欧盟的“韧性”与东盟的“抗御力”——一项区域核心概念的比较研究

当下学界流行的"韧性"(resilience)术语是2016年欧盟"全球战略"中的核心概念。这一概念与印尼在20世纪60年代末提出、东盟在1976年写入《东南亚友好合作条约》的"抗御力"(resilience)属于"同词异译"。"韧性"与"抗御力"之间既有异同,也有联系。其中,对国家实力、区域安全、综合与合作的安全治理这三种基本要素的共同强调是"韧性"成为东盟与欧盟共有概念的关键。这三大要素的凸显又源于东盟和欧盟前后经历的相似的域内外安全形势以及二者在规范与机制层面存在的联系与相互影响。但是,韧性与抗御力之间在规范扩散路径上亦存在显著差异,规范语境、规范设置行为体及规范-机制关系等方面的不同是这种差异的主要成因。     

论东南亚区域主义的兴起与东盟意识的增强

本文阐述了东南亚区域主义的兴起与区域主义意识的发展,指出东盟历经30余年的不断整合与协调,已逐渐培育了一种区域合作的"东盟意识",形成一种兼顾彼此利益的风尚.不断增强东盟意识是21世纪东盟的成功之路.     

欧盟与区域间主义:区域效用与全球意义

区域间主义已成为国际关系中一种新的现象,而欧盟在其中扮演着关键的领跑者角色。欧盟区域间主义以综合性、多元性、契约性、条件性等核心特征,形成一种独特的欧盟模式。它不仅通过规范扩散、认同强化、利益共享和制度建设给欧盟自身发展带来了重要区域效用,而且通过对基于区域一体化的新型南北关系的探索和对世界多极化趋势及多区域主义全球新秩序建设进程的推动,对全球政治经济产生了积极的影响。     

创造新世纪的文化政策

今年7月20日,金大中总统在接受《时代》周刊杂志的采访时对有关“第二次建国”方向的提问,归纳为六个方面进行了回答。即,其基本哲学是并行发展民主主义和市场经济,具体内容如下:(1)以民主主义代替权威主义;(2)以市场经济代替官治经济;(3)把民主主义发展成为世界主义;(4)把中央集权制换为地方分权;(5)把以工业为中心的产业结构发展为以知识为中心的产业结构;(6)从南北对抗主义中脱离出来,向安保和缓和并行发展的方向转换等。     

东亚区域间主义:理论与现实

作为国际治理结构的一部分,东亚的区域间主义在解决当代国际关系中日益增多的跨区域问题发挥了重要作用。本文从经验和理论层面对区域间主义的概念、形式进行了梳理,扩大了对东亚区域间主义的理论认识。通过相关理论分析,本文认为权力平衡、利益共享、地区身份建构等因素直接推动了东亚区域间主义的发展,但东亚区域间主义仍然处于考验之中,其发展还取决于诸多相关因素。     

历史遗产及欧亚区域一体化

苏联历史以何种方式影响着欧亚区域主义(Eurasian regionalism)?尽管很多文献已注意到"后苏联"区域主义概念本身,即已蕴含着历史在其中所发挥的关键作用。但关于"苏联"历史遗产具体影响的研究,尚散布于文献之中且少被关注。这种历史遗产至少在两个方面影响着欧亚区域主义:一方面,它是区域组织(regional organizations)发展的隐性环境因素;另一方面,通过路径依赖的惯性作用,直接影响欧亚区域组织本身的演进。由于苏联遗产,欧亚区域主义的发展与其他地区的区域主义大相径庭。     

韩国FTA政策与东亚区域主义的未来

本文首先阐述了韩国过去与现在的贸易政策,以及韩国FTA政策从区域内向区域外的转变,并分别从国际、地区和国内三个层面详细分析了这一转变的原因。在此基础上,探讨了韩国跨区域自由贸易协定对东亚区域主义的影响。随着更多的亚洲国家签订自由贸易协定,将对东亚区域经济一体化产生积极影响。东亚跨区域自由贸易协定面临的最大挑战是,东亚各国是否有能力来共同协调相互间的利益。     

