三重身份视阈下的冷战后德国安全战略研究

德国国家身份、欧盟核心国身份和北约成员国身份从不同角度共同对德国安全战略的制定和执行产生重要影响。冷战结束后,德国在安全战略目标上,由服务于西方阵营安全以及寻求民族和国家统一,转变为维护德国和欧洲安全,争取在国际事务中发挥领导作用;在安全观念上,以新的视角看待国家主权,认识到世界多极化趋势,逐渐接受综合安全观;在安全手段上,完善国家安全决策机制,重视发挥综合国力的作用。德国依托欧盟加强自身安全,并扩大在欧洲和世界的影响力。欧盟经济一体化和政治联盟的发展一方面使欧洲国家相互依存强化,成为德国安全战略的依托;另一方面,欧盟正成为世界一极,提升了德国在世界政治、安全事务中的地位。德国依托北约维系跨大西洋伙伴关系,作为北约成员国参加北约框架下的军事行动和战争行动,利用北约应对非传统安全威胁。德国安全战略未来将重视内外复合安全和欧洲一体化建设,为国际社会做贡献,实行全方位外交战略,发展与新兴大国关系。     

冷战后欧盟、北约对俄罗斯战略的比较研究

冷战后随着欧洲政治安全格局的变化,欧盟、北约对俄罗斯的战略也实现了根本性的转变.通过对比分析欧盟、北约对俄罗斯的政治认同战略、伙伴关系战略、延伸稳定战略,可以发现两者对俄战略的一般规律,即都通过政治对话提升伙伴关系,通过吸收新成员国实施空间上的扩张,通过参与欧洲周边地区及国际重大事务来提升其国际影响力.从差异来看,欧盟表现为强经济,弱防务;而北约则表现为强防务,弱经济.     

欧盟独立安全与防务力量的发展演变与未来展望

本文分析欧盟独立安全与防务力量形成的历史背景及支持其发展的政治制度和主要组成机构的演变,讨论欧盟武装力量的特点和局限性。笔者认为,就欧盟安全与防务力量目前的功能来看,其大体上完成了欧盟在危机管理、维和、人道主义援助等方面的任务,但是在应对地缘政治危机时,其作用往往趋于边缘化,北约仍旧是维持欧洲安全的核心机制。而且,由于跨大西洋关系的影响、"新旧欧洲"之间的战略分歧,以及欧盟身份定位的不确定性,使得进一步推动欧盟安全与防务力量建设困难重重,其未来发展并不明朗。     

走向“贸易新世界”的美欧关系——“跨大西洋贸易与投资伙伴关系协定”的政治经济学分析

资本驱动下的经济全球化要求发达国家启动"新一代"自由贸易协定,美欧"跨大西洋贸易与投资伙伴关系协定"是其中的代表性案例。美欧经济相互依赖度高,它们之间的贸易和投资受到的非关税壁垒的困扰要超过关税壁垒的困扰,因此协调和统一各自市场规制成为谈判的核心内容。但社会抗议和政治文化的差异同时作用于美欧内部政治层面,阻碍了"跨大西洋贸易与投资伙伴关系协定"的谈判迅速地达成协议。由于"跨大西洋贸易与投资伙伴关系协定"涉及对风险的认定和市场经济模式的调整,美欧双方因历史而形成的社会权利、环境标准、政商关系等领域的差异使它们在这两个问题上很难保持一致。资本与社会的政治博弈决定了"跨大西洋贸易与投资伙伴关系协定"的结果。     

重塑欧美安全关系?——对欧盟“永久结构性合作”机制的解析

欧美安全关系的一个核心问题是北约与欧盟独立安全与防务建设之间的关系。在北约主导的欧洲安全秩序结构下,欧盟独立安全与防务建设的自主性有限、能力建设长期不足。如今,在内外安全环境恶化、英国脱欧和美国特朗普政府调整北约政策的背景下,欧盟25国于2017年12月启动"永久结构性合作",目前已涵盖两批共34个合作项目。"永久结构性合作"是一个有雄心、约束力和包容性的安全合作机制,呈现出欧盟安全与防务领域灵活一体化的发展路径。但是,当前成员国对欧盟防务的"战略文化"和安全威胁认知存在较大分歧,"永久结构性合作"的聚焦领域和审查机制仍然存在局限性。因此,欧盟只能获得有限的战略自主性。"永久结构性合作"在资源获取方面与北约构成竞争关系,但在能力建设方面与北约互补、互用。从这一合作机制的设计来看,欧盟预计将通过"永久结构性合作"构建强大的北约"欧洲支柱",提升对北约防务的贡献度,从而协调欧盟安全与防务一体化和北约的平衡发展,使欧美安全关系良性互动。     

