"安全困境"析论--兼谈"先发制人战略"与进攻性现实主义的关系

"安全困境"概念源自于霍布斯悲观的"自然状态"理念,自其运用于国际政治研究以来,不论防御性现实主义还是新制度自由主义,乃至近年来发展迅速的进攻性现实主义都承认它的真实性.但是,新自由制度主义认为可以通过"囚徒困境"博弈来解决"安全困境",防御性现实主义认为能部分地运用"囚徒困境"博弈来解决"安全困境",而进攻性现实主义则认为不能用"囚徒困境"博弈来解决"安全困境".进攻性现实主义强调在安全困境中国家不可能通过制度和合作,而只能通过主动进攻和扩张权力,乃至通过建立区域霸权来争取本国的安全.但进攻性现实主义却反对布什政府的"先发制人战略",因为该战略以建立世界帝国为目的,从而模糊了国家的安全目标,以致不利于美国在安全困境中谋求真正的安全.     

编者的话

崛起中的中国正面临越来越多的外部挑战。其中,美国军事联盟体系的钳制、领土领海争端中的困境和西方世界在意识形态领域的围堵备受国内学界关注。本期的选题正是围绕以上三个方面展开。本期两篇关于联盟问题的讨论,深化了我们对联盟理论和联盟战略的理解。苏若林和唐世平的文章试图揭示联盟管理过程中盟友之间的互动机制是怎样运转的。这一研究解答了如下问题:盟友间实力对比与意图匹配程度这     

权力转移、战略依赖与联盟转型——以冷战后美日联盟转型为例

联盟是一国通过外部方式增加权力,服务于自身战略目标的重要手段之一。主导国建构联盟体系旨在维持其主导地位。由于国际关系中的权力格局始终处于变动之中,当主导国战略目标不变,相对权力变化有利于主导国时,其对于盟友的战略依赖下降。此时,主导国推动联盟转型以强化对于盟友的控制,盟友的自主性更受制约,主导国或者是将盟友地位矮化、联盟功能简化,甚至解散联盟。当相对权力变化不利于主导国时,联盟对于主导国的价值提升,主导国对于盟友的战略依赖加深。此时,主导国更可能提升盟友地位、强化联盟承诺、扩大联盟的职能。冷战结束之后,美日联盟经历了可能瓦解的危机。文章以冷战后美日联盟转型为例,探讨了美日联盟经历的三次大的转型。在当前的美日联盟中,解禁集体自卫权是美国给予日本一定自主权的重要标志,联盟的安全与防卫合作在空间上扩大至全球范围,在时间上覆盖了和平与战时的全过程。但是,美日联盟转型弱化了美国对于日本的控制,增加了美国卷入地区冲突的风险。     

周边建构与美国盟友的联盟战略——以澳美同盟为例

拜登执政以后，美国加大了对联盟体系的更新与建设，由于实力的相对衰落，美国日益依赖联盟体系推动其全球战略，盟友关于联盟的战略定位以及与联盟的互动正在成为影响美国联盟体系发展变化的重要方面。当前，对于美国联盟体系的研究主要集中于联盟管理、联盟困境与联盟转型三个方面，对于盟友的分析也多采用霸权国视角。文章借鉴国际关系理论中的建构主义思想，结合源自中国的“周边”概念，通过对比陆权、海权等地缘政治概念，阐释了国家以我为主建构周边的过程，论证了周边建构在国家对外战略中的突出作用，初步探索了周边的地缘政治内涵。通过引入实力认知、历史记忆、美国介入以及战略时机四个变量，从中观的地区层次分析了美国盟友的周边安全建构对其联盟战略的影响。文章梳理了澳大利亚周边安全建构的历史，运用以周边为核心的理论框架，探讨了在《澳新美同盟条约》以及“澳英美安全伙伴关系”形成过程中澳大利亚联盟战略的演化机制，一定程度上弥补了当前联盟战略研究中观地区层次的缺失，指出美国盟友的联盟战略主要围绕其对周边的安全建构而形成。     

