冷战后美国东亚战略：底线、挑战与应策，1989-2009
|
摘要
冷战结束以来,鉴于东亚地缘战略环境的延续与变迁,美国确立起其在东亚的三重战略利益。美国认为,它在东亚的底线利益面临着两大战略挑战。美国必须运用其手中的三大战略支柱对上述挑战进行战略应对。由此可见,冷战后美国东亚战略即是以“底线-挑战-应策”为线索来展开的。
冷战后东亚地缘战略环境呈现出延续性与变迁性相交织的特点。这为冷战后美国东亚战略的制定与运作提供了舞台。由于东亚的地理位置及其战略意义、东亚-太平洋的崛起,东亚之于美国的战略重要性开始了由“重欧轻亚”向“欧亚并重”的过渡,由此显现出冷战后东亚地缘政治格局的延续性与态势的变异性。在延续性方面,东亚依旧分离并处于冷和状态、历史并未在此终结;在变异性方面,美国成为“天下莫与之强”的全球超级大国、中美苏“战略大三角”不复存在、诸多潜在的地区冲突热点开始凸显。
面对如此时局,美国确立起其在东亚的三重战略利益:生死攸关的利益、重大利益以及次要利益。冷战后美国在东亚生死攸关的利益主要有三种:确保美国、东亚盟国以及东亚海上通道的安全,防范东亚潜在战略对手的崛起以及防止大规模杀伤性武器及其运载工具在东亚的扩散与使用,这三种生死攸关的利益即是冷战后美国东亚战略不可触碰的底线;重要利益也有三种:维护“美国治下”的东亚和平、扩展美国在东亚的经贸利益以及推广“美国式”的自由民主;次要利益亦是三种:打击跨国犯罪、切断毒品交易以及制止非法移民。
根据上述战略利益,美国认为,在由东亚新兴力量和不稳定力量引发的一系列潜在威胁和严峻挑战中,最严重的是来自两个方面的战略挑战:一是中国崛起,二系朝鲜问题。这两方面挑战许多年来一直为冷战的铁幕所遮掩着。冷战一告结束,它们就相继浮出水面,日益挑战着美国在东亚生死攸关的利益。不难看出,中国崛起涉及到防范东亚潜在战略对手的崛起的利益,而朝鲜问题则关涉到防止大规模杀伤性武器及其运载工具在东亚的扩散与使用的利益。因此,美国认为,美国必须针对上述两大战略挑战进行积极地战略应对。如果对这两大挑战不予重视甚或无视它们,将会使自己处于危险之中。美国对这两大挑战进行战略应对成为其东亚战略的重中之重。针对中国崛起这一挑战,美国确立起“中国挑战论”的对华战略认知,在对华战略应对上,美国游走于战略遏制与战略接触之间,但对华实施预防性防御、和平演变与岛链封锁,仍贯穿了冷战后美国对华战略的始终。针对朝鲜问题这一挑战,美国确立起“朝鲜威胁论”的对朝战略认知,在对朝战略应对上,美国游走于战略威慑与战略对话之间,但两手政策、促使朝鲜重新变天,分而治之、维持半岛的分裂状态,优势主导、避免它国主导半岛事务,仍贯穿了冷战后美国对朝战略的始终。
在对上述两大战略挑战进行战略应对的过程中,美国手中握有三大战略支柱可资运用。超强国力构成美国独步天下的力量基础:硬实力稳步增长、软实力逐渐凸显、东亚存在的加强。双边同盟成为美国无可估价的冷战遗产:日益巩固的美日同盟、不断强化的美韩同盟、逐步拓展的美澳同盟。美国通过多边制度来构建地区安全的多维之网:推动双边同盟的多边化、构建地区多边安全机制、参与“第二轨道论坛”。美国希望借此加大参与亚太事务的力度,最大限度地利用冷战时期遗留下来的现有安全结构,竭力影响该地区局势的演变,试图塑造出美国主导的地区新秩序。
由上可见,以均势求霸权成为冷战后美国东亚战略的实质。美国将自身战略定位为“离岸平衡手”,试图通过制衡地区霸权挑战国、控制地区内结盟大国来实现护持东亚霸权的战略目标。美国这一东亚新均势战略是霸权国的“分而治之”和盟国的“跟着强者走”的结合使然。
那么,究竟何为冷战后美国东亚战略的地缘政治根源呢?答案便是打造坚不可摧的“美国堡垒”、从“担心被包围”到“进行反包围”、“海权对抗陆权”传统的当代演绎。展望冷战后美国东亚战略的未来走向,我们可以察知,美国对东北亚的重视依然、对东南亚的介入加深、对华战略趋向隐蔽化:软性遏制、柔性接触、隐性融合。对此,中国的战略选择应是:“致人而不致于人”、“不战而屈人之兵”、“因利而制权”。
Since the end of the Cold War, given the continuity and change of the geo-strategic environment in East Asia, the United States establishes its triple strategic interests in East Asia. The United States believes that its strategic interests in East Asia faces two major strategic challenges. The United States must use its three strategic pillars in hands to strategically response to the above strategic challenges. Thus, U.S. East Asian strategy after the Cold War proceeds as a clue of“the bottom lines- challenges-policies”.
The geo-strategic environment in East Asia after the Cold War shows the features of continuity and change. This provides the stage for the formulation and operation of U.S. East Asian strategy post-Cold War. Because of geographical location in East Asia and its strategic importance, East Asia - Pacific rising, East Asia’s strategic importance in the United States view started the transition from“Europe superior to East Asia”to“Europe parallel to Asia”, thus showing the continuity of East Asian geopolitical pattern after the Cold War and the variability of its situation. In continuity, East Asia is still separate and in cold peace, history does not end here; in variability, the United States becomes“the strongest”global superpower in the world, the China-America-Soviet“great strategic triangle”no longer exists, many potential hot spots of the regional conflicts began to highlight.
Faced with this current situation, the United States establishes its triple strategic interests in East Asia: vital interests, important interests and secondary interests. The U.S. vital interests in East Asia after the Cold War are three: to ensure the security of the United States, East Asian allies and the sea lanes in East Asia; to prevent the rise of East Asian potential strategic rivals as well as of the spread and use of weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery in East Asia, which is the untouchable bottom-lines of the United States East Asian strategy after the Cold War; there are three important interests: maintaining“Pax Americana”in East Asia, expanding economic and trade interests of the United States in East Asia, and the promoting“American- style”freedom and democracy; secondary interests are also three: to combat transnational crime, cut off the drug trade and curb illegal immigration.
According to the above strategic interests, the United States believes that in a series of potential threats and challenges triggered by the emerging power and the destabilizing forces in East Asia, the most serious strategic challenges are from two aspects: the rise of China and the North Korean issue. These two challenges have been hidden behind the Iron Curtain of the Cold War for many years. Once the Cold War ended, they have surfaced, increasingly challenging the U.S. vital interests in East Asia. It is obvious that the rise of China concerns the interest of preventing the rise of the potential strategic adversary in East Asia and the North Korean problem concerns the interest of preventing the spread and use of weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery in East Asia. Therefore, the United States believes that the United States must actively strategically response to these two major strategic challenges. If these two challenges to be downplayed or even ignored, it will put itself in danger. U.S. strategic responses to these two challenges become the top priority of its East Asian strategy. With regard to the challenge of the rise of China, the United States sets up the strategic perception toward China-“China is a challenge”, the U.S. strategic responses to China walk between the strategic containment and the strategic engagement, but the implementation of preventive defense, peace evolution and island chain blockade, still runs through the post-Cold War U.S. strategy toward China. With regard to the challenge of the North Korea issue, the United States sets up the strategic perception toward the DPRK-“North Korea is a threat”, the United States strategic responses to the DPRK walk between the strategic deterrence and the strategic dialogue, but the dual policy to prompt North Korea to change regime, divide and rule to maintain the division of the peninsula, the primacy to avoid other powers to lead the Korean Peninsula affairs, still runs through the post-Cold War U.S. strategy toward the DPRK.
In the process of these strategic responses to two major strategic challenges, the United States has three available strategic pillars in hands to use. The super-national power forms America’s unmatched power base in the world: the hard power steadily growing, the soft power increasingly highlighting, the presence in East Asia intensified. The bilateral alliance constitutes invaluable legacy of the Cold War: the US-Japan alliance increasingly consolidating, the US-ROK alliance continually strengthening, and other allies gradually expanding. The multilateral institutions constructs multi-dimensional web of regional security: to promote the bilateral alliance into multilateral, to build regional multilateral security mechanism, to participate in“two-track forums”. The United States hopes to increase participation in the Asia-Pacific affairs, adequately takes advantage of the existing security structure from the Cold War legacy, and tries its best to influence the development of its regional situation, trying to create a US-dominated new regional order.
As seen above, seeking hegemony through the balance of power becomes the substance of the East Asian strategy of United States after the Cold War. U.S. strategically positions itself as the“offshore balancer”, trying to balance regional hegemony challenger and control the regional allied great power to achieve the strategic goal of sticking up for hegemony in East Asia. U.S. strategy in East Asia of the new balance of power is formed by binding the hegemonic power’s“dividing and ruling”and the ally’s“going along with the strong”.
So, what exactly are the geo-political roots of the U.S. East Asian strategy after the Cold War? The answer is to build an impregnable“America fortress”, from“fear of being surrounded by”to“anti-siege”, and the contemporary interpretation of“sea power against the land power”tradition. Looking forward the future direction of U.S. East Asian strategy after the Cold War, we can detect, the United States will still focus on Northeast Asia, deepen involvement in Southeast Asia, China strategy tend to concealment, and that the United States will not change the strategic policy of maintaining East Asian hegemony, the use of strategic means will be more diversified and three-pronged track strategy operates: soft containment, flexible contact, implicit integration. Based on this, China’s strategic choice is:“Seizing the initiative”,“achieving victory without a fight”, and“gaining the power through taking advantage of the advantages”.
冷战后东亚地缘战略环境呈现出延续性与变迁性相交织的特点。这为冷战后美国东亚战略的制定与运作提供了舞台。由于东亚的地理位置及其战略意义、东亚-太平洋的崛起,东亚之于美国的战略重要性开始了由“重欧轻亚”向“欧亚并重”的过渡,由此显现出冷战后东亚地缘政治格局的延续性与态势的变异性。在延续性方面,东亚依旧分离并处于冷和状态、历史并未在此终结;在变异性方面,美国成为“天下莫与之强”的全球超级大国、中美苏“战略大三角”不复存在、诸多潜在的地区冲突热点开始凸显。
面对如此时局,美国确立起其在东亚的三重战略利益:生死攸关的利益、重大利益以及次要利益。冷战后美国在东亚生死攸关的利益主要有三种:确保美国、东亚盟国以及东亚海上通道的安全,防范东亚潜在战略对手的崛起以及防止大规模杀伤性武器及其运载工具在东亚的扩散与使用,这三种生死攸关的利益即是冷战后美国东亚战略不可触碰的底线;重要利益也有三种:维护“美国治下”的东亚和平、扩展美国在东亚的经贸利益以及推广“美国式”的自由民主;次要利益亦是三种:打击跨国犯罪、切断毒品交易以及制止非法移民。
根据上述战略利益,美国认为,在由东亚新兴力量和不稳定力量引发的一系列潜在威胁和严峻挑战中,最严重的是来自两个方面的战略挑战:一是中国崛起,二系朝鲜问题。这两方面挑战许多年来一直为冷战的铁幕所遮掩着。冷战一告结束,它们就相继浮出水面,日益挑战着美国在东亚生死攸关的利益。不难看出,中国崛起涉及到防范东亚潜在战略对手的崛起的利益,而朝鲜问题则关涉到防止大规模杀伤性武器及其运载工具在东亚的扩散与使用的利益。因此,美国认为,美国必须针对上述两大战略挑战进行积极地战略应对。如果对这两大挑战不予重视甚或无视它们,将会使自己处于危险之中。美国对这两大挑战进行战略应对成为其东亚战略的重中之重。针对中国崛起这一挑战,美国确立起“中国挑战论”的对华战略认知,在对华战略应对上,美国游走于战略遏制与战略接触之间,但对华实施预防性防御、和平演变与岛链封锁,仍贯穿了冷战后美国对华战略的始终。针对朝鲜问题这一挑战,美国确立起“朝鲜威胁论”的对朝战略认知,在对朝战略应对上,美国游走于战略威慑与战略对话之间,但两手政策、促使朝鲜重新变天,分而治之、维持半岛的分裂状态,优势主导、避免它国主导半岛事务,仍贯穿了冷战后美国对朝战略的始终。
在对上述两大战略挑战进行战略应对的过程中,美国手中握有三大战略支柱可资运用。超强国力构成美国独步天下的力量基础:硬实力稳步增长、软实力逐渐凸显、东亚存在的加强。双边同盟成为美国无可估价的冷战遗产:日益巩固的美日同盟、不断强化的美韩同盟、逐步拓展的美澳同盟。美国通过多边制度来构建地区安全的多维之网:推动双边同盟的多边化、构建地区多边安全机制、参与“第二轨道论坛”。美国希望借此加大参与亚太事务的力度,最大限度地利用冷战时期遗留下来的现有安全结构,竭力影响该地区局势的演变,试图塑造出美国主导的地区新秩序。
由上可见,以均势求霸权成为冷战后美国东亚战略的实质。美国将自身战略定位为“离岸平衡手”,试图通过制衡地区霸权挑战国、控制地区内结盟大国来实现护持东亚霸权的战略目标。美国这一东亚新均势战略是霸权国的“分而治之”和盟国的“跟着强者走”的结合使然。
那么,究竟何为冷战后美国东亚战略的地缘政治根源呢?答案便是打造坚不可摧的“美国堡垒”、从“担心被包围”到“进行反包围”、“海权对抗陆权”传统的当代演绎。展望冷战后美国东亚战略的未来走向,我们可以察知,美国对东北亚的重视依然、对东南亚的介入加深、对华战略趋向隐蔽化:软性遏制、柔性接触、隐性融合。对此,中国的战略选择应是:“致人而不致于人”、“不战而屈人之兵”、“因利而制权”。
Since the end of the Cold War, given the continuity and change of the geo-strategic environment in East Asia, the United States establishes its triple strategic interests in East Asia. The United States believes that its strategic interests in East Asia faces two major strategic challenges. The United States must use its three strategic pillars in hands to strategically response to the above strategic challenges. Thus, U.S. East Asian strategy after the Cold War proceeds as a clue of“the bottom lines- challenges-policies”.
The geo-strategic environment in East Asia after the Cold War shows the features of continuity and change. This provides the stage for the formulation and operation of U.S. East Asian strategy post-Cold War. Because of geographical location in East Asia and its strategic importance, East Asia - Pacific rising, East Asia’s strategic importance in the United States view started the transition from“Europe superior to East Asia”to“Europe parallel to Asia”, thus showing the continuity of East Asian geopolitical pattern after the Cold War and the variability of its situation. In continuity, East Asia is still separate and in cold peace, history does not end here; in variability, the United States becomes“the strongest”global superpower in the world, the China-America-Soviet“great strategic triangle”no longer exists, many potential hot spots of the regional conflicts began to highlight.
Faced with this current situation, the United States establishes its triple strategic interests in East Asia: vital interests, important interests and secondary interests. The U.S. vital interests in East Asia after the Cold War are three: to ensure the security of the United States, East Asian allies and the sea lanes in East Asia; to prevent the rise of East Asian potential strategic rivals as well as of the spread and use of weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery in East Asia, which is the untouchable bottom-lines of the United States East Asian strategy after the Cold War; there are three important interests: maintaining“Pax Americana”in East Asia, expanding economic and trade interests of the United States in East Asia, and the promoting“American- style”freedom and democracy; secondary interests are also three: to combat transnational crime, cut off the drug trade and curb illegal immigration.
According to the above strategic interests, the United States believes that in a series of potential threats and challenges triggered by the emerging power and the destabilizing forces in East Asia, the most serious strategic challenges are from two aspects: the rise of China and the North Korean issue. These two challenges have been hidden behind the Iron Curtain of the Cold War for many years. Once the Cold War ended, they have surfaced, increasingly challenging the U.S. vital interests in East Asia. It is obvious that the rise of China concerns the interest of preventing the rise of the potential strategic adversary in East Asia and the North Korean problem concerns the interest of preventing the spread and use of weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery in East Asia. Therefore, the United States believes that the United States must actively strategically response to these two major strategic challenges. If these two challenges to be downplayed or even ignored, it will put itself in danger. U.S. strategic responses to these two challenges become the top priority of its East Asian strategy. With regard to the challenge of the rise of China, the United States sets up the strategic perception toward China-“China is a challenge”, the U.S. strategic responses to China walk between the strategic containment and the strategic engagement, but the implementation of preventive defense, peace evolution and island chain blockade, still runs through the post-Cold War U.S. strategy toward China. With regard to the challenge of the North Korea issue, the United States sets up the strategic perception toward the DPRK-“North Korea is a threat”, the United States strategic responses to the DPRK walk between the strategic deterrence and the strategic dialogue, but the dual policy to prompt North Korea to change regime, divide and rule to maintain the division of the peninsula, the primacy to avoid other powers to lead the Korean Peninsula affairs, still runs through the post-Cold War U.S. strategy toward the DPRK.
In the process of these strategic responses to two major strategic challenges, the United States has three available strategic pillars in hands to use. The super-national power forms America’s unmatched power base in the world: the hard power steadily growing, the soft power increasingly highlighting, the presence in East Asia intensified. The bilateral alliance constitutes invaluable legacy of the Cold War: the US-Japan alliance increasingly consolidating, the US-ROK alliance continually strengthening, and other allies gradually expanding. The multilateral institutions constructs multi-dimensional web of regional security: to promote the bilateral alliance into multilateral, to build regional multilateral security mechanism, to participate in“two-track forums”. The United States hopes to increase participation in the Asia-Pacific affairs, adequately takes advantage of the existing security structure from the Cold War legacy, and tries its best to influence the development of its regional situation, trying to create a US-dominated new regional order.
As seen above, seeking hegemony through the balance of power becomes the substance of the East Asian strategy of United States after the Cold War. U.S. strategically positions itself as the“offshore balancer”, trying to balance regional hegemony challenger and control the regional allied great power to achieve the strategic goal of sticking up for hegemony in East Asia. U.S. strategy in East Asia of the new balance of power is formed by binding the hegemonic power’s“dividing and ruling”and the ally’s“going along with the strong”.
So, what exactly are the geo-political roots of the U.S. East Asian strategy after the Cold War? The answer is to build an impregnable“America fortress”, from“fear of being surrounded by”to“anti-siege”, and the contemporary interpretation of“sea power against the land power”tradition. Looking forward the future direction of U.S. East Asian strategy after the Cold War, we can detect, the United States will still focus on Northeast Asia, deepen involvement in Southeast Asia, China strategy tend to concealment, and that the United States will not change the strategic policy of maintaining East Asian hegemony, the use of strategic means will be more diversified and three-pronged track strategy operates: soft containment, flexible contact, implicit integration. Based on this, China’s strategic choice is:“Seizing the initiative”,“achieving victory without a fight”, and“gaining the power through taking advantage of the advantages”.
引文
1英国地缘政治学家詹姆斯·费尔格雷夫(James Fairgrieve)语,见[英]杰弗里·帕克:《二十世纪的西方地理政治思想》,李亦鸣等译,解放军出版社1992年版,第43页。
2英国地缘政治学家托马斯·霍尔迪奇(Thomas Holdich)爵士语,See Hans W. Weigert,“Review: Haushofer and the Pacific,”Foreign Affairs, Vol. 20, No. 4, Jul., 1942, p. 732.
3 [美]兹比格涅夫·布热津斯基:《运筹帷幄:指导美苏争夺的地缘战略构想》,刘瑞祥、潘嘉玢等译,军事译文出版社1986年版,前言,第6页。
2 [美]斯皮克曼:《和平地理学》,刘愈之译,商务印书馆1965年版,第35页。
3叶自成主编:《地缘政治与中国外交》,北京出版社1998年版,第23页。
1 Robert J. Art,“A Defensible Defense: American's Grand Strategy after the Cold War”, International Security, Vol.15, No.4, Spring, 1991, pp.7-8.
1英国人(特别是利德尔·哈特)常用“大战略”,法国战略大师安德烈·博福尔将军则冠之以“总体战略”的名号,其意义所指大同小异。故本文不作进一步的区分。
2 [美]小阿瑟·莱克:《军事战略的含义》,载[美]美国陆军军事学院编:《军事战略》,军事科学院外国军事研究部译,军事科学出版社1986年版,第3页。
3即国家安全战略,本研究所使用的战略概念是指这一层次的战略涵义。
4 [美]约翰·柯林斯:《大战略》,军事科学院译,中国人民解放军军事科学院出版社1978年版,第46、47页。
5 [英]富勒:《亚历山大的将道》,李磊、琚宏译,广西师范大学出版社2006年版,第14页。当然,阴谋如能改换成阳谋,似更为妥贴。
1参见:[英]利德尔·哈特:《战略论》,中国人民解放军军事科学院译,战士出版社1981年版,第455页。
2意即不战而使人屈服,才是高明中之最高明的。见《孙子兵法·谋攻篇》。
3 [英]富勒:《亚历山大的将道》,李磊、琚宏译,广西师范大学出版社2006年版,第203、204页。
4 [美]小阿瑟·莱克:《军事战略的含义》,载[美]美国陆军军事学院编:《军事战略》,军事科学院外国军事研究部译,军事科学出版社1986年版,第3-4页。
5参见:陈力:《战略地理论》,解放军出版社1990年版,第3页。
1 [美]小阿瑟·莱克:《军事战略的含义》,载[美]美国陆军军事学院编:《军事战略》,军事科学院外国军事研究部译,军事科学出版社1986年版,第4页。
2 [美]约翰·柯林斯:《大战略》,军事科学院译,中国人民解放军军事科学院出版社1978年版,第47页。
3钮先钟:《西方战略思想史》,广西师范大学出版社2003年版,导言,第7页。
4潘忠歧:《世界秩序:结构、机制与模式》,上海人民出版社2004年版,第49页。John W. Burton, Systems, States, Doplomacy and Rules, Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1968, p.6.
1参见:[英]哈尔福德·麦金德:《历史的地理枢纽》,林尔蔚、陈江译,商务印书馆1985年版,第26页。
1 [英]杰弗里·帕克:《地缘政治学:过去、现在和未来》,刘从德译,新华出版社2003年版,第15页。
2 [美]亨利·基辛格:《重新思考世界新秩序》,《战略与管理》,1994年第3期,第36页。
3 Halford John Mackinder, Democratic Ideals and Reality, New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1942, p.62.
1 [美]斯皮克曼:《和平地理学》,刘愈之译,北京:商务印书馆,1965年版,第78页。
1美国将世界划分为六大战略区,即:欧洲、亚太、中东、非洲、拉美、原苏联地区。
1竹幕的牢固程度尽管次于铁幕,但依然对东亚战略地理区进行了分隔。
1 Michael J. Green and Patrick M. Cronin, ed., The U.S.-Japan Alliance: Past, Present, and Future, New York: Council on Foreign Relations Press, 1999, p.47.
1 Francis Fukuyama,“The End of History?”The National Interest, Summer 1989.
2 [英]阿诺德·汤因比:《文明经受着考验》,沈辉等译,顾建光校,浙江人民出版社1988年版,第110页。
1 [美]兹比格纽·布热津斯基:《大棋局:美国的首要地位及其地缘战略》,中国国际问题研究所译,上海人民出版社1998年版,第21页。
2 [美]约翰·伊肯伯里主编:《美国无敌:均势的未来》,韩召颖译,北京大学出版社2005年版,第1页。
2倪孝铨、[美]罗伯特·罗斯主编:《美中苏三角关系》,人民出版社1993年版,第331页。
1参见:黄凤志:《东北亚地区均势安全格局探析》,《现代国际关系》,2006年第10期,第6、7页。
2 Richard J. Ellings and Edward A. Olsen, Asia’s Challenge to American Strategy, NBR Analysis, The National Bureau of Asian Research, Vol.3, No.2, Jun., 1992, p.8.
3民族主义正在多数亚洲国家迅速发展,这突出表现为对超级大国的更大的独立性和期待自己的国家在地区事务中发挥更大的作用。见:[美]马丁·拉萨特:《超越遏制:90年代美国的亚洲战略》,《美国研究参考资料》,1993年第1期,第7页。
1 [美]国防大学战略研究所:《理清纷乱的世界:美国跨世纪的全球战略评估》,林东主译,国防大学出版社2000年版,第54、55页。
2 U.S. Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report, September 30, 2001, p.4.
1 [美]汉斯·摩根索:《国际纵横策论:争强权、求和平》,卢明华、时殷弘、林勇军译,上海译文出版社1995年版,第140页。
2 The Bipartisan Commission on America’s National Interests, America's National Interests, July 1996. The Commission on America’s National Interest, America’s National Interest, July, 2000.