新区域主义理论:渊源、发展与综合化趋势

国际关系新区域主义理论是针对全球化背景下“新区域主义”这一世界性现象提出来的,但其理论渊源可追溯到冷战时的欧洲一体化理论,尤其是交流主义和新功能主义。目前,这一理论既形成了包括新现实主义、新古典现实主义、新自由制度主义和自由政府间主义等理性主义理论、“新区域主义方法”、“世界秩序方法”等反思主义流派以及社会建构主义在内的多样化局面,又逐步呈现出建立在理论、历史、现实与比较方法之上的综合化发展趋势。     

区域安全竞争中的东亚区域主义——基于对欧洲/北美区域主义的比较分析

区域主义的启动和深化受区域内外安全环境的影响。欧洲区域主义的启动和深化与其内外安全环境之间呈正相关关系,因而它得以历经冷战而不衰,并在冷战后进一步强化。比较而言,北美区域主义的深化与其内外安全环境总体上都是负相关关系,因而北美区域主义至今基本上仍仅限于经济领域。与北美区域主义类似,东亚区域主义的深化与东亚区域内外安全环境也基本上是负相关关系,但不同的是,由于东亚区域的内部安全环境是竞争性的,因此东亚区域的"共同体感觉"虽然呈日益强化之势,但总体上说是脆弱的。东亚区域主义的深化不仅受区域内部安全竞争的挑战,还受到区域外部的竞争性安全环境———区域间大国和全球大国安全竞争———的制约。     

国别区域研究的内涵、争论与趋势

国别区域研究是关于一国域外世界学术知识体系的总和。然而,关于国别区域研究内涵的界定,在学界却一直充满争论。事实上,作为对域外国别和地区进行的知识体系建构,国别区域研究从一开始就是域内和域外区分的地理属性、学理和实践并重的意义属性、人文与社会学科融合的方法属性的统一体,具有明显的跨文化、跨学科、跨区域的特征,本质上是一门交叉学科。通过分析学界在科学主义与事业主义、普遍主义与特殊主义、先验研究与经验研究、全球主义与地区主义等方面的争论,发现国别区域研究存在着全球化、在地化、学科化和部落化四个发展趋势。     

民主化和区域主义相关性研究:东盟的地区实践

民主化的实践对于东南亚区域主义产生了深远影响。随着东南亚地区合作的不断推进,政治转型成为该地区当下所面临的重要议题。本文拟结合民主化与区域主义两者关系的分析,探索传统上以精英为主导的区域主义正在经历的深刻嬗变。研究表明,民主化对于东南亚区域主义发展范式的影响是复杂的,以公民社会为主要载体的参与式区域主义方兴未艾,两种类型的区域主义勾画了东盟地区治理的图景。     

The political economy of economic regionalism in northeast asia: A unique and dynamic pattern

Since the mid-1980s there has been a gradual but steady rise of economic regionalism in Northeast Asia. However, the economic regionalism in Northeast Asia reveals its own dynamics and is presented in a form that is different from those in Western Europe and North America. Characterized by a “flying geese pattern” that has been developing in the region over time, the regionalism is soft and open; that is, it is uninstitutionalized and less discriminatory against other economies. This ongoing regionalism in Northeast Asia will inevitably bring profound political and economic implications for the region and beyond. Kevin G. Cai earned a Ph.D. in political science at Queen's University in Canada in 1996 Currently he is teaching at Kyonggi University in South Korea. His major research interests include the political economy of economic regionalism in the world economy, the regionalism in the Asia-Pacific area, APEC, China's integration into the regional and global economy, and various political, economic and security issues in the Asia-Pacific region. The author would like to thank Michael K. Hawes for his valuable comments on the early draft of this article.     

