试析东北亚安全合作框架变化趋势与特点

东北亚安全合作基本框架正在发生重要的变化,美朝双方实行的战争边缘化政策愈演愈烈,围绕朝核问题美国与朝鲜及中国、韩国、日本等国正进行长期的、战略性角逐;建立某种多边安全合作框架已成为东北亚各国安全政策的基本取向,但各国的侧重点有所不同。     

"六方会谈"机制化:东北亚安全合作的努力方向

寻求建立朝鲜半岛安全机制以取代停战机制,是实现东北亚多边安全合作的重大课题.六方会谈是东北亚各方经过长期艰难努力作出的历史性选择.在六方会谈框架下解决朝核问题有可能成为不可逆转的最佳模式六方会谈的意义已远超出解决朝核问题本身,对于东北亚安全环境建设具有十分重要的意义.六方会谈机制化应该成为东北亚安全环境建设的努力方向.     

后朝核阶段东北亚安全合作的走向

朝鲜进行核试爆,并以明确的语言宣布已经成为"有核国家",引起朝核问题、六方会谈以及东北亚安全合作的重要变化。这标志着朝核问题进入了"后朝核阶段"。朝核问题存在着朝鲜半岛无核化、朝鲜拥核现实化、朝核问题长期化三种可能前景,对六方会谈和东北亚安全合作产生深刻影响。     

美国构建东北亚安全机制的设想

2002年10月,因美国和朝鲜的“核项目”谈判破裂引发了第二次朝核危机。①这次危机在某种程度上加速了重建冷战后东北亚安全秩序的进程。它既对东北亚各国提出了严峻挑战,又为东北亚地区合作,特别是多边安全机制的建立注入了“催化剂”。随着朝核问题逐步纳入和平解决轨道以及“     

朝核问题与东北亚安全合作

朝核问题已经成为东北亚地区最突出的一个安全问题 ,甚至有可能引发国家间的冲突。解决这一问题需要建立一个新的安全机制 ,目前所进行的六方会谈将有可能建立这样一种机制。东北亚安全合作是东北亚国家联合解决本地区安全问题的最高目标 ,为朝核问题所建立的安全机制将是通向未来东北亚地区安全合作的一步。要建立地区主义下的安全合作目前来说条件非常不成熟 ,美国力量的存在将是东亚国家需要克服的最大因素。实现东北亚稳定的大国关系将是所有合作的基础。     

美国对朝鲜政策特点及其影响

美国是影响朝鲜核问题走向和东北亚安全架构与形势的主要因素。当前美国对朝主要以诱拉为主,着重通过交流与对话解决与朝鲜在朝核等问题上的分歧,且取得明显成效。这对朝美关系的改善与朝核问题的解决,很有裨益,并将对东北亚安全局势及东北亚安全合作机制的发展产生积极影响。但美国并没有完全放弃对朝以压促变的政策,朝核问题和半岛局势仍存变数,东北亚安全模式尚处于十字路口。     

日本强化安保战略与东北亚安全

当前，日本进一步强化安保战略，主要举措包括强化国家安全保障会议的“司令塔”功能，完善自卫队的体制建设，加强导弹防御能力，加强岛屿防卫能力，加强海洋安保能力，提升岛屿作战能力，谋求“先发制人”打击力，谋求自卫队合宪，强化日美安保同盟，扩展对外安全合作，推广“印太战略”等。日本安保战略的强化呈现否定二战后“非军事化”、追求威慑力、谋求“塑造力”等特点。日本强化安保战略的目的在于实现“军事大国化”以及夺取地区安保主导权，适应美国对日本政策的变化以及应对朝核问题与“中国威胁”等。日本强化安保战略必将对东北亚安全产生深刻影响。首先，日本军事能力增强，其在可以行使集体自卫权的框架下谋求“先发制人”的能力，将改变美日安全关系中的“矛”与“盾”格局，日本将在东北亚地区扮演更多的安全角色，必将影响东北亚的安全结构。其次，日本强化安保战略的举措刺激朝鲜的“安全神经”，不仅不利于朝核问题的解决，还会进一步加剧东北亚安全形势的紧张。再次，日本在反导系统上与美国捆绑，加深地区安全困境，不利于东北亚安全互信的构建。日本应与中国一道为地区和平与稳定多做积极贡献。     

朝核问题六方会谈的进展与前景

朝核问题六方会谈取得了重要的阶段性成果。朝核问题的症结是朝美两国之间根深蒂固的互不信任与互相敌视,使得朝核问题的最终解决依然面临诸多困难。六方会谈反映了东北亚各国通过多边合作解决地区安全问题的意愿,增强了建立东北亚地区安全合作机制的信心。     

浅议朝核问题与东北亚多边安全合作机制

朝鲜核试验的进行, 朝核问题再次凸显, 地缘安全形势更趋复杂, 东北亚亟待建构一 个以六方会谈为基础的多边安全合作机制。六方会谈作为东北亚多边安全合作实践的一种过程, 既为将来东北亚多边安全合作机制的形成作了铺垫, 又带来了解决问题的契机, 并提供了有益的经 验教训。妥善解决朝核问题和建构新东北亚安全秩序, 以六方或多方会谈为基础的东北亚多边安 全合作机制将会是最好选择。     

朝核六方会谈：从应对危机到东北亚安全机制

朝核问题六方会谈自2003年8月启动以来，共召开了六次会议，终于使朝核危机的解决获得重大进展，也使六方会谈各国在围绕朝核问题展开对话的进程中加深相互了解、增进信任。然而，朝鲜半岛安全政治局面的最终形成还要靠整个东北亚安全机制的建立，六方会谈可能成为这种安全机制的基本框架。     

