古巴—美国关系50年四题

古巴革命是美国与古巴双边关系历史的重要转折点,美国对古巴革命及其后续发展的反应和政策则是冷战环境中美国战略思想的典型表露.全球冷战终结并没有改变古美之间的冷战式关系,凸显了美国政策的单边主义性质、意识形态色彩和国内政治主导倾向.     

Setting a Course: Congressional Foreign Policy Entrepreneurs In Post-World War II U.S. Foreign Policy

"Congressional foreign policy entrepreneurs" are those legislators who initiate their own foreign policy agendas. These individuals seek to frame policy discussions and mobilize public and interest group interest; to direct congressional agendas toward specific foreign policy issues; to structure and influence the formulation of foreign policies by the executive branch; to revise, refocus, or reformulate foreign policies; to generate alternative and replacement foreign policies; and to fill policy vacuums with their own preferred foreign policies. This paper examines the evolution and impact of such entrepreneurs across the periods of the Cold War Consensus (1946–1967), the Cold War Dissensus (1968–1989), and the Post-Cold War (1990–2000). The paper first provides an overview of the concept of foreign policy entrepreneurs. It then turns to case studies of entrepreneurial initiatives from three prolific entrepreneurs whose careers span the post-World War II era: Senators Jacob Javits, Edward Kennedy, and Christopher Dodd. Together, the overview and cases shed light on the different avenues and activities that entrepreneurs use to address their preferred issues and the impact entrepreneurs have on policy, as well as highlight changes in both over time.     

Foreign Policy in Transition? Human Rights, Democracy, and U.S. Arms Exports

During the Cold War, U.S. foreign policy was dominated by the strategic goal to contain Communism. Human rights and democracy were of secondary importance. In the post-Cold War period, the promotion of human rights and democracy as foreign policy concerns rose in prominence. In the spirit of Andrew Pierre, who once characterized arms transfers as "foreign policy writ large ," this study questions whether the transfer of U.S. arms mirrors America's foreign policy goals. To what extent do U.S. arms transfers reflect a concern for human rights and democracy? As a foreign policy instrument, do U.S. arms transfer patterns mark a transition between Cold War and post-Cold War worlds? To address these questions, I examine the empirical linkage between U.S. foreign policy goals and arms export agreements with developing countries for the years 1981–2002. I use a two-stage model to evaluate the decision-making process. The first-stage addresses whether a country is eligible to receive U.S. arms. If a country successfully passes through the selection stage, it progresses to the second stage where a decision is made about the amount of arms transferred. I use a Heckman model to estimate empirically the determinants of arms at both the initial selection stage and the subsequent amount stage. The findings indicate that during the Cold War years, human rights were not a significant determinant of arms transfers—although democracy was positively linked to U.S. arms in the selection stage. In the post-Cold War period, both human rights and democracy had a meaningful impact in determining the eligibility of a country to receive arms.     

Understanding the Unilateralist Turn in U.S. Foreign Policy

How should we explain the recent unilateralist turn in U.S. foreign policy? Some accounts treat growing American unilateralism as a passing aberration attributable to the neoconservative ideology of the Bush administration. This paper, by contrast, traces U.S. unilateralism to the structural effects, at home and abroad, of the end of the Cold War. Internationally, the removal of the Soviet threat has undermined the "institutional bargain" that once guided relations between the U.S. and its major allies. Absent Cold War imperatives, the U.S. is less willing to provide collective goods through strong international institutions and other states are less likely to defer to U.S. demands for special privileges that exempt the U.S. from normal multilateral constraints. Domestically, the end of the Cold War has weakened the ability of presidents to resist the appeals of powerful veto players whose interests are threatened by multilateral commitments. These factors suggest that American unilateralism may have deeper roots and more staying power than many expect.     

Human Rights and Foreign Policy: Wilson and the Greek Dictators, 1967–1970

The military coup of 21 April 1967 brought to power a repressive dictatorship in Greece. It proceeded to deprive Greeks of their human rights and civil liberties, outraged international public opinion and strained transatlantic relations during the Cold War. The “Greek case” culminated in the withdrawal of Greece from the Council of Europe and calls for its expulsion from NATO. This article will analyse the foreign policy considerations that determined British policy towards the Greek junta during 1967—such as Cold War realities, alliance dynamics, economic and commercial imperatives, regional instability in the Mediterranean and domestic pressures. It will look at how these factors coalesced into shaping British policy towards the Greek junta into one in which human rights had little bearing. The article will also consider the impact of the “Greek case” on the image and credibility of the Labour government of 1966–1970 and explain why vociferous anti-junta activities in London were to create such policy difficulties for the British government.     