联盟类型、机制设置与联盟可靠性

有关联盟设计与联盟可靠性的既有研究并未充分解释二者之间的关系。在联盟的形成、管理、维持和瓦解的过程中,每一个阶段的变化都反映出国家对成本与收益的权衡考量,具体包括三个方面:成本与收益的核算、成本与收益的分配和降低成本的努力。然而,现有研究主要关注对成本与收益的核算,对另外两个方面则关注较少。文章从联盟的两个功能类型——威慑与援助——角度出发,认为联盟的可靠性来源于两个方面:威慑对手与援助盟友。联盟机制的作用体现在两方面:对于盟友主要是通过复杂的机制提高背叛成本,对于对手则是发出有代价的信号威慑其冒险行为。通过经验研究和案例分析,我们发现,尽管国家设置更高水平的联盟机制的目的在于提高联盟的可靠性,但由于国家在联盟中的成本与收益以及降低成本的努力不同,因此,联盟机制的设置对联盟可靠性的影响是复杂且有条件的。     

国际政治的社会进化:从米尔斯海默到杰维斯

本文将对国际政治的宏观历史和一个国际政治大理论的辩论进行社会进化论的诠释。文章指出,用单一大理论来解释国际政治历史失败的根本原因,在于我们一直试图用系统的、而非进化论的大理论去解释整个国际政治历史。通过揭示从进攻性现实主义世界到防御性现实主义世界进化背后的根本及辅助机制,文章指出:国际政治系统一直是一个进化的系统。因此,不同的国际政治理论来自并适用于国际政治的不同时期,不同的国际政治时代实际上需要不同的国际政治理论。国际政治应该成为真正的进化论科学,或"给达尔文应有的地位"。     

大西洋联盟体系中的“土耳其问题”——基于联盟管理的视角

大西洋联盟中的“土耳其问题”是指土耳其日益偏离北约战略轨道而引发的一系列连锁反应。北约是安全组织,但土耳其加入该组织既是为了制衡威胁,也是为了实现成为“西方国家”的身份目标。因此,安全威胁—安全供应和身份认同—价值供应的匹配程度均会影响土耳其与西方盟友的联盟紧密性。需要指出的是,安全和身份在联盟管理中的作用并不相同,前者是决定性变量,后者是辅助性变量。基于对两者的动态结构分析,可以发现土耳其与西方盟友的联盟管理模式经历了五个阶段：捆绑、强制、追随、平衡和疏离。当前双方关系的大幅波动归因于联盟管理困境：土耳其因担心“被牵连”而拒绝与盟国保持一致,又因无法实现身份融入而日益脱离西方定位;西方盟友指责土耳其偏离联盟轨道和价值观基础,但又不愿为其提供安全庇护和身份承认。双方在联盟管理的意愿和能力上出现错配,安全困境和身份困境形成共振。联盟资格的工具化、联盟合作的议题化和联盟管理的身份政治化将成为“土耳其问题”的发展趋势。     

对冲地缘政治风险：跨国公司战略联盟与俄欧天然气政治

本文运用国际政治经济学、国际商务学和制度经济学的相关理论,将战略联盟作为独立分析单位引入跨国公司与地缘政治的互动分析之中,考察商业利益影响地缘政治的机制与逻辑。跨国公司利用战略联盟这一有效制度安排,将国家行为引致的地缘政治风险锁定在可控范围之内。为实现上述目的,本文还进一步构建了"战略联盟—地缘政治"二元分析框架,从理论上概括了四种不同类型的互动模式,并以北溪管道财团、南溪管道财团和纳布科管道财团作为案例进行分析与检验。研究发现,市场权力和联盟结构是决定战略联盟对冲地缘政治风险的核心因素。就二者互动关系而言,市场占有率和公司规模不仅影响跨国公司的市场权力,而且决定其主导联盟伙伴关系的能力;联盟结构的不同类型反过来也会影响战略联盟利用市场权力对冲风险的结果。本文构建的"战略联盟—地缘政治"二元分析框架为考察俄欧天然气政治演变提供了新的研究视角,同时也为中国能源企业海外经营时如何规避地缘政治风险提供了有益启示。     

21世纪初的中美关系--非对称性相互依存

当前中美关系已更多地建立在相互依存的基础上,主要表现在经济、军事安全、非传统安全等领域.用新自由制度主义的相互依存理论可以较好解释现在的中美关系.中美相互依存尽管是非对称性的,但接近于复合相互依存的关系.中美非对称性相互依存关系使中美关系呈现敏感性、脆弱性与韧性并存、两重性等特点.中美在非对称性相互依存情况下的政策选择应包括:建立和加强各种合作机制;充分照顾到对方的核心国家利益,寻求扩大相互利益的汇合点;不要试图操纵非对称性相互依存关系而单方得益,应争取"合作双赢".     