1 The White House, The National Security Strategy of The United States of America, March 16, 2006.
1 [美]亨利·基辛格:《大外交》,顾淑馨、林添贵译,海南出版社1998年版,第786页。
2 U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region, Feb. 1995, p.7.
3 The Bipartisan Commission on America’s National Interests, America’s National Interests, July 1996.
1参见:[英]哈尔福德·麦金德:《民主的理想与现实》,武原译,商务印书馆1965年版,第70页。[美]扎勒米?哈利勒扎德等:《美国与亚洲:美国的新战略和兵力态势》,腾建群、林治远等译,新华出版社2001年版,第3页。
2 [美]兹比格纽·布热津斯基:《大棋局:美国的首要地位及其地缘战略》,中国国际问题研究所译,上海人民出版社1998年版,第47页。
3 [美]约翰·米尔斯海默:《大国政治的悲剧》,王义桅、唐小松译,上海人民出版社2003年版,第541页。
4 U.S. Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report, September 30, 2001, p.2.
1 U.S. Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report, February 6, 2006, p.29.
2 The Commission on America’s National Interest, America’s National Interest, July, 2000.
3 The White House, A National Security Strategy of Engagement and Enlargement, July 1994.
4 The White House, The National Security Strategy of The United States of America, March 16, 2006.
5 Christopher Layne,“The Unipolar Illusion: Why New Great Powers Will Rise,”International Security, Vol. 17, No. 4. (Spring, 1993), p. 38.
6 Joseph Cirincione,“The Asian Nuclear Reaction Chain”, Foreign Policy, No. 118 (Spring, 2000), p.130.
1 Condoleezza Rice,“Promoting the National Interest,”Foreign Affairs, Vol. 79, No. 1, (Jan. - Feb., 2000), p. 61.
2 U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region, Feb.27, 1995.
1 Condoleezza Rice,“Promoting the National Interest,”Foreign Affairs, Vol. 79, No. 1, (Jan. - Feb., 2000), p. 52.
2 [美]扎勒米·哈利勒扎德等:《美国与亚洲:美国的新战略和兵力态势》,腾建群、林治远等译,新华出版社2001年版,第2-3页。
1 [新加坡]许美通:《美国与东亚:冲突与合作》,李小刚译,中央编译出版社1999年版,第19页。
2 U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region, Feb.27, 1995.
3 U.S. Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report, September 30, 2001.
4 James Kelly,“Geoge W. Bush and Asia: An Assessment”, in Robert M. Hathaway and Wilson Lee eds., George W. Bush and East Asia: A First Term Assessment, Washington, D.C.: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, 2005, p.22.
5 [美]沃伦·克里斯托弗:《美国新外交:经济、防务、民主——美国前国务卿克里斯托弗回忆录》,新华出版社1999年版,第327页。
1 [新加坡]许美通:《美国与东亚:冲突与合作》,李小刚译,中央编译出版社1999年版,第109页。
2 The White House, A National Security Strategy of Engagement and Enlargement, July 1994.
3潘凤东:《冷战后美国东亚战略析论》,中共中央党校硕士论文,2001-06-30,第16页。
4 U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region, Nov.23, 1998, p.1.
1 U.S. Department of Defense, A Strategic Framework for the Asian Pacific Rim: Looking Toward the 21st Century, April 1990.
1 The Commission on America’s National Interest, America’s National Interest, July, 2000.
2 Richard N. Haass,“Paradigm Lost,”Foreign Affairs, Vol. 74, No. 1 (Jan. - Feb., 1995), pp. 43-58.
1 Council on Foreign Relations, Redressing the Balance: American Engagement with Asia, New York: Council on Foreign Relations Press, 1996, p.3.
1 See Harry Harding,“Red Star Rising in the East,”Washington Post, March 9, 1997, p.Ⅹ-4.
1 Michael J. Green and Patrick M. Cronin, ed., The U.S.-Japan Alliance: Past, Present, and Future, New York: Council on Foreign Relations Press, 1999, p.37.
2 [美]沈大伟:《中美战略关系:从伙伴到竞争对手》,《世界经济与政治》,2001年第2期,第52页。
1参见:阎学通:《美国霸权与中国安全》,天津人民出版社2000年版,第26、27页。
2 U.S. Department of Defense, Asia of 2025, 2000.
3 [美]布热津斯基:《如何与中国共处》,《战略与管理》,2000年第3期,第68页。
4 [美]国防大学战略研究所:《中国战略走向》,国防大学出版社1999年版,第16页。
1 Joshua Cooper Ramo, The Beijing Consensus, London: The Foreign Policy Centre, 2004, p. 3.
2中美之间在科索沃、伊拉克、联合国等一系列重大国际和地区战略问题上矛盾尖锐。
3黄靖:《美国亚太战略与对华政策的演变》,《新远见》,2007年第7期,第46页。
1 Zbigniew Brzezinski,“Make Money, Not War,”Foreign Policy, No. 146 (Jan. - Feb., 2005), p. 46.
2 Zbigniew Brzezinski,“Make Money, Not War,”Foreign Policy, No. 146 (Jan. - Feb., 2005), p. 47.
3 [美]布热津斯基:《如何与中国共处》,《战略与管理》,2000年第3期,第70-71页。
4中国如日东升、美国日薄西山;中国处在漫漫长夜后的黎明时刻,而美国则要进入黄昏时刻开始后的漫漫长夜。
1 U.S. Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report, September 30, 2001.
2 [美]塞缪尔·亨廷顿:《美国国家利益受到忽视》,《外交》,1997年10月号。译文见于《参考消息》,1997年10月16、17、18日,第3版。[美]萨缪尔·亨廷顿:《美国国家利益的消蚀》,《战略与管理》,1998年第6期,第91、92、93页。
1 David Shambaugh,“China’s Military Views the World: Ambivalent Security,”International Security, Winter 1999/2000, pp.52-79.
1 [美]布热津斯基:《如何与中国共处》,《战略与管理》,2000年第3期,第68页。
2罗伯特·罗斯:“美中两个大国需要相互尊重对方的战略利益”,载陈舟:《美国安全战略与东亚:美国著名国际战略家访谈录》,世界知识出版社2002年版,第93-94页。
3 [美]布热津斯基:《如何与中国共处》,《战略与管理》,2000年第3期,第67页。
4 The White House, The National Security Strategy of The United States of America, March 16, 2006, p.6.
1在竞选期间,克林顿不是猛烈抨击布什的对华政策,就是大肆指责中国的人权状况,以争取选票。
2 Zalmay M. Khalilzad,“From Containment to Global Leadership? America and the World After the Cold War”, RAND, 1995.
1牛军:《论克林顿政府第一任期对华政策的演变及其特点》,《美国研究》,1998年第1期,第11页。
2“President’s May 28 Statement on China/MFN,”see in Bulletin, U.S. Information Service, Embassy of the United States of America, May 29, 1993.
3新华社华盛顿1993年1月13日电;刘连第、汪大为编著:《中美关系的轨迹:1993年-2000年大事纵览》,时事出版社2001年版,第359、360页。
4新华社华盛顿1996年5月31日电。
5 Admiral Charles R. Larson,“United States Pacific Command: Posture Statement, 1994”, Honolulu: United States Pacific Commnand, March 1994.
1 Kent Wieemann,“Current State US-China Relations”, U.S. Department of State Dispatch, July 24, 1995, p.587. Bill Clinton,“To Advance the Common Interest in a Open China,”International Herald Tribune, June 1, 1994.
3 U.S. Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report, May 20, 1997.
1 Robert L. Suettinger, Beyond Tiananmen: The Politics of U.S.-China Relations, 1989-2000, Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2003, pp.351-380.
2 U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region, November 23, 1998.
3见美国白宫《新世纪国家安全战略》文件,新华社1998年12月1日电。《参考资料》1999年1月4日。
4美国白宫《新世纪国家安全战略》,美新署2000年1月5日。
1 Global Trends 2015: A Dialogue About the Future With Non-Government Experts (NIC2000-02), December 18, 2000.
2佴祖吉:《克林顿政府第二任期对华政策的调整》,《现代国际关系》,1997年第8期,第12、13页。
3由于中国的未来发展方向未定,美国为避免出现战略失误而加强了两面下注的倾向。
1 Condoleezza Rice,“Promoting the National Interest”, Foreign Affairs, 79, No.1, January/February 2000, pp.45-62.
2转引自:冷晓玲、倪峰:《布什上台以来美国的对华政策》,《当代亚太》,2001年第7期,第3页。
1《美国防部对华订围堵策略——无论有否民主都视为敌人》,[香港]《新报》,2001-05-13。
2 RAND, America and Asia: American New Strategy and Military Forces, May 15, 2001.
3 RAND, The United States and Asia: Toward a New U.S. Strategy and Force Posture, 2001.
4浦启华:《美国的亚太战略与亚太战略格局》,《当代世界与社会主义》,2001年第5期,第36页。
1 The White House, The National Security Strategy of The United States of America, September 2002.
2可以解读为:中美关系将处于合作与斗争并存、交往与磨擦同在的状态,但合作与交往将占主导方面。刘建飞:《21世纪初美国亚太新战略与中美关系》,《重庆社会主义学院学报》,2002年第2期,第48页。
3 The White House, The National Security Strategy of The United States of America, September 20, 2002.
1 U.S. Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report, September 30, 2001, p.4.
2 Nuclear Posture Review [Excerpts], Submitted to Congress on 31 December 2001.
3 The White House, The National Security Strategy of The United States of America, September 20, 2002.
4 See Jessica T. Mathews,“September 11, One Year Later: A World of Change”, Policy Brief, Special Edition 18, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2002.
1 Robert B. Zoellick,“Whither China: From Membership to Responsibility”, Remarks to National Committee on U.S.-China Relations, New York City, September 21, 2005.
2 Condoleezza Rice,“Transformational Diplomacy”, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, January 18, 2006.
1 The White House, The National Security Strategy of The United States of America, March 16, 2006.
1 Ashton B. Carter and John P. White, eds., Keeping the Edge: Managing Defense for the Future, Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2000, p.Ⅳ. http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/files/kte_pref.pdf. [美]艾什顿·卡特、威廉姆·佩里:《预防性防御:一项美国新安全战略》,胡利平、杨韵琴译,上海人民出版社2000年版,第11页。
2寒天阳:《浅析“预防性防御”战略》,《国际政治研究》,2001年第2期,第87页。
3 [美]艾什顿·卡特、威廉姆·佩里:《预防性防御:一项美国新安全战略》,胡利平、杨韵琴译,上海人民出版社2000年版,第19页。William J. Perry,“Defense in an Age of Hope,”Foreign Affairs, Vol. 75, No. 6, Nov. - Dec., 1996, pp. 65, 79.
4 William J. Perry,“Defense in an Age of Hope,”Foreign Affairs, Vol. 75, No. 6, Nov. - Dec., 1996, p. 72.
1 William J. Perry,“Defense in an Age of Hope,”Foreign Affairs, Vol. 75, No. 6, Nov. - Dec., 1996, p. 72.
2谭宏庆:“防范与遏制:美国亚太战略布局与中国”,载中国现代国际关系研究院美欧研究中心编:《反恐背景下美国全球战略》,时事出版社2004年版,第274~280页。
1陈云:《陈云文选》(第三卷),人民出版社1995年版,第370页。
2李沽明1991年12月5日的讲话,[台湾]《世界日报》,1991年12月6日。
1阿拉斯泰尔·伊恩·约翰斯顿:“接触政策是最有效的”,见陈舟:《美国安全战略与东亚:美国著名国际战略家访谈录》,世界知识出版社2002年版,第127-128页。
1赵学功:《巨大的转变:战后美国对东亚的政策》,天津人民出版社2002年版,第396页。
2 William Christoer and Robert Kagan,“Foreign Policy and the Future of the Republic,”The Weekly Standard, September 4th, 1998.
3阎学通等:《中国崛起:国际环境评估》,天津人民出版社1998年版,第242页。
1 [美]布热津斯基:《如何与中国共处》,《战略与管理》,2000年第3期,第73页。
2 [美]迪恩·艾奇逊:《艾奇逊回忆录》,上海《国际问题资料》编辑组等合译,上海译文出版社1978年版,第233页。
3 Department of State, American Foreign Policy, Basic Documents, 1950-1955, New York: Arno Press, 1971, pp.2317-2318.
1陶文钊主编:《美国对华政策文件集(1949-1972)》(第二卷,上册),世界知识出版社2003年版,第383页。
2李植谷等:《美国全球战略大调整》,四川人民出版社1993年版,第178页。
1既有可能成为国际社会负责任的一员和美国的朋友,也有可能谋取地区霸权而成为美国的对手。
1 Scott Snyder,“A New Direction for US Policy Toward North Korea?,”The Korean Journal of Defense Analysis, Winter 1998, p.14.
2 [美]亨利·基辛格:《中国和西欧对美国同样重要》,载现代国际关系研究所选编:《当代世界与中国》,时事出版社1988年版,第74页。明清以来,围绕朝鲜半岛并以此为主战场就先后发生了四次大规模的国际战争:明朝抗日壬辰战争、中日甲午战争、日俄战争以及朝鲜战争。
3 [英]哈尔福德·麦金德:《历史的地理枢纽》,林尔蔚、陈江译,商务印书馆1985年版,第9页。
1 Victor D. Cha and David C. Kang,“The Debate over North Korea,”Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 119, No. 2, Summer, 2004, p. 230.
2 Victor D. Cha and David C. Kang,“The Korea Crisis,”Foreign Policy, No. 136, May - Jun., 2003, p. 24.
3自1953年朝鲜战争结束以来,在非军事区发生了多达1400起冲突事件,造成899名朝鲜人、394名韩国人以及90名美军士兵的死亡。See Victor D. Cha and David C. Kang,“The Korea Crisis,”Foreign Policy, No. 136, May - Jun., 2003, p. 24.
4 Victor D. Cha,“North Korea’s Weapons of Mass Destruction: Badges, Shields, or Swords?”Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 117, No. 2, Summer, 2002, pp. 225, 226.
1 Victor D. Cha and David C. Kang,“The Debate over North Korea,”Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 119, No. 2, Summer, 2004, p. 247.
2 Bruce Cumings,“Spring Thaw for Korea’s Cold War,”The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientist, April 1992, p.20.
3 Cited in Leon V. Sigal, Disarming Strangers: Nuclear Diplomacy with North Korea, Princeton University Press, 1998, p. 21.
4 Victor D. Cha and David C. Kang,“The Korea Crisis,”Foreign Policy, No. 136, May - Jun., 2003, p. 24.
1 Victor D. Cha,“Hawk Engagement and Preventive Defense on the Korean Peninsula,”International Security, Vol. 27, No. 1, Summer, 2002, p. 47.
2 Victor D. Cha,“South Korea in 2004: Peninsular Flux,”Asian Survey, Vol. 45, No. 1, Jan. - Feb., 2005, p. 40.
3所谓“不对称攻击”是指那些实力远逊于美国且与美国没有热线联系的国家,无力与美国正面较量,而是通过采取价格低廉且杀伤力大的非常规手段攻击美国。
1林利民:《朝鲜核问题的三种解决前景与中国的政策选择》,《江南社会学院学报》,2004年第4期,第12页。
1高奇琦:《美国核威胁在朝鲜核选择中的作用》,载复旦大学韩国研究中心编:《韩国研究论丛》(第十四辑),世界知识出版社2007年版,第49页。
2 Michael J. Mazarr,“Going Just a Little Nuclear: Nonproliferation Lessons from North Korea,”International Security, Vol. 20, No. 2, Autumn, 1995, p. 100.
1 Selig S. Harrison,“Did North Korea Cheat?”, Foreign Affairs, Vol. 84, No. 1, Jan. - Feb., 2005, p. 110.
2 Newsweek, July 1994, cited in Bruce Cumings,“The Structural Basis of Anti-Americanism in the Republic of Korea,”unpublished paper presented at Georgetown University, 30 January 2003, p.26.
3 Mary McGrory,“Bush’s Moonshine Policy,”op-ed, Washington Post, 29 December 2002.
4 Fox News, 15 January 2003,10:08 pm, cited in Cumings,“The Structural Basis of Anti-Americanism,”p.25.
5 Victor D. Cha and David C. Kang,“The Debate over North Korea,”Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 119, No. 2, Summer, 2004, p. 238.
1 [美]罗伯特·杰维斯:《国际政治中的知觉与错误知觉》,秦亚青译,世界知识出版社2003年版,第13-15页。
2 Victor D. Cha and David C. Kang,“The Debate over North Korea,”Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 119, No. 2, Summer, 2004, p. 240.
3于迎丽:《论美国对朝政策的“变”与“不变”:兼论奥巴马政府的对朝政策趋向》,《辽东学院学报(社会科学版)》,2010年第1期,第134页。
1 1988年10月开始,美国在北京开始与朝鲜进行低级别的直接对话,在整个1991年召开了18次会议。
2陈峰君、王传剑:《亚太大国与朝鲜半岛》,北京大学出版社2002年版,第105页。
1 The White House, National Security Strategy of The United States, August 15th, 1991.
2 James A. Baker III,“America in Asia: Emerging Architecture for a Pacific Community,”Foreign Affairs, Vol. 70, No. 5, Winter, 1991, pp. 1-18.
1所谓“不对称威胁”,是指那些绝对军事实力与美国极不相称的敌对国家或敌对势力利用非常规手段给美国带来巨大危险的种种威胁,诸如恐怖主义、核生化武器、信息战和环境破坏等。See U.S. Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report, May 1997.
3高连福主编:《东北亚国家对外战略》,社会科学文献出版社2002年版,第52-53页。
1 Anthony Lake,“From Containment to Enlargement”, Johns Hopkins University, School of Advanced International Studies, Washington, D.C., September 21, 1993.
2上海国际问题研究所编:《国际形势年鉴1994》,上海辞书出版社1994年版,第345-347页。
3 Jane’s Defense Weekly, Sep. 10, 1994, p.14.
4 Scott Snyder,“Review: The Fire Last Time: Lessons from the Last Korean Nuclear Crisis,”Foreign Affairs, Vol. 83, No. 4, Jul. - Aug., 2004, p. 145.
5虽说卡特是以私人身份前往朝鲜,但是他在事前已与克林顿总统通过电话,并由负责军事与安全事务的助理国务卿罗伯特·加卢奇(Robert Gallucci)向其进行简报,并有国务院人员随行担任翻译。因此,卡特受克林顿所托进行“第二轨道”外交,是不言而喻的。See Young Whan Kihl and Peter Hayes, eds., Peace and Security in Northeast Asia: The Nuclear Issue and the Korean Peninsula, Armonk, New York: M. E. Sharpe, Inc., 1997, op.cit, pp.190-194.
1 Leon V. Sigal, Disarming Strangers: Nuclear Diplomacy with North Korea, Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1998, p. 132.
2 Agreed Framework betwenn the United States of America and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Geneva, October 21, 1994, available at: http://www.kedo.org/pdfs/AgreedFramework.pdf.
3 Scott Snyder,“Review: The Fire Last Time: Lessons from the Last Korean Nuclear Crisis,”Foreign Affairs, Vol. 83, No. 4, Jul. - Aug., 2004, p. 145.
1 Robert S. Litwak, Regime Change: U.S. Strategy through the Prism of 9/11, Washington, D.C.: Woodrow Wilson Center Press, 2007, p. 258.
2 Samuel S. Kim,“North Korea’s Nuclear Strategy and the Interface between International and Domestic Politics,”Asian Perspective, Vol. 34, No. 1, Spring 2010, p. 63.
3“大浦洞-I”型中程导弹采用三级推进器和固体燃料,以至于很多人都没有预期到朝鲜能在2005年之前获得这种能力。See Victor D. Cha,“The Rationale for‘Enhanced’Engagement of North Korea: After the Perry Policy Review,”Asian Survey, Vol. 39, No. 6, Nov. - Dec., 1999, p. 849.
1高连福:《美国改变了对朝鲜半岛的政策吗》,《当代亚太》,2000年第10期,第13页。
1安洪泉:《调整中的美国对朝鲜政策》,《现代国际关系》,1999年第7期,第24页。
2 Victor D. Cha,“The Rationale for‘Enhanced’Engagement of North Korea: After the Perry Policy Review,”Asian Survey, Vol. 39, No. 6, Nov. - Dec., 1999, p. 846.
1 Statement by Christopher Cox, Hearing of the House International Relations Committee, 13 October 1999.
2 Statement by Dana Rohrbacher, Hearings of the House International Relations Committee, 24 March 1999 and 13 October 1999.
3 Michael O’Hanlon and Mike Mochizuki,“Economic Reform and Military Downsizing: A Key to Solving the North Korean Nuclear Crisis?,”The Brookings Review, Vol. 21, No. 4, Fall, 2003, p. 12.
3 Michael Gordon,“U.S. Toughens Terms for North Korea Talks,”New York Times, 3 July 2001.
4转引自:陈峰君主编:《亚太安全析论》,中国国际广播出版社2004年版,第278页。
1 Victor D. Cha and David C. Kang,“The Korea Crisis,”Foreign Policy, No. 136, May - Jun., 2003, p. 20.
2 Hans M. Kristensen,“Preemptive Posturing: What Happened to Deterrence,”Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, September/October 2002, p.59.
4布什将金正日说成是“小矮子”,并称自己有多么“憎恨”他。“Remarks by President Bush and President Kim Dae-Jung of South Korea,”7 March 2001, http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/03/20010307-6.html. Also see Bob Woodward, Bush At War, New York: Simon & Schuster, 2002, pp.339-340.
1 The White House, The National Security Strategy of The United States of America, September 20, 2002, pp. 14-15.
2 Victor D. Cha and David C. Kang,“The Debate over North Korea,”Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 119, No. 2, Summer, 2004, p. 237.
4 Victor D. Cha and David C. Kang,“The Debate over North Korea,”Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 119, No. 2, Summer, 2004, p. 248.
5 Selig S. Harrison,“Did North Korea Cheat?”, Foreign Affairs, Vol. 84, No. 1, Jan. - Feb., 2005, p. 101.
2 Anwar Iqbal,“Rumsfeld Warns N. Korea: U.S. Can Fight,”United Press International, December 23, 2002.
2 See Samuel S. Kim,“North Korea’s Nuclear Strategy and the Interface between International and Domestic Politics,”Asian Perspective, Vol. 34, No. 1, Spring 2010, p. 66.
1 Victor D. Cha and David C. Kang,“The Debate over North Korea,”Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 119, No. 2, Summer, 2004, p. 237.
2 Philip Shenon,“North Korea Says Nuclear Program Can Be Negotiated”, New York Times, November 3, 2002.
1 Victor D. Cha and David C. Kang,“The Debate over North Korea,”Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 119, No. 2, Summer, 2004, p. 236.
2 The White House, The National Security Strategy of The United States of America, March 16, 2006, pp.3, 4.
1 Glenn Kessler,“Far-Reaching U.S. Plan Impaired N. Korea Deal,”Washington Post, October 26, 2008.
1 Ibid.
3樊吉社:《美国对朝政策:两次朝核危机比较》,《美国研究》,2009年第4期,第36页。
1 [美]艾什顿·卡特、威廉姆·佩里:《预防性防御:一项美国新安全战略》,胡利平、杨韵琴译,上海人民出版社2000年版,第103页。
2“威慑+对话”、“制裁+补偿”、“强硬+怀柔”、“胡萝卜+大棒”诸如此类的表述都可视为一个意思。
3美国这一软硬兼施、诱压并举、刚柔并济的两手政策就像编织在一起的红黑线绳贯彻始终,只是在不同时期根据不同形式变化和美国的政策需要,其红黑两线各自粗细长短会相应有所变动。见:陈峰君主编:《亚太安全析论》,中国国际广播出版社2004年版,第30页。
4“‘Sunshine’or Moonshine?”Wall Street Journal, March 2, 1999.
5 Victor D. Cha,“The Rationale for‘Enhanced’Engagement of North Korea: After the Perry Policy Review,”Asian Survey, Vol. 39, No. 6, Nov. - Dec., 1999, p. 851.
1 Victor D. Cha,“Hawk Engagement and Preventive Defense on the Korean Peninsula,”International Security, Vol. 27, No. 1, Summer, 2002, p. 42, 68.
2陈峰君、王传剑:《亚太大国与朝鲜半岛》,北京大学出版社2002年版,第109页。
3 Douglas Paal,“Achieving Korean Reunification”in Nicholas Eberstadt and Richard Ellings, eds., Korea's Future and the Great Powers, Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2001, p.305.
