水合作管理:澜沧江—湄公河区域关系构建新议题

如何和平共享越境水资源一直是跨国流域关系构建所面临的重要问题和挑战。历史的实践已经证明,合作管理是理性而共赢的选择,其不仅会促进国家间合作的拓展和深化,更会推动整个区域的合作,从而使国家间获益的程度和范围远远超过河流合作本身所带来的收益。在澜沧江—湄公河流域,水资源管理涵盖社会、经济、环境和政治等多维向度。作为最重要的两个次区域多边机制,GMS和MRC作用积极但成效有限,缺乏区域认同的制度安排仍是目前该流域水资源管理所面临的最大问题。未来在澜沧江—湄公河流域,需要提升流域一级的综合合作,加强高级别的政治参与。而中国作为上游国家,也需要从战略高度思考如何发挥地区性大国作用,对共享水资源进行更长远、更系统的管理。     

非传统安全视角下的大湄公河次区域合作评析

在全球化、区域化趋势日益加强的今天,非传统安全问题的凸显成为影响大湄公河次区域合作最为主要的障碍之一。本文分析了大湄公河次区域非传统安全问题的现状及其影响,并探讨了大湄公河次区域非传统安全合作中存在的问题和解决之道。     

大湄公河次区域经济合作政治信任度研究

进行了12年的大湄公河次区域经济合作与成立时的初衷尚有相当的距离,其中障碍之一是各合作方之间在政治上缺乏信任,而湄公河水资源开发有可能引起的生态环境安全问题是导致各方政治信任度不高的关键所在。目前,促进合作各方在政治上相互信任、真诚合作和高度重视环境安全至关重要。     

未来五年澜沧江—湄公河次区域合作展望

澜沧江—湄公河次区域经济合作目前已经融入中国—东盟自由贸易区的框架内并将成为自贸区建设的先行示范区 ,这表明这一合作已进入了一个全新的阶段。本文对未来 5年在交通、资源、农林、旅游等重要领域的合作进行了展望     

发展替代产业 推进澜沧江——湄公河次区域合作

本文论述了澜沧江———湄公河流域国家面临的毒品问题及其对次区域合作的负面影响，探讨了发展替代产业对遏制毒品泛滥和推进次区域合作的作用和意义，介绍了有关各国发展替代种植、替代产业的情况，并从国际环境、地理、人文、经济互补性等方面分析了当前发展替代产业所具备的有利因素，最后就次区域发展替代产业的资金引进、合作机制、合作范围、发展层次等问题提出了建议     

"峰会年"看澜湄地区制度竞合

澜沧江—湄公河地区合作制度之间的竞争与合作正在日益复杂化。2018年作为"峰会年",可以为评估该地区的制度竞合提供有效的视角。通过提出参与成员是否具有排他性、主导成员是否为同类型国家、议题领域是否重叠、合作内容是否涉及"高级政治"、目标原则是否具有外向性这5个维度的指标进行系统评估,并对中国、日本、越南和泰国四个关键国家的互动进行案例分析,文章发现,澜湄地区合作制度之间的竞争被夸大了;澜湄合作与日本—湄公河合作互为主要的竞争对象,但前者是被动跟随而非主动挑起竞争;柬老越发展三角、柬老缅越合作与伊洛瓦底江—湄南河—湄公河三河流域经济合作战略也相互竞争,但后者正在取得优势;澜湄合作与大湄公河次区域经济合作、湄公河委员会之间不会出现"制度达尔文主义"。     

“水外交”视角下的中国和下湄公河国家跨界水资源合作

在跨界水资源合作与国家间"水权力"矛盾与日俱增的背景下,国际机构和部分国家开始重视"水外交",并将其视为处理对外关系的重要方式之一。中国与下湄公河国家在湄公河跨界水资源开发中的争端也急需通过"水外交"来解决。本文在对"水外交"研究脉络进行梳理的基础上,尝试性地将"水外交"定义为"一国政府围绕(跨界与非跨界)水合作项目和‘软水产品’的开发和利用问题,通过技术和社会双层举措来进行解决的外交实施方式",并以此为切入点,通过三个案例分析阐明中国与下湄公河国家跨界水合作中所存在的问题,同时指出中国"水外交"实施不足的具体原因。本文认为中国应通过完善"水外交"体系,建立水资源合作利益共同体,借助"水资源综合管理"、第三方评估机构以及实施积极有为的"水外交"对外策略,来应对湄公河跨界河流开发中的内外困境。     

亚洲开发银行与湄公河次区域经济合作

湄公河流域区域合作在20世纪90年代初重新活跃,并形成了众多国际组织和国家参与的合作机制.其中亚洲开发银行牵头组织的湄公河次区域经济合作是最有成效的一个.本文试图探究亚行在湄公河区域合作过程中的作用与挑战.     

