新时期中国的准联盟外交

的准联盟外交模式反对缔结军事盟约,强凋国家之间的平等协商与合作,彰显"联而不盟"之特点,其本质是共同安全与共同发展.具有共同安全关切和利益诉求的国家依靠双边或多边机制开展合作,共同应对危害各自的各种传统和非传统威胁,如核扩散、恐怖主义、极端主义等.它旨在维护而不是损害主权,强调平等协商而非大国丰导.中国的准联盟外交是全球格局转换、经济相互依赖和中同国际身份转变三个因素共同影响的结果,是国际安全向伞球安全转换的必然要求.     

公地化:解决领土主权争端的另一种思考

国家间的领土主权争端反映的是国家之间在对地球空间产权私有化过程中的分配矛盾。建立在私有化分配方式基础上的领土主权争端已经成为威胁国际稳定、阻碍地区共同发展的重要因素。同时,应对领土主权纷争的传统手段也越来越不适应时代的需要。争议领土公地化为解决国家间领土主权纷争提供了另一种选择,即通过订立维护领土公共性功能的国际条约、创设有效的多边协商机制以及强调多元行为体的共同参与等方式,在一定程度上将争议领土公地化,从而克服由私有化分配方式制造的困局。在当今国际社会中,已经出现了运用公地化策略解决国家间领土主权纷争的成功实践、其中有代表性的包括国际社会应对南极洲主权争议的"冻结主权"原则的实践,中美洲三国对丰塞卡湾的共同行使主权。这些成功实践既涉及地球特殊空间,也涉及一般化的国家间领土主权争议。通过对国际社会中成功实践的考察,探索实现争端领土公地化的关键要素,有助于丰富应对领土主权争端的思路和手段。     

试析全球化时代国家主权让渡的现实可能性

在全球化时代,国家主权让渡是国际关系研究的重要课题,同时也是国际关系实践领域的一种普遍现象。全球化作为人类历史发展的一个阶段,赋予国际关系现实以独特的内容并在多方面为国家主权让渡提供了现实可能性,主要表现为国家利益与区域利益和全球利益的契合为主权让渡提供了空间,主权所有权与主权行使权的分离为国家主权让渡提供了运作上的方便,内政与外交的一致性奠定了主权让渡的基础,国际关系民主化也为主权让渡提供了有利的外部环境因素。     

经济全球化与国家主权

经济全球化是人类社会发展的必然趋势, 在此过程中, 与国家安全密切相关的国家主 权概念也处于不断演进之中。 从绝对主权 、相对主权到强调经济主权, 国家主权与经济全球化更多 产生的是互动的良性碰撞。在平等让渡经济主权基础之上参与国际经济组织与多边贸易体制, 是 国家捍卫其主权的必经之路 。     

国际秩序分层与新的国际关系体系 --构建中国国际关系体系的三个利益层面

21世纪任何一国所希望创建的国际关系体系,其形成都有赖于现实三重国际新秩序的发展.在和平、发展、合作基础上建立民主的国际政治新秩序是中国国际战略的目标追求.体现在现实的国际关系上,中国要从全球、地区、国家三个利益层面构建自身的国际关系体系.在全球利益层面,突出并适应安全与合作这一主题,寻求国际格局中有利于合作的共同战略利益基础,倡导建立多元文明平等、共处、合作、发展的全球秩序;在区域利益层面,着眼于地区利益关系的协调,达成地区内多个大国共同崛起的相互认同,尝试构建由地区潜力型大国或地区组织自愿推动的区域合作体系和相互依赖机制;在国家主权关系层面,重点警惕"新帝国主义"从理论到实践各方面对民族性的侵蚀,重视维护国际利益的民族性和多元性,丰富和创新以国家主权利益为支点的爱国主义,确立维护和平、保障安全、有利发展的崛起战略.     

上海合作组织:时代的召唤--国家共同治理的范例

本文主要探讨上海合作组织的理论意义,指出它确立了新型的国家共同治理范式主权平等,共同治理,共同受益;不断深化的共同治理观念是动力,不断物化的共同治理利益是基础,不断进化的共同治理机制与制度是保障.它为全球化、区域化与国家之间矛盾的解决,为超越冷战思维和建立新型的国家关系,提供了一个范例.     

