外交变革中的部门协调机制:两种模式的检验——以一战前英德为例
详细信息 查看官网全文
- 论文作者：康杰
- 年：2015
- 作者机构：北京大学国际关系学院;
- 会议召开时间：2015-11-21
- 会议录名称：第八届全国国际关系、国际政治专业博士生学术论坛论文集
- 语种：中文
- 分类号：D851.6;D856.1
- 学会代码：GJZY
- 会议名称：第八届全国国际关系、国际政治专业博士生学术论坛
- 会议地点：中国北京
- 主办单位：北京大学国际关系学院、察哈尔学会、《国际政治研究》编辑部
- 学会名称：《国际政治研究》编辑部
- 页数：24
- 文件大小：229k
- 原文格式：D
- 会议级别：全国
摘要
<正>19世纪后期以来,随着工业化与全球竞争时代的来临,对外事务的广泛性、复杂性和专业性都大大提升了。在所有主要大国中,战略评估和政策规划从政治精英的人际圈子,逐步转移到新兴的,以科层制与人才专业化为特征的现代外交和军事部门手中,从一种帷幄与密室中的战略艺术,转变为要求大量专业知识与
引文
(1)关于欧洲主要大国中专业部门的兴起,参见Dallas Irvine,“The French and Prussian Staff Systems before1870”,Journal of American Military Foundation,Vol.2,No.4,1938,pp.192-203;Brian Bond,The Victorian Army and the Staff College,1854-1914,London:Eyre Methuen,1972;Lamar Cecil,The German Diplomatic Services,1871-1914,Princeton:Princeton University Press,1976.
(2)Aaron Friedberg,The Weary Titan,Britain and the Experience of Relative Decline,1895-1905,Princeton:Princeton University Press,1988,pp.290-91.Randall Schweller,Unanswered Threats:Political Constraints on the Balance of Power,Princeton:Princeton University Press,2006.Graham Allison and Philip Zelikow,Essence of Decision:Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis,New York:Pearson,1999.Roberta Wohlstetter,Pearl Harbor:Warning and Decision,Stanford:Stanford University Press,1962.巴里?波森著:《军事学说的来源:两次大战之间的法国、英国和德国》,梅然译,上海:上海人民出版社2013年版。
(3)James Wilson,Bureaucracy:What Government Agencies Do and Why They Do It,New York:Basic Books,1989,pp.181-190.Gordon Craig,The Politics of Prussian Army,1640-1945,Oxford:Clarendon Press,1955.
(1)对历史上的国别教训具有代表性的综合型文集,参见Allan Millet and Williamson Murray eds.,Military Effectiveness,vol.1-3,New York:Cambridge University Press,2010;Paul Kennedy ed.,The War Plans of the Great Powers,1880-1914,London:George Allen&Unwin,1979;威廉森·默里、麦克雷戈·诺克斯、阿尔文·伯恩斯坦编:《缔造战略:统治者、国家与战争》,时殷弘等译,北京:世界知识出版社2004年版。戸部良一:『失敗の本質―日本軍の組織論的研究』,東京,中央公論社,2009.
(2)David Halberstam,The Best and The Brightest,New York:Random House,1972.Amy Zagart,Flawed by design:The evolution of The CIA,JCS and NSC,Stanford:Stanford University Press,1999.
(3)Jack Snyder,Myths of Empire:Domestic Politics and International Ambition,Ithaca:Cornell University Press,1991.
(4)基于国别的过程性研究非常丰富,仅举如下Eckart Kehr,Battleship Building and Party Politics in Germany,Chicago:Chicago University Press,1973.Edward Luttwak,The Pentagon and The Art of War,New York:Touchstone,1984.
(1)如颇具美国特色的“国安会学”和“参联会学”,这些研究旨在归纳和解释美国国家安全委员会和参谋长联席会议的制度沿革。简要举例如下:John Prados,Keepers of The Keys:A History of the National Security Council From Truman to Bush,New York:William Morrow&Co.,1991.Karl Inderfurth and Loch Johnson eds.,Decisions of the Highest Order:Perspectives on the National Security Council,Pacific Grove:Brooks and Cole,1988.David Rothkopf,Running the World:The Inside Story of the National Security Council and the Architects of American Power,New York:Public Affairs,2006.James Locher III,Victory on the Potomac:The Goldwater-Nichols Act Unifies the Pentagon,Austin:Texas A&M University Press,2007.Paul Hammond,Organizing for Defense:The American Military Establishment in the 20thCentury,Princeton:Princeton University Press,1961.Paul Hammond,“The National Security Council as a Device for Interdepartmental Coordination:An Interpretation and Appraisal”,The American Political Science Review,Vol.54,No.4,Dec.,1960.国内最具代表性的研究为:左希迎著:《美国军事制度变迁的逻辑》,北京:社会科学文献出版社2015年版。孙成昊、肖河:《美国国家安全委员会的发展经验及其教训》,《国际关系研究》2014年第5期,第38-50页。
(2)Risa Brooks,Shaping Strategy:The Civil-Military Politics of Strategic Assessment,Princeton:Princeton University Press,2008.