20世纪70年代美国在鄂霍次克海的谍报活动探析

美国海军和美国国家安全局(NSA)等部门于20世纪70年代联合发起了在鄂霍次克海海域窃听苏联海底通讯电缆的谍报活动,它曾被认为是美国现代史上最成功的情报搜集活动之一,此即"常春藤之铃"行动。其起根发由、运策决机及东窗事发都有着比较深刻的历史背景。冷战后美国针对有关国家的类似谍报活动远未停止。     

The Growing Role of States in U.S. Foreign Policy: The Case of the State Partnership Program

States can and do play an important role in contemporary U.S. foreign policy. This article will discuss the growing role of states through an investigation of the State Partnership Program (SSP). The SSP pairs state National Guards with the militaries of other countries through U.S. military engagement programs. The state-level National Guard then becomes the primary site for implementing U.S. military engagement programs. Both a federalism and decision-making perspective, however, are unable to recognize this role. The decision-making bias of foreign policy analysis affords states a limited international role and minimal influence in shaping the policies of the government toward other countries. An implementation perspective, however, reveals a growing role of states carrying out U.S. foreign policy, including the "high politics" of national security issues. States give decisions meaning through the practice of policy implementation. A detailed case study of the Maryland–Estonia partnership illustrates how an implementation perspective can recognize a growing role of states in shaping U.S. foreign policy.     

美日同盟的转型与东亚安全秩序的建构

美日同盟是冷战时代的产物,在冷战中发挥了反苏反共的重要作用。冷战结束后,美日同盟在国际社会的角色转型、性质定位正逐步发生演变,并出现日益强化的趋势。冷战后时代,美日同盟的调整对东亚安全秩序产生了重要影响,一方面,它遏制和防范中国的发展;另一方面,它在一定程度上发挥了制衡作用,有利于防止东亚地区危机的爆发。以美日同盟为核心的东亚安全秩序并不利于东亚地区的和平与稳定,因此,要构建良性的东亚安全秩序,必须把以美日同盟为核心的美国同盟体系和作为新兴大国的中国并重,协调处理东亚安全事务。     

The Foreign Policy Beliefs of Political Campaign Contributors

Since the Vietnam War, scholarly interest in public and elite opinion of U.S. foreign policy has grown. Because elites generally have greater access to policy makers and more consistent political views, most work on this topic has focused on elite opinions of foreign policy. Most research has defined the term elite broadly, often placing more emphasis on social status than political power. We will reexamine elite foreign policy beliefs using a different elite, presidential campaign contributors. We have two main goals in this article. First, we will assess the differences between the foreign policy outlooks of political campaign contributors and other elites. While many types of elites may influence policy, political contributors are particularly likely to gain access to policy makers. The second part of this research note offers some food for thought on the origins of these beliefs. We present evidence that foreign policy beliefs are related to the same ideological orientations that shape contributors' views on domestic issues. The origins of foreign and domestic policy views should probably be considered together.     

关于越战期间美国老挝政策的国外成果研究综述

冷战初期，老挝本不是美国东南亚政策的重点问题，但随着越南战争的爆发，美国对老挝的重视程度逐步加深，直至派出地面部队进行干涉。这一问题值得深思。国外针对该领域的研究已硕果累累，但国内的相关研究才刚刚起步。对国外相关研究成果的整理和推介，应有助于推动国内学者在该领域的研究取得更新突破。     

Future U.S.-Russian Relations

Presidential changes in Russia and the U.S. may open new opportunities for improving increasingly important bilateral relations, but expectations are not high. With the elapse of the so-called Putin autocracy and the Bush unilateralism, U.S.-Russian relations are overshadowed by a new ＂Cold Word War,＂ if not a Cold War. The U.S. will continue to accuse Russia of running an autocracy in order to justify its own invasive foreign conduct and gain the moral high-ground. The two powers will be involved in a bitter struggle, alternating between offensives and defensives, containment and cooperation.     

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.     

Human Rights and Foreign Policy: Wilson and the Greek Dictators, 1967-1970

The military coup of 21 April 1967 brought to power a repressive dictatorship in Greece. It proceeded to deprive Greeks of their human rights and civil liberties, outraged international public opinion and strained transatlantic relations during the Cold War. The “Greek case” culminated in the withdrawal of Greece from the Council of Europe and calls for its expulsion from NATO. This article will analyse the foreign policy considerations that determined British policy towards the Greek junta during 1967—such as Cold War realities, alliance dynamics, economic and commercial imperatives, regional instability in the Mediterranean and domestic pressures. It will look at how these factors coalesced into shaping British policy towards the Greek junta into one in which human rights had little bearing. The article will also consider the impact of the “Greek case” on the image and credibility of the Labour government of 1966-1970 and explain why vociferous anti-junta activities in London were to create such policy difficulties for the British government.     

