论尼泊尔与印度的关系及其发展趋势

君主制时期,尼泊尔同印度的关系绕着“控制与反控制”展开。尼泊尔建立联邦民主共和国后,政治外交政策也显示出和以往不同的灵活性,主动发展与印度的关系。普拉昌达政府旗帜鲜明地提出了发展独立自主的外交政策的政治观点,内帕尔政府从要求得到更多的经济发展自主权的角度,向印度的“控制”政策提出了反抗。     

尼泊尔新总理内帕尔

今年5月23日,尼泊尔共产党(联合马列)高级领导人和资深政治家马达夫·库马尔·内帕尔作为唯一候选人成功当选为尼新一届政府总理,并负责组建联合政府。内帕尔能否领导新政府渡过当前的政治危机,进一步推进尼泊尔的和平进程,成为尼各界及国外媒体关注的焦点。     

尼泊尔政局前景扑朔迷离

今年6月30日，尼泊尔总理尼帕尔发表全国电视讲话，以“受尼联共（毛主义）阻挠无法有效施政”和“为和平进程、宪法制定、摆脱僵局铺平道路”为由宣布辞职。此后，各党派围绕总理人选展开激烈博弈，尼泊尔政局陷入新一轮动荡。自7月21日至10月7日，尼泊尔共举行了11轮总理选举，均以失败告终。导致尼泊尔政局动荡的成因复杂，短期内难以消除，尼泊尔政局在未来一个时期内难以彻底稳定。     

尼泊尔建设资金的筹措

资金是经济建设的的必要条件。尼泊尔政府为加快经济建设的速度,不断增加建设投资,尼泊尔的经济建设是通过尼泊尔政府制定的五年计划进行的,由政府的发展预算规定建设资金。自1958年以来,尼泊尔政府的财政预算分为经常预算和发展预算两类。经常预算是在一个财政年度(头年7月16日起到下年7月15日止)内,政府各部门的经费收支预计,发展预算是用于五年计划建设的资金收支的预计。尼泊尔的第一个发展预算是在1958—59年度开始的[注]。本文就尼泊尔建设资金的来源与政府筹资政策的成效和问题作一简要的介绍和分析。     

印度对南亚邻国政策的调整和“古杰拉尔主义”

印度调整其对南亚邻国的政策始于国大党的前拉奥政府末期，集中地表现在1996年2月同尼泊尔签订的综合开发马哈卡利河流域的条约上。[1]1996年6月，以新人民党为首的13党联合阵线政府上台，古杰拉尔出任高达政府的外长后加速了调整的步伐，集中地表现在是年12月同孟加拉国签订的恒河水分享条约上。上述两项条约都在一定程度上体现出印度对南亚邻国采取更加积极的睦-邻友好政策。在此情况下，印度同尼泊尔和孟加拉国间的双边关系得到了显著的改善，成为1996年印度对外关系方面的两大成就。1997年3月，印度又同巴基斯坦恢复了中断三年多的外事…     

英国工党政府的内外政策取向

今年5月2日，英国工党领袖托尼·布莱尔接替了保守党领袖约翰·梅杰，正式出任英国首相之职。至此，英国工党结束了长达18年的在野党地位，并以在下院659个席位中获得419个席位的压倒多数上台执政。经过如此长时期的反对党地位之后，新上台的工党政府内政沙咬上有何新举措，其内外政策同以往保守党政府的延续性和不同之处又是什么，成为各方关注的问题。本文拟围绕上述问题，就英国工党政府的内外政策取向作一分析。一、国内政策1．更多地关注社会问题。长期以来，英国由工党和保守党两大政党轮流执政，两党间最大的差别之一，表现在工党历…     

印度人民党政府的政策及其影响

一印人民党政府１９９８年３月１９日上台以后，实行的是一种缺乏理性的内外政策，且政策本身自相矛盾：一方面发誓发展经济，消除贫困，改善人民生活；另一方面为树立核大国地位，不遗余力发展军事，大搞核试验，甚至人为地提高事关民生的生活必需品价格，使一些本来就赤...     

尼联合政府执政以来的政绩

尼联合政府执政以来的政绩刘善国尼泊尔大会党自１９９５年９月领导联合政府以来，政绩比较明显。一、政局趋于稳定１９９５年９月，尼泊尔大会党、全国民主党和尼泊尔亲善党组成联合政府以来，积极采取措施稳定政局，收效较为明显。为确保三党联合执政的稳定，政府还扩充...     

塔帕执政可望使动荡的尼泊尔政局趋于相对稳定

塔帕执政可望使动荡的尼泊尔政局趋于相对稳定刘善国１９９７年３月１０日，洛肯德拉·巴哈杜尔·昌德领导三党联合政府上台执政，在仅仅半年后的１０月４日，尼泊尔议会对昌德政府的不信任案进行投票，结果以９４票反对，１０７票赞成，昌德被迫下台。因此，昌德政府成为...     