4接触会向朝鲜及其它“无赖”国家传递错误的信息,从而强化它们所认为的西方是纸老虎的观点。毋庸置疑的是,寻求包容无赖政权在道德上是令人厌恶的。
5 Victor D. Cha,“Hawk Engagement and Preventive Defense on the Korean Peninsula,”International Security, Vol. 27, No. 1, Summer, 2002, p. 70.
1 Victor D. Cha,“Hawk Engagement and Preventive Defense on the Korean Peninsula,”International Security, Vol. 27, No. 1, Summer, 2002, p. 73.
1 Marcus Noland,“Why North Korea Will Muddle Through,”Foreign Affairs, Vol. 76, No. 4, July/August 1997, pp. 105-118; and Byung-joon Ahn,“The Man Who Would Be Kim,”Foreign Affairs, Vol. 73, No. 6, November/December 1994, pp. 94-108.
2 Victor D. Cha and David C. Kang,“The Korea Crisis,”Foreign Policy, No. 136, May - Jun., 2003, pp. 21, 22, 23.
1参见:金强一:《美日东北亚区域战略与朝鲜半岛问题》,《当代亚太》,2004年第9期,第21页。
2于美华:《新时期美、日、俄对朝鲜半岛政策特点及其走势》,《现代国际关系》,1997年第1期,第33页。
3郭锐:《朝鲜半岛与中国大战略》,《解放军外国语学院学报》,2006年第1期,第117页。
1 [美]陶慕廉:《朝鲜半岛危机的最终解决与美国在北朝鲜的利益》,《战略与管理》,1994年第4期,第30页。
2 U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region, Feb.27, 1995.
1 See U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region, Feb.27, 1995. U.S. Department of Defense, A Strategic Framework for the Asian Pacific Rim: Report to Congress, July 1992, p.9.
2“X边论/主义”(单边、双边、多边):由X边构筑的安全网/安全共同体。
1 Samuel P. Huntington,“The Lonely Superpower”, Foreign Affairs, March-April, 1999, p.36.
2 [美]兹比格纽·布热津斯基:《大棋局:美国的首要地位及其地缘战略》,中国国际问题研究所译,上海人民出版社1998年版,第13、32~33页。
4 [美]斯皮克曼:《和平地理学》,刘愈之译,商务印书馆1965年版,第112页。
1“America’s World”, The Economist, October 23, 1999, p.15. Joseph S. Nye Jr., Sean Creehan and Sabeel Rahman“The Power of Persuasion: Dual Components of US Leadership,”Harvard International Review, Winter 2003.
2见:[美]斯塔夫里阿诺斯:《全球通史:1500年以后的世界》,吴象婴、梁赤民译,上海社会科学院出版社1998年版,第543页。
1郑伟民主编:《衰落还是复兴:全球经济中的美国》,社会科学文献出版社1998年版,第278页。
2 The Commission on America’s National Interest, America’s National Interest, July, 2000.
1 Condoleezza Rice,“Promoting the National Interest,”Foreign Affairs, Vol. 79, No. 1, (Jan. - Feb., 2000), p. 46.
1 U.S. Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report, May 20, 1997.
2 Condoleezza Rice,“Promoting the National Interest,”Foreign Affairs, Vol. 79, No. 1, (Jan. - Feb., 2000), p. 51.
3软权力、软力量、软实力、软国力以及柔性国力皆是指soft power。
4 [美]约瑟夫·奈:《美国霸权的困惑:为什么美国不能独断专行》,郑志国等译,世界知识出版社2002年版,第187页。
1 [美]约瑟夫·奈:《“软权力”再思索》,《国外社会科学》,2006年第4期,第90页。
3刘德斌:《软权力:美国霸权的挑战与启示》,《吉林大学社会科学学报》,2001年第3期,第67页。
4 [美]约瑟夫·奈:《美国霸权的困惑:为什么美国不能独断专行》,郑志国等译,世界知识出版社2002年版,第73页。
1 Joseph S. Nye, Jr, The Paradox of American Power: Why the World’s Only Superpower can’t Do It Alone, Oxford University Press, 2002, pp.10-11.
2 Josef Joffe,“Who’s Afraid of Mr. Big?”The National Interest, Summer 2001, p.43.
3 Hubert Védrine with Dominique Moisi, France in an Age of Globalization, Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2001, p.2.
1刘德斌:《软权力:美国霸权的挑战与启示》,《吉林大学社会科学学报》,2001年第3期,第65页。
2王晓德:《美国文化与外交》,世界知识出版社2000年版,第2页。
3王沪宁:《作为国家实力的文化:软权力》,《复旦学报(社会科学版)》,1993年第3期,第96页。
1 U.S. Pacific Command, Posture Statement 1994, pp.2-6.
1该地区的不确定性持续存在且紧张局势有所加剧。美国的前沿部署必须从应付单一、确定的威胁转向应对多样化、不确定的挑战。
2 U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region, Feb. 1995. U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region, Nov.23, 1998.
3朱阳明主编:《亚太安全战略论》,军事科学出版社2000年版,第85页。
4 [美]丹尼斯·布莱尔:《亚太地区安全的集体责任》,新加坡国防与战略研究所,1999年5月。
5 U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region, Feb.27, 1995, p.6.
1 U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region, Nov.23, 1998, pp.10-11.
2美国亚太盟国既有日本、韩国、澳大利亚、泰国、菲律宾等与美国订有安全防卫条约的国家,也有与美国签订“自由联盟”(Compact of Free Association)的马绍尔群岛、硫球及密克罗尼西亚联邦等太平洋岛国。
1 Ted Hopf,“Post-Cold War Allies: The Illusion of Unipolarity”, in Barry Rubin and Thomas A. Keaney, eds., US Allies in a Changing World, London: Frank Cass Publishers, 2001, pp. 28-30.
2新兴大国崛起、地区热点问题凸显、大规模杀伤性武器的扩散等多样化威胁。
1 Toshiyuki Shikata,“The Japan-US Alliance: A Key to the Peace and Stablity of the Asia Pacific Region”, in Barry Rubin and Thomas A. Keaney, eds., US Allies in a Changing World, London: Frank Cass Publishers, 2001, p.191.
1阿拉斯泰尔·伊恩·约翰斯顿:“接触政策是最有效的”,见陈舟:《美国安全战略与东亚:美国著名国际战略家访谈录》,世界知识出版社2002年版,第129-130页。
2 U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region, Feb.27, 1995.
3道格·帕尔:“美国的防务政策调整将充分体现亚洲的优先地位”,载陈舟:《美国安全战略与东亚:美国著名国际战略家访谈录》,世界知识出版社2002年版,第59页。
1 Testimony by Michael H. Armacost, before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Subcommittee on East Asian and Pacific Affairs, April 15, 1997.
1 Thomas J. Christensen,“China, the U.S.-Japan Alliance, and the Security Dilemma in East Asia,”International Security, Vol. 23, No. 4 , Spring 1999, p. 65.
1 U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region, Nov.23, 1998, p.22.
2 Stephen M. Walt, The Origins of Alliance, Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1987, p.4.
3高金钿:《国际战略学概论》,国防大学出版社1995年版,第141页。
2杨伯江等:《朝鲜半岛缓和进程中的东北亚地区形势》,《现代国际关系》,2001年第1期,第31页。
1 1992年中韩建交之时,中国还只是韩国的第六大贸易伙伴国,中韩建交后第二年即1993年上升到第三位。2003年,中国超过日本成为韩国第二大贸易国。2004年,中国首度超越美国成为韩国最大贸易伙伴,而韩国则成为中国第三大贸易伙伴。
2 Derek J. Mitchell,“Does Popular Sentiment Matter? What’s at stake?”Derek J. Mitchell ed., Strategy and Sentiment: South Korean Views of the United States and the U.S.-ROK Alliance, June 2004, CSIS, p.7.
3 [美]兹比格纽·布热津斯基:《大棋局:美国的首要地位及其地缘战略》,中国国际问题研究所译,上海人民出版社1998年版,第63-64页。
1 [美]兹比格涅夫·布热津斯基:《竞赛方案:进行美苏竞争的地缘战略纲领》,刘晓明、陈京华、赵滨译,张毅君校,中国对外翻译出版公司1988年版,第47页。
2 [美]兹比格纽·布热津斯基:《大棋局:美国的首要地位及其地缘战略》,中国国际问题研究所译,上海人民出版社1998年版,第63-64、248页。
3参见:[英]哈尔福德·麦金德:《历史的地理枢纽》,林尔蔚、陈江译,商务印书馆1985年版,第10页。
4根据小布什第二任期美国国家安全委员会亚洲司司长维克多·查的解释,“反力量投送”是指利用美国的前沿部署,阻止其他国家的力量投送超越东亚沿岸。See Victor D. Cha,“Forward Presense, Anti-Americanism, and the U.S.-Korea Alliance’s Future”, Korea Observer, Vol.33, No.4, Winter 2002, pp.507-539.
5 [美]国防大学国家战略研究所:《理清纷乱的世界:美国跨世纪的全球战略评估》,林东主译,国防大学出版社2000年版,第269-270页。
1 Stephen M. Walt,“Why Alliance Endure or Collapse,”Survival, Vol. 39, No. 1, (Spring 1994), p. 157.
1 Desmond Ball,“The US-Australian Alliance,”in Barry Rubin and Thomas A. Keaney, eds. US Alliance in a Changing World, London: Frank Cass Publishers, 2001, p. 248.
1刘新华:《略论澳大利亚的地缘战略地位和美澳军事同盟关系》,《世界经济与政治论坛》,2003年第3期,第78页。
2汤广辉:《澳美关系升温的背后》,《世界知识》,1996年第20期,第19页。
3 Robyn Lim,“Australian Security after the Cold War,”Orbis, (Winter 1998), p.98.
1 Dan Blumenthal,“Strengthening the U.S.-Australian Alliance: Progress and Pitfalls,”Asian Outlook, April–May 2005.
1丹尼斯·布莱尔2000年3月16日在华盛顿卡耐基国际和平基金会的讲话。
2 U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region, Nov. 23, 1998, p.6.
1 William T. Tow,“The‘Anchors’: Collaborative Security, Substance or Smokescreen?”in Brad Williams and Andrew Newman, eds. Japan, Australia and Asia-Pacific Security, London & New York: Routledge, 2006.
2 Dan Blumenthal,“Strengthening the U.S.-Australian Alliance: Progress and Pitfalls,”Asian Outlook, April–May 2005.
1石源华、汪伟民:《美日、美韩同盟比较研究——兼论美日韩安全互动与东北亚安全》,《国际观察》, 2006年第1期,第64页。
1 U.S. Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report, September 30, 2001.
1 [美]兹比格涅夫·布热津斯基:《大抉择:美国站在十字路口》,王振西主译,新华出版社2005年版,第70页。
1 U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region, Feb. 1995.
2 U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region, Nov. 23, 1998, p.66.
1 U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region, Feb. 1995.
1 Thomas J. Christensen,“China, the U.S.-Japan Alliance, and the Security Dilemma in East Asia,”International Security, Vol. 23, No. 4 , Spring 1999, pp. 73-74.
1参见:倪世雄、王义桅:《霸权均势:冷战后美国的战略选择》,《美国研究》,2000年第1期,第10页。
2参见Richard K. Betts,“Wealth, Power, and Instability: East Asia and the United States after the Cold War,”International Security, Vol. 18, No. 3, Winter, 1993-1994, pp. 34-77.
1 See U.S. Department of Defense, A Strategic Framework for the Asian Pacific Rim: Looking Toward the 21st Century, April 1990, p.5; Thomas J. Christensen,“China, the U.S.-Japan Alliance, and the Security Dilemma in East Asia,”International Security, Vol. 23, No. 4, Spring 1999, p. 50.
2 Thomas J. Christensen,“China, the U.S.-Japan Alliance, and the Security Dilemma in East Asia,”International Security, Vol. 23, No. 4, Spring, 1999, p. 50.
3只有当东亚均势体系处于危险之中时,美国才会出手干预以反对东亚均势的破坏者。
4 [美]约翰·米尔斯海默:《大国政治的悲剧》,王义桅、唐小松译,上海人民出版社2003年版,第530页。[美]亨利·基辛格:《美国需要外交政策吗——21世纪的外交》,胡利平、凌建平译,中国友谊出版公司2003年版,第131页。
5可参见:[美]约翰·米尔斯海默:《大国政治的悲剧》,王义桅、唐小松译,上海人民出版社2003年版,第356页。
1 Joseph S. Nye, Jr., The Paradox of American Power: Why the World’s Only Superpower can’t Go It Alone, New York: Oxford University Press, 2002, p.144.
1使东亚地区的麻烦大不至于威胁到美国在该地区的战略利益、小不至于让东亚盟国认为不必美国出面即可自行解决的程度。
2 Michael Harmacost, Friends or Rivals? The Insider’s Account of U.S.-Japan Relations, Columbia University Press, 1996, p.246.
3 U.S. Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report, September 30, 2001, p.12.
1中国快速的经济增长既能使它转变成更为民主、和平与满意的大国,也能让它变成对邻国安全更为强大的威胁。See Aaron L. Friedberg,“Ripe for Rivalry: Prospects for Peace in a Multipolar Asia,”International Security, Vol. 18, No. 3, Winter, 1993-1994, p. 19.
2 [美]约翰·米尔斯海默:《大国政治的悲剧》,王义桅、唐小松译,上海人民出版社2003年版,第540、541、543页。
3 Thomas J. Christensen,“China, the U.S.-Japan Alliance, and the Security Dilemma in East Asia,”International Security, Vol. 23, No. 4, Spring, 1999, p. 50.
4 U.S. Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report, May 1997.
1 [美]迈克尔·阿马科斯科:《朋友还是对手——前美国驻日大使说日本》,于铁军、孙博红译,袁明校,新华出版社1998年版,第254页。
1参见:[美]迈克尔·阿马科斯科:《朋友还是对手——前美国驻日大使说日本》,于铁军、孙博红译,袁明校,新华出版社1998年版,第14、15、20页。
2 Aaron L. Friedberg,“Ripe for Rivalry: Prospects for Peace in a Multipolar Asia,”International Security, Vol. 18, No. 3, Winter, 1993-1994, p. 19.
3黄靖:《美国亚太战略与对华政策的演变》,《新远见》,2007年第7期,第53页。
4 [美]迈克尔·阿马科斯科:《朋友还是对手——前美国驻日大使说日本》,于铁军、孙博红译,袁明校,新华出版社1998年版,第171页。
5吴心伯:《冷战结束之初美国亚太安全战略的转变》,《美国研究》,2002年第3期,第54页。
6 Global Trends 2015: A Dialogue About the Future With Non Government Experts, NIC2000-02, December 2000.
7 Joseph S. Nye, et al.,“Harnessing the Rising Sun: A U.S. Strategy for Managing Japanp’s Rise as a Global Power”, Washington Quarterly, Spring 1993.
1 Selig S. Harrison and Clyde V. Prestowitz, Jr.,“Pacific Agenda: Defense or Economics?”Foreign Policy, No. 79, Summer, 1990, p.68.
1 [美]亨利·基辛格:《大外交》,顾淑馨、林添贵译,海南出版社1998年版,第767页。
2 U.S. Department of Defense, A Strategic Framework for the Asian Pacific Rim: Looking Toward the 21st Century, April 1990.
3 Hans Morgenthau and William Thompson, Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace, 6th ed., New York: McGraw-Hill Press, 1985, p.222. Also see Paul Schroeder,“Historical Reality vs. Neo-Realist Theory,”International Security, Vol. 19, No. 1, Summer, 1994, pp. 108-148.
4“置身的均势”和下文的“游离的均势”的概念,是借鉴于倪世雄和王义桅两位学者的创造。见:倪世雄、王义桅:《霸权均势:冷战后美国的战略选择》,《美国研究》,2000年第1期,第19页。
5 See Kenneth Waltz, Theory of International Politics, Reading, Mass: Addison Wesley, 1979, pp.125-126.
6 Ted Hopf,“Post-Cold War Allies: The Illusion of Unipolarity”, in Barry Rubin and Thomas A. Keaney, eds., US Allies in a Changing World, London: Frank Cass Publishers, 2001, p.28.
1新均势战略或可称之为“大国平衡战略”、“人为的均势”、“游离的均势”、“离岸均势”(offshore balance)、“以均势求霸权”,是指霸权国纠集一些国家结成霸权联盟来制造不包含自身在内的均势,以维护自身优势和领导地位。它在一定程度上反映了“美国例外论”。这一在霸权国看来的新均势战略,从其它均势参与方的角度来看却是一种间接霸权战略。
2 Christopher Layne,“Review: A House of Cards: American Strategy toward China,”World Policy Journal, Vol. 14, No. 3, Fall 1997, pp. 77-95.
3 Michael Mastanduno,“Incomplete Hegemony: The United States and Security Order in Asia”, in Muthiah Alagappa, ed., Asian Security Order: International and Normative Features, Stanford University Press, 2003, pp.151-153.
4当中国崛起时,美国借助日本制衡中国;当日本复苏时,美国借助中国制衡日本。
5 Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr, The Cycles of American History, Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1986, p.53.
1可参见:[美]约翰·米尔斯海默:《大国政治的悲剧》,王义桅、唐小松译,上海人民出版社2003年版,第390页。
2兰德公司的研究报告就此指出,“中日联手将是美国在亚洲面临的最大地缘政治危机”。See RAND, The United States and Asia: Toward a New U.S. Strategy and Force Posture, 2001.
3 RAND, The United States and Asia: Toward a New U.S. Strategy and Force Posture, 2001.
1 [美]迈克尔·阿马科斯科:《朋友还是对手——前美国驻日大使说日本》,于铁军、孙博红译,袁明校,新华出版社1998年版,第235页。
2 The White House, The National Security Strategy of The United States of America, September 20, 2002.
1 Thomas J. Christensen,“China, the U.S.-Japan Alliance, and the Security Dilemma in East Asia,”International Security, Vol. 23, No. 4 , Spring 1999, pp. 52-54.
1 Thomas J. Christensen,“China, the U.S.-Japan Alliance, and the Security Dilemma in East Asia,”International Security, Vol. 23, No. 4 , Spring 1999, p. 70.
1金熙德:《日美同盟的“再定义”及其未来趋势》,《世界经济与政治》,2000年第7期,第14页。
1参见:金强一:《美日东北亚区域战略与朝鲜半岛问题》,《当代亚太》,2004年第9期,第22-23页。
2 Michael Mastanduno,“Incomplete Hegemony: The United States and Security Order in Asia”, in Muthiah Alagappa ed., Asian Security Order: Instrumental and Normative Features, Stanford University Press, 2003, pp.151-153.
1陈舟:《美国安全战略与东亚:美国著名国际战略家访谈录》,世界知识出版社2002年版,第21页。
1梅孜编译:《美国国家安全战略报告汇编》,时事出版社1996年版,第71页。
1 [美]斯皮克曼:《和平地理学》,刘愈之译,商务印书馆1965年版,第33-34页。
2 [美]斯皮克曼:《和平地理学》,刘愈之译,商务印书馆1965年版,第37、38页。
1乔治·费尔丁·伊利奥特少校:“序”,[英]哈尔福德·麦金德:《民主的理想与现实》,武原译,商务印书馆1965年版,第4页。
2 [美]斯皮克曼:《和平地理学》,刘愈之译,商务印书馆1965年版,第37-41页。
3 [美]斯皮克曼:《和平地理学》,刘愈之译,商务印书馆1965年版,第84、85页。
1 [美]斯皮克曼:《和平地理学》,刘愈之译,商务印书馆1965年版,序,第5页。
2 [美]詹姆斯·多尔蒂、小罗伯特?普法尔茨格拉夫:《争论中的国际关系理论》(第二版),邵文光译,世界知识出版社1987年版,第107页。
3 [美]索尔·科恩:《古代和近代的地缘政治观点》,[美]美国陆军军事学院编:《军事战略》,军事科学院外国军事研究部译,军事科学出版社1986年版,第150页。
4保卫西半球不仅包括北美、中美和南美的领土及其邻近岛屿,而且还包括“和平利用大西洋和太平洋的权利”。
5在任何情况下美国都处于安全状态,防止任何可能的挑战。
6 Zbigniew Brzezinski,“A Geostrategy for Eurasia,”Foreign Affairs, Vol. 76, No. 5 (Sep. - Oct., 1997), pp. 50-64.
1 [美]兹比格纽·布热津斯基:《大棋局:美国的首要地位及其地缘战略》,中国国际问题研究所译,上海人民出版社1998年版,第41页。
2 [美]斯皮克曼:《和平地理学》,刘愈之译,商务印书馆1965年版,第108页。
3 [美]斯皮克曼:《和平地理学》,刘愈之译,商务印书馆1965年版,第100页。
4乔治·凯南:《美国外交,1900-1950年》,新美国图书馆1951年,第10页,转引自[美]约瑟夫·奈:《美国定能领导世界吗?》,军事译文出版社1992年版,第192页。
1 [美]斯皮克曼:《和平地理学》,刘愈之译,商务印书馆1965年版,出版说明,第ii页。
2朱听昌、马荣升:《从两洋战略看美国全球战略重点的调整》,《国际观察》,2003年第2期,第23-24页。
1 [英]哈尔福德·麦金德:《民主的理想与现实》,武原译,商务印书馆1965年版,第70页。
2 [英]杰弗里·帕克:《二十世纪的西方地理政治思想》,李亦鸣等译,解放军出版社1992年版,第64页。
1 [美]布热津斯基:《如何与中国共处》,《战略与管理》,2000年第3期,第69页。
2“把中国当朋友培养中国即朋友、当敌人则势必将成为敌人。”约瑟夫·奈认为,美国不应放弃50%的使中国不成为敌人的可能性。
1“软性遏制”或可称之为“预防性遏制”、“参与性遏制”。
2“硬性遏制”战略对付那种直接而即时的威胁。
1 [英]富勒:《亚历山大的将道》,李磊、琚宏译,广西师范大学出版社2006年版,第242页。
1阿拉斯泰尔·伊恩·约翰斯顿:“接触政策是最有效的”,见陈舟:《美国安全战略与东亚:美国著名国际战略家访谈录》,世界知识出版社2002年版,第108页。
2 U.S. Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report, February 6, 2006, p.29.
1黄靖:《美国亚太战略与对华政策的演变》,《新远见》,2007年第7期,第51页。
1 [美]马丁·L·拉萨特:《超越遏制:90年代美国的亚洲战略》,《美国研究参考资料》,1993年第1期,第10-12页。
2 Condoleezza Rice,“Promoting the National Interest,”Foreign Affairs, Vol. 79, No. 1, (Jan. - Feb., 2000), p. 56.
1转引自:庄依众:《美国外交政策中的人权因素》,《社会科学》,1991年第4期,第8页。
2 [美]亨利·基辛格:《中国和西欧对美国同样重要》,载现代国际关系研究所选编:《当代世界与中国》,时事出版社1988年版,第68、69页。
1中国虽然一再宣示自己将致力于内部经济发展,对外无用兵扩张之野心,甚至将国家战略从“和平崛起”调整为“和平发展”。但是,即便中国更加委曲求全,也无法改变美国对华防范与遏制。
2 Joshua Cooper Ramo, The Beijing Consensus, London: The Foreign Policy Centre, 2004, pp.2-3.
1 Joshua Cooper Ramo, The Beijing Consensus, London: The Foreign Policy Centre, 2004, p.39.
2阎学通:《中国崛起的可能选择》,《战略与管理》,1995年第6期,第12页。
1没有空中势力,海上势力就不再有效了,而飞机如果以狭小的、彼此分散很远的地点作为根据地,就没有多大的力量。……陆上飞机比航空母舰上的飞机优越,也已经是明显的事实。见:[美]斯皮克曼:《和平地理学》,刘愈之译,商务印书馆1965年版,第100~103页。
2 [美]罗伯特·罗斯:《美中和睦:大国政治、影响范围与东亚和平》,《世界经济研究》,2004年第3期,第10页。
3《中国外交战略的选择》,《人民日报》,2003-03-19。
1《中国外交战略的选择》,《人民日报》,2003-03-19。
2阎学通:《中国安全战略的发展趋势》,《瞭望》,1996年第8-9期,第51页。
3阎学通:《对中美关系不稳定性的分析》,《世界经济与政治》,2010年第12期,第12、13、15、16、27、28页。
1保持高层接触与交往、战略对话与合作以及健康、成熟与稳定的发展势头。见:倪世雄:《中美关系“三保持”》,《世界知识》,2008年第9期,第35页。
[1]陈力.战略地理论[M].北京:解放军出版社,1990.
[2]李植谷等.美国全球战略大调整[M].成都:四川人民出版社,1993.
[3]陈云.陈云文选(第三卷)[M].北京:人民出版社,1995.
[4]高金钿.国际战略学概论[M].北京:国防大学出版社,1995.
[5]阎学通等.中国崛起:国际环境评估[M].天津:天津人民出版社,1998.