欧盟利益集团对TTIP谈判的影响机制研究

"跨大西洋贸易与投资伙伴关系"(TTIP)谈判自2015年起进展迟缓。本文对欧洲社会左右两翼的利益集团围绕"投资者-东道国争端解决"条款和"规制合作机制"对TTIP谈判施加影响的路径方式、过程与效果进行了实证分析。欧盟利益集团对TTIP架构态度的日趋分化,致使欧盟决策层围绕TTIP谈判的重要问题进行反复磋商、不断调整立场,由此不可避免拖延了整个谈判进程。     

欧美关系的裂痕及发展趋势

冷战结束后,欧美曾携手在中东欧培育新的民主制度和市场经济以及扩大欧盟和北约,双方的合作在20世纪90年代达到高潮。然而,"9·11"事件之后美国发动的伊拉克战争成为欧美从合作高潮跌落的转折点。在如何处理国际问题上,欧美的分歧逐渐显现,冷战时期和冷战结束后初期紧密的跨大西洋关系出现裂痕。奥巴马政府时期,美国将战略重点转向亚太地区,欧洲人开始担心欧洲对美国地缘政治的重要性下降。自特朗普总统上任后,欧美关系又出现诸多新裂痕。特朗普抨击北约和欧盟,赞赏甚至鼓励欧洲内部的民粹主义势力,在处理国际事务中奉行"美国优先"的原则,导致欧盟国家的普遍反感。美国退出《巴黎协定》,以国家安全为由对进口钢铝加征关税以及退出伊核协议,也沉重打击了欧美关系。本文主要分析欧美关系恶化的根源以及未来欧美关系的发展趋势。     

商业理念还是地缘政治?——欧美在欧洲对俄天然气进口依赖上的分歧根源及其影响

俄欧天然气关系是跨大西洋伙伴关系中极具争议的议题。欧洲对俄天然气的商业理念之核心,是通过制度设计约束俄罗斯行为的不确定性,同时通过器物层面的天然气基础设施建设和进口多元化,降低俄罗斯中断天然气供给的潜在威胁,最终使俄罗斯成为安全可靠的天然气供给来源。在有关俄欧天然气关系的地缘政治思维上,美国已不仅仅着眼于俄天然气是否会对欧洲能源安全构成威胁,而是更多地将俄天然气视为助长其对外行为能力的重要工具加以限制。随着欧洲对俄天然气进口依赖增强与美国经济制裁力度加大,美欧俄面临经济制裁与国家治理的困境。这一困境可能导致跨大西洋伙伴关系的裂痕加深。欧盟能否通过地缘政治转向应对不断加剧的天然气地缘竞争,取决于其将经济力量变为政治意图的现实可能与效果。     

例举欧美对华关系举措上的异同

欧盟对华关系是以"全面战略性伙伴关系"定位,美国对华是以"建设性合作关系"定位.欧美对华关系的不同表现在二者在如何建立国际格局和国际秩序上的认知分歧.欧盟认为"自身有义务遵循有效的多边主义原则",谋求世界格局的多极化.美国则认为"多极化不值得追求",谋求保持发展其霸权主义、单极化、单边主义.这就显示了欧美在对华关系的举措上可能产生分歧.但是欧盟这一跨国地区组织目前在"共同的独立外交"上尚难充分发挥求得一致,特别是受到美国的钳制.此外,在与发展中国家的经贸利益冲突中,欧美往往有其利益的一致性.这些情况显示于以下事例:     

欧盟的东亚外交与安全政策:自主抑或追随?

针对欧盟在东亚是非安全行为体和美国的追随者的传统认知,本文从欧盟在东亚的政策目标设定、实现政策目标的资源以及对东亚安全与稳定的贡献出发,论证欧盟在东亚地区是安全行为体并具有政策自主性。欧盟作为非国家行为体,在东亚政策上的自主性是相对于美国而言的,即具有关系性和相对性,并处于不断提升的过程中。与此同时,由于欧盟与美国是"价值观伙伴",在东亚地区的利益具有一致性,欧盟通过政策宣示、政策对话和硬安全领域的政策一致性等保持其自主性和跨大西洋联盟之间的平衡。     

Transatlantic Institutions: Can Partnership be Engineered?

The transatlantic alliance is widely viewed as being in a state of decline. Conflict over the war in Iraq highlighted a growing divergence between the Bush administration and European Union governments in their attitudes towards multilateralism. The rift severely tested institutions created to manage bilateral EU–US relations in the aftermath of the cold war. This article examines how well this institutional architecture has held up. It scrutinises the limitations of networked governance in transatlantic relations and acknowledges the quandary of trying to manufacture partnership using imperfect institutions. The Brussels–Washington channel is only one among many through which transatlantic relations flow, but we argue that it continues to gain in importance. Despite the limits of institutional engineering, we conclude that the US and the EU remain each other's most important ally.     

