中美复合战略稳定关系:建构依据、基本框架与发展趋势

中美战略稳定关系已经超越经典战略稳定性，向着复合战略稳定关系的方向演化。建构中美复合战略稳定关系是稳定两国关系的客观需要。彼此战略竞争加剧给中美之间非均势核威慑基础上的战略稳定性带来负面影响。在美国提高核力量于国家安全战略中的地位、将核武器重新作为霸权工具的背景下，中美战略稳定性面临挑战。特朗普政府对中国挑起贸易争端，经贸关系在中美关系中的“稳定器”和“压舱石”作用减弱，建构中美复合战略稳定关系的必要性凸显。中美之间经济深度相互依存，在维护国际体系稳定方面具有共同利益，这为建构中美复合战略稳定关系奠定了坚实的基础。中美复合战略稳定关系框架包括建立在非均势核威慑基础上的战略稳定性、双方经济的深度相互依存、战略互信、双方对话交流与合作机制等四根支柱，其中以非均势核威慑基础上的战略稳定性为核心支柱。虽然中美战略互信存在短板，但随着中国战略核力量的进步、中美经济相互依存的继续维持和双方对话交流与合作机制的成熟和完善，中美复合战略稳定关系将不断巩固。     

JOINT CUSTODY AND THE PRESCHOOL CHILD

A longitudinal study of 25 families, with children aged 14 months—5 years, in joint custody, is reported. Varying motivations that lead divorcing parents to undertake and sustain joint custody are discussed, together with the stresses and gratifications of these arrangements for the parents and children. Findings are that where both parents are motivated primarily by interest in the child, where the parenting is sensitive and where the child is shielded from interparental conflict, young children do well. Such families were not the majority in this study. Significant differences emerged in the adjustment of the 1–3 age group as compared with the 3–5 age group which point to greater difficulties for the 3–5 year-olds.     

违法合同的效力判定路径之辨识

《合同法》第52条第5项及其司法解释对于纠正违法即无效的错误认识曾起到了历史性作用。但现有的学说及现行立法在就违法合同效力的判定路径上却存在着方向性的偏差,于司法实践并不具有真正的指导意义:区分民法内的强制规范与民法外的强制规范而异其效力,在我国并不可行;通过语义分析尚难以发现强制规范之所在;而将违法之法简单缩限为法律、行政法规上的效力性强制性规定,并不妥当,亦难以操作,且于价值及逻辑层面多有疑问;此外,将违法与损害社会公共利益予以并列,在逻辑上也有不合。故应将违法合同的效力判定纳入《合同法》第52条第4项,通过规范目的的发现及利益的衡量来最终确定违法合同的命运。     

Taming the tigers? Reforming the security sector in Southeast Asia

Abstract

Despite global trends towards military reform characterized by processes of professionalization and democratization, militaries in Southeast Asia have continued to play prominent roles in domestic politics since 11 September. This suggests that wider patterns of global military reform have not had as great an impact on the control, capacity and cooperative functions of armed forces in Southeast Asia as they may have elsewhere. In order to explore why the security sector reform agenda has had so little impact in the region, we investigate recent patterns of civil–military relations in Southeast Asia by focusing on the experiences of four of the region's militaries: Malaysia, Thailand, the Philippines and Indonesia. We argue that the security sector reform agenda is informed by a predominantly North American approach to civil–military relations based on a number of core assumptions that do not reflect Southeast Asian experiences. Hence, we ask whether the reform agenda itself could be modified to better suit the Southeast Asian context. We suggest that although the regional military sector has not reformed along a ‘Western’ path it is nonetheless possible to see other types of, and potential for, reform.     

摇晃婴儿综合征:科学(与非科学)专家的一场真实交战

本文从科学和法律层面介绍了摇晃婴儿综合征的有关内容,就关于摇晃婴儿综合征的科学和非科学专家证言的可采性进行了评价,称在科学和非科学专家之间正在发生一场真实的交战。     

摇晃婴儿综合征:科学(与非科学)专家的一场真实交战

本文从科学和法律层面介绍了摇晃婴儿综合征的有关内容,就关于摇晃婴儿综合征的科学和非科学专家证言的可采性进行了评价,称在科学和非科学专家之间正在发生一场真实的交战.     

Analysing Parliamentary Debate with Computer Assistance

The analysis of parliamentary debates is at the confluence of a number of developments in political science. What light can automated and semi‐automated techniques throw on such analysis? In this paper we compare two such approaches, one semi‐automated (Hamlet) and the other fully automated (Alceste). We use both approaches to identify the prominent themes in debate and to assess how far speakers who favour different positions adopt a distinct pattern of discourse. We seek to assess how far the two approaches yield convergent or divergent analyses. Selecting a second reading debate from the UK House of Commons on a private member's bill on abortion in July 1966, we are able to show similarities of analysis despite the detailed differences between the two approaches. In particular, the analysis in Hamlet al.lows identification of the extent to which individual speakers employ one type of vocabulary rather than another. Alceste is able to provide a statistical basis for the different classes of vocabulary that occur in the debate. However, the two programs rest upon quite different assumptions about the relationship between syntax and meaning, with implications for the practice of political science.