欧盟新中亚战略评析

欧盟新中亚战略在关注中亚民主、人权及当地经济可持续发展的同时,更多关注地区的安全稳定与能源合作.新战略为欧盟全面发展与中亚国家关系确立了政治框架.欧盟试图通过新战略扩大其在中亚地区的影响,维护欧盟的能源和安全利益.受来自欧盟自身和外部因素的制约,新战略将面临一些困难和挑战.     

欧盟的中亚政策

欧盟的中亚政策是其大周边战略的一环,是为了配合睦邻政策,服务于稳定周边的目标.欧盟中亚政策的形成和演变经历了五个阶段,每个阶段侧重的利益目标不同."新中亚战略"把能源与安全确定为中亚政策的主要目标.为了实现这些目标,欧盟与中亚国家在安全、政治经济改革、能源和交通、投资与贸易方面进行紧密的合作.欧盟中亚政策存在的一些问题,加上欧盟面临的各种挑战,导致欧盟在中亚"大博弈"中处于"第二梯队",位于俄、美、中三国之后.     

大国对中亚能源政策的演变及其发展趋势

自中亚国家独立以来，大国对中亚的能源政策经历了不断调整与演变。与此相应，中亚国家为保障本国的利益和安全，也在不断修改本国的能源发展战略，建立和完善与本国经济发展战略相适应的能源合作方面的法律法规和政策措施。未来中亚地区能源发展趋势仍然是大国之间、大国与中亚国家之间的竞争与合作，并拓展到中亚政治、经济、文化等领域，形成相对均衡的多元化、多模式、互利共赢的局面。     

俄罗斯中亚地区军事安全战略与军事政策解析

俄罗斯一向把中亚地区视为本国的“战略后院”,不容其他大国挑战其在中亚地区的主导地位。本文通过对俄与中亚国家双边与多边军事合作的分析,揭示了俄罗斯中亚地区军事安全战略与军事政策的主要内容与存在的问题,并对在深入实施西部大开发战略条件下我国如何在与中亚国家开展全方位合作中不损害中俄战略协作伙伴关系等问题进行了思考。     

欧盟的中亚援助实践研究——以向欧洲输送石油和天然气国家间(INOGATE)项目为例

自1991年中亚5国独立以来,欧盟就开始向中亚国家提供政府援助,截至2006年欧盟共向中亚国家提供了13.9亿欧元的援助资金。在2007年前的欧盟中亚援助政策中,尤以独联体技术援助计划(TAC IS)的地位最为突出。通过该计划,欧盟向中亚国家投入了6.5亿的援助资金,在中亚地区启动了包括向欧洲输送石油和天然气国家间(INOGATE)项目在内的一系列地区性援助项目。通过向中亚国家提供的援助,欧盟在该地区树立起了温和友善的良好形象,从而为欧盟在2007年6月出台完整的中亚战略奠定了坚实的基础。尽管欧盟的中亚援助政策饱受来自内外部意见的各种批评,但欧盟对自身援助政策的不断反思及其援助活动的低姿态与援助范围的全面性,能为中国向发展中国家提供援助和制定中亚战略提供一些有益的启示。     

俄罗斯与中亚国家安全合作机制分析

安全合作是俄罗斯与中亚国家关系的关键性领域,对中亚地区安全态势及发展趋势具有关键意义。俄罗斯与中亚国家借助双边及多边安全制度,构建了军事同盟体系,并形成了完备的组织机构和决策模式。俄罗斯与中亚在共同使用军事设施、军事技术合作、联合军事演习和军事人才培养等方面展开具体的安全合作。俄罗斯与中亚国家安全合作机制的有效性受到权力结构、合法性与国内政治等因素的制约,其未来有可能向更为紧密的方向发展,对中亚地区安全发挥着长期的主导性作用。     

