“负责任外空行为”议程与太空安全机制新动向

近年来，太空安全环境发生急剧变化，各国太空军事化步伐加速，商业航天崛起，太空拥挤加剧，太空军民融合加深。在此背景下，英国于2020年发起一项名为“负责任外空行为”的太空军控新议程。该议程推出后，美国积极参与并试图将之导向一项自愿承诺禁止地基动能反卫星试验的国际协议，这意味着其太空军控立场的重大转向。美国意图借“负责任外空行为”议程干扰对手发展不对称反卫星手段、强化太空同盟、划定太空威慑“红线”、策应太空环境议题。“负责任外空行为”已成为太空安全机制领域最有影响力的议程，不仅因为其引发了大国间政治矛盾，还因其体现了太空安全机制的发展动向。在新的太空安全环境下，太空军事安全和民事安全的国际机制正交叉融合发展，各机制的议程模式将更加开放、参与者更加多样、控制行为的路径更加主流。     

国际太空活动的地缘政治

国家权力的实质性内容及其表现是对重要自然地理空间的控制。随着科技的进步,太空成为人类新的地缘空间,空间技术成为21世纪的权力政治。自苏联卫星上天后,美国紧随其后,美苏两国掀起太空争夺战,世界两极格局也扩大到太空。冷战后,国际地缘政治背景发生深刻变化,太空格局也从冷战时代的两极格局转变为多极化格局。走向太空的国家越来越多,太空探索呈现国际化和全球化趋势,而各国在太空展开的博弈,实际上是国际地缘政治竞争在太空领域的延伸。     

美国“星球大战”计划剖析

近年,美国和苏联在太空中的军事竞赛日益激烈,双方都在建立太空战略系统。在太空中进行未来战争的阴影正在升起,这已成为当前国际上众所关心的重大问题之一。在浩渺无边的太空中角逐优势,早已开始,是美苏双方军备竞争的延续与发展。苏联在这方面投下了巨大力量,在反卫星武器上着了先鞭,正在推行建立航天站的计划,美国认为,这是对它的威胁,必须压倒对方,苏联也寸步不让,因此竞争有增无已。本文的主旨是叙述分析美国方面的决策、决定政策的原     

“星链”对太空军控的影响北大核心

“星链”已成为新一轮太空热的亮点,其他类似项目也纷纷推出。这项创新给太空安全带来的直接挑战是频轨资源的短缺,更加深远的后果是太空军事化和武器化得到重新赋能、太空军民结合加深、太空意外事故导致误判和冲突升级的风险加剧、主权国家的网络信息安全受到挑战。在大国竞争加剧和各国太空军事化步伐持续的背景下,太空军控形势产生多方位变化:国际社会对频轨资源治理的需求将成为太空军控的重要动力来源;军民结合将促进太空安全机制的交叉融合发展;太空实力分布的集中化将动摇各方既存利益关系;太空行为体的多样化会造成国际、国内的双重博弈态势;太空军控的侧重路径可能由限制器物转向控制行为。     

论当前国际军备控制与裁军形势

长期以来,国际军备控制机制得到国际上的广泛参与和普遍遵守,但由于种种原因,军控机制存在着严重的脆弱性和执行的复杂性。当前在军备控制领域,一方面是美国总统奥巴马"无核武器"的倡议在国际上引起强烈反应,另一方面是朝核、伊核问题前景扑朔迷离,核武器、核材料、核技术扩散形势严峻。此时,美俄两个核大国重启核裁军进程,促使其他核国家也为核裁军、保证核安全采取积极行动,形势有了转变。联合国安理会在促进国际军控、防止核扩散方面也可以有所作为。人们期待2010年的核不扩散条约取得成果。     

美国太空威慑战略的历史演进

自20世纪50年代人类开发利用太空以来,太空威慑作为美国与苏联战略博弈的手段之一就已经出现.冷战时期,太空能力的进步先是作为美国政治和技术实力的标志成为国家整体威慑战略的一部分,其后又与核威慑紧密结合,在美苏“相互确保摧毁”和“相互确保生存”的威慑态势中发挥作用.冷战结束后,太空威慑逐渐与核威慑战略分离,成为独立的威慑手段.1996年,美国克林顿政府的《国家太空政策》明确提出太空威慑的概念.     