阿根廷在马岛争端中的困境与出路

180多年的马岛争端史使其成为全球最为悠久的领土争端。长期的阿英马岛主权谈判无实质性进展,阿根廷在马岛争端解决中陷入困境:阿根廷的马岛主权依据占优势,但收回主权乏力;国际社会大多数支持阿根廷的马岛主权诉求,但国际机制作用有限;马岛居民人口虽少,影响却大;多重利益交叉与争夺,加剧了马岛争端的复杂化。对于阿根廷来说,若要解决马岛争端,阿英双方应大力加强政治互信与合作,建立马岛争端管控机制;非殖民化是全球历史发展不可逆转的趋势,马岛亦不例外;阿方应强化马岛争端解决方案的"顶层设计",阿方政府的更替不应成为方案设计断档的缘由;马岛居民是重要的第三方力量,阿方应充分考虑马岛居民的意愿及相关利益;阿英搁置争议、共同开发是当前马岛争端的务实选择。     

非传统安全视角下的中印俄能源合作

中印俄三个国家都是后冷战时代国际政治棋局上的"棋手",出于国家利益的共同追求和国际战略目标的一致,上述三国在各个领域加强了合作.这种合作不仅符合中印俄的国家利益.而且有利于地区稳定和世界和平.在中印俄三边关系中,具有代表性的是能源领域的合作.     

现代国际秩序的演进与中国的时代责任

主权平等、利益至上、国际法治、大国引领、尊重人权等一系列现代性的理念原则,共同构成现代国际秩序的思想基础;历经几百年来的各国竞争与合作,上述原则始终未变并持续深化,现代国际秩序也因此不断发展.当前,现代国际秩序的演进正处在关键阶段.要推进新一轮国际秩序现代化,必须有新的理念、思路和动力,中国的内在国家特性、当前历史方位及未来发展潜力等因素,决定了中国有能力成为未来几十年推动新一轮国际秩序现代化的中坚力量.中国应充分意识到这一历史机遇和时代责任,为新一轮国际秩序现代化做出特殊贡献.     

非传统安全研究中“共享安全”的理论渊源

"共享安全"理论是建立中国特色的国际安全理论体系和话语权的有益探讨。"共享安全"理论具有充分的历史哲学依据,《周易》中"保合太和""协和万邦"的思想为"共享安全"理论奠定了阴阳协调、对立统一的宇宙观;儒家哲学中"己欲立而立人,己欲达而达人"的"忠恕之道",为"共享安全"理论奠定了以"共建""共存"和"共享"为核心的安全观;而践行中庸之道,则成为"共享安全"理论的哲学方法论基础。中国传统政治思想中的和平主义外交理念和亲仁善邻的外交政策,为"共享安全"理论奠定了和平、和谐与合作安全的政治思想基础。东亚传统的安全体制体现了东亚国家在安全利益上的"共依""共存""共建"和"共享",从而为"共享安全"理论奠定了东亚史上传统的安全和外交实践基础。新中国成立后,中国实行的安全政策进一步为"共享安全"理论提供了安全和外交实践,其中作为"共享安全"实践基础的"和平共处"五项基本原则和亲仁善邻的外交政策,成为中国处理与世界各国外交关系的准绳和基本原则,体现了中国与世界各国"共存""共建"和"共享"安全的和平主义战略价值趋向。     

Sovereignty as Responsibility

This article examines the development of a new normative principle of international order, sovereignty as responsibility; its communitarian implications; and the ways in which the newly conceived responsibility of the “international community” to protect the people of states failing to live up to their responsibilities as defined by international norms can come to terms with the notion of democratic self-government.     

Sovereignty a-venir: Towards a Normative Understanding of Sovereignty

This article draws upon Derridean philosophy to argue for a more holistic understanding of sovereignty, a reading of the concept that alternatively envisages sovereignty as home, is prone to normativity, and bestows sovereignty with an ethical perspective. The first section shows how scholarly efforts to approach sovereignty, the English School of international relations theory in particular, do not go far enough in engaging with the concept in normative terms. In the second section we employ the Derridean notions of aporia, to-come and hospitality to synthesise sovereignty a-venir and link it with the normative positiveness of home. The article empirically proceeds with the case of Kosovo to illustrate how sovereignty a-venir points to a promised sovereign condition, normatively understood as hospitable home, but suggests that it will never exist in the present because it remains aporetic. The concluding section reflects on how sovereignty a-venir paves the way for follow-up research in the discipline.     