位势、威胁认知与美国联盟体系的演进

二战结束以来，美国在亚欧非等不同地区建立了不同的联盟机制，组成了美国全球大战略中的联盟体系。随着国际社会“时”与“势”的重要转变，美国联盟体系不断演进并表现出不同特征。美国在不同地区联盟的设置诱因，它们在体系、结构、认知等层面的关联，以及如何影响“印太战略”的实践是文章的研究核心。文章从国际政治的权力动态转移出发，根据位势的强弱和威胁认知的高低，深入阐释了美国不同联盟机制的演变及影响。强位势优势及高威胁认知影响了同心多边机制及其变种的产生，强位势优势及低威胁认知则可能会催生出强多边机制及其变种，弱位势和低威胁认知下的结构关系较为松散，这些联盟机制均服务于建立、维护和拓展美国的全球霸权。随着中美实力对比的变化、美国战略东移以及地缘政治博弈的逐渐升级，美国对亚太地区的战略也体现了“变”与“不变”,弱位势及高威胁认知，刺激了美式小多边机制的产生。文章对美国联盟体系演进的分析突出了行为体间及其内部的互动逻辑，拓展了无政府状态下研究国家战略的视角和维度，在回溯历史和研判当前国际局势的背景下，为管控当前美国通过“印太战略”建立美式小多边开展“阵营化”对抗所带来的地区风险，提供了重要路径。     

Worse Than a Monolith: Disorganization and Rivalry within Asian Communist Alliances and U.S. Containment Challenges, 1949–69

Abstract

This article makes the counterintuitive argument that in the first two decades of the Cold War the communist alliance in East Asia was easiest for the United States and its allies to contain through coercive diplomacy during the period in which the communist alliance was most cohesive and unified under Soviet leadership (1954–57). With a focus on the Korean War and two Indochina Wars, this article shows how internal problems in the communist alliance significantly complicated the containment of communism. In the formative years of the East Asian communist alliances (1950–53), the alliance’s lack of organization and cohesion made it more difficult for anti-communist forces in the region to deter communist expansion and to control escalation of wars once they started. Between 1958–69, internal rivalry for leadership in the communist alliance made containment of the alliance particularly difficult for the United States and its allies. Until the Chinese and Soviet communists actually turned their guns on each other in early 1969, the Sino-Soviet rivalry for leadership of the international communist movement in the 1960s only served to increase the expansionist fervor of the communist movement as a whole, make peace agreements with anti-communist forces in the region more difficult, and maximize the amount of military assistance local revolutionaries, like Ho Chi Minh, received from both Moscow and Beijing.     

Constructing Mutuality: The Zapatistas' Transformation of Transnational Activist Power Dynamics

This article examines the evolution of transnational Zapatista solidarity networks. Although scholars have described an emerging "mutuality" between the Zapatista movement and its allies at the level of international framing, this article considers how the Zapatistas forged this mutuality on the ground, through active redefinition of alliances with Northern supporters. It argues that the Zapatistas delimited who was included in their solidarity networks, set new terms for partnerships, and redefined legitimacy in their transnational alliances. In so doing, they asserted their autonomy from donors. They also fostered discourses and practices of mutual solidarity and Southern leadership, shifting the balance of power between North and South. The case both illuminates the possibilities for Southern movements to challenge Northern control from within and suggests potential pitfalls of doing so; by defying Northern NGOs' influence, the Zapatistas may have risked their long-term viability.     

