全球公共卫生治理的制度重叠及其应对之策

近年来,全球公共卫生治理体系彼此通过议题联结、成员联系和功能互动形成了密切的国际制度重叠,包括以世卫组织为核心的联合国诸公共卫生制度、以盖茨基金会等为代表的非正式公共卫生制度、以二十国集团为代表的涉卫新型国际制度以及特朗普政府试图打造的美式国际公共卫生制度。制度重叠是国际公共卫生秩序的结构性特征,可能会约束与限制世卫组织治理有效性的发挥。全球公共卫生议题的复杂性、全球公共卫生治理的政治化倾向和世卫组织的治理限度决定了协同治理具有必然性和紧迫性,为此,国际社会需要秉持人类卫生健康共同体理念,坚持公共卫生多边主义,警惕美国另起炉灶对全球公共卫生治理的冲击。同时,世卫组织发挥协同治理功能的制度化需求迫在眉睫。此外,新型国际公共卫生治理制度是推动多元制度协同治理的重要力量,将发挥愈加凸显的关键作用。作为国际公共卫生体系的重要成员,中国的负责任国际承诺为国际公共卫生制度重叠提供了重要的协调路径,中国支持世卫组织发挥领导作用,加强在联合国、二十国集团、世贸组织、金砖国家集团等多边制度框架内的协调配合和相互支撑,推动构建人类卫生健康共同体。     

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。     

al Qaeda and Global Governance: When Ideology Clashes With Political Expediency

In recent years, statements by al Qaeda leaders have included references to topics often associated with global-governance proponents’ critique of the state. This article examines the organization's attitude toward symbols of global governance, giving particular attention to its view of the United Nations as the foundation for global governance, and to the manner in which al Qaeda approaches the central questions of environmental threats and human rights. The organization is seeking to insert itself into the discourse of global governance and use it in an instrumental manner; it focuses on anti-Western narrative and seeks to expose the existing order as designed by Western powers, particularly the United States, for self-serving reasons. However, the article argues, notwithstanding al Qaeda's reputation for sophistication in manipulating public opinion, the organization's references to global governance underscore the limitations its rigid ideology imposes on its messaging efforts. Even though adopting the global governance discourse is in line with the group's effort to improve its image, al Qaeda's extremist ideology limits its ability to take full advantage of the benefits this discourse offers.     

The leadership deficit in Europe

The emerging global order is challenging multilateralism in the sense that power is becoming situational: centres of gravity are overlapping and transient, and the transnational interdependence that characterises this ‘polypolar’ world challenges small and great powers alike. Emerging powers are forming a ‘new middle', straddling the North-South divide with dynamic new multilateral formations, and prioritising economic self-interest. South Africa is at risk of being relegated to a new global periphery if it gives priority to political solidarity with the global South rather than economic pragmatism in its multilateral strategies. Its comparative advantage in the diplomatic arena is its middle power credentials. If it rationalizes its multilateralism to focus on diplomatic niche areas it can enhance its political influence in global governance institutions, despite its small economic stature.     

新安全视角下美国政府的气候政策

"人类安全"逐渐成为一种新的安全理念,环境气候问题等各种影响人类安全和福祉的非传统安全问题日益引起广泛关注。全球性安全威胁的严重程度则取决于治理框架的反应能力。包括气候政策、法律和机构在内的气候环境治理框架能够最大限度地削弱全球化冲突的根源,避免影响的发生或减缓其进程。奥巴马上任以来美国新政府能源、环境和应对气候变化政策出现较大调整,大力推动新能源法案来减缓气候变化。这一政策转向具有深刻的历史动因和政治基础,并将给美国经济复苏和美国企业的国际竞争力带来压力,加剧美国对外贸易摩擦和削弱其在国际气候环境合作中的领导地位。     

“中间地带”:和谐世界的枢纽

地缘政治学说发端于西方国家对地区和全球权力的争夺。在这种学说的发展过程中,著名的地缘政治学者麦金德提出了"心脏地带"理论,斯皮克曼提出了"边缘地带"理论,其间还有二次世界大战时期德国的"生存空间"理论。在西方大国眼中,上述地区都是各自在世界权力竞技场中获得主动地位所必须加以控制的地区,从而导致了大国之间激烈的和长期的地缘政治斗争,世界性的战争和不稳定多由此而生。在笔者看来,这些或在地理上处在大国之间,或在政治上处在大国的强烈关注之下的"被争夺"地区应被称为"中间地带"。"中间地带"是国际政治中的力量凹陷地区,其产生的原因、展示出来的特征以及呈现出的意义都对认识国际政治和国际关系的内在本质具有独特的重要性。     