太空战争:国际安全的新视角

随着军事航天技术迅速发展,太空军事化已成为不可阻挡的发展趋势。太空军事化主要表现为两方面:导弹和反导弹系统的矛盾较量和卫星与反卫星武器的矛盾较量。这两对矛盾不断激化而且相互交错,构成了未来发生"太空战争"的主要物质基础。从20世纪50年代甚至更早,导弹与反导弹系统的矛盾斗争就已开始,特别是在60年代中期,美苏展开了旨在"确保相互摧毁"的以洲际核弹道导弹为中心的军备竞赛。为了应对进攻性洲际弹道核导弹的发展,美苏在20世纪五六十年代相继开始研制和部署反弹道导弹防御系统。导弹与反导弹系统的矛盾较量从冷战时期一直延续下来,直至2017年"萨德"入韩在相关大国间引起激烈争端。1957年苏联发射第一颗人造卫星后,美苏迅速开始研制和发射军事卫星,卫星与反卫星武器的矛盾斗争也随之开始。1991年海湾战争中美国的军事卫星发挥了重要作用,以致这场战争被称为"最初的太空战争"。太空是在新科技革命强力驱动下发生深刻变化的国际安全战略新空间、新领域,我们必须高度重视关乎国家安全顶层设计的太空军事战略课题。     

冷战以来苏联(俄罗斯)与巴西关系的演进

冷战以来苏联与巴西的关系经历了建交→断交→复交的曲折过程:1945年苏联与巴西建立了外交关系,1947年巴西断绝了与苏联的外交关系,1961年巴西恢复了与苏联的外交关系.20世纪70年代以后,两国关系从有限接触迈向务实合作.苏联与巴西断绝外交关系后,双方仍偶尔发生接触,但仅局限于经贸领域.20世纪七八十年代,苏联与巴西的关系有所改善,双方在政治、经济和技术领域的互利合作得到进一步加强,务实合作的趋势凸显.究其原因:一是国际舞台上发生了根本变化,巴西同美国的关系出现恶化;二是经济形势的恶化迫使巴西政府加强与苏联的关系.冷战结束以后,作为苏联的继承者,俄罗斯在经历短暂挫折后恢复了与巴西在政治、经济、军事、国际组织等领域的互信和合作,两国建立了长期战略伙伴关系,双边关系迈上了新台阶.     

中美太空合作的现状、挑战与前*

中美太空合作正在出现新动向。1979年以来,中美太空合作经历了三个阶段:第一阶段是1979-1999年,主要合作领域在商业卫星发射；第二个阶段是2000-2011年,主要合作领域在民用航天；第三个阶段是2012年以后,中美太空对话和交流呈现出民用航天主管部门对话与太空安全对话同时进行的特点。虽然由于美国政府换届,共和党人在白宫获得执政地位,可能给过去一段时间内逐渐回暖的中美太空对话与合作再次蒙上阴影,但是值得注意的是,这一阶段的中美太空合作已经表现出与以往不同的特征。中美太空合作多聚焦于具体技术和项目,这使得美国在以往的太空交往和合作中往往处于比较有利的地位。然而,21世纪以来,随着中国航天事业稳定而迅速的发展,中美在太空领域不平衡的局面正在逐渐改变。中国在涉及太空的众多关键领域已经构建起自己的体系,这大大增强了中国在中美太空合作中的主动性。对于未来的中美太空合作,中国已经超越了单纯的项目合作或技术合作的视角,可能在更具战略意义的层面上推动美国更具建设性地参与全球太空治理,共同为维护太空和平与安全承担起大国应该承担的责任。     

