评《强大与安全:澳大利亚国家安全战略》

2013年1月23日,澳大利亚总理吉拉德在澳国立大学发布该国历史上首份国家安全战略报告《强大与安全:澳大利亚国家安全战略》(Strong and Secure-A Strategy for Australia’s National Security,以下简称报告)①。报告大体上延续陆克文政府时期发表的《国家安全声明》(National Security Statement)和2012年出台的《澳大利亚亚洲世纪白皮书》(Australian in the Asian Century White Paper)中有关国家安全观点。报告指出,澳大利亚目前所处的战略安全环境正在发生深刻变化,     

西方保守主义的世界战略--《国家战略:应对变化中的世界》介评

20 0 1年 9月 11日是“世界改变的日子”。之后 ,世界进入了“后后冷战时代”、“恐怖主义时代”或“美国单极时代”。①无论战略家和学者为这个“新时期”冠以何种名称 ,总之世界的演进已经步入一个新的历史阶段。如何应对这种变化 ?英国前首相撒切尔夫人的新作《国家战略 :应对变化中的世界》②一书 ,从西方国家战略的角度回答了这个重大问题。作者以世界知名政治家的战略眼光总结了冷战的历史经验 ,阐述了美国的特殊地位及其作用 ,审视欧盟、俄罗斯、中国、印度等国或国家集团的发展及其影响 ,分析了所谓的“无赖国家”、伊斯兰极端主义…     

评《战后日本国家安全战略》

南开大学日本研究中心博士生导师米庆余教授、天津军事交通工程学院少校教官肖伟著述的《战后日本国家安全战略》一书近日由新华出版社出版。该书主要内容共分为四章,分别论述了日本被占领时期的战略选择;五、六十年代日本的战略调整;七、八十年代的综合安全保障;九十年代的战略走向等内容,后附日本国家战略的相关资料,全书共２５万字。该书是米庆余教授在多年从事日本政治外交研究的基础上,与本校毕业的硕士生、现任少校教官的肖伟同志合作完成的。全书行文简练精辟,以独到的政治眼光,阐述和论证了战后五十余年日本国家安全战略的流变和不…     

理论与战略的集成之作--评《国际格局论》

国际格局是一个有着重大理论和现实意义的问题。十多年来,国际格局在中国是一个“研究时间最长,著述最多,争论最大的”领域,①受到政界和学界的高度重视。但由于种种原因,该项研究仍存在空白,特别是缺乏从理论和战略高度进行系统梳理的力作。李义虎先生所著《国际格局论》②在吸收国内研究成果,并借鉴西方新现实主义和新自由主义理论的基础上,对国际格局进行了系统而深入的研究。可以说,该书属于同领域的集成性成果,对有关国际格局研究的理论进行了富有价值的探索,也从实践高度回答了国家对外战略的选择问题。(一)研究国际格局的重要性。对…     

评《中非发展合作:理论、战略与政策研究》

近十年来,中非合作交往的独特性日益受到世界的关注,各方学者或引经据典、著书立说,或深入非洲实地考察访问,争论诘辩中非关系迅速发展的秘诀。2011年1月,中国社会科学出版社推出了刘鸿武教授与罗建波博士合著的《中非发展合作:理论、战略与政策研究》(以下简称《中非发展合     

国家发展战略研究领域的新成果--评《国际环境与中国的战略机遇期》

当世界进入了一个新世纪、新千年的大转折、大调整的时期,正是中国全面建设小康社会的一个重要阶段。中国要想成为真正意义上的世界强国,能否紧紧抓住今后15-20年充满希望的战略机遇期是一个关键。 从国际上看,随着世界政治多极化和经济全球化进程的发展以及科学技术的突飞猛进,当今的时代已经和正在发生深刻的变化。各大国都在根据新的情况,制订新世纪的战略和策略,力争在综合国力的激烈竞争中脱颖而出,以在新的国际格局中占据主动有     

对美国中东战略的再认识--《安全、改革、和平:美国中东战略的三大支柱》介评

华盛顿近东政策研究所是美国国内从事中东问题研究的专门机构,也是对美国的中东政策具有重要影响的思想库.自1988年起,该研究所每逢美国大选之年都召集两党部分政要和中东问题专家组成"总统研究小组"(the Presidential Study Group),撰写并向新一届政府提交研究报告,就美国的中东政策提出对策建议.17年来,总统研究小组共向政府提供了5份此类报告,即:<建设和平>(Building for Peace,1988)、<美国-以色列持久合作>(the U.S.-Israel relationship:Enduring Partnership,1993)、<在中东建设安全与和平>(Building for Security and Peace in the Middle East,1997)、<乱中行:新世纪的美国与中东>(Navigating through Turbulence,2001)及<安全、改革、和平:美国中东战略的三大支柱>(Security,Reform,and Peace:The Three Pillars of U.S.Strategy in the Middle East,2005).     

