中亚新地区主义与上海合作组织

本文是以理论为基础的实证研究,目的在于探讨中亚一体化发展的条件以及发展缓慢的原因.传统的地区一体化理论范式存在其合理内核,但不足以涵盖所有地区的一体化进程.中亚地区的一体化需要具备综合性、无霸权和机制化等条件,可以把这种新地区主义模式称为"战略一体化".中亚地区一体化机制建设的过程表明,在不同的历史时期,上述中亚地区一体化的条件并没有完全具备,导致一体化机制建设进展缓慢.中亚地区的重要地区性国际组织——上海合作组织在前期成果、合作领域、合作理念、机制化建设等方面为中亚一体化提供了条件,与中亚新地区主义模式的本质特征相契合,在中亚的地区一体化过程中发挥了重要作用,并将为中亚的一体化机制建设提供新的机会.     

Asia … whose Asia? A ‘return to the future’ of a Sino-Indic Asian Community

Abstract

This article is an attempt to provide a corrective to a marked Sinocentrism in contemporary debates on regional integration in Asia. In order to do so, firstly, as a heuristic device, a crucial distinction is made between ‘regionalization’, as involving multifaceted integrative socio-economic processes, and ‘regionalism’, defined as a form of identity construction akin to nationalism. Secondly, a degree of historical depth is proposed to better explain recent developments. Finally, throughout the article, an interdisciplinary approach is taken involving employing realist, historical/sociological institutionalist and constructivist perspectives in the area of international relations. The first two East Asian summits are contextualized in relation to various conceptualizations of an Asian Community over the last century or so. Particular attention is given to the 1955 Asian-African Conference in Bandung as a watershed in this evolution. Varying conceptions of East Asia as part of a larger, transpacific regional entity (APEC) and in, and of, itself (East Asian Economic Group/ASEAN +3) are examined. In situating the first two East Asian summits five developments of significance are examined. These are: a continuing Japanese role in setting the regional agenda; the ambivalence of China's positioning vis-à-vis neighbouring countries; the re-entry of Central Asia in the Asian regional equation; India's ‘return to Asia’; and efforts to maintain ASEAN's centrality in regional construction. These factors, it is argued, are militating towards a return to the Sino-Indic Asia of Bandung. It is thus suggested that notions of an Asian Community involving only Northeast and Southeast Asia are now rejoined by a concept of a Greater Asia. While the historical roots of this conception partly explain its salience, it nevertheless competes with other complementary – and antagonistic – definitions of an Asian Community of more recent lineage.     

The US,Japan, and trade liberalization: from bilateralism to regional multilateralism to regionalism+

Abstract

Amid growing alarm over the rising atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases, increasing attention is being given to ‘geo-engineering’ technologies that could counteract some of the impacts of global warming by either reducing absorption of solar energy (solar radiation management (SRM)) or removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Geo-engineering has the potential to dramatically alter the dynamics of global climate change negotiations because it might cool the climate without constraining fossil fuel use. Some scholars have expressed concern that certain states may be tempted to act unilaterally. This paper assesses the approach that China is likely to adopt towards governance of SRM and the implications this holds for broader international climate negotiations. We survey Chinese public discourse, examine the policy factors that will influence China's position, and assess the likelihood of certain future scenarios. While Chinese climate scientists are keenly aware of the potential benefits of geo-engineering as well as its risks, we find that no significant constituency is currently promoting unilateral implementation of SRM. China will probably play a broadly cooperative role in negotiations toward a multilaterally governed geo-engineering programme but will seek to promote a distinctive developing world perspective that reflects concerns over sovereignty, Western imperialism and maintenance of a strict interpretation of the norm of common but differentiated responsibility.     

新现实主义视野下的东亚地区主义发展路径

作为主流的国际关系理论,新现实主义也被运用于地区层面,成为很多国内外学者阐释东亚地区主义的主要理论范式之一。在新现实主义者看来,东亚国家对于均势体系或结构的追逐由来已久,无论是东盟的成立,大国平衡战略的实践,还是由于中国崛起而引发的"中国威胁论"以及中日之间的矛盾和竞争等都彰显了东亚地区结构的不断变动,显示出东亚地区国家间追逐权力平衡的过程。     

区域主义:通往全球主义的"垫脚石"还是"绊脚石"?

