以全球化视野看金融集团监管

金融集团是二十世纪八十年代以来发展起来的一种创新组织形式,在经济全球化背景下面临由复杂组织结构及集团内部交易等问题引起的特定风险。自成立起来,“联合论坛”先后发布多项旨在监督金融集团稳健运营的文件,以切实加强对多元化金融集团的监管。欧盟理事会发布的“监管指令”消弭了欧盟对金融集团监管的重复、脱节现象,使欧盟监管由行业监管向跨行业监管、机构性监管向功能性监管的方向过渡。     

“改革开放 和谐率先 富民强省”——山东县域改革30年高峰论坛述论

改革开放的30年,也是县域改革与发展艰辛探索、不断开拓、造就辉煌的30年;县域改革具有改革主体的自觉性、运行的目的性、内容的综合性、形式的多样性、方法的科学性等五大特征;30年县域改革发展的经验可主要概括为牢记根本点、启动动力源、找准出发点、瞄准着力点、孕育生长点、领导是关键等;形成城乡经济社会发展一体化新格局是县域改革的奋斗目标,必须坚定不移地努力向前推进;推进县域发展必须创新农村金融制度、完善县域金融市场。     

The debate on a regional arms register in Southeast Asia

Abstract

ASEAN member states are no longer opposed in principle to military information sharing and the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) is now actively considering ideas for new confidence‐building measures in this area. The first specific transparency measure supported by ARF was the UN Register of Conventional Arms, whose success in the region has been a result, at least in part, of its flexibility. Because of the limited scope of the UN Register, debate has continued on the possibility of a regional Register. As this debate has proceeded, however, it has become apparent that the creation of such a Register will require a number of complex and difficult issues to be resolved. What additional data should such a Register include? Who should be responsible for operating such a Register? Which countries should be included? Because of these difficulties, the prospects of a regional Register being established in the near future are rather slender. But, as they become more comfortable with the concept of transparency, there is still considerable scope for ARF members to do more to adopt regional ‘best practice’ in their replies to the main UN Register. The Register formula of framework plus flexibility could also be used as a model for the development of parallel transparency arrangements in areas other than arms transfers. The experience of the Register debate suggest that the development of concrete confidence‐building measures in the ARF region is likely to be a gradual process. Progress is possible, but is unlikely to transform levels of national openness on military affairs overnight. The main obstacles to increased transparency may prove to be domestic and political rather than international and military: demonstrating once again the way in which the confidence‐building agenda is linked to broader debates about the necessary political foundations of a secure regional order.     

Emerging trends in Asia‐Pacific security: The role of Japan

A multi‐faceted approach, including the efforts (a) to maintain existing security arrangements, (b) to enhance security at the sub‐regional level in Northeast and Southeast Asia, (c) to enhance mutual reassurance among the countries in the region and (d) to deepen region‐wide economic cooperation, is vital for Asia‐Pacific security. Trends in these directions are emerging in the post‐cold war conditions. Japan‐US cooperation will continue to be the key element for the success of this approach. Changes in Japan will have positive implications for it.     

霸权国对多边主义制度的有限参与——以冷战后美国参与东盟地区论坛为例

本文首先对霸权国家参与多边主义制度的原因进行简要的理论回顾,然后通过冷战后美国参与东盟地区论坛的个案考察霸权国家有限参与多边主义制度的行为与原因。本文认为,由于对政策自主性的约束是多边主义制度解决问题的有效性以及对霸权国家产生合法化效应的重要来源,约束程度较低的多边主义制度虽然可使霸权国家以低成本的投入参与其中,但也会造成低收益的预期。此时,霸权国家就会选择有限参与。     

Ideas,identity, and institution‐building: From the ‘ASEAN way’ to the ‘Asia‐Pacific way'?