尼泊尔新内阁的政策走向及中国的策略

2017年6月6日,尼泊尔大会党主席谢尔·巴哈杜尔·德乌帕当选为尼政府新一届总理,当前正值尼泊尔新宪法实施的关键时期,通过举行各层级权力机构选举将国家制度顺利过渡为联邦制,妥善应对马德西人群体政治诉求,并由此实现国内政局稳定和国民经济的发展成为其面临的首要内政问题。外交方面,德乌帕政府需要谨慎地处理与中印这两个邻国间的关系,为其国内政策争取有利的外部环境。     

Domestic political conflict,issue areas,and some dimensions of foreign policy behavior other than conflict∗

This paper examines the seemingly complex linkage between domestic political conflict and external behavior by broadening our consideration of foreign policy behavior. Underlying this analysis is a view that there are elements of both assertiveness and caution in the political use of foreign policy by domestically threatened leaders. They act assertively to divert attention away from domestic issues and enhance the image of their regime, but at the same time they are likely to show some restraint in order to avoid costly military and economic reactions by foreign actors. It is hypothesized that domestic conflict affects the degree of independence, commitment, and intensity in a nation's foreign policy behavior, but no so much its foreign conflict. Supplementing this, the mediating role of another foreign policy property, substantive issue area, is examined as a means of identifying conditions under which the impact of internal unrest would be greatest. The results of the analysis are mixed, but they do lend credibility to the idea that domestic conflict is related to multiple dimensions of foreign policy. More broadly, they suggest that governments employ different foreign policy strategies in coping with different types of domestic political conflict.     

进退失据:检视李明博的内外政策

自李明博政府执政以来,韩国国内外政策起初设定的目标几乎全面落空.由于牛肉风波及接蹱而至的全球金融风暴,韩国经济大有陷入第二次金融危机之虞,不仅所谓的"747计划"很可能成为空中楼阁,而且李明博政府目前根本无力在国内达成应对危机所必需的政治共识.对外政策方面,韩美同盟修复与扩展的议程众多却无实质性举措,美国对朝政策的急剧变化更使韩国手足无措;韩中双边关系虽有提升之名却无突破之实,南北关系在朝方的步步紧逼之下更是走到了全面断绝的边缘.深陷内外危机,却处处应对失策,李明博政府的执政能力正经受严峻的考验.     

The Foreign Policy Beliefs of Political Campaign Contributors

Since the Vietnam War, scholarly interest in public and elite opinion of U.S. foreign policy has grown. Because elites generally have greater access to policy makers and more consistent political views, most work on this topic has focused on elite opinions of foreign policy. Most research has defined the term elite broadly, often placing more emphasis on social status than political power. We will reexamine elite foreign policy beliefs using a different elite, presidential campaign contributors. We have two main goals in this article. First, we will assess the differences between the foreign policy outlooks of political campaign contributors and other elites. While many types of elites may influence policy, political contributors are particularly likely to gain access to policy makers. The second part of this research note offers some food for thought on the origins of these beliefs. We present evidence that foreign policy beliefs are related to the same ideological orientations that shape contributors' views on domestic issues. The origins of foreign and domestic policy views should probably be considered together.     

The “Culture Wars” go global: Three cases of religious conflict in foreign policy

Religious identities based on both religious tradition and religious commitment have been increasingly influential in domestic U.S. politics for several decades, but the assumption remains that such identities are mostly unrelated to foreign policy. The authors suggest that domestic political incentives to expand the culture wars have combined with other trends, including the increasing use of unilateral executive power in foreign policy, to create an environment in which policymakers increasingly are tempted to make foreign policy based on domestic political incentives. Three case studies are highlighted: the “Mexico City” policy requiring foreign non-governmental organizations (NGOs) receiving U.S. aid money to pledge not to provide or educate about abortion, moving the U.S. embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, and efforts in the Trump administration to ban travel to the United States from majority-Muslim nations.     

Systemic interaction opportunities and war behavior∗

State leaders must often address domestic and foreign-policy concerns simultane-ously, though doing so can be complicated and risky. One way in which leaders can seek to satisfy domestic demands and pursue foreign policy goals simultaneously is by implementing policies that complement one another; i.e., the implementation of one policy influences the ease with which the other policy can be implemented. For instance, one manner in which leaders can placate domestic audiences is via distributive policies such as social insurance payments that provide economic security to individuals. By providing economic security guarantees, leaders may gain greater discretion over other policy areas, including foreign policy. However, while the social insurance effort may satisfy an audience and enable a leader to take foreign- policy action, especially high payment levels may indicate that a leader must devote an inordinate portion of his budget to domestic concerns, making foreign policy more difficult to implement. Thus, guarantees of economic security might provide leaders with greater foreign policy latitude until domestic expenditures reach sufficient levels that foreign-affairs budgets are reduced. We employ zero-inflated event count models to estimate the relationship between social-insurance levels and the number of Militarized Interstate Disputes in which states engage. Our analyses include 69 states between 1975 and 1990. Our models support the hypothesis that lower levels of social insurance lead to greater numbers of disputes, but that, after a certain level of insurance effort is passed, dispute involvement declines. Our findings suggest a differential effect of social insurance on a leader's ability to act in the foreign policy arena and support the notion that leaders may employ the welfare state to enhance their foreign-policy capabilities, though they appear to meet with conditional and limited success.     

