从“核协议”解读印美战略关系

美国、印度在印总理曼·辛格访美期间达成"印美民用核技术协议",它实际上是印美双方涉及核问题和双边战略关系的谈判结果,为近年来印美关系的全面升温作了阶段性诠释,为双边战略关系的未来发展定下积极的基调,也将影响国际核机制的运作方向和地区乃至全球的战略格局.同时,该协议与中国存在着直接或潜在的战略关联.该协议的宣布在印、美国内及国际社会引发强烈的反应,从不同方面提出了许多值得关切的问题.另一方面,作为印美两国政府基本共识和政策意向的体现,核协议在实施之前还存在许多障碍和不确定因素,还有不少内容有待进一步明朗化,需要从战略角度对之进行深入解析.     

印度、美国围绕民用核合作的利益关联

2006年3月,布什总统访问印度,印、美两国政府宣布就印度核设施分离计划达成共识,为去年7月签署的印美民用核合作协议划上了句号。充满讨价还价与妥协的谈判过程集中体现了两国国家利益的异同。从现阶段看,印、美展开民用核合作还存在不少障碍,具体内容有待明朗化,值得进一步追踪观察。但可以肯定,美印在民用核领域达成合作共识,是美国对印度政策的重大转变。无论从任何角度看,现阶段的印美核合作协议都可视为印美两国在战略层面推进合作的重要里程碑,并必将对双边、地区和全球格局的发展产生深刻影响。     

周边国家要闻

朝美吉隆坡核协议及韩国的反应 5月20日—6月13日,朝美在吉隆坡就有关向朝提供轻水反应堆问题进行了谈判并达成协议,这表明朝美核问题已进入到实施日内瓦框架协议的阶段。 会谈的经过和内容 1994年10月21日,朝美在日内瓦签署了有关冻结朝核的框架协议,规定在今年4月21日前双方要结束有关轻水反应堆问题的谈判。但是围绕着轻水反应堆型号问题双方一直争执不下。美国建议向朝提供韩国制造的两座现代化核反应堆,以代替朝鲜的5兆瓦石墨核反应堆,理由是韩国是向朝提供40亿美元建造核电厂的主要国家之一。朝拒绝接受韩国型核反应     

从《通讯兼容与安全协议》透视近期美印安全合作

2018年9月,美印两国外长与防长在印度举行首届"2+2"会谈,并签署了若干协议,双方承诺在安全、反恐、战略等领域加强合作。美印两国达成的《通讯兼容与安全协议》让印度在国防科技以及军事技术转让方面获得了美国的支持,这也表明了美印两国强化防务安全合作的决心。从长期来看,美印两国深化安全合作的总体态势将继续强化,但是两国安全合作的前景仍然面临着诸多制约因素。     

美苏军控谈判及其对缓和的影响

军备控制谈判是实现军事战略的辅助手段,双方都想通过谈判加强自己,削弱对方。随着核战略的变化,美苏两国现在的核谈判政策与前有所不同。美苏均有困难,需要妥协。苏联困难相对更大,对美让步较多,同时它注意运用策略,较为灵活,设法逐项突破,美国则态度较为僵硬。如果继中导协议之后,双方在战略核武器方面又达成协议,美苏缓和势将扩大。这次新缓和的时间可能比70年代为长。虽然如此,军控谈判的作用有限,它将改善两国关系,但不能消除双方军备竞赛由数量向质量的新发展,以及它们在各地区的争夺。对抗仍是两国关系的实质。美苏今后将在激烈的竞争中共处。     

非正式国际机制与全球福利

本文结合精确性程度、合作深度和授权性程度等国际机制的构成要素,对非正式国际机制的有效性进行了讨论。并分析了在集体谈判修订和大国单方面行为引发的事实修正两种情况下,非正式国际机制的修正对全球福利的影响。如果大国在其他方面的利益需求大于在有效地解决全球公共问题方面的利益需求,大国对非正式国际机制发起的事实修正就会损害全球福利。本文以美印核协议对核供应国集团准则的事实修正为案例说明了这一可能情形。     

印度外交政策制定：以印美民用核合作协议谈判为例

随着印度的逐渐崛起，其对外战略和外交政策走向日益受到国际社会的关注和重视。本文选取印度与美国关于民用核合作协议谈判以及批准过程为研究案例，探究当今印度外交政策制定的过程，以加深对印度政治制度的理解，进而对当前中国对印政策制定有所启示。     

