关于美日、美韩同盟的几点思考

正目前,伴随美国亚太再平衡战略推进,美日、美韩同盟呈现出三个新的变化,即同盟展开"三扩",即扩边、扩容、扩功。扩边,指的是在强化双边同盟的同时,谋求推进三边互动。扩容,指的是在强化同盟传统军事内涵的同时,为同盟注入新的、非传统安全内容。扩功,指的是随着美国亚太再平衡战略的展开,美日、美韩同盟在功能上进行拓展。美日、美韩同盟诞生于冷战最初的岁月,至今已经运行六十余载,不管我们是否愿意,美日同盟、美韩同盟都是我们思考东北亚安全战略时不折不扣的硬结构。因此,我们需要以冷静理性的态度对美日、美     

解读日美军事同盟的新趋势及日本的战略意图

近年来日美军事同盟出现的新变化是深化和细化军事合作的具体事项,“共同应对全球性问题”。日美同盟的发展趋势是“世界中的日美同盟”。日美同盟今后的作用是“共同保卫日本”、“共同应对周边事态”,以及“共同应对全球性问题”。日本加强日美同盟的战略意图是利用日美军事同盟,确保日本安全;依赖日美军事同盟,遏制地区危机;依靠日美军事同盟,管理国际安全。     

日美强化同盟体制的战略图谋

美日“2 2会议”最终协议的达成将导致日美同盟体制发生根本变化。其直接结果是实现美日军事合作全球化,在中国周边形成以日美同盟为核心和支柱的“战略网”,对中国的安全产生直接影响,同时为日本谋求军事崛起提供契机。     

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。     

日美重建安保体制

4月16日—18日,美国总统克林顿访问日本,与日本首相桥本龙太郎进行会谈并共同发表了《日美安全保障联合宣言》。在此宣言发表之前,日美双方就调整冲绳美军基地问题达成了协议,并签署了两国物资和劳务交流协定。这一系列举动标志着日美两国对战后维持40多年之久的安保体制进行重新定义,勾勒出日美同盟关系的新框架,将对亚太局势产生重大的影响。     

新《日美防卫合作指针》的结构特征与历史逻辑北大核心CSSCISSCI

日美两国以修订《日美防卫合作指针》的形式对日美同盟安保体制进行大幅调整。此次"指针"的修订过程反映了日美双方对当前国际形势的认识和战略考虑,其中的中国因素尤为突出。回溯历次"指针"修订过程,可以梳理出日美同盟演变的历史逻辑,预测其今后一段时期的发展趋势,以及其对地区、国际安全环境的影响。     

国际关系伙伴化及其面临的挑战

世纪之交，世界首次出现两种相互矛盾的新趋势：一是国际关系伙伴化，二是美日双边同盟地区化与北约地区军事集团全球化。这一矛盾的发展，将决定今后１０年大国关系与国际格局的演变方向：是多种力量作为伙伴共建协调合作体系，还是美国单极主宰或美欧日合霸，或是多极鼎...     

特朗普治下的美日同盟关系及其未来走向

美日同盟是美国亚太战略的重要支撑,其调整变化对于地区局势产生了重要影响。特朗普执政以来,受国内外环境的影响,其对外政策呈现出孤立主义、少边主义、交易主义等特点,美日同盟也因此出现了一些新变化。特朗普政府的亚太战略尽管仍不明确,但其对美日同盟的倚重不会改变。美日同盟走向将深受地缘政治、中国因素、防务分担、贸易摩擦等诸多因素的影响。虽然美日同盟关系仍然紧密,但并非线性发展,双方之间的贸易摩擦以及军费分摊问题在特朗普上台后表现得更为突出。     

日美同盟与东亚区域合作

日美同盟是冷战时代的产物。随着冷战的结束, 经济全球化的深入发展, 政治多极化 趋势的增强, 日美同盟在国际社会的角色转型、性质定位正逐步发生变化。日美同盟作为冷战的衍 生物, 在国际社会尤其在东亚地区的作用并没有削弱, 相反却日益强化, 这对于当前方兴未艾的东亚 区域合作具有双重性的影响。虽然日美同盟对东亚区域合作在某种程度上具有“平衡器”的杠杆作 用, 但从整个东亚区域合作的整体布局来看, 日美同盟的消极作用日益明显, 严重阻碍东亚区域合作 的发展进程。因此, 要推动东亚区域合作, 必须正确处理好与日美同盟的关系, 积极引导日美同盟发 挥建设性作用, 规避其消极的阻碍作用     

