奥巴马政府的东南亚政策

奥巴马入主白宫一年里推出了一系列加强与东盟合作的举措:签署《东南亚友好合作条约》,表明其加强对东南亚地区影响的决心。积极促进湄公河地区的发展目标,以冀对该地区产生较大影响。首届美国-东盟领导人会议召开,标志着美国"重返东南亚战略"进入实质性实施阶段。美国调整东南亚政策有着把东南亚作为重返亚洲的第一块基石、获取较多经济利益、抵消中国在东南亚的影响等考虑;东南亚国家出于为东盟提供安全保障、希望维持地区"大国力量平衡"和在南中国海问题上获得美国支持等目的也乐见其成。美国加强对东南亚的战略投入,可能会对东盟、东亚合作以及中国外交产生一系列影响。     

奥巴马政府的东南亚政策与美国-东盟关系的发展

奥巴马执政后推行了更为积极的东南亚政策,整体上更加重视东南亚,大力发展美国-东盟关系,强调与东盟的对话协商与合作。其原因在于东盟地缘、政治、经济、安全等各方面对美国都十分重要,而美国这些年来在东南亚地区的影响力相对衰落。美国当前急需解决的内政外交问题太多,没有足够的资源投入东南亚,东盟与美国在主权、人权、发展观等根本性问题上又差异巨大,加之东盟奉行大国平衡外交,因此美国-东盟关系的发展也存在明显限制。美国-东盟关系的发展不会对中国产生影响,但双方关系的性质变化仍值得关注。     

中国视角中的印度与东盟关系

20世纪80年代末90年代初,随着冷战的结束和全球区域经济一体化浪潮的兴起,印度重新意识到东盟对其在政治、经济和外交上的重要性,及时提出“东向政策”。印度调整东盟政策,提升与东南亚的战略关系,是印度实施全方位外交、推行大国战略的重要组成部分,无疑将给东亚区域合作及中国东盟关系的未来发展带来重大影响。中国应适时调整与东盟、印度的关系,增强中印两国在东南亚的共同利益与合作愿景,推动中、印、东盟三边关系向更高层次发展。     

中美竞争背景下的美国对东南亚安全政策CSSCI

特朗普政府上台后,加紧布局以中国为指向的“印太战略”。东南亚是美国防范和制衡中国的前沿,也是印太战略布局的衔接点。特朗普政府将东南亚视作中美战略竞争的外线,重视巩固和加强美国在东南亚的军事优势和战略主导地位,推动与该地区国家安全关系的发展,大力增加政策支持和资金投入,提升军事援助和防务合作水平,力图打造地区多边安全网络。东南亚国家一方面欢迎美国加强与东盟的安全合作,另一方面对“印太战略”中的对抗色彩和遏制中国的意图有所保留和警惕。美国与东盟的安全关系难以实现质的飞跃。中国需重视并提升与东盟的军事外交关系,疏解美国战略调整带来的压力,努力把中国-东盟关系打造成地区和平与稳定的压舱石。     

从“重返”到“再平衡”——奥巴马政府第二任期的东南亚政策

美国总统奥巴马2009年上台后,对东南亚表现出浓厚的兴趣并高调"重返",推出了一系列加强在东南亚存在的举措。2013年连任后,他将在未来4年继续把东南亚作为"亚太再平衡"战略的着力点。同时,奥巴马政府意识到其东南亚政策也需要进行"再平衡",应放缓军事"重返"脚步,在经济、政治、安全等领域全方位投入,均衡化、长期化地推进东南亚外交。国内财政限制、中东等地区外交挑战和外交人员人事变动等因素会对美国新一届政府的东南亚外交有所制约,但其未来政策走向仍将对中国周边外交和中美关系产生持续影响。     

日本对东盟外交的回顾与展望

曾有人形象地把东南亚比做日本的“后院”，确有一定道理。但时过境迁，国际与地区的经济、政治与安全环境已经发生了深刻变化。东盟一体化的进展以及中国地位的提升，改变了原有地区政治格局与经济力量的对比。战后日本对东盟外交有其独特的优势，但面对新情况，也存在诸多不利因素。对东盟外交的成败，关系日本政治大国目标的实现。而日本地区战略的调整也将导致日本与东盟以及东亚其他国家形成新的互动关系。     

东南亚经济发展的地缘政治影响

传统的地缘政治理论仅以地理位置来探讨政治经济的影响,经济全球化赋予地缘政治新的内涵,一国的政治经济影响大大超越了传统地理上的边界。东南亚处于一个特殊的地理位置,东盟长期奉行开放的地区主义政策,域外大国在该地区争相扩大其存在与影响。东南亚经济最近10多年实现长期稳定持续的发展与增长,其意义远远超出经济本身,将对该地区乃至亚洲新的地区秩序产生重大而深远的影响。从经济体量来看,东盟是世界第五大经济体且经济增长率维持在6%左右,是世界上最具经济活力的地区之一,在如今大国关系紧张的环境下,东盟成为各国积极合作的对象。从地缘政治的角度看,东南亚是大国博弈的焦点地区,东盟在过往的"大国平衡"战略中已经积累了足够多的应对大国关系的智慧。     