朝美关系的现实与未来

近年来，美朝两国围绕朝鲜发展核武器问题进行了长期交涉，但直至目前，关于核框架协议的落实、朝鲜是否取消发射导弹等问题仍没有取得最终结果。由于朝美双方在处理当前的许多问题时大都采取了短期行为的方式，所以朝美关系的发展近期内仍难以出现突破性进展。     

美印民用核合作：利益对接与矛盾

广受关注的关印民用核合作协议已经美国国会批准并最终生效,美印民用核合作是两国在战略层面增进关系的里程碑,体现了双方复杂的利益关联,势必对双边、地区及全球格局产生深刻的影响。美国国会的辩论表明美国在涉及国际核不扩散机制和美国安全利益方面,存在明显的双重标准,而印度在强调谋求自身利益的同时,也担心在战略上处于被动。从前景看,仍存在诸多影响关印核合作进展的不确定因素,双方将围绕该问题继续展开利益互动和讨价还价,预计合作不会一帆风顺。     

日美贸易摩擦中三大谈判机制的对比研究

"市场导向的个别领域谈判"、"日美结构性障碍协议"、"日美经济框架对话"是战后日美双方缓解贸易摩擦的三大谈判机制。对三大谈判机制及其各自内部子议题的对比研究发现,贸易谈判中外压强度和谈判有效性之间并不存在对称关系。在这些谈判机制中,美国对日外压与日本国内的内压之间形成了动态的双层博弈。内压的结构与价值诉求、利益指向是分析贸易谈判的重要变量。     

The Baruch Plan and the Quest for Atomic Disarmament

Arms control has emerged as a central component in the diplomatic approach unveiled by the Obama administration. With a long-term goal of abolishing nuclear weapons, interim steps include the revision and potential expansion of existing treaties and a strengthening of the non-proliferation regime, including a potential Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty (FMCT). Such a treaty would mandate that member states submit to rigorous inspection and cataloguing of their stocks of nuclear materials in return for assistance in the development of civilian nuclear programs. This approach, whilst ambitious, is not new. In this article I explore the development, negotiation and ultimate failure of what is often referred to as “the Baruch Plan,” the first attempt to cooperatively control atomic energy under the auspices of the newly formed United Nations. The failure of the Baruch Plan provides important lessons for scholars and practitioners, and underscores the inherent challenges of arms control cooperation.     

战略高科技解禁与印美关系

美国自1998年起对印实施高科技贸易制裁,涉及军民＂双用途＂的高科技项目禁运成为影响印美关系的重大障碍。随着近年来印美战略关系日益升温,印美民用核能合作启动,美国支持印度以特殊身份参与国际防扩散和军控机制,印美双方从各自的战略和经济利益出发,力图通过讨价还价推动高科技出口解禁的进程。奥巴马政府新近宣布对印度国防与民用航天部门解除制裁,表明印美双方围绕该重大问题的利益协调已取得突破性进展,美国多年的对印高科技禁运接近尾声。尽管印美围绕印度战略核发展的矛盾继续存在,但高科技贸易解禁将为印美战略关系提供新的活力。     

略论上海合作组织成员国之间的安全合作

从“上海五国”机制的启动直到“上海合作组织”的成立，毫无疑问是各成员国共同利益的推动。新自由主义学派的国际机制理论则认为，机制源于合作，因国家间相互依赖而产生的合作需求是创建国际机制的根本动因。罗伯特·基欧汉运用博弈论分析了合作产生的动力和可能性，他指出某些国家之间要想达成某种合作，首先要有共同的利益存在，同时要实现这一共同利益必须通过合作。     

Intergovernmental policy makes transnational politics? The unusually transnational politics of TTIP

Abstract

When the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) negotiations were underway, its politics were distinctively transnational. Numerous alliances between European and American industry associations advocated an ambitious agreement to mitigate the effects of conflicting rules. Some civic interest groups also closely cooperated to shape the agreement, while a broad, loose transatlantic coalition of civic interest groups opposed it. The extent of transnationalism in TTIP was greater than what had come before in the transatlantic relationship and what is evident in contemporaneous analogous trade negotiations. This article argues that while the salience of a trade negotiation affects whether societal actors mobilize, it is not sufficient to prompt transnational cooperation. Rather transnational cooperation stems primarily from what the actors are seeking to achieve and whether they have a motive and opportunity to work together. By clarifying the conditions under which transnational cooperation is more likely, this article informs the emerging literature on the new politics of trade. By making the case that the motives to mobilize and cooperate require distinct analysis, it contributes to the literature on transnationalism.     