美国与中亚国家的合作与矛盾

不断拓展与中亚国家合作是美国中亚战略的基本取向。与此同时，与美国开展合作已是中亚各国实现安全和发展目标不可或缺的内容。尽管如此，由于美国与中亚国家战略目标和利益存在差异，双方的矛盾在所难免。美国在中亚国家积极推销“西方民主”，一直遭到中亚国家的抵制，美国对中亚国家人权问题的“关注”也常常引发中亚国家的不满。对于美国而言，与中亚国家冲突不利于其扩展影响力，也不利于与中亚国家建立政治互信，更不利于实现其中亚战略目标。对中亚国家来说，与美国发生冲突不仅影响到对美的政治信任，而且使之与美合作处于进退维谷的两难境地。     

中亚地区合作机制的竞争态势与挑战

近年来,中亚地区合作机制呈现“竞争化”趋势,这不仅是大国主动塑造的竞争性多边主义,也是中亚各国主观上默许的地区合作模式。通过大国之间的国际制度竞争,中亚国家能够赢得更多自主性,也能够更好地实施其多向平衡外交政策。这种制度竞争趋势表现为:美俄均致力于提升“C5+1”制度化合作的水平以维持地区均势;欧盟多措并举强化与中亚国家的合作机制以赢得更多机遇;地区强国积极发展与中亚的合作机制以谋求更多利益;中国扩大与中亚国家的合作范围以打造全方位合作体系。中亚地区合作机制的竞争主要受到地区安全环境变化、大国关系变化、中亚国家外交政策变化三方面因素的影响。未来一段时间,大国将加大对地区资源的竞争以获取投资收益,也将重视发挥自身的比较优势以塑造地区治理规则。中亚国家将持续提升外交自主性,以便赢得更多发展机遇。     

欧盟:新的中亚“战略玩家”

2007年6月欧盟推出维护地区稳定与促进发展的对中亚发展新战略,引起了国际社会的普遍关注.新战略不仅表明了作为国际地缘组织利益的整溯者,更显现出其维护自身战略利益,参与国际事务合作的国际玩家本色.本文试图从欧盟对中亚渗入的历史及发展角度与战略定位,全面分析欧盟与中亚在能源、安全及社会关系的合作态势,透过表象分析来揭示欧盟以扩溢为核心的东扩方略.     

欧盟对中亚政治领域的援助综述

中亚位于欧亚大陆之间,是国际地缘政治的战略要地,欧盟要成为全球战略玩家,中亚是其全球战略中不可或缺的一环。欧盟与中亚关系主要建立在“发展政策”基础上,对中亚的援助是欧盟全球援助体系的重要组成部分,关系到欧盟的诸多战略利益,其中民主化、人权、良治等问题是欧盟发展援助的“主流议题”。中亚国家大都是欧盟眼中的“极权国家”,即便在具备西方民主模式的吉尔吉斯斯坦,欧盟也对巴基耶夫的执政能力及2009年7月的总统大选表示不满。     

The European Union’s trade and investment policy in Asia: new challenges and opportunities in a changing global environment – or: following individual roadmaps

Asia is Europe’s largest trading partner and EU-Asia trade relations have undergone a rapid change since the global financial crisis. On a global scale, the new multilateral trade agreements such as the now stalled Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) involving European Unions’ (EU) major trading partners such as Japan, Singapore and Vietnam also have the potential to change the trade equations. In this paper, we evaluate the new EU trade policy which has been designed to ensure that the EU benefits from the changing global trade scenario and also look at the steps which have been taken by the EU to promote trade relations with its major trading partners in Asia in the predicted ‘Asian century’. We look into the Free Trade Agreements, which are being negotiated with its Asian partners and seek to understand the reasons which have resulted in delays in their signing and negotiations. We evaluate new policies pushed forward by its Asian partners such as the One Belt One Road policy by China and Japan’s policy of securing a large number of trading agreements in the America. Moving ahead, we also shed light on the indirect factors that may influence the success of EU trade negotiations in Asia such as the EU policy on granting China market economy status and the commencement of the ‘Brexit’ process. Lastly, we try to present a list of immediate priorities for EU in Asia, which will ensure that it secures a toehold in trade with the region. All in all, it is shown that the EU has not one and the same approach for all Asian countries but it negotiates flexibly and individually country by country. Because of this “country by country approach” the EU is also not ready to enter into general EU-ASEAN trade negotiations again.     