全球安全治理视域下的自主武器军备控制

随着人工智能的飞速进展，不断智能化的自主武器日益显现出伦理和安全风险，使得限制或禁止自主武器成为全球安全治理领域的新兴议题。相比其他军控对象，自主武器军控进程在过去几年中获得较快推进，其中《特定常规武器公约》会议已决定设立政府专家组专门探讨自主武器问题。文章系统梳理了自主武器军备控制的概念、伦理和安全争议，旨在通过这种梳理更好地理解自主武器军控进程发展的动因，并对这一进程的未来走向做出预测。当前，自主武器军备控制的主要动因集中在道德层面，特别是让机器自主决策杀伤引发的伦理忧虑。而从安全层面看，自主武器蕴涵的安全风险在其他新兴技术领域同样存在，而发展和使用自主武器带来的战略红利依然显著，这使得主要国家推动自主武器军控的意愿并不强烈。在权力政治与道德政治的博弈下，自主武器军控在可预见的时期内将难以形成实质性成果，稍有可能的是通过“软法”等非约束性方式塑造一定的国际规范。在这个过程中，中国可以发挥更加积极主动的作用，在确保战略利益的同时营造有利的大国形象。     

“星链”军事化发展及其对全球战略稳定性的影响

美国推进“星链”军事化发展，使得外空安全和全球战略稳定面临严峻挑战，必须对其潜在风险进行提前研判和评估。较之传统外空装备，“星链”具有多维一体的战场网络覆盖能力、延伸全杀伤链的集成性功能以及面向实战化的信息作战优势，将对全球战略稳定格局带来三大冲击：一是冲击首攻稳定性，“星链”既强化了美国先发制人的战略突袭能力，又弥补了军用太空资产固有的脆弱性，提升了美国太空攻防的整体能力；二是冲击危机稳定性，“星链”会加剧外层空间爆发“意外战争”的风险，同时，针对“星链”的制衡与反制措施可能造成外空危机的快速升级，并由战略领域向常规领域扩散；三是冲击军备竞赛稳定性，“星链”具有攻防一体和军民两用属性，可能加剧军备发展的“安全困境”，引发技术扩散和军备竞赛风险。“星链”技术系统的不透明性和不可预测性，导致有关军备控制的信心建立措施难以施行。应对“星链”军事化发展对于全球战略稳定的挑战，必须吸纳涵盖商业部门在内的多元化安全治理主体，构建核、外空、网络和人工智能等多域联动的安全治理机制，推动面向未来的可持续安全治理。     

Mortgaging Security for Economic Gain: U.S. Arms Policy in an Insecure World

Similar to other consumer sectors of the global economy, the transfer of advanced conventional weapons and military technologies has entered the globalization process, a process that has qualitatively and quantitatively altered the composition and structure of U.S. national security policymaking. By injecting the decisionmaking process governing arms transfers into the global market place, U.S. policy makers must now reconcile maintaining economic competitiveness within the global system without jeopardizing U.S. national security interests. By subordinating national security interests to global economic imperatives, U.S. decisionmakers are at risk of mortgaging the political, societal, and security welfare of its citizenry for profit.     

Arms production in the third tier: An analysis of opportunity and willingness

Major determinants of third world military industrialization operate at the domestic, regional, and global levels. I summarize these and then examine their relative importance by analyzing time‐series cross‐section data for twelve arms producers from 1968 to 1990. Overall, there is considerable support for the various factors identified in the literature. However, my findings do highlight the importance of opportunity, perhaps more than willingness, as an explanation for changing levels of third tier arms production. Resolution of the tensions that drive regional militarization and the eruption of military conflict should have some positive effects ‐on restraining the expansion of arms production capacity. But there also seems to be a certain inevitability to the process, a process that is limited primarily by states' resources, industrial capacities, and access to weapons‐production technologies.     

From Territorial Claim to War: Timing,Causation, and the Steps-to-War

The steps-to-war thesis has become one of the dominant frameworks for explaining war in the discipline. Substantial testing has supported the empirical claims of the argument, but key theoretical questions remain. These primarily have to do with the question of endogeneity. While the steps-to-war thesis argues that each step increases the probability of war, others have argued that you might find the same empirical relationships in cases where war was anticipated, or that rivalry is the underlying causal factor for both the different variables and war itself. This study addresses these critical challenges by examining the historic timing of the steps to war in territorial claims from 1919–1995 to determine whether their sequencing supports the causal argument of the steps-to-war thesis or the various challenges to it. The results indicate that there are clear categorical differences in territorial claims that result in war, and discusses the relevant theoretical implications.     

