;近年来,美国霸权地位相对衰落促其选择退约。但美俄两国政治形势变化及领导人更迭也深刻影响了条约的“生、住、变、灭”的时机和方式。戈尔巴乔夫的“新思维”改革与当时高涨的核裁军运动为签署《中导条约》提供了特殊的政治、社会背景。特朗普政府奉行“美国优先”理念,频频废约“退群”,《中导条约》随之沦为牺牲品。在不同历史时期,陆基中导在全球战略稳定中所起的作用不同。在20世纪60年代初,它是美苏中央威慑的支柱。在20世纪70~80年代,它是影响延伸威慑的重要因素。进入21世纪后,它成为俄罗斯对付美国导弹防御的斗争手段。当前,陆基中导在跨域威慑中扮演日益重要的角色。大国中导博弈正卷土重来,但它必将带有与以往不同的诸多新特点。     

权力欲望中的主权想象——试论1863年《法柬条约》的历史意义

柬埔寨历史的编纂中一个显著的现象是，学界普遍认为1863年的《法柬条约》的意义乃是标志着柬埔寨沦为法国的保护国。本文将从《法柬条约》的文本人手，重新释读该条约的历史意义，以揭示出该条约的签订曾在法国、柬埔寨和暹罗3国之间掀起一场话语权争端。并且在争端的背后，柬埔寨固有的空间话语系统开始被严重摧毁，法国殖民者的主权想象通过权力机制的运作不断折射在柬埔寨。     

‘Weak ally’ or ‘strong enemy?’: Japan in the eyes of Russian diplomats and military agents, 1900-1907

Abstract

At the dawn of the twentieth century, ignorance towards the growing military power of Japan led Imperial Russia to her unexpected and decisive loss of the war of 1904–1905. Just ten years earlier in 1895, Japan was almost half-robbed of the spoils of her victory over China by the Western Powers (including Russia), which insisted on revising the Treaty of Shimonoseki. The Boxer Rebellion of 1899–1901 stopped this confrontation and turned Japan and Russia into allies for a short time: Russian and Japanese soldiers fought together against the Chinese, constituting the two largest units among the five allied troops with Russians playing the leading role on the battlefield and the Japanese being their loyal deputy (as it was viewed by Russian media of the time). All these circumstances led Russia to underestimate the Japanese army in the following years. However, the Russo-Japanese War itself changed that attitude, turning it into a sort of ‘a-next-war-to-be-hysteria’ among the Russian officials who served in Japan after the war. The reports by Russian military agents and diplomats from special collections in the Hoover Institution of War, Columbia University, and other archives used in this paper show us that despite being their government's only ‘eyes’ watching the Orient, sometimes those eyes were ‘blinded’ by the loss in the recent war and by their own experiences. One major reason for this was that many Russian diplomats, military agents and spies had long been serving in the Far East, and for some of them the transformation of Japan from ‘weak ally’ to ‘strong enemy’ status happened so swiftly, they came to overestimate this new ‘peril.’ Another problem was Japanese language skill. In the same way that Russia could not properly predict the growing power of Japan before 1904, she wanted after the war to obtain all possible information about her neighbor and, thus, paid special attention to educating a new generation of oriental specialists.     

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.     

Interagency bargaining and international negotiation: Lessons from the open skies treaty talks

Internal bargaining among government agencies has a direct effect on the formal external negotiation, particularly with regard to the flexibility of the negotiators and their ability to reach agreements. This article illustrates how interagency bargaining within the U.S. and Soviet governments affected the negotiation of the 1992 Open Skies Treaty between the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the former Warsaw Pact.He is currently directing a research project at the center on the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons.