A More Turbulent and Troubled World

The year 2016 marked the 25th anniversary of the end of the Cold War and the 15th anniversary of the 9/11 attack.Though international relations are constantly adjusted,the world is by no means more stable and orderly.International order reshaping triggered by the 2008 financial crisis is deepening,with chaos of various kinds popping up here and there.In the sociopolitical field,the "Trump phenomenon" and Brexit indicate serious weakening of the authority of traditional political systems and elites.In major country relations and international security,the world is witnessing the rise of emerging countries and the and fall of the West,fiercer US-Russia and Sino-US wrestling of strategic significance,and greater global and regional security risks.In global governance,while adjustment of UN-centered global governance is laboring along,national rivalries touch core issues,making global governance more urgent.     

Non-Traditional Overall National Security Outlook

The “New Security Concept” put forward by the Chinese authorities at the turn of the century, with “mutual trust, mutual benefit, equality, and coordination” at its core, dealt mainly with non-traditional security approaches and measures in external security. However, it did not touch upon internal security or other traditional or non-traditional security issues in a broader sense. Therefore it is a low form of non-traditional security outlook and a low form of non-traditional national security outlook. When reviewing overall national security issues besides external security and international security, China has stuck to a traditional national security outlook. In comparison, taking “the people’s security as its aim,” the Overall National Security Outlook (ONSO) embodies non-traditional thinking and “attaches importance to both traditional and non-traditional security.” It is, therefore, an advanced non-traditional national security outlook. Though incorporating rich non-traditional national security issues, the ONSO deals with various traditional national security issues, as well. The ONSO is non-traditional in that it handles and highlights non-traditional national security issues; it is holistic because it pays dual attention to both traditional and nontraditional national security issues; it is advanced as it incorporates both traditional and non-traditional national security issues by means of non-traditional thinking.     

CPC Statements and Decisions on National Security

Since 1982, the Communist Party of China （CPC） Central Committee has gradually deepened and extended its understanding of national security issues, and expanded this from the more traditional fields into a range of non-traditional fields as well. This can be seen in important documents such as the reports of the 14th ,15th, 16th and 17th National Congress of the CPC and the Decisions of the 4th and 6th Plenary Sessions of the 16th CPC Central Committee and the 3rd Plenary Session of the 17th CPC Central Committee. The CPC Central Committee has also decided that ＂with the understanding that the causes of traditional and non-traditional security threats are interrelated, we will strive to improve awareness of and strategies for national security, ＇accelerating＇ and ＇enhancing＇ the creation of a scientific, coordinated and efficient mechanisms for safeguarding national security. We will also strive to incorporate the influential Decisions on national security into our specific areas of work, including ＇the Party＇s governance capacity＇, ＇building a harmonious society＇ and ＇rural reform and development＇ and so on.＂     

CIIS President Attends Webinar on Multilateral Coordination on Security Threats

正On May 20,at the invitation of the US National Committee on American Foreign Policy (NCAFP),CIIS President Qi Zhenhong attended the virtual panel"Statecraft in the 21st Century:Policy Coordination on Traditional and Non-Traditional Security Threats."During the panel President Qi Zhenhong had in-depth discussions with experts and scholars from the US,Japan,and the ROK about the international situation in the face of COVID-19,traditional and non-traditional security issues,global governance,and ChinaUS cooperation.     

Shared Security: Chinese Perspectives on Non-Traditional Security

As mankind faces a growing number of “common threats,” “common crisis awareness” has emerged within the international community. People have begun to realize the very nature of non-traditional threats and their impact on the global village, and to demand responses to those threats in the form of “shared security.” Based on traditional security theories and contributions in the fi eld of peace studies, a constructivist “transitional form” of Western theories has taken shape. Various “independent forms” of non-traditional security theories have subsequently been created, and they all share the common value orientation of “constructed security.” The key to achieving “shared security” lies in how to deal with “heterogeneous” phenomena in the international community. China’s security ideals and diplomatic style are unique when compared with those of the Western world. Chinese concepts such as “Bao He Tai He”(great harmony is preserved in union), “Wan Guo Xian Ning”(the myriad states all enjoy repose), “He Er Bu Tong”(harmony but not sameness), and “Tian Xia Da Tong” (unity of the entire world) all embody rich intellectual resources and the core values for “shared security.” Recently, Chinese scholars have contributed to the growing discourse on “shared security” by proposing such theoretical frameworks as the “New Tian-Xia Doctrine,” “the Common Security of Human Beings,” “the Common Security of Multiactors,” and “the Deepening of Global Governance.” Finally, the author proposes a reexamination of China’s diplomatic practices and argues that “shared security” is not only theoretically valid for non-traditional security but also very feasible in practice.     

International Institutions and GHG

Globalization is pushing public health crises beyond traditional national boundaries. It has also transformed international health governance into global health governance. Health security is one aspect of global public welfare. International institutions, such as the WHO, the WTO, the World Bank, and the BWC, are main providers of global public welfare for health. However, those institutions＇ role in global health governance is not optimized. An analysis of the shortcomings of the international institutions concerned with global heath can contribute to better global health governance. Some tentative solutions to such problems are put forward in this paper.     

New Security Concept and China''''s Peaceful Development

In the post-Cold War period, profound and complex changes have taken place in the field of international security. Threats to international security have become complicated and diversified. Traditional and non-traditional security threats have interweaved…     

Features of World Military Security Situation

The current global military security situation is characterized by rising uncertainties and interlocked traditional/nontraditional security threats with militaries deploying in advance for the unpredictable future in a bid to build a favorable environment through a functional transformation of their respective armed forces.     

Features of World Military Security Situation

The current global military security situation is characterized byrising uncertainties and interlocked traditional/nontraditionalsecurity threats with militaries deploying in advance for the unpredict-able future in a bid to build a favorable environment …     

Change Ideas and Take Initiative in Taking Countermeasures

After the September 11 events, the international pattern and great power relations have readjusted. The importance of non-traditional security factors in international politics rise rapidly. The homeland security issue that various sovereign states are confronting has become prominent. These changes re-challenge the traditional security concept.     

“多元性”非传统安全威胁： 网络安全挑战与治理

随着非传统安全威胁的愈加综合与复杂,非传统安全研究需要进一步精细化。“多元性”非传统安全威胁针对那类与传统安全因素相互交混的威胁而提出,在缘由、意图、主体、手段、地缘等多方面显示了非传统与传统安全相互交织的“多元性”特征。网络安全威胁是“多元性”非传统安全威胁中的重要议题,其呈现了主权难以界定、合法性难以判定、身份难以限定、过程难以追踪、应对难以依靠单一主体的非常规特征,网络安全维护需要新思维。一些国家奉行进攻型网络安全战略,导致了网络空间的威胁升级与安全困境,不利于全球网络安全维护。“优态共存”基于中国“和合”价值观而提出,主张认同建构与互惠共建,更好地适应了网络安全治理的跨界合作、“大安全”观与超越安全困境的能力要求,是较优的网络安全治理方略,可成为“多元性”非传统安全维护的一般路径。     

Re-conceptualizing State Responsibility: Human Security Protection, Confl icts and Governance

Different from the perspective of traditional national security, human security is an essential component of non-traditional security. Human security is influenced by multi-dimensional factors. Human security will be threatened if one or more of these dimensional factors get twisted. Such threats, once accumulated to a certain level, may trigger a confl ict. While some factors may have a low correlation with confl ict, some other factors may have a multiplying effect in triggering the confl ict. Further, confl ict may be triggered by a single factor or multiple factors. Poor governance may lead to escalation of confl icts. Deep understanding of triggering effects and their correlation with confl icts is essential to addressing the root causes and the management of conflicts effectively. Concepts of human security, state responsibility of protection and neo-interventionism have been developed in succession. Though the people-centered security framework draws global attention, it should be recognized that there is no international consensus on an optimal type of governance. However, according to the Charter of the United Nations, the primary responsibilities of human security protection should be rested on the government of a state. The principle of sovereignty remains the fundamental principle of international relations, which should be the guiding principle for addressing human security issues.     

