Continuity in the Face of Upheaval—British Strategic Culture and the Impact of the Blair Government

This chapter will consider how the elements of continuity and change in British foreign policy that emerged under the current Labor government will be managed in the short to medium term and ask what their fuller implications for the UK and European security may be in the longer run. The article will examine how the change that transpired after 1997 which saw a new pro-European stance on security can be reconciled with the prevailing continuities in British strategic culture, namely Britain’s special relationship with the US, its global role, and, as demonstrated in the case of Iraq, the UK’s negation of Franco-German security initiatives. The article will also emphasise the central importance of the UK’s commitment to the EU’s security policy ambitions, given that the UK armed forces are the most capable in Europe and as confirmed in Iraq, an ESDP without a UK contribution would have no credibility. Despite Blair’s policy overtures towards developing greater European military capabilities, the continued reliance on the US has meant that British strategic culture has displayed remarkable continuity rather than fundamental transformation.     

美国对海权的再认识及其政策影响（英文）

A new debate over sea power and a new understanding of it has emerged in the US, highlighting the increasing domestic anxiety about a rising East and a declining West. The return to sea control as the focus of US naval strategy may complicate the regional security situation and create more risks.     

欧美科技制裁协作的动力与分歧：基于欧盟的视角

科技制裁在持续的军事冲突中发挥着关键作用,在和平时期的地缘政治中也从未消失。欧盟与美国是最大的制裁实施者,双方的制裁协作在多个地区和领域产生了重要影响。虽然欧美科技制裁协作较为频繁,但欧盟和美国在制裁政策上仍存在诸多分歧。文章从欧美价值观、安全威胁和二级制裁这三个维度出发,剖析欧盟与美国进行科技制裁协作的动因与诱发分歧的因素,并选择俄罗斯、伊朗和中国这三个具有代表性和差异性的案例进行比较。欧盟与美国对俄罗斯的制裁协作水平最高;在伊朗案例中,二级制裁因素带来的欧美分歧较为突出;在中国案例中,欧美尚未达成明显的制裁共识。共同价值观、安全威胁的紧迫性、二级制裁压力等要素是促使欧盟参与美国科技制裁的重要动因。然而,不同的外交政策理念、安全认知的错位和二级制裁的反作用力也使欧美分歧难以弥合,大大削减了制裁效率。     

中美在亚太地区的安全矛盾：演变与逻辑

近年来,中美在亚太地区的安全矛盾持续发酵,逐渐形成安全利益、理念和地区安全秩序构想的全面对立态势,成为影响中美和平共处的重要因素。秩序疑虑与热点问题的对立是中美在亚太地区安全矛盾的主要表现。中美亚太安全矛盾的全方位突显,根本上源于两国力量对比的变化以及由此引发的权力转移态势,是中美总体力量差距背景下局部力量平衡的表现。这种力量平衡表现为:中国作为地区经济中心与美国作为地区安全中心的“二元结构平衡”;中国作为陆权大国与美国作为海权大国的“陆海权力平衡”;在中国近海区域,中美权力均衡态势初步形成。在此过程中,中美对既有安全矛盾管理的失效以及彼此安全威胁认知的反复塑造,客观上增强了矛盾对立的烈度,安全困境逐步形成。随着权力消长和政策互动,中美在亚太地区的安全困境,逐步呈现出从经典安全困境转向“国家引导型的安全困境”加剧的趋势。未来,中美亚太安全矛盾仍然会受到结构性因素的影响,而经济相互依存趋势、技术发展引发的军事威慑变化、意识形态竞争以及非传统安全合作等因素,则将决定既有安全矛盾是否会走向冲突。     

美国选举安全问题:以2016年和2020年总统大选为例

2016年美国总统大选暴露了长期存在于该国选举体系中的风险,"选举安全"迅速成为当代美国国家安全与国土安全领域的重要议题。美国选举安全涉及网络安全、社会安全、政治安全与军事安全,体现出"复合安全问题"的特质。美国联邦与各州政府试图从降低关键基础设施风险、重建选民信任、减少部门壁垒以及填补机制缺失四个层面入手,系统性化解存在于选举系统的各类安全威胁。2020年美国大选期间,原有选举安全风险得到一定程度的缓解,但美国国家安全体制及文化与其选举安全体系的运行逻辑之间仍存在多层矛盾,特别是美国选举体系的产业市场与创新之间的矛盾、国家安全与"言论自由"之间的矛盾、"全政府"与"地方权"之间的矛盾、"网络自由"与"网络主权"之间的矛盾。这些矛盾会长期存在,将使利益攸关方不断发生龃龉,阻碍相关政策深入推进,最终导致美国在选举安全治理上将一直面临难以克服的困境。     

