Economic and Security Interests in Southeast Asia

Despite worries that ASEAN is becoming weak, the organization remains as strong as it ever was, given the parameters of its design. Its member countries still tightly embrace the organization's principles, the “ASEAN way.” But simple adherence to those principles can be problematic. ASEAN countries, whose national economic and political interests collide, often appeal to the same principles to back their positions. That tends to pull ASEAN in different directions. Great power policies, particularly those of China and the United States, now exacerbate the situation. At the same time, ASEAN's reliance on multilateral consensus has made it difficult to reconcile real differences among its member countries or develop unified regional responses. That can be seen in issues from the Xayaburi dam on the Mekong River to the South China Sea. The ease with which ASEAN's principles can come into conflict and its consensus-driven decision- making can become deadlocked clearly marks the limits of the “ASEAN way.”     

American military presence in Europe

Despite the efforts put into negotiations, they have created a self-perpetuating cycle of disappointment, frustration and empty dialogue. With contradictory Palestinian and Israeli agendas – Palestinians negotiating for an independent state, an end to occupation, etc., and Israel negotiating primarily over security concerns – one must question the reason behind prolonged negotiations. Is US mediation, accused by many of extreme bias towards Israel, to blame? Or are negotiations an Israeli objective to execute a particular political agenda? In spite of the international community's recognition of establishing an independent Palestinian state, the current reality on the ground undermines any creation of one. This reality was allowed only by the strategic prolonging of negotiations. A particular focus on the proceedings following the Oslo Accords explains how Palestinian--Israeli negotiations have been used to pursue a specific objective.     

American Views of Europe

America’s diplomacy towards Europe has passed through two broad historic phases. A first, isolationist phase, determined in part by America’s need to maintain its domestic multinational consensus, was replaced, after World War II and under the Soviet threat, by a policy of hegemonic engagement. The Soviet collapse opened a new era forcing a reinterpretation of America’s role in Europe and the world. Four different narratives have emerged: triumphalist, declinist, chaotic or pluralist. If a unipolar American role seems unlikely to persist, American decline is all too possible. A new hegemonic replacement seems unlikely, which makes the pluralist narrative plausible and desirable. This multipolar world will require an adaptation of the Western alliance and a new way of thinking about interstate relations. Confederal Europe, for its experience in bargaining and conciliation, might have much to offer to the new plural world order.     

俄罗斯在朝鲜核危机中的安全利益

朝鲜半岛是关系俄罗斯安全利益的重要地区,朝鲜半岛的和平与稳定直接关系到俄罗斯远东地区的安全。俄罗斯希望通过加强与朝鲜半岛上两个国家的政治经济关系,促进远东地区经济发展和融入东北亚地区经济一体化进程。普京执政后,俄罗斯对朝鲜半岛的政策有了新的转变,它注意平衡发展与朝鲜和韩国的关系,积极参与朝鲜半岛事务调节,增强自己在东北亚地区的影响力。对于朝鲜核危机,俄罗斯的立场是支持朝鲜半岛无核化和核武器不扩散制度,坚持通过政治外交手段解决问题,以期实现地区的持久和平与稳定。     

国家利益的论争及界定对美国外交和安全战略的影响

冷战结束以来,美国国家利益中的核心要素,如安全、经济繁荣和价值观的内涵和外延发生重要的变化,与此同时,这些核心利益在美国外交和国家安全战略中的优先顺序也发生了明显的变化。围绕着这些问题,美国国内各派发生了激烈的论争。美国不论如何根据国际局势的变化确定国家利益的内涵或国家利益的优先顺序,其最终目的都是为了维护美国在国际体系中的领导地位。     

Security Interests and Policy Priorities of China and EU

At present, the connotation of security has expanded from the traditional sense of security to non-traditional one, covering politics, economy, finance, science and technology, culture and many other areas. Economic globalization makes countries more interdependent on each other. In other words, it makes the interests of different countries further intertwine. The advancement of science and technology and the progress of informationization accelerate the exchange and communication among people.     