日本新安保法对日美同盟的双重影响

日本新安保法是其解禁集体自卫权的制度依据,在突破战后和平宪法的"专守防卫"原则同时,也对日美同盟的走向产生双重影响。一方面,新安保法为增扩日美同盟的行动范围和功能提供法律支撑,使其成为落实日美安全战略理念的平台和亚太安全网络体系的核心;另一方面,日美因各自战略利益及对国际安全干预的成本承受能力等不同,两国在同盟框架内出现错位和互不协调。新安保法可能会在盟国、国民和地区他国三个层面削弱日美同盟的依托基础。日本新安保法无益于地区安全,也无助于维护地区势力均衡,却可能会成为地区冲突的推进器。     

朝核问题与东北亚安全合作框架前景

朝核问题已呈现长期化趋势 ,为在建立东北亚安全合作新框架方面抢得先机 ,美、日、韩等国相应做出政策调整。美国加大了“谈”、“压”的力度 ,但尚未将朝鲜作为战略打击的主要对象。日本对朝政策向右摇摆 ,并寻求在建立东北亚多边安全框架方面发挥独自影响。韩国努力增加美韩联盟的平等色彩 ,谋求在解决朝核问题中发挥主导性作用。抓住朝核问题 ,推动建立东北亚“多极”主导多边安全合作机制 ,中国可以大有作为     

A Fragile Relationship: The United States and the Republic Of Korea

As South Korea became economically and militarily stronger and developed democratic institutions, the country was in a position to assume more responsibilities in its partnership with the United States. The necessary changes could be achieved only with difficulties. The efforts of the US administration to stop the nuclear proliferation by North Korea and South Korea's attempts to develop a policy of engagement towards the DPRK resulted in friction between the allies. The dissonance was amplified by efforts of the Rho Moo Hyun government to pursue a foreign policy that was less dependent upon the United States. The change of atmosphere was underlined by anti-American outbursts in South Korea. A new effort to strengthen the partnership is, however, reasonable. For South Korea the United States is still the indispensable ally as long as an attack by North Korea that probably has nuclear weapons cannot be ruled out. For the United States this alliance contributes to maintain America's paramount influence in East Asia. If both countries agree with this rationale they should take steps to accept basic assumptions and policies of the other side. To find a common position towards the nuclear efforts of North Korea is crucial. Even if both sides try to harmonize their policies, success is not guaranteed. Korean nationalism and American dynamics combined with occasional high-handedness are difficult obstacles.     

A Fragile Relationship: The United States and the Republic Of Korea

As South Korea became economically and militarily stronger and developed democratic institutions, the country was in a position to assume more responsibilities in its partnership with the United States. The necessary changes could be achieved only with difficulties. The efforts of the US administration to stop the nuclear proliferation by North Korea and South Korea's attempts to develop a policy of engagement towards the DPRK resulted in friction between the allies. The dissonance was amplified by efforts of the Rho Moo Hyun government to pursue a foreign policy that was less dependent upon the United States. The change of atmosphere was underlined by anti-American outbursts in South Korea. A new effort to strengthen the partnership is, however, reasonable. For South Korea the United States is still the indispensable ally as long as an attack by North Korea that probably has nuclear weapons cannot be ruled out. For the United States this alliance contributes to maintain America's paramount influence in East Asia. If both countries agree with this rationale they should take steps to accept basic assumptions and policies of the other side. To find a common position towards the nuclear efforts of North Korea is crucial. Even if both sides try to harmonize their policies, success is not guaranteed. Korean nationalism and American dynamics combined with occasional high-handedness are difficult obstacles.     

American elites' strategic thinking towards Korea: From Kennan to Brzezinski

America's foreign policy elites have made different assessments of South Korea's value as an alliance partner, largely depending on their strategic beliefs and visions. Balance-of-power realists like George Kennan have tended to let the regional problems be taken care of by the regional major powers, thus attaching less strategic value to such peripheral states as Korea. On the other hand, globalists like Paul Nitze have emphasized America's preponderant role in maintaining global stability, attaching greater importance to the US-Korean alliance. This article investigates the American foreign policy elites' strategic thinking toward Korea by reviewing the thoughts of Kennan, Nitze, Kissinger and Brzezinski. It then draws out implications for the future US defence commitment to Korea.     