(3)Ibid.pp.29-34.
(4)Ibid.p.57.
(1)Jack Snyder,Myths of Empire:Domestic Politics and International Ambition,Ithaca:Cornell University Press,1991.
(2)Ibid.pp.43-9.
(3)Ibid.pp.57-9.
(4)Eckart Kehr,Battleship Building and Party Politics in Germany,Chicago:Chicago University Press,1973.另见:汉斯·乌尔里希·韦勒著:《德意志帝国:1871-1918》,邢来顺译,西宁:青海人民出版社2004年。
(1)军事部门是一战前对外战略的核心主体。此时的经济部门尚未兴起,而外交部门往往紧密控制在领导手中,或其主官本身就是议会内阁制中领导层的一部分。故而集中讨论军事部门。
(2)见Paul Hammond,Organizing for Defense:The American Military Establishment in the 20th Century,Prince Princeton University Press,1961.Greg Parler,The Goldwater-Nicholas Act of 1986:Resurgence In Defense Reform and The Legacy of Eisenhower,Quantico,Marine Corps Command and Staff College,Marine Corps Combat Development Center,1989.
(1)见著名的“杰克逊分委员会”(Jackson Subcommittee)对国家安全委员会的批评报告。亨利·杰克逊等著:《美国参议院政府工作委员会国家政策机构分委员会1960年12月12日工作报告》,收入亨利·基辛格主编:《国家战略问题》,军事科学院外国军事研究部译,北京:军事科学出版社1992年版。
(2)关于军种部门间竞争促进革新的例子,见Harvey Sapolsky,Polaris System Development:Bureaucratic and Programmatic Success in Government,Cambridge:Harvard University Press,1972.Michael H.Armacost,“The Thor-Jupiter Controversy,”in Donald Mac Kenzie and Judy Wajcman eds.,The Social Shaping of Technology,Milton Keynes,:Open UP 1999,pp.395-405.
(3)Stephen P.Rosen,Winning the Next War:Innovation and the Modern Military,Ithaca:Cornell University Press,1991.
(1)Eyre Crowe,“Memorandum on the Present State of British Relations with France and Germany”,in G.P.Gooch and H.Temperly,eds.British Documents on the Origins of the War,1898-1914,London,1926-1938,vol.3,p.412.
(2)蒋劲松:《德国代议制》,北京:中国社会科学出版社2009年版,第二卷,第875页。
(1)同上书,第717页。
(2)John Rohl,Germany Without Bismarck:The Crisis of Government in the Second Reich,1890-1900,London:Batsford Ltd.,1967,p 22.
(3)此处显示出德意志帝国的二元特征,一方面,铁路、邮政、关税等事务归属帝国范畴,另一方面,核心的军政和外交大权仍旧保留在普鲁士政府的范畴内。
(4)Gordon Craig,The Politics of Prussian Army,1640-1945,Oxford:Clarendon Press,1955,pp.221-229.
(1)John Rohl,The Kaiser and his Court:Wilhelm and the Government of Germany,Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1994,pp.85-86.
(2)Michael Epkenhans,“Wilhelm II and‘His’Navy,1888-1918,”in Annika Mombauer and William Deist eds.,The Kaiser:New Research on Wilhelm II’s Role on the Imperial Germany,Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2004.pp.24-25.
(1)Gehard Ritter,The Sword and the Scepter:the Problems of German Militarism,vol.2,Allen Lane:The Penguin Press,1970,pp.173-179.
(2)John Rohl,The Kaiser and his Court:Wilhelm and the Government of Germany,Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1994,pp.73-5.
(1)Volker Berghahn,Germany and the Approach of War in 1914,London:Macmillan Press,1973,pp.19-22.
(2)参见Richard Evans,Society and Politics in Wilhelm Germany,London:Barnes&Noble,1978.