全球主义与区域主义是20世纪80年代尤其是冷战后同时发展的重要的国际关系现象,学术界对两者关系主要有"冲突论"、"兼容论"、"过渡论"三种看法.出现这一差异的根本原因是区域主义的理论发展滞后于实践.区域主义的初始内涵是民族主义的体现和放大,经过旧区域主义和新区域主义,封闭性的区域主义和开放的区域主义等不同阶段对区域主义内涵的改造,其当代内涵与全球主义日益接近.新帝国主义披着全球主义外衣为殖民主义张目,对区域主义造成一定冲击,我们在推进区域主义和全球主义的同时,应坚决反对新帝国主义.     

Globalization, secessionism, and autonomy

This paper analyzes the relationship between the persistence and growth of secessionist parties in democratic countries and economic globalization, controlling for political and economic factors. The implications of secessionist persistence for decentralization are also examined. The paper finds that globalization is positively related to secessionist vote growth, while there is some evidence that economic conditions also impact secessionist parties in systematic ways. Secessionist support is also substantially affected by policy changes. Central governments have offered autonomy more often to regions with secessionist parties than to regions without such parties, though often the offers take the form of symmetrical countrywide decentralization.     

Regionalism,sub-regionalism and the politics of identity in Oceania

Regional organization in Oceania has a history dating to the early post-war period while the rise of regional identities occurred somewhat later in the context of independence. This paper analyzes regionalization processes and accompanying discourses of regionalism relating to both pan-Pacific and more recent sub-regional developments. It pays particular attention to the dynamics of identity politics in the post-independence period and how these have played out in tensions within and between the varying exercises in regionalization.     

Conclusion – Building Regions from Below: Has the Time Come for Regionalism 2.0?

In a changing world ridden with crises and characterised by a general redistribution of power, regional organisations need to reinvent themselves. Equally, the study of regionalism has to reject its traditional Eurocentrism to embrace new conceptual categories in order to describe more effectively the variety of regional processes across the world. Against this background, this article looks at the European project and its current crisis before discussing other regional ‘experiments’ in Africa, Asia and Latin America, which rest on different principles but also manifest considerable shortcomings. The analysis points to the need to look at regionalism with a critical eye, emphasizing the undeniably important achievements but also the hidden threats that a certain model of regional integration (for instance, the classical top-down elite-driven process adopted by the EU founding fathers) can pose to the sustainability of regional cohesion and the adaptability of this model to other areas of the world.     

中亚地区整合探析

根据权利分配理论、相互依存理论、建构主义等合作理论,苏联解体后的中亚国家整合存在一定的可能性。但各国的政治体制、相互间松散的经济联系和诸多矛盾令整合尚难实现,相关的地区外大国在该地区的博弈更恶化了整合环境。因此,中亚地区整合仍任重而道远。     

竞争性地区主义与亚洲合作的现状及未来

2008年世界金融危机之后,竞争性地区主义的兴起成为亚洲合作中的一个非常值得注意的现象。不过,竞争性地区主义对于亚洲来说并非一个新事物,而是长期孕育在本地区合作的历史进程中。伴随着特朗普的上台和中美竞争的加剧,亚洲竞争性地区主义出现了新的变化趋向:以经济为出发点的合作导向逐渐让位于安全,国际制度日益成为大国权力博弈的工具,制度竞争的内容也从表面的规范之争迈向背后的理念价值之争。这种变化对中美关系发展、地区中小国家的战略选择、东盟在地区合作中的主导地位以及亚洲合作的前景都造成了不小的冲击。为了防止亚洲竞争性地区主义的发展滑向恶性竞争,包括中美在内的泛亚各国,应努力促使"印太战略"和"一带一路"倡议两大机制之间形成某种程度的兼容共存,避免两者成为完全对抗的国际机制,并在部分特定领域共同为亚洲各国提供必要的公共产品。