冷战后东盟地位的增强及其影响

东盟作为东南亚国家的区域性组织，它一方面正在成为东南亚十国凝聚在一起的核心力量，并在该地区的事务中发挥着越来越多的主导作用；另一方面又以地区国际组织的形式来处理与主要大国和相关国际组织的关系，从而以其特殊的地位影响着亚太地区形势和政治格局的变化。随着东盟扩展到东南亚10国，东盟对亚太地区的地位将进一步增强；其内部的团结与稳定和对外政策的走向也将对亚太地区的形势产生重要影响。一个稳定而中立的东盟，将是亚太地区保持和平与稳定的重要力量。     

东盟的对外战略

东盟作为亚太地区最重要的区域集团之一,在亚太地区的政治经济发展和国际事务中发挥着重要的作用。冷战结束后,东盟对外战略的核心目标是"主导东南亚事务、争当亚太一极、扩大世界影响",实现东盟由"地区"走向"世界"的战略蓝图。这一对外战略的实施在某种程度上提升了东盟在本地区的地位和影响力。但是,由于当前东盟的发展还面临着一系列亟待解决的现实问题,由于其他大国在本地区的角逐和竞争,东盟     

东盟对美国印太战略的认知与反应

自美国印太战略出台以来,东南亚的重要性被不断提及。虽然东南亚地区国家并不排斥大国的战略重视,但对美国印太战略的目标、手段、政策重心等普遍感到不安。出于对被边缘化和被分裂的深刻担忧,东盟选择以地区共识的方式发布《东盟印太展望》。这既是对大国战略举措的积极回应及对东盟中心性的主动捍卫,也清晰地表达了这一中小国家联合体对世界事务的共性认知,凸显了东盟与美国在印太地区愿景规划方面的内在差异。东盟的认知与反应,预示着美国印太战略在东南亚的推行将囿于种种局限而难以收到预期效果。     

Exploring USAID's democracy promotion in Bosnia and Afghanistan: a ‘cookie-cutter approach’?

US democracy promotion is integral to the pursuit of the grand project of the American Mission. By promoting democracy America makes its role one of international engagement as opposed to one of isolation. The first part of this paper examines the political and cultural aspects of US democracy promotion in the post-Cold War era through the bi-polar framework of the case-specific versus one-size-fits-all. To better understand USAID's democracy promotion policy, the second part takes this framework and applies it to its political reform strategy in Bosnia under the Clinton administration from 1995 to 2000 and Afghanistan under the Bush administration from 2001 to 2008. This paper confirms that America's democracy promotion simultaneously employed both the case-specific and one-size-fits-all approaches. USAID programmes and projects did at times respond to local conditions but nevertheless appear to employ a blueprint design.     

奥巴马政府亚太战略解析

21世纪初亚洲地位的迅速提升正在引起美国全球战略重心的东移。奥巴马政府亚太战略的目标,是要在"美国的太平洋世纪"里,"保持和加强美国在亚太地区的领导能力,改善安全,扩大繁荣,促进美国的价值观"。为此,美国将以"前沿部署外交"为开端,按照"六条关键性的行动路线"向前推进:增强美国的双边安全同盟;深化美国与新兴大国的关系;发展与区域性多边机构的接触;扩大贸易和投资;打造基础广泛的军事存在;增进民主和人权。这表明,"现实的理想主义"构成了奥巴马政府亚太战略的战略理念。     

印度的海洋战略及印美在印度洋的合作与矛盾

作为主要的印度洋国家,印度长期以来寻求一项确保自身安全和经济利益的大国海洋战略,它体现了印度立足南亚、面向印度洋、争做世界大国的战略图谋。冷战结束以来,特别是随着印度综合国力的发展以及追寻其“大国梦”的步骤加快,印度对印度洋的安全需求持续增大,将确保海洋战略利益、特别是保证印度洋海上石油通道的安全视为保护其基本国家战略利益的头等大事。鉴于印度洋对印度和美国的重要战略意义,印度在实施其海洋战略过程中既会与美国保持合作,同时也可能引发相互间的利益冲突。     

Democracy in Georgia Since the Rose Revolution

Success for Georgia's nascent democracy would be a major success for the democracy-promotion efforts of the United States, which has hailed the democratization there since the Rose Revolution as a success even as concerns have been voiced by some observers regarding the pace and direction of this effort. The U.S. policy of unconditional support for Georgia's government and its disinterest in drawing attention to the new government's democratization shortcomings call into question how serious the United States is about democracy-promotion, particularly in countries that have a semi-democratic but pro-American government. A U.S. approach to Georgia that recognizes the challenges there and seeks to help it solve these problems will demonstrate that America is sincere in its desire to promote democracy, not just to support friendly governments.     

India as a democracy promoter? New Delhi's involvement in Nepal's return to democracy

According to the theory of ‘democratic peace’, India, as the largest democracy in the world and as South Asia's predominant regional power, should be expected to promote democracy in neighbouring countries. However, New Delhi lacks any kind of official democracy-promotion policy, and its past record on democracy promotion efforts in the region is mixed at best. Against this background, the article analyses the substantial role India has come to play in the peace and democratization process in Nepal in the years 2005–2008, asking whether this constitutes a departure from New Delhi's traditional policy of non-interference in its neighbours' internal affairs and a move towards a more assertive approach to democracy promotion. However, the analysis shows that India's involvement in Nepal was the product of short-term stability concerns rather than being an indicator of a long-term change in strategy with the intention of becoming an active player in international democracy promotion.     

美国新中亚战略评析

美国公布新的中亚战略包含四方面调整,即将中亚地区视为独立的地缘政治板块、将阿富汗视为中亚一部分、明确将在中亚加强对俄罗斯和中国的遏制、重新界定美国在该地区的比较优势。新中亚战略的实施将会对中亚地区稳定和主要大国在该地区互动产生一定影响。但由于美国在实施该战略中投入力度有限、比较优势不明显,中亚国家不会轻易改变自身多元平衡外交政策、对阿富汗及其局势的认知与美有明显差异,以及美国在中亚地区的战略冒进可能引发大国反制,新战略的实施不会一帆风顺。     

Institutions of Direct Democracy and Accountability in Latin America's Presidential Democracies

The crisis of representative democracy in Latin America became apparent in a wave of constitutional reforms during the 1990s. A striking feature of these reforms was the incorporation of institutions of direct democracy (IDD) into most post-transitional Latin American constitutions. Despite the shortage of efficient mechanisms of accountability and its concomitant weakening of democratic consolidation in the region, the potential of IDD to bolster accountability in the representative structures of presidential democracies has not yet received systematic scholarly attention. To fill this theoretical gap, the article presents a typology designed to assess the accountability potential of IDD, which is used to classify the constitutional provisions for direct democracy in Latin America's 18 presidential democracies. After juxtaposing the findings of constitutional analysis to the actual record of direct democracy in the region, the article concludes that there is a considerable discrepancy between constitutional accountability potential and the empirical evidence. Whereas the adoption of IDD has hardly affected the vertical dimension of accountability, the practice whereby presidents use referendums to bypass legislative opposition has worked to the detriment of the horizontal dimension of accountability.     

U.S. Foreign Policy in Latin America: Time for a Change

This paper addresses why neoliberal policies of the United States have failed to spur broad-based economic development, and why they have not consolidated stable liberal democracy in Latin America. The author argues that the United States must reevaluate its foreign policy in order to accomplish its goals and maintain its influence in the region. This will mean engaging more moderate leftist leaders in Latin America and adopting changes to its trade policy. Above all, the United States should not revert back to its unilateral interventionist policies of the past.     

Christianity and violence: The case of liberation theology

In the late 1960s a form of Christian radicalism known as liberation theology emerged in Latin America that argued that Latin America's ills were caused by dependent capitalism, and that Latin America could be liberated only by a socialist revolution. The theory of liberation theology had a direct impact on Central America in the 1970s since it justified the alliance of Christians and Marxists in attempting to overthrow repressive regimes in Nicaragua and El Salvador. Under Pope John Paul II, the Vatican has been critical of liberation theology's borrowings from Marxism and its implied endorsement of violence, although a moderate version that stresses the organization of the poor into Christian Base Communities has been more favorably received. Partly as a result of Vatican pressure and partly as a result of a generalized disillusionment of the Latin American left with violence as a means for social change, liberation theologians today have moved away from their earlier infatuation with revolution, and they argue for a deepened democracy that is aware of ‘the preferential option for the poor’.     

The United States and the Promotion of Democracy in Latin America: Then, Now and Tomorrow

The United States has been deeply involved in Latin American affairs for over a century, but promoting democracy has only recently become a priority. The end of the Cold War presented a unique opportunity to provide greater support for democracy in the Western Hemisphere. This article examines the main multilateral and bilateral actions undertaken by the United States to promote democracy in Latin America in recent decades. It makes use of a newly available dataset that specifies the investment made on democracy in different countries and sectors between 1990 and 2005. It also addresses the challenges that the United States confronts in promoting democracy in the region at the current time and the possible scenarios for the near future.