(1)Gehard Ritter,The Sword and the Scepter:the Problems of German Militarism,vol.2,Allen Lane:The Penguin Press,1970,p.197.
(2)冈瑟?罗滕伯格:《毛奇、施里芬与战略包围论》,彼得?帕雷特等主编:《现代战略的缔造者:从马基雅维利到核时代》,时殷弘等译,北京:世界知识出版社2006年版,第291页。
(3)同上文,296页。
(4)徐弃郁著:《脆弱的崛起:大战略与德意志帝国的命运》,北京:新华出版社2011年版,第310至314页。
(1)Samuel Williamson Jr.,The Politics of Grand Strategy:Britain and France Prepared for War,1904-1914,Cambridge:Harvard University Press,1969,p.116.
(2)Ibid.pp.53-57.
(3)Gehard Ritter,The Sword and the Scepter:the Problems of German Militarism,vol.2,Allen Lane:The Penguin Press,1970,p.196.
(1)Gehard Ritter,The Sword and the Scepter:the Problems of German Militarism,vol.2,Allen Lane:The Penguin Press,1970,216-220
(2)Immanuel Geiss,German Foreign Policy,1871-1914,London:Routledge and Boston,1976,pp.142-145.
(1)Gehard Ritter,The Sword and the Scepter:the Problems of German Militarism,vol.2,Allen Lane:The Penguin Press,1970,p.201.
(2)瓦尔特?戈利茨著:《德军总参谋部》,戴耀先译,海口:海南出版社2003年版,第60页。
(3)马丁?万?克列威尔德著:《战争与后勤:从拿破仑到巴顿的后勤史》,胡正梁译,中国人民解放军总后勤部1980年版,第115至119页。
(1)Gehard Ritter,The Sword and the Scepter:the Problems of German Militarism,vol.2,Allen Lane:The Penguin Press,1970,p.230.
(2)Ibid.p.208.
(3)Ibid.pp.212-214.
(1)Holger Herwig,“The Dynamics of Necessity:German Military Policies During The First World War”,in Allan Millet and Williamson Murray eds.,Military Effectiveness,vol.1,New York:Cambridge University Press,2010,pp.88-90
(2)只有1913年初外交国务秘书雅戈夫曾经发出警告。Gehard Ritter,The Sword and the Scepter:the Problems of German Militarism,vol.2,Allen Lane:The Penguin Press,1970,p.218
(1)Lord Hankey,Diplomacy by Conference,New York:Putnam’s Sons,1946,p.126.
(2)关于英国海上力量的相对衰落,Paul Kennedy,The Rise and Fall of British Naval Mastery,London:Macmillan Publishers,1983,pp.205-16.
(3)Lieutenant-General J.Farquharson,“The Military Organization best adapted to Imperial Needs”,Journal of the Royal United Service Institution,Vol.37,No.1(Jan.1893).
(4)Colonel Mark Sever Bell,“The Defence of India,and its Imperial Aspect”,Journal of the Royal United Service Institution,Vol.34(Jan.1890).
(1)Major-General Sir George Aston,“The Committee of Imperial Defence:Its Evolution and Prospects”,Journal of the Royal United Service Institution,Vol.71(Feb.1926).
(2)Franklyn Johnson,Defense by Committee:The British Committee of Imperial Defense,1885-1959,London:Oxford University Press,1960,pp.26-33.
(3)Captain Markham Rose,“Lessons to be Derived from the Expedition to South Africa in regard to the Best Organisation of the Land Forces of the Empire”,Journal of the Royal United Service Institution,Vol.45,No.1,(Jan.1901).
(4)John Gooch,“The Creation of the British General Staff,1904-1914”,Journal of the Royal United Services Institute,Vol.116(Jun.1971).
(5)John Mc Dermott,“The Immediate Origins of the Committee of Imperial Defence:A Reprisal”,Canadian Journal of History,Vol.7,No.3(Dec.1972).
(1)Franklyn Johnson,The British Committee of Imperial Defence:Prototype of U.S.Security Organization”,The Journal of Politics,Vol.23,No.2(May.1961),p.235-6;关于帝国防务委员会完整的组织特征,见Nicholas d’Ombrain,The War Machinery and High Policy:Defense Administration in Peacetime Britain,1902-1914,London:Oxford University Press,1973,pp.115-
(1)John McD ermott,“The Revolution in British Military Thinking from Boer War to the Moroccan Crisis”,The Canadian Journal of History,Vol.9,No.2(Aug.1974),pp.165-9,
(2)Arthur Marder,From the Dreadnought to Scapa Flow:The Royal Navy in Fisher era,1904-1919,vol.1,London:Oxford University Press,1961,pp.38-43.Paul Kennedy,The Rise and Fall of British Naval Mastery,London:Macmillan Publishers,1983,p.228.