印太语境下的日本—印尼海洋安全合作:进展、动因与限度

近年来,随着印太地区权力转移进程的加速,地区安全秩序开始变革,主要国家间的关系也处于重构中.作为印太地区两个具有代表性的重要国家,日本与印尼以海洋安全合作为重点,进一步加强和密切两国关系.日本—印尼合作既受到亚太乃至印太地区局势快速变化、美国对外政策调整等外部环境的较大影响,也是两国基于各自国家利益和战略取向的主动作为.然而,其合作受到若干负面因素的掣肘.双方不仅对未来海洋安全合作具体设想有所差异,在印太安全秩序构建主导权上也存在"美日印澳"或"东盟中心"的认知分歧,而且印尼等距离外交传统与国内民族主义思潮也会抑制两国合作的深入发展.因此,日本与印尼的海洋安全合作仍存在较多不确定性.     

中老缅泰湄公河流域联合执法的法律基础与制度建构

澜沧江—湄公河是联通中国与下游五国的黄金水道,在区域合作中发挥着不可替代的作用。湄公河流域频发的犯罪活动,尤其是2011年10月发生在金三角水域的惨案,将联合执法提上了区域安全合作的议事日程。事件发生后,中老缅泰四国通过开展联合巡逻执法恢复了湄公河的国际航运,但相关制度的构建仍在探索之中。四国应依据相关国际法原则,结合该流域的现实情况,参照其他流域和国家的实践,尽快签署联合执法合作协定。     

Yasuhiro Nakasone Proposal on Maritime Security in East Asia

Maritime security in East Asia is essential to the peace and prosperity of the world. Today, serious problems in this domain have arisen in the region. Resolving these problems is a pressing issue that impacts not just the region, but also the preservation of the peace and prosperity of the entire globe. Despite this urgent need, cooperative frameworks for preventing problems from arising in the first place—as opposed to mere security regimes for deterring conflicts—have yet to be organized. To preserve a maritime security order in East Asia that is based on laws and rules, mechanisms based on mutual trust must be arranged for deterring and preventing conflict.

Based on the foregoing, the Institute for International Policy Studies (IIPS) has been engaged in research on problems of maritime security in East Asia. In December 2015, IIPS held the High-Level Conference on Maritime Security in East Asia and unveiled the “Yasuhiro Nakasone Proposal on Maritime Security in East Asia” (the “Nakasone Proposal”). This paper will discuss the “Nakasone Proposal” and the background to its formulation, as well as the institute's future endeavors.     

Security cooperation in Northeast Asia: Problems and prospects

During the past five years there have been a growing number of proposals for dialogue, “regimes” and other cooperative institutions designed to enhance regional security. This article critically evaluates the key proposals and notes the objections that have been raised against them. It goes on to argue that many of these objections are without validity. The article contrasts the considerable progress in this area, which has been achieved in Southeast Asia with the absence of progress in Northeast Asia — and suggests some reasons for the difference. The article concludes with an analysis of some of the contradictory elements of such concepts as “cooperative security,” “security cooperation” and “common security,” which are gaining increasing currency in the region.     

日本主导东南亚反海盗合作机制对地区海洋安全事务的影响

冷战结束以后,日本重视东亚海洋安全问题,倡议建立亚洲反海盗多边合作机制,在筹建地区海洋安全合作机制进程中取得主导地位。日本借此介入并主导马六甲—新加坡海峡地区反海盗执法联合行动,在地区国际政治舞台上发挥作用,并对地区关系产生影响。日本的主动行动隐含排斥美国、牵制中国的意图,为日本未来在亚洲海上安全领域发挥作用打下基础。     

China,the United States,and the Future of Regional Security Order—An Unhappy Coexistence

The concept of order in regional security is often characterized as hierarchical, consensus-based, or some hybrid middle-road. The debate largely focuses on how major powers, specifically China or America, can individually build an accommodating order. This article explores the causation of order-building in reverse by asking if the Sino-US relationship can create order as a by-product of individual attempts to build and manage security. It examines Chinese and American responses to North Korea and the South China Sea to demonstrate that order can be constructed through a complex set of negotiated interactions, which encompass cooperative, hierarchical, and consensus-building approaches to order-building. This “unhappy coexistence” implies that order as a by-product of state interaction is a useful but incomplete framework to understand security order-building.     

Ivan Grozny's Livonian policy: Some addenda to Norbert Angermann's Studien Zur Livland-Politik Ivan Groznys

This paper examines a clash between modern and post-modern security systems, which may generate cooperative security dilemmas. Cooperative security dilemmas are not state-centric concepts as traditional security dilemmas but apply to international systems. The variations of cooperative security dilemmas are tested in the context of Baltic Sea regional security complex, particularly the integration dilemma in the Nordic countries and the identity dilemma with Russia. The security and defense postures of some regional actors tend to follow modern security understandings that may produce cooperative security dilemmas in the post-modern security environment.     