[6]阎学通.美国霸权与中国安全[M].天津:天津人民出版社,2000.
[7]正源编著.克林顿访华言行录[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,1998.
[8]苏格.美国对华政策与台湾问题[M].北京:世界知识出版社,1998.
[9]翟晓敏.冷战后的美国军事战略[M].北京:国防大学出版社,1999.
[10]张景旭编著.台湾问题:中美关系的焦点[M].福州:福建人民出版社,1999.
[11]王晓德.美国文化与外交[M].北京:世界知识出版社,2000.
[12]刘连第、汪大为编著.中美关系的轨迹:1993年-2000年大事纵览[M].北京:时事出版社,2001.
[13]赵学功.巨大的转变:战后美国对东亚的政策[M].天津:天津人民出版社,2002.
[14]陈舟.美国安全战略与东亚:美国著名国际战略家访谈录[M].北京:世界知识出版社,2002.
[15]陈峰君、王传剑.亚太大国与朝鲜半岛[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2002.
[16]钱其琛.外交十记[M].北京:世界知识出版社,2003.
[17] [美]斯皮克曼.和平地理学[M].刘愈之译.北京:商务印书馆,1965.
[18] [英]哈尔福德·麦金德.民主的理想与现实[M].武原译.北京:商务印书馆,1965.
[19] [英]哈尔福德·麦金德.历史的地理枢纽[M].林尔蔚,陈江译.北京:商务印书馆,1985.
[20] [美]迪恩·艾奇逊.艾奇逊回忆录[M].上海《国际问题资料》编辑组等合译.上海:上海译文出版社,1978.
[21] [美]约翰·柯林斯.大战略[M].军事科学院译.北京:中国人民解放军军事科学院出版社,1978.
[22] [英]利德尔·哈特.战略论[M].中国人民解放军军事科学院译.北京:战士出版社,1981.
[23] [美]兹比格涅夫·布热津斯基.运筹帷幄:指导美苏争夺的地缘战略构想[M].刘瑞祥,潘嘉玢等译.北京:军事译文出版社,1986.
[24] [美]兹比格涅夫·布热津斯基.竞赛方案:进行美苏竞争的地缘战略纲领[M].刘晓明,陈京华,赵滨译.张毅君校.北京:中国对外翻译出版公司,1988.
[25] [美]兹比格纽·布热津斯基.大棋局:美国的首要地位及其地缘战略[M].中国国际问题研究所译.上海:上海人民出版社,1998.
[26] [美]兹比格涅夫·布热津斯基.大抉择:美国站在十字路口[M].王振西主译.北京:新华出版社,2005.
[27] [美]詹姆斯?多尔蒂、小罗伯特?普法尔茨格拉夫.争论中的国际关系理论(第二版)[M].邵文光译.北京:世界知识出版社,1987.
[28] [英]阿诺德·汤因比.文明经受着考验[M].沈辉等译.顾建光校.杭州:浙江人民出版社,1988.
[29] [英]杰弗里·帕克.二十世纪的西方地理政治思想[M].李亦鸣等译.北京:解放军出版社,1992.
[30] [英]杰弗里·帕克.地缘政治学:过去、现在和未来[M].刘从德译.北京:新华出版社,2003.
[31] [美]约瑟夫·奈.美国定能领导世界吗? [M].北京:军事译文出版社,1992.
[32] [美]约瑟夫·奈.美国霸权的困惑:为什么美国不能独断专行[M].郑志国等译.北京:世界知识出版社,2002.
[33] [美]汉斯·摩根索.国际纵横策论:争强权、求和平[M].卢明华,时殷弘,林勇军译.上海:上海译文出版社,1995.
[34] [美]斯塔夫里阿诺斯.全球通史:1500年以后的世界[M].吴象婴,梁赤民译.上海:上海社会科学院出版社,1998.
[35] [美]迈克尔·阿马科斯科.朋友还是对手——前美国驻日大使说日本[M].于铁军,孙博红译.袁明校.北京:新华出版社,1998.
[36] [美]亨利·基辛格.大外交[M].顾淑馨,林添贵译.海口:海南出版社,1998.
[37] [美]亨利·基辛格.美国需要外交政策吗——21世纪的外交[M].胡利平,凌建平译.北京:中国友谊出版公司,2003.
[38] [美]沃伦·克里斯托弗.美国新外交:经济、防务、民主——美国前国务卿克里斯托弗回忆录[M].北京:新华出版社,1999 .
[39] [美]艾什顿·卡特、威廉姆·佩里.预防性防御:一项美国新安全战略[M].胡利平,杨韵琴译.上海:上海人民出版社,2000.
[40] [新加坡]许美通.美国与东亚:冲突与合作[M].李小刚译.北京:中央编译出版社,1999.
[41] [美]国防大学战略研究所.中国战略走向[M].北京:国防大学出版社,1999.
[42] [美]国防大学战略研究所.理清纷乱的世界:美国跨世纪的全球战略评估[M].林东主译.北京:国防大学出版社,2000.
[43] [美]扎勒米?哈利勒扎德等.美国与亚洲:美国的新战略和兵力态势[M].腾建群,林治远等译.北京:新华出版社,2001.
[44] [美]约翰·米尔斯海默.大国政治的悲剧[M].王义桅,唐小松译.上海:上海人民出版社,2003.
[45] [美]罗伯特·杰维斯.国际政治中的知觉与错误知觉[M].秦亚青译.北京:世界知识出版社,2003.
[46] [美]约翰?伊肯伯里主编.美国无敌:均势的未来[M].韩召颖译.北京:北京大学出版社,2005.
[47] [英]富勒.亚历山大的将道[M].李磊,琚宏译.桂林:广西师范大学出版社,2006.
[48] [美]容安澜.悬崖勒马:美国对台政策与中美关系[M].贾宗谊,武文巧译.北京:新华出版社,2007.
[49]Halford John Mackinder, Democratic Ideals and Reality[M]. New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1942.
[50]Karl W. Deutsch and Sidney A. Burrell, et al, Political Community and the North Atlantic Area: International Organization in the Light of Historical Experience[M]. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1957.
[51]Department of State, American Foreign Policy, Basic Documents, 1950-1955[M]. New York: Arno Press, 1971.
[52]Raymond Aron, The Imperial Republic: The United States and the World, 1945-1973[M]. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1975.
[53]Kenneth Waltz, Theory of International Politics[M]. Reading, Mass: Addison Wesley, 1979.
[54]Hans Morgenthau and William Thompson, Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace[M]. 6th ed., New York: McGraw-Hill Press, 1985.
[55]Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr, The Cycles of American History[M]. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1986.
[56]Stephen M. Walt, The Origins of Alliance[M]. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1987.
[57]Martin L. Lasater, The Changing of the Guard: President Clinton and the Security of Taiwan[M]. Boulder: Westview Press, 1995.
[58]Michael J. Mazarr, North Korea and the Bomb: A Case Study in Nonproliferation[M]. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1995.
[59]Council on Foreign Relations, Redressing the Balance: AmericanEngagement with Asia[M]. New York: Council on Foreign Relations Press, 1996.
[60]Michael Harmacost, Friends or Rivals? The Insider’s Account of U.S.-Japan Relations[M]. Columbia University Press, 1996.
[61]John W. Garver, Face off: China, the United States, and Taiwan’s Democratization[M]. Seattle and London: University of Washington Press, 1997.
[62]Leon V. Sigal, Disarming Strangers: Nuclear Diplomacy with North Korea[M]. Princeton University Press, 1998.
[63]Ralph N. Clough, Cooperation or Conflict in the Taiwan Strait[M]. Norman Press, 1999.
[64]James Mann, About Face: A History of American’s Curious Relationship with China, From Nixon to Clinton[M]. New York: Alfred A. Knope, 1999.
[65]Nancy B. Tucker,eds., China Confidential: American Diplomats and Sino-American Relations, 1945-1996[M]. New York: Columbia University Press, 2001.
[66]Nancy B. Tucker, Dangerous Strait: The U.S.-Taiwan-China Crisis[M]. New York: Columbia University Press, 2005.
[67]Hubert Védrine with Dominique Moisi, France in an Age of Globalization[M]. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2001.
[68]Bob Woodward, Bush At War[M]. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2002.
[69]Joseph S. Nye, Jr, The Paradox of American Power: Why the World’s Only Superpower can’t Do It Alone[M]. Oxford University Press, 2002.
[70]Robert L. Suettinger, Beyond Tiananmen: The Politics of U.S.-China Relations, 1989-2000[M]. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2003.
[71]Richard C. Bush, Untying the Knot: Making Peace in the Taiwan Strait[M]. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2005.
[72]Robert S. Litwak, Regime Change: U.S. Strategy through the Prism of 9/11[M]. Washington, D.C.: Woodrow Wilson Center Press, 2007.
[1]现代国际关系研究所选编.当代世界与中国[C].北京:时事出版社,1988.
[2]倪孝铨、[美]罗伯特·罗斯主编.美中苏三角关系[C].人民出版社,1993.
[3]上海国际问题研究所编.国际形势年鉴1994[C].上海:上海辞书出版社,1994.
[4]梅孜编译.美国国家安全战略报告汇编[C].北京:时事出版社,1996 .
[5]梅孜主编.美台关系重要资料选编(1948.11-1996.4)[C].北京:时事出版社,1997.
[6]叶自成主编.地缘政治与中国外交[C].北京:北京出版社,1998.
[7]郑伟民主编.衰落还是复兴:全球经济中的美国[C].北京:社会科学文献出版社,1998.
[8]朱阳明主编.亚太安全战略论[C].北京:军事科学出版社,2000.
[9]高连福主编.东北亚国家对外战略[C].北京:社会科学文献出版社,2002.
[10]陶文钊主编.美国对华政策文件集(1949-1972)(第二卷,上册)[C].北京:世界知识出版社,2003.
[11]陶文钊、杜瑞清、王旭主编.中美关系与东亚国际格局[C].北京:中国社会科学出版社,2003年版。
[12]陶文钊主编.冷战后的美国对华政策[C].重庆:重庆出版社,2007.
[13]陈峰君主编.亚太安全析论[C].北京:中国国际广播出版社,2004.
[14]中国现代国际关系研究院美欧研究中心编.反恐背景下美国全球战略[C].北京:时事出版社,2004.
[15]阎学通、漆海霞编.国际形势与台湾问题预测[C].北京:北京大学出版社,2005.
[16]复旦大学韩国研究中心编.韩国研究论丛(第十四辑)[C].北京:世界知识出版社,2007.
[17]王缉思主编.冷战后的美国外交[C].北京:时事出版社,2008.
[18] [美]美国陆军军事学院编.军事战略[C].军事科学院外国军事研究部译,北京:军事科学出版社,1986.
[19] Steven W. Mosher, eds., The United States and the Republic of China: Democratic Friends, Strategic Allies and Economic Partners[C]. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction, 1992.
[20] James Lilley and Chuck Downs, eds., Crisis in the Taiwan Strait[C]. National Defense University Press, 1997.
[21] Young Whan Kihl and Peter Hayes, eds., Peace and Security in Northeast Asia: The Nuclear Issue and the Korean Peninsula[C]. Armonk, New York: M. E. Sharpe, Inc., 1997.
[22] Michael J. Green and Patrick M. Cronin, ed., The U.S.-Japan Alliance: Past, Present, and Future[C]. New York: Council on Foreign Relations Press, 1999.
[23] Ashton B. Carter and John P. White, eds., Keeping the Edge: Managing Defense for the Future[C]. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2000.
[24] Barry Rubin and Thomas A. Keaney, eds., US Allies in a Changing World[C]. London: Frank Cass Publishers, 2001.
[25] Nicholas Eberstadt and Richard Ellings, eds., Korea's Future and the Great Powers[C]. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2001.
[26] Muthiah Alagappa, ed., Asian Security Order: International and Normative Features[C]. Stanford University Press, 2003.
[27] Derek J. Mitchell ed., Strategy and Sentiment: South Korean Views of the United States and the U.S.-ROK Alliance[C]. June 2004, CSIS.
[28] Robert M. Hathaway and Wilson Lee eds., George W. Bush and East Asia: A First Term Assessment[C]. Washington, D.C.: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, 2005.
[29] Brad Williams and Andrew Newman, eds. Japan, Australia and Asia-Pacific Security[C]. London & New York: Routledge, 2006.
[1]张苾芜.维系美台关系基本因素分析[J].台湾研究集刊,1991(4).
[2]庄依众.美国外交政策中的人权因素[J].社会科学,1991(4).
[3]王沪宁.作为国家实力的文化:软权力[J].复旦学报(社会科学版),1993(3).
[4]刘连弟.克林顿政府对台政策趋向和中美关系[J].世界经济与政治,1995(3).
[5]李亚强.台湾岛的海洋战略地理价值[J].舰船知识,1995(5).
[6]阎学通.中国崛起的可能选择[J].战略与管理,1995(6).
[7]阎学通.中国安全战略的发展趋势[J].瞭望,1996(8-9).
[8]阎学通.对中美关系不稳定性的分析[J].世界经济与政治,2010(12).
[9]汤广辉.澳美关系升温的背后[J].世界知识,1996(20).
[10]于美华.新时期美、日、俄对朝鲜半岛政策特点及其走势[J].现代国际关系,1997(1).
[11]周新莉.台美关系大事记(上)[J].台湾研究,1997(1).
[12]周新莉.台美关系大事记(上)(1996年7～12月)[J].台湾研究,1997(2).
[13]佴祖吉.克林顿政府第二任期对华政策的调整[J].现代国际关系,1997(8).
[14]牛军.论克林顿政府第一任期对华政策的演变及其特点[J].美国研究,1998(1).
[15]安洪泉.调整中的美国对朝鲜政策[J].现代国际关系,1999(7).
[16]倪世雄,王义桅. .霸权均势:冷战后美国的战略选择[J].美国研究,2000(1).
[17]倪世雄.中美关系“三保持”[J].世界知识,2008(9).
[18]金熙德.日美同盟的“再定义”及其未来趋势[J].世界经济与政治,2000(7).
[19]高连福.美国改变了对朝鲜半岛的政策吗[J].当代亚太,2000(10).
[20]杨伯江等.朝鲜半岛缓和进程中的东北亚地区形势[J].现代国际关系,2001(1).
[21]寒天阳.浅析“预防性防御”战略[J].国际政治研究,2001(2).
[22]刘德斌.软权力:美国霸权的挑战与启示[J].吉林大学社会科学学报,2001(3).
[23]浦启华.美国的亚太战略与亚太战略格局[J].当代世界与社会主义,2001(5).
[24]冷晓玲,倪峰.布什上台以来美国的对华政策[J].当代亚太,2001(7).
[25]刘建飞. 21世纪初美国亚太新战略与中美关系[J].重庆社会主义学院学报,2002(2).
[26]吴心伯.冷战结束之初美国亚太安全战略的转变[J].美国研究,2002(3).
[27]朱听昌,马荣升.从两洋战略看美国全球战略重点的调整[J].国际观察,2003(2).
[28]刘新华.略论澳大利亚的地缘战略地位和美澳军事同盟关系[J].世界经济与政治论坛,2003(3).
[29]龚开国.“不沉的航空母舰”(下)——透视美国在台湾的利益和对台政策[J].两岸关系,2003(9).
[30]林利民.朝鲜核问题的三种解决前景与中国的政策选择[J].江南社会学院学报,2004(4).
[31]金强一.美日东北亚区域战略与朝鲜半岛问题[J].当代亚太,2004(9).
[32]李晔,张杨.“离岸平衡手”与遏制中国:兼论美国东亚安全战略下的西藏政策[J].东北师大学报(哲学社会科学版),2005(2).
[33]石源华,汪伟民.美日、美韩同盟比较研究——兼论美日韩安全互动与东北亚安全[J].国际观察,2006(1).
[34]郭锐.朝鲜半岛与中国大战略[J].解放军外国语学院学报,2006(1).
[35]黄凤志.东北亚地区均势安全格局探析[J].现代国际关系,2006(10).
[36]陈向阳,种昕.“韩美同盟”研讨会纪要[J].现代国际关系,2006(12).
[37]朴键一.朝鲜半岛核问题与新世纪中国外交[J].东疆学刊,2007(2).
[38]黄靖.美国亚太战略与对华政策的演变[J].新远见,2007(7).
[39]樊吉社.美国对朝政策:两次朝核危机比较[J].美国研究,2009(4).
[40]于迎丽.论美国对朝政策的“变”与“不变”:兼论奥巴马政府的对朝政策趋向[J].辽东学院学报(社会科学版),2010(1).
[41] [美]马丁?拉萨特.超越遏制:90年代美国的亚洲战略[J].美国研究参考资料,1993(1).
[42] [美]亨利·基辛格.重新思考世界新秩序[J].战略与管理,1994(3).
[43] [美]陶慕廉.朝鲜半岛危机的最终解决与美国在北朝鲜的利益[J].战略与管理,1994(4).
[44] [美]萨缪尔·亨廷顿.美国国家利益的消蚀[J].战略与管理,1998(6).
[45] [美]布热津斯基.如何与中国共处[J].战略与管理,2000(3).
[46] [美]沈大伟.中美战略关系:从伙伴到竞争对手[J].世界经济与政治,2001(2).
[47] [美]罗伯特·罗斯.美中和睦:大国政治、影响范围与东亚和平[J].世界经济研究,2004(3).
[48] [美]约瑟夫·奈.“软权力”再思索[J].国外社会科学,2006(4).
[49]Hans W. Weigert. Review: Haushofer and the Pacific[J]. Foreign Affairs, Vol. 20, No. 4, Jul., 1942.
[50]Francis Fukuyama. The End of History? [J]. The National Interest, Summer 1989.
[51] Selig S. Harrison and Clyde V. Prestowitz, Jr.. Pacific Agenda: Defense or Economics? [J]. Foreign Policy, No. 79, Summer, 1990.
[52] Robert J. Art. A Defensible Defense: American's Grand Strategy after the Cold War[J]. International Security, Vol.15, No.4, Spring, 1991.
[53] James A. Baker III. America in Asia: Emerging Architecture for aPacific Community[J]. Foreign Affairs, Vol. 70, No. 5, Winter, 1991.
[54] Richard J. Ellings and Edward A. Olsen. Asia’s Challenge to American Strategy[J]. NBR Analysis, The National Bureau of Asian Research, Vol.3, No.2, Jun., 1992.
[55] Bruce Cumings. Spring Thaw for Korea’s Cold War[J]. The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientist, April 1992.
[56] Christopher Layne. The Unipolar Illusion: Why New Great Powers Will Rise[J]. International Security, Vol. 17, No. 4., Spring, 1993.
[57] Richard K. Betts. Wealth, Power, and Instability: East Asia and the United States after the Cold War[J]. International Security, Vol. 18, No. 3, Winter, 1993-1994.
[58] Aaron L. Friedberg. Ripe for Rivalry: Prospects for Peace in a Multipolar Asia[J]. International Security, Vol. 18, No. 3, Winter, 1993-1994.
[59] Stephen M. Walt. Why Alliance Endure or Collapse[J]. Survival, Vol. 39, No. 1, Spring 1994.
[60] Paul Schroeder. Historical Reality vs. Neo-Realist Theory[J]. International Security, Vol. 19, No. 1, Summer, 1994.
[61] Byung-joon Ahn. The Man Who Would Be Kim[J]. Foreign Affairs, Vol. 73, No. 6, November/December 1994.
[62] Richard N. Haass. Paradigm Lost[J]. Foreign Affairs, Vol. 74, No. 1 (Jan. - Feb., 1995).
[63] Michael J. Mazarr. Going Just a Little Nuclear: Nonproliferation Lessons from North Korea[J]. International Security, Vol. 20, No. 2, Autumn, 1995.
[64] William J. Perry. Defense in an Age of Hope[J]. Foreign Affairs, Vol. 75, No. 6, Nov. - Dec., 1996.
[65] Marcus Noland. Why North Korea Will Muddle Through[J]. Foreign Affairs, Vol. 76, No. 4, July/August 1997, pp. 105-118.
[66] Christopher Layne. Review: A House of Cards: American Strategy toward China[J]. World Policy Journal, Vol. 14, No. 3, Fall 1997.
[67] Zbigniew Brzezinski. A Geostrategy for Eurasia[J]. Foreign Affairs, Vol. 76, No. 5, Sep. - Oct., 1997.
[68] Zbigniew Brzezinski. Make Money, Not War[J]. Foreign Policy, No. 146 (Jan. - Feb., 2005).
[69] Zbigniew Brzezinski. America’s Staying Power[J]. Foreign Policy, No. 146, Jan. - Feb., 2005.
[70] Robert Kagan. The Benevolent Empire[J]. Foreign Policy, No. 111, Summer 1998, pp. 24-35.
[71] Robyn Lim. Australian Security after the Cold War[J]. Orbis, (Winter 1998).
[72] Scott Snyder. A New Direction for US Policy Toward North Korea? [J]. The Korean Journal of Defense Analysis, Winter 1998.
[73]Thomas J. Christensen. China, the U.S.-Japan Alliance, and the Security Dilemma in East Asia[J]. International Security, Vol. 23, No. 4 , Spring 1999.
[74] Joseph S. Nye, et al. Harnessing the Rising Sun: A U.S. Strategy for Managing Japanp’s Rise as a Global Power[J]. Washington Quarterly, Spring 1993.
[75] Joseph S. Nye Jr.. Redefining the National Interest[J]. Foreign Affairs, Vol. 78, No. 4, Jul. - Aug., 1999.
[76] Samuel P. Huntington. The Lonely Superpower[J]. Foreign Affairs, March-April, 1999.
[77] David Shambaugh. China’s Military Views the World: AmbivalentSecurity[J]. International Security, Winter 1999/2000.
[78] Victor D. Cha. The Rationale for‘Enhanced’Engagement of North Korea: After the Perry Policy Review[J]. Asian Survey, Vol. 39, No. 6, Nov. - Dec., 1999.
[79] Victor D. Cha. North Korea’s Weapons of Mass Destruction: Badges, Shields, or Swords? [J]. Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 117, No. 2, Summer, 2002.
[80] Victor D. Cha. Forward Presense, Anti-Americanism, and the U.S.-Korea Alliance’s Future[J]. Korea Observer, Vol.33, No.4, Winter 2002.
[81] Victor D. Cha. Hawk Engagement and Preventive Defense on the Korean Peninsula[J]. International Security, Vol. 27, No. 1, Summer, 2002.
[82] Victor D. Cha and David C. Kang. The Korea Crisis[J]. Foreign Policy, No. 136, May - Jun., 2003.
[83] Victor D. Cha and David C. Kang. The Debate over North Korea[J]. Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 119, No. 2, Summer, 2004.
[84] Victor D. Cha. South Korea in 2004: Peninsular Flux[J]. Asian Survey, Vol. 45, No. 1, Jan. - Feb., 2005.
[85] Condoleezza Rice. Promoting the National Interest[J]. Foreign Affairs, Vol. 79, No. 1, Jan. - Feb., 2000.
[86] Joseph Cirincione. The Asian Nuclear Reaction Chain[J]. Foreign Policy, No. 118, Spring, 2000.
[87] Leon V. Sigal. Countdown on Korea[J]. The American Prospect, Vol. 12, No. 15, August 27, 2001.
[88] William T. Tow and Leisa Hay. Australia, the United States and a‘China Growing Strong’: Managing Conflict Avoidance[J]. Australian Journal of International Affairs, Vol. 55, No. 1, 2001.
[89] Josef Joffe. Who’s Afraid of Mr. Big? [J]. The National Interest,Summer 2001.
[90] Mark Beeson. Issues in Australian Foreign Policy[J]. Australian Journal of Politics and History, Vol. 48, No. 2, 2002.
[91] Hans M. Kristensen. Preemptive Posturing: What Happened to Deterrence[J]. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, September/October 2002.
[92] Michael O’Hanlon and Mike Mochizuki. Economic Reform and Military Downsizing: A Key to Solving the North Korean Nuclear Crisis? [J]. The Brookings Review, Vol. 21, No. 4, Fall, 2003.
[93] Michael O’Hanlon and Mike Mochizuki. Toward a Grand Bargain with North Korean[J]. The Washington Quarterly, Vol. 26, No. 4, Autumn, 2003.
[94] Scott Snyder. Review: The Fire Last Time: Lessons from the Last Korean Nuclear Crisis[J]. Foreign Affairs, Vol. 83, No. 4, Jul. - Aug., 2004.
[95] Selig S. Harrison. Did North Korea Cheat? [J]. Foreign Affairs, Vol. 84, No. 1, Jan. - Feb., 2005.
[96] Dan Blumenthal. Strengthening the U.S.-Australian Alliance: Progress and Pitfalls[J]. Asian Outlook, April–May 2005.
[97] Samuel S. Kim. North Korea’s Nuclear Strategy and the Interface between International and [98] Domestic Politics[J]. Asian Perspective, Vol. 34, No. 1, Spring 2010.