A Fine Balance: India Walks a Tightrope between Iran and the United States

India confronts the conflicting imperatives of Indian domestic politics and its strategic interests when dealing with Iran. As India's global profile has risen in recent years and its ties with the United States have strengthened, this conflict has come into sharper relief. India's traditionally close ties with Iran have become a major factor influencing how certain sections of U.S. policymakers evaluate a U.S.-India partnership. India has tried to balance carefully its relations with Iran and the United States; however, due to intense American pressure, especially after the signing of the U.S.-India civilian nuclear energy cooperation pact, India has moved closer to the United States concerning the Iranian nuclear program. But strong domestic constraints remain that will prevent India from completely abandoning its ties with Iran, even as a re-evaluation of India-Iran bilateral ties is long overdue.     

Hybrid Warfare,International Negotiation,and an Experiment in “Remote Convening”

The authors are leading a multinational effort to understand the effects of “hybrid” warfare on international commercial negotiation. The start-up process is itself essentially a negotiation, among about forty individual practitioners and scholars with very diverse backgrounds, over whether and how they will work together. In a pandemic, a key risk is that the necessary cooperation and trust will be harder to build, particularly among professionals who are dealing with security-sensitive issues and who have never met each other. This article discusses the current necessity of replacing the in-person model for eliciting such cooperation which the authors had developed previously for large collaborative projects, and describes a “remote convening” replacement process.     

Negotiating Verification: International Diplomacy and the Evolution of Nuclear Safeguards, 1945–1972

Nuclear safeguards have been an essential part of the global order since the beginnings of the nuclear age. The International Atomic Energy Agency [IAEA], an international bureaucracy that is supposed to be a non-political, technical institution administers this global nuclear safeguards regime. Even though safeguards have always been controversial, they have turned out to be the most enduring item in the international community’s toolbox to prevent or slow down the spread of nuclear weapons to non-nuclear states. This analysis shows that nuclear safeguards, whilst they survived the fall of the Iron Curtain, were a genuine invention of the Cold War. At the beginning of the nuclear age, there was an overall understanding that safeguards were not strong enough to prevent the global spread of nuclear weapons. It was only over the course of the late 1950s and 1960s that safeguards moved from the margins to the centre of diplomatic negotiations about global nuclear order. Newly declassified records from the IAEA Archives in Vienna offer insights into the evolution of early nuclear safeguards and suggest that negotiation patterns, proceedings, and settings affected the outcome of this nuclear diplomacy.     

Iran and nuclear ambiguity

A comparison between Iran's current nuclear efforts and those of the pro-Western regime of Shah Reza Pahlavi shows that Iranian ambitions for a full-fledged civilian nuclear programme have remained relatively constant for nearly half a century. Today, fuel cycle technology provides Iran with a latent nuclear weapon's potential. However, US concerns about an Iranian bomb, which began in the early 1970s and aggravated after the Iranian Revolution, long predate Teheran's uranium enrichment programme. Thus, Iran is a specific case of the general problem presented by the inherent potential of nuclear technology to both civilian and military ends. Approaches to dealing with a long-term, ambiguous, latent nuclear weapon threat, whether Iranian or other, are suggested.     

Seeking CSDP Accountability Through Interparliamentary Scrutiny

The EU's Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) requires parliamentary accountability. At present, as CSDP-related decisions are increasingly taken in the framework of the UN or the EU, neither the European Parliament (EP) nor national parliaments are able to hold decision-makers accountable. Interparliamentary cooperation can provide added value in bringing about parliamentary scrutiny of CSDP. Nevertheless, despite an official agreement, the EP and national parliaments have different views on what such interparliamentary cooperation entails. There are five conditions – cooperation and complementarity among parliaments, conferential dialogues, coordinated agendas, and comprehensive and comparative scrutiny – that have to be fulfilled to create added value for interparliamentary cooperation on CSDP matters.     

再论《奉俄协定》

《奉俄协定》是苏联政府为了落实其在《中苏协定》中关于共管中东铁路权益,与以张作霖为首的奉系集团所签订的协定.该协定的签署不仅开了苏联与中国地方当局订立协约的先河,同时对中苏关系乃至整个远东地区形势的发展产生了重大影响.奉直两个军阀集团之间的关系走向直接影响了奉苏交涉谈判进度和《奉俄协定》的签署,但该协定作为主权国与地方当局签订的协约有违于国际法的规定.