The US role in Korean democracy and security since cold war era

This paper traces the role that US played in the developmentof Korean democracy and maintaining peace and security in theKorean peninsula. First, it looks back into the US role in theKorean political transformation from 1950s through 1980s. Itexamines why the US introduced American style democracy in thedivided country and what was the role of the US in the criticaljunctures of regime changes and transformations. The UnitedStates had two contradictory objectives in South Korea: to buildup South Korea as ‘a showcase for democracy’ andas an anti-communist buffer state. The two objectives set ‘theAmerican boundary’ to South Korean democracy. The firstobjective acted upon as an enabling condition for incipientdemocracy, while the second acted upon as a confining conditionto development of democracy in South Korea. Second, it investigatesthe role that the US played in the outbreak of financial crisisin 1987 and in the ensuing comprehensive neoliberal restructuringof the economy by the Kim Dae Jung government after the crisis.Third, it analyzes three events that put US–Korean relationsunder stress since the inauguration of Bush administration:Anti-Americanism, perception gap on North Korea, and the newmilitary transformation initiative of US. Finally, it drawspolicy rationales for stronger Korea–US alliance in thefuture from the Korean perspective: Korea–US allianceas leverages against China and Japan, means of pursuing an effectiveengagement policy toward North Korea, a cornerstone to liftSouth Korea to a hub state in Northeast Asia, and geopoliticalbalancer and stabilizer in Northeast Asia after the unificationof Korea.     

韩国疏美亲中现象剖析

以2002年11月驻韩美军装甲车轧死两名女中学生事件为导火索,韩国国内出现了强烈的反美情绪,接着发生的蜡灯示威,引起“韩美同盟危机论”,形成强烈的以驻韩美军为中心的“反美舆论”。与此同时,伴随着中国的崛起和飞速前进的中韩关系的发展,在韩国社会及政治外交领域出现了要求以中韩亲近替换韩美同盟的呼声。其原因主要有国际政治格局的变动、国内政治的需求、驻韩美军调整问题、韩日关系的恶化以及中韩关系的崛起等五个方面。面对这种现象,我国应该审时度势稳妥推进。     

菲律宾、日本和韩国反美军基地社会运动比较研究

美国驻在海外他国的军事基地，一直以来是国际政治中的焦点所在，本文试从美国军事基地驻在国民众反基地的社会运动视角入手，研究其对美军基地的存废的影响程度。通过对菲律宾、日本和韩国3国反基地社会运动的组织、过程以及绩效的比较，以获得对反基地社会运动的作用与不足的更为深入的认识。     

论战后日本东亚区域合作政策及其走势

日本从 2 0世纪 6 0年代开始先后提出了一系列如“太平洋自由贸易区”等区域经济合作构想。进入新世纪 ,随着东亚区域经济合作的加快 ,日本东亚区域合作政策也进行了调整 ,面临着几种选择 :与东盟建成自由贸易区、加入中国—东盟自由贸易区、与中韩组成东亚区域合作体、与东亚各国签订双边自由贸易协定。但无论哪种选择都必须做好以下几点工作 :顺利实现区域合作重心的转移、加强与中国的合作以及改变不合理的分工体制。     

中、日、韩三国产业的互补性与竞争性——基于对外贸易的分析

随着韩国与中国经济的快速发展,中、日、韩三国产业结构与产业发展的差距有所缩小。当前三国之间的国际分工仍留有“雁行模式”的痕迹,制造业在三国均占有主导地位,但制造业内部各部门的发展水平仍有差距,三国在对外贸易中表现出来的产业互补性仍然较强。而另一方面,韩国与中国资本、技术密集型行业的发展对日本形成了竞争,韩国在少数劳动密集型行业同中国也存在竞争,三国产业在原先以互补性为主的基础上出现逐渐增强的竞争趋势。     

Japanese revisionists and the ‘Korea threat’: insights from ontological security

Abstract

This article contributes to the debate on Japanese security. Drawing on insights from ontological security, it challenges conventional understandings that China and North Korea are Japan’s main security threats. It argues that South Korea poses a powerful threat to the Japanese right-wing revisionists’ perception of Japan. The revisionists have attempted to secure Japan’s identity from the ‘Korea threat’ by labelling South Korea a ‘non-democracy’, and this tactic has been taken up by the Japanese government as well. The article concludes by pointing out that such moves could unwittingly result in the emergence of security dilemmas between the two main democracies in Northeast Asia.