(1)William Samuelson Jr.,The Politics of Grand Strategy:Britain and France Prepares for War,1904-1914,Cambridge,Massachusetts:Harvard University Press,1969,pp.46-50.
(2)Ibid.,p.108.
(3)Ibid.,p.111.
(1)Ibid.,pp.187-93.
(2)约翰·古奇:《疲惫的巨人:英国的战略和政策(1890-1918年)》,载威廉森·默里等编:《缔造战略:统治者、国家与战争》,时殷弘等译,北京:世界知识出版社2004年,第313页。
(2)Aaron Friedberg,The Weary Titan,Britain and the Experience of Relative Decline,1895-1905,Princeton:Princeton University Press,1988,pp.290-91.Randall Schweller,Unanswered Threats:Political Constraints on the Balance of Power,Princeton:Princeton University Press,2006.Graham Allison and Philip Zelikow,Essence of Decision:Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis,New York:Pearson,1999.Roberta Wohlstetter,Pearl Harbor:Warning and Decision,Stanford:Stanford University Press,1962.巴里?波森著:《军事学说的来源:两次大战之间的法国、英国和德国》,梅然译,上海:上海人民出版社2013年版。
(3)James Wilson,Bureaucracy:What Government Agencies Do and Why They Do It,New York:Basic Books,1989,pp.181-190.Gordon Craig,The Politics of Prussian Army,1640-1945,Oxford:Clarendon Press,1955.
(1)对历史上的国别教训具有代表性的综合型文集,参见Allan Millet and Williamson Murray eds.,Military Effectiveness,vol.1-3,New York:Cambridge University Press,2010;Paul Kennedy ed.,The War Plans of the Great Powers,1880-1914,London:George Allen&Unwin,1979;威廉森·默里、麦克雷戈·诺克斯、阿尔文·伯恩斯坦编:《缔造战略:统治者、国家与战争》,时殷弘等译,北京:世界知识出版社2004年版。戸部良一:『失敗の本質―日本軍の組織論的研究』,東京,中央公論社,2009.
(2)David Halberstam,The Best and The Brightest,New York:Random House,1972.Amy Zagart,Flawed by design:The evolution of The CIA,JCS and NSC,Stanford:Stanford University Press,1999.
(3)Jack Snyder,Myths of Empire:Domestic Politics and International Ambition,Ithaca:Cornell University Press,1991.
(4)基于国别的过程性研究非常丰富,仅举如下Eckart Kehr,Battleship Building and Party Politics in Germany,Chicago:Chicago University Press,1973.Edward Luttwak,The Pentagon and The Art of War,New York:Touchstone,1984.
(1)如颇具美国特色的“国安会学”和“参联会学”,这些研究旨在归纳和解释美国国家安全委员会和参谋长联席会议的制度沿革。简要举例如下:John Prados,Keepers of The Keys:A History of the National Security Council From Truman to Bush,New York:William Morrow&Co.,1991.Karl Inderfurth and Loch Johnson eds.,Decisions of the Highest Order:Perspectives on the National Security Council,Pacific Grove:Brooks and Cole,1988.David Rothkopf,Running the World:The Inside Story of the National Security Council and the Architects of American Power,New York:Public Affairs,2006.James Locher III,Victory on the Potomac:The Goldwater-Nichols Act Unifies the Pentagon,Austin:Texas A&M University Press,2007.Paul Hammond,Organizing for Defense:The American Military Establishment in the 20thCentury,Princeton:Princeton University Press,1961.Paul Hammond,“The National Security Council as a Device for Interdepartmental Coordination:An Interpretation and Appraisal”,The American Political Science Review,Vol.54,No.4,Dec.,1960.国内最具代表性的研究为:左希迎著:《美国军事制度变迁的逻辑》,北京:社会科学文献出版社2015年版。孙成昊、肖河:《美国国家安全委员会的发展经验及其教训》,《国际关系研究》2014年第5期,第38-50页。
(2)Risa Brooks,Shaping Strategy:The Civil-Military Politics of Strategic Assessment,Princeton:Princeton University Press,2008.
(3)Ibid.pp.29-34.
(4)Ibid.p.57.
(1)Jack Snyder,Myths of Empire:Domestic Politics and International Ambition,Ithaca:Cornell University Press,1991.
(2)Ibid.pp.43-9.
(3)Ibid.pp.57-9.
(4)Eckart Kehr,Battleship Building and Party Politics in Germany,Chicago:Chicago University Press,1973.另见:汉斯·乌尔里希·韦勒著:《德意志帝国:1871-1918》,邢来顺译,西宁:青海人民出版社2004年。
(1)军事部门是一战前对外战略的核心主体。此时的经济部门尚未兴起,而外交部门往往紧密控制在领导手中,或其主官本身就是议会内阁制中领导层的一部分。故而集中讨论军事部门。
(2)见Paul Hammond,Organizing for Defense:The American Military Establishment in the 20th Century,Prince Princeton University Press,1961.Greg Parler,The Goldwater-Nicholas Act of 1986:Resurgence In Defense Reform and The Legacy of Eisenhower,Quantico,Marine Corps Command and Staff College,Marine Corps Combat Development Center,1989.
(1)见著名的“杰克逊分委员会”(Jackson Subcommittee)对国家安全委员会的批评报告。亨利·杰克逊等著:《美国参议院政府工作委员会国家政策机构分委员会1960年12月12日工作报告》,收入亨利·基辛格主编:《国家战略问题》,军事科学院外国军事研究部译,北京:军事科学出版社1992年版。
(2)关于军种部门间竞争促进革新的例子,见Harvey Sapolsky,Polaris System Development:Bureaucratic and Programmatic Success in Government,Cambridge:Harvard University Press,1972.Michael H.Armacost,“The Thor-Jupiter Controversy,”in Donald Mac Kenzie and Judy Wajcman eds.,The Social Shaping of Technology,Milton Keynes,:Open UP 1999,pp.395-405.
(3)Stephen P.Rosen,Winning the Next War:Innovation and the Modern Military,Ithaca:Cornell University Press,1991.
(1)Eyre Crowe,“Memorandum on the Present State of British Relations with France and Germany”,in G.P.Gooch and H.Temperly,eds.British Documents on the Origins of the War,1898-1914,London,1926-1938,vol.3,p.412.
(2)蒋劲松:《德国代议制》,北京:中国社会科学出版社2009年版,第二卷,第875页。
(1)同上书,第717页。
(2)John Rohl,Germany Without Bismarck:The Crisis of Government in the Second Reich,1890-1900,London:Batsford Ltd.,1967,p 22.
(3)此处显示出德意志帝国的二元特征,一方面,铁路、邮政、关税等事务归属帝国范畴,另一方面,核心的军政和外交大权仍旧保留在普鲁士政府的范畴内。
(4)Gordon Craig,The Politics of Prussian Army,1640-1945,Oxford:Clarendon Press,1955,pp.221-229.
(1)John Rohl,The Kaiser and his Court:Wilhelm and the Government of Germany,Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1994,pp.85-86.
(2)Michael Epkenhans,“Wilhelm II and‘His’Navy,1888-1918,”in Annika Mombauer and William Deist eds.,The Kaiser:New Research on Wilhelm II’s Role on the Imperial Germany,Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2004.pp.24-25.
(1)Gehard Ritter,The Sword and the Scepter:the Problems of German Militarism,vol.2,Allen Lane:The Penguin Press,1970,pp.173-179.
(2)John Rohl,The Kaiser and his Court:Wilhelm and the Government of Germany,Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1994,pp.73-5.
(1)Volker Berghahn,Germany and the Approach of War in 1914,London:Macmillan Press,1973,pp.19-22.
(2)参见Richard Evans,Society and Politics in Wilhelm Germany,London:Barnes&Noble,1978.
(1)Gehard Ritter,The Sword and the Scepter:the Problems of German Militarism,vol.2,Allen Lane:The Penguin Press,1970,p.197.
(2)冈瑟?罗滕伯格:《毛奇、施里芬与战略包围论》,彼得?帕雷特等主编:《现代战略的缔造者:从马基雅维利到核时代》,时殷弘等译,北京:世界知识出版社2006年版,第291页。
(3)同上文,296页。
(4)徐弃郁著:《脆弱的崛起:大战略与德意志帝国的命运》,北京:新华出版社2011年版,第310至314页。
(1)Samuel Williamson Jr.,The Politics of Grand Strategy:Britain and France Prepared for War,1904-1914,Cambridge:Harvard University Press,1969,p.116.
(2)Ibid.pp.53-57.