从大国间关联利益看国家安全——美国对俄德的经济战略及其后果

冷战结束以后,美国面临一次战略机遇,将昔日的对手俄罗斯转变为合作伙伴;二战结束以后,美国也曾面临过类似的机遇:将欧洲最大的战争机器德国转变成盟友。美国对俄罗斯与联邦德国实施的经济战略后果迥然不同。冷战后,美国对俄罗斯的经济战略是失败的,它让俄罗斯与美国的关系日益疏远;而二战结束以后,美国对联邦德国的经济战略则取得了成功,将往日的对手转变成了盟友。本文试图指出:冷战结束以后,美国在俄罗斯转型问题上实施了消极的对外经济战略,既没有减免俄罗斯背负的债务负担,也没及时有效地提供援助。俄罗斯的经济困境导致了其国内政治困局,也使得俄罗斯民众和精英对西方国家的认知越来越负面,美国失去了一个可能的合作伙伴。与此形成对照的是二战结束以后,美国协助昔日的对手德国进行经济重建,并通过实施马歇尔计划进行大规模的国际援助。这样的经济战略最终也惠及美国。因此,即便是相互竞争的国家,国家利益也存在关联性。随着当代世界安全结构的变迁,大国的利益半径在扩大,关联利益日趋明显。要实现自身的国家利益,就需要关照包括竞争对手在内的国家利益。     

欧洲安全问题与俄罗斯的战略抉择

两极格局的结束对欧洲安全形势产生了重大影响,而俄罗斯的安全利益所受影响尤其明显.为走出安全困境,俄罗斯近年来进行了一系列的努力,并作出了较为现实的战略选择.文章分析了限制俄改善其在欧洲安全格局中的地位的种种因素.     

Security governance in Europe: a return to system

The security governance literature has developed in four waves: the first is dedicated to matters of definition; the second to conceptual debate; the third to matters of application in the European setting and the fourth to how well the concept works in extra-European regions and at the global level. For all this effort, security governance as a concept remains problematic: it still has some way to go before it obtains clear definitional precision, conceptual clarity and a secure standing as concept in Security Studies. We address some of the theoretical and methodological difficulties common to the literature and argue that security governance has become overly preoccupied with agency and has thereby neglected structure. It has, in other words, obtained an actor-centered focus and so tended to conflate security governance as an analytical category with the specific actions of security actors. It has thus moved forward little in its ability to determine how and why security actors behave in the aggregate and whether that behavior reflects wider systemic properties. We thus ask in a third section whether it is worth returning to systemic thinking on security governance especially in the European context where the concept has had its most sophisticated application.     

重新定义恐怖主义

长期以来,学术界存在着这样的观点,一是认为给恐怖主义下定义没有必要,理论意义和实践意义都不大;二是认为要在国际范围内给恐怖主义找到一个客观的定义几乎是不可能的。本文意在强调,建立一个客观的、能为国际社会所接受的恐怖主义定义不是没有希望的;而一个有效的、反对恐怖主义的国际联合行动迫切需要这样一个定义。本文认为,恐怖主义不仅仅是一种政治暴力行为,还是一种社会思潮和政治主张,忽略这一点将会给反恐斗争带来许多“盲点”。     

Fostering Security in Southeastern Europe: A Role for the EAPC

China’s regional policy is mainly centred on its efforts to forge a friendly, stable and prosperous neighbourhood. To achieve this end, China has developed an approach combining both partnership bilateralism and tailored regional multilateralism. By and large, China does not consider its neighbourhood as a whole and has been very cautious and hesitant to engage in overarching ‘region-building’. China has relied mostly on soft (attractive) use of power, particularly economic power, supported by cultural and assurance diplomacy, even though diplomatic and economic coercion have been exercised occasionally. China has once again become the biggest economy in Asia. Yet, neither the new power configuration in Asia nor China’s own ambitions point to a return to the old ‘Middle Kingdom’ with China holding a dominant position in its neighbourhood. China will most probably continue to see itself as a self-restrained regional power in the foreseeable future.     

