全球化时代现代外交制度的挑战与转型

全球化是当今时代的一个重要特征。全球化的发展,国际政治与国内政治的界限日益模糊,对现代国家制度产生了强有力的冲击。作为现代国家制度的重要组成部分,现代外交制度的转型在所难免。通过考察全球化特别是全球公民社会发展对现代外交制度的影响,可以把握现代外交制度转型的方向。本文在考察外交制度的概念、现代外交制度的形态以及全球化对现代外交制度影响的基础上,得出结论:新民主外交将是现代外交制度转型的方向。     

应对挑战与积极外交:2019年俄罗斯的内外政策

普京开启总统第四任期以来,俄罗斯面临政治稳定的挑战与经济增长的压力。2019年,在政治领域,普京直面政权党"统一俄罗斯"党在2018年地方选举中受挫的现实和普京民意趋势走低的挑战,在治国理念上从官方层面倡导"普京主义",并坚决抵制西方政治干预,确保在2019年地方选举中基本完成预定目标,维持了政治稳定的局面。在经济领域,面对经济停滞不前和民生水平下滑引发民心思变的社会情绪,普京治下的俄罗斯曾寄希望于"突破性发展"战略的有效推进,但由于经济结构、投资水平、劳动力人口等因素的影响,俄罗斯的经济发展成效有限。在外交领域,着眼于国家利益,俄罗斯对外政策的主要目标依然是深化欧亚地区一体化进程,管控与西方矛盾,采取了一系列积极外交举措。2019年,中俄关系继续向好,稳中有进,中俄全面战略协作伙伴关系进入新时代。总体看,俄罗斯国家特质呈现动态均衡性的特点,但发展面临的挑战依然存在。     

国际法发展新动向及中国的外交实践

伊拉克战争对联合国和以《联合国宪章》为基础的国际法体系及其维护的国际秩序造成了前所未有的冲击。但形势的发展表明,联合国并未被边际化,现行国际法及国际秩序并未从根本上受到动摇,伊拉克战争反而使国际社会更加重视联合国和多边主义,更加重视国际法规则的制定和运用。随着国际形势的变化,国际法的发展出现了一些新的动向,值得我们密切关注和深入研究。在2003年,我国积极参与国际规则的制定,并签署了有关的国际条约,较好地维护了国家的根本利益,为推动国际关系的法制化作出了贡献。     

中国安全外交与地区多边机制

中国安全外交的界定具有内涵与外延不断演进的历程,反映了中国应对国内安全问题时所承受的外交压力,并因此而采取的因应新安全观治理非传统安全问题的政策措施。中国安全外交体现了中国综合运用外交手段应对和解决国内外安全问题的新思维,超越了将安全问题与外交手段简单结合的传统思维,满足了当前形势下各国处理全球性安全问题的新要求。中国在全球化时代下对国际和国内安全治理的认知,已经超越了国家安全、传统安全和联盟安全,增强了对共同安全、综合安全、合作安全与可持续安全的认识。中国在参与东盟地区论坛、东盟防长扩大会议、香格里拉对话会、上海合作组织和亚洲相互协作与信任措施会议等地区多边机制中的安全外交具有一致性特征,反映出中国试图促进更为包容、更加有效的地区多边安全机制,消除美国军事同盟体系对地区安全形势的负面影响。近年来,中国在国际和地区安全事务中的影响力逐渐增强,中国安全外交也处于快速演进过程中,效果已经逐渐显现出来。随着中国提出并逐渐充实和完善亚洲新安全观,中国安全外交也将对维护国家安全和地区稳定发挥更大的作用。     

当前俄罗斯的东亚政策研究

苏联解体后,俄罗斯的外交政策从向西方“一边倒”转为东西方平衡的“双头鹰外交”,东亚在其整体外交格局中的地位上升.俄罗斯东亚战略的主要目标是要成为东亚大国,其政策主要受到两方面因素的驱动和影响：一是基于对国际和地区均势的追求,二是出于本国平衡发展的需要,以及对自身面临威胁的认知.中俄关系是俄罗斯东亚政策的重心,同时它也积极发展与东亚其他行为体的关系.俄罗斯与东亚的关系在过去十多年里稳步提升,但也面临着俄远东地区开发困难重重、融入东亚经济空间进展缓慢、国内意见分歧等诸多挑战.在世界战略重心东移的背景下,在当前因乌克兰危机而使俄与欧美的地缘政治冲突激化的情势下,俄罗斯将会进一步加强其整体外交政策中的东亚维度.     

Probing Into Chinese Hegemony and the Indian Challenge in the Southeast Asian Landscape

China is on the rise in Southeast Asia with its giant economy, modern military, and influential diplomacy potentially establishing a potential Chinese hegemony in the region. If such growth is not challenged by another regional power, the balance of peaceful stability will be tilted and economic development hampered. Thus, another rising power, India must face the challenges that a powerful China brings to the table. With its developing economy well-equipped armed forces and subtle diplomacy, it has the tools and capability to balance the distribution of power in Southeast Asia. This study analyzes and dissects the influence of both India and China in Southeast Asia and its impact on the future of the region. It focuses on the tangibles and intangibles that India needs to hurdle and overcome to provide China with a worthy challenger. It also brings into perspective the role of ASEAN （Association of Southeast Asian Nations） as a catalyst in India-China relations. As a bloc, ASEAN has the potential to be a vibrant economy and important personality in the region. How ASEAN will be able to cope with a rising China and a fast-developing India will also be addressed in the study. Finally, how the development and stability of the region can be maintained in spite of the brewing rivalry between China and India is also an important aspect of this study.     