The Costs of Respecting Sovereignty

Respect for sovereignty can be an effective tool to manage relations between states, drawing boundaries of acceptable behavior. But there are also clear costs of respecting sovereignty. A foreign policy based on a principled defense of sovereignty can be, in fact, morally wrong, politically illegitimate, and strategically dangerous. This does not mean that sovereignty should be broken wantonly, but only that prudential judgment must be exercised to weigh the costs and benefits of respecting the sovereignty of a state. In the end, our security and our values, not the principle of sovereignty, should be the metric by which we should judge the necessity and legitimacy of U.S. actions.     

民族自决权与国家主权

民族自决权与国家主权是国际法和国际关系中两个最基本的原则.民族自决权对国家主权而言是一柄双刃剑,一方面,民族自决思想导致了主权国家的诞生,它对于一个民族的统一与整合以及摆脱压迫和争取独立曾起过极为重要的作用.另一方面,民族自决权又挑战现有主权国家的完整与统一,动摇了国家主权原则.只有构筑公正合理的国际政治经济新秩序,民族自决权与国家主权作为集体人权才能得到协调发展.     

A Doctrine of Contingent Sovereignty

Disengagement of U.S. leadership in recent years has not only emboldened the world's worst actors, it has enabled the emergence of non-state groups such as the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) to threaten a new and ominous trend in international affairs—the pursuit of sovereign authority by transnational violent-extremists. Amending both the Clausewitzian “remarkable trinity” to explicitly encompass non-state actors in war and the balance-of-power praxis of Talleyrand to one favoring dynamic repair of failed and failing states in diplomacy, the Doctrine of Contingent Sovereignty proposed in this article provides the requisite tools for bolstering legitimacy of weakened states while simultaneously affording the necessary freedom-of-action for the United States to secure its vital national interests. Analogous to the Monroe Doctrine of the nineteenth-century, which put putative expansionist powers on notice, this new doctrine asserts that the privilege of sovereignty remains contingent upon adherence to accepted international norms of behavior.     

加拿大文化主权与文化政策

加拿大提出了文化主权的概念,并制定了相应的保护文化主权的文化政策,采用立法、制定法规条例、政府资助和税收优惠等多种手段,维护其文化的自主性和独立性,抵御来自美国的文化影响和文化渗透.美国是加拿大的唯一邻国,也是世界上最大的文化产品生产国,在加美特殊关系中,如果加拿大对本国文化没有相应的保护措施,美国文化就有可能垄断加拿大文化市场.因此,追求文化主权成为加拿大抵御美国文化影响的主要手段.     

对国家主权原则的再认识

在经济全球化,政治多极化的今天,国际社会出现了很多新现象、新问题,信息通讯技术的飞速发展,地区经济一体化的推进,全球经济相互依赖的加深,全球环境、人口、粮食等问题的出现,国际组织、跨国公司作用的加强等等,都对国家主权原则提出了挑战,是不是国家主权原则已经过时,国家主权可以分割转让了,这是我们当前面临的一个重大问题.     

Sovereignty and the Foreign Fighter Problem

Sovereignty is the bedrock of international law. If security requires that the United States transgress sovereign borders to attack foreign fighters and their support networks hiding in third countries, then the U.S. should adopt a strategy to amend international law accordingly. One should not be too quick, however, to disregard a robust notion of sovereignty, a concept that has helped avert conflict among the world's major powers. The United States needs a strategy for sovereignty's future that is based in the emerging security context and a prioritization of American interests. Instead, the United States and the rest of the world are meandering toward a less robust sovereignty with weaker and more ambiguous international law. The U.S. and its global interests would be better served by strong and clear international rules that increase predictability and that confer legitimacy to action against dangerous enemies.     

Sovereignty, globalization and transnational social movements

Traditionally, sovereign states have been defined, in termsof their external and internal dimensions, as mutually exclusiveterritorial jurisdictions. Economic globalization is associatedwith the liberalization of the world economy, decreases in transactioncosts, the development of communication technologies, and theemergence of transnational social and cultural spaces. Thesehave eroded the divide between national and international systemsand fostered the dispersal of power in social networks. As aresult, it is unrealistic to define state sovereignty as a counterposeto the global system, as these phenomena have become mutuallyembedded. States and their sovereignty are not disappearing– on the contrary, they may be gaining new tasks and resources– but they cannot exercise their agentive power as effectivelyas before. This means that the internal dimension of state sovereigntyhas been transformed more thoroughly than the external one.This is in part due to the growth and proliferation of transnationalsocial movements, which have also gained agentive power in nationalsocieties. Therefore, the anti-globalization movement, althoughit is unable to halt the process of economic integration, hasbeen able to redefine the terms of the globalization debateand influence responses by national governments and internationalfinancial institutions.