联盟形成理论:评估及对中国的政策启示

本文对联盟形成理论进行了全面回顾与评析,认为在过去几十年中,联盟形成理论主要有两大发展,一是在研究"为什么形成联盟"这个问题上,存在从势力均衡理论到威胁均衡理论再到利益均衡理论的理论演进;二是上述三个理论各自内部的理论深化。按照拉卡托斯的理论演进判断标准以及"奥卡姆剃刀"(Occam’srazor)原则,文章对有关理论演进进行了评估,认为从势力均衡理论到威胁均衡理论的发展相对成功。然后,本文提出如何从联盟形成理论及其演进历程中寻求启发,以建构一个简约的联盟解体理论。最后,讨论了联盟形成理论对中国当前对外政策的启示。     

Contested Resource Extraction,Anti-Corporate Protests and the Politics of Movement Alliance in Bangladesh

Why do activist groups form alliances and why do some alliances later fall apart? This article asks these questions in the context of a popular mobilisation against resource extraction in Bangladesh. It focuses on the dynamics of a strategic alliance between a locally organised community mobilisation against a British mining company and an urban radical activist group, known for its anti-capitalist activism, to explore the subsequent collapse of the alliance and the demobilisation of one group. Based on the qualitative analysis of in-depth interviews with activists and organisational documents, the article probes the underlying causes of rupture. Although several individual and organisational factors are identified, it is argued that Bangladesh’s confrontational political culture and its authoritarian party system played a critical role, with local activists vulnerable to co-optation or being silenced by powerful political actors. The article contributes to social movement scholarship by emphasising that specific political cultures can undermine efforts to build strategic alliances between diverse social movement organisations.     

The voice and loyalty of business in Kuwait: merchant politics in times of contention

According to the classic rentier state theory literature, the political activity of Kuwaiti merchants effectively ceased after the government acquired oil rents. More recent works explain business alliances with the government through the competition for resources between the capitalist class and the population at large. This article argues that the merchants’ political position vis-à-vis the ruling powers has not been consistent and has shifted between ‘voice’ and ‘loyalty’. To explain the choice of political action by the Kuwaiti business community the article compares the merchants’ role in two major contentious events—the popular uprising of 2011 and the 1989 pro-democracy movement. Despite the similarities between them, in 1989 prominent business figures were in the vanguard of opposition, while after 2011 they chose to re-emerge as government allies. The comparison suggests that the shift from ‘voice’ to ‘loyalty’ can be explained by the changing political field. I contend that the rise of new social forces and new types of political opposition antagonized business and forced it to side with the government in order to pursue its vital rent-seeking interests.     

美韩同盟再定义与韩国的战略选择:进程与争论

本文系统总结了自2002年底以来美韩同盟再定义的磋商过程,以及双方在驻韩美军基地调整、同盟内部军事安全角色分工、同盟的未来战略构想等三大焦点问题上所取得的实质性进展,认为通过区域扩展和内涵扩展的路径选择,美韩同盟再定义已基本实现利益平衡与威胁平衡的双重目标。通过对美韩全球性战略同盟关系的定位与确认,韩国也由此结束了数年来激烈的外交方向辩论,再度确立了中近期亲美的结盟外交路线,然而有关韩国对外战略的争论不会就此终结。     

New roles in the Japan‐US alliance

"There is a much greater need for the security alliance today than at any time during the Cold War era, and at this critical juncture new lifeblood needs to be injected into this alliance if it is to continue to thrive,” writes Yasuhiro Nakasone, former prime minister of Japan, IIPS chairman, and now well into his fifth decade as a member of the Diet. Nakasone analyzes the state of the alliance, describes the changed roles of the allies, and urges new Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto to explain to the Japanese people the alliance's contribution to peace and prosperity in Asia‐Pacific.     

The Role of Leaders in Intra-Alliance Bargaining

This article develops a theory about the role of leaders in long-term international bargaining, specifically in the context of negotiations within existing military alliances. The international relations literature suggests that domestic opposition (to cooperation on a particular issue) increases a state’s bargaining power vis-á-vis its negotiating partner. This study confirms that domestic opposition to cooperation generally increases a state’s bargaining power at the international level, but it suggests that domestic opposition to the state’s leader – which affects the leader’s vulnerability – does not have a uniform effect on the country’s bargaining power. It demonstrates the central role a state leader plays in international bargaining and explains the dynamics of alliance negotiations left unexplained in the literature. In order to examine the argument, this study uses “structured, focused comparison” of the U.S. alliances with Japan and Spain.