期刊文献+

日本在南海问题上的对华政策新调整

Japan’s New Policy Adjustment Towards China on the South China Sea Issue
原文传递
导出
摘要 一国在面对由崛起国而引发的权力体系结构变化时,囿于自身政治、经济、军事力量的局限性,为抵消潜在的风险和可能的威胁,易对崛起国或潜在霸权国实施"对冲"战略。根据一国对威胁认知及相对能力的强弱,其实施的对冲战略强度也不尽相同。本文在综合运用对冲战略分析框架并引入影响"对冲"强度变化的因素后认为,相较之前,2015年后日本在南海问题上对华实施了牵制和制衡成分较为凸显的"强对冲"战略。这种转变是在日本南海威胁认知度提高,"对冲"中国相对能力增强及与中国信任程度持续走低的情况下,做出的对本国利益较为有利的战略调整。 Facing the power system shift caused by a rising power,a country with limited political and military strength is likely to implement the strategy of"hedging"against rising powers or"potential hegemons"to offset the potential risks and threats.According to a country’s threat perception and relative strength,the intensity of its"hedging strategy"is also different.After comprehensively applying the"hedging strategy"analysis framework and introducing factors affecting"hedging"intensity,this article holds that Japan has implemented the"strong hedging strategy"towards China with evident containment and balances on the South China Sea issue since 2015.Meanwhile,Japan seems to be making a strategic adjustment to its own advantage under the condition of its rising awareness of threat perception,the increasing relative strength and the continuous decline of trust with China.
作者 沈海涛 刘玉丽 SHEN Hai-tao;LIU Yu-li
出处 《东北亚论坛》 CSSCI 北大核心 2020年第2期84-100,128,共18页 Northeast Asia Forum
基金 国家社科基金项目(14BGJ005).
关键词 制衡 对冲 日本 南海 政策 Balancing Hedging Japan the South China Sea Policy
  • 相关文献

参考文献10

二级参考文献137

  • 1崔丕.乔治·凯南的“遏制”战略构想散论[J].东北师大学报(哲学社会科学版),1998(2):25-33. 被引量:6
  • 2叶海林.不对称需求对中印关系的影响[J].印度洋经济体研究,2014(1):6-15. 被引量:15
  • 3梅丽莎.康利.泰勒,阿卡提.班次瓦特,钟爱.澳大利亚与印度在“印太”认识上的分歧[J].印度洋经济体研究,2014(1):138-143. 被引量:13
  • 4刘宗义.冲突还是合作?——“印太”地区的地缘政治和地缘经济选择[J].印度洋经济体研究,2014(4):4-20. 被引量:17
  • 5俞正樑.试论美国对华的对冲战略[J].国际观察,2006(1):2-8. 被引量:10
  • 6罗伯特·基欧汉 约瑟夫·奈 (门洪华译).《权力与相互依赖》[M].北京大学出版社,2002年第3版.第19页.
  • 7See Byung -joon Ahn,"The man who woudl BKim",Foreign Affairs, Nov./Dec.1994, pp.94-108; Choong-Nam Kim,"The Uncertain Future of North Korea: Soft Landing or Crash Landing?" Korea and World Affairs, Winter 1996, pp.623-636; Marcus Noland, "Why North Korea will Muddle Through", Foreign Affairs, July/August 1997,pp.105-118; Michael Green, "North Korea Regime Crisis: US Perspective and Responses", Korean Journal of Defense Analysis,Winter 1997; Nicholas Eberstadt, The End of North Korea, AEI, Washington DC, 2000; Bruce Cumings, "Feeding the North Korea Mrth", The Nation, September 29, 1997,pp.22-24;Robert Scalapino, "North Korea at a Crossroads", Hoover Essays in Public Policy, No.73, Hoover Institution, Stanford University, 1997; Aidan Foster-Carter, Korea's Coming Reunification: Another East Asian Superpower? EIU Special Report No.M212, EIU, London, 1992.
  • 8See Nicholas Eberstadt, The End of North Korea, AEI, Washington DC, 2000; Leon Sigal, Disarming Strangers: Nuclear Diplomacy with North Korea, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1998; Chung-in Moon and David Steinberg, eds., The Kim Dae-Jung Government's Sunshine Policy, Yonsei Press, Seoul, 1999; David Kang, "Preventive War and North Korea", Security Studies, Winter 1994/1995, pp.330-363; Victor Cha, "Is there still a Rational North Korea Option for War", Security Dialogue, Dec.1998, pp.447-490.
  • 9Scott Snyder, North Korea Negotiating Behavior, US Institute of Peace, Washington DC, 1999.Chuck Downs, Over the Line, AEI Press, Washington DC, 1999.
  • 10国际危机研究把"威胁"概念视为各种危机现象的核心.迈克尔·布莱特(Michael Brecher)、格伦·辛迪(Glenn Synder)以及保罗·迪辛(Paul Diesing)学者等把对"决策单元高度优先目标"的威胁视为国际危机的基本特征之一.See M.Brecher,"Towards a Theory of International Crisis Behavior", International Studies Quarterly, March 1977, pp.43-44; G.H.Snyder and P.Diesing, Conflict among Nations, Princeton University Press, NJ, 1977,p.6.

共引文献167

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部