The United States,Europe, and Homeland Security: Seeing Soft Security Concerns Through a Counterterrorist Lens

The attacks of 11 September 2001 created a new paradigm for domestic security in the United States. The struggle against terrorism, particularly catastrophic terrorism, became the government’s most important priority. In the wake of these attacks, the Department of Homeland Security was established, with broader powers of enforcement, set forth in new legislation such as the Patriot Act. This new focus on homeland security will have a secondary effect on the efforts of the US to deal effectively with a range of soft security threats in that it will increase attention to those concerns, particularly as they are seen as enablers of terrorism. The establishment of the Department of Homeland Security is the largest reorganization of the US government in over 50 years, and will necessitate a reordering of the inter-departmental relationships on security matters as well as those critical to soft security cooperation with friends and allies abroad. Although the new department has absorbed many aspects of enforcing the nation’s laws, other functions key to soft security remain spread throughout other US government agencies. A comprehensive understanding of this new order will be key to enhancing the international struggle against soft security threats.     

美国国家安全认知的新视阈：人工智能与国家安全

人工智能作为一种革命性技术,正在从根本上变革国际社会的发展进程及方式。面对这一发展趋势,美国已将人工智能提升到国家安全的高度。人工智能对美国国家安全的影响主要存在于三个方面:首先,人工智能是影响和塑造未来美国国家安全的核心变量。人工智能能够优化美国在国际政治格局中的力量配比,弥合并纠正美国社会内部的分裂和失序状况,并助推美国军事实力实现“跨越式”发展。其次,有效克服人工智能的负面效应是确保未来美国国家安全的关键。人工智能可能引发诸多社会和道德问题,其固有的缺陷也将增加战争决策的风险成本,还可能增加武装冲突的频率和强度。最后,美国强调中国人工智能的快速发展对未来美国国家安全构成严重“威胁”。中美在人工智能领域的竞争已无法避免,美国认为中国正在试图“挑战”美国在高新技术领域的领导地位;为应对美国在人工智能领域对华遏制政策,中国应制定和形成人工智能研发以及应用规则和规范;通过制度化协调与合作来规制中美关系,努力避免“科技冷战”的发生。     

霸权的逻辑：美国亚太安全战略的多边转向

二战后,美国在亚太地区构筑起双边联盟体系,但近年来对于加强多边安全合作更为积极。美国近几届政府在亚太安全战略方面作出了重大调整,从奥巴马政府到拜登政府都在推动双边合作转向多边合作,而为何发生这一转变值得探讨。美国在权力优势明显时,倾向于采取双边合作;当美国权力优势缩小时,更加重视多边合作,其安全合作形式是接近于联盟还是相对松散的安全合作,则取决于外部威胁性质和内部分歧大小。美国亚太安全合作形式的调整取决于中美实力差距、外部威胁变化和成员国分歧,多边形式可以更大范围地进行国际动员,最大程度地维护自身的霸权地位。美国在亚太地区的多边安全合作拥有稳固的合作基础、灵活的多边形式和共同的身份认同,有助于美国调动战略资源和联合应对共同关注的威胁。亚太多边安全合作增强了美国的安全动员能力,冲击了亚太地区秩序,给中国带来较大的安全压力。但不同合作机制也面临合作程度不一、成员战略分歧和合作议题分散的影响,合作进程存在着不确定性。     

The Quad,AUKUS, and I2U2 formats: Major lessons from minilaterals

Over the past two decades, a trend has emerged where US partners and allies look outside of their bilateral relationship with the United States and pre-existing multilateral bodies to join ad-hoc networks. They are joining these networks to both obtain their own security goods and to provide regional public goods. Yet, these ad-hoc networks, or “minilaterals,” often include multiple US allies or shared partners of the United States. For example, the revived Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad) includes Japan, India, Australia, and the United States, encompassing two separate US treaty alliances. Similarly, the tripartite pact AUKUS connects the US-UK transatlantic alliance relationship to the US-Australia alliance in the Indo-Pacific. The newest addition to this growing trend in minilateralism, the I2U2, which redefine the Middle East as West Asia by bringing together the United States, India, Israel, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), provides additional insight into the benefits of minilaterals as mechanisms for organizing interstate cooperation.     

Not quite the ‘Great Britain of the Far East’: Japan's security,the US–Japan alliance and the ‘war on terror’ in East Asia

Japan, in responding to US expectations for support in the ‘war on terror’, has displayed a degree of strategic convergence on global security objectives, thus prompting policy-makers and observers to dub it the ‘Great Britain of the Far East’. This article argues, however, that Japan is far from assuming this role. For Japan, the ‘war on terror’ serves more as a political pretext for legitimating long-planned changes in military security policy that are often only marginally related to the US's anti-terrorism agenda. Instead, Japan has focused much more on using the terror threat rationale as a means to push forward its response to the regional and traditional security challenges of North Korea and China, even if at times it attempts to depict both as ‘new security challenges’ or as involving elements of counterterrorism. The final conclusion is that US military hegemony may be weakened by Japan's and the Asia-Pacific's potential divergence from the US global security agenda.     