Ideas and interests in global financial governance: comparing German and US preference formation

Financial crises underline the necessity for more effective global governance. Despite the creation of the Basel II Accord, no agreement has been reached on the reform of the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Why do governments only selectively agree to reform global governance? I argue that convergence and divergence of governmental positions cannot be explained solely by the logic of the international system, institutions or globalization. Instead, they strongly reflect domestic ideas and interests. Furthermore, the ability of governments to compromise internationally is influenced by the different impact of domestic ideas and interests. With regard to their prevalence in domestic preference formation, ideas prevail when governance affects lobby groups diffusely and poses fundamental questions on the role of politics in governing the economy. Interests prevail when lobby groups are affected directly and new governance concerns a specific distribution of costs. These arguments are tested on the preference formation of the United States and German governments on the IMF and Basel II.     

美国全球卫生安全战略及其对世界卫生安全体系的挑战

进入21世纪以来,新型冠状病毒、埃博拉、重症急性呼吸综合征以及甲流感等新发和复发传染病危机对全球卫生安全构成严重威胁,因此,如何促进全球卫生安全治理是当今国际社会亟待解决的问题。尽管美国曾经在全球卫生安全治理中发挥了重要作用,但尚未形成清晰的全球卫生安全治理政策。美国于2019年5月首次发布《全球卫生安全战略》,标志着特朗普政府全球卫生安全政策正式出台。该《全球卫生安全战略》以应对传染病威胁为核心,呈现出了以国家安全为导向和"全政府"路径的特点,充分体现了特朗普政府的"负担分担""美国优先"和反多边主义的思维。在全球卫生安全领域,各国已成为"因病相依"的全球命运共同体。有效的全球卫生安全治理需要全球多边主义,特朗普政府以国家安全为导向和以"美国优先"为原则的《全球卫生安全战略》与全球卫生安全的实现之间存在张力。特朗普政府的上述思维不仅侵蚀了全球卫生安全体系建构所必需的国际政治合作基础,也恶化了全球卫生安全的融资体系,因此对全球卫生安全体系构成了挑战。     

奥巴马政府亚太战略解析

21世纪初亚洲地位的迅速提升正在引起美国全球战略重心的东移。奥巴马政府亚太战略的目标,是要在"美国的太平洋世纪"里,"保持和加强美国在亚太地区的领导能力,改善安全,扩大繁荣,促进美国的价值观"。为此,美国将以"前沿部署外交"为开端,按照"六条关键性的行动路线"向前推进:增强美国的双边安全同盟;深化美国与新兴大国的关系;发展与区域性多边机构的接触;扩大贸易和投资;打造基础广泛的军事存在;增进民主和人权。这表明,"现实的理想主义"构成了奥巴马政府亚太战略的战略理念。     

Governance through government networks: The G8 and international organizations

As an informal grouping without headquarters, permanent staff or legal powers, the world’s major industrialized countries must rely on other actors, in particular international organizations, to manage global problems. This article examines how the Group of Eight contributes to global governance by cooperating with international organizations in the cases of debt relief and the fight against terrorist finance. It shows that the G8 draws on international institutions with the aid of government networks and argues that this cooperation is stronger, the greater the Group’s concentration of relevant power and the more important it considers the institutions’ resources.     

The Political Economy of Intellectual Property Protection: The Case of Software

The end of the twentieth century was marked by a sea change in global governance in the realm of intellectual property rights (IPRs). Whereas countries historically retained substantial autonomy with regard to what they defined as intellectual "property" and the rights granted to the owners of intellectual property, the 1990s witnessed the establishment of new global obligations regarding national practices. This paper focuses on the case of software "piracy" to assess the mechanisms by which the new global obligations for the treatment of IPRs are transmitted from the international to the national levels. We first consider a set of national-level factors that many scholars have shown to be important determinants of IPR policy. We then supplement the standard emphasis on domestic factors with an analysis of new transnational factors: countries' multilateral obligations under the World Trade Organization's (WTO) Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) and bilateral pressures from the United States to increase the protection of IPRs. Population-averaged panel data models are used to assess the effects of these national and transnational determinants on levels of software piracy in 80 countries from 1994 to 2002. Our results indicate that membership in the WTO and bilateral pressures from the United States—particularly pressures that offer reciprocal concessions—lead to substantial increases in levels of protection in rich and poor countries. There is, in short, a new international political economy of intellectual property.     