Abstract

This article examines the extent to which the development of multilateral institutions in the Asia‐Pacific region may be viewed as an exercise in identity‐building. It argues that institution‐building in this region is more of a ‘process‐orientated’ phenomenon, rather than simply being an outcome of structural changes in the international system (such as the decline of American hegemony). The process combines universal principles of multilateralism with some of the relatively distinct modes of socialization prevailing in the region. Crucial to the process have been the adaptation of four ideas: ‘cooperative security’, ‘open regionalism’, ‘soft regionalism’, and ‘flexible consensus’. The construction of a regional identity, which may be termed the ‘Asia‐Pacific Way’ has also been facilitated by the avoidance of institutional grand designs and the adoption of a consensual and cautious approach extrapolated from the ‘ASEAN Way’. The final section of the article examines the limitations and dangers of the Asia‐Pacific Way. It concludes with the assertion that while the Asia‐Pacific Way is an over‐generalised, instrumental, and pragmatic approach to regional cooperation, and there remain significant barriers to the development of a collective regional identity that is constitutive of the interests of the actors, it has helped introduce the concept and practice of multilateralism into a previously sceptical region and might have ‘bought’ enough time and space for regional actors to adapt to the demands of multilateralism.     

中国与东盟地区论坛（ARF）：从积极参与到创新实践

近年来,中国与国际组织的关系逐渐从改革开放初期的参与融入阶段向改革创新的更高层次演变,本文以东盟地区论坛（ARF）为例,通过具体的数据来论证中国在其中的积极参与和创新实践的两个进程。     

The ASEAN Regional Forum in United States East Asian strategy

This paper analyses the development of the US approach to the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), from 1991 onwards. It examines theories of why a superpower would participate in a multilateral security institution, and investigates the motivations for the attitudes and extent of participation of the George H. Bush, Clinton and George W. Bush administrations towards the ARF. It argues that, in the post-Cold War period and in the face of a rising China, US East Asia strategy has been geared towards retaining the American preponderance of power. Thus, the US has pursued a strategy of containment and deterrence centred upon the regional bilateral alliance structure. Multilateral institutions have been treated as a supplementary means of supporting the secondary strategy of engaging with China. However, the ARF is not viewed as one of the important institutions through which to fulfil this supplementary aim. Because it cannot deal with the key regional security issues, the ARF is seen as a low-stakes arena by Washington. But the paper concludes that US participation in the ARF may nevertheless be crucial in boosting the legitimacy of American security interests in the region, thus helping to safeguard US preponderance.     

“第四届海峡论坛·海峡百姓论坛”综述

海峡两岸同胞携手共创的＂海峡百姓论坛＂迎来了第四届盛举,论坛自2007年以来历时四届,分别在福建福州、台湾台中和福建泉州成功举办,推动近百个姓氏的30多万人寻根谒祖。6月23日,＂第四届海峡论坛.海峡百姓论坛＂在台湾南端的高雄市举办,与历届相比,盛况空前,亮点纷呈,成效突出,实现多项新的跨越。研究、探讨了台湾原住民与福建历史渊源关系,提出了台湾原住民和汉族都来自中国大陆的学术观点,应用现代科学来验证闽台同根同源。虽然台湾有本土化的质变,但源头始终跟大陆脱离不了关系。论坛始终以＂两岸同根,闽台一家＂的主题,以地对地、以姓对姓、以民对民,论坛的民间性、草根性与广泛性充分体现了血融于水的亲情,展示了海峡两岸宗亲姓氏文化交流和中华文化交流的亲和力和生命力。     

The ASEAN naval build‐up: Implications for the regional order

This paper examines the ongoing ASEAN force modernization in the light of whether it is stabilizing or destabilizing for the region. Donald K. Emmerson's framework for analysing security regimes — the concentration or dispersion of power in achieving regional order — is employed as a basis for analysis. The paper comes to the conclusion that while the ASEAN arms build‐up will not have a destabilizing effect on the wider Asia‐Pacific regional order or balance, it could have serious implications for ASEAN and Southeast Asia. This is because while the actual increase in the number of weapon systems and platforms is not large, it still constitutes a significant increase in percentage terms, and even more so with regard to capability. Moreover, the ASEAN members are building up their forces at a time when there are no obvious military threats. They are in effect engaged in contingency planning. All these factors could be destabilizing for ASEAN's internal balance. As such, there is a need for ASEAN to address the arms build‐up, and introduce confidence‐building measures. One suggested forum for transparency measures is the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF).