单极称霸与多极反霸两种势力继续深化较量的一年--2004年国际政治形势回顾

2004年的国际政治关系总的形势是美国把反恐与称霸紧密结合,加紧实现其建立单极世界的图谋;多极化继续在曲折中深入发展;联合国内多边主义与单边主义的斗争持续不断.     

Managing the Hegemon: nato under Unipolarity

The shift to unipolarity has introduced new dilemmas for America's allies. Their level of strategic uncertainty has increased, largely because under unipolarity, allies' threat perceptions are more likely to diverge across time or issue areas and are not shaped as much by structural systemic factors. Although they want to maintain the pre-existing security arrangements as a means of managing the rising uncertainty, allies need to deal with the dual concern of either being trapped into the hegemonic partner's policies, or being abandoned by the hegemon. These two concerns—the alliance security dilemma—may become more or less prominent given the nature of the divergence in threat perceptions on different issues and at different times. To deal with this dual threat, allies employ two strategies: using the pre-existing alliance as a pact of restraint, and developing a division of labor with the hegemon. Both the dilemmas and the strategies used to mitigate them are examined here in the context of the European behavior within nato following the Gulf War, the nato involvement in Kosovo, the war in Afghanistan, and the war in Iraq.     

United States Hegemony and the New Economics of Defense

Liberal theory asserts that the need for cost-effective, technologically advanced weapons requires the United States to acquiesce to increasing defense globalization even as this restrains U.S. power. Realist logic dictates that the United States should resist defense liberalization to retain its self-sufficiency. This is a false choice; the United States encourages defense globalization in order to extend its international political influence. This paper proposes an alternate theory of technological hegemony that explains the U.S. policy of massive R&D investment in both the late Cold War and the current era of American preponderance. Modern weapons' complexity and economies of scale tend to produce monopolies, and the value chain for the production of these monopolistic goods is dominated by the systems integration techniques of prime contracting firms. In turn these prime contractors remain largely enthralled by U.S. market power. The United States gains international influence by controlling the distribution of these weapons. Put simply, technology with international political effects is likely to have international political origins.     

Democratic Hegemony and American Hegemony

The emergence of an ‘American democratic empire’, rising from the global informational and transportation revolution, that has its epicentre situated on the territory of the United States (US), has produced a profound metamorphosis in world affairs. National power elites, including those in America, are confronting a dilemma. They are compelled to accept, favour and even defend the so-called globalisation process in order to avoid further erosion of their economic and political power. On the other hand, this process is also directly threatening this same power. The paradox is that the US is the main promoter and defender of last resort of the new global ‘order’, which at the same time is restricting its own margins for sovereign action. The ‘democratic empire’ is thus fostering the rise of a democratic hegemonism at the expense of a ‘US hegemonism’. This democratic hegemonism is a gradually rising—and fragile—consensus on a proliferating set of perceptions and values, stressing individual freedom, responsibility and political and social activism. This consensus arises from the material possibilities of a more individualistic way of life and the increasing capacity of single individuals or organised groups to participate in global and local political decision-making processes. This is a process that favours the empowerment of interest groups whose reference is no longer solely the nation-state. Hence, traditional power elites are progressively losing their ability to present themselves as the ultimate embodiment of a national ‘general interest’. The irony of the seemingly intractable contradiction between US hegemonism and democratic hegemonism is that the actual spreading of the logic of the latter is closely dependent on US power and willingness to defend its own national interest. The greatest challenge for the coming decades will be the construction of supranational governance institutions under democratic hegemony, so as to avoid a classic imperial self-isolation of the US—a situation that would trigger the inevitable demise of democratic hegemonism and, for the time being, of any order as such.     

展望新世纪的巴以和平谈判

自1993年巴勒斯坦和以色列签署奥斯陆协议以来,巴以和谈经过双方7年多的努力,在2000年进入了最后关键阶段。2000年7月,巴勒斯坦自治政府主席阿拉法特和以色列总理巴拉克在戴维营峰会上就最终解决耶路撒冷等问题进行了讨论,巴以虽未能最后达成和平协议,但进一步缩小了分歧。之后,阿拉法特和巴拉克的立场都有所松动,人们对巴以在年内达成和平协议寄予较大希望。然而,9月28日以色列右翼反对党领袖沙龙不顾巴方警告,强行“访问”伊斯兰圣地引发了巴以间大规模流血冲突,使巴以和谈遭到重大挫折,巴以在近期内达成和平协议的可能性终告…     

Undermining Adversaries: Unipolarity,Threat Perception,and Negative Balancing Strategies after the Cold War

This paper engages the ongoing soft balancing debate by suggesting a new analytical framework for states’ countervailing strategies—a negative balancing model—to explain why states do not form alliances and conduct arms races to balance against power or threats as they previously did. Negative balancing refers to a state's strategies or diplomatic efforts aiming to undermine a rival's power. By contrast, positive balancing means to strengthen a state's own power in world politics. I argue that a state's balancing strategies are shaped by the level of threat perception regarding its rival. The higher the threat perception, the more likely it is for a state to choose positive balancing. The lower the threat perception, the more likely it is for a state to choose negative balancing. I suggest that the hegemon provides security as a public good to the international system in a unipolar world in which the relatively low-threat propensity of the system renders positive balancing strategies incompatible with state interests after the Cold War. Instead, states have employed various negative balancing strategies to undermine each other's power, especially when dealing with us primacy. China's negative balancing strategy against the United States and the us negative balancing strategy against Russia are two case studies that test the validity of the negative balancing model.     

Peace,Development and Progress

Theinternationalsituationinthepastyearwascomplicatedandchangeable.TheUnitedStateswagedwaronIraq熏whichshockedtheworld鸦therelationshipamongtheworldpowershadundergonepro鄄foundchanges鸦therehadbeennewdivisionandrealignmentintherelationsacrosstheAtlantic鸦thebuildingof″LargeEurope″hadmaderapidprogress鸦theMiddle-EastsituationhadremainedunstablewithPalestineandIsraelstillgettingstuckinantroubledtimes鸦KoreaPeninsulanuclearissuehaddrawntheworldwideattention鸦UNwasregainingitsvigorafterhavin…     

Anchoring the Peace: Civil Society Actors in Peace Accords and Durable Peace

Is peace more likely to prevail when the peace accord includes civil society actors such as religious groups, women's organizations, and human rights groups? This is the first statistical study that explores this issue. The article develops key claims in previous research regarding the role of civil society actors and durable peace, and proposes a set of hypotheses that focus on legitimacy in this process. The hypotheses are examined by employing unique data on the inclusion of civil society actors in all peace agreements in the post–Cold War period. The statistical analysis shows that inclusion of civil society actors in the peace settlement increases the durability of peace. The results further demonstrate that peace accords with involvement from civil society actors and political parties in combination are more likely to see peace prevail. The findings also suggest that inclusion of civil society has a particularly profound effect on the prospects for overall peace in nondemocratic societies.     

霸权·制度·战略——读《霸权之翼:美国国际制度战略》

二战结束,特别是冷战结束以来,美国在世界权力结构的优势地位更加明显,美国霸权的神奇性色彩愈发突出.然而,对于美国霸权在世界政治转型中所出现的新变化,已有的霸权理论模式("霸权稳定论"、"霸权周期理论"、"霸权转移论"等)未能做出迅速而有效的解释,国际关系学界有必要对此而为之.中央党校国际战略研究所门洪华博士新近完成的<霸权之翼:美国国际制度战略>(以下简称<霸权之翼>)一书,[1]就是上述有益探索中的一种尝试.     

应对国际新挑战,促进和平与发展

中国持续而稳定发展,国际地位凸显.中国面对的国际环境机遇与挑战并存,尽管机遇是主要的,但伴随发展而起的新挑战也是严峻的.只有及时抓好机遇,认真应对挑战,坚定地走和平发展之路,才能实现中华民族的伟大复兴,并为建立和谐世界、促进人类共同繁荣做出积极贡献.     