[1]潘凤东.冷战后美国东亚战略析论[D].北京:中共中央党校国际战略研究所硕士论文,2001.
[2]韩相熙.论冷战后美国的东亚战略及其局限性[D].北京:北京大学国际关系学院博士论文,2003 .
[3]刘琳.冷战后美国东亚安全战略研究[D].北京:军事科学院战略研究部博士论文,2007.
[4]付瑞红.美国东亚战略的中国因素(1989-2008)[D].北京:中共中央党校国际战略研究所博士论文,2010.
[1] U.S. Department of Defense, A Strategic Framework for the Asian Pacific Rim: Looking Toward the 21st Century[R]. April 1990.
[2] U.S. Department of Defense, A Strategic Framework for the Asian Pacific Rim: Report to Congress[R]. July 1992.
[3] U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region[R]. Feb.27, 1995.
[4] U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region[R]. Nov.23, 1998.
[5] U.S. Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report[R]. May 20, 1997.
[6] U.S. Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report[R]. September 30, 2001.
[7] U.S. Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report[R]. February 6, 2006.
[8] The White House, National Security Strategy of The United States[R]. August 15th, 1991.
[9] The Bipartisan Commission on America’s National Interests, America's National Interests[R]. July 1996.
[10] The Commission on America’s National Interest, America’s National Interest[R]. July, 2000.
[11] The White House, A National Security Strategy of The United States[R]. March 20th,1990.
[12] The White House, National Security Strategy of The United States[R]. August 15th, 1991.
[13] The White House, A National Security Strategy of Engagement and Enlargement[R]. July 21, 1994.
[14]The White House, A National Security Strategy of Engagement and Enlargement[R]. February 27, 1995.
[15] The White House, A National Security Strategy of Engagement and Enlargement[R]. 1996.
[16] The White House, A National Security Strategy of a New Century[R]. May 1997.
[17] The White House, A National Security Strategy of a New Century[R]. October 1998.
[18] The White House, A National Security Strategy of a New Century, December 1999.
[19] The White House, A National Security Strategy of a New Century[R]. January 2000.
[20] The White House, The National Security Strategy of The United States of America[R]. September 2002.
[21] The White House, The National Security Strategy of The United States of America[R]. March 16, 2006.
[22] U.S. Pacific Command, Posture Statement 1994[R].
[23] Global Trends 2015: A Dialogue About the Future With Non-Government Experts (NIC2000-02) [R]. December 18, 2000.
[24] Nuclear Posture Review [Excerpts] [R]. Submitted to Congress on 31 December 2001.
[25] RAND, America and Asia: American New Strategy and Military Forces[R]. May 15, 2001.
[26] RAND, The United States and Asia: Toward a New U.S. Strategy and Force Posture[R]. 2001.
[27] President’s May 28 Statement on China/MFN[R]. Bulletin, U.S. Information Service, Embassy of the United States of America, May 29, 1993.
[28] Anthony Lake. From Containment to Enlargement[R]. Johns Hopkins University, School of Advanced International Studies, Washington, D.C., September 21, 1993.
[29] Admiral Charles R. Larson. United States Pacific Command: Posture Statement, 1994[R]. Honolulu: United States Pacific Commnand, March 1994.
[30] Kent Wieemann. Current State US-China Relations[R]. U.S. Department of State Dispatch, July 24, 1995.
[31] Zalmay M. Khalilzad. From Containment to Global Leadership? America and the World After the Cold War[R]. RAND, 1995.
[32] Jessica T. Mathews. September 11, One Year Later: A World of Change[R]. Policy Brief, Special Edition 18, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2002.
[33] Joshua Cooper Ramo. The Beijing Consensus[R]. London: The Foreign Policy Centre, 2004.
[34] Robert B. Zoellick. Whither China: From Membership to Responsibility[R]. Remarks to National Committee on U.S.-China Relations, New York City, September 21, 2005.
[35] Condoleezza Rice. Transformational Diplomacy[R]. Georgetown University, Washington, DC, January 18, 2006.
[1]中美发表联合声明[N].人民日报, 1997-10-31.
[2]美国防部对华订围堵策略——无论有否民主都视为敌人[N].新报, 2001-05-13.
[3]中国外交战略的选择[N].人民日报,2003-03-19.
[4] Bill Clinton. To Advance the Common Interest in a Open China[N]. International Herald Tribune, June 1, 1994-06-01.
[5] Harry Harding. Red Star Rising in the East[N]. Washington Post, 1997-03-09.
[6] William Christoer and Robert Kagan. Foreign Policy and the Future of the Republic[N]. The Weekly Standard, 1998-09-04.
[7] Sunshine”or Moonshine?[N]. Wall Street Journal, 1999-03-02.
[8] America’s World[N]. The Economist, 1999-10-23.
[9] Michael Gordon. U.S. Toughens Terms for North Korea Talks[N]. New York Times, 2001-07-03.
[10] Stuart Harris. Little Brother’s Free Will[N]. Australian Financial Review, 2001-09-05.
[11] Owen Harries. Time to Reconsider our U.S. Ties[N]. Australian Financial Review, 2001-09-10.
[12] Philip Shenon. North Korea Says Nuclear Program Can Be Negotiated[N]. New York Times, 2002-11-03.
[13] Anwar Iqbal. Rumsfeld Warns N. Korea: U.S. Can Fight[N]. United Press International, 2002-12-23.
[14] Mary McGrory. Bush’s Moonshine Policy[N]. Washington Post, 2002-12-29.
[15] Paul Kelly. All the World’s a Stage[N]. The Weekend Australian, 2003-07-05.
[16] Scott Burchill. The Perils of Alliance[N]. Australian Financial Review, 2003-07-11.
[17] Joseph S. Nye Jr., Sean Creehan and Sabeel Rahman. The Power of Persuasion: Dual Components of US Leadership[N]. Harvard International Review, 2003-01-01.
[18] Kelly Says Taiwan Relations Act Key to West Pacific Stability[N]. Washington File, 2004-04-22.
[19] U.S. Opposes Unilateral Action That Might Change Taiwan Situation[N]. Washington File, 2004-02-02.
[20] Glenn Kessler. Far-Reaching U.S. Plan Impaired N. Korea Deal[N]. Washington Post, 2008-10-26.
[1] William J. Clinton, Address Before a Joint Session of the Congress on the State of the Union[EB/OL].(1994-01-25)[2010-05-26] http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=50409.
[2] Agreed Framework betwenn the United States of America and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea[EB/OL]. (1994-10-21)[2010-10-26] http://www.kedo.org/pdfs/AgreedFramework.pdf.
[3] Joseph S. Nye Jr.. The Challenge of Soft Power[J/OL]. Time, (1999-03-08)[2010-12-12] http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,21163,00.html.
[4] Stanley O. Roth. The Taiwan Relations Act at Twenty-and Beyond[R/OL]. address to The Woodrow Wilson Center and The American Institute in Taiwan (1999-03-24)[2010-10-13]. http://www.usinfo.state.gov/regional/ea/uschina/rothtwn.htm.
[5] The Heritage Foundation and the Project for the New American Century.Statement on the Defense of Taiwan[R/OL]. (1999-08-28)[2010-08-07] http://www.newamericancentury.org/taiwandefensestatement.htm/.
[6] William J. Perry. Review of United States Policy Toward North Korea: Findings and Recommendations[R/OL]. (1999-10-12)[2009-05-06] www.state.gov/www/regions/eap/991012_northkorea_rpt.html.
[7] Remarks by President Bush and President Kim Dae-Jung of South Korea[EB/OL]. (2001-03-07)[2010-11-23] http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/03/20010307-6.html.
[8] Statement by the President[EB/OL]. (2001-06-13)[2010-04-02] http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/06/20010611-4.html.
[9] Remarks by PresidentBush and President Kim Dae-Jung of South Korea[EB/OL]. (2001-03-07)[2009-07-13] http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/03/20010307-6.html.
[10] Transcript of Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage Press Conference-conclusion of China Visit[EB/OL].(2002-08-26) [2009-09-17] http://www.usinfo.state.gov/regional/ea/uschina/armit826.htm.
[11] Aidan Foster-Carter. No Turning Back? [J/OL]. Comparative Connections, 2002 (7)[2010-04-09]. http://www.csis.org/pacfor/cc/0203Qnk_sk.html, 1 August 2002.
[12] The White House, The President’s State of the Union Address, http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/01/20020129-ll.html, January 29, 2002.
[13]《海峡两岸》专访美国中国问题专家斯卡拉皮诺教授[EB/OL]. (2004-12-21)[2009-11-08] http://www.cctv.com/program/hxla/20041221/100419.shtml.
[14] Eleanor Hall. Analyst says US-Australia alliance outdated[EB/OL]. The World Today (2005-08-17)[2010-12-23]http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2005/s1439959.htm.
[15] Kurt Campbell. Chinese Ambitions and the Future of Asia[R/OL]. Edited transcript of remarks at the Carnegie Council on Ethnics in International Affarirs (2005-10-19)[2011-06-02] http://www.carnegiecouncil.org/resources/transcripts/5267.html.
[16] John McGlynn. Banco Delta Asia, North Korea’s Frozen Funds and U.S. Undermining of the Six-Party Talks: Obstacles to a Solution[J/OL]. The Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus (2007-06-09)[2009-02-13] http://japanfocus.org/articles/print_article/2446.
[17]“捧杀”中国,以“中国模式”的名义?[EB/OL].(2010-01-14)[2010-05-13] http://news.xinhuanet.com/world/2010-01/24/content_12863839_3.htm.
[18]美智库“2049项目”研究所总裁薛瑞福接受环球时报专访预测39年后的中国[EB/OL].(2010-07-11) [2010-07-13] http://world.huanqiu.com/roll/2010-07/919047.html.
2英国地缘政治学家托马斯·霍尔迪奇(Thomas Holdich)爵士语,See Hans W. Weigert,“Review: Haushofer and the Pacific,”Foreign Affairs, Vol. 20, No. 4, Jul., 1942, p. 732.
3 [美]兹比格涅夫·布热津斯基:《运筹帷幄:指导美苏争夺的地缘战略构想》,刘瑞祥、潘嘉玢等译,军事译文出版社1986年版,前言,第6页。
2 [美]斯皮克曼:《和平地理学》,刘愈之译,商务印书馆1965年版,第35页。
3叶自成主编:《地缘政治与中国外交》,北京出版社1998年版,第23页。
1 Robert J. Art,“A Defensible Defense: American's Grand Strategy after the Cold War”, International Security, Vol.15, No.4, Spring, 1991, pp.7-8.
1英国人(特别是利德尔·哈特)常用“大战略”,法国战略大师安德烈·博福尔将军则冠之以“总体战略”的名号,其意义所指大同小异。故本文不作进一步的区分。
2 [美]小阿瑟·莱克:《军事战略的含义》,载[美]美国陆军军事学院编:《军事战略》,军事科学院外国军事研究部译,军事科学出版社1986年版,第3页。
3即国家安全战略,本研究所使用的战略概念是指这一层次的战略涵义。
4 [美]约翰·柯林斯:《大战略》,军事科学院译,中国人民解放军军事科学院出版社1978年版,第46、47页。
5 [英]富勒:《亚历山大的将道》,李磊、琚宏译,广西师范大学出版社2006年版,第14页。当然,阴谋如能改换成阳谋,似更为妥贴。
1参见:[英]利德尔·哈特:《战略论》,中国人民解放军军事科学院译,战士出版社1981年版,第455页。
2意即不战而使人屈服,才是高明中之最高明的。见《孙子兵法·谋攻篇》。
3 [英]富勒:《亚历山大的将道》,李磊、琚宏译,广西师范大学出版社2006年版,第203、204页。
4 [美]小阿瑟·莱克:《军事战略的含义》,载[美]美国陆军军事学院编:《军事战略》,军事科学院外国军事研究部译,军事科学出版社1986年版,第3-4页。
5参见:陈力:《战略地理论》,解放军出版社1990年版,第3页。
1 [美]小阿瑟·莱克:《军事战略的含义》,载[美]美国陆军军事学院编:《军事战略》,军事科学院外国军事研究部译,军事科学出版社1986年版,第4页。
2 [美]约翰·柯林斯:《大战略》,军事科学院译,中国人民解放军军事科学院出版社1978年版,第47页。
3钮先钟:《西方战略思想史》,广西师范大学出版社2003年版,导言,第7页。
4潘忠歧:《世界秩序:结构、机制与模式》,上海人民出版社2004年版,第49页。John W. Burton, Systems, States, Doplomacy and Rules, Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1968, p.6.
1参见:[英]哈尔福德·麦金德:《历史的地理枢纽》,林尔蔚、陈江译,商务印书馆1985年版,第26页。
1 [英]杰弗里·帕克:《地缘政治学:过去、现在和未来》,刘从德译,新华出版社2003年版,第15页。
2 [美]亨利·基辛格:《重新思考世界新秩序》,《战略与管理》,1994年第3期,第36页。
3 Halford John Mackinder, Democratic Ideals and Reality, New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1942, p.62.
1 [美]斯皮克曼:《和平地理学》,刘愈之译,北京:商务印书馆,1965年版,第78页。
1美国将世界划分为六大战略区,即:欧洲、亚太、中东、非洲、拉美、原苏联地区。
1竹幕的牢固程度尽管次于铁幕,但依然对东亚战略地理区进行了分隔。
1 Michael J. Green and Patrick M. Cronin, ed., The U.S.-Japan Alliance: Past, Present, and Future, New York: Council on Foreign Relations Press, 1999, p.47.
1 Francis Fukuyama,“The End of History?”The National Interest, Summer 1989.
2 [英]阿诺德·汤因比:《文明经受着考验》,沈辉等译,顾建光校,浙江人民出版社1988年版,第110页。
1 [美]兹比格纽·布热津斯基:《大棋局:美国的首要地位及其地缘战略》,中国国际问题研究所译,上海人民出版社1998年版,第21页。
2 [美]约翰·伊肯伯里主编:《美国无敌:均势的未来》,韩召颖译,北京大学出版社2005年版,第1页。
2倪孝铨、[美]罗伯特·罗斯主编:《美中苏三角关系》,人民出版社1993年版,第331页。
1参见:黄凤志:《东北亚地区均势安全格局探析》,《现代国际关系》,2006年第10期,第6、7页。
2 Richard J. Ellings and Edward A. Olsen, Asia’s Challenge to American Strategy, NBR Analysis, The National Bureau of Asian Research, Vol.3, No.2, Jun., 1992, p.8.
3民族主义正在多数亚洲国家迅速发展,这突出表现为对超级大国的更大的独立性和期待自己的国家在地区事务中发挥更大的作用。见:[美]马丁·拉萨特:《超越遏制:90年代美国的亚洲战略》,《美国研究参考资料》,1993年第1期,第7页。
1 [美]国防大学战略研究所:《理清纷乱的世界:美国跨世纪的全球战略评估》,林东主译,国防大学出版社2000年版,第54、55页。
2 U.S. Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report, September 30, 2001, p.4.
1 [美]汉斯·摩根索:《国际纵横策论:争强权、求和平》,卢明华、时殷弘、林勇军译,上海译文出版社1995年版,第140页。
2 The Bipartisan Commission on America’s National Interests, America's National Interests, July 1996. The Commission on America’s National Interest, America’s National Interest, July, 2000.
1 The White House, The National Security Strategy of The United States of America, March 16, 2006.
1 [美]亨利·基辛格:《大外交》,顾淑馨、林添贵译,海南出版社1998年版,第786页。
2 U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region, Feb. 1995, p.7.
3 The Bipartisan Commission on America’s National Interests, America’s National Interests, July 1996.
1参见:[英]哈尔福德·麦金德:《民主的理想与现实》,武原译,商务印书馆1965年版,第70页。[美]扎勒米?哈利勒扎德等:《美国与亚洲:美国的新战略和兵力态势》,腾建群、林治远等译,新华出版社2001年版,第3页。
2 [美]兹比格纽·布热津斯基:《大棋局:美国的首要地位及其地缘战略》,中国国际问题研究所译,上海人民出版社1998年版,第47页。
3 [美]约翰·米尔斯海默:《大国政治的悲剧》,王义桅、唐小松译,上海人民出版社2003年版,第541页。
4 U.S. Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report, September 30, 2001, p.2.
1 U.S. Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report, February 6, 2006, p.29.
2 The Commission on America’s National Interest, America’s National Interest, July, 2000.
3 The White House, A National Security Strategy of Engagement and Enlargement, July 1994.
4 The White House, The National Security Strategy of The United States of America, March 16, 2006.
5 Christopher Layne,“The Unipolar Illusion: Why New Great Powers Will Rise,”International Security, Vol. 17, No. 4. (Spring, 1993), p. 38.
6 Joseph Cirincione,“The Asian Nuclear Reaction Chain”, Foreign Policy, No. 118 (Spring, 2000), p.130.
1 Condoleezza Rice,“Promoting the National Interest,”Foreign Affairs, Vol. 79, No. 1, (Jan. - Feb., 2000), p. 61.
2 U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region, Feb.27, 1995.
1 Condoleezza Rice,“Promoting the National Interest,”Foreign Affairs, Vol. 79, No. 1, (Jan. - Feb., 2000), p. 52.
2 [美]扎勒米·哈利勒扎德等:《美国与亚洲:美国的新战略和兵力态势》,腾建群、林治远等译,新华出版社2001年版,第2-3页。
1 [新加坡]许美通:《美国与东亚:冲突与合作》,李小刚译,中央编译出版社1999年版,第19页。
2 U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region, Feb.27, 1995.
3 U.S. Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report, September 30, 2001.
4 James Kelly,“Geoge W. Bush and Asia: An Assessment”, in Robert M. Hathaway and Wilson Lee eds., George W. Bush and East Asia: A First Term Assessment, Washington, D.C.: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, 2005, p.22.
5 [美]沃伦·克里斯托弗:《美国新外交:经济、防务、民主——美国前国务卿克里斯托弗回忆录》,新华出版社1999年版,第327页。
1 [新加坡]许美通:《美国与东亚:冲突与合作》,李小刚译,中央编译出版社1999年版,第109页。
2 The White House, A National Security Strategy of Engagement and Enlargement, July 1994.
3潘凤东:《冷战后美国东亚战略析论》,中共中央党校硕士论文,2001-06-30,第16页。
4 U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region, Nov.23, 1998, p.1.
1 U.S. Department of Defense, A Strategic Framework for the Asian Pacific Rim: Looking Toward the 21st Century, April 1990.
1 The Commission on America’s National Interest, America’s National Interest, July, 2000.
2 Richard N. Haass,“Paradigm Lost,”Foreign Affairs, Vol. 74, No. 1 (Jan. - Feb., 1995), pp. 43-58.
1 Council on Foreign Relations, Redressing the Balance: American Engagement with Asia, New York: Council on Foreign Relations Press, 1996, p.3.
1 See Harry Harding,“Red Star Rising in the East,”Washington Post, March 9, 1997, p.Ⅹ-4.
1 Michael J. Green and Patrick M. Cronin, ed., The U.S.-Japan Alliance: Past, Present, and Future, New York: Council on Foreign Relations Press, 1999, p.37.
2 [美]沈大伟:《中美战略关系:从伙伴到竞争对手》,《世界经济与政治》,2001年第2期,第52页。
1参见:阎学通:《美国霸权与中国安全》,天津人民出版社2000年版,第26、27页。
2 U.S. Department of Defense, Asia of 2025, 2000.
3 [美]布热津斯基:《如何与中国共处》,《战略与管理》,2000年第3期,第68页。
4 [美]国防大学战略研究所:《中国战略走向》,国防大学出版社1999年版,第16页。
1 Joshua Cooper Ramo, The Beijing Consensus, London: The Foreign Policy Centre, 2004, p. 3.
2中美之间在科索沃、伊拉克、联合国等一系列重大国际和地区战略问题上矛盾尖锐。
3黄靖:《美国亚太战略与对华政策的演变》,《新远见》,2007年第7期,第46页。
1 Zbigniew Brzezinski,“Make Money, Not War,”Foreign Policy, No. 146 (Jan. - Feb., 2005), p. 46.
2 Zbigniew Brzezinski,“Make Money, Not War,”Foreign Policy, No. 146 (Jan. - Feb., 2005), p. 47.
3 [美]布热津斯基:《如何与中国共处》,《战略与管理》,2000年第3期,第70-71页。
4中国如日东升、美国日薄西山;中国处在漫漫长夜后的黎明时刻,而美国则要进入黄昏时刻开始后的漫漫长夜。
1 U.S. Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report, September 30, 2001.
2 [美]塞缪尔·亨廷顿:《美国国家利益受到忽视》,《外交》,1997年10月号。译文见于《参考消息》,1997年10月16、17、18日,第3版。[美]萨缪尔·亨廷顿:《美国国家利益的消蚀》,《战略与管理》,1998年第6期,第91、92、93页。
1 David Shambaugh,“China’s Military Views the World: Ambivalent Security,”International Security, Winter 1999/2000, pp.52-79.
1 [美]布热津斯基:《如何与中国共处》,《战略与管理》,2000年第3期,第68页。
2罗伯特·罗斯:“美中两个大国需要相互尊重对方的战略利益”,载陈舟:《美国安全战略与东亚:美国著名国际战略家访谈录》,世界知识出版社2002年版,第93-94页。
3 [美]布热津斯基:《如何与中国共处》,《战略与管理》,2000年第3期,第67页。
4 The White House, The National Security Strategy of The United States of America, March 16, 2006, p.6.
1在竞选期间,克林顿不是猛烈抨击布什的对华政策,就是大肆指责中国的人权状况,以争取选票。
2 Zalmay M. Khalilzad,“From Containment to Global Leadership? America and the World After the Cold War”, RAND, 1995.
1牛军:《论克林顿政府第一任期对华政策的演变及其特点》,《美国研究》,1998年第1期,第11页。
2“President’s May 28 Statement on China/MFN,”see in Bulletin, U.S. Information Service, Embassy of the United States of America, May 29, 1993.
3新华社华盛顿1993年1月13日电;刘连第、汪大为编著:《中美关系的轨迹:1993年-2000年大事纵览》,时事出版社2001年版,第359、360页。
4新华社华盛顿1996年5月31日电。
5 Admiral Charles R. Larson,“United States Pacific Command: Posture Statement, 1994”, Honolulu: United States Pacific Commnand, March 1994.
1 Kent Wieemann,“Current State US-China Relations”, U.S. Department of State Dispatch, July 24, 1995, p.587. Bill Clinton,“To Advance the Common Interest in a Open China,”International Herald Tribune, June 1, 1994.
3 U.S. Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report, May 20, 1997.
1 Robert L. Suettinger, Beyond Tiananmen: The Politics of U.S.-China Relations, 1989-2000, Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2003, pp.351-380.
2 U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region, November 23, 1998.
3见美国白宫《新世纪国家安全战略》文件,新华社1998年12月1日电。《参考资料》1999年1月4日。
4美国白宫《新世纪国家安全战略》,美新署2000年1月5日。
1 Global Trends 2015: A Dialogue About the Future With Non-Government Experts (NIC2000-02), December 18, 2000.
2佴祖吉:《克林顿政府第二任期对华政策的调整》,《现代国际关系》,1997年第8期,第12、13页。
3由于中国的未来发展方向未定,美国为避免出现战略失误而加强了两面下注的倾向。
1 Condoleezza Rice,“Promoting the National Interest”, Foreign Affairs, 79, No.1, January/February 2000, pp.45-62.
2转引自:冷晓玲、倪峰:《布什上台以来美国的对华政策》,《当代亚太》,2001年第7期,第3页。
1《美国防部对华订围堵策略——无论有否民主都视为敌人》,[香港]《新报》,2001-05-13。
2 RAND, America and Asia: American New Strategy and Military Forces, May 15, 2001.
3 RAND, The United States and Asia: Toward a New U.S. Strategy and Force Posture, 2001.
4浦启华:《美国的亚太战略与亚太战略格局》,《当代世界与社会主义》,2001年第5期,第36页。
1 The White House, The National Security Strategy of The United States of America, September 2002.
2可以解读为:中美关系将处于合作与斗争并存、交往与磨擦同在的状态,但合作与交往将占主导方面。刘建飞:《21世纪初美国亚太新战略与中美关系》,《重庆社会主义学院学报》,2002年第2期,第48页。
3 The White House, The National Security Strategy of The United States of America, September 20, 2002.
1 U.S. Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report, September 30, 2001, p.4.
2 Nuclear Posture Review [Excerpts], Submitted to Congress on 31 December 2001.
3 The White House, The National Security Strategy of The United States of America, September 20, 2002.
4 See Jessica T. Mathews,“September 11, One Year Later: A World of Change”, Policy Brief, Special Edition 18, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2002.