Parsing Pegasus: An Infrastructural Approach to the Relationship between Technology and Swiss Security Politics

How do technologies matter for security politics? This article introduces the kind of arguments an infrastructural approach would focus its answer on. It illustrates how the approach would work by focussing on how the spyware Pegasus developed by the Israeli company NSO matters for Swiss security politics. It follows the infrastructural approach showing how and why it would tend to three things primarily: the politics of the infrastructures Pegasus is inscribed in, the politics of the processes of infrastructuring the software generates and the infrapolitics that sustain and transform these processes and infrastructures. The article also discusses the strengths and weaknesses of infrastructural approaches, underlining that since they are relational, processual and radically open epistemologically and ontologically, infrastructural approaches are suitable for opening new agendas, re‐problematising and re‐imagining the politics of security technologies. They are less suited for studies premised on a fixed understanding of the politics of security technology.     

Civil Liberties vs. Security: Why Citizens Accept or Reject Digital Security Measures

Fundamental changes to security policy in European democracies raise the question of the acceptance of new security measures. This paper aims to explain why new measures are accepted (or not). It combines three core elements that are typically analysed separately in the literature: individual attitudes (especially trust), social context and cost/benefit balancing. Comparing Germany and the UK, the model is tested using data from two countries with different societal perceptions of two prototypical security measures: communications data retention and passenger name records. The analysis confirms that trust is crucial, but in a more complex way than usually argued. Trust in specific institutions and actors, related to the specific security measure, is decisive for acceptance. Furthermore, individual cost/benefit balancing is also important for acceptance. Consequently, our model shows that a more detailed analysis than in former studies is needed for understanding the acceptance of security measures in European democracies such as Germany and the UK.     

拜登政府的美日印澳四方安全合作构想述评

2017年美日印澳四方安全对话重启以来,马拉巴尔2020军演是美日印澳四国首次举行的联合军演。马拉巴尔2020军演折射出美日印澳四国针对中国的意愿及合作新进展。美日印澳四方安全合作是美国印太战略的基础和牵制中国崛起的重要机制,在近几年持续获得进展。美日印澳四国在安全领域加强合作,对四国与中国双边关系产生深远影响。马拉巴尔2020军演后,原本紧张的中印及中澳关系继续恶化。美国进一步推动与中国的竞争。美日印澳四国不但在安全领域针对中国,还营造不利于中国的国际舆论。拜登上台后,美日印澳四方安全合作继续强化。拜登比特朗普更重视与盟友合作,借由与日印澳三国磋商推动美日印澳四方安全合作机制化和常态化并走向准军事联盟。美日印澳四国明确表示不会在政治与安全领域停止针对中国,但是在经贸领域基于自身利益考量将改善对华关系。美日印澳四方安全合作升级对中国安全环境及国家利益构成严重威胁。拜登政府正在强化针对中国的印太地区多边安全架构。美国试图在外交层面让中国陷入孤立态势,在安全层面对中国形成战略包围。拜登政府的美日印澳四方安全合作构想将让中国面临更加复杂的外交局面,更加险恶的安全态势。     

安全预期、经济收益与东亚安全秩序

冷战后,东亚地区不仅没有进入一个充满紧张和冲突的时期,反而维持了相对长时间的和平状态。有关东亚安全秩序的既有解释主要强调的是体系结构或过程,但不足以解释东亚安全秩序内部的动力和机制,以及这种秩序蕴含的内在不稳定性的主要原因。本文提出了一种功能论的解释,认为美国和中国分别为东亚地区提供了安全预期和经济收益两项最为重要的公共产品,是维系当前东亚安全秩序的基础。然而,在中国崛起和美国重返东亚带来的冲击下,这两种地区性公共产品的供给脱节和供给矛盾使既有东亚安全秩序面临内在的不稳定性。为了应对这种不确定性,达到稳定周边环境和缓解崛起疑虑的效果,中国在为本地区提供稳定的经济收益的同时也需要在政治和军事方面采取积极的安全保障措施,营造东亚安全秩序的新基础。     

构建“东北亚人类安全共同体”中的人类安全议题和国际机制探索

韩国朴槿惠总统自从2009年以来提倡"东北亚和平合作构想",并向美中等国家寻求支持。"东北亚和平合作构想"就是以韩国和朝鲜为主,包括美国、中国、日本、俄罗斯和蒙古等亚太国家和非国家行动主体,培养非传统安全或是软性安全热点问题合作。但该构想存在许多问题,如美国是否作为参与国加入,议题是否包含传统安全和制度化水平问题。如果美国加入,那么,东北亚区域固有的人类安全议题的选择混乱或将引起东北亚的认同性危机;议题的最终目标如果是传统安全,那么非传统安全或软性安全的重要性将被削弱;在制度化水平方面,习惯和惯例的制约性和实效性将成为问题。本文提出了作为东北亚区域内国家间的和平合作体,形成针对人类安全议题的"东北亚人类安全共同体"的方案,研究人类安全理论和国际机制并验证了其合理性。由此,确认了仅限于东北亚国家之间的人类安全范围内形成共同体的合理性。