Ethnicity,political survival,and the exchange of nationalist foreign policy

How does leadership’s desire for political survival in ethnically heterogeneous democracies affect the probability of states exchanging nationalist foreign policy? I define nationalist foreign policy as foreign policy that aims to fulfill national self-governance using a civic or ethnic frame. I argue that civic-nationalist policy disputing the territoriality of one’s own state is more likely, while ethno-nationalist policy favoring the leadership’s foreign co-ethnics is less likely, when the size of the leadership’s ethnic group is small and the level of democracy is relatively high. This is because the leadership, under such domestic conditions, has to mobilize support from other ethnic groups in order to stay in power. Civic-nationalist policy allows the leadership to increase domestic solidarity across ethnic lines and mobilize support from other ethnic groups, whereas ethno-nationalist policy would risk other ethnic groups criticizing the leadership of being ethno-centrist. These hypotheses are supported by quantitative analysis using an original dataset.     

Two-Level Negotiations and U.S. Foreign Policy: The Failure of the Johnson Plan for the Palestinian Refugees, 1961–1962

The Kennedy administration sought to resolve the Palestine refugee problem in 1961–62 with a plan for compensation, resettlement, or repatriation under the formal auspices of the United Nations Palestine Conciliation Commission and negotiated by UN special envoy Dr. Joseph Johnson. The negotiations failed and the plan was canceled by the administration in December 1962. The article utilizes a multi-level conceptual model which examines the links between interstate negotiation, domestic politics and boundary-crossing interactions between foreign states and non-state domestic actors and their impact on foreign policy. It analyzes the multi-level negotiations that were conducted between representatives of the governments of Israel and the United States regarding the Johnson proposals, discussions held between Israel representatives and American Jewish leaders and prominent Jewish individuals, and between American government representatives and these same Jewish leaders and individuals. The study analyzes the factors that contributed to the failure of the plan and illustrates the nexus between foreign policy and domestic politics and the role of non-state actors in foreign policy decision making.     

The Domestic Determinants of Foreign Policy Behavior in Middle Eastern Enduring Rivals, 1948–1998

Rivalry-related issues tend to dominate the foreign policy agenda of states in enduring rivalries. Thus, the enduring rivalry research program provides an important framework for foreign policy analysis. This paper probes the domestic elements of strategic interaction in the three main Middle Eastern rivalries: Israel–Egypt, Israel–Jordan, and Israel–Syria. The empirical tests probe whether the number of parties represented in Israel's cabinet and Arab and Israeli domestic unrest impact the propensity for these rivals to employ hostility against each other. We specify vector autoregression (VAR) models and negative binomial event count models with monthly levels of hostility as the dependent variables for the period 1948–1998. The results provide interesting foreign policy implications regarding the impact of Israeli domestic political structures on conflict dynamics in the Middle East. There is no evidence that the foreign policy behavior of Arab states becomes risk averse when Israeli leaders might need an external scapegoat. These findings are discussed in the context of other research on enduring rivalries and strategic interaction.     

Two-Level Negotiations and U.S. Foreign Policy: The Failure of the Johnson Plan for the Palestinian Refugees, 1961-1962

The Kennedy administration sought to resolve the Palestine refugee problem in 1961-62 with a plan for compensation, resettlement, or repatriation under the formal auspices of the United Nations Palestine Conciliation Commission and negotiated by UN special envoy Dr. Joseph Johnson. The negotiations failed and the plan was canceled by the administration in December 1962. The article utilizes a multi-level conceptual model which examines the links between interstate negotiation, domestic politics and boundary-crossing interactions between foreign states and non-state domestic actors and their impact on foreign policy. It analyzes the multi-level negotiations that were conducted between representatives of the governments of Israel and the United States regarding the Johnson proposals, discussions held between Israel representatives and American Jewish leaders and prominent Jewish individuals, and between American government representatives and these same Jewish leaders and individuals. The study analyzes the factors that contributed to the failure of the plan and illustrates the nexus between foreign policy and domestic politics and the role of non-state actors in foreign policy decision making.     

The G7, International Terrorism and Domestic Politics: Modeling Policy Cohesion in Response to Systemic Disturbance

This work probes the variability in G7 cohesion in response to relatively new disturbances in the international system. Using a domestic politics model, we argue that G7 cohesion weakens in the face of international terrorism in the context of variable domestic consequences to common foreign policy responses to this systemic disturbance. We compare the predictions from our model with predictions stemming from neorealist and liberal/institutionalist explanations. We find that, consistent with the domestic politics explanation, G7 foreign policy cohesion declines as internal terrorism increases.