1 Robert B. Zoellick,“Whither China: From Membership to Responsibility”, Remarks to National Committee on U.S.-China Relations, New York City, September 21, 2005.
2 Condoleezza Rice,“Transformational Diplomacy”, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, January 18, 2006.
1 The White House, The National Security Strategy of The United States of America, March 16, 2006.
1 Ashton B. Carter and John P. White, eds., Keeping the Edge: Managing Defense for the Future, Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2000, p.Ⅳ. http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/files/kte_pref.pdf. [美]艾什顿·卡特、威廉姆·佩里:《预防性防御:一项美国新安全战略》,胡利平、杨韵琴译,上海人民出版社2000年版,第11页。
2寒天阳:《浅析“预防性防御”战略》,《国际政治研究》,2001年第2期,第87页。
3 [美]艾什顿·卡特、威廉姆·佩里:《预防性防御:一项美国新安全战略》,胡利平、杨韵琴译,上海人民出版社2000年版,第19页。William J. Perry,“Defense in an Age of Hope,”Foreign Affairs, Vol. 75, No. 6, Nov. - Dec., 1996, pp. 65, 79.
4 William J. Perry,“Defense in an Age of Hope,”Foreign Affairs, Vol. 75, No. 6, Nov. - Dec., 1996, p. 72.
1 William J. Perry,“Defense in an Age of Hope,”Foreign Affairs, Vol. 75, No. 6, Nov. - Dec., 1996, p. 72.
2谭宏庆:“防范与遏制:美国亚太战略布局与中国”,载中国现代国际关系研究院美欧研究中心编:《反恐背景下美国全球战略》,时事出版社2004年版,第274~280页。
1陈云:《陈云文选》(第三卷),人民出版社1995年版,第370页。
2李沽明1991年12月5日的讲话,[台湾]《世界日报》,1991年12月6日。
1阿拉斯泰尔·伊恩·约翰斯顿:“接触政策是最有效的”,见陈舟:《美国安全战略与东亚:美国著名国际战略家访谈录》,世界知识出版社2002年版,第127-128页。
1赵学功:《巨大的转变:战后美国对东亚的政策》,天津人民出版社2002年版,第396页。
2 William Christoer and Robert Kagan,“Foreign Policy and the Future of the Republic,”The Weekly Standard, September 4th, 1998.
3阎学通等:《中国崛起:国际环境评估》,天津人民出版社1998年版,第242页。
1 [美]布热津斯基:《如何与中国共处》,《战略与管理》,2000年第3期,第73页。
2 [美]迪恩·艾奇逊:《艾奇逊回忆录》,上海《国际问题资料》编辑组等合译,上海译文出版社1978年版,第233页。
3 Department of State, American Foreign Policy, Basic Documents, 1950-1955, New York: Arno Press, 1971, pp.2317-2318.
1陶文钊主编:《美国对华政策文件集(1949-1972)》(第二卷,上册),世界知识出版社2003年版,第383页。
2李植谷等:《美国全球战略大调整》,四川人民出版社1993年版,第178页。
1既有可能成为国际社会负责任的一员和美国的朋友,也有可能谋取地区霸权而成为美国的对手。
1 Scott Snyder,“A New Direction for US Policy Toward North Korea?,”The Korean Journal of Defense Analysis, Winter 1998, p.14.
2 [美]亨利·基辛格:《中国和西欧对美国同样重要》,载现代国际关系研究所选编:《当代世界与中国》,时事出版社1988年版,第74页。明清以来,围绕朝鲜半岛并以此为主战场就先后发生了四次大规模的国际战争:明朝抗日壬辰战争、中日甲午战争、日俄战争以及朝鲜战争。
3 [英]哈尔福德·麦金德:《历史的地理枢纽》,林尔蔚、陈江译,商务印书馆1985年版,第9页。
1 Victor D. Cha and David C. Kang,“The Debate over North Korea,”Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 119, No. 2, Summer, 2004, p. 230.
2 Victor D. Cha and David C. Kang,“The Korea Crisis,”Foreign Policy, No. 136, May - Jun., 2003, p. 24.
3自1953年朝鲜战争结束以来,在非军事区发生了多达1400起冲突事件,造成899名朝鲜人、394名韩国人以及90名美军士兵的死亡。See Victor D. Cha and David C. Kang,“The Korea Crisis,”Foreign Policy, No. 136, May - Jun., 2003, p. 24.
4 Victor D. Cha,“North Korea’s Weapons of Mass Destruction: Badges, Shields, or Swords?”Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 117, No. 2, Summer, 2002, pp. 225, 226.
1 Victor D. Cha and David C. Kang,“The Debate over North Korea,”Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 119, No. 2, Summer, 2004, p. 247.
2 Bruce Cumings,“Spring Thaw for Korea’s Cold War,”The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientist, April 1992, p.20.
3 Cited in Leon V. Sigal, Disarming Strangers: Nuclear Diplomacy with North Korea, Princeton University Press, 1998, p. 21.
4 Victor D. Cha and David C. Kang,“The Korea Crisis,”Foreign Policy, No. 136, May - Jun., 2003, p. 24.
1 Victor D. Cha,“Hawk Engagement and Preventive Defense on the Korean Peninsula,”International Security, Vol. 27, No. 1, Summer, 2002, p. 47.
2 Victor D. Cha,“South Korea in 2004: Peninsular Flux,”Asian Survey, Vol. 45, No. 1, Jan. - Feb., 2005, p. 40.
3所谓“不对称攻击”是指那些实力远逊于美国且与美国没有热线联系的国家,无力与美国正面较量,而是通过采取价格低廉且杀伤力大的非常规手段攻击美国。
1林利民:《朝鲜核问题的三种解决前景与中国的政策选择》,《江南社会学院学报》,2004年第4期,第12页。
1高奇琦:《美国核威胁在朝鲜核选择中的作用》,载复旦大学韩国研究中心编:《韩国研究论丛》(第十四辑),世界知识出版社2007年版,第49页。
2 Michael J. Mazarr,“Going Just a Little Nuclear: Nonproliferation Lessons from North Korea,”International Security, Vol. 20, No. 2, Autumn, 1995, p. 100.
1 Selig S. Harrison,“Did North Korea Cheat?”, Foreign Affairs, Vol. 84, No. 1, Jan. - Feb., 2005, p. 110.
2 Newsweek, July 1994, cited in Bruce Cumings,“The Structural Basis of Anti-Americanism in the Republic of Korea,”unpublished paper presented at Georgetown University, 30 January 2003, p.26.
3 Mary McGrory,“Bush’s Moonshine Policy,”op-ed, Washington Post, 29 December 2002.
4 Fox News, 15 January 2003,10:08 pm, cited in Cumings,“The Structural Basis of Anti-Americanism,”p.25.
5 Victor D. Cha and David C. Kang,“The Debate over North Korea,”Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 119, No. 2, Summer, 2004, p. 238.
1 [美]罗伯特·杰维斯:《国际政治中的知觉与错误知觉》,秦亚青译,世界知识出版社2003年版,第13-15页。
2 Victor D. Cha and David C. Kang,“The Debate over North Korea,”Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 119, No. 2, Summer, 2004, p. 240.
3于迎丽:《论美国对朝政策的“变”与“不变”:兼论奥巴马政府的对朝政策趋向》,《辽东学院学报(社会科学版)》,2010年第1期,第134页。
1 1988年10月开始,美国在北京开始与朝鲜进行低级别的直接对话,在整个1991年召开了18次会议。
2陈峰君、王传剑:《亚太大国与朝鲜半岛》,北京大学出版社2002年版,第105页。
1 The White House, National Security Strategy of The United States, August 15th, 1991.
2 James A. Baker III,“America in Asia: Emerging Architecture for a Pacific Community,”Foreign Affairs, Vol. 70, No. 5, Winter, 1991, pp. 1-18.
1所谓“不对称威胁”,是指那些绝对军事实力与美国极不相称的敌对国家或敌对势力利用非常规手段给美国带来巨大危险的种种威胁,诸如恐怖主义、核生化武器、信息战和环境破坏等。See U.S. Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report, May 1997.
3高连福主编:《东北亚国家对外战略》,社会科学文献出版社2002年版,第52-53页。
1 Anthony Lake,“From Containment to Enlargement”, Johns Hopkins University, School of Advanced International Studies, Washington, D.C., September 21, 1993.
2上海国际问题研究所编:《国际形势年鉴1994》,上海辞书出版社1994年版,第345-347页。
3 Jane’s Defense Weekly, Sep. 10, 1994, p.14.
4 Scott Snyder,“Review: The Fire Last Time: Lessons from the Last Korean Nuclear Crisis,”Foreign Affairs, Vol. 83, No. 4, Jul. - Aug., 2004, p. 145.
5虽说卡特是以私人身份前往朝鲜,但是他在事前已与克林顿总统通过电话,并由负责军事与安全事务的助理国务卿罗伯特·加卢奇(Robert Gallucci)向其进行简报,并有国务院人员随行担任翻译。因此,卡特受克林顿所托进行“第二轨道”外交,是不言而喻的。See Young Whan Kihl and Peter Hayes, eds., Peace and Security in Northeast Asia: The Nuclear Issue and the Korean Peninsula, Armonk, New York: M. E. Sharpe, Inc., 1997, op.cit, pp.190-194.
1 Leon V. Sigal, Disarming Strangers: Nuclear Diplomacy with North Korea, Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1998, p. 132.
2 Agreed Framework betwenn the United States of America and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Geneva, October 21, 1994, available at: http://www.kedo.org/pdfs/AgreedFramework.pdf.
3 Scott Snyder,“Review: The Fire Last Time: Lessons from the Last Korean Nuclear Crisis,”Foreign Affairs, Vol. 83, No. 4, Jul. - Aug., 2004, p. 145.
1 Robert S. Litwak, Regime Change: U.S. Strategy through the Prism of 9/11, Washington, D.C.: Woodrow Wilson Center Press, 2007, p. 258.
2 Samuel S. Kim,“North Korea’s Nuclear Strategy and the Interface between International and Domestic Politics,”Asian Perspective, Vol. 34, No. 1, Spring 2010, p. 63.
3“大浦洞-I”型中程导弹采用三级推进器和固体燃料,以至于很多人都没有预期到朝鲜能在2005年之前获得这种能力。See Victor D. Cha,“The Rationale for‘Enhanced’Engagement of North Korea: After the Perry Policy Review,”Asian Survey, Vol. 39, No. 6, Nov. - Dec., 1999, p. 849.
1高连福:《美国改变了对朝鲜半岛的政策吗》,《当代亚太》,2000年第10期,第13页。
1安洪泉:《调整中的美国对朝鲜政策》,《现代国际关系》,1999年第7期,第24页。
2 Victor D. Cha,“The Rationale for‘Enhanced’Engagement of North Korea: After the Perry Policy Review,”Asian Survey, Vol. 39, No. 6, Nov. - Dec., 1999, p. 846.
1 Statement by Christopher Cox, Hearing of the House International Relations Committee, 13 October 1999.
2 Statement by Dana Rohrbacher, Hearings of the House International Relations Committee, 24 March 1999 and 13 October 1999.
3 Michael O’Hanlon and Mike Mochizuki,“Economic Reform and Military Downsizing: A Key to Solving the North Korean Nuclear Crisis?,”The Brookings Review, Vol. 21, No. 4, Fall, 2003, p. 12.
3 Michael Gordon,“U.S. Toughens Terms for North Korea Talks,”New York Times, 3 July 2001.
4转引自:陈峰君主编:《亚太安全析论》,中国国际广播出版社2004年版,第278页。
1 Victor D. Cha and David C. Kang,“The Korea Crisis,”Foreign Policy, No. 136, May - Jun., 2003, p. 20.
2 Hans M. Kristensen,“Preemptive Posturing: What Happened to Deterrence,”Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, September/October 2002, p.59.
4布什将金正日说成是“小矮子”,并称自己有多么“憎恨”他。“Remarks by President Bush and President Kim Dae-Jung of South Korea,”7 March 2001, http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/03/20010307-6.html. Also see Bob Woodward, Bush At War, New York: Simon & Schuster, 2002, pp.339-340.
1 The White House, The National Security Strategy of The United States of America, September 20, 2002, pp. 14-15.
2 Victor D. Cha and David C. Kang,“The Debate over North Korea,”Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 119, No. 2, Summer, 2004, p. 237.
4 Victor D. Cha and David C. Kang,“The Debate over North Korea,”Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 119, No. 2, Summer, 2004, p. 248.
5 Selig S. Harrison,“Did North Korea Cheat?”, Foreign Affairs, Vol. 84, No. 1, Jan. - Feb., 2005, p. 101.
2 Anwar Iqbal,“Rumsfeld Warns N. Korea: U.S. Can Fight,”United Press International, December 23, 2002.
2 See Samuel S. Kim,“North Korea’s Nuclear Strategy and the Interface between International and Domestic Politics,”Asian Perspective, Vol. 34, No. 1, Spring 2010, p. 66.
1 Victor D. Cha and David C. Kang,“The Debate over North Korea,”Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 119, No. 2, Summer, 2004, p. 237.
2 Philip Shenon,“North Korea Says Nuclear Program Can Be Negotiated”, New York Times, November 3, 2002.
1 Victor D. Cha and David C. Kang,“The Debate over North Korea,”Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 119, No. 2, Summer, 2004, p. 236.
2 The White House, The National Security Strategy of The United States of America, March 16, 2006, pp.3, 4.
1 Glenn Kessler,“Far-Reaching U.S. Plan Impaired N. Korea Deal,”Washington Post, October 26, 2008.
1 Ibid.
3樊吉社:《美国对朝政策:两次朝核危机比较》,《美国研究》,2009年第4期,第36页。
1 [美]艾什顿·卡特、威廉姆·佩里:《预防性防御:一项美国新安全战略》,胡利平、杨韵琴译,上海人民出版社2000年版,第103页。
2“威慑+对话”、“制裁+补偿”、“强硬+怀柔”、“胡萝卜+大棒”诸如此类的表述都可视为一个意思。
3美国这一软硬兼施、诱压并举、刚柔并济的两手政策就像编织在一起的红黑线绳贯彻始终,只是在不同时期根据不同形式变化和美国的政策需要,其红黑两线各自粗细长短会相应有所变动。见:陈峰君主编:《亚太安全析论》,中国国际广播出版社2004年版,第30页。
4“‘Sunshine’or Moonshine?”Wall Street Journal, March 2, 1999.
5 Victor D. Cha,“The Rationale for‘Enhanced’Engagement of North Korea: After the Perry Policy Review,”Asian Survey, Vol. 39, No. 6, Nov. - Dec., 1999, p. 851.
1 Victor D. Cha,“Hawk Engagement and Preventive Defense on the Korean Peninsula,”International Security, Vol. 27, No. 1, Summer, 2002, p. 42, 68.
2陈峰君、王传剑:《亚太大国与朝鲜半岛》,北京大学出版社2002年版,第109页。
3 Douglas Paal,“Achieving Korean Reunification”in Nicholas Eberstadt and Richard Ellings, eds., Korea's Future and the Great Powers, Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2001, p.305.
4接触会向朝鲜及其它“无赖”国家传递错误的信息,从而强化它们所认为的西方是纸老虎的观点。毋庸置疑的是,寻求包容无赖政权在道德上是令人厌恶的。
5 Victor D. Cha,“Hawk Engagement and Preventive Defense on the Korean Peninsula,”International Security, Vol. 27, No. 1, Summer, 2002, p. 70.
1 Victor D. Cha,“Hawk Engagement and Preventive Defense on the Korean Peninsula,”International Security, Vol. 27, No. 1, Summer, 2002, p. 73.
1 Marcus Noland,“Why North Korea Will Muddle Through,”Foreign Affairs, Vol. 76, No. 4, July/August 1997, pp. 105-118; and Byung-joon Ahn,“The Man Who Would Be Kim,”Foreign Affairs, Vol. 73, No. 6, November/December 1994, pp. 94-108.
2 Victor D. Cha and David C. Kang,“The Korea Crisis,”Foreign Policy, No. 136, May - Jun., 2003, pp. 21, 22, 23.
1参见:金强一:《美日东北亚区域战略与朝鲜半岛问题》,《当代亚太》,2004年第9期,第21页。
2于美华:《新时期美、日、俄对朝鲜半岛政策特点及其走势》,《现代国际关系》,1997年第1期,第33页。
3郭锐:《朝鲜半岛与中国大战略》,《解放军外国语学院学报》,2006年第1期,第117页。
1 [美]陶慕廉:《朝鲜半岛危机的最终解决与美国在北朝鲜的利益》,《战略与管理》,1994年第4期,第30页。
2 U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region, Feb.27, 1995.
1 See U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region, Feb.27, 1995. U.S. Department of Defense, A Strategic Framework for the Asian Pacific Rim: Report to Congress, July 1992, p.9.
2“X边论/主义”(单边、双边、多边):由X边构筑的安全网/安全共同体。
1 Samuel P. Huntington,“The Lonely Superpower”, Foreign Affairs, March-April, 1999, p.36.
2 [美]兹比格纽·布热津斯基:《大棋局:美国的首要地位及其地缘战略》,中国国际问题研究所译,上海人民出版社1998年版,第13、32~33页。
4 [美]斯皮克曼:《和平地理学》,刘愈之译,商务印书馆1965年版,第112页。
1“America’s World”, The Economist, October 23, 1999, p.15. Joseph S. Nye Jr., Sean Creehan and Sabeel Rahman“The Power of Persuasion: Dual Components of US Leadership,”Harvard International Review, Winter 2003.
2见:[美]斯塔夫里阿诺斯:《全球通史:1500年以后的世界》,吴象婴、梁赤民译,上海社会科学院出版社1998年版,第543页。
1郑伟民主编:《衰落还是复兴:全球经济中的美国》,社会科学文献出版社1998年版,第278页。
2 The Commission on America’s National Interest, America’s National Interest, July, 2000.
1 Condoleezza Rice,“Promoting the National Interest,”Foreign Affairs, Vol. 79, No. 1, (Jan. - Feb., 2000), p. 46.
1 U.S. Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report, May 20, 1997.
2 Condoleezza Rice,“Promoting the National Interest,”Foreign Affairs, Vol. 79, No. 1, (Jan. - Feb., 2000), p. 51.
3软权力、软力量、软实力、软国力以及柔性国力皆是指soft power。
4 [美]约瑟夫·奈:《美国霸权的困惑:为什么美国不能独断专行》,郑志国等译,世界知识出版社2002年版,第187页。
1 [美]约瑟夫·奈:《“软权力”再思索》,《国外社会科学》,2006年第4期,第90页。
3刘德斌:《软权力:美国霸权的挑战与启示》,《吉林大学社会科学学报》,2001年第3期,第67页。
4 [美]约瑟夫·奈:《美国霸权的困惑:为什么美国不能独断专行》,郑志国等译,世界知识出版社2002年版,第73页。
1 Joseph S. Nye, Jr, The Paradox of American Power: Why the World’s Only Superpower can’t Do It Alone, Oxford University Press, 2002, pp.10-11.
2 Josef Joffe,“Who’s Afraid of Mr. Big?”The National Interest, Summer 2001, p.43.
3 Hubert Védrine with Dominique Moisi, France in an Age of Globalization, Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2001, p.2.
1刘德斌:《软权力:美国霸权的挑战与启示》,《吉林大学社会科学学报》,2001年第3期,第65页。
2王晓德:《美国文化与外交》,世界知识出版社2000年版,第2页。
3王沪宁:《作为国家实力的文化:软权力》,《复旦学报(社会科学版)》,1993年第3期,第96页。
1 U.S. Pacific Command, Posture Statement 1994, pp.2-6.
1该地区的不确定性持续存在且紧张局势有所加剧。美国的前沿部署必须从应付单一、确定的威胁转向应对多样化、不确定的挑战。
2 U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region, Feb. 1995. U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region, Nov.23, 1998.
3朱阳明主编:《亚太安全战略论》,军事科学出版社2000年版,第85页。
4 [美]丹尼斯·布莱尔:《亚太地区安全的集体责任》,新加坡国防与战略研究所,1999年5月。
5 U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region, Feb.27, 1995, p.6.
1 U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region, Nov.23, 1998, pp.10-11.
2美国亚太盟国既有日本、韩国、澳大利亚、泰国、菲律宾等与美国订有安全防卫条约的国家,也有与美国签订“自由联盟”(Compact of Free Association)的马绍尔群岛、硫球及密克罗尼西亚联邦等太平洋岛国。
1 Ted Hopf,“Post-Cold War Allies: The Illusion of Unipolarity”, in Barry Rubin and Thomas A. Keaney, eds., US Allies in a Changing World, London: Frank Cass Publishers, 2001, pp. 28-30.
2新兴大国崛起、地区热点问题凸显、大规模杀伤性武器的扩散等多样化威胁。
1 Toshiyuki Shikata,“The Japan-US Alliance: A Key to the Peace and Stablity of the Asia Pacific Region”, in Barry Rubin and Thomas A. Keaney, eds., US Allies in a Changing World, London: Frank Cass Publishers, 2001, p.191.
1阿拉斯泰尔·伊恩·约翰斯顿:“接触政策是最有效的”,见陈舟:《美国安全战略与东亚:美国著名国际战略家访谈录》,世界知识出版社2002年版,第129-130页。
2 U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region, Feb.27, 1995.
3道格·帕尔:“美国的防务政策调整将充分体现亚洲的优先地位”,载陈舟:《美国安全战略与东亚:美国著名国际战略家访谈录》,世界知识出版社2002年版,第59页。
1 Testimony by Michael H. Armacost, before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Subcommittee on East Asian and Pacific Affairs, April 15, 1997.
1 Thomas J. Christensen,“China, the U.S.-Japan Alliance, and the Security Dilemma in East Asia,”International Security, Vol. 23, No. 4 , Spring 1999, p. 65.
1 U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region, Nov.23, 1998, p.22.
2 Stephen M. Walt, The Origins of Alliance, Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1987, p.4.
3高金钿:《国际战略学概论》,国防大学出版社1995年版,第141页。
2杨伯江等:《朝鲜半岛缓和进程中的东北亚地区形势》,《现代国际关系》,2001年第1期,第31页。
1 1992年中韩建交之时,中国还只是韩国的第六大贸易伙伴国,中韩建交后第二年即1993年上升到第三位。2003年,中国超过日本成为韩国第二大贸易国。2004年,中国首度超越美国成为韩国最大贸易伙伴,而韩国则成为中国第三大贸易伙伴。
2 Derek J. Mitchell,“Does Popular Sentiment Matter? What’s at stake?”Derek J. Mitchell ed., Strategy and Sentiment: South Korean Views of the United States and the U.S.-ROK Alliance, June 2004, CSIS, p.7.
3 [美]兹比格纽·布热津斯基:《大棋局:美国的首要地位及其地缘战略》,中国国际问题研究所译,上海人民出版社1998年版,第63-64页。
1 [美]兹比格涅夫·布热津斯基:《竞赛方案:进行美苏竞争的地缘战略纲领》,刘晓明、陈京华、赵滨译,张毅君校,中国对外翻译出版公司1988年版,第47页。
2 [美]兹比格纽·布热津斯基:《大棋局:美国的首要地位及其地缘战略》,中国国际问题研究所译,上海人民出版社1998年版,第63-64、248页。
3参见:[英]哈尔福德·麦金德:《历史的地理枢纽》,林尔蔚、陈江译,商务印书馆1985年版,第10页。
4根据小布什第二任期美国国家安全委员会亚洲司司长维克多·查的解释,“反力量投送”是指利用美国的前沿部署,阻止其他国家的力量投送超越东亚沿岸。See Victor D. Cha,“Forward Presense, Anti-Americanism, and the U.S.-Korea Alliance’s Future”, Korea Observer, Vol.33, No.4, Winter 2002, pp.507-539.
5 [美]国防大学国家战略研究所:《理清纷乱的世界:美国跨世纪的全球战略评估》,林东主译,国防大学出版社2000年版,第269-270页。
1 Stephen M. Walt,“Why Alliance Endure or Collapse,”Survival, Vol. 39, No. 1, (Spring 1994), p. 157.
1 Desmond Ball,“The US-Australian Alliance,”in Barry Rubin and Thomas A. Keaney, eds. US Alliance in a Changing World, London: Frank Cass Publishers, 2001, p. 248.
1刘新华:《略论澳大利亚的地缘战略地位和美澳军事同盟关系》,《世界经济与政治论坛》,2003年第3期,第78页。
2汤广辉:《澳美关系升温的背后》,《世界知识》,1996年第20期,第19页。
3 Robyn Lim,“Australian Security after the Cold War,”Orbis, (Winter 1998), p.98.
1 Dan Blumenthal,“Strengthening the U.S.-Australian Alliance: Progress and Pitfalls,”Asian Outlook, April–May 2005.
1丹尼斯·布莱尔2000年3月16日在华盛顿卡耐基国际和平基金会的讲话。
2 U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region, Nov. 23, 1998, p.6.
1 William T. Tow,“The‘Anchors’: Collaborative Security, Substance or Smokescreen?”in Brad Williams and Andrew Newman, eds. Japan, Australia and Asia-Pacific Security, London & New York: Routledge, 2006.
