摘要
2016年当选美国总统以来,特朗普对美国对外政策传统进行了众多变革和颠覆,美国自身和国际社会都受到了巨大冲击。在特朗普政府的对外政策被各种词汇不断“标签化”的背后,弄清何种“主义”支撑和指导着特朗普政府的对外战略、明确此种“主义”成型的原因、研判其自身的局限和对中美关系的影响成为各界讨论的热点。本文通过对特朗普政府执政三年多发布的官方文件及其实际战略作为进行剖析,认为“特朗普主义”具有如下基本内涵:大国竞争的基本战略判断、美国优先的具体政策指针和在此基础上形成的单边主义与强制主义外交风格。此外,由于复杂的国内政治因素影响,特朗普政府的美国优先原则还体现出“铁锈带优先”和“白人优先”两项特点。国际格局的持续变化,政党政治和社会主流认知变迁等美国国内政治因素与特朗普个人特质的综合作用是“特朗普主义”最终成型的原因。“特朗普主义”除对国际秩序造成诸多负面冲击外,对中美关系也产生了深远的影响,其本身受到美国内部的广泛批评。
Since the ascension of President Donald J.Trump in 2016,his administration has sought to significantly overhaul United States foreign policy,which has had a profound impact on the United States and the international order.As the Trump administration’s foreign policy has been given various labels,it has become a hot topic for academic discussion.As such,it is critical to clarify what“doctrine”informs and guides the Trump administration’s foreign policy strategy,examine the reasons for the formation of such a“Trump Doctrine”,and assess its limitations and influence,particularly concerning its impact on Sino-US relations.By analyzing the administration’s national strategy documents,this article identifies four major elements of the Trump Doctrine:(1)great power competition as the basic strategic judgment;(2)America First as the specific principle that guides foreign policy;(3)unilateral and coercive diplomatic style consistent with the America First principle;and(4)“Rust Belt First”and“Whites First”as domestic manifestations of America First.Causes of the“Trump Doctrine”include a combination of ongoing structural changes,domestic factors such as party politics and changing societal perceptions,and President Trump’s personal traits.The“Trump Doctrine”has not only had negative consequences for the international order,but also profound impact on Sino-US relations.This is why it has received extensive criticism inside the US.
作者
韩召颖
黄钊龙
Han Zhaoying;Huang Zhaolong
出处
《国际论坛》
CSSCI
北大核心
2020年第4期3-18,155,共17页
International Forum
关键词
特朗普主义
大国竞争
美国优先
单边主义
强制主义
the Trump Doctrine
great power competition
America First
unilateralism
coercive diplomacy