American Perspectives on the Transatlantic Security Agenda

This article explores US perspectives on the new transatlantic security agenda in the context of the evolution of strategic culture. The war on terrorism and the Iraq War of 2003 serve as focal points to examine sources of divergence and convergence between US and European security policies. The article explores key questions including: Have we seen the collapse of a shared, transatlantic security culture since September 11? How have US leaders manipulated strategic cultures to achieve security objectives in the new era? Why has the Bush administration willingly engaged (and even encouraged) the intra-European divide? How significant to the United States is the shift in “old” and “new” European perspectives on the war on terrorism? The article concludes with an assessment of the implications of recent events for the future of transatlantic security ties.     

Security governance and the private military industry in Europe and North America

Even before Iraq, the grow ing use of private military contractors has been widely discussed in the academic and public literature. However, the reasons for the proliferation of private military companies and its implications are frequently generalized due to a lack of suitable theoretical approaches for the analysis of private means of violence in contemporary security. Consequently, this article contends, the analysis of the growth of the private military industry typically conflates two separate developments: the failure of some developing states to provide for their national security and the privatization of military services in industrialized nations in Europe and North America. This article focuses on the latter and argues that the concept of security governance can be used as a theoretical framework for understanding the distinct development, problems and solutions for the governance of the private military industry in developed countries.     

亚太地区的安全稳定与俄中利益

亚太地区出现一个全新的局面。一方面,区域内的国际合作正在拓展,一个能够带来区域稳定和安全并得到普遍认同的体系正在形成。另一方面,亚太国家之间争夺地区内影响力的对抗和竞争的危险性日益加重,甚至有可能导致公开冲突并阻碍区域一体化的进程。为此,继续构建一个囊括地区内所有国家的,以合作、互信、对等安全为基础的新机制十分重要。亚太地区的发展直接影响俄罗斯联邦的利益,俄罗斯倡导要确保地区的稳定和安全,以及囊括所有亚太国家的建设性合作。近年来,俄罗斯政府特别重视促进东西伯利亚及远东地区的经济发展,该地区是俄罗斯实现亚太地区一体化的一个重要载体。开展同中国的合作,进一步开发俄罗斯远东地区,对于俄罗斯贯彻经济战略、实现经济现代化、融入亚太地区的经济空间,都具有原则性的重要意义。     

Security,subjectivity and space in postcolonial Europe: Muslims in the diaspora

Abstract

In this article, we call into question the assumptions that undergird conceptions of boundary, territory, community and ethno-cultural belonging in the constitution of European security. Both the term ‘human security’ as defined by development and human rights scholars and ‘securitisation’ as conceptualised by critical security studies concern the socio-psychological aspects of security. Yet, few attempts have been made to seriously discuss the psychological effects of securitisation on subjectivity and space. There is, as we will argue, a tendency in much literature to use concepts of ‘existential security’, ‘fear’, ‘needs’ and the ‘politics of belonging’ – obviously connected to the human mind and individual emotionality – without much space being devoted to the investigation of these concepts in terms of socio-psychological processes. We intend to fill this gap by discussing security and securitisation in terms of the psychology of subjectivity and space among young Muslims in Europe. Our principal argument is that through openness to the political psychology of subjectivity and space, and the (de)securitisation of both, we are able to develop more adequate maps of the European experience of danger and opportunity.     

美国式国际秩序与东北亚安全结构

美国式国际秩序为我们理解东北亚安全结构提供了一条最佳的路径.在全球范围内,美国根据对其国际秩序的认同程度来划分敌友,采取针对不同国家的外交政策.东北亚安全结构作为一个区域性安全结构受制于国际关系核心结构层面所发生的变化,美国也根据东北亚国家对其国际秩序的认同程度采取不同的安全政策.本文认为东北亚国家的安全程度取决于美国的实力状况和东北亚各国尤其是中国和俄罗斯对美国式国际秩序的认同程度.