Sovereignty and the Foreign Fighter Problem

Sovereignty is the bedrock of international law. If security requires that the United States transgress sovereign borders to attack foreign fighters and their support networks hiding in third countries, then the U.S. should adopt a strategy to amend international law accordingly. One should not be too quick, however, to disregard a robust notion of sovereignty, a concept that has helped avert conflict among the world's major powers. The United States needs a strategy for sovereignty's future that is based in the emerging security context and a prioritization of American interests. Instead, the United States and the rest of the world are meandering toward a less robust sovereignty with weaker and more ambiguous international law. The U.S. and its global interests would be better served by strong and clear international rules that increase predictability and that confer legitimacy to action against dangerous enemies.     

生物多样性议题安全建构的碎片化

1992年,《生物多样性公约》与《联合国气候变化框架公约》《联合国防治荒漠化公约》一并成为全球环境治理与合作的重要制度性框架文件。目前,生物多样性的国际合作程度、社会认知深度、治理行动速度等都明显逊色。生物多样性治理的迫切程度不亚于其他的全球性环境议题,但其议题安全化的分散性却不利于建构整体性的安全认知。生物多样性议题安全建构的碎片化体现在生态、治理目标、谈判、国家及其他行为体四个层面。生态层面是指生物多样性的安全认知;治理目标层面是指全球生物多样性治理的"爱知目标"与安全的联系;谈判层面包括资金机制、资源动员、遗传资源获取和惠益分享、保护区以及主流化等议题;各缔约方及其他行为体层面不仅在各项议题上表达各自关切,同时也将生物多样性问题建构为粮食安全、水安全、公共卫生安全、经济安全等多元安全关注。生物多样性议题安全建构的碎片化导致了该问题虽然在话语上进入了安全领域,但是缺乏共同的安全认知,难以提供简明和清晰的治理目标和路径,不利于推动全球有效治理。     

“Systemically Significant States”: Tracing the G20’s Membership Category as a New Logic of Stratification in the International System

ABSTRACT

The international system has long distinguished classes of states, such as “great powers”. Recently, “systemically significant states” has emerged as a new designation within global financial governance. This designation was introduced by the G7 to justify the new membership composition of the G20, and has since been adopted in policy documents and recommendations by other institutions, such as the IMF. This article traces the origins of the term “systemically significant” and argues that, although nominally meant to be a term of inclusion and a signal of the pluralisation of governance authority, it instead serves as a new category of stratification rooted in a neoliberal governmentality of risk.     

The Changing Nature of Multilateralism and Brazilian Foreign Policy

An important characteristic of the current international setting is the crisis of the structure in existence, rather than the emergence of a new order. The rise of new interests and demands, as well as the speed of the transformation make the current understanding of global governance more complex. Brazil, like other medium powers, has an interest in institutionalised multilateralism as a means of increasing its bargaining capacity and hindering the unilateralism of major powers, without being antagonistic to them. It is attempting to increase its weight in traditional international bodies, which provide the grounding for international legitimacy, as well as in new informal arrangements. While this strategy could lead to the establishment of a new hierarchy that brings in countries of growing relative importance, it has put the weight of regional integration into another perspective in Brazilian foreign policy.     

《中导条约》与全球战略稳定论析

《中导条约》是冷战期间美苏达成的一项重要军控条约,是全球战略稳定的支柱之一。2019年8月,美俄相继退约,引发国际社会极大关注。人们担心,条约退场将冲击全球战略稳定,刺激军备竞赛,影响欧亚安全形势,削弱国际军控体系。中国是美国退约重要借口之一,条约作废势必深刻影响中国外部安全环境。《中导条约》从诞生、发展到消亡,有着深刻的国际、国内和个人三个层面的演变动因,归根结底起决定性作用的是国际格局变迁。20世纪80年代,苏美攻守异势促成了《中导条约》的诞生;进入21世纪后,北约对俄的挤压以及中导技术扩散促使俄罗斯抛出条约全球化倡议;近年来,美国霸权地位相对衰落促其选择退约。但美俄两国政治形势变化及领导人更迭也深刻影响了条约的“生、住、变、灭”的时机和方式。戈尔巴乔夫的“新思维”改革与当时高涨的核裁军运动为签署《中导条约》提供了特殊的政治、社会背景。特朗普政府奉行“美国优先”理念,频频废约“退群”,《中导条约》随之沦为牺牲品。在不同历史时期,陆基中导在全球战略稳定中所起的作用不同。在20世纪60年代初,它是美苏中央威慑的支柱。在20世纪70~80年代,它是影响延伸威慑的重要因素。进入21世纪后,它成为俄罗斯对付美国导弹防御的斗争手段。当前,陆基中导在跨域威慑中扮演日益重要的角色。大国中导博弈正卷土重来,但它必将带有与以往不同的诸多新特点。     