评《泰国经济发展战略》

《南洋问题研究》1988年第二期刊登了汪慕恒同志的《泰国经济发展战略》一文。该文分四个部份:一、发展进口替代工业化阶段,二、发展面向出口工业化阶段,三、八十年代经济发展战略的调整,四、展望。如所周知,关于经济发展战略的文章,应该对一个国家国民经济主要部门的原有状况、所实行的发展战略和措施,及其作用和效果,作全面的评价、分析和论证。可惜该文并没有这样做,尤其对战略措施的实施、作     

特朗普政府《国家网络战略》:实效与理念并举

白宫2018年9月发布的《国家网络战略》标志着特朗普网络空间政策的成熟。特朗普政府对内注重网络新技术的研发,力推基础设施的信息化升级,确保美国数字经济的发展。在全球网络空间治理领域,特朗普政府力推既有的多利益攸关方模式成为主导治理形式,反对以国家为中心的治理方式,并在该领域继续拓展美国价值理念。此战略的出台充分表明特朗普政府的网络空间政策特点在于既重视实际效果,也强调美式价值观念的传播;在保证自身网络安全的同时,维持既有优势地位。其所带来的后果在于网络空间全球治理将会进入动荡与调整阶段。网络守成大国和新兴国家在治理理念与模式上的分野短时间内难以消弭。     

认清国际环境抓住战略机遇--评《国际环境与中国的战略机遇期》

党的十六大报告提出:“二十一世纪头二十年,对我国来说,是一个必须紧紧抓住并且可以大有作为的重要战略机遇期。”中国的“战略机遇期”的形成,既有国内的原因,又与国际环境密切相关。 “9·11”事件以后,特别是美国发动伊拉     

Strategy,Security, and War in Iraq: The United States and the Gulf in the 21st Century

Over the course of events taking place in and around the Persian Gulf over the last three years, the United States has used force to replace a despotic dictator who once served Western interests, placed considerable distance between itself and its erstwhile regional partner Saudi Arabia, and reduced its role as arbiter in the Arab–Israeli dispute. Operation Iraqi Freedom would seem to reveal that the United States has chosen a broader vision for the role that force could play as part of a more aggressive security strategy. The Gulf littoral's forward-deployed footprint, set into place during the first Gulf War, enabled effects-based capabilities to be tested in Iraq that have come online since the 1990s, enabling the US military to begin to operationalise what was initially dubbed the ‘Revolution in Military Affairs’ and now is called ‘Transformation’. As such, the Gulf infrastructure provides the US with a model to emulate around the world as it seeks to realign its forces to better address new threats in the global theatre. The Gulf facilities will become central hubs in the network of bases stretching throughout Central and South Asia and the Horn of Africa which will perform missions associated with the global war on terror. Operation Iraqi Freedom represents only the beginning of this phenomenon in an emerging new global defense strategy that may see forward-deployed forces around the world used with increased frequency to manage an uncertain security environment.     

The United States and Maritime Strategy: A Parochial View from the U.S. Naval War College

The emergence of transnational non-state threats, America's ongoing war on terror, and the increasing globalization of the world's economy all affect the security and stability of the maritime environment. As the world's leading economic and maritime power, the US bears a unique responsibility—it must secure and share the benefits of the global commons. A maritime strategy is not just a force planning exercise, or a guide to naval operations in wartime. This article identifies key trends and non-military issues – geographic, economic, and diplomatic – that the Navy and the country must consider in developing a new maritime strategy to provide for good order at sea in the coming decades.     

The Iraq War and International Relations: Implications for Small States

The Iraq War exposes the new shape of world politics. It discredits the idea of a benign hegemon defending world order, content to be an ‘offshore balancer’, exercising its power through multinational institutions and constrained by mutually agreed rules. Rather, the hegemon, facing few external constraints in a unipolar world, is driven by the particularistic interests of its ruling group, in the pursuit of informal empire wherein military force is used to impose client regimes and economic subordination. The impotence of both a realist power balance and of liberal institutions to restrain it calls into question the main bases of global order, leaving imperial overreach as the main limitation on hegemonic power. Small states may be able to adapt to, even temporarily profit from, bandwagoning with the hegemon, but it is they that are potentially most threatened when a hegemonic power undermines the international constraints on the use of power.     

The Future of War and American Military Strategy

The outcome of ongoing debates over the future of American military strategy will play a critical role in shaping the foreign and military policies of the United States over the next decade. Traditionalists worry about the shift towards emphasizing counterinsurgency (COIN) operations and irregular warfare, believing that the use of force is often ineffective in COIN situations and the American military should concentrate on planning for conventional war. In contrast, COIN advocates argue that the United States must focus its efforts on preparing for the wars it is most likely to fight, irregular wars. However, both schools of thought rely on assumptions about the future security environment that may reveal another path forward. First, although it seems intuitive to view irregular warfare as the dominant future concern, it is exceedingly difficult to predict accurately the future security environment, as the last 20 years have clearly shown. Second, and perhaps most importantly, the character of emergent threats will depend on how the United States focuses its resources. Paradoxically, no matter what it emphasizes, the military threats the United States is or will be most capable of defeating are the ones it is least likely to face, since potential adversaries will be deterred and seek other ways of confrontation. However, with some smart and careful investments, including the recognition that not all parts of the military have to be optimized for the same task, the United States military can both lock in its conventional dominance and continue to improve its ability to succeed in the irregular wars most likely to dominate the landscape in the short to medium term.     

The New Maritime Strategy: Confronting Peer Competitors, Rogue States, and Transnational Insurgents

Established military organizations, such as the U.S. military services, have many things – revered service traditions, stable bureaucratic structures, standard operating procedures, and of course distinctive weapons systems.¹ Ideally, they should also have a coherent military strategy, one which will guide them in how to fight their wars or how to deter these wars from ever happening. The U.S. Navy is now developing a new maritime strategy, its first real strategy since the 1980s. The Maritime Strategy then was directed toward a single enemy, the Soviet Union. The new strategy faces three very different kinds of enemies: peer competitors, rogue states and transnational terrorists. The new strategy will include such familiar concepts as containment and deterrence, but is should be centered upon the concepts of command of the commons and denial.     

以色列能源战略评介

由于长期处于众多阿拉伯国家的敌视中,以色列不可能轻松地从海湾富油国进口石油和天然气,这就决定了以色列能源成本的高昂,及其为实现能源供给所采取的能源战略的现实性和特殊性.也是在这样的困境中,以色列形成了具有自身特色的能源战略:安全困境和能源困境的统一协调;追随美国的中东战略,以美以联盟为基础,从美国盟友阵营找寻能源出路;以科技创新为导向,减轻能源进口造成的国际支付平衡和走能源多元化的可持续发展道路;强化国内能源部门的私有化改革;以及多项权衡后的核能发展战略.     

Making and Mobilizing Moderates: Rhetorical Strategy,Political Networks,and Counterterrorism

Studies of counterterrorism have argued for the importance of bolstering, or “mobilizing,” moderates in the confrontation with violent extremists. Yet the literature has not elucidated when states seek to mobilize moderates and marginalize extremists, how they do so, or when they prove successful. The received wisdom is that states should cultivate and strengthen moderate allies by reaching out to them. This approach, however, fails to grasp the political challenges confronting potential moderates, whose priority is to build and retain legitimacy within their political community. Inspired by network approaches, we maintain that moderates can more easily emerge when their political interactions with the authorities are relatively sparse. We further argue that the state's strategies, including crucially its rhetorical moves, can bolster the moderates' local legitimacy. At times, this will entail not reaching out to moderates but isolating them. Before moderates can be mobilized, they must be made, and the state's criticism, more than its love, may do much to help moderate political forces emerge. This article explains why mobilizing moderates is critical, when it is difficult, and how authorities can nevertheless play a productive role in moderates' emergence. We establish our theoretical framework's plausibility by examining two cases—India's ultimately triumphant campaign against Sikh extremists and Spain's gradual marginalization of Basque extremists. We then suggest what lessons these campaigns against ethnonational terrorism hold for the so-called War on Terror.     

Advance Agent of the Truman Doctrine: The United States,The New York Times,and the Greek Civil War

Democratic theorists observe high correlations between public opinion and government policy, but it is difficult to determine the direction of causation. This article concerns the relative abilities of government officials and media owners to influence political discourse. Both affected The New York Times' coverage of the Greek civil war before the declaration of the Truman Doctrine. When the Truman administration leaked its intention to intervene in Greece and offered a new interpretation of the civil war, the Times instantly adopted the new theme. The Times had the resources and opportunity to challenge government arguments, but its correspondent in Athens suppressed available information that contradicted official statements, and the publisher supported his reporter despite obvious partisanship. Top reporters maintained close ties with government officials, and they promoted American interventionism in the pages of the newspaper. And a seamless connection between editorials and news coverage reflects ownership's support for the Truman Doctrine. Government's influence may be strongest when officials and media owners share interests and values. And the temporal order raises implications for the relationship between opinion and policy: Policymakers may select new policies first and then move public opinion to win support for planned policy changes.