2 Dan Blumenthal,“Strengthening the U.S.-Australian Alliance: Progress and Pitfalls,”Asian Outlook, April–May 2005.
1石源华、汪伟民:《美日、美韩同盟比较研究——兼论美日韩安全互动与东北亚安全》,《国际观察》, 2006年第1期,第64页。
1 U.S. Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report, September 30, 2001.
1 [美]兹比格涅夫·布热津斯基:《大抉择:美国站在十字路口》,王振西主译,新华出版社2005年版,第70页。
1 U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region, Feb. 1995.
2 U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region, Nov. 23, 1998, p.66.
1 U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region, Feb. 1995.
1 Thomas J. Christensen,“China, the U.S.-Japan Alliance, and the Security Dilemma in East Asia,”International Security, Vol. 23, No. 4 , Spring 1999, pp. 73-74.
1参见:倪世雄、王义桅:《霸权均势:冷战后美国的战略选择》,《美国研究》,2000年第1期,第10页。
2参见Richard K. Betts,“Wealth, Power, and Instability: East Asia and the United States after the Cold War,”International Security, Vol. 18, No. 3, Winter, 1993-1994, pp. 34-77.
1 See U.S. Department of Defense, A Strategic Framework for the Asian Pacific Rim: Looking Toward the 21st Century, April 1990, p.5; Thomas J. Christensen,“China, the U.S.-Japan Alliance, and the Security Dilemma in East Asia,”International Security, Vol. 23, No. 4, Spring 1999, p. 50.
2 Thomas J. Christensen,“China, the U.S.-Japan Alliance, and the Security Dilemma in East Asia,”International Security, Vol. 23, No. 4, Spring, 1999, p. 50.
3只有当东亚均势体系处于危险之中时,美国才会出手干预以反对东亚均势的破坏者。
4 [美]约翰·米尔斯海默:《大国政治的悲剧》,王义桅、唐小松译,上海人民出版社2003年版,第530页。[美]亨利·基辛格:《美国需要外交政策吗——21世纪的外交》,胡利平、凌建平译,中国友谊出版公司2003年版,第131页。
5可参见:[美]约翰·米尔斯海默:《大国政治的悲剧》,王义桅、唐小松译,上海人民出版社2003年版,第356页。
1 Joseph S. Nye, Jr., The Paradox of American Power: Why the World’s Only Superpower can’t Go It Alone, New York: Oxford University Press, 2002, p.144.
1使东亚地区的麻烦大不至于威胁到美国在该地区的战略利益、小不至于让东亚盟国认为不必美国出面即可自行解决的程度。
2 Michael Harmacost, Friends or Rivals? The Insider’s Account of U.S.-Japan Relations, Columbia University Press, 1996, p.246.
3 U.S. Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report, September 30, 2001, p.12.
1中国快速的经济增长既能使它转变成更为民主、和平与满意的大国,也能让它变成对邻国安全更为强大的威胁。See Aaron L. Friedberg,“Ripe for Rivalry: Prospects for Peace in a Multipolar Asia,”International Security, Vol. 18, No. 3, Winter, 1993-1994, p. 19.
2 [美]约翰·米尔斯海默:《大国政治的悲剧》,王义桅、唐小松译,上海人民出版社2003年版,第540、541、543页。
3 Thomas J. Christensen,“China, the U.S.-Japan Alliance, and the Security Dilemma in East Asia,”International Security, Vol. 23, No. 4, Spring, 1999, p. 50.
4 U.S. Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report, May 1997.
1 [美]迈克尔·阿马科斯科:《朋友还是对手——前美国驻日大使说日本》,于铁军、孙博红译,袁明校,新华出版社1998年版,第254页。
1参见:[美]迈克尔·阿马科斯科:《朋友还是对手——前美国驻日大使说日本》,于铁军、孙博红译,袁明校,新华出版社1998年版,第14、15、20页。
2 Aaron L. Friedberg,“Ripe for Rivalry: Prospects for Peace in a Multipolar Asia,”International Security, Vol. 18, No. 3, Winter, 1993-1994, p. 19.
3黄靖:《美国亚太战略与对华政策的演变》,《新远见》,2007年第7期,第53页。
4 [美]迈克尔·阿马科斯科:《朋友还是对手——前美国驻日大使说日本》,于铁军、孙博红译,袁明校,新华出版社1998年版,第171页。
5吴心伯:《冷战结束之初美国亚太安全战略的转变》,《美国研究》,2002年第3期,第54页。
6 Global Trends 2015: A Dialogue About the Future With Non Government Experts, NIC2000-02, December 2000.
7 Joseph S. Nye, et al.,“Harnessing the Rising Sun: A U.S. Strategy for Managing Japanp’s Rise as a Global Power”, Washington Quarterly, Spring 1993.
1 Selig S. Harrison and Clyde V. Prestowitz, Jr.,“Pacific Agenda: Defense or Economics?”Foreign Policy, No. 79, Summer, 1990, p.68.
1 [美]亨利·基辛格:《大外交》,顾淑馨、林添贵译,海南出版社1998年版,第767页。
2 U.S. Department of Defense, A Strategic Framework for the Asian Pacific Rim: Looking Toward the 21st Century, April 1990.
3 Hans Morgenthau and William Thompson, Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace, 6th ed., New York: McGraw-Hill Press, 1985, p.222. Also see Paul Schroeder,“Historical Reality vs. Neo-Realist Theory,”International Security, Vol. 19, No. 1, Summer, 1994, pp. 108-148.
4“置身的均势”和下文的“游离的均势”的概念,是借鉴于倪世雄和王义桅两位学者的创造。见:倪世雄、王义桅:《霸权均势:冷战后美国的战略选择》,《美国研究》,2000年第1期,第19页。
5 See Kenneth Waltz, Theory of International Politics, Reading, Mass: Addison Wesley, 1979, pp.125-126.
6 Ted Hopf,“Post-Cold War Allies: The Illusion of Unipolarity”, in Barry Rubin and Thomas A. Keaney, eds., US Allies in a Changing World, London: Frank Cass Publishers, 2001, p.28.
1新均势战略或可称之为“大国平衡战略”、“人为的均势”、“游离的均势”、“离岸均势”(offshore balance)、“以均势求霸权”,是指霸权国纠集一些国家结成霸权联盟来制造不包含自身在内的均势,以维护自身优势和领导地位。它在一定程度上反映了“美国例外论”。这一在霸权国看来的新均势战略,从其它均势参与方的角度来看却是一种间接霸权战略。
2 Christopher Layne,“Review: A House of Cards: American Strategy toward China,”World Policy Journal, Vol. 14, No. 3, Fall 1997, pp. 77-95.
3 Michael Mastanduno,“Incomplete Hegemony: The United States and Security Order in Asia”, in Muthiah Alagappa, ed., Asian Security Order: International and Normative Features, Stanford University Press, 2003, pp.151-153.
4当中国崛起时,美国借助日本制衡中国;当日本复苏时,美国借助中国制衡日本。
5 Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr, The Cycles of American History, Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1986, p.53.
1可参见:[美]约翰·米尔斯海默:《大国政治的悲剧》,王义桅、唐小松译,上海人民出版社2003年版,第390页。
2兰德公司的研究报告就此指出,“中日联手将是美国在亚洲面临的最大地缘政治危机”。See RAND, The United States and Asia: Toward a New U.S. Strategy and Force Posture, 2001.
3 RAND, The United States and Asia: Toward a New U.S. Strategy and Force Posture, 2001.
1 [美]迈克尔·阿马科斯科:《朋友还是对手——前美国驻日大使说日本》,于铁军、孙博红译,袁明校,新华出版社1998年版,第235页。
2 The White House, The National Security Strategy of The United States of America, September 20, 2002.
1 Thomas J. Christensen,“China, the U.S.-Japan Alliance, and the Security Dilemma in East Asia,”International Security, Vol. 23, No. 4 , Spring 1999, pp. 52-54.
1 Thomas J. Christensen,“China, the U.S.-Japan Alliance, and the Security Dilemma in East Asia,”International Security, Vol. 23, No. 4 , Spring 1999, p. 70.
1金熙德:《日美同盟的“再定义”及其未来趋势》,《世界经济与政治》,2000年第7期,第14页。
1参见:金强一:《美日东北亚区域战略与朝鲜半岛问题》,《当代亚太》,2004年第9期,第22-23页。
2 Michael Mastanduno,“Incomplete Hegemony: The United States and Security Order in Asia”, in Muthiah Alagappa ed., Asian Security Order: Instrumental and Normative Features, Stanford University Press, 2003, pp.151-153.
1陈舟:《美国安全战略与东亚:美国著名国际战略家访谈录》,世界知识出版社2002年版,第21页。
1梅孜编译:《美国国家安全战略报告汇编》,时事出版社1996年版,第71页。
1 [美]斯皮克曼:《和平地理学》,刘愈之译,商务印书馆1965年版,第33-34页。
2 [美]斯皮克曼:《和平地理学》,刘愈之译,商务印书馆1965年版,第37、38页。
1乔治·费尔丁·伊利奥特少校:“序”,[英]哈尔福德·麦金德:《民主的理想与现实》,武原译,商务印书馆1965年版,第4页。
2 [美]斯皮克曼:《和平地理学》,刘愈之译,商务印书馆1965年版,第37-41页。
3 [美]斯皮克曼:《和平地理学》,刘愈之译,商务印书馆1965年版,第84、85页。
1 [美]斯皮克曼:《和平地理学》,刘愈之译,商务印书馆1965年版,序,第5页。
2 [美]詹姆斯·多尔蒂、小罗伯特?普法尔茨格拉夫:《争论中的国际关系理论》(第二版),邵文光译,世界知识出版社1987年版,第107页。
3 [美]索尔·科恩:《古代和近代的地缘政治观点》,[美]美国陆军军事学院编:《军事战略》,军事科学院外国军事研究部译,军事科学出版社1986年版,第150页。
4保卫西半球不仅包括北美、中美和南美的领土及其邻近岛屿,而且还包括“和平利用大西洋和太平洋的权利”。
5在任何情况下美国都处于安全状态,防止任何可能的挑战。
6 Zbigniew Brzezinski,“A Geostrategy for Eurasia,”Foreign Affairs, Vol. 76, No. 5 (Sep. - Oct., 1997), pp. 50-64.
1 [美]兹比格纽·布热津斯基:《大棋局:美国的首要地位及其地缘战略》,中国国际问题研究所译,上海人民出版社1998年版,第41页。
2 [美]斯皮克曼:《和平地理学》,刘愈之译,商务印书馆1965年版,第108页。
3 [美]斯皮克曼:《和平地理学》,刘愈之译,商务印书馆1965年版,第100页。
4乔治·凯南:《美国外交,1900-1950年》,新美国图书馆1951年,第10页,转引自[美]约瑟夫·奈:《美国定能领导世界吗?》,军事译文出版社1992年版,第192页。
1 [美]斯皮克曼:《和平地理学》,刘愈之译,商务印书馆1965年版,出版说明,第ii页。
2朱听昌、马荣升:《从两洋战略看美国全球战略重点的调整》,《国际观察》,2003年第2期,第23-24页。
1 [英]哈尔福德·麦金德:《民主的理想与现实》,武原译,商务印书馆1965年版,第70页。
2 [英]杰弗里·帕克:《二十世纪的西方地理政治思想》,李亦鸣等译,解放军出版社1992年版,第64页。
1 [美]布热津斯基:《如何与中国共处》,《战略与管理》,2000年第3期,第69页。
2“把中国当朋友培养中国即朋友、当敌人则势必将成为敌人。”约瑟夫·奈认为,美国不应放弃50%的使中国不成为敌人的可能性。
1“软性遏制”或可称之为“预防性遏制”、“参与性遏制”。
2“硬性遏制”战略对付那种直接而即时的威胁。
1 [英]富勒:《亚历山大的将道》,李磊、琚宏译,广西师范大学出版社2006年版,第242页。
1阿拉斯泰尔·伊恩·约翰斯顿:“接触政策是最有效的”,见陈舟:《美国安全战略与东亚:美国著名国际战略家访谈录》,世界知识出版社2002年版,第108页。
2 U.S. Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report, February 6, 2006, p.29.
1黄靖:《美国亚太战略与对华政策的演变》,《新远见》,2007年第7期,第51页。
1 [美]马丁·L·拉萨特:《超越遏制:90年代美国的亚洲战略》,《美国研究参考资料》,1993年第1期,第10-12页。
2 Condoleezza Rice,“Promoting the National Interest,”Foreign Affairs, Vol. 79, No. 1, (Jan. - Feb., 2000), p. 56.
1转引自:庄依众:《美国外交政策中的人权因素》,《社会科学》,1991年第4期,第8页。
2 [美]亨利·基辛格:《中国和西欧对美国同样重要》,载现代国际关系研究所选编:《当代世界与中国》,时事出版社1988年版,第68、69页。
1中国虽然一再宣示自己将致力于内部经济发展,对外无用兵扩张之野心,甚至将国家战略从“和平崛起”调整为“和平发展”。但是,即便中国更加委曲求全,也无法改变美国对华防范与遏制。
2 Joshua Cooper Ramo, The Beijing Consensus, London: The Foreign Policy Centre, 2004, pp.2-3.
1 Joshua Cooper Ramo, The Beijing Consensus, London: The Foreign Policy Centre, 2004, p.39.
2阎学通:《中国崛起的可能选择》,《战略与管理》,1995年第6期,第12页。
1没有空中势力,海上势力就不再有效了,而飞机如果以狭小的、彼此分散很远的地点作为根据地,就没有多大的力量。……陆上飞机比航空母舰上的飞机优越,也已经是明显的事实。见:[美]斯皮克曼:《和平地理学》,刘愈之译,商务印书馆1965年版,第100~103页。
2 [美]罗伯特·罗斯:《美中和睦:大国政治、影响范围与东亚和平》,《世界经济研究》,2004年第3期,第10页。
3《中国外交战略的选择》,《人民日报》,2003-03-19。
1《中国外交战略的选择》,《人民日报》,2003-03-19。
2阎学通:《中国安全战略的发展趋势》,《瞭望》,1996年第8-9期,第51页。
3阎学通:《对中美关系不稳定性的分析》,《世界经济与政治》,2010年第12期,第12、13、15、16、27、28页。
1保持高层接触与交往、战略对话与合作以及健康、成熟与稳定的发展势头。见:倪世雄:《中美关系“三保持”》,《世界知识》,2008年第9期,第35页。
[1]陈力.战略地理论[M].北京:解放军出版社,1990.
[2]李植谷等.美国全球战略大调整[M].成都:四川人民出版社,1993.
[3]陈云.陈云文选(第三卷)[M].北京:人民出版社,1995.
[4]高金钿.国际战略学概论[M].北京:国防大学出版社,1995.
[5]阎学通等.中国崛起:国际环境评估[M].天津:天津人民出版社,1998.
[6]阎学通.美国霸权与中国安全[M].天津:天津人民出版社,2000.
[7]正源编著.克林顿访华言行录[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,1998.
[8]苏格.美国对华政策与台湾问题[M].北京:世界知识出版社,1998.
[9]翟晓敏.冷战后的美国军事战略[M].北京:国防大学出版社,1999.
[10]张景旭编著.台湾问题:中美关系的焦点[M].福州:福建人民出版社,1999.
[11]王晓德.美国文化与外交[M].北京:世界知识出版社,2000.
[12]刘连第、汪大为编著.中美关系的轨迹:1993年-2000年大事纵览[M].北京:时事出版社,2001.
[13]赵学功.巨大的转变:战后美国对东亚的政策[M].天津:天津人民出版社,2002.
[14]陈舟.美国安全战略与东亚:美国著名国际战略家访谈录[M].北京:世界知识出版社,2002.
[15]陈峰君、王传剑.亚太大国与朝鲜半岛[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2002.
[16]钱其琛.外交十记[M].北京:世界知识出版社,2003.
[17] [美]斯皮克曼.和平地理学[M].刘愈之译.北京:商务印书馆,1965.
[18] [英]哈尔福德·麦金德.民主的理想与现实[M].武原译.北京:商务印书馆,1965.
[19] [英]哈尔福德·麦金德.历史的地理枢纽[M].林尔蔚,陈江译.北京:商务印书馆,1985.
[20] [美]迪恩·艾奇逊.艾奇逊回忆录[M].上海《国际问题资料》编辑组等合译.上海:上海译文出版社,1978.
[21] [美]约翰·柯林斯.大战略[M].军事科学院译.北京:中国人民解放军军事科学院出版社,1978.
[22] [英]利德尔·哈特.战略论[M].中国人民解放军军事科学院译.北京:战士出版社,1981.
[23] [美]兹比格涅夫·布热津斯基.运筹帷幄:指导美苏争夺的地缘战略构想[M].刘瑞祥,潘嘉玢等译.北京:军事译文出版社,1986.
[24] [美]兹比格涅夫·布热津斯基.竞赛方案:进行美苏竞争的地缘战略纲领[M].刘晓明,陈京华,赵滨译.张毅君校.北京:中国对外翻译出版公司,1988.
[25] [美]兹比格纽·布热津斯基.大棋局:美国的首要地位及其地缘战略[M].中国国际问题研究所译.上海:上海人民出版社,1998.
[26] [美]兹比格涅夫·布热津斯基.大抉择:美国站在十字路口[M].王振西主译.北京:新华出版社,2005.
[27] [美]詹姆斯?多尔蒂、小罗伯特?普法尔茨格拉夫.争论中的国际关系理论(第二版)[M].邵文光译.北京:世界知识出版社,1987.
[28] [英]阿诺德·汤因比.文明经受着考验[M].沈辉等译.顾建光校.杭州:浙江人民出版社,1988.
[29] [英]杰弗里·帕克.二十世纪的西方地理政治思想[M].李亦鸣等译.北京:解放军出版社,1992.
[30] [英]杰弗里·帕克.地缘政治学:过去、现在和未来[M].刘从德译.北京:新华出版社,2003.
[31] [美]约瑟夫·奈.美国定能领导世界吗? [M].北京:军事译文出版社,1992.
[32] [美]约瑟夫·奈.美国霸权的困惑:为什么美国不能独断专行[M].郑志国等译.北京:世界知识出版社,2002.
[33] [美]汉斯·摩根索.国际纵横策论:争强权、求和平[M].卢明华,时殷弘,林勇军译.上海:上海译文出版社,1995.
[34] [美]斯塔夫里阿诺斯.全球通史:1500年以后的世界[M].吴象婴,梁赤民译.上海:上海社会科学院出版社,1998.
[35] [美]迈克尔·阿马科斯科.朋友还是对手——前美国驻日大使说日本[M].于铁军,孙博红译.袁明校.北京:新华出版社,1998.
[36] [美]亨利·基辛格.大外交[M].顾淑馨,林添贵译.海口:海南出版社,1998.
[37] [美]亨利·基辛格.美国需要外交政策吗——21世纪的外交[M].胡利平,凌建平译.北京:中国友谊出版公司,2003.
[38] [美]沃伦·克里斯托弗.美国新外交:经济、防务、民主——美国前国务卿克里斯托弗回忆录[M].北京:新华出版社,1999 .
[39] [美]艾什顿·卡特、威廉姆·佩里.预防性防御:一项美国新安全战略[M].胡利平,杨韵琴译.上海:上海人民出版社,2000.
[40] [新加坡]许美通.美国与东亚:冲突与合作[M].李小刚译.北京:中央编译出版社,1999.
[41] [美]国防大学战略研究所.中国战略走向[M].北京:国防大学出版社,1999.
[42] [美]国防大学战略研究所.理清纷乱的世界:美国跨世纪的全球战略评估[M].林东主译.北京:国防大学出版社,2000.
[43] [美]扎勒米?哈利勒扎德等.美国与亚洲:美国的新战略和兵力态势[M].腾建群,林治远等译.北京:新华出版社,2001.
[44] [美]约翰·米尔斯海默.大国政治的悲剧[M].王义桅,唐小松译.上海:上海人民出版社,2003.
[45] [美]罗伯特·杰维斯.国际政治中的知觉与错误知觉[M].秦亚青译.北京:世界知识出版社,2003.
[46] [美]约翰?伊肯伯里主编.美国无敌:均势的未来[M].韩召颖译.北京:北京大学出版社,2005.
[47] [英]富勒.亚历山大的将道[M].李磊,琚宏译.桂林:广西师范大学出版社,2006.
[48] [美]容安澜.悬崖勒马:美国对台政策与中美关系[M].贾宗谊,武文巧译.北京:新华出版社,2007.
[49]Halford John Mackinder, Democratic Ideals and Reality[M]. New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1942.
[50]Karl W. Deutsch and Sidney A. Burrell, et al, Political Community and the North Atlantic Area: International Organization in the Light of Historical Experience[M]. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1957.
[51]Department of State, American Foreign Policy, Basic Documents, 1950-1955[M]. New York: Arno Press, 1971.
[52]Raymond Aron, The Imperial Republic: The United States and the World, 1945-1973[M]. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1975.
[53]Kenneth Waltz, Theory of International Politics[M]. Reading, Mass: Addison Wesley, 1979.
[54]Hans Morgenthau and William Thompson, Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace[M]. 6th ed., New York: McGraw-Hill Press, 1985.
[55]Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr, The Cycles of American History[M]. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1986.
[56]Stephen M. Walt, The Origins of Alliance[M]. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1987.
[57]Martin L. Lasater, The Changing of the Guard: President Clinton and the Security of Taiwan[M]. Boulder: Westview Press, 1995.
[58]Michael J. Mazarr, North Korea and the Bomb: A Case Study in Nonproliferation[M]. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1995.
[59]Council on Foreign Relations, Redressing the Balance: AmericanEngagement with Asia[M]. New York: Council on Foreign Relations Press, 1996.
[60]Michael Harmacost, Friends or Rivals? The Insider’s Account of U.S.-Japan Relations[M]. Columbia University Press, 1996.
[61]John W. Garver, Face off: China, the United States, and Taiwan’s Democratization[M]. Seattle and London: University of Washington Press, 1997.
[62]Leon V. Sigal, Disarming Strangers: Nuclear Diplomacy with North Korea[M]. Princeton University Press, 1998.
[63]Ralph N. Clough, Cooperation or Conflict in the Taiwan Strait[M]. Norman Press, 1999.
[64]James Mann, About Face: A History of American’s Curious Relationship with China, From Nixon to Clinton[M]. New York: Alfred A. Knope, 1999.
[65]Nancy B. Tucker,eds., China Confidential: American Diplomats and Sino-American Relations, 1945-1996[M]. New York: Columbia University Press, 2001.
[66]Nancy B. Tucker, Dangerous Strait: The U.S.-Taiwan-China Crisis[M]. New York: Columbia University Press, 2005.
[67]Hubert Védrine with Dominique Moisi, France in an Age of Globalization[M]. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2001.
[68]Bob Woodward, Bush At War[M]. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2002.
[69]Joseph S. Nye, Jr, The Paradox of American Power: Why the World’s Only Superpower can’t Do It Alone[M]. Oxford University Press, 2002.
[70]Robert L. Suettinger, Beyond Tiananmen: The Politics of U.S.-China Relations, 1989-2000[M]. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2003.
[71]Richard C. Bush, Untying the Knot: Making Peace in the Taiwan Strait[M]. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2005.
[72]Robert S. Litwak, Regime Change: U.S. Strategy through the Prism of 9/11[M]. Washington, D.C.: Woodrow Wilson Center Press, 2007.
[1]现代国际关系研究所选编.当代世界与中国[C].北京:时事出版社,1988.
[2]倪孝铨、[美]罗伯特·罗斯主编.美中苏三角关系[C].人民出版社,1993.
[3]上海国际问题研究所编.国际形势年鉴1994[C].上海:上海辞书出版社,1994.
[4]梅孜编译.美国国家安全战略报告汇编[C].北京:时事出版社,1996 .
[5]梅孜主编.美台关系重要资料选编(1948.11-1996.4)[C].北京:时事出版社,1997.
[6]叶自成主编.地缘政治与中国外交[C].北京:北京出版社,1998.
[7]郑伟民主编.衰落还是复兴:全球经济中的美国[C].北京:社会科学文献出版社,1998.
[8]朱阳明主编.亚太安全战略论[C].北京:军事科学出版社,2000.
[9]高连福主编.东北亚国家对外战略[C].北京:社会科学文献出版社,2002.
[10]陶文钊主编.美国对华政策文件集(1949-1972)(第二卷,上册)[C].北京:世界知识出版社,2003.