重塑国家之责：人的安全保护、冲突与治理

与传统的“国家安全”观相比，“人的安全”观是非传统安全领域中的重要内容。人的安全受多维度影响。其中一个或几个维度出现问题，人的安全就受到威胁；威胁达到一定程度，就可能导致冲突。这些维度构成冲突诱因。冲突诱因呈现多元化。有的诱因与冲突相关度较低，有的诱因对诱发冲突具有乘数效应。就触发状态而言，冲突可能由单一因素诱发，亦可由多种因素叠加引发。如果治理失当，会导致冲突恶化。一个国家要有效地治理冲突，就应当对导致冲突的诱因及相关度有深刻理解，如此方可对症下药。人的安全概念、国家保护责任与新干预主义是相继形成的三个概念。应当说，尽管以人为中心的安全框架日益被全球关注，但应当采取何种治理形式，何种治理形式属于最优方案，在国际社会中并未达成共识。但是，根据《联合国宪章》的精神，保护人的安全的责任首先在于当事国政府。主权原则仍是国际关系的基本原则，是解决人的安全问题必须遵守的根本准则。     

中国崛起与全球安全治理转型

中国崛起与全球安全治理转型是21世纪初国际关系领域两个备受瞩目的全球性现象。文章以全球安全治理体系中的安全制度安排和安全规范设定为主要分析路径,以全球政治安全治理和全球经济安全治理为主要分析单元。一方面,自二战结束以来全球安全治理体系可分为"单边全球主义"和"全球单边主义"两个阶段,并且每一阶段的全球安全治理体系均可分解为政治制度、经济制度、政治规范和经济规范四个领域;另一方面,运用比较研究法,对各个时期全球安全治理体系在上述四个领域所体现出来的差异性进行剖析,可以发现,这种差异性集中表现为正在进行中的全球安全治理体系转型,崛起的中国在此次转型过程中开始发挥参与者、建设者和贡献者的作用。在传统全球安全治理体系陷入危机之时,中国崛起在相关领域所带来的制度效应和规范效应正在逐渐潜移默化地嵌入到全球安全治理体系中,中国的政策和实践也将相应日益形成规范化的趋势。     

澜湄合作中的非传统安全治理:从碎片化到平台化

澜湄地区的安全问题以非传统安全为主,涉及跨境犯罪、社会公共卫生、水与环境安全、信息网络犯罪等广泛议题,呈现出明显的复合性与联动性的结构特征,深刻地影响着该地区的政治、经济和社会安全。自2016年澜沧江—湄公河合作机制正式成立以来,国内外学术界对澜湄合作给予广泛关注和多视角研究,但对于该机制框架下的非传统安全研究还相对缺乏。长期以来,澜湄地区的非传统安全治理属于“碎片化”治理模式,机制拥堵,治理政策、资金、技术、人力和物力的投入分散,且缺乏持续性,导致安全问题无法从根本上解决。澜湄合作机制成立后,从合作治理内容、结构、参与主体等方面,推动了非传统安全治理逐步向“平台化”模式演进和发展,从根本上促进了澜湄地区国家之间的务实合作与非传统安全问题的解决。《澜湄合作五年行动计划(2018~2022)》已将非传统安全合作列为重点合作内容,未来澜湄合作需要在治理范式创新、多层平台搭建、早期项目设计和收获等方面完善非传统安全治理机制,持续推动澜湄合作拓展和深化。     

新安全视角下美国政府的气候政策

"人类安全"逐渐成为一种新的安全理念,环境气候问题等各种影响人类安全和福祉的非传统安全问题日益引起广泛关注。全球性安全威胁的严重程度则取决于治理框架的反应能力。包括气候政策、法律和机构在内的气候环境治理框架能够最大限度地削弱全球化冲突的根源,避免影响的发生或减缓其进程。奥巴马上任以来美国新政府能源、环境和应对气候变化政策出现较大调整,大力推动新能源法案来减缓气候变化。这一政策转向具有深刻的历史动因和政治基础,并将给美国经济复苏和美国企业的国际竞争力带来压力,加剧美国对外贸易摩擦和削弱其在国际气候环境合作中的领导地位。     