(3)Gehard Ritter,The Sword and the Scepter:the Problems of German Militarism,vol.2,Allen Lane:The Penguin Press,1970,p.196.
(1)Gehard Ritter,The Sword and the Scepter:the Problems of German Militarism,vol.2,Allen Lane:The Penguin Press,1970,216-220
(2)Immanuel Geiss,German Foreign Policy,1871-1914,London:Routledge and Boston,1976,pp.142-145.
(1)Gehard Ritter,The Sword and the Scepter:the Problems of German Militarism,vol.2,Allen Lane:The Penguin Press,1970,p.201.
(2)瓦尔特?戈利茨著:《德军总参谋部》,戴耀先译,海口:海南出版社2003年版,第60页。
(3)马丁?万?克列威尔德著:《战争与后勤:从拿破仑到巴顿的后勤史》,胡正梁译,中国人民解放军总后勤部1980年版,第115至119页。
(1)Gehard Ritter,The Sword and the Scepter:the Problems of German Militarism,vol.2,Allen Lane:The Penguin Press,1970,p.230.
(2)Ibid.p.208.
(3)Ibid.pp.212-214.
(1)Holger Herwig,“The Dynamics of Necessity:German Military Policies During The First World War”,in Allan Millet and Williamson Murray eds.,Military Effectiveness,vol.1,New York:Cambridge University Press,2010,pp.88-90
(2)只有1913年初外交国务秘书雅戈夫曾经发出警告。Gehard Ritter,The Sword and the Scepter:the Problems of German Militarism,vol.2,Allen Lane:The Penguin Press,1970,p.218
(1)Lord Hankey,Diplomacy by Conference,New York:Putnam’s Sons,1946,p.126.
(2)关于英国海上力量的相对衰落,Paul Kennedy,The Rise and Fall of British Naval Mastery,London:Macmillan Publishers,1983,pp.205-16.
(3)Lieutenant-General J.Farquharson,“The Military Organization best adapted to Imperial Needs”,Journal of the Royal United Service Institution,Vol.37,No.1(Jan.1893).
(4)Colonel Mark Sever Bell,“The Defence of India,and its Imperial Aspect”,Journal of the Royal United Service Institution,Vol.34(Jan.1890).
(1)Major-General Sir George Aston,“The Committee of Imperial Defence:Its Evolution and Prospects”,Journal of the Royal United Service Institution,Vol.71(Feb.1926).
(2)Franklyn Johnson,Defense by Committee:The British Committee of Imperial Defense,1885-1959,London:Oxford University Press,1960,pp.26-33.
(3)Captain Markham Rose,“Lessons to be Derived from the Expedition to South Africa in regard to the Best Organisation of the Land Forces of the Empire”,Journal of the Royal United Service Institution,Vol.45,No.1,(Jan.1901).
(4)John Gooch,“The Creation of the British General Staff,1904-1914”,Journal of the Royal United Services Institute,Vol.116(Jun.1971).
(5)John Mc Dermott,“The Immediate Origins of the Committee of Imperial Defence:A Reprisal”,Canadian Journal of History,Vol.7,No.3(Dec.1972).
(1)Franklyn Johnson,The British Committee of Imperial Defence:Prototype of U.S.Security Organization”,The Journal of Politics,Vol.23,No.2(May.1961),p.235-6;关于帝国防务委员会完整的组织特征,见Nicholas d’Ombrain,The War Machinery and High Policy:Defense Administration in Peacetime Britain,1902-1914,London:Oxford University Press,1973,pp.115-
(1)John McD ermott,“The Revolution in British Military Thinking from Boer War to the Moroccan Crisis”,The Canadian Journal of History,Vol.9,No.2(Aug.1974),pp.165-9,
(2)Arthur Marder,From the Dreadnought to Scapa Flow:The Royal Navy in Fisher era,1904-1919,vol.1,London:Oxford University Press,1961,pp.38-43.Paul Kennedy,The Rise and Fall of British Naval Mastery,London:Macmillan Publishers,1983,p.228.
(1)William Samuelson Jr.,The Politics of Grand Strategy:Britain and France Prepares for War,1904-1914,Cambridge,Massachusetts:Harvard University Press,1969,pp.46-50.
(2)Ibid.,p.108.
(3)Ibid.,p.111.
(1)Ibid.,pp.187-93.
(2)约翰·古奇:《疲惫的巨人:英国的战略和政策(1890-1918年)》,载威廉森·默里等编:《缔造战略:统治者、国家与战争》,时殷弘等译,北京:世界知识出版社2004年,第313页。