美国新中亚战略评析

美国公布新的中亚战略包含四方面调整,即将中亚地区视为独立的地缘政治板块、将阿富汗视为中亚一部分、明确将在中亚加强对俄罗斯和中国的遏制、重新界定美国在该地区的比较优势。新中亚战略的实施将会对中亚地区稳定和主要大国在该地区互动产生一定影响。但由于美国在实施该战略中投入力度有限、比较优势不明显,中亚国家不会轻易改变自身多元平衡外交政策、对阿富汗及其局势的认知与美有明显差异,以及美国在中亚地区的战略冒进可能引发大国反制,新战略的实施不会一帆风顺。     

Interregional relations and legitimacy in global governance: the EU in ASEM

This article explores the ramifications of the European Union’s (EU) internal legitimacy debate for its external relations. It applies the Asia–Europe Meeting (ASEM) as a case study to examine the EU’s attempts to promote legitimacy in global governance, more specifically in interregional institutions. The article’s theoretical framework draws from the EU’s legitimacy debate. It identifies three key sources of legitimacy, namely, (i) input legitimacy or democratic control and accountability, (ii) output legitimacy or performance and achievement of core purposes, and (iii) the degree of common identity as externalised through collective representation and the articulation of shared norms and values. The empirical analysis thereafter leads to three observations. First, the EU’s presence has contributed to an increased democratic involvement by ASEM’s different stakeholders including parliaments and civil society. Second, purely from an institutional legitimacy perspective ASEM achieves its purpose as a forum to ‘constructively engage’ with Asian countries and address issues relating to global governance. Third, ASEM reveals the EU’s dual identity as an intergovernmental grouping and an organisation with a gradually increasing capacity of collective representation. However, the advancement of the EU’s normative objectives through ASEM has been problematic, leading to a more interest-based and pragmatic policy path. The article concludes that the EU’s legitimacy debate has had a bearing on relations with Asia and, in particular, with ASEM. Importantly, and given the EU’s setbacks, some elements of the ‘EU’s way’ have proven successful in promoting democratic notions of legitimacy beyond the state.     

Security cooperation in and with Asia: towards a pragmatic turn in the EU’s security policy?

ABSTRACT

Since the adoption of the first EU-Asia Strategy in 1994, there has been persistent scepticism about the EU’s ability to play a significant role in Asian security. Yet, since the release of the 2012 Updated East Asia Policy Guidelines, the EU has declared its intent to make greater practical contributions to Asian security. Against these premises, this article attempts to reflect on the evolution of the EU’s security approach to Asia, with the ultimate goal of analysing to what degree, it represents a continuation or a departure from former EU policies in the region. In scrutinising these developments, this article argues that in light of the strategic changes, that have occurred in Europe and in Asia, the EU has started to revise its security approach to the region in more pragmatic terms. The pragmatic character of the EU is seen as looking into the changes of the content of the security discourse, which appears increasingly depoliticised and, into the new practices of cooperation, which unlike in the past, seek to empower local actors, are sensitive to local needs and, call for greater security collaboration between the EU and Asian countries, to cope with regional and global challenges.     

美国重返亚洲对中国东亚地区FTA战略的影响——基于TPP合作视角的分析

美国通过加入TPP从实质上确立了"重返亚洲"的全球战略调整,在更大程度上加快了对亚太地区经济一体化进程的干涉。美国主导下的TPP对东亚区域经济合作机制的发展产生了重要影响,也给中国的整体和局部FTA战略带来了诸多的不确定性和挑战。中国必须正确认识美国在东亚地区的经济战略转变以及TPP扩张带来的潜在影响,在此基础上对FTA战略做出合理的调整。中国的FTA战略重心仍应保留在东亚地区,提高国内企业对FTA的利用率,同时跟踪研究TPP的最新进展,为以后加入TPP谈判做好相应的准备工作。     