African agency and global orders: the demanding case of nuclear arms control

Abstract

How much agency do African states have to shape global orders? This study puts the global nuclear order under scrutiny to answer this question. It amounts to a demanding case. Arms control is something that global great powers take very seriously, and there is no weapons category that they take more seriously than nuclear weapons. My findings provide a nuanced picture. Although often outflanked and frustrated by nuclear weapon states, the nuclear order would look different without African actors exerting their agency. They successfully shaped background and foreground institutions constituting the global nuclear order by building advocacies for new institutions upon already existing ones, reaching out to state and non-state actors outside of Africa, and channelling communication through African states with authority in global fora. This study makes three contributions: First, it underlines the key finding of recent literature on African agency that African actors are more to be reckoned with than often assumed. Second, it provides novel evidence about the diplomatic mechanisms through which they come to make a difference. Third, it adds to our grasp of the constitution of global orders as well as the processes through which they come to be made, re-made and unmade more generally.     

当代国际体系的渐变和嬗变--基于两个三十年的比较与思考

当前国际体系正处于新旧交替和质变飞跃的过渡期,筹划和推动新的国际体系建设是事关国际政治经济发展的重大问题。冷战结束以来三十年的国际体系延续和发展了二战后国际体系的主体框架,处于突变后的渐变过程,世界在“后冷战体系”和“前多极体系”之间探索和徘徊。越来越多的非西方国家在批判过时的国际关系理论,国际社会作为一个整体也在扶正祛邪中不断促进国际体系朝着更加公正、合理的方向前进。未来三十年世界将开启东西方力量相对平衡和世界多极化基本稳定的新时期,这一进程大体上与中国的第二个百年奋斗目标同步推进,国际体系将从后冷战转型期朝着构建新型国际关系和人类命运共同体的方向演进,并最终成熟定型。中国在逐步走近世界舞台中央的历史进程中,应注重加强国际体系理论建设,准确把握国际社会的主要矛盾。解决各自的发展问题和国际社会的共同挑战,对公平正义的普遍需求和供给的相对不足将越来越成为国际社会发展的主要矛盾。中国要着力解答当前和未来的时代命题,勾勒国际体系改革基本架构,进而促进和平、发展、合作、共赢的时代潮流不断向前,推动实现公正、共同富裕的新时代目标。     

新中国成立以来承担国际责任的历史考察

新中国成立以来一贯重视承担国际义务,在不同时期形成了各具特色又一脉相承的中国国际责任观,并以此为指导展开了极富时代特色的外交实践。建国初期,高举国际主义大旗是党的第一代领导人履行国际义务的鲜明特色;改革开放后,推动建立国际新秩序是第二代领导人承担国际责任的突出贡献;冷战结束后,广泛参与国际机制成为中国承担国际责任的现实选择;新世纪以来,推动建设和谐世界是新时期中国担当大国责任的集中表现。     

Oslo and Its Aftermath: Lessons Learned from Track Two Diplomacy

Since the collapse of the Oslo peace process and the violence that followed, many scholars have reflected upon the Israeli–Palestinian peace process. Most of this analysis has focused on official negotiations without considering the substantial role that unofficial peace efforts have played in peacebuilding, both prior to and after Oslo. This article, in contrast, seeks to better understand the application of “track two” diplomacy to the Israeli–Palestinian case. It reports on a self‐reflection effort by numerous Israeli–Palestinian peace practitioners to better understand what has worked, what has not, and how new initiatives could be more effectively organized and carried out in the future. The research presented is based on an inventory of seventy‐nine track two projects that occurred between Israelis and Palestinians between 1992 and 2004, personal interviews with many of those who organized and oversaw these projects, and two focus group meetings that brought together a total of forty practitioners. In this article, we seek to better understand two issues: (1) how track two initiatives have changed in scope, organization, and intent; and (2) how track two practitioners have sought to disseminate their work beyond the participants of those initiatives. Our findings present an overall picture of the Israeli–Palestinian second track practice and identify a number of trends and common types of practice. Among the trends we have identified are the following: during the peace process years, more track two initiatives were undertaken with elite/professional participants than with representatives of the grassroots, but in the subsequent decade‐and‐a‐half, Israeli–Palestinian grassroots, track two initiatives gradually replaced senior‐level track two exchanges; most of the grassroots initiatives we studied were relationship focused, whereas those involving elite participants are outcome focused; the track two community subscribes to a set of theoretical propositions about which conditions and contexts facilitate the transmission of track two insights and ideas to the political process, but these propositions have yet to be validated; and track two specialists do little strategic planning about ways to most effectively transfer track two insights and ideas to the political process. Our research also identified four distinct, but not mutually exclusive, approaches to practice: the psychological, the constructivist, the capacity building, and the realistic interest.