边界功能、威胁认知与中国对陆上边界问题的应对

2017年6月,中印在洞朗地区发生边界对峙。中方在此次危机中始终保持了克制,并未通过武力方式解决边界危机。这与中国在1962年运用军事手段应对印度的挑衅截然不同。为何针对与同一个对象国出现的同类性质危机,中国的应对方式存在显著差异?文章认为,中国对陆上边界问题的处理方式,主要受到边界功能和决策者对威胁程度的认知这两个因素的影响。基于中国决策者对边界功能是政治与安全功能凸显还是经济功能优先,以及对对象国行为所带来的威胁认知高低程度不同的判断,将导致中国对边界问题采取四种应对方式:诉诸武力、展示决心(包括军事对峙等)、外交谈判、互利合作。通过对中国处理1962年与2017年两次中印边界危机、1956年中缅边界问题、2004年中俄边界问题的方式进行分析,可以发现上述分析框架得到了初步验证。文章通过探讨中国对陆上边界问题采取不同应对措施的原因,不仅有助于厘清影响中国政府针对陆上边界问题采取差异化应对措施的因素,还有利于为中国恰当地处理中印领土争端及其他陆上争议边界问题提供一定的启示,进而为改善中国周边外交、保障中华民族的伟大复兴提供初步的政策建议。

Boundary Functions,Threat Perception and China’s Response to Mainland Border Disputes

This article holds that China’s handling of land boundary affairs is mainly influenced by two factors:boundary function and the awareness of decision makers of threat perception.The article suggests that China opts for one of four different coping strategies for addressing border issues on the basis of how Chinese decision makers assess boundary function with respect to the relative importance of political and security factors or economic factors,as well as an assessment of the perceived severity of the threat posed by an opposing state.These four strategies include:force,demonstrate determination(including military confrontation),diplomatic negotiations,and mutually beneficial cooperation.Exploring the reasons underlying differences across China’s diverse handlings of various land boundary disputes not only helps clarify the factors that influence the Chinese government’s responses to such issues,but also helps to inform China’s handling of its current territorial disputes with India as well as other land boundary disputes.It can further enhance China’s neighborhood diplomacy and provide important policy guidances for China’s efforts to revitalize the Chinese nation.