Challenging U.S. Policymakers' Image of an Isolationist Public

A persisting question in international studies is whether academic research can have an impact on the making of foreign policy. Much research has shown that policy decisions can be greatly influenced by misperceptions, just as much as by objective factors. The article describes an effort by academic researchers to challenge U.S. policymakers' image of an actor in the U.S. foreign policy process—the American public. The study's focus was a widely held assumption in the U.S. foreign policy community that the American public in the wake of the Cold War was entering a renewed phase of isolationism, similar to the interwar years. The study first interviewed policy practitioners on their perceptions of the public, then performed a comprehensive review of existing polling data, and finally conducted new polls with input from policymakers themselves. The net result of the elite interviews and the analysis of public attitudes revealed a significant gap in all areas, which is presented in synopsis. Interviews with policy practitioners reveal two key dynamics that could well contribute to policymakers' misreading the public: a failure to seek out information about the public and a tendency to assume that the vocal public is representative of the general public. Indications that the study did have some impact on the thinking of policy practitioners are discussed in the conclusion.     

Exiles and the Marketing of U.S. Policy toward Cuba and Iraq

This paper analyses the role of Cuban Americans and Iraqi Americans as allies of like-minded public officials in the marketing of contested foreign policies to the United States public. Each of these ethnic exile communities played a traditional lobbying role as would be expected of interest groups, but the argument here is that the interactive relationship between the ethnic interest groups and government officials in advocating policy is the more interesting development in these cases. While there are differences in the two cases, the similarities between marketing an embargo and an invasion suggest that foreign-policy analysts may want to pay closer attention to the interactive relationship between exile communities and government officials in policy advocacy. I suggest in conclusion that we need to be wary of according defectors and exiles privileged positions in future foreign-policy debates.     

从美对俄战略看当前美俄的紧张关系

美俄关系是世界上最重要的大国关系之一。美国弱俄、抑俄政策是冷战时期对苏“遏制”战略的继续，意识形态的对抗贯穿美苏和美俄关系的发展过程。近些年来，美俄不断形成相互挑战之势，今年俄格军事冲突又导致美俄对抗势头加剧。但两国不会回到冷战时代，非敌非友的两国关系将会长期保持。     

The Anglo-Protestant Basis of U.S. Foreign Policy

U.S. foreign policy thinking is based ultimately on the particular historical experience and cultural legacy of the American founding, and at the very base of that founding is the preeminence of Anglo-Protestantism. The religious heritage of the United States, a sixteenth century blend of a theological reformation and the rise of modernity in the Enlightenment, has endowed American politics with a predisposition for egalitarian, anti-hierarchical, and contractual forms, and that disposition applies as well to foreign affairs. The syntax, but not the content, of Anglo-Protestantism shapes basic attitudes particularly when political elites face crisis situations, but it is institutionalized in government and society at all levels. Six examples from the post-World War II period illustrate the case.     

U.S. Foreign Aid and Foreign Policy: Building Strong Relationships by Doing It Right!

Foreign aid policies cannot be more successful than their implementation, which inherently involves people and institutions. But people have their own interests and cultural frameworks, and institutions are inevitably grounded in culture and politics. Inattention to the agendas of individuals involved on both sides of foreign aid to Central and Eastern Europe played a major role in its shortcomings. A recent court decision holding two Harvard university scholars guilty of defrauding the U.S. government while running a flagship project to reform the Russian economy underscores the pitfalls in outsourcing traditional functions of government to small, well-connected groups that are not fully accountable in serving the public interest. Drawing on the author's experience studying informal systems and networks over several decades, this article illuminates the importance of foreign policy and aid relationships—how they are set up, who wins and who loses, and how their lack of accountability can contribute to the derailment of nation-building and constructive relations among countries.     

美国文化价值观对美国外交的影响

自美国踏上国际舞台之日起,其外交就带有一个明显的特点,即价值观化。以天赋使命观、种族优越论、扩张意识、实用主义等为基本特征的美国文化隐形影响、指导、规范着美国对外政策的制定与实施,并在对外政策中得到充分的体现。同时,美国外交赤裸裸地强行输出美式民主、自由等价值观,这种观念和行为深刻影响着国际社会。