Betwixt balance and community: America, ASEAN, and the security of Southeast Asia

Realist scholars have long claimed, not incorrectly, that aUS-led balance of power is fundamental to the security and prosperityof Southeast Asia. Yet the Southeast Asian experience has alsobeen one where multilateral security dialogue and regional communityformation figure prominently. In contrast to views which exaggeratethe importance of US preponderance in Southeast Asia whilstdismissing regional multilateral efforts, we offer seven argumentsagainst any undue overstatement of the US contribution to regionalpeace and stability. If anything, a historically ambivalentUS presence contributed to ASEAN's emergence as a mechanismof regional diplomacy. Such ambivalence is no longer feasiblesince 9/11. However, Washington's current engagement in SoutheastAsia should focus on revitalizing regional multilateralism.Our claim is not that the region's security is due to ASEANregionalism rather than US strategic dominance. We argue insteadthat absent the region's fluency with ‘soft’ multilateralism,Southeast Asia's security would probably have been far worse.

SoutheastAsians are more acutely aware of the uncertainties of U.S. policiesthan other regions of the world. They remember the Americanretrenchment in the 1970s followed by a decade of self-doubt.Hence ASEAN countries drew towards each other to seek greaterstrength in self-reliance. They found that together in ASEAN,they could better overcome their problems; but they still needthe United States to balance the strength of the Soviet shipsand aircraft. The renewal of self-confidence in America hasreassured us that America will help maintain the peace and stabilityof the region. It is this balance of power which has enabledthe free market economies to thrive. – Lee Kuan Yew¹

     

亚太军事形势动荡的美国因素

当前亚太地区军事形势激烈动荡，正处于冷战结束以来最为复杂的时期。关国是推动亚太地区军事形势动荡的主要“推手”，其目的一是为美国的战略重点转移服务；二是为美国输出军火做铺垫；三是为遏阻中国的发展进程营造氛围。对此，我应高度警惕，冷静观察，沉着应对。     

东亚金融区域主义的兴起及其地缘安全影响

2008年全球金融危机以后,国际货币金融体系持续动荡,以地区金融安全合作为导向的金融区域主义逐步兴起,且成为一种显著的地缘政治经济现象。金融区域主义对地缘安全的影响主要有两个方面:一是地区金融安全,地区金融主义有助于构筑地区金融安全网络,推动地缘经济整合;二是地缘政治安全,地区金融主义会扩大地区大国的地缘政治影响力以及增加地区排斥外围国家干涉本地事务的能力。金融区域主义产生的这些地缘安全影响对不同的行为主体而言,具有不同的意义。首先,东盟作为地区性的经济共同体,会极力反对东亚大国利用金融区域主义将东盟纳入其势力范围之下,威胁东盟的地缘政治安全环境。其次,作为最大出资方,中日对地区货币金融领导权的争夺变得日趋激烈,且形成了持续的冲突性关系,从而削弱了东亚金融安全合作的政治前景。最后,东亚作为美元回流机制中的关键一环,如果将美国排斥在外,无疑会增加东亚地区与美国的地缘政治矛盾。因而,东亚金融区域主义在兴起的过程中,不仅要看到其稳定地区货币金融秩序的一面,同时也要看到其有可能制造地缘政治安全问题的一面。     

美国国家安全情报传递机制论析

作为世界上情报体系最为发达的国家，美国国家安全情报机制一直以来备受各方关注。九一一事件催生了美国情报体系全面而彻底的改革。经过十多年的努力，美国情报界实现了从机构林立的分散体系到由国家情报总监办公室领导的有机整体的重大转型。从总体机制来看，美国情报界现已形成情报机构一体化与任务一体化的双轮驱动体系，其情报传递网络不仅涵盖领导、协调、执行三个层级间的纵向传送，而且包括不同情报机构之间的横向协调，基本实现了情报整合与信息共享。美国国家情报总监办公室成为名副其实的美国情报界统领，其下设的反恐、反扩散、反情报和网络情报中心构成了美国国家安全情报分类传递机制的四大支柱。通过比较，四大分类传递机制中最为成熟的是反恐中心，其次是反情报与安全中心，再次是网络威胁情报整合中心，最后是反扩散中心。由于各类情报机制自身发展程度的不同，其改革过程中所面临的挑战也不一样。美国国家安全情报传递机制的改革“瓶颈”既有发展不足导致的结构性困境，也有外部安全环境变化带来的挑战。此外，特朗普政府上台后的一系列政策举措使得美国国家安全情报体系的发展方向呈现出新的态势。     