Triad of terror: post-START reductions in broader context

Abstract

This paper considers the present condition and future prospects for post-Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (post-START) nuclear arms reductions in the following sequence. First, we review the essential features of the agreement between Obama and Russian President Dmitri Medvedev in July 2009, for a START follow-on agreement. Second, we discuss the larger political and military-strategic contexts within which these post-START negotiations will play out. Third, we perform an analysis to determine whether the START follow-on guidelines would meet prospective requirements for mutual deterrence and, in addition, whether US–Russian reductions could safely go even lower. Fourth, we take a specific look at the estimated impact of defenses on deterrence stability under post-START reductions. Fifth, pertinent conclusions are summarized.     

Arms Transfers beyond the State-to-State Realm

Arms transfers beyond the state-to-state realm can have harmful effects for international security dramatically affecting the relations and behavior of states. This article examines why an emerging international norm on "prohibiting states to transfer arms to nonstate groups" has failed to diffuse at the international level. It discusses the already available international law framework existing at the regional and international levels upon which the potential norm could be built. The failure of the norm to diffuse at the international level can be primarily explained by the existence of a long-consolidated norm: the customary practice of states to transfer weapons to nonstate actors, that is, groups they deem legitimate to, without any interference or constraint. ¹ The unrestrained transfer of weapons is an established foreign-policy practice. It is the way states form, uphold alliances, extend friendships, and build spheres of influence ( Sorokin 1994 ). Clearly, no state willingly wants to give this up. Therefore, the multilateral agreement on a norm barring most or all transfers of weapons to nonstate actors would curtail the freedom of action to build spheres of influence as states please. There are genuine ethical and moral dilemmas in this discussion, a nonstate actor may be a freedom fighter or a terrorist depending on different perspectives. The distinction between the categories "state" and "nonstate" actors may risk classifying actors in two camps: the good and the bad, respectively. This is problematic as a few states are known to be the most brutal perpetrators of egregious violations against their own citizens, whereas certain nonstate actors are legitimately fighting for the protection of vulnerable populations.     

Power at Sea: A Naval Power Dataset, 1865–2011

Naval power is a crucial element of state power, yet existing naval data sets are limited to a small number of states and ship types. Here we present 147 years of naval data on all the world’s navies from 1865 to 2011. This country-year data set focuses on warships with ship-based weapons capable of using kinetic force to inflict damage on other structures or peoples. After identifying a country’s active naval forces, we create a measure of naval power based on the aggregate tonnage of the active ships. Additionally, we create count variables for ship types such as aircraft carriers or battleships. This article introduces the country-year data, describes variables of interests for use in country-year, dyadic, or systemic studies, and suggests potential questions of interest scholars could explore using the naval power data set.     

Selling to Both Sides: The Effects of Major Conventional Weapons Transfers on Civil War Severity and Duration

Civil wars are primarily fought with small and light arms, but the availability of major conventional weapons to states and rebels can alter the nature of the war being fought. This study explores the impact of major conventional weapons transfers on civil war severity and duration. By using a recipient based approach to arms transfers, I find rebel acquisition of major conventional weapons from international sources leads to conflict escalation and deadlier conflicts. State importation of major conventional weapons is associated with longer conflicts. These findings provide researchers a means to account for rebel capabilities in civil war research and policy makers insight to limit the destructiveness of civil wars.     

2004年美、日、韩3国的军事发展动向与东北亚政局

2004年在美国军事加快东移的背景下,日韩也采取了大肆扩充军备的政策。这不仅会在今后几年打破东北亚地区已有的相对军事战略平衡,引发军备竞赛的升级。同时,对该地区热点问题的解决也会带来直接影响,地区内国家间的相互猜疑和不信任会进一步增强。