中国边疆跨境非传统安全：挑战与应对

中国边疆邻国众多、民族多样、文化多元,地缘政治与周边环境复杂。在深度全球化时代,各国利益相互镶嵌,安全互依互保。随着中国全面扩大对外开放以及"一带一路"倡议的推进,边疆跨境非传统安全问题愈加复杂多元,互为关联,关涉政治、经济、文化、生态、公共卫生等诸多领域,涵盖地缘、认同、利益与网络等不同安全场域,并融入周边安全、国际安全与人类安全之中。在新形势下,边疆跨境非传统安全及其治理呈现出越来越多的新问题与新难题,只有以总体国家安全观为指导,促进国际与国内相涉行为体之间的协同共治,加强边疆跨境非传统安全全方位、多层次的体系性治理,才能有利于推进维护总体国家安全。     

新时代中国参与中东安全治理的理念与实践

进入新时代以来,中国始终坚持共同、综合、合作、可持续的安全观,倡导构建中东安全新架构。在参与中东传统安全治理、化解地区冲突方面,中国始终推动对话协商,致力于公正合理解决中东热点问题,构筑兼顾各方合理关切的集体安全架构。在改善地区安全环境方面,中国抓住中东地区主要安全矛盾,顺应地区国家寻求缓和与发展的时代潮流,取得了促成沙特与伊朗复交的重大成果。在参与非传统安全治理方面,中国与中东国家共同提高应对非传统安全威胁的能力,共同维护发展中国家的权益。在参与中东安全治理的过程中,中国形成了以共同安全破解独享安全、以综合安全破解分割安全、以合作安全破解竞争安全等理念和经验,在中东安全事务中发挥了重要的建设性作用。     

新冠肺炎疫情与全球安全文化的退化

安全文化是一个社群就怎样界定安全和安全威胁、怎样保障和实现安全所达成的主体间理解和共同知识。冷战之后,全球化推动了一个全球社会的初步形成,因之也催生了一种以开放安全、共同安全与合作安全为基本内容的合作型全球安全文化的雏形。但是由于全球治理失灵,不断出现且日益积累的全球性威胁得不到有效应对,民粹现实主义强势兴起,合作型全球安全文化屡遭重创,开始向以封闭安全、孤立安全、零和安全的冲突型安全文化转变,明显降低了国际安全合作的几率。抗击新冠肺炎疫情中的全球公共安全合作的失败就是一个明显的例证。虽然人类向共同体进化的历史大趋势不可阻挡,但在一段时间内,合作型全球安全文化与冲突型全球安全文化的激烈竞争将会是国际关系的新常态。     

数字经济时代的全球数据安全治理与中国策略

进入数字经济时代以来,日益严峻的数据安全风险与变幻莫测的国际形势交织叠加,各国围绕数据安全治理规则博弈呈现加剧态势,引发全球数据安全治理问题。各国际行为体虽然已经意识到数据安全治理的重要性,但对全球数据安全治理并未形成统一的治理框架。全球数据安全治理仅仅由单边、双边和多边框架以及贸易规则拼凑而成,相关治理议题在公民个人、社会、经济以及国家安全等多个层面相继涌现。多领域多维度的数据安全问题难免造成治理主体利益诉求的差异,也导致全球数据安全治理出现了规则碎片化、机制效用不足、治理乏力等问题。与此同时,个别国家的数据霸权主义行为更是使得国际行为体难以凝聚共识,全球数据安全治理步履蹒跚,重视和加强对全球数据安全问题的治理迫在眉睫。中国高度重视数据安全的相关议题,由于中国在数据治理领域起步较晚,仍存在立法不完善、技术创新能力薄弱、国际合作不足、治理乏力等问题。中国需要全面、系统地分析影响数据安全的各种重大风险因素,准确把握全球数据安全趋势,进一步优化中国在全球数据安全治理中的策略选择。