Securing the Homelands: Transatlantic Co-operation after Bush

Since 9/11, internal security co-operation has grown into a major feature of transatlantic relations. This article seeks to appraise both the achievements of the Bush administration in this field and the prospects for President Obama's period of office. Homeland security has been a new and difficult area of co-operation to foster, yet both sides of the Atlantic have come to recognise their shared interests in working together. The article cautions those European policy-makers who are hoping for a major change in homeland security co-operation under the new president. It is likely that the policies of the new administration will be characterised more by continuity than by change.     

Defence cooperation between Brazil and Namibia: Enduring ties across the South Atlantic

This article addresses the nature of transatlantic relations between Brazil and Namibia in the last two decades and argues that, in stark contrast with any other relationship regarding the African continent, Brazil's motivation in deepening ties with Namibia was largely built upon an extensive military-to-military cooperation partnership. By focusing on long-standing bureaucratic interests, the article demonstrates how Brazilian–Namibian relations were driven over the years by strategic affinities, business opportunities made available by the security sectors of both countries and, more recently, growing concerns over the sovereignty of their respective maritime areas in tandem with renewed interest for security developments within the the South Atlantic region.     

Assessing the Debate, Assessing the Damage: Transatlantic Relations after Bush

Transatlantic relations during the Bush administration sank to the lowest point in the post-war period following the invasion of Iraq in 2003. This article provides an analysis of both the current state of that relationship and the academic debate which accompanies it. Arguments over the impact of various factors are analysed to determine the extent of transatlantic divergence. Thus, demographic change in America and Europe, divergence of political values between Europe and America, power differences, post-war geopolitical realignments, European integration and American unilateralism and exceptionalism are all analysed and evaluated. While some of these arguments presented are challenged, the article argues that the process of constructing separate European and American identities from within the transatlantic community is the single most significant contemporary challenge to transatlantic relations.     

In search of a post-hegemonic order: Germany,NATO and the European security and defence policy

This article explores the erosion of the conditions which supported Germany's emergence as a ‘Civilian Power’, in particular fundamental changes in the US perspective on the transatlantic relationship and international security, but also the increased sensitivity of German foreign policy to domestic circumstances. It explores Germany's so far ambivalent and inconsistent role in the pursuit of a post-hegemonic order for Euro-Atlantic security, focusing in particular on the emerging European Security and Defence Policy.     

German foreign policy and transatlantic relations since unification

Looking at German foreign policy and transatlantic relations since unification, this article argues that fundamental views and principles about Germany's role in Europe and the world have endured. The integrationist impulse remains strong. As shown by Kosovo, Germans have put this multilateralism above qualms about the use of military force. This has also left Berlin and Washington continuing to share many objectives, not only traditional ones about power and peace in Europe, but also on a whole host of challenges that have come with globalisation, both in the wider world and in the multiplicity of commercial and civil relationships across the Atlantic.     

Security and Peace in East Asia and the Asia-Pacific

Abstract

Two recent books make significant contributions to the scholarly literature both in East Asian security studies and in international relations theory more generally. While developing international relations theory by drawing from the non-Western experiences of East Asia, these books complement the existing international relations theory that has been criticized for being overly West-centric. The books also develop some interesting East Asian, neopragmatic ideas on the “theory of theory” in international relations. These ideas have a potential of not only changing our answers to questions about East Asian security but also reformulating the questions we ask in our investigation of international security issues.     

The Origins of Security Cooperation in the Southern Cone

Argentine-Brazilian relations have undergone a remarkable transformation over the last two decades, from enduring rivalry to cooperation. Dating back to the late 1970s, security cooperation has been a byproduct of two different sets of factors, strategic and military organizational, that propelled the two countries independently but simultaneously toward peaceful settlement. The 1979–80 settlement of disputes over hydroelectric power and nuclear technology not only ended centuries of militarized competition but established the first institutional structures of what is today one of the world's most durable security regimes.     

Civilians and the Military in Latin America: The Absence of Incentives

This article argues that civil‐military relations should be conceptualized not only in terms of democratic civilian control but also for effectiveness in implementing a spectrum of roles and missions. It also argues that achieving effectiveness requires institutional development as a necessary but not sufficient condition. Currently in Latin America, the focus in civil‐military relations remains exclusively on civilian control. While there is a growing awareness of the need for analysis beyond asserting control over the armed forces, so far nobody has proposed or adopted a broader analytical framework. This article proposes such a framework, and employs it to analyze differences among four major South American countries: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, and Colombia. The explanation for the differences identified by use of the framework is found in the incentives of civilian elites in Chile and Colombia, who have recognized serious threats to national security and defense.