朝鲜核试爆与重开六方会谈

朝鲜核试爆是美朝新一轮较量的产物。朝鲜核危机的发展仍取决于美朝关系能否发生变化。重开六方会谈是相关各方的共同愿望,但取得实质性进展的可能很小。朝鲜将实际成为“拥核”国家,朝核危机长期化的可能性越来越大。六方会谈并不因为朝鲜核试爆而减弱其历史作用,它依然是解决朝核问题的最佳形式,也是各方为应对和消除朝鲜“拥核”而进行对话、沟通、协商的理想平台,并有可能进而成为实现朝鲜半岛和平机制和东北亚安全合作的合理载体。     

朝鲜半岛安全问题及中国与有关各方的合作策略

自朝鲜核试验到最近的"天安"号事件,朝鲜半岛及东北亚安全形势发生重大变化。问题的解决涉及多方甚至整个国际社会。中国应妥善处理中美关系,加强中、日、韩三国间的互信、共识与合作,加强与俄罗斯及国际社会的沟通与合作。在坚决促朝弃核,推进半岛无核化的同时以经济外交为杠杆促朝融入国际社会,在寻求外交谈判解决半岛危机的同时,做好应对半岛可能出现的突发事件的准备。     

朝鲜经济发展方式探析

近年来,朝鲜正在将政策重心从核武安全问题转移到国内经济建设和对外经贸合作上。一系列经济政策措施表明,朝鲜正在探索"朝鲜式的"经济发展方式:在不触及朝鲜现有体制的前提下,不断提高科技发展水平,改善产业结构,扩大对外经济合作,通过体制外改革,建立新的经济发展体系,探索实现"强盛大国"战略目标的路径和方式。其中,对外经济合作对朝鲜经济发展方式的探索具有重要意义。要实现经济发展方式的转变,朝鲜还需要国内外各种条件和措施的配合,需要克服许多困难。     

Rising to the Challenge: Europe’s Security Policy in East Asia amid US-China Rivalry

ABSTRACT

China’s growing power and assertiveness towards its smaller and weaker neighbours has been a wakeup call for the European Union and its member states which, as a result, have stepped up their involvement in East Asia. EU security policy in the region shows many elements of alignment with the United States, but also differences. In North East Asia, the EU has adopted harsh sanctions against North Korea but, contrary to the Trump administration which continues to seek regime change, has left the door open for dialogue. Moreover, the EU supports the process of trilateral cooperation among China, Japan and South Korea, while Washington has traditionally been lukewarm towards a process that excludes the US and risks being dominated by Beijing. The transatlantic allies also show differing approaches with regard to maritime disputes in the South China Sea. While EU security policy in East Asia is largely complementary to that of Washington, in some cases Europe tends – albeit inadvertently – to favour Beijing.     

中韩对朝经济合作探析

中国是朝鲜传统友好国家,长期以来经贸关系密切。韩国作为朝鲜"同民族兄弟"国家,近年来,对朝经济交流与合作日益增加,甚至出现了超过中国、成为朝鲜第一大贸易伙伴的趋势。中朝、韩朝双边经贸交流各有特点,并对朝鲜恢复经济建设发挥着重要作用,同时也因朝鲜半岛政治经济环境因素的影响而存在着一定的局限性。为克服这些局限性,中、韩、朝可以在物流、基础设施、直接投资及大图们江开发等领域加强三方共同合作,消除朝鲜的安全顾虑,帮助朝鲜融入国际社会,促进东北亚区域经济合作,实现"共赢"的目标。     

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.     

特朗普政府对朝核问题的危机管理及前景研判

2017年的朝核危机实质上是特朗普政府实施边缘政策而带来的一场危机,即,通过极限施压迫使朝鲜在战争和让步之间做出选择,以推动半岛无核化进程。然而,特朗普政府对朝核问题的危机管理因朝鲜的外交对冲、美国国内政治因素的制约以及国际合作的缺失使双方谈判陷入僵局,美国国内甚至出现是否会默认朝鲜有核的争论。若要真正推动朝鲜半岛无核化取得实质性进展,特朗普政府的现实方案仍是设定有限目标,并由联合国安理会制定可逆条款,约束美朝不信守承诺的行为,以国际社会的担保减少美朝互信缺失带来的消极影响,加快推进半岛无核化的和平进程。     

10+3框架下的东北亚区域合作--兼谈对东北亚合作的几点新认识

10+3框架的产生,使东北亚次区域合作有了制度上的保障,以中、日、韩为核心的东北亚合作成了东亚区域合作的一个重要组成部分。当前,中、日、韩合作的最大障碍是中日之间缺乏互信,双方应当“以史为鉴,面向未来”,共同推动东北亚合作。东北亚合作应当坚持开放性,以 10+3为主,多渠道并进。     

The Bush Administration and the Nuclear Challenges by North Korea

When in October 2002 the US administration confronted the North Koreans with intelligence that the latter had a program to enrich uranium, another nuclear crisis on the Korean peninsula was triggered. It quickly developed into a plutonium crisis because the DPRK then started to “defrost” the nuclear facilities that had been frozen by the Agreed Framework and to revive its nuclear weapons program. North Korea told the world that it was building up a nuclear deterrent force. Though the US administration toyed with the idea of working towards a collapse of the DPRK, it ultimately decided to pursue diplomacy. The two Koreas and the four great Pacific powers got involved in the negotiations. The administration insisted on a complete, verifiable, and irreversible dismantling of the North Korean nuclear programs. The DPRK was reluctant to proceed with the talks, since it felt that its basic security interests were being disregarded. Three rounds of six-party talks held in Beijing did not surpass the stage of prenegotiations. At the end of 2004, the prospects for the talks were gloomy.¹