东盟特惠贸易安排:回顾与评价

东盟特惠贸易安排是东南亚早期区域经济合作中的一项主要内容。从1977年的《东盟特惠贸易安排协定》开始,东盟各国围绕商品关税减让等主要方法,对增加东盟区内的贸易往来作出了持久的努力。本文回顾了东盟特惠关税安排的缘起与发展,分析了该项目所取得的成就与问题,并从东南亚区域经济合作整个发展史的角度评价了东盟特惠贸易安排的历史地位与意义。     

“Great and Powerful Friends of Yesteryear”: Australia's Dilemma with “East of Suez”, 1967–71

Great Britain's decision to withdraw its forces from Southeast Asia by the mid-1970s created uncertainty for those living in the region. The potential loss of British presence led Australia to attempt to discourage Britain from leaving, while also recsognising recognising the decision as an opportunity to re-evaluate Australia's strategic outlook in Southeast Asia and the Pacific. Scholars have treated Asia and the Pacific as two regions with distinct experiences related to withdrawal. Some address changing Anglo-Australian relations but include little, or no, mention of the Pacific territories. Others, writing about the Pacific, focused more the individual paths taken by each island than on connecting the larger process of decolonisation in the Pacific to the one in Asia. This article pairs Australia's Strategic Basis of Defence papers with documentary evidence across multiple departments in Canberra to understand how British withdrawal from east of Suez connected Australian concerns about security in Southeast Asia and the Pacific Islands. By connecting the two areas through Australian interests, the withdrawal from east of Suez can be understood as a catalyst for Australia's pursuit of a distinctive role within its neighbourhood.     

战后日本“重返”东南亚与英国的应对

二战后,英国政府不希望日本经济复苏过快,并且不愿看到日本经济过多地染指东南亚。1954年英国促成日本加入由它倡导的科伦坡计划,以便把日本在东南亚的活动尽量纳入其可控范围之内。除此以外,在50年代和60年代前期,英国对日本在东南亚的企图进行了重重阻挠。但是进入60年代中后期,随着日本的经济飞速发展,国力日渐增强,英国已无力阻止日本进入东南亚。英国在日英首脑会晤的场合,不断敦促日本加强对东南亚国家的援助,而日本却一再敦促英国维持在东南亚的军事存在。     

Asymmetrical Regionalism: China,Southeast Asia and Uneven Development

Does the rise of China present a threat or an opportunity for Southeast Asia? One of the most revealing arenas in which this will be determined will be within the context of regional institution-building. For a region that is perennially associated with under-institutionalisation it is remarkable just how many initiatives have been proposed recently. Such institutions, may be important venues within which ‘asymmetric regionalism’ may be manifest and perhaps managed. The paper provides an assessment of this process through an analysis of China’s relationship with Southeast Asia. The paper initially provides a brief theoretical introduction which explains the relationship between regional development and its possible impact on inter-state relations. Following this I provide an analysis of the political economic and strategic dynamics that are shaping and being shaped by regional initiatives. Finally, I assess how successful ASEAN’s efforts have been to engage China via regional mechanisms has actually been.     

The growing role of NGOs in ASEAN

The role and activities of nongovernment organizations (NGOs) in Southeast Asia are increasing, says JoAnn Fagot Aviel, Professor of International Relations at San Francisco State University. This growth is being encouraged both by the increasing emphasis, world‐wide, on regionalization and by the attempts by the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) to promote regional economic cooperation. Although in the past NGOs have been on the periphery of ASEAN, Aviel argues that the future of the Association may depend as much on the activities of NGOs as on those of ASEAN's governments and private enterprises. In this article, Aviel focuses on the role played by NGOs in the Asian region and their relationship with ASEAN. She predicts that NGO activity in Southeast Asia will continue to grow and forge links between people in the region.     

美国奥巴马政府南海政策研究

相对于以往历届美国政府的南海政策,奥巴马政府对南海地区国家利益和国际利益的政策表述体现了更多将南海问题推向地区化和国际化的特征。出于亚太战略和重返东南亚的需要,奥巴马政府在南海问题上更倾向于表达与东南亚各国相近的共同利益,支持东南亚各南海权益声索国,反对中国的南海权益主张,并与东南亚国家共同遏制中国日益上升的地区影响力。然而,作为调整亚太战略的一种手段,奥巴马政府的南海政策不会走向因过度干预而损及亚太利益的极端。2011年,印度尼西亚担任东盟轮值主席国,鉴于不同于越南的南海利益诉求,印尼应当不会比越南更热衷于推动南海问题的继续升温。受地区主要国家政策温和化的影响,奥巴马政府的南海政策及其对地区形势的影响将呈现相对减弱的态势。