金融危机与美国霸权战略的调整

战后以来,强大经济实力始终是美国霸权政治的基础,金融则扮演了美国经济"晴雨表"的角色。2007年后的金融危机和债务危机削弱了美国霸权的经济"实力",使美国霸权战略不得不进行一系列调整:在经济领域,奥巴马政府实施了经济优先战略,推动美国霸权战略的"国内化"转向,力图夯实美国在世界政治经济格局中的霸主基础;在国际政治领域,加速推进"转型外交"进程,倡导多边主义和国际协作;在军事领域,采取相对收缩的军事战略,适时调整海外军事布局,全力应对国际金融危机。     

The Foreign Policy Legacy of Barack Obama

Barack Obama finishes his second term with a mixed but positive foreign policy legacy. America’s global standing is much improved from the waning days of the George W. Bush administration eight years ago. Obama’s most notable achievements were the international agreement slowing Iran’s progress toward nuclear weapons capability and diplomatic normalisation with Cuba. On the other side of the ledger were his failure to extricate America from military overextension in the greater Mideast and from the global policing mindset that produced that overextension. Also marring his record was his incoherent response to Syria’s deadly civil war and Libya’s collapse into anarchy following the 2011 international intervention.     

East Asia in a unipolar international order and Europe’s role in the region

This article attempts to explore the post-Cold War international system in which regional orders intermingle their influence. It pays special attention to regional conflicts in East Asia in the new era and what roles global powers could play to maintain regional stability. I will first examine the characteristics of the new global order after the end of the bipolarity. I will then focus on American foreign policy in the new international system in the context of its dealing with major global events that have strategic implications for its relations with other major global powers. As to discussions of regional orders, this article focuses on East Asia, where conflicts between states have not evaporated despite the relaxation of the global Cold War confrontation. What makes this area special is the involvements of many great powers and less-powerful nations that could somehow easily manipulate the seniors into the conflicts to their favour. While the regional order in East Asia is being shaped by the post- Cold War international order, the regions peace and conflicts will in turn significantly influence global order. Finally, I will argue that dealing with problems in East Asia should acquire involvements of powers that would give necessary momentum to the existing participants to solve conflicts by the means of multilateralism. The European Union (EU) is often forgotten for its role in contributing to world order, and the EU should be taken seriously by the powers in East Asia as a possible player in maintaining the regional peace. I conclude that both global and regional security depend on continuing US unipolarity, strengthened by the co-operation of the EU in the form of multilateralism. By the same token, US unilateralism without a EU counter-balancing it, only invites potential challengers, such as China, to threaten the USs preponderant position, thereby destabilising world peace.This article was supported by a research project (NSC-P3-2414-H-004-018) of the National Science Council, Taiwan, which is gratefully acknowledged.     

The OSCE's post-September 11 agenda,and Central Asia

With an enlarged membership and a wide agenda including politico-security matters, economic and environmental issues and human aspects, the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) aims at promoting stability and democratisation in its area, fostering good governance. The September 11 attacks on the United States in 2001 have prompted the organisation to reinforce its commitments with regard to the prevention of and combat against terrorism, as a primary goal in the pursuit of its main tasks of conflict prevention and management, and post-conflict rehabilitation. The institutional response of the OSCE has been translating its effort to address the new concerns while promoting its founding principles, both at headquarters and in the field. The extent to which the organisation's institutions and commitments are adequate to respond to the new challenges and promote good governance in the OSCE area are analysed. Are the OSCE principles, agreed commitments and elaborated post-September 11 agenda adequate to meet the many uncertainties and to build cooperation and security in the OSCE space? Is the OSCE prepared to respond effectively to the current challenges particularly with regard to Central Asia? Which means and what actions might the organisation pursue in the context of its new agenda? By matching words with action OSCE's contribution to global governance in Central Asia is clarified through assessing its means, activities and adequacy to meet old and new challenges.