The Berlin Republic,Iraq, and the Use of Force

This article holds that German security policy and attitudes towards the use of force remain framed by the distinct strategic culture that emerged during West Germany’s rearmament and international rehabilitation in the 1950’s. This strategic culture, characterised by strong anti-military sentiment and a commitment to multilateral diplomacy and international law, determined Germany’s position over Iraq and its ongoing opposition to the US-led invasion of the country. However, the strength and highly vociferous nature of Germany’s opposition to US policy also indicated that German strategic culture is itself evolving, as both elites and society reconsider aspects of German national history and the role of collective memory. Much of this new discourse relates to the notion of the ‘Berlin Republic’, which in foreign and security policy terms is synonymous with the emergence of greater self confidence, the introduction of more ‘national’ vocabulary into foregin policy statements and a less reflexive attitude to transatlantic security.     

Central Asian Regional Security Complex: The Impact of Russian and US Policies

This paper aims to reveal the impact made by the Russian and US policies on the Central Asian regional security complex (RSC) in the 1990s and 2000s. It traces the evolution of post-Soviet Central Asia from a proto-complex to a fully fledged RSC, analysing major security trends and discovering the consolidation of the RSC's boundary, polarity and social construction. The analysis has not shown much divergence in the way US and Russian policies have influenced the Central Asian RSC. It is argued that Moscow and Washington have made a significant impact on the consolidation of the RSC's boundaries, with the effects of US and Russian policies on its polarity and social construction being rather limited.     

Rethinking European Security: The Inter-regional Dimension and the Turkish Nexus

Abstract

Security agendas in Europe have gone through some striking modifications over the last couple of decades, reflecting changes in both the nature and the scope of post-Cold War security concerns. While the traditional security concerns have not completely disappeared, new sources of insecurity and instability have emerged out of the post-Cold War politico-strategic environment in Europe's peripheries. Turkey sits at the nexus of this hitherto marginalized theatre of risks and challenges. Thus, while investigating this new and broader security environment for Europe and then locating Turkey's role and place in such milieu, this article argues that Turkey has a critical role to play in this endeavour of achieving security and stability in both Europe and its surrounding regions.     

American Perspectives on the Transatlantic Security Agenda

This article explores US perspectives on the new transatlantic security agenda in the context of the evolution of strategic culture. The war on terrorism and the Iraq War of 2003 serve as focal points to examine sources of divergence and convergence between US and European security policies. The article explores key questions including: Have we seen the collapse of a shared, transatlantic security culture since September 11? How have US leaders manipulated strategic cultures to achieve security objectives in the new era? Why has the Bush administration willingly engaged (and even encouraged) the intra-European divide? How significant to the United States is the shift in “old” and “new” European perspectives on the war on terrorism? The article concludes with an assessment of the implications of recent events for the future of transatlantic security ties.     

美国气候战略及中美气候合作北大核心

当前全球气候危机加速演进,气候变化与国际战略深度融合,全球气候治理进入大变局和秩序重塑的关键时期。美国拜登政府重启气候新议程,将气候变化议题提升至美国国家安全与外交政策的中心地位,其战略目标是在全球气候权力重组、气候安全体系重构、气候治理秩序重塑中争夺主导权,拜登政府的气候战略框架已基本成型。统筹应对美国气候战略竞争风险和深入推进COP26后中美气候外交,关系到国际安全体系与全球气候治理新秩序的构建。中美唯有良性互动、拓展合作空间才能维护国际安全及人类在21世纪的可持续发展。     

冷战后美国亚太安全护持战略行为模式——以南海外交为例

冷战后美国的战略行为模式并非完全承袭基于国际系统结构基本分析框架的霸权护持模式。美国亚太安全护持战略行为模式是基于国际系统进程基本分析框架的导出概念。厘清对安全护持的认识需要解构这一概念,找出蕴涵于其中的基本战略行为,而基本战略行为的判定须通过"基于维度"的考察。施韦勒和米尔斯海默意义上的制衡可以作为这种基本战略行为的分析基底,但制衡的概念必须重塑才能符合基本战略行为的要求,重塑制衡的方式主要是打破其指涉对象的单一维度而进行多维重构。随着冷战后亚太安全环境的变迁,美国的安全护持战略行为模式也存在转型的必要,而制衡行为的转型又是安全护持模式转型的核心。冷战后美国对南海相关声索国的外交行动验证了安全护持模式及其转型的有效性。