西方“技术联盟”:构建新科技霸权的战略路径

新一轮科技革命与产业变革正在深入发展,科技正成为大国战略竞争的主战场。围绕科技发展与应用之规则、标准、体系等因素的竞争,将直接影响到国际战略的权力结构与国际体系的重塑。基于"技术多边主义"战略,美国将与其伙伴国家围绕高科技领域组建"技术联盟",共同制定全球科技发展与治理的新规则、新标准,进而实现对新科技塑造权力的掌握。随着西方"技术联盟"框架体系日渐成型,全球力量结构、国际格局与国际体系都将受到深刻影响。     

巴以和平曙光再现,和平道路仍然曲折艰难

布什总统第二任期内会更多关注巴、以冲突。温和派阿巴斯接替阿拉法特,巴勒斯坦进入后阿拉法特时代。沙龙与工党组成联合政府。中东再现和平曙光。巴以恢复和谈还须克服障碍。和平进程将是脆弱而艰难的,出现反复甚至逆转的可能性始终存在。     

Preemption, Unilateralism, and Hegemony: The American Tradition?

Historian John Lewis Gaddis has found precedent for the current war on terror in early American history, arguing that the British burning of the capitol in 1814 had an impact on defense policy similar to the terrorist attacks of 9/11, leading to an emphasis on preemption. In basic respects, Gaddis restates the consensus among diplomatic historians that the early republic's foreign policy focused on preemption, unilateralism, and hegemony. But these depictions of early American diplomacy conflate separate eras and ignore an opposing tradition that was more moderate and principled. They are not without some truth, but their imperious sway in histories of our country needs to be checked and balanced.     

Cherish Peace, Jointly Create the Future

Respected Chairman,Respected experts and friends:I am very pleased to come to Tokyo to participate inthe Seminar on Building a Mutually Beneficial andWin- win Sino- Japanese Partnership" at the invita-tion of the Kazankai Society. On the occasion of the33rd anniversary of the establishment of Sino -Japanese diplomatic relations and the 60th anniver-saryofthe victoryofthe Chinese People'sResistanceAgainst Japanese Aggression and the World Anti-Fascist War, it is of great significance …     

Globalisation,Reconciliation and the Conditions for Conserving Peace

This paper analyses the relationship between globalisation and peace. The first part focuses on the diachronic process by which world globalisation developed after the Peace of Westphalia by means of the mechanical and subsequently organic formation of globalisation. Globalisation is analytically conceptualised as a global market of instrumentalities in which everything, like the lingua franca, is common—culture, communication, transport. Globalisation is then analysed with reference to peace and conflicts. A starting point is the observation that globalisation needs peace and pacified environments, whereas peace does not depend on globalisation. To show this the author discusses the polysemy of peace, generated by the peace of tradition and modernity and the peace of good and goods. In terms of practical relations a key role is played by how these various conceptions of peace relate to ultimate and intermediate values. The range of conceptions of peace is applied to a model of four categories of national society and each of these categories is placed in relation with another, since these reciprocal relations are the condition generating world globalisation. The result of the comparison is that globalisation produces conflict because the different conceptions of peace prevalent in each society are unable to enter into dialogue with each other. In the real world contemporary globalisation is made possible and effective by a range of engines (political and military centres, and peacemaking centres–international organisations), control functions (individuals, organisations, public opinion, a worldwide creative “multitude”) and instruments (reconciliation, negotiation, a tendency in relations for intermediate values to prevail over ultimate values).     

国际货币基金组织与美元霸权

布雷顿森林体系是以美元霸权为特征的国际货币体系。国际货币基金组织对该体系的运行和发展做出了重要贡献。即便在布雷顿森林体系瓦解后,其对国际货币体系的稳定和运行仍然功不可没。国际货币基金组织60年来的发展历程,见证了国际货币合作对于美元霸权的重要作用。     

朝鲜半岛和平协定与和平机制

2007年以来东北亚局势的重大变化,使签定取代1953年朝鲜半岛《停战协定》的《和平协定》时机日渐成熟。签定新协定的主体应是朝、韩、美、中四方。达成新协定的主要障碍在于实现持久和平的途径,尤其是美国的立场与政策。只有从"停战机制"转向签订《和平协定》,建立和平机制,东北亚地区的和平与稳定才能得到保障。     

西方经济霸权理论述评

西方学者关于"经济霸权"的界定中,"能力"和"支配"是两个重要的关键词.西班牙和葡萄牙为16世纪的地区性经济霸权国家;荷兰、英国和美国被一致认为是自公元1500年以来历史上出现的三个世界经济霸权国家.关于"经济霸权国家的更迭",西方学者的理论可分为单因素决定论和多因素决定论,但从经济学视角看,则涉及到经济增长理论.因此,经济霸权国家更迭理论的进一步发展取决于经济增长理论的进展.