中國崛起與美中互動關係解析(1990~2016):權力轉移理論與貿易和平理論的應用

The Rise of China and the Interaction Between the U.S. and China (1990-2016): The Applying of Power Transition Theory and Trade Peace Theory

林偉修(Wei-Hsiu Lin)

政治學報;72期 (2021/12) P115 - 151

關鍵字:美中關係, 貿易和平, 衝突, 權力轉移, US-China Relation, Trade Peace, Conflict, Power Transition

中文摘要

權力轉移理論(power transition theory)和貿易和平理論(trade peace theory)對於「中國崛起」提出截然不同的觀點。權力轉移理論認為,中國崛起改變了國際權力結構,當中國與現今霸權美國的權力差距愈來愈小,在中國亟欲挑戰美國霸權之際,雙方衝突升高的可能將是無可避免。然而,貿易和平理論卻認為基於機會成本的考量,美中之間盤根錯節的貿易關係使得兩國都不願意升高衝突,美中之間發生軍事衝突的可能性微乎其微。本文整合上述兩個理論,提出貿易─權力轉移的分析架構並檢視1990~2016年間的美中互動。根據該分析架構,「中國崛起」拉近了美中之間的權力差距,提高兩國之間的緊張,但隨著雙方貿易從依賴關係一直發展到現在的美中互賴,中國選擇回應的方式受到限制,美中衝突或許會發生,但是衝突持續升高甚或變成武裝衝突的機率,可能並不如權力轉移理論所預期的高。

英文摘要:

Power transition theory and trade peace theory regard the rise of China differently. Power transition theory argues that while the power parity between China and the U.S. becomes narrow, the probability of militarized conflicts will increase significantly. However, trade peace theory provides different insights, in which interlocking trade relations between the U.S. and China increase the possibility that both countries are unwilling to solve conflicts with military power. This paper integrates the two theories above and provides a framework with trade-power-transition to analyze the interaction between the U.S. and China during 1990 and 2016. According to the framework, the rise of China did narrow power parity, intensifying the tension between the U.S. and China, but the trade relation developing from dependence to interdependence relationship will constrain China's choices. Conflicts between the U.S. and China are still possible, however, the probability of militarized conflicts will not be as high as the power transition theory predicts.

全文下載:連結

不對稱地位的法制化強固:NPT建制核武國核保防特權的深化與影響

Legalized Solidification of the Asymmetrical Status: Strengthening and Impacts of the Nuclear Safeguards Privileges for the Nuclear-Weapon States in the NPT Regime

曾雅真(Yea-Jen Tseng)

政治學報;72期 (2021/12) P1-42

關鍵字:地位, 肯認, 核不擴散 , 核保防 , 核燃料銀行, Status , Recognition, Nuclear Non-Proliferation , Nuclear Safeguards , Fuel Bank

中文摘要

國家間的不對稱地位,是國際社會的重要特徵。國際條約的談判定稿、簽署、批准,以及生效的法制化過程,反映締約國對某些概念或對於彼此相對地位的合意(consent),它是國家肯認(recognition)的重要指標。國際核不擴散條約(Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, NPT)透過核保防(nuclear safeguards)協議暨其附加議定書的法制化路徑,差異化核武國與非核武國核保防的權利暨義務。國際鈾濃縮中心(International Uranium Enrichment Center)核燃料銀行(fuel bank)的法制化,肯認俄羅斯自願核保防協定的例外,對非核武國施加額外的核保防制約,再度強固核武國的國際優勢地位。核保防協議是全球核不擴散建制(nuclear non-proliferation regime)的核心機制,它是肯認某些強權具備國際不對稱地位的法制化典範。研究發現,國際造法的法制化過程,可以利於國際差序地位的固化。生效暨遵循核不擴散條約暨各種核保防協議,不但突顯國際原子能總署(International Atomic Energy Agency, IAEA)核保防建制反映的國際地位不對稱現象,並且進一步產出強權國際地位強固效果,是對於NPT建制產出國際差序地位的持續肯認。

英文摘要:

Asymmetrical status is an important character in the international society. The legalization process of negotiation, drafting, signature, ratification and entering into force of the international convention reflect the consent that contracting states agreed to certain ideas or their relative status, it is an important indication to state’s recognition. With the legalization of the nuclear safeguards agreement as well as the additional protocol, the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) differentiated the rights and duties between the nuclear weapon states and the non-nuclear weapon states. The legalization of the International Uranium Enrichment Center (IUEC) fuel bank recognized the exception of Russia's voluntary offer safeguards agreement, imposed additional safeguards constraints on the non-nuclear weapon states, and solidified the international supreme status. The nuclear safeguards agreement is the core of the NPT regime. It is the legalization example for recognizing that certain great powers possess international asymmetrical status. This paper discovered that legalization process of the international law-making is promoting the solidification of the international hierarchical status. The coming into force and the compliance with the NPT and its relative nuclear safeguards agreements showed the asymmetry of the international status and produced solidification effectiveness to the international great power status. It is the continuous recognition to the international hierarchical status.

全文下載:連結

「世界化」與「全球化」中的國際關係研究:連結「全球歷史社會學」與「全球國際關係研究」的對話

The Worlding and Globalizing International Relations: Connecting the Dialogue Between Global Historical Sociology and Global International Relations

郭雪真(Hsueh-Chen Kuo)

政治學報;72期 (2021/12) P43 - 83

關鍵字:全球歷史社會學, 全球國際關係研究 , 非西方國際關係理論 , 後西方國際關係理論, 國際關係歷史社會學, Global Historical Sociology , Global International Relations , Non-Western International Relation Theory, Post-Western International Relations Theory , Historical Sociology in International Relations

中文摘要

國際關係研究是以歐洲為中心的西方國際關係研究,有些學者質疑為何沒有非西方觀點的國際關係研究,遂促使出現更多非西方或後西方的國際關係理論觀點。從亞洲學派開始以本土成長的理論化,進行國際關係理論的世界化與全球化歷程。國際關係理論研究遂出現了「本土成長轉向」或「後西方轉向」,主張國際關係理論應該脫離西方的觀點,以本土成長或後西方的觀點發展國際關係理論。藉由廣泛地檢視及批判西方國際關係理論,要發展非西方或後西方國際關係理論,或是「去除(歐洲)中心化國際關係」或「世界化國際關係」,進而推動超越西方和非西方的「全球國際關係研究」。既有的「國際關係歷史社會學」或「全球歷史社會學」理論批判西方歐洲中心主義、西方與非西方權力不對稱,主張各文明之間對話、全球社會轉型與分殊化等基本概念與觀點,提供了「全球國際關係研究」反思批判西方國際關係研究的後設理論觀點,吸納非西方歷史社會的經驗與觀點,顯示其與「全球國際關係研究」的相同主張,作為探討連結兩者對話的基礎,以擴展國際關係研究的深度與廣度,從西方歐美、非西方、後西方走向全球研究層次的內容發展。

英文摘要:

International Relations (IR) is the Western International Relations Theory (IRT) based on the development of Eurocentric world politics. Some scholars have questioned "why there is no Non-Western International Relations". It has promoted more scholars to provide more Non-Western or Post-Western approaches into IR. Starting from the Asian School with homegrown theorizing, the IR is ongoing a worlding and globalizing process to Global International Relations (GIR). Therefore, there is a "homegrown turn" or "Post-Western turn" in the IRT, to advocate IRT should break away from Western perspectives and to develop on the homegrown, local or post-western perspectives. Scholars widely reviewed and criticize the Western IR, not only searching for building the Non-Western IR which has always been existed in, but also developing the Non-Western or Post-Western IR, or decentering IR or (re)worlding IR, to promote the GIR. With the International Relations and Historical Sociology (IRHS) or Global Historical Sociology (GHS)'s basic concepts and perspectives such as critique the Western Eurocentrism, the unbalance of power in the West between Non-West, the dialogues among civilizations, the transformation and differentiation of global society, to connect the dialogue between GIR and GHS to extend the breadth and depth of IR, from the Western, Non-Western, Post-Western toward to Global levels and contents.

全文下載:連結

日本制訂《和平安全法制》法案的政治過程

Japan' Political Process of Enacting the "Legislation for Peace and Security"

林賢參(Hsien-Sen Lin)

政治學報;72期 (2021/12) P85 - 113

關鍵字:和平安全法制 , 官邸主導, 集體自衛權 , 憲法解釋 , Legislation for Peace and Security, Prime Minister's Office-Led, Political Process, Right of Collective Self-Defense, Constitutional Interpretation

中文摘要

本文透過政治過程論(political process theory)的觀點,探討日本安倍晉三內閣推動解除集體自衛權行使禁令的政治過程。首先,本文梳理戰後日本決策型態,由「官僚主導」轉型為「官邸主導」的政治過程。其次,檢視安倍內閣變更歷年來堅持的憲法第九條解釋,允許日本自衛隊行使集體自衛權以協防受到攻擊的友好國家之決策過程。其後,檢討安倍內閣的權力基礎,以及法案在國會審議過程中,在野黨、輿論對於《和平安全法制關聯法案》的影響。最後結論認為,面對在野黨杯葛與多數輿論反對的情況下,法案依然表決通過、完成立法,明顯呈現「安倍一強」與「官邸主導」的日本國內政治結構。

英文摘要:

This article examines the political process of the Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's cabinet lifting the ban on allowing Japan's Self-Defense Forces to exercise the right of collective self-defense through the perspective of Political Process Theory. First, this article reviews Japan's postwar policy-making pattern, which is the political process of transforming the pattern from "bureaucrat-led" to "Prime Minister's Office-led." Second, this article examines the decision-making process of Abe's cabinet to permit Japan's Self-Defense Forces to exercise the right of collective self-defense, which allows for the use of force overseas to help a friendly country under attack. The decision changed the Japanese government's long-standing position that Article 9 of the Constitution of Japan prohibited the country from engaging in collective self-defense. Third, this article examines Abe cabinet's power base and the process of the National Diet's deliberation on the "Legislation for Peace and Security" under the influences of the opposition parties and public opinions. Finally, this article concludes that in the face of boycotts by the main opposition parties and opposition from the opinion of the majority, the enactment of the Legislation which clearly presents a domestic-political structure of "Abe as Number One" and "Prime Minister's Office-led."

全文下載:連結