Perceptions of Asia in Europe

The question of how Asia is perceived by the European Union is becoming increasingly relevant for European as well as for Asian policy makers. The more successful Asia and emerging countries like China and India become, the more vulnerable the European public and all involved stakeholders are to fall victim to old and new stereotypes. A lack of knowledge may result in the EU becoming more vulnerable to developing prejudice towards Asia. The new research project “Asia in the Eyes of Europe” aims to identify, measure and compare public awareness and perceptions of Asia within the European Union. The research is to deliver an analysis of Europe’s cognitive outlook towards Asia. It tracks the existing landscape of perceptions of Asia within the EU and seeks to contribute to, deepen and enhance European–Asian understanding. A study of Asia’s image in Europe can thus help Europeans and Asians to understand in how far their interaction impacts on the shaping of institutions of regional governance that can complement structures of global governance.     

哈萨克斯坦参与全球治理的举措、动力及前景

自1991年独立以来,哈萨克斯坦不但成功巩固了国家主权,在政治、经济、社会发展等领域取得了举世瞩目的成就,而且在外交领域赢得了国际社会的高度赞誉,使哈萨克斯坦成为全球治理舞台中最为活跃的中亚国家。在参与全球治理进程中,哈萨克斯坦将自己定位为“有实力的重要地区大国”,奉行以巩固主权独立和维护国家利益为中心的“全方位务实平衡”外交战略,通过建立睦邻友好信任带的“近邻外交”和以伙伴关系为基础的“远邻外交”,拉近与世界各大国及周边国家的外交关系,在国际和地区热点问题上扮演着“沟通者”和“调停者”角色,积极推动中亚地区内部的一体化进程,广泛参与全球与地区性国际组织,在核不扩散和文明对话等领域提出了各种有影响力的倡议,力图将本国的利益和世界的利益融为一体,为哈萨克斯坦的发展赢得了很大的机遇和空间,使哈萨克斯坦在国际社会中的能见度不断提升。作为中亚国家经济发展最为成功、外交最为活跃、国际影响力最为显著的国家,哈萨克斯坦参与全球治理的实践经验值得发展中国家学习借鉴。     

Introduction: the EU,East Asian conflicts,and the norm of integration

The promotion of regional integration is a core objective of the European Union’s (EU) foreign policy and has been seen as part of its attempt to transform international society and to make the world a more peaceful place to live. However, the success of this regionalization strategy has been limited and East Asia has been a particularly problematic case. This introduction raises some fundamental questions by first presenting some basic concepts so that the overall studies of the special issue can be systematically undertaken. The underlying questions are the following: How bleak is the picture with regard to regionalism in East Asia and the roles of the EU? Has the EU had no effect on the development of East Asian regionalism? And what potential does regional integration have in helping the transformation of conflicts in East Asia? In addition to these questions, it also discusses and conceptualizes underlying discourses on regional integration, conflict transformation, and regionalism in East Asia. By doing so, it aims to point out that the East Asia region is changing, the EU does play a role in this, and regionalization cannot be ignored as an institutional context that has the potential to assist conflict transformation, especially if windows of opportunity for such engagement arise in the future.     

A case of failed interregionalism? Analyzing the EU-ASEAN free trade agreement negotiations

In 2007, the European Union (EU) and the Association of the Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) started interregional negotiations on a free trade agreement, which failed 2 years later. Relying on document analysis and elite interviews with officials from the EU and ASEAN’s members, this article addresses why and the extent to which the interregional negotiations failed. By rooting the theoretical model in a power-based approach, the analysis demonstrates that the EU has attempted to secure its economic and regulatory power in Southeast Asia. In striving for such power, interregionalism was initially the intuitive way because the EU perceived ASEAN as a cohesive bloc. However, the EU’s ambitious vision for comprehensive agreements clashed with the actual heterogeneity of ASEAN member states. The failure of the interregional approach is, thus, a result of the EU’s delicate balance between political and economic interests in Southeast Asia, which it pursues with trade-specific issues.