[11]陶文钊、杜瑞清、王旭主编.中美关系与东亚国际格局[C].北京:中国社会科学出版社,2003年版。
[12]陶文钊主编.冷战后的美国对华政策[C].重庆:重庆出版社,2007.
[13]陈峰君主编.亚太安全析论[C].北京:中国国际广播出版社,2004.
[14]中国现代国际关系研究院美欧研究中心编.反恐背景下美国全球战略[C].北京:时事出版社,2004.
[15]阎学通、漆海霞编.国际形势与台湾问题预测[C].北京:北京大学出版社,2005.
[16]复旦大学韩国研究中心编.韩国研究论丛(第十四辑)[C].北京:世界知识出版社,2007.
[17]王缉思主编.冷战后的美国外交[C].北京:时事出版社,2008.
[18] [美]美国陆军军事学院编.军事战略[C].军事科学院外国军事研究部译,北京:军事科学出版社,1986.
[19] Steven W. Mosher, eds., The United States and the Republic of China: Democratic Friends, Strategic Allies and Economic Partners[C]. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction, 1992.
[20] James Lilley and Chuck Downs, eds., Crisis in the Taiwan Strait[C]. National Defense University Press, 1997.
[21] Young Whan Kihl and Peter Hayes, eds., Peace and Security in Northeast Asia: The Nuclear Issue and the Korean Peninsula[C]. Armonk, New York: M. E. Sharpe, Inc., 1997.
[22] Michael J. Green and Patrick M. Cronin, ed., The U.S.-Japan Alliance: Past, Present, and Future[C]. New York: Council on Foreign Relations Press, 1999.
[23] Ashton B. Carter and John P. White, eds., Keeping the Edge: Managing Defense for the Future[C]. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2000.
[24] Barry Rubin and Thomas A. Keaney, eds., US Allies in a Changing World[C]. London: Frank Cass Publishers, 2001.
[25] Nicholas Eberstadt and Richard Ellings, eds., Korea's Future and the Great Powers[C]. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2001.
[26] Muthiah Alagappa, ed., Asian Security Order: International and Normative Features[C]. Stanford University Press, 2003.
[27] Derek J. Mitchell ed., Strategy and Sentiment: South Korean Views of the United States and the U.S.-ROK Alliance[C]. June 2004, CSIS.
[28] Robert M. Hathaway and Wilson Lee eds., George W. Bush and East Asia: A First Term Assessment[C]. Washington, D.C.: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, 2005.
[29] Brad Williams and Andrew Newman, eds. Japan, Australia and Asia-Pacific Security[C]. London & New York: Routledge, 2006.
[1]张苾芜.维系美台关系基本因素分析[J].台湾研究集刊,1991(4).
[2]庄依众.美国外交政策中的人权因素[J].社会科学,1991(4).
[3]王沪宁.作为国家实力的文化:软权力[J].复旦学报(社会科学版),1993(3).
[4]刘连弟.克林顿政府对台政策趋向和中美关系[J].世界经济与政治,1995(3).
[5]李亚强.台湾岛的海洋战略地理价值[J].舰船知识,1995(5).
[6]阎学通.中国崛起的可能选择[J].战略与管理,1995(6).
[7]阎学通.中国安全战略的发展趋势[J].瞭望,1996(8-9).
[8]阎学通.对中美关系不稳定性的分析[J].世界经济与政治,2010(12).
[9]汤广辉.澳美关系升温的背后[J].世界知识,1996(20).
[10]于美华.新时期美、日、俄对朝鲜半岛政策特点及其走势[J].现代国际关系,1997(1).
[11]周新莉.台美关系大事记(上)[J].台湾研究,1997(1).
[12]周新莉.台美关系大事记(上)(1996年7～12月)[J].台湾研究,1997(2).
[13]佴祖吉.克林顿政府第二任期对华政策的调整[J].现代国际关系,1997(8).
[14]牛军.论克林顿政府第一任期对华政策的演变及其特点[J].美国研究,1998(1).
[15]安洪泉.调整中的美国对朝鲜政策[J].现代国际关系,1999(7).
[16]倪世雄,王义桅. .霸权均势:冷战后美国的战略选择[J].美国研究,2000(1).
[17]倪世雄.中美关系“三保持”[J].世界知识,2008(9).
[18]金熙德.日美同盟的“再定义”及其未来趋势[J].世界经济与政治,2000(7).
[19]高连福.美国改变了对朝鲜半岛的政策吗[J].当代亚太,2000(10).
[20]杨伯江等.朝鲜半岛缓和进程中的东北亚地区形势[J].现代国际关系,2001(1).
[21]寒天阳.浅析“预防性防御”战略[J].国际政治研究,2001(2).
[22]刘德斌.软权力:美国霸权的挑战与启示[J].吉林大学社会科学学报,2001(3).
[23]浦启华.美国的亚太战略与亚太战略格局[J].当代世界与社会主义,2001(5).
[24]冷晓玲,倪峰.布什上台以来美国的对华政策[J].当代亚太,2001(7).
[25]刘建飞. 21世纪初美国亚太新战略与中美关系[J].重庆社会主义学院学报,2002(2).
[26]吴心伯.冷战结束之初美国亚太安全战略的转变[J].美国研究,2002(3).
[27]朱听昌,马荣升.从两洋战略看美国全球战略重点的调整[J].国际观察,2003(2).
[28]刘新华.略论澳大利亚的地缘战略地位和美澳军事同盟关系[J].世界经济与政治论坛,2003(3).
[29]龚开国.“不沉的航空母舰”(下)——透视美国在台湾的利益和对台政策[J].两岸关系,2003(9).
[30]林利民.朝鲜核问题的三种解决前景与中国的政策选择[J].江南社会学院学报,2004(4).
[31]金强一.美日东北亚区域战略与朝鲜半岛问题[J].当代亚太,2004(9).
[32]李晔,张杨.“离岸平衡手”与遏制中国:兼论美国东亚安全战略下的西藏政策[J].东北师大学报(哲学社会科学版),2005(2).
[33]石源华,汪伟民.美日、美韩同盟比较研究——兼论美日韩安全互动与东北亚安全[J].国际观察,2006(1).
[34]郭锐.朝鲜半岛与中国大战略[J].解放军外国语学院学报,2006(1).
[35]黄凤志.东北亚地区均势安全格局探析[J].现代国际关系,2006(10).
[36]陈向阳,种昕.“韩美同盟”研讨会纪要[J].现代国际关系,2006(12).
[37]朴键一.朝鲜半岛核问题与新世纪中国外交[J].东疆学刊,2007(2).
[38]黄靖.美国亚太战略与对华政策的演变[J].新远见,2007(7).
[39]樊吉社.美国对朝政策:两次朝核危机比较[J].美国研究,2009(4).
[40]于迎丽.论美国对朝政策的“变”与“不变”:兼论奥巴马政府的对朝政策趋向[J].辽东学院学报(社会科学版),2010(1).
[41] [美]马丁?拉萨特.超越遏制:90年代美国的亚洲战略[J].美国研究参考资料,1993(1).
[42] [美]亨利·基辛格.重新思考世界新秩序[J].战略与管理,1994(3).
[43] [美]陶慕廉.朝鲜半岛危机的最终解决与美国在北朝鲜的利益[J].战略与管理,1994(4).
[44] [美]萨缪尔·亨廷顿.美国国家利益的消蚀[J].战略与管理,1998(6).
[45] [美]布热津斯基.如何与中国共处[J].战略与管理,2000(3).
[46] [美]沈大伟.中美战略关系:从伙伴到竞争对手[J].世界经济与政治,2001(2).
[47] [美]罗伯特·罗斯.美中和睦:大国政治、影响范围与东亚和平[J].世界经济研究,2004(3).
[48] [美]约瑟夫·奈.“软权力”再思索[J].国外社会科学,2006(4).
[49]Hans W. Weigert. Review: Haushofer and the Pacific[J]. Foreign Affairs, Vol. 20, No. 4, Jul., 1942.
[50]Francis Fukuyama. The End of History? [J]. The National Interest, Summer 1989.
[51] Selig S. Harrison and Clyde V. Prestowitz, Jr.. Pacific Agenda: Defense or Economics? [J]. Foreign Policy, No. 79, Summer, 1990.
[52] Robert J. Art. A Defensible Defense: American's Grand Strategy after the Cold War[J]. International Security, Vol.15, No.4, Spring, 1991.
[53] James A. Baker III. America in Asia: Emerging Architecture for aPacific Community[J]. Foreign Affairs, Vol. 70, No. 5, Winter, 1991.
[54] Richard J. Ellings and Edward A. Olsen. Asia’s Challenge to American Strategy[J]. NBR Analysis, The National Bureau of Asian Research, Vol.3, No.2, Jun., 1992.
[55] Bruce Cumings. Spring Thaw for Korea’s Cold War[J]. The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientist, April 1992.
[56] Christopher Layne. The Unipolar Illusion: Why New Great Powers Will Rise[J]. International Security, Vol. 17, No. 4., Spring, 1993.
[57] Richard K. Betts. Wealth, Power, and Instability: East Asia and the United States after the Cold War[J]. International Security, Vol. 18, No. 3, Winter, 1993-1994.
[58] Aaron L. Friedberg. Ripe for Rivalry: Prospects for Peace in a Multipolar Asia[J]. International Security, Vol. 18, No. 3, Winter, 1993-1994.
[59] Stephen M. Walt. Why Alliance Endure or Collapse[J]. Survival, Vol. 39, No. 1, Spring 1994.
[60] Paul Schroeder. Historical Reality vs. Neo-Realist Theory[J]. International Security, Vol. 19, No. 1, Summer, 1994.
[61] Byung-joon Ahn. The Man Who Would Be Kim[J]. Foreign Affairs, Vol. 73, No. 6, November/December 1994.
[62] Richard N. Haass. Paradigm Lost[J]. Foreign Affairs, Vol. 74, No. 1 (Jan. - Feb., 1995).
[63] Michael J. Mazarr. Going Just a Little Nuclear: Nonproliferation Lessons from North Korea[J]. International Security, Vol. 20, No. 2, Autumn, 1995.
[64] William J. Perry. Defense in an Age of Hope[J]. Foreign Affairs, Vol. 75, No. 6, Nov. - Dec., 1996.
[65] Marcus Noland. Why North Korea Will Muddle Through[J]. Foreign Affairs, Vol. 76, No. 4, July/August 1997, pp. 105-118.
[66] Christopher Layne. Review: A House of Cards: American Strategy toward China[J]. World Policy Journal, Vol. 14, No. 3, Fall 1997.
[67] Zbigniew Brzezinski. A Geostrategy for Eurasia[J]. Foreign Affairs, Vol. 76, No. 5, Sep. - Oct., 1997.
[68] Zbigniew Brzezinski. Make Money, Not War[J]. Foreign Policy, No. 146 (Jan. - Feb., 2005).
[69] Zbigniew Brzezinski. America’s Staying Power[J]. Foreign Policy, No. 146, Jan. - Feb., 2005.
[70] Robert Kagan. The Benevolent Empire[J]. Foreign Policy, No. 111, Summer 1998, pp. 24-35.
[71] Robyn Lim. Australian Security after the Cold War[J]. Orbis, (Winter 1998).
[72] Scott Snyder. A New Direction for US Policy Toward North Korea? [J]. The Korean Journal of Defense Analysis, Winter 1998.
[73]Thomas J. Christensen. China, the U.S.-Japan Alliance, and the Security Dilemma in East Asia[J]. International Security, Vol. 23, No. 4 , Spring 1999.
[74] Joseph S. Nye, et al. Harnessing the Rising Sun: A U.S. Strategy for Managing Japanp’s Rise as a Global Power[J]. Washington Quarterly, Spring 1993.
[75] Joseph S. Nye Jr.. Redefining the National Interest[J]. Foreign Affairs, Vol. 78, No. 4, Jul. - Aug., 1999.
[76] Samuel P. Huntington. The Lonely Superpower[J]. Foreign Affairs, March-April, 1999.
[77] David Shambaugh. China’s Military Views the World: AmbivalentSecurity[J]. International Security, Winter 1999/2000.
[78] Victor D. Cha. The Rationale for‘Enhanced’Engagement of North Korea: After the Perry Policy Review[J]. Asian Survey, Vol. 39, No. 6, Nov. - Dec., 1999.
[79] Victor D. Cha. North Korea’s Weapons of Mass Destruction: Badges, Shields, or Swords? [J]. Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 117, No. 2, Summer, 2002.
[80] Victor D. Cha. Forward Presense, Anti-Americanism, and the U.S.-Korea Alliance’s Future[J]. Korea Observer, Vol.33, No.4, Winter 2002.
[81] Victor D. Cha. Hawk Engagement and Preventive Defense on the Korean Peninsula[J]. International Security, Vol. 27, No. 1, Summer, 2002.
[82] Victor D. Cha and David C. Kang. The Korea Crisis[J]. Foreign Policy, No. 136, May - Jun., 2003.
[83] Victor D. Cha and David C. Kang. The Debate over North Korea[J]. Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 119, No. 2, Summer, 2004.
[84] Victor D. Cha. South Korea in 2004: Peninsular Flux[J]. Asian Survey, Vol. 45, No. 1, Jan. - Feb., 2005.
[85] Condoleezza Rice. Promoting the National Interest[J]. Foreign Affairs, Vol. 79, No. 1, Jan. - Feb., 2000.
[86] Joseph Cirincione. The Asian Nuclear Reaction Chain[J]. Foreign Policy, No. 118, Spring, 2000.
[87] Leon V. Sigal. Countdown on Korea[J]. The American Prospect, Vol. 12, No. 15, August 27, 2001.
[88] William T. Tow and Leisa Hay. Australia, the United States and a‘China Growing Strong’: Managing Conflict Avoidance[J]. Australian Journal of International Affairs, Vol. 55, No. 1, 2001.
[89] Josef Joffe. Who’s Afraid of Mr. Big? [J]. The National Interest,Summer 2001.
[90] Mark Beeson. Issues in Australian Foreign Policy[J]. Australian Journal of Politics and History, Vol. 48, No. 2, 2002.
[91] Hans M. Kristensen. Preemptive Posturing: What Happened to Deterrence[J]. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, September/October 2002.
[92] Michael O’Hanlon and Mike Mochizuki. Economic Reform and Military Downsizing: A Key to Solving the North Korean Nuclear Crisis? [J]. The Brookings Review, Vol. 21, No. 4, Fall, 2003.
[93] Michael O’Hanlon and Mike Mochizuki. Toward a Grand Bargain with North Korean[J]. The Washington Quarterly, Vol. 26, No. 4, Autumn, 2003.
[94] Scott Snyder. Review: The Fire Last Time: Lessons from the Last Korean Nuclear Crisis[J]. Foreign Affairs, Vol. 83, No. 4, Jul. - Aug., 2004.
[95] Selig S. Harrison. Did North Korea Cheat? [J]. Foreign Affairs, Vol. 84, No. 1, Jan. - Feb., 2005.
[96] Dan Blumenthal. Strengthening the U.S.-Australian Alliance: Progress and Pitfalls[J]. Asian Outlook, April–May 2005.
[97] Samuel S. Kim. North Korea’s Nuclear Strategy and the Interface between International and [98] Domestic Politics[J]. Asian Perspective, Vol. 34, No. 1, Spring 2010.
[1]潘凤东.冷战后美国东亚战略析论[D].北京:中共中央党校国际战略研究所硕士论文,2001.
[2]韩相熙.论冷战后美国的东亚战略及其局限性[D].北京:北京大学国际关系学院博士论文,2003 .
[3]刘琳.冷战后美国东亚安全战略研究[D].北京:军事科学院战略研究部博士论文,2007.
[4]付瑞红.美国东亚战略的中国因素(1989-2008)[D].北京:中共中央党校国际战略研究所博士论文,2010.
[1] U.S. Department of Defense, A Strategic Framework for the Asian Pacific Rim: Looking Toward the 21st Century[R]. April 1990.
[2] U.S. Department of Defense, A Strategic Framework for the Asian Pacific Rim: Report to Congress[R]. July 1992.
[3] U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region[R]. Feb.27, 1995.
[4] U.S. Department of Defense, The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region[R]. Nov.23, 1998.
[5] U.S. Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report[R]. May 20, 1997.
[6] U.S. Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report[R]. September 30, 2001.
[7] U.S. Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report[R]. February 6, 2006.
[8] The White House, National Security Strategy of The United States[R]. August 15th, 1991.
[9] The Bipartisan Commission on America’s National Interests, America's National Interests[R]. July 1996.
[10] The Commission on America’s National Interest, America’s National Interest[R]. July, 2000.
[11] The White House, A National Security Strategy of The United States[R]. March 20th,1990.
[12] The White House, National Security Strategy of The United States[R]. August 15th, 1991.
[13] The White House, A National Security Strategy of Engagement and Enlargement[R]. July 21, 1994.
[14]The White House, A National Security Strategy of Engagement and Enlargement[R]. February 27, 1995.
[15] The White House, A National Security Strategy of Engagement and Enlargement[R]. 1996.
[16] The White House, A National Security Strategy of a New Century[R]. May 1997.
[17] The White House, A National Security Strategy of a New Century[R]. October 1998.
[18] The White House, A National Security Strategy of a New Century, December 1999.
[19] The White House, A National Security Strategy of a New Century[R]. January 2000.
[20] The White House, The National Security Strategy of The United States of America[R]. September 2002.
[21] The White House, The National Security Strategy of The United States of America[R]. March 16, 2006.
[22] U.S. Pacific Command, Posture Statement 1994[R].
[23] Global Trends 2015: A Dialogue About the Future With Non-Government Experts (NIC2000-02) [R]. December 18, 2000.
[24] Nuclear Posture Review [Excerpts] [R]. Submitted to Congress on 31 December 2001.
[25] RAND, America and Asia: American New Strategy and Military Forces[R]. May 15, 2001.
[26] RAND, The United States and Asia: Toward a New U.S. Strategy and Force Posture[R]. 2001.
[27] President’s May 28 Statement on China/MFN[R]. Bulletin, U.S. Information Service, Embassy of the United States of America, May 29, 1993.
[28] Anthony Lake. From Containment to Enlargement[R]. Johns Hopkins University, School of Advanced International Studies, Washington, D.C., September 21, 1993.
[29] Admiral Charles R. Larson. United States Pacific Command: Posture Statement, 1994[R]. Honolulu: United States Pacific Commnand, March 1994.
[30] Kent Wieemann. Current State US-China Relations[R]. U.S. Department of State Dispatch, July 24, 1995.
[31] Zalmay M. Khalilzad. From Containment to Global Leadership? America and the World After the Cold War[R]. RAND, 1995.
[32] Jessica T. Mathews. September 11, One Year Later: A World of Change[R]. Policy Brief, Special Edition 18, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2002.
[33] Joshua Cooper Ramo. The Beijing Consensus[R]. London: The Foreign Policy Centre, 2004.
[34] Robert B. Zoellick. Whither China: From Membership to Responsibility[R]. Remarks to National Committee on U.S.-China Relations, New York City, September 21, 2005.
[35] Condoleezza Rice. Transformational Diplomacy[R]. Georgetown University, Washington, DC, January 18, 2006.
[1]中美发表联合声明[N].人民日报, 1997-10-31.
[2]美国防部对华订围堵策略——无论有否民主都视为敌人[N].新报, 2001-05-13.
[3]中国外交战略的选择[N].人民日报,2003-03-19.
[4] Bill Clinton. To Advance the Common Interest in a Open China[N]. International Herald Tribune, June 1, 1994-06-01.
[5] Harry Harding. Red Star Rising in the East[N]. Washington Post, 1997-03-09.
[6] William Christoer and Robert Kagan. Foreign Policy and the Future of the Republic[N]. The Weekly Standard, 1998-09-04.
[7] Sunshine”or Moonshine?[N]. Wall Street Journal, 1999-03-02.
[8] America’s World[N]. The Economist, 1999-10-23.
[9] Michael Gordon. U.S. Toughens Terms for North Korea Talks[N]. New York Times, 2001-07-03.
[10] Stuart Harris. Little Brother’s Free Will[N]. Australian Financial Review, 2001-09-05.
[11] Owen Harries. Time to Reconsider our U.S. Ties[N]. Australian Financial Review, 2001-09-10.
[12] Philip Shenon. North Korea Says Nuclear Program Can Be Negotiated[N]. New York Times, 2002-11-03.
[13] Anwar Iqbal. Rumsfeld Warns N. Korea: U.S. Can Fight[N]. United Press International, 2002-12-23.
[14] Mary McGrory. Bush’s Moonshine Policy[N]. Washington Post, 2002-12-29.
[15] Paul Kelly. All the World’s a Stage[N]. The Weekend Australian, 2003-07-05.
[16] Scott Burchill. The Perils of Alliance[N]. Australian Financial Review, 2003-07-11.
[17] Joseph S. Nye Jr., Sean Creehan and Sabeel Rahman. The Power of Persuasion: Dual Components of US Leadership[N]. Harvard International Review, 2003-01-01.
[18] Kelly Says Taiwan Relations Act Key to West Pacific Stability[N]. Washington File, 2004-04-22.
[19] U.S. Opposes Unilateral Action That Might Change Taiwan Situation[N]. Washington File, 2004-02-02.
[20] Glenn Kessler. Far-Reaching U.S. Plan Impaired N. Korea Deal[N]. Washington Post, 2008-10-26.
[1] William J. Clinton, Address Before a Joint Session of the Congress on the State of the Union[EB/OL].(1994-01-25)[2010-05-26] http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=50409.
[2] Agreed Framework betwenn the United States of America and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea[EB/OL]. (1994-10-21)[2010-10-26] http://www.kedo.org/pdfs/AgreedFramework.pdf.
[3] Joseph S. Nye Jr.. The Challenge of Soft Power[J/OL]. Time, (1999-03-08)[2010-12-12] http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,21163,00.html.
[4] Stanley O. Roth. The Taiwan Relations Act at Twenty-and Beyond[R/OL]. address to The Woodrow Wilson Center and The American Institute in Taiwan (1999-03-24)[2010-10-13]. http://www.usinfo.state.gov/regional/ea/uschina/rothtwn.htm.
[5] The Heritage Foundation and the Project for the New American Century.Statement on the Defense of Taiwan[R/OL]. (1999-08-28)[2010-08-07] http://www.newamericancentury.org/taiwandefensestatement.htm/.
[6] William J. Perry. Review of United States Policy Toward North Korea: Findings and Recommendations[R/OL]. (1999-10-12)[2009-05-06] www.state.gov/www/regions/eap/991012_northkorea_rpt.html.
[7] Remarks by President Bush and President Kim Dae-Jung of South Korea[EB/OL]. (2001-03-07)[2010-11-23] http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/03/20010307-6.html.
[8] Statement by the President[EB/OL]. (2001-06-13)[2010-04-02] http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/06/20010611-4.html.
[9] Remarks by PresidentBush and President Kim Dae-Jung of South Korea[EB/OL]. (2001-03-07)[2009-07-13] http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/03/20010307-6.html.
[10] Transcript of Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage Press Conference-conclusion of China Visit[EB/OL].(2002-08-26) [2009-09-17] http://www.usinfo.state.gov/regional/ea/uschina/armit826.htm.
[11] Aidan Foster-Carter. No Turning Back? [J/OL]. Comparative Connections, 2002 (7)[2010-04-09]. http://www.csis.org/pacfor/cc/0203Qnk_sk.html, 1 August 2002.
[12] The White House, The President’s State of the Union Address, http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/01/20020129-ll.html, January 29, 2002.
[13]《海峡两岸》专访美国中国问题专家斯卡拉皮诺教授[EB/OL]. (2004-12-21)[2009-11-08] http://www.cctv.com/program/hxla/20041221/100419.shtml.
[14] Eleanor Hall. Analyst says US-Australia alliance outdated[EB/OL]. The World Today (2005-08-17)[2010-12-23]http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2005/s1439959.htm.
[15] Kurt Campbell. Chinese Ambitions and the Future of Asia[R/OL]. Edited transcript of remarks at the Carnegie Council on Ethnics in International Affarirs (2005-10-19)[2011-06-02] http://www.carnegiecouncil.org/resources/transcripts/5267.html.
[16] John McGlynn. Banco Delta Asia, North Korea’s Frozen Funds and U.S. Undermining of the Six-Party Talks: Obstacles to a Solution[J/OL]. The Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus (2007-06-09)[2009-02-13] http://japanfocus.org/articles/print_article/2446.
[17]“捧杀”中国,以“中国模式”的名义?[EB/OL].(2010-01-14)[2010-05-13] http://news.xinhuanet.com/world/2010-01/24/content_12863839_3.htm.
[18]美智库“2049项目”研究所总裁薛瑞福接受环球时报专访预测39年后的中国[EB/OL].(2010-07-11) [2010-07-13] http://world.huanqiu.com/roll/2010-07/919047.html.
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |