跨大西洋安全关系的制度化：从理性选择到社会建构
|
摘要
长期以来,国际政治学界认识到国际制度是国际秩序的重要支柱。从国际社会发展的现实来看,为什么国家在某个特定的问题领域中愿意选择某一种特定形式的制度安排?为什么国家有时为了加入某个正式的国际制度而愿意放弃或移交部分行动自由乃至部分主权,有时却为了保持自己的行动自由而拒绝加入或违背国际制度?为什么国家有时愿意签订具有法律约束力的条约,有时却选择达成不具有约束力的非正式协议?为什么有的国家试图强化制度安排的超国家性质,而有的国家力图保持它的政府间特点?为何有的制度化能够维持相当一段时间,而有的制度化则仅仅成为昙花一现?这些都是值得国际政治专业学们探讨的问题。其核心问题涉及到制度化的动力及其转变,以及制度化对国家行为产生的影响。
对于制度化动力的探讨,当前主要存在两个对立的理论。一个是综合新现实主义和新自由主义的理性选择理论,强调国家从预期结果逻辑出发,对制度化的成本-收益进行计算,其正向结果将推动国家参与和支持制度化,这构成国家的工具性制度化行为。另一个则是吸收建构主义和反思主义的社会建构理论,强调国家对适当性逻辑的遵循——国家追求、遵循、学习制度规范而参与制度化,构成了一个建构性制度化的进程。然而二者进行分析时,总是将对方视为直接对立方而造成单个理论无法全面揭示制度化本质的结果。这是因为在国际制度的现实中,单纯的一种制度化动力和影响路径很少存在,必须建立起一个桥接点,吸收二者之长来进行全面分析。因此,国际制度研究中的一个重要问题在于如何通过建立一种新的概念化框架,将理性选择和社会建构两种分析模型有效的整合在内。如果将理论与现实相结合就能发现,在制度化的过程中两种因素同时起作用。对国家在国际制度中的社会化和社会交往的研究就是一个很好的融合点。理性选择和社会建构的相似之处在于两者都强调社会互动和社会化的性质和作用。社会化水平是衡量制度化高低的重要标准,一个国家的发展和崛起可以通过加入国际制度方式的融入国际社会,以一种温和的方式实现自身利益。
本文认为,国家间的制度化进程存在三个主要的变量,国家权力,国家认同以及社会化程度,前两者分别是两个动力的核心变量,国家权力主要是指制度化过程中,参与制度化的国家之间的权力差异；国家认同主要是指国家对自身和他者的认知情况,其中包含对政治制度、经济体制、意识形态、法律体系、文化传统、宗教信仰以及语言等方面等因素。社会化程度是前两者因素发挥作用的平台,是理性选择和社会建构两种制度化动力的桥接点,也是衡量制度化水平高低的重要标准。其他的因素同这三个因素存在重要关系,并以此为中心对制度化发生作用。针对国际制度分析的现实,本文出三个假设：第一,从理性选择的角度来看,国家间权力差距越大,国家接受制度化的愿望越强烈,制度化水平也会相对较高。第二,从社会建构的角度来看,国家间相互认同程度越高,国家间制度化水平越高。第三,在国际制度化中,国家间交往越密切,社会化程度越高,持续性回报越多,从理性选择动力向社会建构动力转化体现地越明显,制度化程度就越高,国际制度就更加有效和稳定。反之亦然。
对于跨大西洋关系的制度化,单独的理性选择与社会建构都不能推动它的高水平发展。因此,本文借鉴一个关键词：战略性社会建构动力,将理性技术和社会建构动力结合分析。战略性指的是国家的理性选择战略,也就是对国家权力和利益的考虑以及收益达成所需成本的得失计算,以及在这个基础上对制度规范的战略性使用。社会建构指的是社会因素在国际制度化中的影响,以及制度化对国家的规范性塑造和认同培养,也就是参与制度化的国家之间的社会化交往与发展。在大部分情况下,二者是不可分割的,相互影响甚至转化,这在欧美制度化中得到明显的印证。在这种动力下,理性选择和社会建构融合于动态的社会化交往过程中,共同对国家参与制度制度化产生影响。
历史上,国家间的冲突并不少见,安全领域中国家之间的结盟与背叛更是一个常态。但二战后的欧美,在安全领域的制度建设方面,是世界上制度化最为完善和稳定的地区。从一定程度上而言,欧美安全关系的发展史就是一个制度化的历史。冷战期间,欧美联盟以内外双重威胁为动力而开始发展,以北大西洋公约为主体,辅助以其它的安全制度群,建立了一个完善的制度网络。冷战之后,同新现实主义的预测相反,欧美制度化非但没有衰落,反而经历了一个改革与扩大的过程。冷战结束后,国际形势发生了巨大变化,西方领导人希望在现存安全制度的基础上,对跨大西洋地区的安全体系进行重新建构,这包含安全组织的调整和扩大、新制度的建立等等,对未来的欧美关系乃至全球安全体系产生重要影响。因此,欧美之间制度化的发展是国际制度建设的典型代表,其中很多东西对于国家间关系的发展和调整具有深远的启发意义,值得世界各国认真学习。
在政治现实的背后隐藏着欧美制度化动力转变的路线。随着欧美关系的发展,经过双方复杂和密集的社会交往,欧美间制度化向更高的层次发展,制度化的动力从单纯的对共同安全的追求和国家利益的追逐,到逐渐浓厚的社会建构,更多的因素尤其是社会因素被包含在内,其作用也愈加明显,形成了一个综合的战略性社会建构动力。欧美制度化动力的变化以及制度化结果给欧美自身甚至整个世界带来了深远的影响。其中欧美制度化呈现了一系列明显的特征,最为明显的是“宪政主义特征”,使得欧美间外交政策的制定和实施很少诉诸于权力而是诉诸于制度。认同方面,欧美双方在原有对西方文化共同认知的基础上,对自由民主规范、法治原则等观念进行内化和吸收,推动跨大西洋地区进入一个以康德文化为主体的安全制度共同体；在社会交往方面,长期的欧美间交往催生了浓厚的制度性回报,为欧美制度的维持和发展提供良好的基础和强劲的动力。这些特征将是未来跨大西洋安全关系发展的重要筹码,推动其总体向一个稳定合作的方向发展。
总之,本文在采纳众家之长的基础上,结合新制度主义各派理论,吸收社会学、政治学、历史学的相关知识,论述跨大西洋安全关系的制度化进程。制度化是一个复杂进程,尤其是制度化动力方面,国家参与制度化的动机更是包含众多因素。单纯的理性选择和社会建构理论难以对其进行深入和全面的解释。国际政治现实中,也很少出现单纯某一类型的逻辑动力。如果能够将这些因素和逻辑结合在一起,将加强国际关系理论对国家的国际规范遵守的解释力。从跨大西洋安全关系的制度化进程来看,如果国家能够同时认识制度的工具性影响和建构性影响,将国家的理性分析和社会交往同时给予重视,将有助于国家吸收和学习新的国际规范,它将更快地融入到国际社会中,并达成更加稳定的制度性合作。
For a long time, many scholars in the political science have realized that international institution is one of the key pillars for the international order. From reality of the international society, there are lots of interesting questions about the international institutions. Why one state prefers to choose some kind of international institution on peculiar field? Why one state could desert some of national interest even some part of sovereignties to join in some kind of institutionalization but refuse to join others to keep the freedom? Why one state would like to strengthen the super-state rights of some kinds of international institutions and weaken others? And why some international institutions could keep stable for a very long time and others are short-lived. These questions are deserved to be analyze by us. The key question among them is what are the driving forces and their change, also the influence to the national states from the institutionalization.
For these two questions, there are two kinds of opposing answers. One is the theory of rational choice which absorbs the common foundation of neorealism and neoliberalism, which emphasizes logic of consequentialism and the cost-benefit calculation, which we can call rational-institutionalism. The other is the theory of social construction which absorbs the constructivism theory and other social theories such as the English School, which emphasizes the logic of appropriateness and national states abide by and learn international norms. We can call it social-institutionalism. However, from observation of the international realities, we can see that one individual theory cannot interpret the institutionalization of transatlantic security relations clearly and completely. I would like to move away from an "either/or," "gladiator" style of analysis (either rational choice or constructivism) to a "both/and" perspective, and build a bridge to connect the rationalism and constructivism. The socialization theory and reality can take the bridge role and make up the gap. There are lots of similarities between rational choice and social construction, the social interaction and socialization are one of the most characteristics. So the analysis of socialization would help us reveal the development of institutionalization.
There are three key variables in the process of institutionalization:national power, national identity and the socialization level. The first on is the core of rational choice, especially the power disparities which decide the capability of pursuit of interest and the form of foreign policy. The core of social construction is the national identity means national states how know and understand itself and others, which contains many factors, for example the political system, the economical structure, ideological system, religious belief. The socialization is the stage for first two variables and the bridge for rational choice and social construction, which is also an important measurement for the level of institutionalization. On these three variables, this paper put forward three hypotheses:First, from a view of rational choice, the more extreme the power disparities, the stronger national state want to join in the process of institutionalization, the higher level for the institutionalization. Second, from a view of social construction, the more similar for the national identity is, the higher level for the institutionalization. On the basis of such two hypotheses, we can also find the other two hypotheses. One of them refers to the social interaction of states in the international institutions. The other refers to the membership and effectiveness of international institutions. Third, in the process of institutionalization, the more interaction among states is, the higher for the socialization, the more increasing return to institutions. Which could push the rational choice driving force change into social construction driving force; push the institutionalization level from low to high and bring a more stable and efficient environment and vice versa.
And for the Transatlantic security relations, both rational choice or social construction itself cannot bring us a clear explanation. So this paper would like to borrow a word to put forward a comprehensive driving force:the strategic social construction driving force, which contains both rational choice and social construction forces, also the process of social interaction among states. For the strategic part, states would follow the calculation path. National power, interest and the cost are the key elements. For the social construction part, the social factors play important role, especially the national identity, such as the construction of common knowledge, the basic value, and the types of states. With the development of institutionalization, at the basis of the rational choice driving force, more and more social factors are absorbed and finally promote the coming of the strategic social construction driving force. Behind the strategic social construction driving force, the socialization and interaction are core elements, which bring the compliance of international norms and put the institutionalization to a higher level.
We all know that the security is the most important field for one state, where state is reluctant to make any concession. From the history, we can always find that the alliance and betrayal are normal behaviors among states, especially on the national security field. However, if we look at the institutionalization of transatlantic security relations, we can find that their alliance is stable, durable and highly institutionalized in general. The characteristic of transatlantic security relations is formalization and multilateralism, which makes the Transatlantic Alliance become the one of the most successful ones in the world history. After the Cold War, there are lots of huge changes in the International Society. The Western leaders plan to reconstruct the transatlantic even the global security structure, whose basis would be the existing security institutions. In the new era, the Transatlantic Alliance itself should make fundamental changes, including the adjustment and enlargement, the building of new institutions and so on. The strategic change brings important influences to the transatlantic relations even the global security. So the institutionalization of Transatlantic is the representative of the whole world, from which we can learn a lot, especially on how to construct and preserve the international institutions.
Behind the political reality, we can see the change of driving force for the transatlantic institutionalization. On the basis of rational choice, the transatlantic institutionalization absorbs social factors, changes into a strategic social construction dynamics. Both rational and social factors are integrated into national socialization, which pushes the instrumental institutionalization change into constructive institutionalization, and brings deep and far influence to national states, which brings deep influence for transatlantic relation even the global order. From observation of its process, we can see there are many obvious characteristics, among which is the "constitutional characteristics", which locks the usage of national power during the process of making and carrying out of foreign policy. On the aspect of identity, both sides of transatlantic region build a institutional security community on the basis of norms of freedom, democracy and law, in which Kantian culture is the chief standard. On the aspect of socialization, long history interaction produces thick increasing return to institution and brings strong driving force to keep and develop the transatlantic institutionalization. All of these characteristic are vital factor for the future development of transatlantic security relation, which would make it in a stable cooperation status.
In general, this paper wants to adopt the merit of different theories, especially the usage of institutionalism, the sociology, politics, and history and so on, to explain the development of the process of institutionalization of transatlantic relations. The key question of this paper is that:what is the driving force of institutionalization for Transatlantic States? In other word, why states take part in institutions or what kinds of factors decide the level of institutionalization. Inside the core question, I would like to discuss what is the influence of the different driving force? We can see that most of institutionalization are complicated process, which contain many different factors. Either the rational choice or the social construction cannot explain it clearly and profoundly, which need us to use a comprehensive method. For the development of transatlantic institutionalization, if national states could realize both the instrumental and constructive effects of international institutions, and emphasize both the rational choice and socialization, they could reach a more stable and efficient institutional.cooperation.
对于制度化动力的探讨,当前主要存在两个对立的理论。一个是综合新现实主义和新自由主义的理性选择理论,强调国家从预期结果逻辑出发,对制度化的成本-收益进行计算,其正向结果将推动国家参与和支持制度化,这构成国家的工具性制度化行为。另一个则是吸收建构主义和反思主义的社会建构理论,强调国家对适当性逻辑的遵循——国家追求、遵循、学习制度规范而参与制度化,构成了一个建构性制度化的进程。然而二者进行分析时,总是将对方视为直接对立方而造成单个理论无法全面揭示制度化本质的结果。这是因为在国际制度的现实中,单纯的一种制度化动力和影响路径很少存在,必须建立起一个桥接点,吸收二者之长来进行全面分析。因此,国际制度研究中的一个重要问题在于如何通过建立一种新的概念化框架,将理性选择和社会建构两种分析模型有效的整合在内。如果将理论与现实相结合就能发现,在制度化的过程中两种因素同时起作用。对国家在国际制度中的社会化和社会交往的研究就是一个很好的融合点。理性选择和社会建构的相似之处在于两者都强调社会互动和社会化的性质和作用。社会化水平是衡量制度化高低的重要标准,一个国家的发展和崛起可以通过加入国际制度方式的融入国际社会,以一种温和的方式实现自身利益。
本文认为,国家间的制度化进程存在三个主要的变量,国家权力,国家认同以及社会化程度,前两者分别是两个动力的核心变量,国家权力主要是指制度化过程中,参与制度化的国家之间的权力差异；国家认同主要是指国家对自身和他者的认知情况,其中包含对政治制度、经济体制、意识形态、法律体系、文化传统、宗教信仰以及语言等方面等因素。社会化程度是前两者因素发挥作用的平台,是理性选择和社会建构两种制度化动力的桥接点,也是衡量制度化水平高低的重要标准。其他的因素同这三个因素存在重要关系,并以此为中心对制度化发生作用。针对国际制度分析的现实,本文出三个假设：第一,从理性选择的角度来看,国家间权力差距越大,国家接受制度化的愿望越强烈,制度化水平也会相对较高。第二,从社会建构的角度来看,国家间相互认同程度越高,国家间制度化水平越高。第三,在国际制度化中,国家间交往越密切,社会化程度越高,持续性回报越多,从理性选择动力向社会建构动力转化体现地越明显,制度化程度就越高,国际制度就更加有效和稳定。反之亦然。
对于跨大西洋关系的制度化,单独的理性选择与社会建构都不能推动它的高水平发展。因此,本文借鉴一个关键词：战略性社会建构动力,将理性技术和社会建构动力结合分析。战略性指的是国家的理性选择战略,也就是对国家权力和利益的考虑以及收益达成所需成本的得失计算,以及在这个基础上对制度规范的战略性使用。社会建构指的是社会因素在国际制度化中的影响,以及制度化对国家的规范性塑造和认同培养,也就是参与制度化的国家之间的社会化交往与发展。在大部分情况下,二者是不可分割的,相互影响甚至转化,这在欧美制度化中得到明显的印证。在这种动力下,理性选择和社会建构融合于动态的社会化交往过程中,共同对国家参与制度制度化产生影响。
历史上,国家间的冲突并不少见,安全领域中国家之间的结盟与背叛更是一个常态。但二战后的欧美,在安全领域的制度建设方面,是世界上制度化最为完善和稳定的地区。从一定程度上而言,欧美安全关系的发展史就是一个制度化的历史。冷战期间,欧美联盟以内外双重威胁为动力而开始发展,以北大西洋公约为主体,辅助以其它的安全制度群,建立了一个完善的制度网络。冷战之后,同新现实主义的预测相反,欧美制度化非但没有衰落,反而经历了一个改革与扩大的过程。冷战结束后,国际形势发生了巨大变化,西方领导人希望在现存安全制度的基础上,对跨大西洋地区的安全体系进行重新建构,这包含安全组织的调整和扩大、新制度的建立等等,对未来的欧美关系乃至全球安全体系产生重要影响。因此,欧美之间制度化的发展是国际制度建设的典型代表,其中很多东西对于国家间关系的发展和调整具有深远的启发意义,值得世界各国认真学习。
在政治现实的背后隐藏着欧美制度化动力转变的路线。随着欧美关系的发展,经过双方复杂和密集的社会交往,欧美间制度化向更高的层次发展,制度化的动力从单纯的对共同安全的追求和国家利益的追逐,到逐渐浓厚的社会建构,更多的因素尤其是社会因素被包含在内,其作用也愈加明显,形成了一个综合的战略性社会建构动力。欧美制度化动力的变化以及制度化结果给欧美自身甚至整个世界带来了深远的影响。其中欧美制度化呈现了一系列明显的特征,最为明显的是“宪政主义特征”,使得欧美间外交政策的制定和实施很少诉诸于权力而是诉诸于制度。认同方面,欧美双方在原有对西方文化共同认知的基础上,对自由民主规范、法治原则等观念进行内化和吸收,推动跨大西洋地区进入一个以康德文化为主体的安全制度共同体；在社会交往方面,长期的欧美间交往催生了浓厚的制度性回报,为欧美制度的维持和发展提供良好的基础和强劲的动力。这些特征将是未来跨大西洋安全关系发展的重要筹码,推动其总体向一个稳定合作的方向发展。
总之,本文在采纳众家之长的基础上,结合新制度主义各派理论,吸收社会学、政治学、历史学的相关知识,论述跨大西洋安全关系的制度化进程。制度化是一个复杂进程,尤其是制度化动力方面,国家参与制度化的动机更是包含众多因素。单纯的理性选择和社会建构理论难以对其进行深入和全面的解释。国际政治现实中,也很少出现单纯某一类型的逻辑动力。如果能够将这些因素和逻辑结合在一起,将加强国际关系理论对国家的国际规范遵守的解释力。从跨大西洋安全关系的制度化进程来看,如果国家能够同时认识制度的工具性影响和建构性影响,将国家的理性分析和社会交往同时给予重视,将有助于国家吸收和学习新的国际规范,它将更快地融入到国际社会中,并达成更加稳定的制度性合作。
For a long time, many scholars in the political science have realized that international institution is one of the key pillars for the international order. From reality of the international society, there are lots of interesting questions about the international institutions. Why one state prefers to choose some kind of international institution on peculiar field? Why one state could desert some of national interest even some part of sovereignties to join in some kind of institutionalization but refuse to join others to keep the freedom? Why one state would like to strengthen the super-state rights of some kinds of international institutions and weaken others? And why some international institutions could keep stable for a very long time and others are short-lived. These questions are deserved to be analyze by us. The key question among them is what are the driving forces and their change, also the influence to the national states from the institutionalization.
For these two questions, there are two kinds of opposing answers. One is the theory of rational choice which absorbs the common foundation of neorealism and neoliberalism, which emphasizes logic of consequentialism and the cost-benefit calculation, which we can call rational-institutionalism. The other is the theory of social construction which absorbs the constructivism theory and other social theories such as the English School, which emphasizes the logic of appropriateness and national states abide by and learn international norms. We can call it social-institutionalism. However, from observation of the international realities, we can see that one individual theory cannot interpret the institutionalization of transatlantic security relations clearly and completely. I would like to move away from an "either/or," "gladiator" style of analysis (either rational choice or constructivism) to a "both/and" perspective, and build a bridge to connect the rationalism and constructivism. The socialization theory and reality can take the bridge role and make up the gap. There are lots of similarities between rational choice and social construction, the social interaction and socialization are one of the most characteristics. So the analysis of socialization would help us reveal the development of institutionalization.
There are three key variables in the process of institutionalization:national power, national identity and the socialization level. The first on is the core of rational choice, especially the power disparities which decide the capability of pursuit of interest and the form of foreign policy. The core of social construction is the national identity means national states how know and understand itself and others, which contains many factors, for example the political system, the economical structure, ideological system, religious belief. The socialization is the stage for first two variables and the bridge for rational choice and social construction, which is also an important measurement for the level of institutionalization. On these three variables, this paper put forward three hypotheses:First, from a view of rational choice, the more extreme the power disparities, the stronger national state want to join in the process of institutionalization, the higher level for the institutionalization. Second, from a view of social construction, the more similar for the national identity is, the higher level for the institutionalization. On the basis of such two hypotheses, we can also find the other two hypotheses. One of them refers to the social interaction of states in the international institutions. The other refers to the membership and effectiveness of international institutions. Third, in the process of institutionalization, the more interaction among states is, the higher for the socialization, the more increasing return to institutions. Which could push the rational choice driving force change into social construction driving force; push the institutionalization level from low to high and bring a more stable and efficient environment and vice versa.
And for the Transatlantic security relations, both rational choice or social construction itself cannot bring us a clear explanation. So this paper would like to borrow a word to put forward a comprehensive driving force:the strategic social construction driving force, which contains both rational choice and social construction forces, also the process of social interaction among states. For the strategic part, states would follow the calculation path. National power, interest and the cost are the key elements. For the social construction part, the social factors play important role, especially the national identity, such as the construction of common knowledge, the basic value, and the types of states. With the development of institutionalization, at the basis of the rational choice driving force, more and more social factors are absorbed and finally promote the coming of the strategic social construction driving force. Behind the strategic social construction driving force, the socialization and interaction are core elements, which bring the compliance of international norms and put the institutionalization to a higher level.
We all know that the security is the most important field for one state, where state is reluctant to make any concession. From the history, we can always find that the alliance and betrayal are normal behaviors among states, especially on the national security field. However, if we look at the institutionalization of transatlantic security relations, we can find that their alliance is stable, durable and highly institutionalized in general. The characteristic of transatlantic security relations is formalization and multilateralism, which makes the Transatlantic Alliance become the one of the most successful ones in the world history. After the Cold War, there are lots of huge changes in the International Society. The Western leaders plan to reconstruct the transatlantic even the global security structure, whose basis would be the existing security institutions. In the new era, the Transatlantic Alliance itself should make fundamental changes, including the adjustment and enlargement, the building of new institutions and so on. The strategic change brings important influences to the transatlantic relations even the global security. So the institutionalization of Transatlantic is the representative of the whole world, from which we can learn a lot, especially on how to construct and preserve the international institutions.
Behind the political reality, we can see the change of driving force for the transatlantic institutionalization. On the basis of rational choice, the transatlantic institutionalization absorbs social factors, changes into a strategic social construction dynamics. Both rational and social factors are integrated into national socialization, which pushes the instrumental institutionalization change into constructive institutionalization, and brings deep and far influence to national states, which brings deep influence for transatlantic relation even the global order. From observation of its process, we can see there are many obvious characteristics, among which is the "constitutional characteristics", which locks the usage of national power during the process of making and carrying out of foreign policy. On the aspect of identity, both sides of transatlantic region build a institutional security community on the basis of norms of freedom, democracy and law, in which Kantian culture is the chief standard. On the aspect of socialization, long history interaction produces thick increasing return to institution and brings strong driving force to keep and develop the transatlantic institutionalization. All of these characteristic are vital factor for the future development of transatlantic security relation, which would make it in a stable cooperation status.
In general, this paper wants to adopt the merit of different theories, especially the usage of institutionalism, the sociology, politics, and history and so on, to explain the development of the process of institutionalization of transatlantic relations. The key question of this paper is that:what is the driving force of institutionalization for Transatlantic States? In other word, why states take part in institutions or what kinds of factors decide the level of institutionalization. Inside the core question, I would like to discuss what is the influence of the different driving force? We can see that most of institutionalization are complicated process, which contain many different factors. Either the rational choice or the social construction cannot explain it clearly and profoundly, which need us to use a comprehensive method. For the development of transatlantic institutionalization, if national states could realize both the instrumental and constructive effects of international institutions, and emphasize both the rational choice and socialization, they could reach a more stable and efficient institutional.cooperation.
引文
① Jan Hallenberg and Hakan Karlsson eds, Changing Transatlantic Security Relations, Routledge Taylor& Francis Group,2006, p.4.
② G John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, Preface.
③ John Gerard Ruggie, Multilateralism:The Anatomy of an Institution, in Ruggie (ed.), Multilateralism Matters:The Theory and Praxis of an Institutional Form, New York:Columbia University Press,1993, pp.32-33; Steven McGuire and Michael Smith, The European Union and the United States:competition and convergence in the global arena, Palgrave Macmillan,2008.p.1.
④有关于欧美与跨大西洋关系的含义：“欧洲”这个词语有很多所指：西欧、欧洲整体、欧盟、美国在北约中的欧洲盟友、从大西洋到乌拉尔山脉的地区等等,这些含义涉及到两个问题：第一个是,“欧洲”包含那些国家和地区?第二,欧洲是否是一个有意义的整体?就欧美关系而言,它包含多重关系,多边关系,美、德、法、英等国家间的关系；双边关系：美国同西欧或者欧盟整体；另外一层双边关系：美国同单个欧洲国家的关系。本文所指的“欧洲”分为两个时期,冷战时期是指同苏联集团相对应的西欧部分,主要是北约内的欧洲国家。冷战之后,则主要包含欧盟与北约的成员国。因为在欧美制度化的过程中,大西洋东岸方面主要是美国在发挥主导作用。因此,欧 美关系可以等同于跨大西洋关系。参见Paasi, Anssi. The Institutionalization of Regions:A Theoretical Framework for Understanding the Emergence of Regions and the Constitution of Regional Identity. Fennia, Vol.164, No.1:1986, pp.105-146.
① Jan Hallenberg and Hakan Karlsson eds, Changing Transatlantic Security Relations, Routledge Taylor& Francis Group,2006, Preface.
②秦亚青主编：《理性与国际合作：自由主义国际关系理论研究》,北京：世界知识出版社,2008年版,第38页；John J. Mearsheimer, The False Promise of International Institutions, International Security, Vol.19, No.3. Winter, 1994-1995, pp.5-49.
③[加]阿米塔·阿查亚：《建构安全共同体：东盟与地区秩序》,王正毅冯怀新译,上海：上海人民出版社,2004年版,第7页,第42页。
② John Mearsheimer, Back to the Future:Instability of Europe after the Cold War, International Security, Vol.15, No.4, 1990, pp.5-57; Kenneth Waltz, The Emerging Structure of International Politics, International Security, Vol.18, No.2, 1993, pp.44-79; Pierre Hassner, Europe beyond Partition and Unity:Disintegration or Reconstruction?, International Affairs, Vol.66, No.3,1990, pp.461-75; Hugh DeSantis, The Grating of NATO, Washington Quarterly, Vol.14,1989, pp.83-95. Christopher Layne, Superpower Disengagement, Foreign Policy, No.78, Spring 1990, pp.3-25; and Stephen Walt, The Ties That Fray:Why Europe and America Are Drifting Apart, National Interest, No.54, Winter 1998/1999, pp.3-11; Robert Gilpin, American Policy in the Post-Reagan Era, Daedelus, Vol.116, No.3,1987, pp.33-67; Paul Kennedy, The Rise and Fall of the Great Power:Economic Change and Military Conflict from 1500-2000, New York: Random House,1987; Micheal Mastanduno, Preserving the Unipolar Moment:Realist Theories and U.S. Grand Strategy after the Cold War, International Security, Vol.21, No.4,1997, pp.49-88.24. GW. Grayson, Strange Bedfellows:NATO Marches East, Lanham, NY:University Press of America 1999.
⑤ John Duffield, NATO's Function after the Cold War, Political Science Quarterly, Vol.199, No.5,1994/1995.
①王美权：《为了谁的安全：北约军事战略大透视》,北京：新华出版社,2000年版。
②肖元恺：《世界的防线：欧洲安全与国际政治》,北京：新华出版社,2000年版。
③叶江等编：《解读美欧——欧洲一体化进程中的美欧关系》,上海：上海三联出版社,1999年版。
④门洪华：《霸权之翼：美国国际制度战略》,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版。
①冯仲平：《欧洲安全观与欧美关系》,《欧洲研究》,2003年第5期；冯仲平：《欧美关系：“合而不同”——析伊拉克战争对欧美关系的影响》,《国家安全通讯》,2003年第7期。
②黄飞君：《跨大西洋关系的现状与未来》,《领导文萃》,2005年第3期； 匡国栋：《新大西洋关系若隐若现》,《瞭望》,2004年第27期。
③孔继萍：《欧美关系的现状及发展》,《云南师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》,2003年第2期。
④连玉如：《浅论21世纪世界新秩序与欧美关系调整》,《国际政治研究》,2003年第4期。
⑤孙春玲,王朝晖,杨芳：《2003年以来欧美关系研究主要资料信息》,《国际资料信息》,2003年第9期。
①何俊志等译：《新制度主义政治学译文精选》,天津：天津人民出版社,2007年版；薛晓源,陈家刚等：《全球化与新制度主义》,北京：社会科学文献出版社,2004年版。
②田野：《国际关系中的制度选择：一种交易成本的视角》,上海：上海人民出版社,2006年版。
③范菊华：《规范与国际制度安排：一种建构主义阐释》,《现代国际关系》,2002年第10期；陈晓进：《“国际制度”概念辨析》,《国际关系学院学报》,2000年第4期：李晓燕：《从“合作”到“和谐”：国际制度的作用趋向》,《山东师范大学学报(人文社会科学版)》,2004年第6期；随新民：《国际制度的合法性与有效性——新现实主义、新自由制度主义和建构主义三种范式比较》,《学术探索》,2004年第6期；田野：《国际制度的形式选择：—个基于国家间交易成本的模型》,《经济研究》,2005年第7期；张琦：《权力、制度、认同——国际秩序的新理解》,《德州学院学报》,2007年第1期。此外,还有很多有关国际制度理论的研究,本文不再一一列举。
④ Deutsch,Karl W., et al, Political Community and the North Atlantic Area. Princeton, N.J.:Princeton University Press, 1957.
① Frank R.Douglas, the United States, NATO, and A New Multilateral Relationship, Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc., 2008. Gustav Lindstrom eds., Shift and Rift:Assessing US-EU relations after Iraq. Published by the EU Institute for Security Studies,2003. Hallenberg and Hakan Karlsson eds, Changing Transatlantic Security Relations, Routledge Taylor& Francis Group,2006. Roland Dannreuther and John Peterson, Security Strategy and Transatlantic Relations, Routledge:Taylor& John Francis Group,2006.
②[美]罗伯特·阿特：《美国大战略》,郭树勇译,北京：北京大学出版社,2006年版。
③ Glaser, Charles, Why NATO Is Still Best:Future Security Arrangements for Europe, International Security, Vol.18, No.1,1993.
④ Transatlantic Transformation:Building a NATO-EU Security Architecture, Washington, DC:Atlantic Council of the U.S., March 2006, available at http://www.acus.org/docs/0603-Transatlantic Transformation.pdf; Daniel S. Hamilton, ed, Transatlantic Transformation:equipping NATO for the 21 st century, Washington, DC:Center for Transatlantic Relations, 2004.
① Ronald D. Asmus, New Plumbing, New Purposes-Rebuilding the Transatlantic Alliance, American Interest, November/December 2008; Simon Serfaty, ed., A Recast Partnership? Institutional Dimensions of Transatlantic Relations, Washington, DC:CSIS,2008; Celeste A. Wallander, Institutional Assets and Adaptability:NATO after the Cold Wa", International Organization, Vol.54, No.4,2000, pp.705-735.
② Stephen Sestanovich, What has Moscow done? Rebuilding U.S.-Russian Relations, Foreign Affairs, Vol.87, No.6, 2008, pp.12-28; John S. Duffield, NATO's Function after the Cold War, Political Science Quarterly, Vol.109, No.5, 1994-1995.
③ David P.Calleo, Why EUand US Geopolitical interests are no longer the same, Europe World, Summer,2008.
④例如,大国参与制度化的动力首先在于权力的维持和保存。为此,大国进行妥协甚至放弃部分权力,换取小国对共同规则的支持。有的学者认为,这种制度化的建设是领导国对未来的投资。如果投资成功,相关的规则和制度建设完善,那么即使在未来大国的物质权力下降,其地位也能维持。参考,Terry Moe, Political Institutions:The Neglected Side of the Story, Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Vol.6,1990, pp.213-253.
⑤ DiMaggio, Paul J.and Walter W.Powell, the Iron Cage Revisited:Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields, American Sociological Review, Vol.48, No.2,1983.
⑥ Remmer Karen L, Theoretical Decay and Theoretical Development:Resurgence of Institutional Analysis. Comparatvie Politics, Vol.50, No.4,1997.
① James M.Goldgeier and Michael McFaul, A Tale of Two Worlds:Core and Periphery in the Post-Cold War Era, International Organization, Vol.46, No.3,1992; Charles Kupchan and Clifford Kupchan, Concerts, Collective Security, and the Future of Europe, International Security, Vol.16, No.1,1991; Steven Van Evera, Primed for Peace:Europe after the Cold War, International Security, Vol.15, No.3,1990-1991; Frank Schimmelfennig, NATO Enlargement a Constructivist Explanation, Security Studies, Vol.8, No.2/3,1998/1999-Spring 1999.
② Jeffrey T. Checkel, International Institutions and Socialization in Europe:Introduction and Framework, International Organization, Vol.59, No.3,2005, pp 801-826.
③ Kenneth W.Abbott and Duncan Snidal, Why States Act Through Formal International Organization, Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol.42, No.1,1998.
④ European Commission, Review on the Framework for Relations between the European Union and United States:an independent study, April, Brussels:DG External Relations,2005.
⑤ Alexander Gheciu, NATO in the "New Europe":the Politics of International Socialization after the Cold War, Stanford University Press,2005.
⑥ David Robertson, NATO's Future Role:A European View, Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science, Vol.38, No.1, The New Europe:Revolution in East-West Relations,1991, pp.164-175.
⑦ Anthony Lake, From Containment to Enlargement, Vital Speeches of the Day, Vol.60, No.1,1993. Douglas Brinkley, Democratic Enlargement:the Clinton Doctrine, Foreign Policy, No.106,1997.
⑧ Stanley R. Sloan, US Perspectives on NATO's Future, International Affairs, Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944-, Vol.71, No.2,1995.
①[加]阿米塔·阿查亚：《建构安全共同体：东盟与地区秩序》,王正毅冯怀新译,上海：上海人民出版社,2004年版,第5页。
② Stephen M.Walt, Why Alliance Endure or Collapse, Survival, Vol.39, No.1,1997, pp.156-79.
① Roland Dannreuther and John Peterson, Security Strategy and Transatlantic Relations, Routledge:Taylor& John Francis Group,2006.
② Joseph M.Grieco, Understanding the Problem of International Cooperation:The Limits of Neoliberalism and the Future of Realist Theory, in Neorealism and Neoliberalism:The Contemporary Debate, edtited by David A.Baldwin, New York:Columbia University Press,1993.
③ Terry Moe, Political Institutions:the Neglected Side of the Story, Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Vol.6, No.2,1990, pp.213-253.
④ Helen Milner, International Theories of Cooperation:Strengths and Weakness, World Politics, Vol.44, No.3,1992.
⑤[美]朱迪斯戈尔茨坦,罗伯特·O·基欧汉：《观念和外交政策：信仰、制度与政治变迁》,刘东国于军译,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版。
⑤ John Ikenberry, Institutions, Strategic Restraint, and the Persistence of American Postwar Order, International Security, Vol.23, No.3(Winter 1998/1999), pp.43-78; G. John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001.
① Hollis and Smith, Explaining and Understanding International Relations, OxfordLClaredon Press,1990.
②参见何俊志等译：《新制度主义政治学译文精选》,天津：天津人民出版社,2007年版。本书所包含的文章,对制度主义的内容做了详细分析。
③王学东：《新制度主义的欧洲一体化理论评析》,《欧洲研究》,2003年第5期。
④[德]贝娅特·科勒-科赫,托马斯·康策尔曼,米歇勒·克诺特：《欧洲一体化与欧盟治理》,顾俊礼等译,北京：中国社会科学出版社,2004年3月。
①在本文中,为了突出两种动力的作用,分别用理性选择和社会建构来代表理性制度主义和社会制度主义两种理论。
② Hemmer, Christopher, Katzenstein, Peter J, Why is There No NATO in Asia? Collective Identity, Regionalism, and the Origins of Multilateralism, International Organization, Vol.56, No.3,2002, pp.575-607.
①[美]詹姆斯G马奇,约翰·奥尔森：《国际政治秩序的制度动力》,载于彼得.卡赞斯坦,罗伯特.基欧汉,斯蒂芬.卡拉斯纳编的《世界政治理论的探索与争鸣》,秦亚青等译,上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第319-321页。
②《新制度主义政治学译文精选》,何俊志等译,天津：天津人民出版社,2007年版,第49页。
①[美]玛莎.费丽莫：《国家社会中的国家利益》,袁正清译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2001年版,第35页。
②郭树勇：《大国成长的逻辑：西方大国崛起的国际政治社会学分析》：北京：北京大学出版社,2006年版,第54页。
③ United States Information Agency, the New European Security Architecture, USIA Office of Research and Media Reaction, Washington, D.C.,1995.
① Frank Schimmelfennig, Strategic Calculation and International Socialization:Membership Incentives, Party Constellations, and Sustained Compliance in Central and Eastern Europe, International Organization, Vol.59, No.4,2005, pp.827-860.
② Robert O. Keohane, The Demand for International Regimes, International Organization, Vol.36, No.2, International Regimes (Spring,1982), pp.325-355.
① John G. Ruggie, The Anatomy of an Institution, in Multilateralism Matters:The Theory and Praxis of an Institution, edited by John Gerard Ruggie, New York:Columbia University Press,1993, pp.3-47; Christian Reus-Smit, The Constitutional Structure of International Society and Nature of Fundamental Institutions, International Organization, Vol.51, No.4,1997, pp.555-589.
②[美]罗伯特.吉尔平：《世界政治中的战争与变革》,宋新宁译,上海：上海人民出版社,2007年版,第57页。
①例如国家利益也是一个重要的变量,国家利益的改变程度是衡量制度化的重要标准。参考：David H. Bearce and Stacy Bondanella, Intergovernmental Organizations, Socialization, and Member-State Interest Convergence, International Organization, Vol.61, No4,2007.
① T.V.Paul and Johan A.Hall.Intemational,Order and the Future of World Politics,Cambridge University Press 1999, p.2.
②本文并不旨在分析民主和平论,而是分析国家间信仰、规范、文化对国家交往的影响,重点是国家间的社会互动和交流。
① Joseph M.Grieco, Understanding the Problem of International Cooperation:The Limits of Neoliberalism and the Future of Realist Theory, in Neorealism and Neoliberalism:The Contemporary Debate, editeb by David A.Baldwin, New York:Columbia University Press,1993.
② Kenneth W.Abbott and Duncan Snidal, Why States Act Through Formal International Organization, Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol.42, No.1,1998, pp.3-32.
③ KratochwiL, F. V., and J. G. Ruggie, International Organization:A State of the Art on an Art of the State, International Organization Vol.40, No.4,1986, pp.753-775; Ness, G. D., and S. R. Brechin, Bridging the Gap:International Organizations as Organizations, International Organization Vol.42, No.2,1988, pp.245-273.
④[美]贝思·西蒙斯主编：《国际制度》,黄仁伟等译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第45页。
①薛晓源,陈家刚编译：《全球化与新制度主义》北京：社会科学文献出版社,2004年版,第280页。
② Jeffrey T. Checkel, International Institutions and Socialization in Europe:Introduction and Framework, International Organization, Vol.59, No.3,2005, pp 801-826.
① Acheson, Dean, Statement on the North Atlantic Treaty. Department of State Bulletin,1949, in Why is There No NATO in Asia? Collective Identity, Regionalism, and the Origins of Multilateralism, by Hemmer, Christopher, Katzenstein, Peter J, International Organization, Vol.56, No.3, Summer2002, pp.575-607.
②[美]詹姆斯G马奇,约翰·奥尔森：《国际政治秩序的制度动力》,载于彼得.卡赞斯坦,罗伯特.基欧汉,斯蒂芬.卡拉斯纳编的《世界政治理论的探索与争鸣》,秦亚青等译,上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第320页。Frank.Schimmelfennig, The EU, NATO, and the Integration of Europe:Rules and Rhetoric. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2003, p.199.
② G John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, pp.23-32.
①Jon Elster, Claus Offe, and Ulrich K.Preuss, Institutional Design in Post-Communist Societies:Rebuilding the Ship at Sea, New York:Cambridge University Press,1998, pp.17-19.
② Holmes, Passions and Constraint, On the Theory of Liberal Democracy, Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1995, pp.23-27.
③ Douglass C. North, Institutions, Institutional Change, and Economic Performance, New York:Cambridge University Press,1990, p.95.
①从现实的角度来看,由于制度建设的完善性、制度覆盖面、原则规范的明确性,使得北约成为跨大西洋两岸安全关系制度化的最典型代表。因此,本文在论述跨大西洋安全关系时,着重对北约进行分析。当然,其它的一些安全制度甚至非正式的交往也非常重要,也是本文论述的内容之一。
①Goffman E., the Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, New York:Anchor Books,1959.转引自[美]约瑟夫·拉彼德,[德]弗里德里希·克拉托赫维尔：《文化和认同：国际关系回归理论》,金烨译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2003年2月, 第71-72页。
①[美]罗伯特.吉尔平：《世界政治中的战争与变革》,宋新宁译,上海：上海人民出版社,2007年版,第234-235页。
① Joseph M.Grieco, Anarchy and the Limits of Cooperation:A Realist Critique of the Newest Liberal Institutionalism, International Organization, Vol.42, No.3,1988, pp.485-507.
②参见[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海世纪出版社2008年版。Johnston, Alastair Iain, Treating International Institutes as Social Environments, International Studies Quarterly, Vol.45, No4,2001, pp.487-515; Colin H.Kahl, Constructing a Separate Peace:Constructivism, Collective Liberal Identity, and Democratic Peace, Security Studies Vol.8, No.2/3, Winter 1998/99-Spring 1999, pp.94-144; Checkel, J. T., The Constructivist Turn in International Relations Theory, World Politics, Vol.50,1998, pp.324-348.
③[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海世纪出版社2008年版,第173页。
①秦亚青主编：《理性与国际合作：自由主义国际关系理论研究》,北京：世界知识出版社2008年版,第232页。
② Checkel, Jeffrey T., Why Comply? Social Learning and European Identity Change, International Organization, Vol.55, No 3, Summer2001, pp.556.
③ G John Ikenberry and Charles Kupchan, Socialization and Hegemonic Power. International Organization, Vol.44, No.3, 1990,pp.283-315.
④其中德国学派对哈贝马斯的社会交往理论的应用颇为广泛,并取得很多研究成果。例如：Thomas Risse, Let's Argue:Communicative Action in World Politics, International Organization, Vol.54, No.11,2000.pp.1-39; Harald Muller, Arguing, Bargaining and All That:Communicative Action, Rationalist Theory and the logic of Appropriatenss in International Relations, European Journal of International Relations, Vol.10, No.3,2004, pp.395-435.
①秦亚青主编：《理性与国际合作：自由主义国际关系理论研究》,北京：世界知识出版社,2008年版,第231页。
② Fareed Zakaria, From Wealth to Power:The Unusual Origins of America's World Role, Princeton:Princeton University Press,1998, pp.11-17.
①Oran Young, International Cooperation:Building Regimes for National Resources and the Environmental, Ithaca: Cornell University Press,1989, chapter three.
② John Gerard Ruggie, Third Try at World Order? America and Multilateralism After the Cold War, Political Science Quarterly, Vol.109, No.4,1994, pp.553-570.
③ Douglass C. North, Institutions, Institutional Change, and Economic Performance, New York:Cambridge University Press,1990, p.95; Paul Pierson, When Effect Becomes Cause:Policy Feedback and Political Change, World Politics, Vol.45, No.4,1993, pp.595-628.
①门洪华：《霸权之翼：美国国际制度战略》：北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版,第38页。
②参见何俊志等编译：《新制度主义政治学译文精选》,天津人民出版社,2007年4月,第154页。
③[美]罗伯特.吉尔平：《世界政治中的战争与变革》,宋新宁译,上海：上海人民出版社,2007年版,第4页。
④ Christian Reus-Smit, The Constitutional Structure of International Society and Nature of Fundamental Institutions, International Organization, Vol.51, No.4,1997, p.558.
①[美]玛莎·费丽莫,《国家社会中的国家利益》,袁正清译,浙江人民出版社,2001年版,第5-7页。
②参见何俊志等编译：《新制度主义政治学译文精选》,天津：天津人民出版社,2007年版。以及薛晓源,陈家刚编译：《全球化与新制度主义》,北京,社会科学文献出版社,2004年版。
③参见何俊志等编译：《新制度主义政治学译文精选》,天津：天津人民出版社,2007年版,第288页。
④薛晓源,陈家刚编译：《全球化与新制度主义》,北京,社会科学文献出版社,2004年版,第233页。
①同上,第420页。
②[美]道格拉斯.诺斯：《经济史中的结构与变迁》,陈郁译,上海：上海人民出版社,1994年版,第25页。
③ Sue E.S. Crawford, Elior Ostrom, A Grammar of Institutions, American Political Science Review, Vol.89, No.3, 1995, pp.582-599.
④转引自薛晓源,陈家刚编译：《全球化与新制度主义》,北京,社会科学文献出版社,2004年版,第8页。
① Stephen Krasner, ed., International Regime, Ithaca and London:Cornell University Press,1983, p.2.转引自[美]罗伯特·基欧汉：《霸权之后：世界政治经济中的合作与纷争》,苏长和等译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第57页。
②陈晓进：《“国际制度”概念辨析》,《国际关系学院学报》,2000年第4期,第20-23页.
③ John Gerard Ruggie, International Responses to Technology:Concepts and Trends, International Organization, Vol.29, No.3,1975, pp.557-583.
④[美]罗伯特·基欧汉,约瑟夫·奈：《权力与相互依赖》(第3版),门洪华译,北京：北京大学出版社,2003年版,第20页。
⑤苏长和,《重新定义国际制度》,《欧洲》,1999年第6期,第22页。
① Barbara Koremenos, Charles Lipson, and Duncan Snidal, the Rational Design of International Institutions, International Organization, Vol.55, No.4,2001, pp.761-799.
② Reus-Smit, Christian, The Constitutional Structure of International Society and the Nature of Fundamental Institutions, International Organization, Vol.51, No.4,1997, p.557.
③ Stein, Arthur A, Why Nations Cooperate:Circumstance and Choice in International Relations. Ithaca, N.Y.:Cornell University Press,1990, pp.39-44.
① Frank Schimmelfennig, Strategic Calculation and International Socialization:Membership Incentives, Party Constellations, and Sustained Compliance in Central and Eastern Europe, International Organization, Vol.59, No.4,2003, pp.827-860.
②制度或机制向更高级的方向演变就意味着它的发展。制度的发展可以分为以下几种情况：机制的构成要素或“核心特质”的完善和广为接受,正式程度越来越高,影响范围越来越大；机制的行动指导和约束能力日趋增强,建立起各方接受的行为规则和程序：机制的遵从措施趋向完善,得到愈加坚定有力的贯彻执行。参见王杰主编：《国际机制论》,北京：新华出版社,2002年版,第246页。
③[美]詹姆斯·G马奇,约翰·奥尔森：《国际政治秩序的制度动力》,转引自[美]彼得.卡赞斯坦,罗伯特.基欧汉,斯蒂芬.卡拉斯纳编《世界政治理论的探索与争鸣》秦亚青,苏长和,门洪华魏玲译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第366页。
② John Gerard Ruggie, International Organization "I wouldn't start from here if I were you", in Constructing World Polity:Essays on International Institutionalization, edited by John Gerard Ruggie, New York:Routledge,1998, pp.54-55.
③ Friedrich V. Kratochwil, Rules, Norms and Decisions:On the Conditions of Practical and Legal Reasoning in International Relations and Domestic Affairs, New York:Cambridge University Press,1989, p.63.
④ Michael E. Smith, Europe s Foreign and Security Policy:The Institutionalization of Cooperation, New York: Cambridge University Press,2004, p.26.
①田野：《国际关系中的制度选择：一种交易成本的视角》,上海：上海人民出版社,2006年版,第14页。
②[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第130页。
①同上第215-216页。
② Boli,John,and George Thomas, INGOs and the Organization of World Culture. In Constructing World Culture: International Nongovernmental Organizations Since 1875, edited by Boli,John,and George Thomas, Stanford, Calif: Stanford University Press,1998, preface.
③ Alexander Gheciu, NATO in the "New Europe":the Politics of International Socialization after the Cold War, Stanford University Press,2005, p.232.
① J. Samuel Barkin and Bruce Cronin, The State and Nation:Changing Norms and Rules of Sovereignty in International Relations, International Organization, Vol.48, No.1, pp.107-130.
② David A. Lake, Beyond Anarchy—The Importance of Security Institutions, International Security, Vol.26, No.1,2001, pp.129-160.
③笔者认为,这是因为两个领域的关键因素和主体的不同。经济领域,关键因素是市场,而市场的主要特征就是自由竞争。主体方面,个人、集团甚至国家在市场中起到不同的作用。而在安全领域,关键因素是国防力量和外交事务的建设,事关国家社稷,这就决定在安全领域的主体是国家政府,政府能够从一个更加深远和谨慎的角度来看待国家间关系,从大局出发,制定稳妥的政策。
③ Max Weber, Economy and Society, Vol.1.edited by Guenther Roth and Claus Wittich, Berkeley:University of California,1978, P.208-236.
① G John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p269.
② Robert O. Keohane, Neoliberal Institutionalism:A Perspective on World Politics, in International Institutions and State Power:Essays in International Relations Theory, edited by Robert O. Keohane, Colorado:Westview Press, Inc, 1989, pp.627.
③田野：《国际关系中的制度选择：一种交易成本的视角》,上海：上海人民出版社,2006年版,第127页。
① G John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press.2001, preface.
② Oran Young, Political Leadership and Regime Formation:On the Development of Institutions in International Society, International Organization, Vol.45, No.3,1991, p131.
① Anne-Marie Slaughter, International Law in a World of Liberal States. European Journal of International Law Vol.6, No.1,1995, pp,503-538.
②[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第166页。
③[美]玛莎·费丽莫,《国家社会中的国家利益》,袁正清译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2001年版,第7页。
①在本文中,为了突出两种动力的作用,分别用理性选择和社会建构来代表理性制度主义和社会制度主义两种理论。
② Daniel Hamilton, Charles Barry, Hans Binnendijk, Stephen Flanagan, Julianne Smith, James Townsend, The Washington NATO Project:Alliance Reborn:An Atlantic Compact for the 21st Century, February 2009, p.10.
③Robert O. Keohane, International Institutions:Two Approaches, International Studies Quarterly, Vol.32, No.4,1988, pp.379-396.
①约翰·杰拉尔德·鲁杰：《什么因素将世界维系在一起?新功利主义与社会建构主义的挑战》,转引自彼得·卡赞斯坦,罗伯特·基欧汉,斯蒂芬·卡拉斯纳编的《世界政治理论的探索与争鸣》,秦亚青等译,上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第281页。
②美国实用主义哲学家查尔斯·皮尔斯(Charles Pierce)将它称之为“外展”性解释方式(abduction).参考：John G. Ruggie, Peace in Our Time?Causality,Social Facts.and Narrative Knowing. Amercian Society of International Law Proceedings 89th Annual Meeting,1995, pp.93-100.
① Goffman, E. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York:Anchor Books 1,959.转引自约瑟夫·拉彼德弗里德里希·克拉托赫维尔主编：《文化和认同：国际关系回归理论》：金烨译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2003年版,第83页。
②[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第96页。
① Kratochwil,Friedrich V.,and John Gerard Ruggie, International Organization:A State of the Art on an Art of the State. International Organization, Vol.40, No.4,1986, pp.753-775.
① Jeffrey T. Checkel, International Institutions and Socialization in Europe:Introduction and Framework, International Organization, Vol.59, No.3,2005, pp 801-826.
② Hechter, M. and S. Kanazawa, Sociological Rational Choice Theory. Annual Review of Sociology Vol.23, No.1,1997, pp.191-214.
③[美]詹姆斯G.马奇,约翰·奥尔森：《国际政治秩序的制度动力》,转引自彼得·卡赞斯坦,罗伯特·基欧汉,斯蒂芬·卡拉斯纳编的《世界政治理论的探索与争鸣》,秦亚青等译,上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第368-369页。
① Finnemore, Martha, Norms, Culture, and World Politics:Insights from Sociology's Institutionalism, International Organization, Vol.50, No.2,1996, pp.323-347.
①参见阿瑟·斯坦《协调与合作：无政府世界中的制度》,转引自大卫·鲍德温主编：《新现实主义与新自由主义》,肖欢荣译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2001年版,第42-46页。
① Johnston, Alastair Iain, Treating International Institutes as Social Environments, International Studies Quarterly, Vol.45, No4,2001, pp.487-515;
② Jeffrey T. Checkel, Social Construction and Integration, Journal of European Public Policy, Vol.6, No.4,1999, pp.545-560.
①转引自彼得·卡赞斯坦,罗伯特·基欧汉,斯蒂芬·卡拉斯纳编的《世界政治理论的探索与争鸣》,秦亚青等译,上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第273页。
② Martha Finnemore, National Interests in International Society, Ithaca, NY:Cornell University Press,1996, p.129.
③ Jeffrey T. Checkel, The Constructivist Turn in International Relations Theory, World Politics, Vol.50, No.2,1998, pp.324-348.
④ Richard Ashley, The Poverty ofNeoliberalism, International Organization, Vol.38, No.2,1984, p.243.
⑤F rank Schimmelfennig, NATO Enlargement a Constructivist Explanation, Security Studies,Vol.8, No.2/3, 1998/1999-Spring 1999, pp.198-234, p.200.
①秦亚青：《权力、制度、文化：国际关系理论与方法研究文集》,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版,第100页。
② John J. Mearsheimer, "The False Promise ofInternational Institutions", International Security, Vol.19, No.3, 1994-1995, pp.5-49.
①转引自薛晓源,陈家刚等编译：《全球化与新制度主义》,北京：社会科学文献出版社,2004年版,第436-438页。
②[美]贝思·西蒙斯主编：《国际制度》,黄仁伟等译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第108页。
③王逸舟：《探寻全球主义国际关系》,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版,第25页。
①[美]罗伯特.吉尔平：《世界政治中的战争与变革》,宋新宁译,上海：上海人民出版社,2007年版,第15页。
② Max Weber, Economy and Society, vol.1.edited by Guenther Roth and Claus Wittich, Berkeley:University of California,1978, p.213.
③ G. John Ikenberry and Charles Kupchan, Socialization and Hegemonic Power. International Organization, Vol.44, No.3, 1990,pp.283-315.
④ Joseph M. Grieco. Anarchy and Limits of Cooperation:A Realist Critique of the Newest Liberal Institutionalism, International Organization, Vol.42, No.3,1988, pp.85-507.
⑤John J. Mearsheimer "The False Promise of International Institutions ", International Security, Vol.19, No.3, 1994-1995, pp.5-49.
⑥ Tony Evans and Peter Wilson, Regime Theory and the English School of International Relations:A Comparison, Millennium:Journal of International Studies Vol.21, No.3,1992, pp.329-51.
①郭树勇：《大国成长的逻辑：西方大国崛起的国际政治社会学分析》：北京：北京大学出版社,2006年版,第6页。
②Ian Hurd,Legitimacy and Authority in International Politics,International Organization,Vol.53,No.2,1999, pp.379-408,p.389.
③转引自何俊志等编译《新制度主义政治学译文精选》,天津：天津人民出版社,2007年4月,第291页。
①门洪华：《霸权之翼：美国国际制度战略》：北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版,第37页。
② Mark A. Pollack and Grefory C.Shaffer, eds., Transatlantic Governance in the Global Economy, Lanham, MD:
Rowman and Littlefield,2001, p.7.
③ Henry Kissinger, Our Nearsighted World Vision, Washington Post, January 10,2000, A19.
④[美]罗伯特.吉尔平：《世界政治中的战争与变革》,宋新宁译,上海：上海人民出版社,2007年版,第16页。
①田野博士认为,国家间缔约成本包含国家同质性、问题领域敏感程度以及透明度。国家间治理成本包含：不确定性,交易频率,资产专业性。参见田野：《国际关系中的制度选择：一种交易成本的视角》,上海：上海人民出版社,2006年版,第77页。
②格伦·施奈德曾经对国家结盟的成本进行过论述,他认为国家结盟的成本包含两部分：国家涉入战争的危险,以及国家行为的自由性。主要有三个因素：盟友的需求,未来盟友满足需求的程度,联盟条约的实质性内容。参见Glenn H.Sntyder, Alliance Theory:A Neorealist First Cut, Journal of International Affairs, Vol.44, No.1,1990, p.1 10.
③[美]贝思·西蒙斯主编：《国际制度》,黄仁伟等译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第45页。
④此外,还需要注意国家参与制度化的成本还包含政府的外交和政治成本,也就是国家必须考虑自己的所作所为在国际社会引发的影响以及这些行为在国内政治引发的影响。例如,冷战后,中东欧国家政府就必须分析参与北约和欧盟所带来的政治压力,尤其是来自民族主义者和共产主义拥护者的压力。
⑤ David A. Lake, Beyond Anarchy Anarchy—The Importance of Security Institutions, International Security, Vol.26, No.1,2001, pp.129-160,p.137.
⑥田野：《国际关系中的制度选择：一种交易成本的视角》,上海；上海人民出版社,2006年版,第77页和第82页。
⑦田野：《国际关系中的制度选择：一种交易成本的视角》,上海：上海人民出版社,2006年版,第169-171页。
① John Lewis Gaddis, The Emerging Post-Revisionist Synthesis on the Origins of the Cold War, Diplomatic History, Vol. 7, No.3,1983, pp.171-190.
② Lawrence S. Kaplan, NATO and the United States:The Enduring Alliance, Boston:Twayne,1988, p.39.
③David A. Lake, Entangling Relations:American Foreign Policy in Its Century, Princeton, N. JPrinceton University Press,1999, chapter 2.
④参见[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第293-294页。
①转引自何俊志等编译《新制度主义政治学译文精选》,天津：天津人民出版社,2007年4月,第290页。
②阿瑟·斯坦：《协调与合作：无政府世界中的制度》,转引自大卫·鲍德温：《新现实主义与新自由主义》,肖欢荣／译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2001年版,第51页。
③转引自何俊志等编译《新制度主义政治学译文精选》,天津：天津人民出版社,2007年4月,第154页.
①[美]朱迪斯戈尔茨坦,罗伯特·O·基欧汉：《观念和外交政策：信仰、制度与政治变迁》,刘东国于军译,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版,第199页。
②[澳]克雷格.A.斯奈德等著：《当代安全与战略》,徐纬地等译,长春：吉林人民出版社,2001年版,第129页。
③ Robert O. Keohane and Lisa L. Martin, The Promise of Institutionalist Theory, International Security Vol.20, No.1.1995, pp.39-51.
④[美]贝思·西蒙斯主编：《国际制度》,黄仁伟等译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第516页。
①转引自[美]贝思·西蒙斯主编：《国际制度》,黄仁伟等译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第52页。
②同上
③ Steve Weber, Multilateralism in NATO:Shaping the Postwar Balance of Power,1945-1961. Berkeley:University of California Press,1991, pp.16-17.
④John Duffield, International Regimes and Alliance Behavior:Explaining NATO conventional Force Levels, International Organization, Vol.46, No.4,1992, pp.819-55.
① Robert Powell, Absolute and Relative Gains in International Relation Theory, American Political Science Review, Vol85,No.4,1991,pp.1303-20.
② Ikenberry,G J., After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.65.
③ Athony Clark Arend, Do Legal Rules Matter? International Law and International Politics, Virginia Journal of International Law, Vol38, No.2,1998, pp107-153.
①[美]道格拉斯·c·诺思,《制度、制度变迁与经济绩效》,上海三联书店,1994年版,第115页。
②笔者对瑞典国防研究所林德瓦(Fredrik Lindvall)的采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2008年10月21日。
③[英]巴瑞·布赞,[丹麦]奥利·维夫,[丹麦]迪·怀尔德：《新安全论》,朱宁译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2003年版,第2页。
① James G March, Johan P. Olsen, The New Institutionalism:Organizational Factor in Political Life, American Political Science Review, Vol.78, No.5,1984, pp.734-749.
② Bronislaw E. Matecki, Establishment of the International Finance Corporation:A Case Study, International Organization Vol.10, No.2,1956, pp.261-275.
③[美]玛莎.费丽莫：《国家社会中的国家利益》,袁正清译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2001年版,第20页。
④参见[美]约瑟夫.S.奈, 《硬权力与软权力》,门洪华译,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年。
⑤李砚忠：《试析新制度主义的意识形态理论及其现代意义》,《重庆社会科学》2007年第4期。
①俞新天：《强大的无形力量——文化对当代国际关系的作用》,上海：上海人民出版社,第193页。
②[美]朱迪斯戈尔茨坦,罗伯特·0-基欧汉：《观念和外交政策：信仰、制度与政治变迁》,刘东国于军译,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版,第8页。
③同上第172页。
④[美]贝思·西蒙斯主编：《国际制度》,黄仁伟等译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第503页。
① Jeffrey W. Legro, Which Norms Matter? Revisiting the Failure of Internationalism. International Organization, Vol.51, No.1,1997, pp.31-63.
②王逸舟：《探寻全球主义国际关系》,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版,第11页。
③[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第243-254页。
④ Weber, Steve, Shaping the Postwar Balance of Power:Multilateralism in NATO, in Multilateralism Matters:The Theory and Praxis of an Institutional Form, edited by John Gerard Ruggie, New York:Columbia University Press, pp.233-92.
①[美]约瑟夫·拉彼德,[德]弗里德里希·克拉托赫维尔：《文化和认同：国际关系回归理论》,金烨译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2003年2月,第72页。
②[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第104页。
③俞新天：《强大的无形力量——文化对当代国际关系的作用》,上海：上海人民出版社,第186页。
④转引自薛晓源,陈家刚等编译：《全球化与新制度主义》,北京：社会科学文献出版社,2004年版,第271页。
⑤ Hemmer, Christopher, Katzenstein, Peter J, Why is There No NATO in Asia? Collective Identity, Regionalism, and the Origins of Multilateralism, International Organization, Vol.56, No.3,2002, pp.575-607.
⑤何俊志等编译《新制度主义政治学译文精选》,天津：天津人民出版社,2007年4月,第341页。
①俞新天：《强大的无形力量——文化对当代国际关系的作用》,上海：上海人民出版社,第186页。
② Kurth James, The Next NATO:Building an American Commonwealth of Nations, The National Interest, No.65,2001, pp.5-16.
③[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第220页。
④[英]巴里·布赞：《美国和诸大国：21世纪的世界政治》,刘永涛译,上海：上海世纪出版集团,2007年版,第15页。
①转引自[英]巴里·布赞：《美国和诸大国：21世纪的世界政治》,刘永涛译，上海：上海世纪出版集团,2007年版,第17页。
②同上第17-18页。
①[英]巴里·布赞：《美国和诸大国：21世纪的世界政治》,刘永涛译,上海：上海世纪出版集团,2007年版,第26页。
② Robyn Dawes, et al, Cooperation for the benefit ofus-not me, or my conscience, in Beyond Self-Interest, edited by J. Mansbridge, Chicago:University of Chicago Press, pp.97-110.转引自[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第224页。
① Bruce Cronin, From Balance to Community:Transnational Identity and Political Integration, Security Studies, Vol.8, No.2& 3,1998, pp.270-301.
① Robert O. Keohane, International Institutions:Two Approaches, International Studies Quarterly, Vol.32, No.4,1988, pp.379-396.
②[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第166。
③[美]约瑟夫·拉彼德,[德]弗里德里希·克拉托赫维尔：《文化和认同：国际关系回归理论》,金烨译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2003年2月,第82页。
①[加]阿米塔·阿查亚：《建构安全共同体：东盟与地区秩序》,王正毅冯怀新译,上海：上海人民出版社,2004年版,第37页。
② Anne-Marie Slaughter, International Law in a World of Liberal States. European Journal of International Law Vol.6, No.1,1995, pp,503-538.
③ Peter Katzenstein(ed.), The Culture of National Security:Norms and Identity in World Politics, New York:Columbia University Press,1996, p.520.
① T.V.Paul and Johan A.Hall, International Order and the Future of World Politics, Cambridge University Press,1999, p.2.
②Oran Young, Political Leadership and Regime Formation:On the Development of Institutions in International Society, International Organization, Vol.45, No.3,1991, p.131.
① Anne-Marie Slaughter, International Law in a World of Liberal States. European Journal of International Law Vol.6, No.1,1995, pp,503-538.
② Richard Ullman, The U.S. and the World:An Interview with George Kennan, New York Review of Books, Vol.46, No.13,1999,pp.4-6.
①[美]贝思·西蒙斯主编：《国际制度》,黄仁伟等译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第105-144页。
②[德]贝娅特·科勒-科赫,托马斯·康策尔曼,米歇勒·克诺特：《欧洲一体化与欧盟治理》,顾俊礼等译,北京：中国社会科学出版社,2004年3月,第217页。
①[美]曼瑟尔·奥尔森：《集体行动的逻辑》,陈郁等译,上海；上海三联出版社,2007年版第41页。
②秦亚青主编：《理性与国际合作：自由主义国际关系理论研究》,北京：世界知识出版社2008年版,第73-75页。
③参见[美]道格拉斯·c·诺思,《制度、制度变迁与经济绩效》,上海三联书店,1994年版,第17页。
① Martin, Lisa, The Rational Choice of Multilateralism, in Multilateralism Matters:The Theory and Praxis of an Institutional Form, edited by John Gerard Ruggie, New York:Columbia University Press,1993, p.92.
② Christian Reus-Smit, The Constitutional Structure of International Society and Nature of Fundamental Institutions, International Organization, Vol.51, No.4,1997, pp.555-589.
③ Remmer Karen L., Theoretical Decay and Theoretical Development:Resurgence of Institutional Analysis, Comparative Politics, Vol.50, No.4,1997, pp.34-61, p.57.
① Helen V Milner, The Assumption of Anarchy in International Politics:A Critique. Review of International Studies, Vol.17, No1,1991, pp.67-85.
② Martha Finnemore, National Interests in International Society, Ithaca, NY:Cornell University Press,1996, p.127.
③ John Gerard Ruggie, The Past as Prologue? Interests, Identity and American Foreign Policy, International Security, Vol.21, No.4,1997, pp.89-125.)
④ Peter Katzenstein(ed), The Culture of National Security:Norms and Identity in World Politics, New York:Columbia University Press,1996, pp.2-5.
①[美]亚历山大·温特,《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海世纪出版社2008年版,第115-123页。
② Goldstein Judith and Robert O. Keohane, eds., Ideas and Foreign Policy:Beliefs, Institutions and Political Change, Ithaca, N.Y.:Cornell University Press,1993, p.7.
③ Robert O. Keohane, International Institutions:Two Approaches, International Studies Quarterly, Vol.32, No.4,1988, pp.379-396.
① See Karl Deutsch, Political Community and the North Atlantic Area:International Organization in the Light of Historical Experience. Princeton, N.J.:Princeton University Press,1957.
②[澳]约翰·伯顿：《全球冲突——国际危机的国内根源》,谭朝洁译,上海：上海人民出版社,2007年版,中文序言。
③[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第98页。
④ Thomas Risse-Kappen, Cooperation among Democracies——the European Influence on U.S. Foreign Policy,1995, Princeton, New Jersey:Princeton Press, p.3.
①倪世雄：《当代西方国际关系理论》,复旦大学出版社,2005年版,第224页。
①王杰主编：《国际机制论》,北京：新华出版社,2002年版,第116页。
② Robert O. Keohane, "International Institutions:Two Approaches", International Studies Quarterly, Vol.32, No.4, 1988, pp.379-396.
①[加拿大]阿米塔·阿查亚,《建构安全共同体：东盟与地区秩序》,王正毅等译,上海人民出版社2004年版。
②Peter Katzenstein and Alexander Wendt eds., The Culture of National Security:Norms and Identity in World Politics, New York:Columbia University Press,1996.
③Thomas Risse-Kappen, Democratic Peace-War like Democracies:A Social Constructivist Interpretation of the Liberal Argument, European Journal of International Relations, No.1,1995., Vol.1, No.4,491-517 (1995)
④[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第353页。
④Jeffrey Checkel, The Constructivist Turn in International Relations Theory, World Politics, Vol.50, No.2,1998, p.339.
① John Gerard Ruggie, "Multilateralism:The Anatomy of an Institution," in Multilateralism Matters:the Theory and Praxis of an Institutional Form, edited by Ruggie, New York:Columbia University Press,1993, p31.
② Juergen Haacke, Theory and Praxis in International Relations:Habermas, Self-Reflection, Rational Argumentation. Millennium, Vol.25, No.2,1996, pp.255-89.
①秦亚青主编：《理性与国际合作：自由主义国际关系理论研究》,北京：世界知识出版社,2008年版,第230页
① Frank Schimmelfennig, Strategic Calculation and International Socialization:Membership Incentives, Party Constellations, and Sustained Compliance in Central and Eastern Europe, International Organization, Vol.59, No.4,2005, pp.827-860.
① Frank Schimmelfennig, NATO Enlargement a Constructivist Explanation, Security Studies, Vol.8, No.2/3, Winter, 1998/1999-Spring 1999, pp.198-234.
②罗伯特·基欧汉：《非正式暴力的全球化、世界政治理论与“恐怖的自由主义”》,转载于罗伯特·基欧汉、门洪华编：《局部全球化世界中的自由主义、权力和治理》,门洪华译,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版,第316-319页。
③转引自[美]彼得·卡赞斯坦,罗伯特·基欧汉,斯蒂芬·卡拉斯纳主编：《世界政治理论的探索与争鸣》,秦亚青等译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第16页。
① Ronald Rogowski, Commerce and Coalitions:How Trade Affects Domestic Politcal Alignments, Priceton NJ.:Priceton University Press,1989, pp.2-6.
② Morris Fiorina, Rational Choice and the new institutionalism, Polity, Vol.28, No.1,1995, pp.107-115.
③转引自[美]彼得·卡赞斯坦,罗伯特·基欧汉,斯蒂芬·卡拉斯纳主编：《世界政治理论的探索与争鸣》,秦亚青等译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第40页。
①[美l亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第140页·
① Schofield Norman, Anarchy, Altruism and Cooperation, Social Choice and Welfare 2:1985, pp.207-219.
② David M. Kreps, Corporate Culture and Economic Theory, in Perspectives on Positive Political Economy, edited by James E.Alt and Shepsle, Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1990, pp.125-127.
③有关谢林点与共同知识的关系,参见秦亚青主编：《理性与国际合作：自由主义国际关系理论研究》,北京：世界知识出版社,2008年版,第44页。
① Rajeev Bhargava, Individualism in Social Science, Oxford:Clarendon Press,p.143-156.转引自[美]亚历山大·温特,《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第157页。
②何俊志等编译《新制度主义政治学译文精选》,天津：天津人民出版社,2007年4月,第170页。
② Aaron Wildavsky, Why self-interest means less outside of a social context. Journal ofTheoretical Politics, Vol.6, No.2, pp.131-159.
①[美]亚历山大·温特,《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第129-134页。② Aaron Wildavsky, Why self-interest means less outside of a social context, Journal of Theoretical Politics, Vol.6, No.2, pp.131-159.
①Andre Kukla,The struature of self-fulfilling and self-negating prophecies,Theoryand Psychology,4,pp.5.33.转引自[美]亚历山大·温特,《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第181页。
②[美]亚历山大·温特,《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第263页。
③《当代西方国际关系理论》,倪世雄,复旦大学出版社,2005年10月。p223-1
④参照：奥尔森集体理论中的特权集团(引自：集体行动的逻辑：[美]曼瑟尔。奥尔森, 陈郁等译,上海三联出版社,2007年6月,p41A).
⑤(转引自：《全球化与新制度主义》,薛晓源,陈家刚, 社会科学文献出版社,2004年,p20a
①倪世雄：《当代西方国际关系理论》,上海：复旦大学出版社,2005年版,第219-223页。
①[美]肯尼思.华尔兹：《国际政治理论》,信强译,上海：上海人民出版社,2003年版,第74—77页。
②[美]亚历山大·温特,《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第77-80页。
③ Steven Rappaport, Economic models and historical explanation, Philosophy of the Social Sciences,25, pp.421-441.
④[加]阿米塔·阿查亚：《建构安全共同体：东盟与地区秩序》,王正毅冯怀新译,上海：上海人民出版社,2004年版,第29页。
①转引自[美]迈尔斯·卡勒：《国际关系中的理性》,载于[美]彼得·卡赞斯坦,罗伯特·基欧汉,斯蒂芬·卡拉斯纳主编：《世界政治理论的探索与争鸣》,秦亚青等译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第353页。
② William Freudenbrug, Scott Frickel, and Robert Gramling, Beyond the nature/society divides:Learning to think about a mountain, Sociological Forum, Vol.10, pp.361-392.转引自[美]亚历山大·温特,《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第77-80页。
③彼得.卡赞斯坦,罗伯特.基欧汉,斯蒂芬.卡拉斯纳,《<国际组织>杂志与世界政治研究》,转引自[美]彼得·卡赞斯坦,罗伯特·基欧汉,斯蒂芬·卡拉斯纳主编：《世界政治理论的探索与争鸣》,秦亚青等译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第45页。
④ Jeffrey T. Checkel, Why Comply? Social Learning and European Identity Change, International Organization, Vol.55, No 3, Summer2001, pp.553-588, p.581.
①[美]玛莎.费丽莫：《国家社会中的国家利益》,袁正清译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2001年版,第35页。
②郭树勇：《大国成长的逻辑：西方大国崛起的国际政治社会学分析》：北京：北京大学出版社,2006年版,第54页。
③ Alexander E. Wendt, The Agent-Structure Problem in International Relations Theory, International Organization, Vol.41, No.3,1987, p.360.
④ Christian Reus-Smit, The Constitutional Structure of International Society and Nature of Fundamental Institutions, International Organization, Vol.51, No.4,1997, pp.555-589, p.564.
⑤ Johnston, Alastair Iain, Treating International Institutes as Social Environments, International Studies Quarterly, Vol.45, No.4,2001, pp.487-515.
⑥ David H. Bearce and Stacy Bondanella, "Intergovernmental Organizations, Socialization, and Member-State Interest Convergence", International Organization, Vol.61, No.4, Fall 2007, PP.703-733, p.704.
①其中德国学派对哈贝马斯的社会交往理论的应用颇为广泛,并取得很多研究成果。参考Thomas, Risse, "'Let's Argue!'Communicative Action in World Politics," International Organization, Vol.54, No.1,2000, pp.1-39; Harald Muller, "Arguing, Bargaining and All That:Communicative Action, Rationalist Theory and the logic of Appropriateness in International Relations," European Journal of International Relations, Vol.10, No.3,2004, pp.177-202.
② Johnston, Alastair Iain, Treating International Institutes as Social Environments, International Studies Quarterly, Vol.45, No.4,2001, pp.487-515.
③ Stryker,S., and A. Statham, Symbolic Interaction and Role Theory,in The Handbook of Social Psychology. Vol.1, edited by GLindzey and E.Aronson, pp.311-378. New York:Random House,1985, p.325.
④ Freedman,P. E., and A.Freedman, Political Learning. In The Handbook of Political Behavior, Vol.1, edited by S.Long, pp.255-303, New York:Plenum Press,1981, p.258.
⑤ G John Ikenberry and Charles Kupchan, Socialization and Hegemonic Power. International Organization, Vol.44, No.3, 1990,pp.283-315.
⑥ Meyer, J. W, The Structuring of a World Environmental Regime,1870-1990, International Organization,Vol.51,No.4, 1997, pp.623-651.
① Axelrod, R., Promoting Norms:An Evolutionary Approach to Norms, in The Complexity of Cooperation, edited by R. Axelrod, pp.44-68. Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press.1997, p.58-59.
②. John Ikenberry and Charles Kupchan, Socialization and Hegemonic Power. International Organization, Vol.44, No.3, 1990,pp.283-315.
③袁正清：《交往行为理论与国际政治研究——以德国国际关系研究视角为中心的一项考察》,《世界经济与政治》2006年第9期。
① Jeffrey T. Checkel, International Institutions and Socialization in Europe:Introduction and Framework, International Organization, Vol.59, No.3,2005, pp 801-826.
① Underdal, Arild, Explaining Compliance and Defection:Three Models, European Journal of International Relations, Vol.4, No.1,1998,pp.5-36.
② Mutz, D. C., P. M. Sniderman, and R. A. Brody, Political Persuasion:The Birth of a Field of Study, in Political Persuasion and Attitude Change, edited by D.C.Mutz,P.M. Sniderman, and R.Brody, pp.1-14. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1996,p1.
③ James L. Gibson, A Sober Second Thought:An Experiment in Persuading Russians to Tolerate, American Journal of Political Science, Vol.42, No.3,1998, pp.819-850.
① G John Ikenberry and Charles Kupchan, Socialization and Hegemonic Power. International Organization, Vol.44, No.3, 1990,pp.283-315,p.290.
②[美]亚历山大·温特,《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第320页。
③王逸舟：《西方国际政治学：历史与理论》,上海：上海人民出版社,2006年版,第382页。
① Haas,Ernst B, Words Can Hurt You or Who Said What to Whom About Regimes, in International Regimes, edited by Stephen D.Krasner, Ithca, N.Y.Lcomell University Press,1983, pp.23-59.
② G. John Ikenberry and Charles Kupchan, Socialization and Hegemonic Power. International Organization, Vol.44, No.3, 1990,pp.283-315,p.292.
①[美]玛莎·费丽莫,《国家社会中的国家利益》,袁正清译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2001年版,第44页,第58页。
② Rogowski, R, Institutions as Constraints on Strategic Choice, in Strategic Choice and International Relations, edited by D. A. Lake and R. Powell, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,1999, pp.115-136.
③ G. John Ikenberry and Charles Kupchan, Socialization and Hegemonic Power. International Organization, Vol.44, No.3, 1990,pp.283-315,p.284.
①参见[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第323页。
② Stephen D. Krasner, American Policy and Global Economic Stability, In., America in a Changing World Political Economy, edited by William P. Avery and David P.Rapkin, New York:Longman,1982, p.32.
③[美]罗伯特.吉尔平：《世界政治中的战争与变革》,宋新宁译,上海：上海人民出版社,2007年版,第36-38页。
③Johnson, James, Is Talk Really Cheap:Prompting Conversation Between Critical Theory and Rational Choice, American Political Science Review, Vol.87, No.1,1993, pp.74-86.
④ Egeberg, Morten, Transcending Intergavernmentalism? Identity and Role Perceptions of National Officials in EU Decision-Making, Journal of European Public Policy, Vol.6, No.3,1999, pp.456-74.
① Kratochwil, F. V., and J. G. Ruggie, International Organization:A State of the Art on an Art of the State, International Organization Vol.40, No.4,1986, pp.753-775.
②[美]贝思·西蒙斯主编,《国际制度》,黄仁伟等译,上海：上海世纪出版社2006年版,第45页。
③转引自薛晓源,陈家刚等编译：《全球化与新制度主义》,北京：社会科学文献出版社,2004年版,第260页。
① Levy, Jack, Learning and Foreign Policy:Sweeping A Conceptual Minefield, International Organization, Vol.48, No.2, 1994,pp.279-312.
② David H. Bearce and Stacy Bondanella, Intergovernmental Organizations, Socialization, and Member-State Interest Convergence, International Organization, Vol.61, No.4,2007, pp.703-33, p.703.
③阿米塔·阿查亚曾经在其论著中对“反制度化”的问题进行了详细论述。参见[加]阿米塔·阿查亚：《建构安全共同体：东盟与地区秩序》,王正毅冯怀新译,上海：上海人民出版社,2004年版,第6页。
① Peter Katzenstein, Introduction:Alternative Perspectives on National Security, in The Culture of National Security: Norms and Identity in World Politics, edited by Peter Katzenstein. New York:Columbia University Press,1996, p.5.
② Johnston, Alastair Iain, Treating International Institutes as Social Environments, International Studies Quarterly, Vol.45, No.4,2001, pp.487-515, p.502.
③ Frank Schimmelfennig, NATO Enlargement:A Constructivist Explanation, Security Studies, Vol.8, No.2&3, winter 1998/99-Spring 1999, pp.198-234.
①参见[美]玛莎·费丽莫,《国家社会中的国家利益》,袁正清译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2001年版,第37-38页。
②何俊志等编译：《新制度主义政治学译文精选》,天津：天津人民出版社,2007年版,第13-14页。
①秦亚青主编：《理性与国际合作：自由主义国际关系理论研究》,北京：世界知识出版社2008年版,第241-43页。
② Johnson, James, Is Talk Really Cheap:Prompting Conversation Between Critical Theory and Rational Choice, American Political Science Review, Vol.87, No.1,1993, pp.74-86.
① Levy, Jack, Learning and Foreign Policy:Sweeping A Conceptual Minefield, International Organization, Vol.48, No.2, 1994,pp.279-312.
① Ian Hurd, Legitimacy and Authority in International Politics, International Organization, Vol.53, No.2,1999, pp.379-408.
② Johnston, Alastair Iain, Treating International Institutes as Social Environments, International Studies Quarterly, Vol.45, No4,2001, pp.487-515.
③ Jeffrey T. Checkel, International Institutions and Socialization in Europe:Introduction and Framework, International Organization, Vol.59, No.3,2005, pp 801-826.
④Jepperson, Ronald L., Alexander Wendt, and Peter J. Katzenstein, Norms, Identity, and Culture in National Security, in The Culture of National Security:Norms and Identity in World Politics, edited by Peter J. Katzenstein, New York: Columbia University Press,1996, pp.33-78; Kowert, Paul, and Jeffrey W. Legro, Norms, Identity, and their Limits:A Theoretical Reprise, in The Culture of National Security:Norms and Identity in World Politics, edited by Peter J. Katzenstein. New York:Columbia University Press,1996, pp.451-497.
⑤ Jeffrey T. Checkel, Social Construction and Integration, Journal of European Public Policy, Vol.6, No.4,1999, pp.545-560.
①马莎·芬尼莫尔凯瑟琳·斯金克：《国际规范的动力与政治变革》,载于[美]彼得.卡赞斯坦,罗伯特.基欧汉,斯蒂芬.卡拉斯纳编《世界政治理论的探索与争鸣》秦亚青,苏长和,门洪华魏玲译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第297页。
① Schoppa Leonard, The Social Context in Coercive International Bargaining, International Organization, Vol.53, No.2, 1999,pp.307-342.
② Thomas, Risse,'Let's Argue!'Communicative Action in World Politics, International Organization, Vol.54, No.1,2000, pp.1-39.Harald Muller, Arguing, Bargaining and All That:Communicative Action, Rationalist Theory and the logic of Appropriateness in International Relations, European Journal of International Relations, Vol.10, No.3,2004, pp.177-202.
③Gurowitz, Amy, Mobilizing International Norms:Domestic Actors, Immigrants, and the Japanese State, World Politics, Vol.51, No.3,1999, pp.413-445.
④Ron, James, Varying Methods of State Violence, International Organization, Vol.51, No.2,1997, pp.275-300.
⑤ Green, Donald P., and Ian Shapiro, Pathologies of Rational Choice Theory:A Critique of Applications in Political Science, New Haven, Conn.:Yale University Press,1994, pp.17-19.
① Johnson, James, Is Talk Really Cheap:Prompting Conversation Between Critical Theory and Rational Choice, American Political Science Review, Vol.87, No.1,1993, pp.74-86.
①参见[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第115-123页。
② Goldstein Judith and Robert O. Keohane, eds., Ideas and Foreign Policy:Beliefs, Institutions and Political Change, Ithaca, N.Y.:Cornell University Press,1993, p.8.
③Levy, Jack, Learning and Foreign Policy:Sweeping A Conceptual Minefield, International Organization, Vol.48, No.2, 1994,pp.279-312.
④ Ian Hurd, Legitimacy and Authority in International Politics, International Organization, Vol.53, No.2,1999, pp.379-408
⑤ Haas, Ernst B, Words Can Hurt You or Who Said What to Whom About Regimes, in International Regimes, edited by Stephen D.Krasner, Ithca, N.Y.Lcornell University Press,1983, pp.23-59.
①参见[美]玛莎·费丽莫,《国家社会中的国家利益》,袁正清译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2001年版,第58页
②[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2008年版,第141页。
③ David M. Kreps, Corporate Culture and Economic Theory, in Perspectives on Positive Political Economy, edited by James E.Alt and Shepsle,pp.90-143, Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1990, p.125-127.
④转引自何俊志等编译《新制度主义政治学译文精选》,天津：天津人民出版社,2007年4月,第170页。
① Ikenberry.G J., After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.72.
②James M. Buchanan, The Limits of Liberty, Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1975, chap.5.
① Oran R. Young, Political Leadership and Regime formation:On the Development of Institutions in International Society, International Organization Vol.45, No.3,1991, pp.281-308.
②俞新天：《强大的无形力量——文化对当代国际关系的作用》,上海：上海人民出版社,第212页。
② Robert D. Putnam, Diplomacy and Domestic Politics:The Logic of Two-Level Games, International Organization, Vol.42, No.3,1988, pp.427-60.
① Robert O. Keohane, Empathy and International Regimes, in Beyond Self-Interest, edited by Jane Mansbridge, Chicago: University of Chicago Press,1990, pp.227-236.
② Goldstein Judith and Robert O. Keohane, eds., Ideas and Foreign Policy:Beliefs, Institutions and Political Change, Ithaca, N.Y.:Cornell University Press,1993, p.12-17.
③ James L. Gibson, A Sober Second Thought:An Experiment in Persuading Russians to Tolerate, American Journal of Political Science, Vol.42, No.3,1998, pp.19-50.
④ Diana C. Mutz, Paul M. Sniderman, and Richard A. Brody, eds., Political Persuasion and Attitude Change, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press,1996, p.8.
① Zimbardo, Philip G, and Michael R. Leippe, The Psychology of Attitude Change and Social Influence, New York: McGraw Hill,1991, p.225.
② Egeberg, Morten, Transcending Intergovernmentalism? Identity and Role Perceptions of National Officials in EU Decision-Making, Journal of European Public Policy, Vol.6, No.3,1999, pp.456-474.
③ Elster. Jon. ed. Deliberative Democracy. New York:Cambridge University Press,1998, pp.109-111.
④参见[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第259-260页。
①同注释①
② Francisco Ramirez, Yasemin Soysal,and Suzanne Shanahan, The Changing Logic of Political Citizenship: Cross-National Acquisition of Women's Suffrage Rights,1890-1990, American Sociological Review, Vol.62, No.2, pp.735-45.
③ Robert Axelrod, An Evolutionary Approach toNorms. American Political Review, Vol.80, No.41986, pp.1095-1111.
①田野：《国际关系中的制度选择：一种交易成本的视角》,上海：上海人民出版社,2006年版,第6页。
② James N Rosenau, Before Cooperation:Hegemony, Regimes, and Habit-Driven Actors in World Politics, International Organization, Vol.40, No.4,1986, pp.849-894.
③Oran Young, Political Leadership and Regime Formation:On the Development of Institutions in International Society, International Organization, Vol.45, No.3,1991, p.131.
① Slaughter, Anne-Marie, International Law in a Word of Liberal States, European Journal of International Law, Vol.6, No.1,1995, pp.530-538.
②参见[加]阿米塔·阿查亚：《建构安全共同体：东盟与地区秩序》,王正毅冯怀新译,上海：上海人民出版社,2004年版,第5页。
③俞新天：《强大的无形力量——文化对当代国际关系的作用》,上海：上海人民出版社,第210页。
④同上第211页。
①阿瑟·斯坦：《协调与合作：无政府世界中的制度》,载于大卫·鲍德温主编：《新现实主义与新自由主义》,肖欢荣／译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2001年版,第50页。
②王逸舟：《探寻全球主义国际关系》,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版,第24页。
③ G. John Ikenberry, Institutions, Strategic Restraint, and the Persistence of American Postwar Order, International Security, Vol.23, No.3(Winter 1998/1999), pp.43-78
① Barbara Koremenos, Charles Lipson, and Duncan Snidal, the Rational Design of International Institutions, International Organization,Vol.55, No.4,22001, pp.761-799, p.767.
② Thomas W., Gilligan and Keith Krehbiel, Organization of Information of Informative Committees by A Rational Legislature, American Journal of Political Science, Vol.34, No.2,1990, pp.531-64.
① T.V.Paul and Johan A.Hall, International Order and the Future of World Politics, Cambridge University Press 1999, p.2.
②本文并不旨在分析民主和平论,而是分析国家间信仰、规范、文化对国家交往的影响,重点是国家间的社会互动和交流。
①Kenneth W.Abbott and Duncan Snidal, Why States Act Through Formal International Organization, Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol.42, No.l,1998. pp.3-32.
②Kratochwil,Friedrich V.,and John Gerard Ruggie, International Organization:A State of the Art on an Art of the State. International Organization, Vol.40, No.4,1986, pp.753-775; Ness, G D., and S. R. Brechin, Bridging the Gap: International Organizations as Organizations, International Organization Vol.42, No.2,1988, pp.245-273.
①[美]贝思·西蒙斯主编：《国际制度》,黄仁伟等译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第45页。
②转引自薛晓源,陈家刚等编译：《全球化与新制度主义》,北京：社会科学文献出版社,2004年版,第280页。
③ Jeffrey T. Checkel, International Institutions and Socialization in Europe:Introduction and Framework, International Organization, Vol.59, No.3,2005, pp 801-826.
① Acheson, Dean, Statement on the North Atlantic Treaty. Department of State Bulletin,1949, in Why is There No NATO in Asia? Collective Identity, Regionalism, and the Origins of Multilateralism, by Hemmer, Christopher, Katzenstein, Peter J, International Organization, Vol.56, No.3, Summer2002, pp.575-607.
②参考[美]马莎·芬尼莫尔凯瑟琳·斯金克：《国际规范的动力与政治变革》,载于[美]彼得.卡赞斯坦,罗伯特.基欧汉,斯蒂芬.卡拉斯纳编《世界政治理论的探索与争鸣》秦亚青,苏长和,门洪华魏玲译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第297页；Frank. Schimmelfennig, The EU, NATO, and the Integration of Europe:Rules and Rhetoric. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2003, p.199.
① G John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, pp.23-32.
② Jon Elster, Claus Offe, and Ulrich K.Preuss, Institutional Design in Post-Communist Societies:Rebuilding the Ship at Sea, New York:Cambridge University Press,1998, pp.12-17.
③ Holmes, Passions and Constraint, On the Theory of Liberal Democracy, Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1995.
④[美]道格拉斯·c·诺思：《制度、制度变迁与经济绩效》,上海：上海三联书店,1994年版,第100-102页。
① John J. Mearsheimer, The False Promise of International Institutions, International Security, Vol.19, No.3. Winter, 1994-1995, pp.5-49.
① G.John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.20.
② Ikenberry,GJ., After Victory:institutions,strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of oerder after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, P44a.
③ Kalevi J.Holsti, Peace and War:Armed Conflicts and International Order,1648-1989, New York:Cambridge University Press,1991,chapter two.
④ Robert H.Jackson, Quasi-States:Sovereignty, International Relations and the Third World, New York:Cambridge University Press,1990.
⑤ Michael Sheehan, The Balance of Power:History and Theory, London:Routledge,1996.
① G John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.p163.
② David Fromkia, In the Time of the Americans:The Generation That Changed America's Role in the World, New York: Alfred A-Knoph,1995.
③[美]罗伯特.吉尔平：《世界政治中的战争与变革》,宋新宁译,上海：上海人民出版社,2007年版,第56-57页。
③Peter J.Katzenstein, International Relations Theory and the Analysis of Change, in Global Changes and Theoretical Challenges, edited by Ernst-Otto Czempiel and James N.Rosenau, Lexington, Mass:Lexington Books,1989, p.296.
① G John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.166.
② Roland Dannreuther and John Peterson, Security Strategy and Transatlantic Relations, Routledge:Taylor& John Francis Group,2006, p.6.
③ Robert Jervis, A Political Science Perspective on the Balance of Power and the Concert, American Historical Review, Vol.97, No.3, June 1992, p.723.
① Stephen Krasner, American Policy and Global Economic Stability, in America in a Changing World Political Economy, edited by Willianm P. Avery and David P.Rapkin, New York:Longman,1982.
② G John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press.2001, p.57.
③ G.John Ikenberry and Charles Kupchan, Socialization and Hegemonic Power. International Organization, Vol.44, No.3, 1990,pp.283-315.
④ Alexander Thompson, Coercion Through IOs:The Security Council and the Logic of Information Transmission, International Organization, Vol.60, No.l,2006, pp.1-34.
① Michael S. Sherry, In the Shadow of War:The United States since the 1930s, New Haven:Yale University Press,1995, Preface.
②转引自Norman Graebner, America as a World Power:A Realist Appraisal from Wilson to Reagan, Wilmington, Del.: Scholarly Resources,1984, p.275.
③ Paul Bairoch, International Industrialization Levels from 1750 to 1980, Journal of European Economic History, Vol.11, No.2,1982, p.304.
① Joseph M.Grico,Realist International Theory and the Study of World Politics, in New Thinking in International Relations Theory, edited by Michael Doyle and GJohn Ikenberry, Bouldet,Colo:Westview Press,1997,pp.163-201.
②G John Ikenberry and Charles Kupchan, Socialization and Hegemonic Power.International Organization, Vol.44, No.3, 1990,pp.283-315.
③ Duncan Snidal, The Limits of Hegemonic Stability Theory, International Organization, Vol.39, No.4,1985, pp.579-614.
④ Terry Moe, Political Institutions:The Neglected Side of the Story, Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Vol.6, No.2,1990, pp.227-228.
① Albert Hirschman, National Power and the Structure of Foreign Trade, Berkeley and los Angeles:University of California Press,1980, p.29.
② George Kennan, Memorandum by the Director of the Policy Planning Staff to the Secretary of State and the Under Secretary of State Lovett, FRUS,1948, Vol.1, Washington, D.C.:Government Printing Office, February 24,1948, p. 524.
③Lisa Martin, The Rational State Choice of Multilateralism, in Multilateralism Matters:The Theory and Praxis of an Institution, edited by John Gerard Ruggie, New York:Columbia University Press,1993, p1 10.
① Peter Foot, America and the Origins of the Atlantic Alliance:A Reappraisal, in The Origins of NATO, edited by Joseph Smith, Exeter: University of Exeter Press,1990, p.83.
② John Gerard Ruggie, Winning the Peace:America and World Order in the New Era, New York:Columbia University Press,1996, chap.5.
③[美]朱迪斯戈尔茨坦,罗伯特·O·基欧汉：《观念和外交政策：信仰、制度与政治变迁》,刘东国于军译,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版,第85页。
④ George Kennan, Summary of Discussion on Problem of Relief, Rehabilitation and Reconstruction of Europe,29 May 1947, FRUS.1947, Vol.3, p.235.
⑤ Geir Lundestad, Empire by Invitation'in the American Century, Diplomatic History, Vol.23, No.2,1999, pp.189-217.
⑥ Robert Art, Why Western Europe Needs the United States and NATO, Political Science Quarterly, Vol.111, No.1,1996, pp.1-39.
① Peter Schmidt, European Conception of the Transatlantic Relationship:Historical Overview and Some Conceptual Issues, in A Hybrid Relationship:Transatlantic Security Cooperation beyond NATO, edited by Peter Schmidt, Peter Lang GmbH, Internationaler Verlag der Wissenschaften, Frankfurt am Main,2008, p.27.
② G John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.55.
③ Lawrence S.Kaplan, NATO 1948:the Birth of the Transatlantic Alliance, Rowman& Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2007, p.232.
① Geir Lundestad, Empire by Invitation? The United States and Western Europe.1945-1952, Journal of Peace Research, Vol.23, No.3,1986, pp.263-277.
②[美]曼瑟尔·奥尔森：《集体行动的逻辑》,陈郁等译,上海：上海三联出版社,2007年版,第41页。
③秦亚青主编：《理性与国际合作：自由主义国际关系理论研究》,北京：世界知识出版社,2008年版,第45页。
④ Hemmer, Christopher, Katzenstein, Peter J, Why is There No NATO in Asia? Collective Identity, Regionalism, and the Origins of Multilateralism, International Organization, Vol.56, No.3,2002, pp.575-607.
⑤ Jon Elster, Rational Choice, Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1986 pp.1-33.
①秦亚青主编：《理性与国际合作：自由主义国际关系理论研究》,北京：世界知识出版社,2008年版,第46页。
② David P.Calleo."The EU and US Geopolitical interests are no longer the same",Europe'World, Summer 2008.摘自: http://www.europesworld.org/ewEnglish/Home/Article/tabid/191/ArticleType/articleview/ArticleID/21156/Default.aspx
③ James N. Rosenau, Before Cooperation:Hegemony, Regimes, and Habit-Driven Actors in World Politics, International Organization, Vol.40, No.4,1986, p.861.
④ Martha Finnemore:Norms, Culture, and world Politic:insight from sociology's institutionalism, International Organization, Vol.50, No.2,1996, pp.325-347, p.330.
⑤叶江等编：《解读美欧——欧洲一体化进程中的美欧关系》,上海：上海三联出版社,1999年版,第279页。
① Acheson, Dean, Statement on the North Atlantic Treaty. Department of State Bulletin 20 (508),385,1949, Awaiable at Hemmer, Christopher, Katzenstein, Peter J, Why is There No NATO in Asia? Collective Identity, Regionalism, and the Origins of Multilateralism, International Organization, Vol.56, No.3,2002, pp.575-607.
②王逸舟：《西方国际政治学：历史与理论》,上海：上海人民出版社,2006年版,第224页。
③同上,第217页。
④ Alexandra Gheciu, NATO's History:The Politics of "Securing the West" Since 1949. Ph.D. diss. draft, Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y.,2001, pp.3-5.
⑤ Martha Finnemore:Norms, Culture, and world Politic:insight from sociology's institutionalism, International Organization, Vol.50, No.2,1996, pp.325-347, p.325.
⑥ Barry Buzan, From International System to International Society:Structural Realism and Regime Theory Meet the English School, International Organization, Vol.47, No.3,1993, pp.327-352.
① Randolph M.Siverson and Juliann Emmons, Birds of Feather:Democratic Political System and Alliance Choices in the Twentieth Century, Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol.35, No.2,1991, pp.285-306.
② Joseph M.Grieco, Anarchy and the Limits of Cooperation:A Realist Critique of the Newest Liberal Institutionalism, International Organization, Vol.42, No.3,1988, pp.485-507.
③ Peter Cowhey, Domestic Institutions and the Credibility of International Commitments:Japan and the United States, International Organization, Vol.47, No.2,1993, pp.299-326.
④ David Reynolds, America's Europe, Europe's America:Image, Influence, and Interaction,1933-1958, Diplomatic History, Vol.20, No.4,1996, pp.651-662.
①例如在对柏林占领区的管理,对希腊和土耳其危机的政策,对1947年欧洲经济危机的应对措施,欧洲国家尤其是英国给美国的决策施加了很多影响。
② John Lewis Gaddis, We Now Know:Rethinking Cold War History, New York:Oxford University Press,1997, p.205.
③ Patrick Thaddeus Jackson, Occidentalism:Rhetoric, Process, and Postwar German Reconstruction. Ph.D. diss., Columbia University, New York,2001, pp.428-429, see Hemmer, Christopher, Katzenstein, Peter J, Why is There No NATO in Asia? Collective Identity, Regionalism, and the Origins of Multilateralism, International Organization, Vol.56, No.3,2002, pp.575-607.
④[美]罗伯特·杰维斯：《世界政治研究中的现实主义》,载于[美]彼得·卡赞斯坦,罗伯特·基欧汉,斯蒂芬·卡拉斯纳主编：《世界政治理论的探索与争鸣》,秦亚青等译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第410页。
⑤ See Thomas Risse-Kappen, Cooperation among Democracies——the European Influence on U.S. Foreign Policy, 1995, Princeton, New Jersey:Princeton Press, pp.204-206.
① Ian Clark, The Hierarchy of States:Reform and Resistance in the International Order, Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1989. p.10.
② Alex Wendt, Collective Identity Formation and the International State, American Politics Review, Vol.88, No.2,1994, pp.384-396.
③ Christian Reus-Smit, The Constitutional Structure of International Society and Nature of Fundamental Institutions, International Organization, Vol.51, No.4,1997, pp.555-589.
④ David Robertson, NATO's Future Role:A European View, Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science, Vol.39, No.1,1991, pp.164-175.
⑤ Peter Schmidt, European Conception of the Transatlantic Relationship:Historical Overview and Some Conceptual Issues, in A Hybrid Relationship:Transatlantic Security Cooperation beyond NATO, edited by Peter Schmidt, Peter Lang GmbH, Internationaler Verlag der Wissenschaften, Frankfurt am Main,2008, p.70.
⑥ Lawrence S.Kaplan, NATO 1948:the Birth of the Transatlantic Alliance, Rowman& Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2007, p.232.
⑦ Henry A. Kissinge, Diplomacy, New York:Simon and Schuster,1994, p.835.
① Thomas J.Knock, To End All Wars:Woodrow Wilson and the Quest for a New World Order, New York:Oxford University Press,1992, pp.221-222.
② See Clarence Streit. Union Now:The Proposal for Inter-Democracy Federal Union. New York:Harper and Brothers,1939.
③ Alexander Gheciu, NATO in the "New Europe":the Politics of International Socialization after the Cold War, Stanford University Press,2005, p.35.
④ U.S. Department of State, FRUS,1948, Vol.3, pp.4-6.
⑤ Wichard Woyke, The Foundation and History of NATO, in The Western Security Community, edited by Norbert Wiggershaus and Roland Foerster, Oxford:Berg,1993, p.6.
⑥ Debates of the House of Commons of Canada, Parliament of Canada (Ottawa:Library of Parliament,1948),3:2303.
① Acheson, Dean. Present at the Creation:My Life in the State Department. London:Hamish Hamilton,1970. p.493.
②托马斯·里斯：《民主共同体的集体认同：以北约为例》,载于[美]彼得·卡赞斯坦主编,《国家安全的文化：世界政治中的规范与认同》,宋伟,刘铁娃译,北京大学出版社,2009年版,第336-377页。
③转引自 Lloyd C.Gardner, A Covenant with Power:American and World Order form Wilson to Reagan, New York: Oxford University Press,1984, p.100.
④ "Minutes of the Fourth Meeting of the Washington Exploratory Talks on Security" 8 July 1948, FRUS,1948, Vol.3, pp.163-169.
⑤ "The Secretary of State to the Embassy in France,"19 October 1949, FRUS,1949, Vol.4, p.471.
①Mark Smith, NATO Enlargement during the Cold War, New York:Palgrave,2000, p.77.
②最终,1977年西班牙弗朗西斯的专制统治结束之后,西班牙正式加入北约被提上日程,并于1982年正式加入。西班牙加入欧美制度化是北约“内外双逻辑”的体现。一方面在于西班牙的战略地位的重要性是对外逻辑的中心；另一方面则是加强北约内部民主规范的动力。将西班牙纳入制度化,表明欧美国家对民主原则的支持和肯定,并以此鼓励其他国家向这方面的发展。
①Walter Russell Mead, Special Providence:American foreign policy and how it changed the world, London:Routledge, 2002, chapter 2.
① John Van Oudenaren, From Atlantic Community to Atlantic Partnership and Beyond:American Conceptions of the Transatlantic Relationship since 1945, in A Hybrid Relationship:Transatlantic Security Cooperation beyond NATO, edited by Peter Schmidt, Peter Lang GmbH, Internationaler Verlag der Wissenschaften, Frankfurt am Main,2008, pp.43-66.
② Roland Dannreuther and John Peterson, Security Strategy and Transatlantic Relations, Routledge:Taylor& John Francis Group,2006, P6.
③ Harry S. Truman, Address to Joint Session of Congress on Aid to Greece and Turkey,12 March 1947. Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States:Harry S. Truman, January 1 to December 31,1947, Washington, D.C.:United States Government Printing Office,1963, pp.176-180.
④ Harry S. Truman, Address on Foreign Economic Policy,6 March 1947, Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States:Harry S. Truman, January 1 to December 31,1947, Washington, D.C.:United States Government Printing Office, 1963, pp.167-172.
① Lloyd C.Gardener, The Atlantic Charter:Idea and Reality,1942-1945, in The Atlantic Charter, edited by Douglas Brinkley and David R. Facey-Crowther, London:Macmillan,1994, pp.45-81.
② John Foster Dulles, Peace without Platitudes, Fortune, Vol.25, No.1, January 1942, pp.42-43
③G. John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.176.
① James Robert Huntley, Uniting the Democracies:Institutions of the Emerging Atlantic-Pacific System, New York:New York University Press,1980, p.4.
② Ronald Steel, Walter Lippmann and the American Century, Boston:Little, Brown,1980, pp.404-408.
① The Director of the Policy Planning Staff [Kennan] to the Scretary of State and Under Secretary of State [Acheson],23 May 1947, FRUS,1947, Vol.3, p.225.
② Memorandum of Director of the Office of European Affairs[Hickerson] to the Secretary of State,19 January 1948, FRUS,1948, Vol.3, pp.6-7.
③ Memorandum of Director of the Policy Planning Staff[Kennan]to the Secretary of State,20 January 1948, FRUS,1948, Vol.3, pp.7-8.
④ The Undersecretary of the State [Lovett]to the British Ambassador[Inverchapel],2 February 1948, FRUS,1948, Vol.3, pp.17-18.
⑤ John Lewis Gaddis, We Now Know:Rethinking Cold War History, New York:Oxford University Press,1997, p.200.
① G. John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.193.
② Summary Record of a Meeting of United States Ambassadors at Paris,21-22 October 1949, FRUS,1949, Vol.4, p.492.
③ Memorandum of Conversation by the British Foreign Office, undated, FRUS,1947, Vol.3, pp.818-819.
④ John Baylis, Britain and the Formation of NATO," in The Origins of NATO, edited by Joseph Smith, Exeter:University of Exeter Press,1990, p.11.
⑤ The British Ambassador [Inverchapel] to the Under Secretary of State[Lovett], FRUS,1948, Vo.3, P.14.
① Geir Lundestad, An Empire by Invitation? The United States and Western Europe,1945-1952, Journal of Peace Research, Vol.23, No.3,1986, p.270.
②[美]沃·惠·罗斯托：《从第七层楼上展望世界》,国际关系学院“五七”翻译组译,北京：商务印书馆,1973年版,第61页。
①[法]戴高乐：《战争回忆录》第2卷,北京翻译社译：北京：世界知识出版社,1959年版,第649页。
②《国际条约集(1945～1947)》,世界知识出版社,1959年版,第438-439页。
①《国际条约集(1948～1949)》,世界知识出版社,1959年版,第48-52页。
②[美]哈里·杜鲁门著：《杜鲁门回忆录》第2卷,李石译,上海：三联书店,1974年版,第289页。
①《国际条约集(1948～1949)》,世界知识出版社,1959年版,第191-195页。
②转引自：Wichard Woyke, The Foundation and History of NATO, in The Western Security Community, edited by Norbert Wiggershaus and Roland Foerster, Oxford:Berg,1993, p252.
③转引自：Olav Riste, Norway's Attitude to Military Integration, in The Western Security Community, edited by Norbert Wiggershaus and Roland Foerster. Oxford Berg,1993, p.192.
① NATO. Statement by Committee One on Religion and Spiritual Values, Paris:NATO Information Division,1957, p.1.
② Robert J. Art, American Foreign Policy and the Fungibility of Force, Security Studies, Vol.5, No.4, Summer 1996, p. 28.
③ G. John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.213.
④ Mary N.Hampton, NATO at the Creation:U.S. Foreign Policy, West Germany and the Wilsonian Impulse, Security Studies, Vol.4, No.3, Spring 1995, pp.610-56.
①华盛顿政府也认识到丘吉尔的策略,总统罗斯福担心丘吉尔的提议是将美国拴在欧洲。参考：G. John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001,p.206.
②Steve Weber, Shaping the Postwar Balance of Power:Mutilateralism in NATO, International Organization, Vol.46, No.3,1992, pp.633-680.
③ Peter Schmidt, European Conception of the Transatlantic Relationship:Historical Overview and Some Conceptual Issues, in A Hybrid Relationship:Transatlantic Security Cooperation beyond NATO, edited by Peter Schmidt, Peter Lang GmbH, Internationaler Verlag der Wissenschaften, Frankfurt am Main,2008, p.69.
④ David P. Callo, Early American Views of NATO:Then and Now, in The Troubled Alliance:Atlantic Relations in the 1980's, edited by Lawrence Freedman, New York:St.Martin Press,1984, p.9.
①参见[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2008年版,第123页。
②Charles A. McClelland and Gray D:Conflict Patterns in the Interactions among Nations, in International among Nations and Foreign Policy:A Reader in Research and Theory, edited by (James N. Rosenau, New York:Free Press,
1969, pp.711-724.
③[美]詹姆斯N·罗洗瑙主编：《没有政府的治理》,张胜军,刘小林等／译,南昌：江西人民出版社,2001年版,第14页。
① Escott Reid, Time of Fear and Hope:The Making of the North Atlantic Treaty,1947-1949, Toronto:McClelland and Stewart,1977,pp.25-28.
② NATO Report, NATO Civil Organization Records,1952-1965, NATO Archives,1955, Vol.55, p.69.
③ Lunn. Simon. The Collective Parliamentary Voice of the Alliance:The Role of the North Atlantic Assembly, in NATO: 50 Years On, edited by Peter Jenner. London:Atalink,1998. pp.143-146.
① Caroline Fehl, Living with a Reluctant Hegemony:The Transatlantic Conflict Over Multilateral Arms Control, European Journal of International Relations, Vol.14, No.2,2008, pp.259-287.
② Steve Weber, Multilateralism in NATO:Shaping the Postwar Balance of Power,1945-1961, Berkeley:University of California Press,1991, p.41.
③ Peter F.Cowhey, Elect Locally-Order Globally:Domestic Politics and Multilateral Cooperation, in Multilateralism Matters:The Theory and Praxis of an Institutional Form, edited by John Gerard Ruggie, New York:Columbia University Press,1993, p.158.
① Jon Elster, Introduction, in Constitutionalism and Democracy, edited by Jon Elster and Rune Slagstad, New York: Cambridge University Press,1988, p.15.
② Joseph M.Grieco, State Interests and Institutional Rule Trajectories:A Neorealist Interpretation of the Maastricht Treaty and European Economic and Monetary Union, Security Studies, Vol.5, No.3,1996, p.288.
③ Kenneth W.Abbott and Duncan Snidal, Why States Act Through Formal International Organization, Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol.42, No.1,1998, pp.3-32.
④Peter J.Katzenstein and Yutak Tsjujinka,'Bullying','Buysing','Binding':US-Japanse Transnational Relations and Domestic Structure, in Bring Transnational Relation Back in:Non-State Actor, Domestic Structures and International Institutions, edited by Thomas Risse-Kappen, New York:Cambridge University Press,1995, pp.79-111.
⑤ Daniel Deudney, The Philadelphian System:Sovereignty, Arms Control, and Balance of Power in the American States-Union, International Organization,Vol.49, No.2,1995, pp.191-228.
① Thomas Risse-Kappen, Cooperation among Democracies——the European Influence on U.S. Foreign Policy, Princeton, New Jersey:Princeton Press,1995, p.16.
② Steve Weber, Shaping the Postwar Balance of Power:Multilateralism in NATO, in Multilateralism Matters:The Theory and Praxis of an Institutional Form, edited by John Gerard Ruggie, New York:Columbia University Press,1993, p.145.
③有人询问2008年诺贝尔和平奖获得者前芬兰总统马尔蒂.阿赫蒂萨里(Martti Ahtisaari)愿意接受什么身份：联合国工作人员、芬兰总统、欧洲领导,但是他的回答是,我更愿意别人把我看作是西方民主的推动者。致力于用 和平与民主的方式来解决国际争端。这不仅是西方的专属文化,不仅属于欧美国家之间,而应该是解决全球性冲突问题方法之一。2008年12月12日于瑞典实务研究所的报告：《Peacemaking in a Changing World》.
①[英]巴瑞·布赞,[丹麦]奥利·维夫,[丹麦]迪·怀尔德：《新安全论》,朱宁译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2003年版,第16页。
②[加]阿米塔·阿查亚：《建构安全共同体：东盟与地区秩序》,王正毅冯怀新译,上海：上海人民出版社,2004年版,第7页,第22-23页。
① Karl Deutsch, The Analysis of International Relations,3rd edition, Englewood Cliffs:NJ:Prentice Hall,1988, p.271-272.
②[加]阿米塔·阿查亚：《建构安全共同体：东盟与地区秩序》,王正毅冯怀新译,上海：上海人民出版社,2004年版,第21页。
①王逸舟：《西方国际政治学：历史与理论》,上海：上海人民出版社,2006年版,第217-223页。
②玛莎·费丽莫：《建构人道主义干涉的规范》,载于[美]彼得·卡赞斯坦主编,《国家安全的文化：世界政治中的规范与认同》,宋伟,刘铁娃译,北京大学出版社,2009年版,第149-178页。
③ Hemmer, Christopher, Katzenstein, Peter J, Why is There No NATO in Asia? Collective Identity, Regionalism, and the Origins of Multilateralism, International Organization, Vol.56, No.3,2002, pp.575-607.
④ Ronald J. Yalem, Regional Security Communities, in The Yearbook on International Affairs, edited by George W. Keeton and Geoge Scharzenberger, London:Stevens,1979, pp.217-223.
①瑞典外交部官员玛丽卡·法伦(MarikaFahlen)认为：应该将欧美之间处理国家间关系的经验向更多的区域和领域推广……,国际制度框架之内的和平协商是处理国家间关系的有效之道。于瑞典国际事务研究所。笔者对玛丽卡·法伦的采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2008年12月12日。
②[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第288页。
③“友谊”更主要的集中于安全领域,很少外溢到其他领域。因此,这也可以说明,欧美在安全领域的紧密合作,而在经济领域则是存在激烈竞争。
④参见[加]阿米塔·阿查亚：《建构安全共同体：东盟与地区秩序》,王正毅冯怀新译,上海：上海人民出版社,2004年版,第2页。
⑤ Wolf-Dieter Eberwin, The Future of International Warfare:Toward a Global Security Community, International Political Science Review, Vol.16, No.4,1995,pp.341-360, p.347.
① Emanuel Adler and Michael Barnett, Security Communities in Theoretical Perspective, in Security Communities, edited by Emanuel Adler and Michal Barnett, Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1998, p.3.
②[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第291页。
① Thomas J.Kennedy, NATO Politico-Military Consultation:Washington, D.C.:National Defense University Press,1984, p.8.
② "we do not wish our allies to desertus", by President Eisenhower in 144th NSC Meeting, May 13,1953,FRUS 1952-1954,Vol.15, pp.1014-1017.
③ Friedrich V. Kratochwil, Rules, Norms and Decisions:On the Conditions of Practical and Legal Reasoning in International Relations and Domestic Affairs, New York:Cambridge University Press,1989, p.63.
① Robert O.Keohane and Joseph S.Nye,Jr., Transgovernmental Relations and International Organizations, World Politics, Vol.27, No.11974, pp.39-62.
② Robert Putnam, Diplomacy and domestic politics:The logic of two-level games, International Organization, Vol.42, No.3,1988, pp.427-460.
③ Emanuel Adler, Seizing the Middle Ground:Constructivism in World Politics, European Journal of International Relations, Vol.3, No.3,1997, p.345.
④ Emanuel Adler and Michael Bamett, A Framework for the Study of Security Communities, in Security Communities, edited by Emanuel Adler and Michal Barnett, Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1998, pp.43-44.
① Hemmer, Christopher, Katzenstein, Peter J, Why is There No NATO in Asia? Collective Identity, Regionalism, and the Origins of Multilateralism, International Organization, Vol.56, No.3,2002, pp.575-607.
②参见[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第224页。
① See G. John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.52.
②郭树勇：《大国成长的逻辑：西方大国崛起的国际政治社会学分析》：北京：北京大学出版社,2006年版,第74页。
⑤ Alexander Wendt, The Agent Structure Problem in International Relations Theory, International Organization, Vol.41, No.3,1987, pp.335-370.
①参见[美]约瑟夫.S.奈, 《硬权力与软权力》,门洪华译,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年。
② Frank. Schimmelfennig, The EU, NATO, and the Integration of Europe:Rules and Rhetoric. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2003, p.4.
③ Frank. Schimmelfennig, The EU, NATO, and the Integration of Europe:Rules and Rhetoric. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2003, p.6.
① Friedrich V. Kratochwil, Rules, Norms and Decisions:On the Conditions of Practical and Legal Reasoning in International Relations and Domestic Affairs, New York:Cambridge University Press,1989, p.63.
② Thomas Risse-Kappen, Cooperation among Democracies——the European Influence on U.S. Foreign Policy, Princeton, New Jersey:Princeton Press,1995, p.207.
① Sir Oliver Frank, in Listener,14 June 1956. Quoted in John W. Wheeler-Bennett and Anthony Nicholls, The Semblance of Peace:The Political Settlement after the Second World War, London:Macmillan,1972, p.573.
② G John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.263.
③ George Kennan, Review of Current Trends-U.S. Foreign Policy,24 February 1948. FRUS, Washington, D.C.:U.S. Government Printing Office,1948, Vol.1, Part 2, pp.515-517.
①门洪华：《霸权之翼：美国国际制度战略》,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版,第250页.
① G. John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.210.
② "Summary Record of a Meeting of United States Ambassadors at Paris," 21-22 October 1949, FRUS, Washington, D.C.:U.S. Government Printing Office,1949, Vol.4, p.485.
① G. John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.212.
② Statement of the Secretary of State to the North Atlantic Council, FRUS,1952-54, Washington, D.C.:U.S. Government Printing Office, Vol.5,P,461.
① Andei Kozyrev, Partnership or Cold Peace? Foreign Policy, No.99,1995, PP.3-14.
② "United Nations:Address before the 39th Session of the General Assembly, "24 September 1984, Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents, Vol.20, No.38,1 October 1984, Washington, D.C.:Office of the Federal Register, p.1359.
③ Raynond L.Garthoff, The Great Transition:American-Soviet Relation and the End of the Cold War, Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institute,1994, p.247.
④ See G. John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.297.
① G. John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.6.
②同上p.216.
① Pierre Hassner, Europe beyond Partition and Unity:Disintegration or Reconstruction?, International Affairs, Vol.66, No.3,1990, pp.461-475; Pierre Hassner, Europe beyond Partition and Unity:Disintegration or Reconstruction? International Affairs, Vol.66,1990, pp.461-75.
② Micheal Mastanduno, Preserving the Unipolar Moment:Realist Theories and U.S. Grand Strategy after the Cold War, International Security, Vol.21, No.4,1997, pp.49-88.
③Chirtopher Layne, The Unipolar Illusion, International Security, Vol.17, No.4,1993, pp.5-51.
④ Stephen Walt, The Origins of Alliance, Ithaca,N.Y.:Cornell University Press,1990, preface.
⑤ John Mearsheimer, Back to the Future:Instability of Europe after the Cold War, International Security, Vol.15, No.4, 1990,pp.5-57
⑥ Kenneth Waltz, Structural Realism after the Cold War, International Security, Vol.25, No.1,2000, p.19.
① John Duffield, NATO's Function after the Cold War, Political Science Quarterly, Vol.199, No.5,1994/1995, pp.763-87.
② Stephen Walt, The Origins of Alliance, Ithaca,N.Y.:Cornell University Press,1990, preface.
③ John Mearsheimer, Back to the Future:Instability of Europe after the Cold War, International Security, Vol.15, No.4, 1990, pp.5-57
① Roger Cohen, France to Rejoin Military Command of NATO Alliance, New York Times,6 December 1995, Al.
② Josef Joffe, Where Germany Has Never Been Before, National Interest, No.56,1999, pp.45-53.
③ G. John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.215.
④ Stephen Flanagan, NATO and Central and Eastern Europe, Washington Quarterly, Vol.15, No.2,1992, pp.141-151.
⑤ Robert B.McCalla, NATO's Persistence after the Cold War, International Organization, Vol.50, No.3,1996, pp.445-475.
⑥ Bill Clinton, American Foreign Policy and the Democratic Ideal, Campaign speech, Pabst Theater, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Octoberl,1992; Steven A. Holmes, Choice for National Security Adviser Has a Long-Awaited Chance to Lead, New York Times, January 3,1993.
⑦笔者对瑞典外交部官员玛丽卡·法伦(Marika Fahlen)的采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2008年12月12。
① Claries A. Kupchan, Reviving the West, Foreign Affairs, Vol.75,No.3,1996, pp.92-104.
② James Dobbins, New Direction for Transatlantic Security Cooperation, Survival, Vol.47, No.4,2005-2006, pp.39-54.
③ Thomas M. Leonard, NATO EXPANSION:ROMANIA AND BULGRARIA WITHIN THE LARGER CONTEXT, East European Quarterly, XXXIII, No.4, January,2000, pp.517-544.
④托马斯·里斯：《民主共同体的集体认同：以北约为例》,载于[美]彼得·卡赞斯坦主编,《国家安全的文化：世界政治中的规范与认同》,宋伟,刘铁娃译,北京：北京大学出版社,2009年版,第336-377页。
④ Peter Schmidt, European Conception of the Transatlantic Relationship:Historical Overview and Some Conceptual Issues, in A Hybrid Relationship:Transatlantic Security Cooperation beyond NATO, edited by Peter Schmidt, Peter Lang GmbH, Internationaler Verlag der Wissenschaften, Frankfurt am Main,2008, p.74.
⑥笔者对比利时皇家国际关系研究所研究员、欧洲学院教授比斯科普(SvenBiscop)的采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2009年4月21。
① David C.Gompert and F.Stephen Larrabee edited, America and Europe:A Partnership for A New Era, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1997, pp.6-12.
②笔者对美国波拖马可政策研究协会(Potomac Institute for Policy Studies)高级研究员亚历山大(Yonah Alexander)的采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2008年10月21日。
③ Daniel Hamilton, Charles Barry, Hans Binnendijk, Stephen Flanagan, Julianne Smith, James Townsend, The Washington NATO Project:Alliance Reborn:An Atlantic Compact for the 21st Century, February 2009, p.20. Daniel Hamilton, Charles Barry, Hans Binnendijk, Stephen Flanagan, Julianne Smith, James Townsend. The Washington NATO Project:Alliance Reborn:An Atlantic Compact for the 21st Century, January 2009, p.52. Available at www.acus.org/publication/alliance-reborn-atlantic-compact-21st-century.7
① Barbara Koremenos, Charles Lipson, and Duncan Snidal, the Rational Design of International Institutions, International Organization, Vol.55, No.4,2001, pp.761-799.
② Celeste A. Wallander, Institutional Assets and Adaptability:NATO After the Cold War, International Organization, Vol.54, No.4,2000, pp.705-735, p.731.
③ James D. Morrow, Modeling the Forms of International Cooperation:Distribution Versus Information. International Organization, Vol.48, No.3,1994, pp.387-423.
①笔者对瑞典国际事务研究所研究员玛尔雷(Ulrika Moller)的采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2008年10月26日。
②Celeste A. Wallander, Institutional Assets and Adaptability:NATO After the Cold War, International Organization, Vol.54, No.4,2000, pp.705-735, p.717.
① Celeste A. Wallander, Institutional Assets and Adaptability:NATO After the Cold War, International Organization, Vol.54, No.4,2000, pp.705-735,
① Anthony Lake, From Containment to Enlargement, Vital Speeches of the Day, Vol.60, No.1,15, October,1993, pp.13-19.
② Robert A. Pastor, Forward to the Beginning:Widening the Scope for Global Collective Action, in Emerging Norm, of Justified Intervention, edited by Laura W. Reed and Carl Kaysen, Cambridge, MA:Committee on International Security Studies,1993, pp.122-126.
③例如“统一联合特遣部队(Combined Joint Task Forces.简称CJTFs)的建立：不仅仅是为了共同防御,而且是为了危机管理,安全秩序维持等等。
① NATO, Study on NATO Enlargement, Brussels:the NATO Information and Press Office, September 1995, para.3.
② Madeleine Albright, Enlarging NATO, The Economist,15 February 1997, p.22.
③ "Founding Act on Mutual Relations, Cooperation and Security between the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the Russian Federation", Paris,27 May 1997, available in NATO Review, vol.45, no.4, July-August 1997.
④ Peter Schmidt, European Conception of the Transatlantic Relationship:Historical Overview and Some Conceptual Issues, in A Hybrid Relationship:Transatlantic Security Cooperation beyond NATO, edited by Peter Schmidt, Peter Lang GmbH, Internationaler Verlag der Wissenschaften, Frankfurt am Main,2008, p.17.
⑤ Speech at 41st Munich Conference on Security Policy,13 February 2005, Available at www.securityconference.de/konferenzen/rede.2005.
⑥ Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, Global NATO:Overdue or Overstretch? Speech at SDA Conference, Brussels,6 November 2006, p.2, Available at www.nato.int/docu/speech/2006/s061106a.htm.
① Daniel Hamilton, Charles Barry, Hans Binnendijk, Stephen Flanagan, Julianne Smith, James Townsend. The Washington NATO Project:Alliance Reborn:An Atlantic Compact for the 21st Century, January 2009, p.52. Available at www.acus.org/publication/alliance-reborn-atlantic-compact-21 st-century.
② Cheryl Shanks, Harold K. Jacobson, and Jeffrey H. Kaplan, Inertia and Change in the Constellation of International Governmental Organization,1981-1992, International Organization, Vol.50, No.4, Autumn 1996, pp.593-628.
① NATO, Transatlantic Transformation:Building a NATO-ED Security Architecture, Washington, DC:Atlantic Council of the U.S., March 2006.Available at http://www.acus.org/docs/0603-Transatlantic Transformation.pdf.
② David C.Gompert and F.Stephen Larrabee edited, America and Europe:A Partnership for A New Era, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1997, p.15.
① Knut Kirste, NATO's Security Agenda after Enlargement, Baltic Defense Review, No.11, Vol.1,2004, pp.97-103.
② Marten H.A. van Heuven, The Atlantic Council of the United States:NATO in 2010. July,1999. Available at www.acus.org/files/publication_pdfs/82/9908-NATO_2010.pdf.
① David C.Gompert and F.Stephen Larrabee edited, America and Europe:A Partnership for A New Era, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1997, p.3.
② Franklin D. Kramer and Simon Serfaty, Recasting the Euro-Atlantic Partnership, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Washington, D.C. February 1,2007. Available at www.csis.org/media/csis/pubs/csis_euroatlantic_feb07.pdf.
③ Malcolm Chalmers, Beyond the Alliance System, World Policy, Vol.7, No.2,1990, pp.215-50.
① Clarles A. Kupchan, Reviving the West', Foreign Affairs, Vol.75, No.3, May-June 1996, pp.97-98.
② Jose Maria Aznar, NATO:An Alliance for Freedom, Madrid:FAES,2005. Available at www.washingtonspeakers.com/prod_images/pdfs/AznarJose.NATOAnAllianceForFreedom.11.29.05.pdf.
③ Ronald D. Asmus, Richard K.Kugler, and F. Stephen Larrabee, NATO Expansion:The Next Steps, Survival, Vo'.37, No.1,1995,pp.7-33.
④ Julian Lindley-French, NATO and the EU:Terms of Engagement or Estrangement?, in A Recast Partnership? Institutional Dimensions of Transatlantic Relations, edited by Simon Safety, Washington, DC:CSIS,2008.
⑤ Anthony Lake, From Containment to Enlargement, Vital Speeches of the Day, Vol.60, No.1,1993; Douglas Brinkley, Democratic Enlargement:the Clinton Doctrine, Foreign Policy, No.106,1997, pp.111-127.
① White House, A National Security of Engagement and Enlargement, Washington, D.C.:White House, July 1994, p.6.
② James M. Goldgeier, Not Whether but When:The U.S. Decision to Enlarge NATO, Washington, D.C.:Brookings Institution,1999, p.236.
③ Secretary of State Madeline K. Albright, Statement on NATO Enlargement before the Senate Foreign Relation Committee,24 February 1998, as released by the Office of the Spokesman, U.S. Department of State, p.6.
④ NATO, Study on NATO Enlargement, Brussels:NATO Press Office,1995, p.7.
⑤ Christopher Jones, NATO Enlargement:Brussels as the Heir of Moscow, Problems of Post-Communism, Vol.45, No.4, 1998, p.52.
⑥ Pat Towell, "Aspiring NATO Newcomers Face Long Road to Integration," Congressional Quarterly, Vol.56, NO.6(7 February 1998, p.275.)
⑦ Ronald D. Asmus, Richard K.Kugler, and F. Stephen Larrabee, NATO Expansion:The Next Steps, Survival, Vol.37, No.1,1995, pp.7-33.
① Secretary of State Madeline K. Albright, Statement on NATO Enlargement before the Senate Foreign Relation Committee,24 February 1998, as released by the Office of the Spokesman, U.S. Department of State, pp.2-3. ② Strobe Talbott, Why NATO Should Grow, New York Review Books, Vol.42, No.13,1995, pp.217-30. ③ Madeline K. Albright, Why Bigger Is Better, Economist, Vol.342,1997, pp.21-23. ④ Javier Solana, Preparing for the Madrid Summit, NATO Review, Vol.45, No.2,1997, p.3.
⑤ Strobe Talbott, Why the Transformed NATO Deserves to Survive and Enlarge, International Herald Tribune,19 February 1997, p.8.
⑥ Ronald Asmus, Stop Fussing About NATO Enlargement and Get On With It, International Herald Tribune,9 December 1996, p.8.
⑦ Valclav Havel, The Euro-American Alliance Needs to Deepen as it Expands, International Herald Tribune,15 May 1997, p.8.
① James M. Goldgeier, NATO Expansion:The Anatomy of a Decision, Washington Quarterly, Vol.21, No.1,1998, pp. 86-87.
② Cited in Schimmelfennig, Frank. NATO Enlargement:to the East:An Analysis of Collective Decision-Making. EAPC-NATO Fellowship Report,1998-2000. Brussels:NATO Library,2000.p.225.
③ Madeleine Korbel Albright, Speech at the North Atlantic Council Ministerial Meeting in Sintra,29 May 1997, cited in http://www.nato.int/usa/special/970529-a.htm
④ Rachel A. Epstein, NATO Enlargement and the Spread of Democracy:Evidence and Expectations, Security Studies, Vol.14, No.1,2005, pp.63-105.
⑤ Daniel Deudney and G John Ikenberry, The Logic of the West, World Policy Journal, Vol.10, No.4, Winter 1993/94, pp, 17-25.
⑥ Judy Dempsey, US Rebuffs dermany on Plan for NATO, International Herald Tribune,15 February,2005. Online. Available:http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/02/14/news/munich.php(accessed 14 December 2005.
⑦ Judy Dempsey, For EU and NATO, a race for influence, International Herald Tribune,18 February,2005. Online. Available:http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/02/14/news/munich.php(accessed 14 December 2005.
① Solana, Javier, Preparing for the Madrid Summit, NATO Review, Vol.45, No.2,1997, p.3.
② David C.Gompert and F.Stephen Larrabee edited, America and Europe:A Partnership for A New Era, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1997, p.233.
③ Jose Maria Aznar, NATO:An Alliance for Freedom, speech at the AEI, The Spain Herald, November 17,2005.
④ John Duffield, NATO's Function after the Cold War, Political Science Quarterly, Vol.109, No.5,1994/1995, pp. 763-787, p.781.
⑤ See Roland Dannreuther and John Peterson, Security Strategy and Transatlantic Relations, Routledge:Taylor& John Francis Group,2006, p.56.
① Celeste A. Wallander, Institutional Assets and Adaptability:NATO after the Cold War, International Organization, Vol. 54, No.4,2000, pp.705-735, p.731.
② Waterman Harvey, Zagorcheva Dessie and Reiter, Dan, Correspondence:NATO and Democracy, International Security, Vol.26, No.3,2001, pp.221-235.
③ Simon Lunn, The Collective Parliamentary Voice of the Alliance:The Role of the North Atlantic Assembly, in NATO: 50 Years On, edited by Peter Jenner. London:Atalink,1998, p.145.
④ Cahen, Alfred, The Role of the Non-Governmental Organizations, in NATO:50 Years On, edited by Peter Jenner. London:Atalink,1998. p.148.
⑤ Thomas Risse-Kappen, Cooperation among Democracies——the European Influence on U.S. Foreign Policy, Princeton, New Jersey:Princeton Press,1995, p.224.
① Ronald Asmus, Stop Fussing About NATO Enlargement and Get On With It, International Herald Tribune,9 December 1996, p.8.
② Celeste A. Wallander, Institutional Assets and Adaptability:NATO after the Cold War, International Organization, Vol.54, No.4,2000, pp.705-735, p.729.
③ Daniel Hamilton, Charles Barry, Hans Binnendijk, Stephen Flanagan, Julianne Smith, James Townsend. The Washington NATO Project:Alliance Reborn:An Atlantic Compact for the 21st Century, January 2009, p.39. Available at www.acus.org/publicationyalliance-reborn-atlantic-compact-21st-century.
④ Franklin D. Kramer and Simon Serfaty, Recasting the Euro-Atlantic Partnership, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Washington, D.C., February 1,2007, p.3. http://www.csis.org/media/csis/pubs/csis_euroatlantic_feb07.pdf.
① Frances G Burwell, The Indispensable Partnership:Launching a New NATO-EU Relationship at Riga, the Atlantic council of the United States, Transatlantic Relations Program, November,2006, p.4.
② Robert B.McCalla, NATO's Persistence after the Cold War, International Organization, Vol.50, No.3,1996, pp.445-475.
③ Andre Blais and Stephane Dion, The budget maximizing bureaucrat:Appraisals and Evidence. Pittsburgh, Penn.: University of Pittsburgh Press,1991, pp.3-12.
④ Richard H. Hall, Organizations:Structures, processes and outcomes,5th ed. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:Prentice-Hall, 1991, pp.277-292.
① Josef Joffe, Europe's American Pacifier, Foreign Policy, No.54,1984, pp.64-82.
② United States Department of State, Bureau of Public Affairs, Office of Public Communications, The New Transatlantic Agenda:Joint U.S.-European Union Action Plan,Washington,D.C.,3 December 1995. Available at http://ec.europa.eu/extemal_relations/us/docs/new_transatlantic_agenda_en.pdf
③ A Security Europe in a Better World, European Security Strategy, Brussels,12 December 2003, Available at http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cmsUpload/78367.pdf
④ Robert B.McCalla, NATO's Persistence after the Cold War, International Organization, Vol.50, No.3,1996, pp.445-475, p,479.
⑤ David S. Yost, NATO and International Organizations, Rome:NATO Defense College,2007, p.6.
① Robert J. Lieber, No Transatlantic Divorce in the Offing, Orbis, Vol.44, No.4,2000, pp.571-584.
② Jonathan Dean, Is NATO's Past Also Its Future?, Arm Control Today, Vo.22, No.1,1992, p.54.
③ John J. Mearsheimer. "The False Promise of International Institutions", International Security, Vol.19, No.3, 1994-1995, pp.5-49, p.6.
① Ronald D. Asmus, Richard L. Kugler, and F. Stephen Larrabee, Building a New NATO, Foreign Affairs, Vol.72, No.4, 1993,pp.28-40,p.36.
② Waterman Harvey, Zagorcheva Dessie and Reiter Dan, Correspondence:NATO and Democracy, International Security, Vol.26, No.3,2001, pp.221-235.
③ John Duffield, NATO's Function after the Cold War, Political Science Quarterly, Vol.109, No.5,1994/1995, pp. 763-787, p.768.
① Franklin Kramer and John Lyman, Transatlantic Cooperation for Sustainable Energy Security:A Report of the CSIS Global Dialogue Between the EU and the US, January 2009. Available at http：//csis.org/publication/transatlantic-cooperation-sustainable-energy-security
②笔者对阿尔卡拉比(Issam al-Chalabi)的采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2008年11月10日。
③ Francis Fukuyama, State Building:Governance and World Order in the 21st Century, Ithaca, N.Y.:Cornell Univ. Press, 2004, chapter one.
④ John Duffield, NATO's Function after the Cold War, Political Science Quarterly, Vol.109, No.5,1994/1995, pp. 763-787, p.775.
⑤ Johan Jorgen Hoist, The Future of NATO, The Norwegian Atlantic Committee Series, No.154,1993, pp.14-15.
① Charles L. Glaser, Why NATO is Still Best:Future Security Arrangements for Europe, International Security, Vol.18, No.1,1993, pp.5-50, p.19.
② Lawrence S.Kaplan, NATO 1948:the Birth of the Transatlantic Alliance, Rowman& Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2007, p.238.
③[美]罗伯特·阿特：《美国大战略》,郭树勇译,北京：北京大学出版社,2006年版,第4页。
③ (NATO's Persistence after the Cold War) Robert B.McCalla (International Organization), Vol.50, No.3.(Summer, 19%), pp.445-475P455c-38
④ Stem Rynning, NATO Renewed, The Power and Purpose of Transatlantic Cooperation, New York,2005, pp.179-84.
⑤ European Union, A Secure Europe in a Better World:The European Security Strategy,12 December 2003, Available at http://ue.eu.int/uedocs/cmsUpload/78367.pdf; George W. Bush, The National Security Strategy of the United States, Washington:The White House, March 2006. Available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss/2006/
① Zachary Selden, Stabilization and Democratization:Renewing the Transatlantic Alliance, Parameters:US Army War College, Vol.37, No.4,2007, pp.85-98.
② William C. Wohlforth, The Stability ofa Unipolar World, International Security, Vol.24, No.1,1999, pp.5-41. ③ G John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars,
Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.234.
④ G John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press.2001, p.234.
①美国国防大学教授墨斯(Kenneth Moss)认为,当前全球性挑战,需要欧美联盟承担更多的责任。但他同时警告,北约不要成为一个世界警察,反对北约的全球化。笔者对墨斯的采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2009年4月14日。
② Stanley R. Sloan, US Perspectives on NATO's Future, International Affairs, Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944-, Vol.71, No.2,1995, pp.217-231.
③ Joseph S. Nye, US Power and Strategy after Iraq, Foreign Affairs, Vol.82, No.4,2003, pp.60-73.
④ See Daniel S. Hamilton ed., Transatlantic Transformation:equipping NATO for the 21" century, Washington,DC:Center for Transatlantic Relations, Brookings Institution Press,2004.
⑤ David A. Lake, Beyond Anarchy—The Importance of Security Institutions, International Security, Vol.26, No.1,2001, pp.129-160.
⑥ Michael T. Klare, For Oil and Empire? Rethinking War with Iraq, Current History, Vol.102, No.662,2003, p.135.
①[美]M.沃尔兹著,于海青摘译：《存在一个美利坚帝国吗?》,《国外社会科学》,2004年第3期,第44-45页。
②[美]J.B.福斯特著,高静宇摘译：《帝国主义新时代》,《国外社会科学》,2004第3期,第42页。
③刘丰：《联盟、制度与后冷战时代的北约》,《国际论坛》,2005年第2期。
② Mark T. Berger, From Pax Romana to Pax Americana? The history and future of the new American Empire.
①赵怀普：《论冷战后美欧关系的调整》,《世界经济与政治》,2003年第4期。International Politics, Vol.46, No.2/3, pp.140-156.
③ Thomas F. Madden, Empire of Trust:How Rome Built-and America is Building-a New World. New York:Dutton, 2008,pp.5-6.
④ George C. Herring, From Colony to Superpower:US Foreign Relations since 1776, New York:Oxford University Press,2008, p.966.
⑤ Robert Gilpin, U.S. Power and Multinational Corporation:The Political Economy of Foreign Direct Investment, New York:Basic Books,1975, p.85.
⑥门洪华：《霸权之翼：美国国际制度战略》：北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版,第66页。
① Stephen M. Walt, The Case for Finite Containment:Analyzing U.S. Grand Strategy, International Security, Vol.14, No. 1,1989, pp.5-49.
② Christopher Layne, Tragedy in the Balkans, New York Times, June 5,1992, p.15.
③ Stephen Van Evera, Why Europe Matters, Why the Third World Doesn't:American Grand Strategy After the Cold War, Journal of Strategic Studies, Vol.13, No.2,1990, pp.2-12.
④ Fareed Zakaria, The Future of American Power. Foreign Affairs, Vol.87, No.3,2008, pp.18-43.
⑤ David C.Gompert and F.Stephen Larrabee edited, America and Europe:A Partnership for A New Era, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1997, p.3.
⑥ United States Information Agency, The New European Security Architecture, USIA Office of Research and Media Reaction, Washington, D.C., September 1995, pp.7-35.
⑦ Roland Dannreuther and John Peterson, Security Strategy and Transatlantic Relations, Routledge:Taylor& John Francis Group,2006, p.2.
① Gunther Helmann and Reinhand Wolf, Neorealism, Neoliberal Institutionalism, and the Future of NATO, Security Studies, Vol.3, No.l,1993, p.11.
② Kenneth N. Waltz, Structual Realism after the Cold War, International Security, Vol.25, No.1,2000, pp.5-41.
③[美]罗伯特·阿特：《美国大战略》,郭树勇译,北京：北京大学出版社,2006年版,第9页。
③ Barry James, The EU Counterweight to American Influence, International Herald Tribune, June 16,2000, p.4.
④ Robert J. Lieber, Persistent primacy and the future of the American era, International Politics, Vol.46, No.2/3,2009, pp.119-139.
① Nicholas Burns, Expanding the Alliance of Democracies, The Wall Street Journal,29 March 2004.
② William Drozdiak, Even Allies Resent U.S. Dominance, Washington Post,4 November 1997, pp.Al, A13.
③美国因黄金储备剧减而被迫宣布停止黄金和美元的自由兑换,从此,主要国家之间的汇率开始自由浮动,布雷顿体系的主要特点不复存在,这被称为造成的著名的“尼克松震荡”。
③ Michael Mastanduno, Preserving the Unipolar Moment:Realist Theories and U.S. Grand Strategy after the Cold War, International Security, Vol.21, No.4,1997, p.58.
① Glaser, Charles, Why NATO Is Still Best:Future Security Arrangements for Europe, International Security, Vol.18, No.1,1993, pp.5-50, p.21.
② Robert. Art, Why Western Europe Needs the United States and NATO, Political Science Quarterly, Vol.111, No.1,1996, pp.1-39.
③ Waterman Harvey, Zagorcheva Dessie and Reiter, Dan, Correspondence:NATO and Democracy, International Security, Vol.26, No.3,2001, pp.221-235.
④ Celeste A. Wallander, Institutional Assets and Adaptability:NATO after the Cold War, International Organization, Vol. 54, No.4,2000, pp.705-735.
⑤ Josef Joffe, Europe's American Pacifier, Foreign Policy, No.54,1984, pp.64-82, p.68.
⑥ Jan Willem Honing, The'Renationalization'of Western European Defense, Security Studies, Vol.2, No.1,1992, pp.122-139.
① Anand Menon, Anthony Forster, and William Wallace, A Common European Defense?" Survival, Vol.34,1992, pp.98-119.
② Josef Joffe, Europe's American Pacifier, Foreign Policy, No.54,1984, pp.64-82, p.74.
③ Ivan G. Tyulin, The Future of NATO in a Changing Europe, in The Future of European Security, edited by Beverly Crawford, Berkeley:University of California, International and Area Studies,1992, p.51.
④ Jan Perlez, Larger NA TO Seen as Lid on Germany, International Herald Tribune,8 December 1997.
① David Robertson, NATO's Future Role:A European View, Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science, Vol.38, No.1, The New Europe:Revolution in East-West Relations,1991, pp.164-175.
② Gregory F. Treverton, Elements of a New European Security Order, Journal of International Affairs, Vol.45, No.1,1991, p.102.
③ James E. Goodby, Peacekeeping in the New Europe, Washington Quarterly, Vol.15, No.2,1992, pp.154-155.
④ Jenonne Walker, No More Yugoslavia, New York Times, May 20,1992, p.15.
⑤ Stephen J. Flapagan, NATO and Central and Eastern Europe:From Liaison to Security Partnership, Washington Quarterly, Vol.15, No.2,1992, pp.141-151.
①笔者对俄罗斯议会副议长安德烈·克里莫夫(Andrei Klimov)的采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2009年6月16日。
② Roland Dannreuther and John Peterson, Security Strategy and Transatlantic Relations, Routledge:Taylor& John Francis Group,2006, p.55.
③丁原洪：《北约走向何方?》,《和平与发展》,2008年第3期,第33-37页。
④笔者对的捷克共和国外交部政策计划处主任霍宾格尔(Vaclav Hubinger)采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2009年2月16日。
⑤ Volker Heise, European Security and Defense Policy in Transatlantic Relations, in A Hybrid Relationship: Transatlantic Security Cooperation beyond NATO, edited by Peter Schmidt, Peter Lang GmbH, Internationaler Verlag der Wissenschaften, Frankfurt am Main,2008, p.31.
① Karl Lowe and Thomas-Durell Young, Multinational corps in NATO, Survival, Vol.33, No.1,1991, pp.66-77.
②芬兰外长亚历山大·斯塔博(H.E. Mr. Alexander Stubb)的报告：《Strengthening theEU's Global Role》,斯德哥
尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2009年6月9日。
③ Glaser, Charles, Why NATO Is Still Best:Future Security Arrangements for Europe, International Security, Vol.18, No.1,1993, pp.5-50.
④ Celeste A. Wallander, Institutional Assets and Adaptability:NATO after the Cold War, International Organization, Vol.54, No.4,2000, pp.705-735.
⑤ Celeste A. Wallander, Russian Transimperialism and its Implications, in Global Powers in the 21st Century:Strategies and Relations, edited by Alexander T.J. Lennon and Amanda Kozlowski, Cambridge MA:MIT Press,2008, pp.217-235.
⑥ Stephen Sestanovich, What has Moscow Done? Rebuilding U.S.-Russian Relations, Foreign Affairs, Vol.87, No.6,(November/December 2008), pp.12.
⑦ Walter B. Slocombe, Europe, Russia and American Missile Defense, Survival, Vol.50, No.2,19-24.
⑧笔者对德国外交委员的主任拉尔(Alexander Rahr)的采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2009年6月 7日。
① NATO, The Alliance's Strategic Concept Agreed by the Heads of States and Government Participating in the Meeting of the North Atlantic Council. Rome, November 8,1991. http://www. nato.int/docu/basictxt/b911108.htm.
② Waterman Harvey, Zagorcheva Dessie and Reiter, Dan, Correspondence:NATO and Democracy, International Security, Vol.26, No.3,2001, pp.221-235.
③ United States:Department of State. Bureau of European and Canadian Affairs, Report to Congress on the Enlargement of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization:Rationale, Benefits, Costs and Implications, February 24,1997.
④ Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents, Washington, D.C.:Government Printing Office, May 31 and July 7, 1997.
⑤ Clinton's NATO Effort Risky:President's Vision Rests on Historic Rationale, Washington Post, July 8.1997.
⑥ Americans Not Yet Sold On Need For Larger NATO, Washington Post, July 3,1997, p.14.
① Alexander Gheciu, NATO in the "New Europe ":The Politics of International Socialization after the Cold War, Stanford University Press,2005, p.529.
② Gabriel Popescu, Diaspora Geopolitics:Romanian-Americans and NATO Expansion, Routledge&Francis Group,2005, p.475.
③ What Romania wants from NATO and why they might not get it. http://alina_stefanescu.typepad.com/romania_revealed/2009/04/the-latest-on-the-upcoming-moldovan-elections-that-coul d-push-the-communists-from-power.html.
④ NATO General Says Romania"Key Partner," Rompres (in English), July 8,1998.
⑤ Tom Gallagher, Balkan But Different:Romania and Bulgaria's Contrasting Paths to NATO Membership 1994-2002, Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics, Vol.20, No.4,2004, pp.1-19.
⑥ Andrew Cottey, East-Central Europe after the Cold War. Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary in Search of Security, Basingstoke:Macmillan,1995, p.94.
① Jonathan Eyal, NATO's Enlargement:Anatomy of a Decision, International Affairs, Vol.73, No.4,1997, pp.711-712.
② Vaclav Havel, A Call for Sacrifice:The Co-Responsibility of the West, Foreign Affairs, Vol.74, No.4,1994, pp.2-6.
③ Lawrence S.Kaplan, NATO 1948:the Birth of the Transatlantic Alliance, Rowman& Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2007, p.239.
④ Robert. Art, Why Western Europe Needs the United States and NATO, Political Science Quarterly, Vol.111, No.1,1996, pp.1-39.
⑤[美]罗伯特·阿特：《美国大战略》,郭树勇译,北京：北京大学出版社,2006年6月,p.179.
⑤ Frank Schimmelfennig, The EU, NATO, and the Integration of Europe:Rules and Rhetoric, Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2003, p.39.
①挪威外交部次长海尔基辛认为,现在全球应该向欧美间的制度化学习,吸收和学习民主规范,利用和平方式解决冲突。其中,对于当今的发展中国家,其成长是一个学习和吸收“良性”政治体系和政治规范的过程。笔者对海尔基辛的采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2008年12月12日。
② Radu Bogdan, Romanian Reflections, NATO Review, Vol.48, No.2,2000, pp.23-25.
③ Ian Clark, Another "Double Movement":The Great Transformation after the Cold War? Review of International Studies, Vol.27, No.5,2001, pp.237-255.
①有人的学者曾经支持,冷战的结束、欧美共同敌人的消失,使得欧美利益的界定模糊不清。但是二者对民主自由规范的认知为欧美联盟的维持和发展提供底线。参见[美]彼得·卡赞斯坦,《国家安全的文化：世界政治中的规范与认同》,宋伟,刘铁娃译,北京：北京大学出版社,2009年版,前言,第63页。
② David C.Gompert and F.Stephen Larrabee edited, America and Europe:A Partnership for A New Era, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1997, p.14.
③ Gunther Hellmann and Reinhard Wolf, Neorealism, Neoliberal Institutionalism, and Future of NATO, Security Studies, Vol.3,No.1,1993, p.17.
④ Stephen M.Walt, Why Alliance Endure or Collapse, Survival, Vol.39, No.1,1997, p.173.
① Thomas Bernauer, Full Membership or Full Club? Expansion of NATO and the Future Security Organization of Europe, in Towards a New Europe. Stops and Starts in Regional Integration, edited by Gerald Schneider, Patricia A. Weitsman, and Thomas Bernauer, Wesrport, Conn.:Prager,1995, pp.186-187.
② Stanley R. Sloan, US Perspectives on NATO's Future, International Affairs, Royal Institute of International Affairs
1944-, Vol.71, No.2,1995, p.221.
③ Secretary of State Madeline K. Albright, Statement on NATO Enlargement before the Senate Foreign Relation Committee,24 February 1998, as released by the Office of the Spokesman, U.S. Department of State, p.3.
④ Strobe Talbott, Why NATO Should Grow, New York Review Books, Vol.42, No.13,1995, p.27.
① Mary N.Hampton, NATO at the Creation:U.S. Foreign Policy, West Germany and the Wilsonian Impulse, Security Studies, Vol.4, No.3,1995, pp.610-56.
②王军：《朋友还是对手——冷战后的欧美关系解读》,北京：人民出版社,2006年版,第79页。
② Robert B. McCalla, NATO's Persistence after the Cold War, International Organization, Vol.50, No.3,1996, pp.445-475, p.462.
③ Alexander Wendt, Collective Identity Formation and the International State, American Political Science Review, Vol.88, No.2,1994, pp.384-385.
④ Alexander Gheciu, NATO in the "New Europe":The Politics of International Socialization after the Cold War, Stanford:Stanford University Press,2005, p,232.
⑤ Frank Schimmelfennig, The EU, NATO, and the Integration of Europe:Rules and Rhetoric, Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2003, p.39.
① Philip H. Gordon, Bridging the Atlantic Divide, Foreign Affairs, January/February 2003, p.4.
② John Van Oudenaren, From Atlantic Community to Atlantic Partnership and Beyond:American Conceptions of the Transatlantic Relationship since 1945, in A Hybrid Relationship:Transatlantic Security Cooperation beyond NATO, edited by Peter Schmidt, Peter Lang GmbH, Internationaler Verlag der Wissenschaften, Frankfurt am Main,2008, pp.43-66.
③[美]理查德·尼克松著：《透视新世界》,刘庸安等译,北京：中国言实出版社,2000年版,第105页。
① "Financial and Economic Data Relating to NATO Defense," NATO Press Release M-DPC-2(01)156,18 December 2001.
② Johanna Granville, The Many Paradoxes of NATO Enlargement, Current History, Vol.98, No.627,1999, pp.165-170.
③ Andrew Cottey, East-Central Europe after the Cold War. Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary in Search of Security, Basingstoke:Macmillan,1995, p.37.
④ "NATO and the U.S. Commitment to Europe," address given by President George H. W. Bush at the Oklahoma State University Commencement, Stillwater, Oklahoma, May 4,1990. Cited in Honing, Jan Willem. "NATO:An Institution under Threat?" Occasional Paper, no.22. New York:Institute for East-West Security Studies,1991, p.5.
① James M. Goldgeier, Not Whether but When:The U.S. Decision to Enlarge NATO, Washington, D.C.:Brookings Institution,1999, p.23.
② Lawrence S.Kaplan, NATO 1948:the Birth of the Transatlantic Alliance, Rowman& Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2007, p.204.
③ Frank Schimmelfennig, NATO Enlargement a Constructivist Explanation, Security Studies,Vol.8, No.2/3, 1998/1999-Spring 1999, pp.198-234.
④ Strobe Talbott, Why NATO Should Grow, New York Review Books, Vol.42, No.13,1995, pp.217-30.
⑤ Vaclav Havel, A Call for Sacrifice:The Co-Responsibility of the West, Foreign Affairs, Vol.74, No.4,1994, pp.2-6.
① Adrian G. V Hyde-Price, Democratization in Eastern Europe. The External Dimension, in Democratization in Eastern Europe:Domestic and International Perspectives, edited by Geoffrey Pridham and Tatu Vanhanen, London:Routledge, 1994, pp.220-52.
② Brian Knowlton, Top General Defends U.S. Choices for NATO, International Herald Tribune,17 June 1997, p.2.
③ William Drozdiak, Europeans Protest Clinton's Limit on Widening NATO, International Herald Tribune,12 June 1997 p.1 and p.11.
④ Javier Solana, Preparing for the Madrid Summit, NATO Review, Vol.45, No.2,1997 pp.3-6. Available at http://www.nato.int/docu/review
⑤ Frank. Schimmelfennig, The EU, NATO, and the Integration of Europe:Rules and Rhetoric. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2003, p.153.
⑥ Speech at the North Atlantic Council Ministerial Meeting in Sintra,29 May 1997. Available at http:// www.nato.int/usa/special/970529-a.htm
①转引自童世骏：《老欧洲新欧洲——“9.11”以来欧洲复兴思潮对英美单边主义的批判》,上海：华东师范大学出版社,2004年版,第69页。
② International Institute for Strategies Studies, Transatlantic Relations:Persistent predicaments, Strategic Comments, Vol.11, No.7, September,2005.Available at http://www.iiss.org/newsite/showsubpdfsarchive.php?scID=239&type=iiss.pdf(accessed 4 January 2006
① Joseph S. Nye, US Power and Strategy after Iraq, Foreign Affairs, Vol.82, No.4,2003, pp.60-73.
②参见[美]约瑟夫·奈：《美国霸权的困惑：为什么美国不能独断专行》,何治国等译,北京：世界知识出版社,2002年版,第165页。
② William J.Perry, The Enduring Dynamic Relationship That Is NATO, Defense Viewpoint, Vol.10, No.9,1995. Available at http://www.defenselink.mil/speeches/1995/s19950205-perry.html.
③ See Tom Gallagher, Balkan But Different:Romania and Bulgaria's Contrasting Paths to NATO Membership 1994-2002, Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics, Vol.20, No.4,2004, pp.1-19.
① Rachel A. Epstein, NATO Enlargement and the Spread of Democracy:Evidence and Expectations, Security Studies, Vol.14, No.1,2005, pp.63-105.
② Dan Reiter and Allan C. Stam Ⅲ, Democracy, War Initiation, and Victory, American Political Science Review, Vol.92, No.2,1998, pp.377-389.
③ Alexander Gheciu, NATO in the "New Europe":the Politics of International Socialization after the Cold War, Stanford University Press,2005, pp.80-82.
④ Johnston, Alastair Iain, Treating International Institutes as Social Environments, International Studies Quarterly, Vol.45, No.4,2001, pp.487-515.
① Jeffrey T. Checkel, Why Comply? Social Learning and European Identity Change, International Organization, Vol.55, No3,2001,pp.553-588.
② Johnston, Alastair Iain, Treating International Institutes as Social Environments, International Studies Quarterly, Vol.45, No.4,2001, pp.487-515, p.498.
① Teodor Melescanu, Security in Central Europe:A Positive-Sum Game, NATO Review, Vol.41, No.5,1993, pp.12-18.
②同注释②.
③ Ceslovas V. Stankevicius, NATO Enlargement and the Indivisibility of Security in Europe:A View from Lithuania, NATO Review, Vol.44, No.5,1996, pp.21-25.
④Clay Clemens ed., NATOandthe Quest for Post-Cold War Security, Basingstoke:Macmillan,1997, p,112.
⑤Jonathan Eyal, NATO's Enlargement:Anatomy of a Decision, International Affairs, Vol.73, No.4,1997, pp.695-719.
① Waterman Harvey, Zagorcheva Dessie and Reiter, Dan, Correspondence:NATO and Democracy, International Security, Vol.26, No.3,2001, pp.221-235.
② James M Golddeier, Not Whether but when. The US Decision to Enlarge NATO, Washington, DC:Brooking Institution Press,1999, p.20.
③ Gale A Mattox, NATO:Past and Future, in NATO Expansion (Miller Center Series on A New World Order, edited by, Kenneth W. Thompson, Lanham, MD:University Press of America,1998, p.27.
④Douglas Brinkley, Democratic Enlargement:The Clinton Doctrine, Foreign Policy, Vol.106,1997, pp.113-114.
① Ruhe, Volker, Shaping Euro-Atlantic Policies:A Grand Strategy for a New Era, Survival, Vol.35, No.2,1993, pp.133-134.
② Remarks by the President to the House of Parliament," 29 November 1995. Available at http://www.pub. whitehouse.gov/publications.
③ "Top Ten Question on NATO Enlargement", Fact Sheet Released by the NATO Enlargement Ratification Office, US Department of State, February 19,1998. Available at http://www.state.gov/www/regions/eur/fs_980219_natoqanda.html
④ Pavel NECAS:Beyond Tradition:A New Strategic Concept for NATO? Available at http://www.ndc.nato.int/download/publications/necas.pdf
⑤ Asmus, Ronald D. and Larrabee, F. Stephen, NATO and the Have-Nots:Reassurance after Enlargement, Foreign Affairs, Vol.75,1996, pp.13-20.
① See Frank. Schimmelfennig, The EU, NATO, and the Integration of Europe:Rules and Rhetoric. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2003, pp.177-187.
②笔者对的福特汉姆大学(Fordham University)选举政治和民主研究中心(Center for Electoral Politics and Democracy)考斯塔斯·潘那古普鲁斯博士的采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2009年1月18日。
① Ruhe, Volker, Shaping Euro-Atlantic Policies:A Grand Strategy for a New Era, Survival, Vol.35, No.2,1993, pp.133-134.
①[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第115-123页。
② Goldstein Judith and Robert O. Keohane, eds., Ideas and Foreign Policy:Beliefs, Institutions and Political Change, Ithaca, N.Y.:Cornell University Press,1993, p.27.
② Levy, Jack, Learning and Foreign Policy:Sweeping A Conceptual Minefield, International Organization, Vol.48, No.2, 1994, pp.279-312.
③ Ian Hurd, Legitimacy and Authority in International Politics, International Organization, Vol.53, No.2,1999, pp.379-408.
④ Haas,Ernst B, Words Can Hurt You or Who Said What to Whom About Regimes, in International Regimes, edited by Stephen D.Krasner, Ithca, N.Y.Lcornell University Press,1983, pp.23-59.
①参见[美]玛莎·费丽莫,《国家社会中的国家利益》,袁正清译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2001年版,第44-58页。
② G John Ikenberry and Charles Kupchan, Socialization and Hegemonic Power. International Organization, Vol.44, No.3, 1990,pp.283-315,p.292.
③[美]亚历山大·温特,《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第141页。
④ David M. Kreps, Corporate Culture and Economic Theory, in Perspectives on Positive Political Economy,edited by James E.Alt and Shepsle,pp.90-143.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1990, pp.125-127.
①参见何俊志等编译《新制度主义政治学译文精选》,天津：天津人民出版社,2007年4月,第170页。
②Washington Post,July 12,1997,A1.
① Jennifer Milliken, The Study of Discourse in International Relations:A Critique of Research and Methods, European Journal of International Relations, Vol.5, No.2,1999, pp.225-254.
② Kennedy, Robert.1998. Educating Leaders for the 21st Century:A Snapshot of the Marshall Center for Security Studies. NATO Review 46 (4). Available at:(http://www.nato.int/docu/review/1998/9804-08.htm).
③ See http://www.PfPconsortium.org
①在瑞典国防学院研修期间,笔者曾有幸参与其举办的各类培训班。这个学院就是PSP的成员之一,每年为北约成员国的军事领导人举行各种培训班,例如“欧洲安全培训班”,“危机处理培训班”等等。
② Teodor Melescanu, Minister of Defense of Romania, Confronting New Security Challenges, NATO'S NATIONS AND PARTNERS FOR PEACE, No.4,2002, pp.96-101.
③Jeffrey T. Checkel, "Going Native " in Europe? Theorizing Social Interaction in European Institutions, Comparative Political Studies, Vol.36,2003, pp.209-231.
④ Williams, Michael C., and Iver Neumann. From Alliance to Security Community:NATO, Russia, and the Power of Security. Millennium, Vol.29, No.2,2000, pp.37-87.
① Farrell, Theo. Constructivist Security Studies:Portrait of a Research Program, International Studies Review, Vol.4, No.1,2002,pp.70-71.
② Chris Donnelly, Security in the 21st Century:New Challenges and New Response, http://www.nato.int/docu/speech/ 2003/so30605a.htm.
①刘军：《理性主义国际关系理论的困境与建构主义的挑战——以冷战后的北约东扩为例》,《国际观察》,2007年第2期。
① Alexander Gheciu, NATO in the "New Europe":the Politics of International Socialization after the Cold War, Stanford University Press,2005, p.232.
②David C.Gompert and F.Stephen Larrabee edited, America and Europe:A Partnership for A New Era, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1997, p.83.
① Thomas M Franck. The Power of Legitimacy among Nations, Oxford:Oxford University Press,1990, p.49.
② Johnston, Alastair Iain, Treating International Institutes as Social Environments, International Studies Quarterly, Vol.45, No.4,2001, pp.487-515, p.511.
① Alexandra Checkel, Security Institutions as Agents of Socialization? NATO and the "New Europe ", International Organization, Vol.59, No.4,2005, pp.973-1012.
① Robert B.McCalla, NATO's Persistence after the Cold War, International Organization, Vol.50, No.3,1996, pp.445-475, p.464.
① Roland Dannreuther and John Peterson, Security Strategy and Transatlantic Relations, Routledge:Taylor& John Francis Group,2006, p15 and p.47.
②18世纪的英国首相帕尔姆斯顿Lord Palmerston曾说过,我们没有永远的盟友,也没有永恒的朋友,只有永恒的利益。We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual.
① James Thomson, US Interests and the Fate of the Alliance, Survival, Vol.45, No.4, Winter 2003-2004, pp.207-220.
② David P.Calleo, The EU and US Geopolitical interests are no longer the same", Europe'World, Summer 2008.
① David Holley, War with Iraq:International Opinion, Los Angeles Times,13 April 2003, p.11.
② "We're not Children!", The Economist (US edition),17 May 2003, pp.44-45.
①童世骏：《老欧洲新欧洲——“9.11”以来欧洲复兴思潮对英美单边主义的批判》,上海：华东师范大学出版社,2004年版,第66-69页。
② Robert Kagan, Paradise and Power:America and Europe in the New World Order, London:Atlantic Books,2003, pp.1-2.
③赵怀普：《论冷战后美欧关系的调整》,《世界经济与政治》,2003年第4期。
④Roland Dannreuther and John Peterson, Security Strategy and Transatlantic Relations, Routledge:Taylor& John Francis Group,2006, p.182.
①王军：《朋友还是对手——冷战后的欧美关系解读》,人民出版社,2006年版,第70页。
② Thomas Risse-Kappen, Cooperation among Democracies——the European Influence on U.S. Foreign Policy, Princeton, New Jersey:Princeton Press,1995, p.3.
① Robert Cooper, Security Strategy:is Europe from Venus, America from Mars? the First Annual John Erickson Memorial Lecture, Old College, University of Edinburgh, v25 February2005, p1 82.
② Lawrence S.Kaplan, NATO 1948:the Birth of the Transatlantic Alliance, Rowman& Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2007,p.241.
③ The Baltimore Sun. November 10.2002.
④ James M.Goldgeier and Michael McFaul, A Tale of Two Worlds:Core and Periphery in the Post-Cold War Era, International Organization, Vol.46, No.3,1992, pp.467-91; Charles Kupchan and Clifford Kupchan, Concerts.Collective Security and the Future of Europe, International Security Vol.16, No.1,1991, pp.114-61; Steven Van Evera, Primed for Peace:Europe after the Cold War, International Security, Vol.15, No.3, Winter 1990-1991, pp.7-57.
①王逸舟：《探寻全球主义国际关系》,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版,第9页。
② Roland Dannreuther and John Peterson, Security Strategy and Transatlantic Relations, Routledge:Taylor& John Francis Group,2006, p.186.
① James P.Rubin, Building a New Atlantic Alliance:Restoring America's Partnership With Europe, Foreign Afferis,July/August 2008, pp.99-110.
②在选举过程中,欧洲后裔在美国选举中具有一定的影响,尤其是中东欧国家的后裔,对奥巴马高度支持,而后者保证在未来给予中东欧国家更多援助。笔者对罗格斯大学(Rutgers University)贝克博士(Ross K. Baker)的采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2008年10月28日。
③芬兰外长亚历山大·斯塔博(H.E. Mr. Alexander Stubb)的报告,《Strengthening the EU's Global Role》,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2009年6月9日。
①笔者对歌德堡大学学者帕默(Brian Palmer)的采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2008年10月28日。
② Simon Serfaty, ed., A Recast Partnership? Institutional Dimensions of Transatlantic Relations, Washington, DC:CSIS, 2008.
① David C.Gompert and F.Stephen Larrabee edited, America and Europe:A Partnership for A New Era, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1997, pp.226-228
② David C.Gompert and F.Stephen Larrabee edited, America and Europe:A Partners hip for A New Era, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1997, p.3.
③ Daniel Hamilton, American Perspectives on the European Security and Defense Policy, Danish Yearbook of International Affairs, Copenhagen:Danish Institute for International Studies,2004, available at http:/transatlantic.sais-jhu.edu/PDF/articles/DH%20Article%20from%20Dannish%20Institute.pdf.
④ Esther Brimmer, ed., The EU's Search for a Strategic Role:ESDP and its Implications for Transatlantic Relations, Washington, DC:Center for Transatlantic Relations,2002, available at http：//transatlantic.sais-jhu.edu/PDF/publications/esdp_book.pdf;
⑤ Frank Kupferschmidt, "EU and NATO as'Strategic Partners':The Balkans Experience", pp.127-146.P128b
① Atlantic council of the United States, The Indispensable Partnership:Launching a New NATO-EU Relationship at Riga, the Transatlantic Relations Program, November,2006, p.9.
② Daniel Hamilton, Charles Barry, Hans Binnendijk, Stephen Flanagan, Julianne Smith, James Townsend, The Washington NATO Project:Alliance Reborn:An Atlantic Compact for the 21st Century, February 2009, p.18.
③ Ronald D. Asmus, Richard L. Kugler, and F. Stephen Larrabee, Building a New NATO, Foreign Affairs, Vo.72, No.4, 1993,pp.28-40.
④ David C.Gompert and F.Stephen Larrabee edited, America and Europe:A Partnership for A New Era, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1997, p.231.
① Stuart Croft, Jolyon Howorth, Terry Terriff and Mark Webber, NATO's triple challenge, International Affairs, Vol.76, No.3,2000, pp.495-518.
② Thomas Risse-Kappen, Cooperation among Democracies——the European Influence on U.S. Foreign Policy, Princeton, New Jersey:Princeton Press,1995, p.195.
③笔者对丹麦皇家防务学院研究员彼特(Peter Dahl Thruelsen)的采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2009年2月16日。
③ Richard L. Kugler and Hans Binnendijk, Toward a New Transatlantic Compact, Washington, DC:Center for Technology and National Security Policy, National Defense University, August 2008.
⑤门洪华：《霸权之翼：国际制度的战略价值》,《开放导报》,2005年10月第5期。
① Daniel S. Hamilton, NATO Summit I:In area, or in trouble, International Herald Tribune, November 26,2006. Available at http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/11/26/opinion/edhamil.php
② Ivo Daalder and James Goldgeier, Global NATO, Foreign Affairs, Vol.85, No.5,2006, p.106.
③ Brinkley, Democratic Enlargement, Michael Cox, U.S. Foreign Policy after the Cold War:Superpower without a Mission?, London:Royal Institute of International Affairs,1995, p.121.
④ Secretary of State Madeline K.Albright, Statement on NATO Enlargement before the Senate Foreign Relation Committee,24 February 1998, as released by the Office of the Spokesman, U.S. Department of State, p.6.
⑤王逸舟：《西方国际政治学：历史与理论》,上海：上海人民出版社,2006年版,第223页。
⑥秦亚青主编：《理性与国际合作：自由主义国际关系理论研究》,北京：世界知识出版社,2008年版,第81页。
① Rafael L.Bardaji, NATO:An Alliance for Freedom, Madrid:FAES.2005.
② David C.Gompert and F.Stephen Larrabee edited, America and Europe:A Partnership for A New Era, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1997, p.252.
③ Lawrence S.Kaplan, NATO 1948:the Birth of the Transatlantic Alliance. Rowman& Littlefield Publishers,Inc.,2007 p242
④秦亚青主编：《理性与国际合作：自由主义国际关系理论研究》,北京：世界知识出版社,2008年版,第203页。
①[美]彼德·卡赞斯坦著：《文化规范与国家安全—战后日本警察与自卫队》,李小华译,北京：新华出版社,2002年版,中文版序言。
②[美]彼得·卡赞斯坦主编,《国家安全的文化：世界政治中的规范与认同》,宋伟,刘铁娃译,北京：北京大学出版社,2009年版,第2页。
③ Keith R.Krause edited, Culture and Security, Multilateralism:Arms Control and Security Building, Frank Cass Pulishers,1999, pp.12-17.
④托马斯·里斯：《民主共同体的集体认同：以北约为例》,载于[美]彼得·卡赞斯坦主编,《国家安全的文化：世界政治中的规范与认同》,宋伟,刘铁娃译,北京：北京大学出版社,2009年版,第336-377页。
① Jack Levy, The Causes of War:A Review of Theories and Evidence, in Behavior, Society, and Nuclear War, vol.1, edited by Philip Tetlock et al., New York:Oxford:Oxford University Press,1989, p.270.
②笔者对北约驻瑞典大使丹尼尔森(Veronika Ward Danielsson)的采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2009年2月15。
③ 2008 report of the U.S. National Intelligence Council, Global Trends 2025:A Transformed World. Available at http://www.dni.gov/nic/PDF_2025/2025_Global_Trends_Final_Report.pdf;
① Mckingley is quoted in David Fromkin, In the Time of the Americans:The Generation That Changed America's Role in the World, New York:Knopf,1995, p.23.
② Warren F. Kimball, The Juggler:Franklin Roosevelt as Wartime Statesman, Princeton, N.J.:Princeton University Press, 1991, p.96.
③[美]沃·惠·罗斯托著,《从第七层楼上展望世界》,国际关系学院“五七”翻译组译,北京：商务印书馆,1973年版,
第61页。
③ William Schneider, The New Isolationism, in Eagle Adrift:American Foreign Policy at the End of the Century, edited by Robert J. Lieber, New York:Longman,1997, pp.27-28.
① "U.S. Public Support for U.N. Unexpectedly Grows, New Poll Shows," United Nations Association of the United States of America, December 7,1995.
② James M.Goldgeier and Michael McFaul, A Tale of Two Worlds:Core and Periphery in the Post-Cold War Era, International Organization, Vol.46, No.3,1992, pp.467-491.
① G. John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.258.
① See Craig R. Whitney, NATO at 50:With Nations at Odds, Is It A Misalliance? New York Times,15 February 1999, p.A7.
② Robert B, Zoellick, The United States, in 21th Century Strategies of the Trilateral Countries:In Concert or Conflict?, edited by Zoellick, Peter D. Sutherland, and Hisashi Owada, New York:Trilateral Commission,1999, p.5
③ Flora Lewis, Uncomfortable with U.S. Power, Real or Illusory, International Herald Tribune,14 May 1999, p.5.
④ See Craig R. Whitney, NATO at 50:With Nations at Odds, Is It A Misalliance?, New York Times,15 February 1999, p.A7.
① Adam Przeworski, Democracy as a Contigent Outcome of Conflict, in Constitutionalism and Democracy, edited by Jon Elster and Rune Slagstad, New York:Cambridge University Press,1988, P267.
② G John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.268.
① Transatlantic Transformation:Building a NATO-EU Security Architecture, Washington, DC:Atlantic Council of the U.S., March 2006, available at http://www.acus.org/docs/0603-Transatlantic_Transformation.pdf;
② Marten H.A. van Heuven, THE ATLANTIC COUNCIL OF THE UNITED STATES:NATO IN 2010, OCCASIONAL PAPER. July,1999.
③ Alvaro de Vasconcelos and Marcin Zaborowski, The EU and the world in 2009:European perspectives on the new American foreign policy agenda, Paris:EU ISS Report No.4, January 2009.
④ Teodor Melescanu, Minister of Defence of Romania, Confronting New Security Challenges, NATO'S NATIONS AND PARTNERS FOR PEACE, No.4,2002, pp.96-101.
⑤ We will engage. We will listen. We will consult. America needs the world, just as I believe the world needs America.
⑥ See http://www.securityconference.de/konferenzen/2009/index.php?menu_2009==&menu_konferenzen=&
⑦丹尼尔森的报告：《阿富汗重建——一个加拿大的视角》,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2009年2月25日。
⑧ Steven McGuire and Michael Smith, The European Union and the United States:competition and convergence in the global arena, Palgravc Macmillan,2008, p.6.
① http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%AE%AA%E6%94%BF%E4%B8%BB%E4%B9%89
② Christian Reus-Smit, The Constitutional Structure of International Society and the Nature of Fundamental Institutions, International Organization, Vol.51, No.4,1997, p.560.
③ Jon Elster, Claus Offe, and Ulrich K.Preuss, Institutional Design in Post-Communist Societies:Rebuilding the Ship at Sea, New York:Cambridge University Press,1998, p.63.
① Giovanni Satori, Comparative Constitutional Engineering:An Inquiry into Structure, Incentives and Outcomes, London:Macmillan,1994, p.198.
② Stephen D.Krasner, Compromising Westphalia, International Security, Vol.20, No.3, Winter 1995/96, p.117.
③ Stephen Holmes, Passions and Constraint:On the Theory of Liberal Democracy, Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1995, pp.152-177.
④ Daniel Hamilton, Charles Barry, Hans Binnendijk, Stephen Flanagan, Julianne Smith, James Townsend, The Washington NATO Project:Alliance Reborn:An Atlantic Compact for the 21st Century, February 2009, p.10.
① G John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.48.
②参见[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2008年版,第297页。
③ Stephen D. Krasner, Global Communication and National Power:Life on the Pareto Frontier, World Politics, Vol.43, No.3,1991, pp.336-366
④ Oran Young, Political Leadership and Regime Formation:On the Development of Institutions in International Society, International Organization, Vol.45, No.3,1991, p.282.
⑤ G. John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.58.
① John Gerard Ruggie, "Multilateralism:The Anatomy of an Institution," in Multilateralism Matters:the Theory and Praxis of an Institutional Form, edited by Ruggie, New York:Columbia University Press,1993, pp.3-50.
②美国的自由多边主义有很深的历史,例如早期的“门户开放”政策,一战后的“十四点原则”等。这个原则在二战 后初期,仍受到英法两国的抵制。英法两国对殖民帝国念念不忘,都希望重新回到战争之前的国际形势,重新恢复对殖民地的统治。对此,美国最初使用了“权力”手段来推行自由多边主义。例如,1945-1946年,美国利用经济手段迫使英国放弃贸易歧视原则,并解散帝国特惠制度。美国手中的美元是最好的讨价还价的武器。马歇尔计划也是推行美国信仰规范的大好时机。正如马歇尔本人所言,美国不仅打算重建欧洲经济,而且要重新塑造欧洲的政治行为原则。推动欧洲国家放弃殖民主义政策,采取自由多边主义的行为方式。随着马歇尔计划的实施,欧洲经济的恢复,美国自由多边主义的规范也渐渐在欧洲流行。参考：David Watt, Perception of the United States in Europe,1945-1983, in The Troubled Alliance:Atlantic Relations in the 1980s, edited by Lawarence Freedman, New York: St. Martin's Press,1983, pp.29-30.
① Maria-Gabriela Manea, How and Why Interaction Matters ASEAN"s Regional Identity and Human Rights, Cooperation and Conflict:Journal of the Nordic Interactional Studies Association, Vol.44, No,1, March 2009, pp.27-49.
① Cameron G Thies, Progress, History and Identity in IR Theory:The Case of the Idealist-Realist Debate, European Journal of International Relations, Vol.8, No.4,2002, pp.147-185.
② T.V.Paul and Johan A.Hall, International Order and the Future of World Politics, Cambridge University Press,1999, p.2.
③ Oran Young, Political Leadership and Regime Formation:On the Development of Institutions in International Society, International Organization, Vol.45, No.3,1991, p.131.
④ Slaughter, Anne-Marie, International Law in a Word of Liberal States, European Journal of International Law, Vol.6, No.1,1995, pp.530-538.
① Ole Jacob Sending, Constitution, Choice and Change:Problems with the " Logic of Appropriateness" and its Use in Constructivist Theory, European Journal of International Relations, Vol.8, No.4,2002, pp.443-470.
② Maja Zehfuss, Constructivism in International Relations:The Politics of Reality, Cambridge University Press,2002, p.77.
③[加]阿米塔·阿查亚：《建构安全共同体：东盟与地区秩序》,王正毅冯怀新译,上海：上海人民出版社,2004年版,第37页。
③ Hemmer, Christopher, Katzenstein, Peter J, Why is There No NATO in Asia? Collective Identity, Regionalism, and the Origins of Multilateralism, International Organization, Vol.56, No.3,2002, pp.575-607.
① Karl Deutsch, The Analysis of International Relations,3rd edition by Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice Hall,1988, pp.271-272.
①张铭洪： 《简单路径依赖模型及其经济学含义分析》,《厦门大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》,2002年第5期,第55-61页。
②有的学者将制度的持续性回报成为制度路径依赖(path dependence)或典型形式,但这些术语都强调制度维持的积淀。参见何俊志等编译《新制度主义政治学译文精选》,天津：天津人民出版社,2007年4月,第191页。
③秦亚青主编：《理性与国际合作：自由主义国际关系理论研究》,北京：世界知识出版社,2008年版,第224页。
①[美]道格拉斯·c·诺思：《制度、制度变迁与经济绩效》,上海：上海三联书店,1994年版,第107页。
①[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第75页。
②[美]贝思·西蒙斯主编：《国际制度》,黄仁伟等译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第503页。
③[美]道格拉斯·c·诺思：《制度、制度变迁与经济绩效》,上海：上海三联书店,1994年版,第115页。
④何俊志等编译《新制度主义政治学译文精选》,天津：天津人民出版社,2007年4月,第247页。
⑤ Cheryl Shanks, Harodl K.Jacobson, and Jeffrey H.Kaplan, Inertia and Change in the Constellation of International Governmental Organization,1981-1992, International Organization, Vol.50, No.4, Autumn 1996, pp.593-628.
①[美]玛莎·费丽莫,《国家社会中的国家利益》,袁正清译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2001年版,第3页。
②门洪华：《霸权之翼：美国国际制度战略》,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版,第51页。
③Paul Pierson,When Effect Becomes Cause :Policy Feedback and Political Change,World Politics,Vol,45,No.4,1993, pp.595-628.
① G John Ikenberry, Institutions, Strategic Restraint, and the Persistence of American Postwar Order, International Security, Vol.23, No.3, Winter 1998/1999, pp.43-78.
② Maria-Gabriela Manea, How and Why Interaction Matters ASEAN's Regional Identity and Human Rights, Cooperation and Conflict:Journal of the Nordic Interactional Studies Association, Vol.44, No.1,2009. pp.27-49.
③ T T. V.Paul and Johan A.Hall, International Order and the Future of World Politics, Cambridge University Press,1999, p.2.
① Kratochwil, F. V., and J. G. Ruggie, International Organization:A State of the Art on an Art of the State, International Organization Vol.40, No.4,1986, pp.753-775.
②[美]道格拉斯·c·诺思：《制度、制度变迁与经济绩效》,上海：上海三联书店,1994年版,第117页。
① John J. Mearsheimer, The False Promise of International Institutions, International Security, Vol.19, No.3. Winter, 1994-1995, pp.5-49.
② John Duffield, NATO's Function after the Cold War, Political Science Quarterly, Vol.109, No.5,1994/1995, pp. 763-787.
③ John Gerard Ruggie, Multilateralism:The Anatomy of an Institution, in Multilateralism Matters:the Theory and Praxis of an Institutional Form, edited by Ruggie, New York:Columbia University Press,1993, pp.32-33.
① Celeste A. Wallander, Institutional Assets and Adaptability:NATO after the Cold War, International Organization, Vol.54, No.4,2000, pp.705-735.
① Acheson, Dean, Statement on the North Atlantic Treaty, Department of State Bulletin 20 (508),1949, p.385. From Hemmer, Christopher, Katzenstein, Peter J, Why is There No NATO in Asia? Collective Identity, Regionalism, and the Origins of Multilateralism, International Organization, Vol.56, No.3,2002, pp.575-607.
②建构主义国际关系理论的介入为分析北约扩大问题研究提供了新的思路与研究视角。许多国际政治学者运用建构主义的理论与方法论来分析北约及其扩大,并取得丰富的成果。参见Alexander Gheciu, NATO in the "New Europe ":The Politics of International Socialization after the Cold War, Stanford University Press,2005, p.529.
① G. John Ikenberry, Institutions. Strategic Restraint, and the Persistence of American Postwar Order, International Security, Vol.23, No.3(Winter 1998/1999), pp.43-78
②笔者对北瑞典援助阿富汗委员会(Swedish Committee for Afghanistan)委员会阿登伯格(Jenny Anderberg)的采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2009年2月15日。
①[美]彼得·卡赞斯坦,《国家安全的文化：世界政治中的规范与认同》,宋伟,刘铁娃译,北京：北京大学出版社,2009年版,前言,第28页和第35页。
① John Van Oudenaren, From Atlantic Community to Atlantic Partnership and Beyond:American Conceptions of the Transatlantic Relationship since 1945, in A Hybrid Relationship:Transatlantic Security Cooperation beyond NATO, edited by Peter Schmidt, Peter Lang GmbH, Internationaler Verlag der Wissenschaften, Frankfurt am Main,2008, p.66.
郭树勇：《大国成长的逻辑：西方大国崛起的国际政治社会学分析》,北京：北京大学出版社,2006年版。何俊志等编译：《新制度主义政治学译文精选》,天津：天津人民出版社,2007年版。李小军： 《导弹扩散及其控制制度》,复旦大学2006年博士论文。卢敏：《全球化进程中的相互认可机制研究》,厦门大学2007年博士论文。门洪华：《霸权之翼：美国国际制度战略》,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版。倪世雄：《当代西方国际关系理论》,复旦大学出版社,2005年版。戚洪国： 《国际合作的制度取向》,吉林大学2007年博士论文。秦亚青：《权力、制度、文化：国际关系理论与方法研究文集》,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版。秦亚青主编：《理性与国际合作：自由主义国际关系理论研究》,北京：世界知识出版社2008年版。田野：《国际关系中的制度选择：一种交易成本的视角》,上海：上海人民出版社,2006年版。肖元恺：《世界的防线：欧洲安全与国际政治》,北京：新华出版社,2000年版。王杰主编：《国际机制论》,北京：新华出版社,2002年版。王美权：《为了谁的安全：北约军事战略大透视》,北京：新华出版社,2000年版。王逸舟：《探寻全球主义国际关系》,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版。
薛晓源,陈家刚等编译：《全球化与新制度主义》,北京：社会科学文献出版社,2004年版。
叶江等编：《解读美欧——欧洲一体化进程中的美欧关系》,上海：上海三联出版社,1999年版。
俞新天：《强大的无形力量——文化对当代国际关系的作用》,上海：上海人民出版社。
赵乾坤： 《大国权力与地区规范》,外交学院,2006年博士论文。
周宏主编：《欧洲发展报告Vol.8(2003～2004)：欧洲模式与欧美关系》,中国社会科学出版社,2004年。
[澳]克雷格.A.斯奈德等著：《当代安全与战略》,徐纬地等译,长春：吉林人民出版社,2001 年版。
[澳]约翰·伯顿：《全球冲突——国际危机的国内根源》,谭朝洁译,上海：上海人民出版社,2007年版,中文序言。
[德]贝娅特·科勒-科赫,托马斯·康策尔曼,米歇勒·克诺特：《欧洲一体化与欧盟治理》,顾俊礼等译,北京：中国社会科学出版社,2004年3月。
[加]阿米塔·阿查亚：《建构安全共同体：东盟与地区秩序》,王正毅 冯怀新译,上海：上海人民出版社,2004年版。
[美]贝思·西蒙斯主编：《国际制度》,黄仁伟等译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版。
[美]彼得.卡赞斯坦,罗伯特.基欧汉,斯蒂芬.卡拉斯纳编《世界政治理论的探索与争鸣》秦亚青,苏长和,门洪华魏玲译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版。
[美]大卫·鲍德温主编：《新现实主义与新自由主义》,肖欢荣译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2001年版。
[美]道格拉斯·c·诺思,《制度、制度变迁与经济绩效》,上海三联书店,1994年版。
[美]肯尼思.华尔兹：《国际政治理论》,信强译,上海：上海人民出版社,2003年版。
[美]罗伯特·阿特：《美国大战略》,郭树勇译,北京：北京大学出版社,2006年版。
[美]罗伯特.吉尔平：《世界政治中的战争与变革》,宋新宁译,上海：上海人民出版社,2007年版。
[美]罗伯特·基欧汉、门洪华编：《局部全球化世界中的自由主义、权力和治理》,门洪华译,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版。
[美]玛莎·费丽莫,《国家社会中的国家利益》,袁正清译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2001年版。
[美]曼瑟尔·奥尔森：《集体行动的逻辑》,陈郁等译,上海：上海三联出版社,2007年版。
[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版。
[美]约瑟夫·拉彼德弗里德里希·克拉托赫维尔主编：《文化和认同：国际关系回归理论》：金烨译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2003年版。
[美]约瑟夫.S.奈, 《硬权力与软权力》,门洪华译,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年。[美]朱迪斯戈尔茨坦,罗伯特·O·基欧汉：《观念和外交政策：信仰、制度与政治变迁》,刘东国于军译,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版。
[英]巴里·布赞：《美国和诸大国：21世纪的世界政治》,刘永涛译,上海：上海世纪出版集团,2007年版。
[英]巴瑞·布赞,[丹麦]奥利·维夫,[丹麦]迪·怀尔德：《新安全论》,朱宁译,杭州：浙江人民 出版社,2003年版。
陈晓进：《“国际制度”概念辨析》,《国际关系学院学报》,2000年第4期。
丁银河： 《冷战后欧洲一体化进程中美国因素分析》, 《湖北经济学院学报》,2006年第2期。
范菊华：《规范与国际制度安排：一种建构主义阐释》,《现代国际关系》,2002年第10期。
冯仲平：《欧洲安全观与欧美关系》,《欧洲研究》,2003年第5期。
冯仲平：《欧美关系：“合而不同”——析伊拉克战争对欧美关系的影响》,《国家安全通讯》,2003年第7期。
郭毅,徐莹,陈欣： 《新制度主义：理论评述及其对组织研究的贡献》, 《社会》,2007年第1期。
何志鹏： 《国际法的遵行机制探究》, 《东方法学》,2009年第5期。
胡淑慧,袁胜育： 《欧盟扩大与美国的政策》, 《河南师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》,2005年第2期。
郇庆治： 《伊拉克战争后的欧美关系：欧洲视点》, 《国际政治研究》,2004年第1期。
黄飞君：《跨大西洋关系的现状与未来》,《领导文萃》,2005年第3期。
黄新华： 《政治科学中的新制度主义——当代西方新制度主义政治学述评》, 《厦门大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》,2005年第3期。
贾烈英： 《国际制度的有效性：以联合国为例》, 《国际政治科学》,2006年第1期。
江西元： 《“9·11”事件后美国外交安全战略走向》, 《国际观察》,2002年第4期。
孔继萍：《欧美关系的现状及发展》,《云南师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》,2003年第2期。
匡国栋：《新大西洋关系若隐若现》,《瞭望》,2004年第27期。
李砚忠：《试析新制度主义的意识形态理论及其现代意义》,《重庆社会科学》2007年第4期。
李晓燕：《从“合作”到“和谐”：国际制度的作用趋向》,《山东师范大学学报(人文社会科学版)》,2004年第6期。
连玉如：《浅论21世纪世界新秩序与欧美关系调整》,《国际政治研究》,2003年第4期。
刘阿明： 《解读“9·11”后的法美关系》, 《国际论坛》,2003年第5期。
刘得手： 《美欧关系的变化与趋势》, 《当代世界》,2008年第2期。
刘燕： 《论新制度主义的研究方法》, 《理论探讨》,2006年第3期。
沈世顺： 《从布拉格峰会看北约的发展变化》, 《世界经济与政治》,2003年第1期。
石斌： 《相互依赖、国际制度、·全球治理——罗伯特·基欧汉的世界政治思想》, 《国际政治研究》,2005年第4期。
石凯,胡伟： 《新制度主义“新”在哪里》, 《教学与研究》,2006年第5期。
随新民：《国际制度的合法性与有效性——新现实主义、新自由制度主义和建构主义三种范式比较》,《学术探索》,2004年第6期。
孙春玲,王朝晖,杨芳：《2003年以来欧美关系研究主要资料信息》,《国际资料信息》,2003年第9期。
唐颖侠： 《试析遵守问题与国际制度的理性设计》, 《天津社会科学》,2008年第1期。
田野：《国际制度的形式选择：一个基于国家间交易成本的模型》,《经济研究》,2005年第7期。
田野： 《制度分析的层次问题与国际制度研究》, 《教学与研究》,2007年第5期。
王芳： 《新布什主义下的欧美关系》,《中国青年政治学院学报》,2005年第6期。
王红雨： 《冷战后美国对欧洲一体化政策的调整》, 《经济与社会发展》,2004年第3期。
王学东： 《国家声誉在大国崛起中的作用》, 《国际政治科学》,2005年第1期。
王学玉：《新地区主义——在国家与全球化之间架起桥梁》,《世界政治与经济》,2004年第1期。
魏妹：,《政治学中的新制度主义》, 《南京大学学报(哲学.人文科学.社会科学版)》,2002年第1期。
夏方林： 《欧美关系的新变化及其发展前景》, 《]当代世界》,1996年第2期。
叶江,谈谭：《试论国际制度的合法性及其缺陷——以国际安全制度与人权制度为例》,《世界经济与政治》,2005年第12期。
余宜斌： 《政治学：从旧制度主义到新制度主义》, 《兰州学刊》,2007年第7期。
袁正清：《交往行为理论与国际政治研究——以德国国际关系研究视角为中心的一项考察》,《世界经济与政治》,2006年第9期。、张惠玲,杨烨： 《冷战后欧美关系演变中的文化因素》,‘中共桂林市委党校学报》,2005年第1期。
张宏毅： 《美国政治价值观与世界霸权》, 《理论前沿》,2004年第4期。
张铭洪, 《简单路径依赖模型及其经济学含义分析》,《厦门大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》,2002第5期。
张琦：《权力、制度、认同——国际秩序的新理解》,《德州学院学报》,2007年第1期。
赵怀普： 《冷战后的美国—欧盟关系及存在的问题》, 《外交学院学报》,2000年第1期。
周丕启： 《国家大战略：目标与途径》,《现代国际关系》,2006年第10期。
卓越,张珉： 《新制度经济学与政治学新制度主义的三个流派》, 《教学与研究》,2007年第11期。
Alexander E. Wendt, The Agent-Structure Problem in International Relations Theory, International Organization, Vol.41, No.3,1987.
Alexander Gheciu, NATO in the "New Europe ":the Politics of International Socialization after the Cold War, Stanford University Press,2005.
Beatrice Heuser, Transatlantic Relations:Sharing Ideals and Costs. London:Royal Institute of International Affairs,1996.
Beck,P. A., and M. K. Jennings, Family Traditions, Political Periods, and the Development of Partisan Orientations, Journal of Politics, Vol.53, No.3,1991, pp.743-763.
Boli,John,and George Thomas, Constructing World Culture:International Nongovernmental Organizations Since 1875, Stanford, Calif:Stanford University Press,1998.
David A. Lake, Entangling Relations:American Foreign Policy in Its Century, Princeton, N.JPrinceton University Press,1999.
David C.Gompert and F.Stephen Larrabee edited, America and Europe:A Partnership for A New Era, Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1997.
Daniel Hamilton, Charles Barry, Hans Binnendijk, Stephen Flanagan, Julianne Smith, James Townsend, The Washington NATO Project:Alliance Reborn:An Atlantic Compact for the 21st Century, February 2009.
D.C.Mutz,P.M. Sniderman, and R.Brody, Political Persuasion and Attitude Change,, pp.1-14. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1996.
Elster, Jon, ed. Deliberative Democracy. New York:Cambridge University Press,1998.
Gregory Treverton, Makingthe Alliance Work:The United States and Western Europe.Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press,1985.
GW. Grayson, Strange Bedfellows:NATO Marches East, Lanham, NY:University Press of America 1999.
Fareed Zakaria, From Wealth to Power:The Unusual Origins of America's World Role, Princeton: Princeton University Press,1998.
Frank Schimmelfennig, The EU, NATO, and the Integration of Europe:Rules and Rhetoric, Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2003.
Friedrich V. Kratochwil, Rules, Norms and Decisions:On the Conditions of Practical and Legal Reasoning in International Relations and Domestic Affairs, New York:Cambridge University Press, 1989.
Geir Lundestad, "Empire" by integration:The United States and European Integration 1945-1997.London:Oxford University Press,1998.
G John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001.
Haas, Ernst, When Knowledge is Power:Three Models of Change in International Organizations, Berkeley:University of California Press,1990.
Jan Hallenberg and Hakan Karlsson eds, Changing Transatlantic Security Relations, Routledge Taylor& Francis Group,2006.
Jane J. Mansbridge, Beyond Self-interest, Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1990.
John Gerard Ruggie ed., Constructing World Polity:Essays on International Institutionalization, New York:Routledge,1998.
John Peterson, Europe and America in the 1990s:The Prospects for Partnership.Aldershot: Edward El-gar,1993.
Leffler, Melvin P, A Preponderance of Power:National Security, the Truman Administration, and the Cold War. Stanford, Calif.:Stanford University Press 1992.
Mark A. Pollack and Grefory C.Shaffer, eds., Transatlantic Governance in the Global Economy, Lanham, MD:Rowman and Littlefield,2001.
Mark Smith, NATO Enlargement during the Cold War, New York:Palgrave,2000.
Martha Finnemore, National Interests in International Society, Ithaca, NY:Cornell University Press,1996.
Max Weber, Economy and Society, Vol.1.edited by Guenther Roth and Claus Wittich, Berkeley: University of California,1978.
Michael E. Smith, Europe's Foreign and Security Policy:The Institutionalization of Cooperation, New York:Cambridge University Press,2004.
Morrow,J.D., Game Theory for Political Scientists. Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press, 1994.
NATO. Study on NATO Enlargement, Brussels:NATO Press Office,1995.
Norbert Wiggershaus and Roland Foerster, The Western Security Community, Oxford:Berg,1993.
Paul Kennedy, The Rise and Fall of the Great Power:Economic Change and Military Conflict from 1500-2000, New York:Random House,1987.
Peter Jenner, NATO:50 Years On, London:Atalink,1998.
Peter Katzenstein(ed.), The Culture of National Security:Norms and Identity in World Politics, New York:Columbia University Press,1996.
Robert O. Keohane, International Institutions and State Power:Essays in International Relations Theory, Colorado:Westview Press, Inc,1989.
Roland Dannreuther and John Peterson, Security Strategy and Transatlantic Relations, Routledge:Taylor& John Francis Group,2006.
Russell Hardin, Self-interest, group identity, in A. Breton, et al., eds., Nationalism and Rationality, Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Steven McGuire and Michael Smith, The European Union and the United States:competition and convergence in the global arena, Palgrave Macmillan,2008.
Steve Weber, Multilateralism in NATO:Shaping the Postwar Balance of Power,1945-1961. Berkeley:University of California Press,1991.
Thomas Risse-Kappen, Cooperation among Democracies——the European Influence on U.S. Foreign Policy, Princeton, New Jersey:Princeton Press,1995.
T.V.Paul and Johan A.Hall, International Order and the Future of World Politics, Cambridge University Press,1999.
Zimbardo, Philip G, and Michael R. Leippe, The Psychology of Attitude Change and Social Influence. New York:McGraw Hill,1991,
Anne-Marie Slaughter, International Law in a World of Liberal States. European Journal of International Law Vol.6, No.1,1995, pp,503-538.
Alexander Thompson, Coercion Through IOs:The Security Council and the Logic of Information Transmission, International Organization, Vol.60, No.1,2006, pp.1-34.
Athony Clark Arend, Do Legal Rules Matter? International Law and International Politics, Virginia Journal of International Law, Vol38, No.2,1998, pp107-153.
Bronislaw E. Matecki, Establishment of the International Finance Corporation:A Case Study, International Organization Vol.10, No.2,1956, pp.261-275.
Bruce Cronin, From Balance to Community:Transnational Identity and Political Integration, Security Studies, Vol.8, No.2& 3,1998, pp.270-301.
Celeste A. Wallander, Institutional Assets and Adaptability:NATO after the Cold War, International Organization, Vol.54, No.4,2000, pp.705-735.
Cheryl Shanks, Harodl K.Jacobson, and Jeffrey H.Kaplan, Inertia and Change in the Constellation of International Governmental Organization,1981-1992, International Organization, Vol.50, No.4,1996, pp.593-628.
Christian Reus-Smit, The Constitutional Structure of International Society and Nature of Fundamental Institutions, International Organization, Vol.51, No.4,1997, pp.555-589.
Colin H.Kahl, Constructing a Separate Peace:Constructivism, Collective Liberal identity, and Democratic Peace, Security Studies Vol.8, No.2/3, Winter 1998/99-Spring 1999, pp.94-144.
David A. Lake, Beyond Anarchy—The Importance of Security Institutions, International Security, Vol.26, No.1,2001, pp.129-160.
David H. Bearce and Stacy Bondanella, "Intergovernmental Organizations, Socialization, and Member-State Interest Convergence", International Organization, Vol.61, No.4,2007, pp.703-733.
Finnemore, Martha, Norms, Culture, and World Politics:Insights from Sociology's Institutionalism, International Organization, Vol.50, No.2,1996, pp.323-347.
Flynn, Gregory, and Henry Farrell., Piecing Together the Democratic Peace:The CSCE, Norms, and the'Construction'of Security in Post-Cold War Europe, International Organization, Vo.53, No.3, 1999, pp.505-536.
Frank Schimmelfennig, NATO Enlargement a Constructivist Explanation, Security Studies,Vol.8, No.2/3,1998/1999-Spring 1999, pp.198-234.
Frank Schimmelfennig, Strategic Calculation and International Socialization:Membership Incentives, Party Constellations, and Sustained Compliance in Central and Eastern Europe, International Organization, Vol.59, No.4,2005, pp.827-860.
G John Ikenberry and Charles Kupchan, Socialization and Hegemonic Power. International Organization, Vol.44, No.3,1990, pp.283-315.
Helen V Milner, The Assumption of Anarchy in International Politics:A Critique. Review of International Studies, Vol.17, No1,1991, pp.67-85.
Hechter, M. and S. Kanazawa, Sociological Rational Choice Theory. Annual Review of Sociology Vol.23, No.1,1997, pp.191-214.
Ian Hurd, Legitimacy and Authority in International Politics, International Organization, Vol.53, No.2,1999, pp.379-408.
Harald Muller, Arguing, Bargaining and All That:Communicative Action, Rationalist Theory and the logic of Appropriatenss in International Relations, European Journal of International Relations, Vol. 10, No.3,2004, pp.395-435.
J. Samuel Barkin and Bruce Cronin, The State and Nation:Changing Norms and Rules of Sovereignty in International Relations, International Organization, Vol.48, No.1, pp.107-130.
James D. Morrow, Modeling the Forms of International Cooperation:Distribution Versus Information. International Organization, Vol.48, No.3,1994, pp.387-423.
James G. March, Johan P. Olsen, The New Institutionalism:Organizational Factor in Political Life, American Political Science Review, Vol.78, No.5,1984, pp.734-749.
James N. Rosenau, Before Cooperation:Hegemony, Regimes, and Habit-Driven Actors in World Politics, International Organization, Vol.40, No.4,1986, pp.849-894.
James Thomson, US Interests and the Fate of the Alliance, Survival, Vol.45, No.4, Winter 2003-2004, pp.207-220.
Jeffrey T. Checkel, International Institutions and Socialization in Europe:Introduction and Framework, International Organization, Vol.59, No.3,2005, pp 801-826.
Jeffrey T. Checkel, Social Construction and Integration, Journal of European Public Policy, Vol.6, No.4,1999, pp.545-560.
Jeffrey T. Checkel, Why Comply? Social Learning and European Identity Change, International Organization, Vol.55, No.3,2001, pp.553-588.
Jeffrey W. Legro, Which Norms Matter? Revisiting the Failure of Internationalism. International Organization, Vol.51, No.1,1997, pp.31-63.
John J. Mearsheimer, The False Promise of International Institutions, International Security, Vol.19, No.3,1994-1995, pp.5-49.
John Duffield, International Regimes and Alliance Behavior:Explaining NATO conventional Force Levels, International Organization, Vol.46, No.4,1992, pp.819-55.
John Gerard Ruggie, The Past as Prologue? Interests, Identity and American Foreign Policy, International Security, Vol.21, No.4,1997, pp.89-125.
John Gerard Ruggie, Third Try at World Order? America and Multilateralism After the Cold War, Political Science Quarterly, Vol.109, No.4,1994, pp.553-570.
John Lewis Gaddis, The Emerging Post-Revisionist Synthesis on the Origins of the Cold War, Diplomatic History, Vol.7, No.3,1983, pp.171-190.
Johnston, Alastair Iain, Treating International Institutes as Social Environments, International Studies Quarterly, Vol.45, No4,2001, pp.487-515.
Joseph M. Grieco. Anarchy and Limits of Cooperation:A Realist Critique of the Newest Liberal Institutionalism, International Organization, Vol.42, No.3,1988, pp.85-507.
Kenneth N Waltz, Structural Realism after the End of the Cold War, International Security, Vol.25, No.l,2000, pp.5-41.
Kratochwil,Friedrich V.,and John Gerard Ruggie, International Organization:A State of the Art on an Art of the State. International Organization, Vol.40, No.4,1986, pp.753-775.
Levy, Jack, Learning and Foreign Policy:Sweeping A Conceptual Minefield, International Organization, Vol.48, No.2,1994, pp.279-312.
Maria-Gabriela Manea, How and Why Interaction Matters ASEAN's Regional Identity and Human Rights, Cooperation and Conflict:Journal of the Nordic Interactional Studies Association, Vol.44, No.l, 2009. pp.27-49.
Meyer, J. W, The Structuring of a World Environmental Regime,1870-1990, International Organization, Vol.51, No.4,1997, pp.623-651.
Oran Young, Political Leadership and Regime Formation:On the Development of Institutions in International Society, International Organization, Vol.45, No.3,1991, pp:281-308.
Paul Pierson, When Effect Becomes Cause:Policy Feedback and Political Change, World Politics, Vol.45, No.4,1993, pp.595-628.
Pierre Hassner, Europe beyond Partition and Unity:Disintegration or Reconstruction?, International Affairs, Vol.66, No.3,1990, pp.461-75.
Remmer Karen L., Theoretical Decay and Theoretical Development:Resurgence of Institutional Analysis, Comparative Politics, Vol.50, No.4,1997, pp.34-61.
Richard Ashley, The Poverty of Neoliberalism, International Organization, Vol.38, No.2,1984, pp.227-251.
Richard Ullman, The U.S. and the World:An Interview with George Kennan, New York Review of Books, Vol.46, No.13,1999, pp.4-6.
Robert B.McCalla, NATO's Persistence after the Cold War, International Organization, Vol.50, No.3,1996, pp.445-475.
Robert O. Keohane, International Institutions:Two Approaches, International Studies Quarterly, Vol.32, No.4,1988, pp.379-396.
Robert O. Keohane and Lisa L. Martin, The Promise of Institutionalist Theory, International Security Vol.20, No.1.1995, pp.39-51.
Robert Powell, Absolute and Relative Gains in International Relation Theory, American Political Science Review, Vol85, No.4,1991,pp.1303-1320.
Schoppa, Leonard, The Social Context in Coercive International Bargaining, International Organization, Vol.53, No.2,1999, pp.307-342.
Stephen Walt, The Ties That Fray:Why Europe and America Are Drifting Apart, National Interest, No.54, Winter 1998/1999, pp.3-11.
Strobe Talbott, Why NATO Should Grow, New York Review Books, Vol.42, No.13,1995, pp.217-30.
Thomas Risse-Kappen, Democratic Peace-War like Democracies:A Social Constructivist Interpretation of the Liberal Argument, European Journal of International Relations, No.1,1995., Vol.1, No.4,491-517.
Thomas Risse, Let's Argue:Communicative Action in World Politics, International Organization, Vol.54, No.11,2000.pp.1-39.
Tony Evans and Peter Wilson, Regime Theory and the English School of International Relations:A Comparison, Millennium:Journal of International Studies Vol.21, No.3,1992, pp.329-51.
Underdal, Arild, Explaining Compliance and Defection:Three Models, European Journal of International Relations, Vol.4, No.1,1998, pp.5-36.
② G John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, Preface.
③ John Gerard Ruggie, Multilateralism:The Anatomy of an Institution, in Ruggie (ed.), Multilateralism Matters:The Theory and Praxis of an Institutional Form, New York:Columbia University Press,1993, pp.32-33; Steven McGuire and Michael Smith, The European Union and the United States:competition and convergence in the global arena, Palgrave Macmillan,2008.p.1.
④有关于欧美与跨大西洋关系的含义：“欧洲”这个词语有很多所指：西欧、欧洲整体、欧盟、美国在北约中的欧洲盟友、从大西洋到乌拉尔山脉的地区等等,这些含义涉及到两个问题：第一个是,“欧洲”包含那些国家和地区?第二,欧洲是否是一个有意义的整体?就欧美关系而言,它包含多重关系,多边关系,美、德、法、英等国家间的关系；双边关系：美国同西欧或者欧盟整体；另外一层双边关系：美国同单个欧洲国家的关系。本文所指的“欧洲”分为两个时期,冷战时期是指同苏联集团相对应的西欧部分,主要是北约内的欧洲国家。冷战之后,则主要包含欧盟与北约的成员国。因为在欧美制度化的过程中,大西洋东岸方面主要是美国在发挥主导作用。因此,欧 美关系可以等同于跨大西洋关系。参见Paasi, Anssi. The Institutionalization of Regions:A Theoretical Framework for Understanding the Emergence of Regions and the Constitution of Regional Identity. Fennia, Vol.164, No.1:1986, pp.105-146.
① Jan Hallenberg and Hakan Karlsson eds, Changing Transatlantic Security Relations, Routledge Taylor& Francis Group,2006, Preface.
②秦亚青主编：《理性与国际合作：自由主义国际关系理论研究》,北京：世界知识出版社,2008年版,第38页；John J. Mearsheimer, The False Promise of International Institutions, International Security, Vol.19, No.3. Winter, 1994-1995, pp.5-49.
③[加]阿米塔·阿查亚：《建构安全共同体：东盟与地区秩序》,王正毅冯怀新译,上海：上海人民出版社,2004年版,第7页,第42页。
② John Mearsheimer, Back to the Future:Instability of Europe after the Cold War, International Security, Vol.15, No.4, 1990, pp.5-57; Kenneth Waltz, The Emerging Structure of International Politics, International Security, Vol.18, No.2, 1993, pp.44-79; Pierre Hassner, Europe beyond Partition and Unity:Disintegration or Reconstruction?, International Affairs, Vol.66, No.3,1990, pp.461-75; Hugh DeSantis, The Grating of NATO, Washington Quarterly, Vol.14,1989, pp.83-95. Christopher Layne, Superpower Disengagement, Foreign Policy, No.78, Spring 1990, pp.3-25; and Stephen Walt, The Ties That Fray:Why Europe and America Are Drifting Apart, National Interest, No.54, Winter 1998/1999, pp.3-11; Robert Gilpin, American Policy in the Post-Reagan Era, Daedelus, Vol.116, No.3,1987, pp.33-67; Paul Kennedy, The Rise and Fall of the Great Power:Economic Change and Military Conflict from 1500-2000, New York: Random House,1987; Micheal Mastanduno, Preserving the Unipolar Moment:Realist Theories and U.S. Grand Strategy after the Cold War, International Security, Vol.21, No.4,1997, pp.49-88.24. GW. Grayson, Strange Bedfellows:NATO Marches East, Lanham, NY:University Press of America 1999.
⑤ John Duffield, NATO's Function after the Cold War, Political Science Quarterly, Vol.199, No.5,1994/1995.
①王美权：《为了谁的安全：北约军事战略大透视》,北京：新华出版社,2000年版。
②肖元恺：《世界的防线：欧洲安全与国际政治》,北京：新华出版社,2000年版。
③叶江等编：《解读美欧——欧洲一体化进程中的美欧关系》,上海：上海三联出版社,1999年版。
④门洪华：《霸权之翼：美国国际制度战略》,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版。
①冯仲平：《欧洲安全观与欧美关系》,《欧洲研究》,2003年第5期；冯仲平：《欧美关系：“合而不同”——析伊拉克战争对欧美关系的影响》,《国家安全通讯》,2003年第7期。
②黄飞君：《跨大西洋关系的现状与未来》,《领导文萃》,2005年第3期； 匡国栋：《新大西洋关系若隐若现》,《瞭望》,2004年第27期。
③孔继萍：《欧美关系的现状及发展》,《云南师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》,2003年第2期。
④连玉如：《浅论21世纪世界新秩序与欧美关系调整》,《国际政治研究》,2003年第4期。
⑤孙春玲,王朝晖,杨芳：《2003年以来欧美关系研究主要资料信息》,《国际资料信息》,2003年第9期。
①何俊志等译：《新制度主义政治学译文精选》,天津：天津人民出版社,2007年版；薛晓源,陈家刚等：《全球化与新制度主义》,北京：社会科学文献出版社,2004年版。
②田野：《国际关系中的制度选择：一种交易成本的视角》,上海：上海人民出版社,2006年版。
③范菊华：《规范与国际制度安排：一种建构主义阐释》,《现代国际关系》,2002年第10期；陈晓进：《“国际制度”概念辨析》,《国际关系学院学报》,2000年第4期：李晓燕：《从“合作”到“和谐”：国际制度的作用趋向》,《山东师范大学学报(人文社会科学版)》,2004年第6期；随新民：《国际制度的合法性与有效性——新现实主义、新自由制度主义和建构主义三种范式比较》,《学术探索》,2004年第6期；田野：《国际制度的形式选择：—个基于国家间交易成本的模型》,《经济研究》,2005年第7期；张琦：《权力、制度、认同——国际秩序的新理解》,《德州学院学报》,2007年第1期。此外,还有很多有关国际制度理论的研究,本文不再一一列举。
④ Deutsch,Karl W., et al, Political Community and the North Atlantic Area. Princeton, N.J.:Princeton University Press, 1957.
① Frank R.Douglas, the United States, NATO, and A New Multilateral Relationship, Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc., 2008. Gustav Lindstrom eds., Shift and Rift:Assessing US-EU relations after Iraq. Published by the EU Institute for Security Studies,2003. Hallenberg and Hakan Karlsson eds, Changing Transatlantic Security Relations, Routledge Taylor& Francis Group,2006. Roland Dannreuther and John Peterson, Security Strategy and Transatlantic Relations, Routledge:Taylor& John Francis Group,2006.
②[美]罗伯特·阿特：《美国大战略》,郭树勇译,北京：北京大学出版社,2006年版。
③ Glaser, Charles, Why NATO Is Still Best:Future Security Arrangements for Europe, International Security, Vol.18, No.1,1993.
④ Transatlantic Transformation:Building a NATO-EU Security Architecture, Washington, DC:Atlantic Council of the U.S., March 2006, available at http://www.acus.org/docs/0603-Transatlantic Transformation.pdf; Daniel S. Hamilton, ed, Transatlantic Transformation:equipping NATO for the 21 st century, Washington, DC:Center for Transatlantic Relations, 2004.
① Ronald D. Asmus, New Plumbing, New Purposes-Rebuilding the Transatlantic Alliance, American Interest, November/December 2008; Simon Serfaty, ed., A Recast Partnership? Institutional Dimensions of Transatlantic Relations, Washington, DC:CSIS,2008; Celeste A. Wallander, Institutional Assets and Adaptability:NATO after the Cold Wa", International Organization, Vol.54, No.4,2000, pp.705-735.
② Stephen Sestanovich, What has Moscow done? Rebuilding U.S.-Russian Relations, Foreign Affairs, Vol.87, No.6, 2008, pp.12-28; John S. Duffield, NATO's Function after the Cold War, Political Science Quarterly, Vol.109, No.5, 1994-1995.
③ David P.Calleo, Why EUand US Geopolitical interests are no longer the same, Europe World, Summer,2008.
④例如,大国参与制度化的动力首先在于权力的维持和保存。为此,大国进行妥协甚至放弃部分权力,换取小国对共同规则的支持。有的学者认为,这种制度化的建设是领导国对未来的投资。如果投资成功,相关的规则和制度建设完善,那么即使在未来大国的物质权力下降,其地位也能维持。参考,Terry Moe, Political Institutions:The Neglected Side of the Story, Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Vol.6,1990, pp.213-253.
⑤ DiMaggio, Paul J.and Walter W.Powell, the Iron Cage Revisited:Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields, American Sociological Review, Vol.48, No.2,1983.
⑥ Remmer Karen L, Theoretical Decay and Theoretical Development:Resurgence of Institutional Analysis. Comparatvie Politics, Vol.50, No.4,1997.
① James M.Goldgeier and Michael McFaul, A Tale of Two Worlds:Core and Periphery in the Post-Cold War Era, International Organization, Vol.46, No.3,1992; Charles Kupchan and Clifford Kupchan, Concerts, Collective Security, and the Future of Europe, International Security, Vol.16, No.1,1991; Steven Van Evera, Primed for Peace:Europe after the Cold War, International Security, Vol.15, No.3,1990-1991; Frank Schimmelfennig, NATO Enlargement a Constructivist Explanation, Security Studies, Vol.8, No.2/3,1998/1999-Spring 1999.
② Jeffrey T. Checkel, International Institutions and Socialization in Europe:Introduction and Framework, International Organization, Vol.59, No.3,2005, pp 801-826.
③ Kenneth W.Abbott and Duncan Snidal, Why States Act Through Formal International Organization, Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol.42, No.1,1998.
④ European Commission, Review on the Framework for Relations between the European Union and United States:an independent study, April, Brussels:DG External Relations,2005.
⑤ Alexander Gheciu, NATO in the "New Europe":the Politics of International Socialization after the Cold War, Stanford University Press,2005.
⑥ David Robertson, NATO's Future Role:A European View, Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science, Vol.38, No.1, The New Europe:Revolution in East-West Relations,1991, pp.164-175.
⑦ Anthony Lake, From Containment to Enlargement, Vital Speeches of the Day, Vol.60, No.1,1993. Douglas Brinkley, Democratic Enlargement:the Clinton Doctrine, Foreign Policy, No.106,1997.
⑧ Stanley R. Sloan, US Perspectives on NATO's Future, International Affairs, Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944-, Vol.71, No.2,1995.
①[加]阿米塔·阿查亚：《建构安全共同体：东盟与地区秩序》,王正毅冯怀新译,上海：上海人民出版社,2004年版,第5页。
② Stephen M.Walt, Why Alliance Endure or Collapse, Survival, Vol.39, No.1,1997, pp.156-79.
① Roland Dannreuther and John Peterson, Security Strategy and Transatlantic Relations, Routledge:Taylor& John Francis Group,2006.
② Joseph M.Grieco, Understanding the Problem of International Cooperation:The Limits of Neoliberalism and the Future of Realist Theory, in Neorealism and Neoliberalism:The Contemporary Debate, edtited by David A.Baldwin, New York:Columbia University Press,1993.
③ Terry Moe, Political Institutions:the Neglected Side of the Story, Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Vol.6, No.2,1990, pp.213-253.
④ Helen Milner, International Theories of Cooperation:Strengths and Weakness, World Politics, Vol.44, No.3,1992.
⑤[美]朱迪斯戈尔茨坦,罗伯特·O·基欧汉：《观念和外交政策：信仰、制度与政治变迁》,刘东国于军译,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版。
⑤ John Ikenberry, Institutions, Strategic Restraint, and the Persistence of American Postwar Order, International Security, Vol.23, No.3(Winter 1998/1999), pp.43-78; G. John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001.
① Hollis and Smith, Explaining and Understanding International Relations, OxfordLClaredon Press,1990.
②参见何俊志等译：《新制度主义政治学译文精选》,天津：天津人民出版社,2007年版。本书所包含的文章,对制度主义的内容做了详细分析。
③王学东：《新制度主义的欧洲一体化理论评析》,《欧洲研究》,2003年第5期。
④[德]贝娅特·科勒-科赫,托马斯·康策尔曼,米歇勒·克诺特：《欧洲一体化与欧盟治理》,顾俊礼等译,北京：中国社会科学出版社,2004年3月。
①在本文中,为了突出两种动力的作用,分别用理性选择和社会建构来代表理性制度主义和社会制度主义两种理论。
② Hemmer, Christopher, Katzenstein, Peter J, Why is There No NATO in Asia? Collective Identity, Regionalism, and the Origins of Multilateralism, International Organization, Vol.56, No.3,2002, pp.575-607.
①[美]詹姆斯G马奇,约翰·奥尔森：《国际政治秩序的制度动力》,载于彼得.卡赞斯坦,罗伯特.基欧汉,斯蒂芬.卡拉斯纳编的《世界政治理论的探索与争鸣》,秦亚青等译,上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第319-321页。
②《新制度主义政治学译文精选》,何俊志等译,天津：天津人民出版社,2007年版,第49页。
①[美]玛莎.费丽莫：《国家社会中的国家利益》,袁正清译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2001年版,第35页。
②郭树勇：《大国成长的逻辑：西方大国崛起的国际政治社会学分析》：北京：北京大学出版社,2006年版,第54页。
③ United States Information Agency, the New European Security Architecture, USIA Office of Research and Media Reaction, Washington, D.C.,1995.
① Frank Schimmelfennig, Strategic Calculation and International Socialization:Membership Incentives, Party Constellations, and Sustained Compliance in Central and Eastern Europe, International Organization, Vol.59, No.4,2005, pp.827-860.
② Robert O. Keohane, The Demand for International Regimes, International Organization, Vol.36, No.2, International Regimes (Spring,1982), pp.325-355.
① John G. Ruggie, The Anatomy of an Institution, in Multilateralism Matters:The Theory and Praxis of an Institution, edited by John Gerard Ruggie, New York:Columbia University Press,1993, pp.3-47; Christian Reus-Smit, The Constitutional Structure of International Society and Nature of Fundamental Institutions, International Organization, Vol.51, No.4,1997, pp.555-589.
②[美]罗伯特.吉尔平：《世界政治中的战争与变革》,宋新宁译,上海：上海人民出版社,2007年版,第57页。
①例如国家利益也是一个重要的变量,国家利益的改变程度是衡量制度化的重要标准。参考：David H. Bearce and Stacy Bondanella, Intergovernmental Organizations, Socialization, and Member-State Interest Convergence, International Organization, Vol.61, No4,2007.
① T.V.Paul and Johan A.Hall.Intemational,Order and the Future of World Politics,Cambridge University Press 1999, p.2.
②本文并不旨在分析民主和平论,而是分析国家间信仰、规范、文化对国家交往的影响,重点是国家间的社会互动和交流。
① Joseph M.Grieco, Understanding the Problem of International Cooperation:The Limits of Neoliberalism and the Future of Realist Theory, in Neorealism and Neoliberalism:The Contemporary Debate, editeb by David A.Baldwin, New York:Columbia University Press,1993.
② Kenneth W.Abbott and Duncan Snidal, Why States Act Through Formal International Organization, Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol.42, No.1,1998, pp.3-32.
③ KratochwiL, F. V., and J. G. Ruggie, International Organization:A State of the Art on an Art of the State, International Organization Vol.40, No.4,1986, pp.753-775; Ness, G. D., and S. R. Brechin, Bridging the Gap:International Organizations as Organizations, International Organization Vol.42, No.2,1988, pp.245-273.
④[美]贝思·西蒙斯主编：《国际制度》,黄仁伟等译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第45页。
①薛晓源,陈家刚编译：《全球化与新制度主义》北京：社会科学文献出版社,2004年版,第280页。
② Jeffrey T. Checkel, International Institutions and Socialization in Europe:Introduction and Framework, International Organization, Vol.59, No.3,2005, pp 801-826.
① Acheson, Dean, Statement on the North Atlantic Treaty. Department of State Bulletin,1949, in Why is There No NATO in Asia? Collective Identity, Regionalism, and the Origins of Multilateralism, by Hemmer, Christopher, Katzenstein, Peter J, International Organization, Vol.56, No.3, Summer2002, pp.575-607.
②[美]詹姆斯G马奇,约翰·奥尔森：《国际政治秩序的制度动力》,载于彼得.卡赞斯坦,罗伯特.基欧汉,斯蒂芬.卡拉斯纳编的《世界政治理论的探索与争鸣》,秦亚青等译,上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第320页。Frank.Schimmelfennig, The EU, NATO, and the Integration of Europe:Rules and Rhetoric. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2003, p.199.
② G John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, pp.23-32.
①Jon Elster, Claus Offe, and Ulrich K.Preuss, Institutional Design in Post-Communist Societies:Rebuilding the Ship at Sea, New York:Cambridge University Press,1998, pp.17-19.
② Holmes, Passions and Constraint, On the Theory of Liberal Democracy, Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1995, pp.23-27.
③ Douglass C. North, Institutions, Institutional Change, and Economic Performance, New York:Cambridge University Press,1990, p.95.
①从现实的角度来看,由于制度建设的完善性、制度覆盖面、原则规范的明确性,使得北约成为跨大西洋两岸安全关系制度化的最典型代表。因此,本文在论述跨大西洋安全关系时,着重对北约进行分析。当然,其它的一些安全制度甚至非正式的交往也非常重要,也是本文论述的内容之一。
①Goffman E., the Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, New York:Anchor Books,1959.转引自[美]约瑟夫·拉彼德,[德]弗里德里希·克拉托赫维尔：《文化和认同：国际关系回归理论》,金烨译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2003年2月, 第71-72页。
①[美]罗伯特.吉尔平：《世界政治中的战争与变革》,宋新宁译,上海：上海人民出版社,2007年版,第234-235页。
① Joseph M.Grieco, Anarchy and the Limits of Cooperation:A Realist Critique of the Newest Liberal Institutionalism, International Organization, Vol.42, No.3,1988, pp.485-507.
②参见[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海世纪出版社2008年版。Johnston, Alastair Iain, Treating International Institutes as Social Environments, International Studies Quarterly, Vol.45, No4,2001, pp.487-515; Colin H.Kahl, Constructing a Separate Peace:Constructivism, Collective Liberal Identity, and Democratic Peace, Security Studies Vol.8, No.2/3, Winter 1998/99-Spring 1999, pp.94-144; Checkel, J. T., The Constructivist Turn in International Relations Theory, World Politics, Vol.50,1998, pp.324-348.
③[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海世纪出版社2008年版,第173页。
①秦亚青主编：《理性与国际合作：自由主义国际关系理论研究》,北京：世界知识出版社2008年版,第232页。
② Checkel, Jeffrey T., Why Comply? Social Learning and European Identity Change, International Organization, Vol.55, No 3, Summer2001, pp.556.
③ G John Ikenberry and Charles Kupchan, Socialization and Hegemonic Power. International Organization, Vol.44, No.3, 1990,pp.283-315.
④其中德国学派对哈贝马斯的社会交往理论的应用颇为广泛,并取得很多研究成果。例如：Thomas Risse, Let's Argue:Communicative Action in World Politics, International Organization, Vol.54, No.11,2000.pp.1-39; Harald Muller, Arguing, Bargaining and All That:Communicative Action, Rationalist Theory and the logic of Appropriatenss in International Relations, European Journal of International Relations, Vol.10, No.3,2004, pp.395-435.
①秦亚青主编：《理性与国际合作：自由主义国际关系理论研究》,北京：世界知识出版社,2008年版,第231页。
② Fareed Zakaria, From Wealth to Power:The Unusual Origins of America's World Role, Princeton:Princeton University Press,1998, pp.11-17.
①Oran Young, International Cooperation:Building Regimes for National Resources and the Environmental, Ithaca: Cornell University Press,1989, chapter three.
② John Gerard Ruggie, Third Try at World Order? America and Multilateralism After the Cold War, Political Science Quarterly, Vol.109, No.4,1994, pp.553-570.
③ Douglass C. North, Institutions, Institutional Change, and Economic Performance, New York:Cambridge University Press,1990, p.95; Paul Pierson, When Effect Becomes Cause:Policy Feedback and Political Change, World Politics, Vol.45, No.4,1993, pp.595-628.
①门洪华：《霸权之翼：美国国际制度战略》：北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版,第38页。
②参见何俊志等编译：《新制度主义政治学译文精选》,天津人民出版社,2007年4月,第154页。
③[美]罗伯特.吉尔平：《世界政治中的战争与变革》,宋新宁译,上海：上海人民出版社,2007年版,第4页。
④ Christian Reus-Smit, The Constitutional Structure of International Society and Nature of Fundamental Institutions, International Organization, Vol.51, No.4,1997, p.558.
①[美]玛莎·费丽莫,《国家社会中的国家利益》,袁正清译,浙江人民出版社,2001年版,第5-7页。
②参见何俊志等编译：《新制度主义政治学译文精选》,天津：天津人民出版社,2007年版。以及薛晓源,陈家刚编译：《全球化与新制度主义》,北京,社会科学文献出版社,2004年版。
③参见何俊志等编译：《新制度主义政治学译文精选》,天津：天津人民出版社,2007年版,第288页。
④薛晓源,陈家刚编译：《全球化与新制度主义》,北京,社会科学文献出版社,2004年版,第233页。
①同上,第420页。
②[美]道格拉斯.诺斯：《经济史中的结构与变迁》,陈郁译,上海：上海人民出版社,1994年版,第25页。
③ Sue E.S. Crawford, Elior Ostrom, A Grammar of Institutions, American Political Science Review, Vol.89, No.3, 1995, pp.582-599.
④转引自薛晓源,陈家刚编译：《全球化与新制度主义》,北京,社会科学文献出版社,2004年版,第8页。
① Stephen Krasner, ed., International Regime, Ithaca and London:Cornell University Press,1983, p.2.转引自[美]罗伯特·基欧汉：《霸权之后：世界政治经济中的合作与纷争》,苏长和等译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第57页。
②陈晓进：《“国际制度”概念辨析》,《国际关系学院学报》,2000年第4期,第20-23页.
③ John Gerard Ruggie, International Responses to Technology:Concepts and Trends, International Organization, Vol.29, No.3,1975, pp.557-583.
④[美]罗伯特·基欧汉,约瑟夫·奈：《权力与相互依赖》(第3版),门洪华译,北京：北京大学出版社,2003年版,第20页。
⑤苏长和,《重新定义国际制度》,《欧洲》,1999年第6期,第22页。
① Barbara Koremenos, Charles Lipson, and Duncan Snidal, the Rational Design of International Institutions, International Organization, Vol.55, No.4,2001, pp.761-799.
② Reus-Smit, Christian, The Constitutional Structure of International Society and the Nature of Fundamental Institutions, International Organization, Vol.51, No.4,1997, p.557.
③ Stein, Arthur A, Why Nations Cooperate:Circumstance and Choice in International Relations. Ithaca, N.Y.:Cornell University Press,1990, pp.39-44.
① Frank Schimmelfennig, Strategic Calculation and International Socialization:Membership Incentives, Party Constellations, and Sustained Compliance in Central and Eastern Europe, International Organization, Vol.59, No.4,2003, pp.827-860.
②制度或机制向更高级的方向演变就意味着它的发展。制度的发展可以分为以下几种情况：机制的构成要素或“核心特质”的完善和广为接受,正式程度越来越高,影响范围越来越大；机制的行动指导和约束能力日趋增强,建立起各方接受的行为规则和程序：机制的遵从措施趋向完善,得到愈加坚定有力的贯彻执行。参见王杰主编：《国际机制论》,北京：新华出版社,2002年版,第246页。
③[美]詹姆斯·G马奇,约翰·奥尔森：《国际政治秩序的制度动力》,转引自[美]彼得.卡赞斯坦,罗伯特.基欧汉,斯蒂芬.卡拉斯纳编《世界政治理论的探索与争鸣》秦亚青,苏长和,门洪华魏玲译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第366页。
② John Gerard Ruggie, International Organization "I wouldn't start from here if I were you", in Constructing World Polity:Essays on International Institutionalization, edited by John Gerard Ruggie, New York:Routledge,1998, pp.54-55.
③ Friedrich V. Kratochwil, Rules, Norms and Decisions:On the Conditions of Practical and Legal Reasoning in International Relations and Domestic Affairs, New York:Cambridge University Press,1989, p.63.
④ Michael E. Smith, Europe s Foreign and Security Policy:The Institutionalization of Cooperation, New York: Cambridge University Press,2004, p.26.
①田野：《国际关系中的制度选择：一种交易成本的视角》,上海：上海人民出版社,2006年版,第14页。
②[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第130页。
①同上第215-216页。
② Boli,John,and George Thomas, INGOs and the Organization of World Culture. In Constructing World Culture: International Nongovernmental Organizations Since 1875, edited by Boli,John,and George Thomas, Stanford, Calif: Stanford University Press,1998, preface.
③ Alexander Gheciu, NATO in the "New Europe":the Politics of International Socialization after the Cold War, Stanford University Press,2005, p.232.
① J. Samuel Barkin and Bruce Cronin, The State and Nation:Changing Norms and Rules of Sovereignty in International Relations, International Organization, Vol.48, No.1, pp.107-130.
② David A. Lake, Beyond Anarchy—The Importance of Security Institutions, International Security, Vol.26, No.1,2001, pp.129-160.
③笔者认为,这是因为两个领域的关键因素和主体的不同。经济领域,关键因素是市场,而市场的主要特征就是自由竞争。主体方面,个人、集团甚至国家在市场中起到不同的作用。而在安全领域,关键因素是国防力量和外交事务的建设,事关国家社稷,这就决定在安全领域的主体是国家政府,政府能够从一个更加深远和谨慎的角度来看待国家间关系,从大局出发,制定稳妥的政策。
③ Max Weber, Economy and Society, Vol.1.edited by Guenther Roth and Claus Wittich, Berkeley:University of California,1978, P.208-236.
① G John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p269.
② Robert O. Keohane, Neoliberal Institutionalism:A Perspective on World Politics, in International Institutions and State Power:Essays in International Relations Theory, edited by Robert O. Keohane, Colorado:Westview Press, Inc, 1989, pp.627.
③田野：《国际关系中的制度选择：一种交易成本的视角》,上海：上海人民出版社,2006年版,第127页。
① G John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press.2001, preface.
② Oran Young, Political Leadership and Regime Formation:On the Development of Institutions in International Society, International Organization, Vol.45, No.3,1991, p131.
① Anne-Marie Slaughter, International Law in a World of Liberal States. European Journal of International Law Vol.6, No.1,1995, pp,503-538.
②[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第166页。
③[美]玛莎·费丽莫,《国家社会中的国家利益》,袁正清译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2001年版,第7页。
①在本文中,为了突出两种动力的作用,分别用理性选择和社会建构来代表理性制度主义和社会制度主义两种理论。
② Daniel Hamilton, Charles Barry, Hans Binnendijk, Stephen Flanagan, Julianne Smith, James Townsend, The Washington NATO Project:Alliance Reborn:An Atlantic Compact for the 21st Century, February 2009, p.10.
③Robert O. Keohane, International Institutions:Two Approaches, International Studies Quarterly, Vol.32, No.4,1988, pp.379-396.
①约翰·杰拉尔德·鲁杰：《什么因素将世界维系在一起?新功利主义与社会建构主义的挑战》,转引自彼得·卡赞斯坦,罗伯特·基欧汉,斯蒂芬·卡拉斯纳编的《世界政治理论的探索与争鸣》,秦亚青等译,上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第281页。
②美国实用主义哲学家查尔斯·皮尔斯(Charles Pierce)将它称之为“外展”性解释方式(abduction).参考：John G. Ruggie, Peace in Our Time?Causality,Social Facts.and Narrative Knowing. Amercian Society of International Law Proceedings 89th Annual Meeting,1995, pp.93-100.
① Goffman, E. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York:Anchor Books 1,959.转引自约瑟夫·拉彼德弗里德里希·克拉托赫维尔主编：《文化和认同：国际关系回归理论》：金烨译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2003年版,第83页。
②[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第96页。
① Kratochwil,Friedrich V.,and John Gerard Ruggie, International Organization:A State of the Art on an Art of the State. International Organization, Vol.40, No.4,1986, pp.753-775.
① Jeffrey T. Checkel, International Institutions and Socialization in Europe:Introduction and Framework, International Organization, Vol.59, No.3,2005, pp 801-826.
② Hechter, M. and S. Kanazawa, Sociological Rational Choice Theory. Annual Review of Sociology Vol.23, No.1,1997, pp.191-214.
③[美]詹姆斯G.马奇,约翰·奥尔森：《国际政治秩序的制度动力》,转引自彼得·卡赞斯坦,罗伯特·基欧汉,斯蒂芬·卡拉斯纳编的《世界政治理论的探索与争鸣》,秦亚青等译,上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第368-369页。
① Finnemore, Martha, Norms, Culture, and World Politics:Insights from Sociology's Institutionalism, International Organization, Vol.50, No.2,1996, pp.323-347.
①参见阿瑟·斯坦《协调与合作：无政府世界中的制度》,转引自大卫·鲍德温主编：《新现实主义与新自由主义》,肖欢荣译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2001年版,第42-46页。
① Johnston, Alastair Iain, Treating International Institutes as Social Environments, International Studies Quarterly, Vol.45, No4,2001, pp.487-515;
② Jeffrey T. Checkel, Social Construction and Integration, Journal of European Public Policy, Vol.6, No.4,1999, pp.545-560.
①转引自彼得·卡赞斯坦,罗伯特·基欧汉,斯蒂芬·卡拉斯纳编的《世界政治理论的探索与争鸣》,秦亚青等译,上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第273页。
② Martha Finnemore, National Interests in International Society, Ithaca, NY:Cornell University Press,1996, p.129.
③ Jeffrey T. Checkel, The Constructivist Turn in International Relations Theory, World Politics, Vol.50, No.2,1998, pp.324-348.
④ Richard Ashley, The Poverty ofNeoliberalism, International Organization, Vol.38, No.2,1984, p.243.
⑤F rank Schimmelfennig, NATO Enlargement a Constructivist Explanation, Security Studies,Vol.8, No.2/3, 1998/1999-Spring 1999, pp.198-234, p.200.
①秦亚青：《权力、制度、文化：国际关系理论与方法研究文集》,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版,第100页。
② John J. Mearsheimer, "The False Promise ofInternational Institutions", International Security, Vol.19, No.3, 1994-1995, pp.5-49.
①转引自薛晓源,陈家刚等编译：《全球化与新制度主义》,北京：社会科学文献出版社,2004年版,第436-438页。
②[美]贝思·西蒙斯主编：《国际制度》,黄仁伟等译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第108页。
③王逸舟：《探寻全球主义国际关系》,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版,第25页。
①[美]罗伯特.吉尔平：《世界政治中的战争与变革》,宋新宁译,上海：上海人民出版社,2007年版,第15页。
② Max Weber, Economy and Society, vol.1.edited by Guenther Roth and Claus Wittich, Berkeley:University of California,1978, p.213.
③ G. John Ikenberry and Charles Kupchan, Socialization and Hegemonic Power. International Organization, Vol.44, No.3, 1990,pp.283-315.
④ Joseph M. Grieco. Anarchy and Limits of Cooperation:A Realist Critique of the Newest Liberal Institutionalism, International Organization, Vol.42, No.3,1988, pp.85-507.
⑤John J. Mearsheimer "The False Promise of International Institutions ", International Security, Vol.19, No.3, 1994-1995, pp.5-49.
⑥ Tony Evans and Peter Wilson, Regime Theory and the English School of International Relations:A Comparison, Millennium:Journal of International Studies Vol.21, No.3,1992, pp.329-51.
①郭树勇：《大国成长的逻辑：西方大国崛起的国际政治社会学分析》：北京：北京大学出版社,2006年版,第6页。
②Ian Hurd,Legitimacy and Authority in International Politics,International Organization,Vol.53,No.2,1999, pp.379-408,p.389.
③转引自何俊志等编译《新制度主义政治学译文精选》,天津：天津人民出版社,2007年4月,第291页。
①门洪华：《霸权之翼：美国国际制度战略》：北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版,第37页。
② Mark A. Pollack and Grefory C.Shaffer, eds., Transatlantic Governance in the Global Economy, Lanham, MD:
Rowman and Littlefield,2001, p.7.
③ Henry Kissinger, Our Nearsighted World Vision, Washington Post, January 10,2000, A19.
④[美]罗伯特.吉尔平：《世界政治中的战争与变革》,宋新宁译,上海：上海人民出版社,2007年版,第16页。
①田野博士认为,国家间缔约成本包含国家同质性、问题领域敏感程度以及透明度。国家间治理成本包含：不确定性,交易频率,资产专业性。参见田野：《国际关系中的制度选择：一种交易成本的视角》,上海：上海人民出版社,2006年版,第77页。
②格伦·施奈德曾经对国家结盟的成本进行过论述,他认为国家结盟的成本包含两部分：国家涉入战争的危险,以及国家行为的自由性。主要有三个因素：盟友的需求,未来盟友满足需求的程度,联盟条约的实质性内容。参见Glenn H.Sntyder, Alliance Theory:A Neorealist First Cut, Journal of International Affairs, Vol.44, No.1,1990, p.1 10.
③[美]贝思·西蒙斯主编：《国际制度》,黄仁伟等译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第45页。
④此外,还需要注意国家参与制度化的成本还包含政府的外交和政治成本,也就是国家必须考虑自己的所作所为在国际社会引发的影响以及这些行为在国内政治引发的影响。例如,冷战后,中东欧国家政府就必须分析参与北约和欧盟所带来的政治压力,尤其是来自民族主义者和共产主义拥护者的压力。
⑤ David A. Lake, Beyond Anarchy Anarchy—The Importance of Security Institutions, International Security, Vol.26, No.1,2001, pp.129-160,p.137.
⑥田野：《国际关系中的制度选择：一种交易成本的视角》,上海；上海人民出版社,2006年版,第77页和第82页。
⑦田野：《国际关系中的制度选择：一种交易成本的视角》,上海：上海人民出版社,2006年版,第169-171页。
① John Lewis Gaddis, The Emerging Post-Revisionist Synthesis on the Origins of the Cold War, Diplomatic History, Vol. 7, No.3,1983, pp.171-190.
② Lawrence S. Kaplan, NATO and the United States:The Enduring Alliance, Boston:Twayne,1988, p.39.
③David A. Lake, Entangling Relations:American Foreign Policy in Its Century, Princeton, N. JPrinceton University Press,1999, chapter 2.
④参见[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第293-294页。
①转引自何俊志等编译《新制度主义政治学译文精选》,天津：天津人民出版社,2007年4月,第290页。
②阿瑟·斯坦：《协调与合作：无政府世界中的制度》,转引自大卫·鲍德温：《新现实主义与新自由主义》,肖欢荣／译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2001年版,第51页。
③转引自何俊志等编译《新制度主义政治学译文精选》,天津：天津人民出版社,2007年4月,第154页.
①[美]朱迪斯戈尔茨坦,罗伯特·O·基欧汉：《观念和外交政策：信仰、制度与政治变迁》,刘东国于军译,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版,第199页。
②[澳]克雷格.A.斯奈德等著：《当代安全与战略》,徐纬地等译,长春：吉林人民出版社,2001年版,第129页。
③ Robert O. Keohane and Lisa L. Martin, The Promise of Institutionalist Theory, International Security Vol.20, No.1.1995, pp.39-51.
④[美]贝思·西蒙斯主编：《国际制度》,黄仁伟等译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第516页。
①转引自[美]贝思·西蒙斯主编：《国际制度》,黄仁伟等译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第52页。
②同上
③ Steve Weber, Multilateralism in NATO:Shaping the Postwar Balance of Power,1945-1961. Berkeley:University of California Press,1991, pp.16-17.
④John Duffield, International Regimes and Alliance Behavior:Explaining NATO conventional Force Levels, International Organization, Vol.46, No.4,1992, pp.819-55.
① Robert Powell, Absolute and Relative Gains in International Relation Theory, American Political Science Review, Vol85,No.4,1991,pp.1303-20.
② Ikenberry,G J., After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.65.
③ Athony Clark Arend, Do Legal Rules Matter? International Law and International Politics, Virginia Journal of International Law, Vol38, No.2,1998, pp107-153.
①[美]道格拉斯·c·诺思,《制度、制度变迁与经济绩效》,上海三联书店,1994年版,第115页。
②笔者对瑞典国防研究所林德瓦(Fredrik Lindvall)的采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2008年10月21日。
③[英]巴瑞·布赞,[丹麦]奥利·维夫,[丹麦]迪·怀尔德：《新安全论》,朱宁译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2003年版,第2页。
① James G March, Johan P. Olsen, The New Institutionalism:Organizational Factor in Political Life, American Political Science Review, Vol.78, No.5,1984, pp.734-749.
② Bronislaw E. Matecki, Establishment of the International Finance Corporation:A Case Study, International Organization Vol.10, No.2,1956, pp.261-275.
③[美]玛莎.费丽莫：《国家社会中的国家利益》,袁正清译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2001年版,第20页。
④参见[美]约瑟夫.S.奈, 《硬权力与软权力》,门洪华译,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年。
⑤李砚忠：《试析新制度主义的意识形态理论及其现代意义》,《重庆社会科学》2007年第4期。
①俞新天：《强大的无形力量——文化对当代国际关系的作用》,上海：上海人民出版社,第193页。
②[美]朱迪斯戈尔茨坦,罗伯特·0-基欧汉：《观念和外交政策：信仰、制度与政治变迁》,刘东国于军译,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版,第8页。
③同上第172页。
④[美]贝思·西蒙斯主编：《国际制度》,黄仁伟等译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第503页。
① Jeffrey W. Legro, Which Norms Matter? Revisiting the Failure of Internationalism. International Organization, Vol.51, No.1,1997, pp.31-63.
②王逸舟：《探寻全球主义国际关系》,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版,第11页。
③[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第243-254页。
④ Weber, Steve, Shaping the Postwar Balance of Power:Multilateralism in NATO, in Multilateralism Matters:The Theory and Praxis of an Institutional Form, edited by John Gerard Ruggie, New York:Columbia University Press, pp.233-92.
①[美]约瑟夫·拉彼德,[德]弗里德里希·克拉托赫维尔：《文化和认同：国际关系回归理论》,金烨译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2003年2月,第72页。
②[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第104页。
③俞新天：《强大的无形力量——文化对当代国际关系的作用》,上海：上海人民出版社,第186页。
④转引自薛晓源,陈家刚等编译：《全球化与新制度主义》,北京：社会科学文献出版社,2004年版,第271页。
⑤ Hemmer, Christopher, Katzenstein, Peter J, Why is There No NATO in Asia? Collective Identity, Regionalism, and the Origins of Multilateralism, International Organization, Vol.56, No.3,2002, pp.575-607.
⑤何俊志等编译《新制度主义政治学译文精选》,天津：天津人民出版社,2007年4月,第341页。
①俞新天：《强大的无形力量——文化对当代国际关系的作用》,上海：上海人民出版社,第186页。
② Kurth James, The Next NATO:Building an American Commonwealth of Nations, The National Interest, No.65,2001, pp.5-16.
③[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第220页。
④[英]巴里·布赞：《美国和诸大国：21世纪的世界政治》,刘永涛译,上海：上海世纪出版集团,2007年版,第15页。
①转引自[英]巴里·布赞：《美国和诸大国：21世纪的世界政治》,刘永涛译，上海：上海世纪出版集团,2007年版,第17页。
②同上第17-18页。
①[英]巴里·布赞：《美国和诸大国：21世纪的世界政治》,刘永涛译,上海：上海世纪出版集团,2007年版,第26页。
② Robyn Dawes, et al, Cooperation for the benefit ofus-not me, or my conscience, in Beyond Self-Interest, edited by J. Mansbridge, Chicago:University of Chicago Press, pp.97-110.转引自[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第224页。
① Bruce Cronin, From Balance to Community:Transnational Identity and Political Integration, Security Studies, Vol.8, No.2& 3,1998, pp.270-301.
① Robert O. Keohane, International Institutions:Two Approaches, International Studies Quarterly, Vol.32, No.4,1988, pp.379-396.
②[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第166。
③[美]约瑟夫·拉彼德,[德]弗里德里希·克拉托赫维尔：《文化和认同：国际关系回归理论》,金烨译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2003年2月,第82页。
①[加]阿米塔·阿查亚：《建构安全共同体：东盟与地区秩序》,王正毅冯怀新译,上海：上海人民出版社,2004年版,第37页。
② Anne-Marie Slaughter, International Law in a World of Liberal States. European Journal of International Law Vol.6, No.1,1995, pp,503-538.
③ Peter Katzenstein(ed.), The Culture of National Security:Norms and Identity in World Politics, New York:Columbia University Press,1996, p.520.
① T.V.Paul and Johan A.Hall, International Order and the Future of World Politics, Cambridge University Press,1999, p.2.
②Oran Young, Political Leadership and Regime Formation:On the Development of Institutions in International Society, International Organization, Vol.45, No.3,1991, p.131.
① Anne-Marie Slaughter, International Law in a World of Liberal States. European Journal of International Law Vol.6, No.1,1995, pp,503-538.
② Richard Ullman, The U.S. and the World:An Interview with George Kennan, New York Review of Books, Vol.46, No.13,1999,pp.4-6.
①[美]贝思·西蒙斯主编：《国际制度》,黄仁伟等译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第105-144页。
②[德]贝娅特·科勒-科赫,托马斯·康策尔曼,米歇勒·克诺特：《欧洲一体化与欧盟治理》,顾俊礼等译,北京：中国社会科学出版社,2004年3月,第217页。
①[美]曼瑟尔·奥尔森：《集体行动的逻辑》,陈郁等译,上海；上海三联出版社,2007年版第41页。
②秦亚青主编：《理性与国际合作：自由主义国际关系理论研究》,北京：世界知识出版社2008年版,第73-75页。
③参见[美]道格拉斯·c·诺思,《制度、制度变迁与经济绩效》,上海三联书店,1994年版,第17页。
① Martin, Lisa, The Rational Choice of Multilateralism, in Multilateralism Matters:The Theory and Praxis of an Institutional Form, edited by John Gerard Ruggie, New York:Columbia University Press,1993, p.92.
② Christian Reus-Smit, The Constitutional Structure of International Society and Nature of Fundamental Institutions, International Organization, Vol.51, No.4,1997, pp.555-589.
③ Remmer Karen L., Theoretical Decay and Theoretical Development:Resurgence of Institutional Analysis, Comparative Politics, Vol.50, No.4,1997, pp.34-61, p.57.
① Helen V Milner, The Assumption of Anarchy in International Politics:A Critique. Review of International Studies, Vol.17, No1,1991, pp.67-85.
② Martha Finnemore, National Interests in International Society, Ithaca, NY:Cornell University Press,1996, p.127.
③ John Gerard Ruggie, The Past as Prologue? Interests, Identity and American Foreign Policy, International Security, Vol.21, No.4,1997, pp.89-125.)
④ Peter Katzenstein(ed), The Culture of National Security:Norms and Identity in World Politics, New York:Columbia University Press,1996, pp.2-5.
①[美]亚历山大·温特,《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海世纪出版社2008年版,第115-123页。
② Goldstein Judith and Robert O. Keohane, eds., Ideas and Foreign Policy:Beliefs, Institutions and Political Change, Ithaca, N.Y.:Cornell University Press,1993, p.7.
③ Robert O. Keohane, International Institutions:Two Approaches, International Studies Quarterly, Vol.32, No.4,1988, pp.379-396.
① See Karl Deutsch, Political Community and the North Atlantic Area:International Organization in the Light of Historical Experience. Princeton, N.J.:Princeton University Press,1957.
②[澳]约翰·伯顿：《全球冲突——国际危机的国内根源》,谭朝洁译,上海：上海人民出版社,2007年版,中文序言。
③[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第98页。
④ Thomas Risse-Kappen, Cooperation among Democracies——the European Influence on U.S. Foreign Policy,1995, Princeton, New Jersey:Princeton Press, p.3.
①倪世雄：《当代西方国际关系理论》,复旦大学出版社,2005年版,第224页。
①王杰主编：《国际机制论》,北京：新华出版社,2002年版,第116页。
② Robert O. Keohane, "International Institutions:Two Approaches", International Studies Quarterly, Vol.32, No.4, 1988, pp.379-396.
①[加拿大]阿米塔·阿查亚,《建构安全共同体：东盟与地区秩序》,王正毅等译,上海人民出版社2004年版。
②Peter Katzenstein and Alexander Wendt eds., The Culture of National Security:Norms and Identity in World Politics, New York:Columbia University Press,1996.
③Thomas Risse-Kappen, Democratic Peace-War like Democracies:A Social Constructivist Interpretation of the Liberal Argument, European Journal of International Relations, No.1,1995., Vol.1, No.4,491-517 (1995)
④[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第353页。
④Jeffrey Checkel, The Constructivist Turn in International Relations Theory, World Politics, Vol.50, No.2,1998, p.339.
① John Gerard Ruggie, "Multilateralism:The Anatomy of an Institution," in Multilateralism Matters:the Theory and Praxis of an Institutional Form, edited by Ruggie, New York:Columbia University Press,1993, p31.
② Juergen Haacke, Theory and Praxis in International Relations:Habermas, Self-Reflection, Rational Argumentation. Millennium, Vol.25, No.2,1996, pp.255-89.
①秦亚青主编：《理性与国际合作：自由主义国际关系理论研究》,北京：世界知识出版社,2008年版,第230页
① Frank Schimmelfennig, Strategic Calculation and International Socialization:Membership Incentives, Party Constellations, and Sustained Compliance in Central and Eastern Europe, International Organization, Vol.59, No.4,2005, pp.827-860.
① Frank Schimmelfennig, NATO Enlargement a Constructivist Explanation, Security Studies, Vol.8, No.2/3, Winter, 1998/1999-Spring 1999, pp.198-234.
②罗伯特·基欧汉：《非正式暴力的全球化、世界政治理论与“恐怖的自由主义”》,转载于罗伯特·基欧汉、门洪华编：《局部全球化世界中的自由主义、权力和治理》,门洪华译,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版,第316-319页。
③转引自[美]彼得·卡赞斯坦,罗伯特·基欧汉,斯蒂芬·卡拉斯纳主编：《世界政治理论的探索与争鸣》,秦亚青等译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第16页。
① Ronald Rogowski, Commerce and Coalitions:How Trade Affects Domestic Politcal Alignments, Priceton NJ.:Priceton University Press,1989, pp.2-6.
② Morris Fiorina, Rational Choice and the new institutionalism, Polity, Vol.28, No.1,1995, pp.107-115.
③转引自[美]彼得·卡赞斯坦,罗伯特·基欧汉,斯蒂芬·卡拉斯纳主编：《世界政治理论的探索与争鸣》,秦亚青等译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第40页。
①[美l亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第140页·
① Schofield Norman, Anarchy, Altruism and Cooperation, Social Choice and Welfare 2:1985, pp.207-219.
② David M. Kreps, Corporate Culture and Economic Theory, in Perspectives on Positive Political Economy, edited by James E.Alt and Shepsle, Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1990, pp.125-127.
③有关谢林点与共同知识的关系,参见秦亚青主编：《理性与国际合作：自由主义国际关系理论研究》,北京：世界知识出版社,2008年版,第44页。
① Rajeev Bhargava, Individualism in Social Science, Oxford:Clarendon Press,p.143-156.转引自[美]亚历山大·温特,《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第157页。
②何俊志等编译《新制度主义政治学译文精选》,天津：天津人民出版社,2007年4月,第170页。
② Aaron Wildavsky, Why self-interest means less outside of a social context. Journal ofTheoretical Politics, Vol.6, No.2, pp.131-159.
①[美]亚历山大·温特,《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第129-134页。② Aaron Wildavsky, Why self-interest means less outside of a social context, Journal of Theoretical Politics, Vol.6, No.2, pp.131-159.
①Andre Kukla,The struature of self-fulfilling and self-negating prophecies,Theoryand Psychology,4,pp.5.33.转引自[美]亚历山大·温特,《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第181页。
②[美]亚历山大·温特,《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第263页。
③《当代西方国际关系理论》,倪世雄,复旦大学出版社,2005年10月。p223-1
④参照：奥尔森集体理论中的特权集团(引自：集体行动的逻辑：[美]曼瑟尔。奥尔森, 陈郁等译,上海三联出版社,2007年6月,p41A).
⑤(转引自：《全球化与新制度主义》,薛晓源,陈家刚, 社会科学文献出版社,2004年,p20a
①倪世雄：《当代西方国际关系理论》,上海：复旦大学出版社,2005年版,第219-223页。
①[美]肯尼思.华尔兹：《国际政治理论》,信强译,上海：上海人民出版社,2003年版,第74—77页。
②[美]亚历山大·温特,《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第77-80页。
③ Steven Rappaport, Economic models and historical explanation, Philosophy of the Social Sciences,25, pp.421-441.
④[加]阿米塔·阿查亚：《建构安全共同体：东盟与地区秩序》,王正毅冯怀新译,上海：上海人民出版社,2004年版,第29页。
①转引自[美]迈尔斯·卡勒：《国际关系中的理性》,载于[美]彼得·卡赞斯坦,罗伯特·基欧汉,斯蒂芬·卡拉斯纳主编：《世界政治理论的探索与争鸣》,秦亚青等译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第353页。
② William Freudenbrug, Scott Frickel, and Robert Gramling, Beyond the nature/society divides:Learning to think about a mountain, Sociological Forum, Vol.10, pp.361-392.转引自[美]亚历山大·温特,《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第77-80页。
③彼得.卡赞斯坦,罗伯特.基欧汉,斯蒂芬.卡拉斯纳,《<国际组织>杂志与世界政治研究》,转引自[美]彼得·卡赞斯坦,罗伯特·基欧汉,斯蒂芬·卡拉斯纳主编：《世界政治理论的探索与争鸣》,秦亚青等译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第45页。
④ Jeffrey T. Checkel, Why Comply? Social Learning and European Identity Change, International Organization, Vol.55, No 3, Summer2001, pp.553-588, p.581.
①[美]玛莎.费丽莫：《国家社会中的国家利益》,袁正清译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2001年版,第35页。
②郭树勇：《大国成长的逻辑：西方大国崛起的国际政治社会学分析》：北京：北京大学出版社,2006年版,第54页。
③ Alexander E. Wendt, The Agent-Structure Problem in International Relations Theory, International Organization, Vol.41, No.3,1987, p.360.
④ Christian Reus-Smit, The Constitutional Structure of International Society and Nature of Fundamental Institutions, International Organization, Vol.51, No.4,1997, pp.555-589, p.564.
⑤ Johnston, Alastair Iain, Treating International Institutes as Social Environments, International Studies Quarterly, Vol.45, No.4,2001, pp.487-515.
⑥ David H. Bearce and Stacy Bondanella, "Intergovernmental Organizations, Socialization, and Member-State Interest Convergence", International Organization, Vol.61, No.4, Fall 2007, PP.703-733, p.704.
①其中德国学派对哈贝马斯的社会交往理论的应用颇为广泛,并取得很多研究成果。参考Thomas, Risse, "'Let's Argue!'Communicative Action in World Politics," International Organization, Vol.54, No.1,2000, pp.1-39; Harald Muller, "Arguing, Bargaining and All That:Communicative Action, Rationalist Theory and the logic of Appropriateness in International Relations," European Journal of International Relations, Vol.10, No.3,2004, pp.177-202.
② Johnston, Alastair Iain, Treating International Institutes as Social Environments, International Studies Quarterly, Vol.45, No.4,2001, pp.487-515.
③ Stryker,S., and A. Statham, Symbolic Interaction and Role Theory,in The Handbook of Social Psychology. Vol.1, edited by GLindzey and E.Aronson, pp.311-378. New York:Random House,1985, p.325.
④ Freedman,P. E., and A.Freedman, Political Learning. In The Handbook of Political Behavior, Vol.1, edited by S.Long, pp.255-303, New York:Plenum Press,1981, p.258.
⑤ G John Ikenberry and Charles Kupchan, Socialization and Hegemonic Power. International Organization, Vol.44, No.3, 1990,pp.283-315.
⑥ Meyer, J. W, The Structuring of a World Environmental Regime,1870-1990, International Organization,Vol.51,No.4, 1997, pp.623-651.
① Axelrod, R., Promoting Norms:An Evolutionary Approach to Norms, in The Complexity of Cooperation, edited by R. Axelrod, pp.44-68. Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press.1997, p.58-59.
②. John Ikenberry and Charles Kupchan, Socialization and Hegemonic Power. International Organization, Vol.44, No.3, 1990,pp.283-315.
③袁正清：《交往行为理论与国际政治研究——以德国国际关系研究视角为中心的一项考察》,《世界经济与政治》2006年第9期。
① Jeffrey T. Checkel, International Institutions and Socialization in Europe:Introduction and Framework, International Organization, Vol.59, No.3,2005, pp 801-826.
① Underdal, Arild, Explaining Compliance and Defection:Three Models, European Journal of International Relations, Vol.4, No.1,1998,pp.5-36.
② Mutz, D. C., P. M. Sniderman, and R. A. Brody, Political Persuasion:The Birth of a Field of Study, in Political Persuasion and Attitude Change, edited by D.C.Mutz,P.M. Sniderman, and R.Brody, pp.1-14. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1996,p1.
③ James L. Gibson, A Sober Second Thought:An Experiment in Persuading Russians to Tolerate, American Journal of Political Science, Vol.42, No.3,1998, pp.819-850.
① G John Ikenberry and Charles Kupchan, Socialization and Hegemonic Power. International Organization, Vol.44, No.3, 1990,pp.283-315,p.290.
②[美]亚历山大·温特,《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第320页。
③王逸舟：《西方国际政治学：历史与理论》,上海：上海人民出版社,2006年版,第382页。
① Haas,Ernst B, Words Can Hurt You or Who Said What to Whom About Regimes, in International Regimes, edited by Stephen D.Krasner, Ithca, N.Y.Lcomell University Press,1983, pp.23-59.
② G. John Ikenberry and Charles Kupchan, Socialization and Hegemonic Power. International Organization, Vol.44, No.3, 1990,pp.283-315,p.292.
①[美]玛莎·费丽莫,《国家社会中的国家利益》,袁正清译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2001年版,第44页,第58页。
② Rogowski, R, Institutions as Constraints on Strategic Choice, in Strategic Choice and International Relations, edited by D. A. Lake and R. Powell, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,1999, pp.115-136.
③ G. John Ikenberry and Charles Kupchan, Socialization and Hegemonic Power. International Organization, Vol.44, No.3, 1990,pp.283-315,p.284.
①参见[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第323页。
② Stephen D. Krasner, American Policy and Global Economic Stability, In., America in a Changing World Political Economy, edited by William P. Avery and David P.Rapkin, New York:Longman,1982, p.32.
③[美]罗伯特.吉尔平：《世界政治中的战争与变革》,宋新宁译,上海：上海人民出版社,2007年版,第36-38页。
③Johnson, James, Is Talk Really Cheap:Prompting Conversation Between Critical Theory and Rational Choice, American Political Science Review, Vol.87, No.1,1993, pp.74-86.
④ Egeberg, Morten, Transcending Intergavernmentalism? Identity and Role Perceptions of National Officials in EU Decision-Making, Journal of European Public Policy, Vol.6, No.3,1999, pp.456-74.
① Kratochwil, F. V., and J. G. Ruggie, International Organization:A State of the Art on an Art of the State, International Organization Vol.40, No.4,1986, pp.753-775.
②[美]贝思·西蒙斯主编,《国际制度》,黄仁伟等译,上海：上海世纪出版社2006年版,第45页。
③转引自薛晓源,陈家刚等编译：《全球化与新制度主义》,北京：社会科学文献出版社,2004年版,第260页。
① Levy, Jack, Learning and Foreign Policy:Sweeping A Conceptual Minefield, International Organization, Vol.48, No.2, 1994,pp.279-312.
② David H. Bearce and Stacy Bondanella, Intergovernmental Organizations, Socialization, and Member-State Interest Convergence, International Organization, Vol.61, No.4,2007, pp.703-33, p.703.
③阿米塔·阿查亚曾经在其论著中对“反制度化”的问题进行了详细论述。参见[加]阿米塔·阿查亚：《建构安全共同体：东盟与地区秩序》,王正毅冯怀新译,上海：上海人民出版社,2004年版,第6页。
① Peter Katzenstein, Introduction:Alternative Perspectives on National Security, in The Culture of National Security: Norms and Identity in World Politics, edited by Peter Katzenstein. New York:Columbia University Press,1996, p.5.
② Johnston, Alastair Iain, Treating International Institutes as Social Environments, International Studies Quarterly, Vol.45, No.4,2001, pp.487-515, p.502.
③ Frank Schimmelfennig, NATO Enlargement:A Constructivist Explanation, Security Studies, Vol.8, No.2&3, winter 1998/99-Spring 1999, pp.198-234.
①参见[美]玛莎·费丽莫,《国家社会中的国家利益》,袁正清译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2001年版,第37-38页。
②何俊志等编译：《新制度主义政治学译文精选》,天津：天津人民出版社,2007年版,第13-14页。
①秦亚青主编：《理性与国际合作：自由主义国际关系理论研究》,北京：世界知识出版社2008年版,第241-43页。
② Johnson, James, Is Talk Really Cheap:Prompting Conversation Between Critical Theory and Rational Choice, American Political Science Review, Vol.87, No.1,1993, pp.74-86.
① Levy, Jack, Learning and Foreign Policy:Sweeping A Conceptual Minefield, International Organization, Vol.48, No.2, 1994,pp.279-312.
① Ian Hurd, Legitimacy and Authority in International Politics, International Organization, Vol.53, No.2,1999, pp.379-408.
② Johnston, Alastair Iain, Treating International Institutes as Social Environments, International Studies Quarterly, Vol.45, No4,2001, pp.487-515.
③ Jeffrey T. Checkel, International Institutions and Socialization in Europe:Introduction and Framework, International Organization, Vol.59, No.3,2005, pp 801-826.
④Jepperson, Ronald L., Alexander Wendt, and Peter J. Katzenstein, Norms, Identity, and Culture in National Security, in The Culture of National Security:Norms and Identity in World Politics, edited by Peter J. Katzenstein, New York: Columbia University Press,1996, pp.33-78; Kowert, Paul, and Jeffrey W. Legro, Norms, Identity, and their Limits:A Theoretical Reprise, in The Culture of National Security:Norms and Identity in World Politics, edited by Peter J. Katzenstein. New York:Columbia University Press,1996, pp.451-497.
⑤ Jeffrey T. Checkel, Social Construction and Integration, Journal of European Public Policy, Vol.6, No.4,1999, pp.545-560.
①马莎·芬尼莫尔凯瑟琳·斯金克：《国际规范的动力与政治变革》,载于[美]彼得.卡赞斯坦,罗伯特.基欧汉,斯蒂芬.卡拉斯纳编《世界政治理论的探索与争鸣》秦亚青,苏长和,门洪华魏玲译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第297页。
① Schoppa Leonard, The Social Context in Coercive International Bargaining, International Organization, Vol.53, No.2, 1999,pp.307-342.
② Thomas, Risse,'Let's Argue!'Communicative Action in World Politics, International Organization, Vol.54, No.1,2000, pp.1-39.Harald Muller, Arguing, Bargaining and All That:Communicative Action, Rationalist Theory and the logic of Appropriateness in International Relations, European Journal of International Relations, Vol.10, No.3,2004, pp.177-202.
③Gurowitz, Amy, Mobilizing International Norms:Domestic Actors, Immigrants, and the Japanese State, World Politics, Vol.51, No.3,1999, pp.413-445.
④Ron, James, Varying Methods of State Violence, International Organization, Vol.51, No.2,1997, pp.275-300.
⑤ Green, Donald P., and Ian Shapiro, Pathologies of Rational Choice Theory:A Critique of Applications in Political Science, New Haven, Conn.:Yale University Press,1994, pp.17-19.
① Johnson, James, Is Talk Really Cheap:Prompting Conversation Between Critical Theory and Rational Choice, American Political Science Review, Vol.87, No.1,1993, pp.74-86.
①参见[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第115-123页。
② Goldstein Judith and Robert O. Keohane, eds., Ideas and Foreign Policy:Beliefs, Institutions and Political Change, Ithaca, N.Y.:Cornell University Press,1993, p.8.
③Levy, Jack, Learning and Foreign Policy:Sweeping A Conceptual Minefield, International Organization, Vol.48, No.2, 1994,pp.279-312.
④ Ian Hurd, Legitimacy and Authority in International Politics, International Organization, Vol.53, No.2,1999, pp.379-408
⑤ Haas, Ernst B, Words Can Hurt You or Who Said What to Whom About Regimes, in International Regimes, edited by Stephen D.Krasner, Ithca, N.Y.Lcornell University Press,1983, pp.23-59.
①参见[美]玛莎·费丽莫,《国家社会中的国家利益》,袁正清译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2001年版,第58页
②[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2008年版,第141页。
③ David M. Kreps, Corporate Culture and Economic Theory, in Perspectives on Positive Political Economy, edited by James E.Alt and Shepsle,pp.90-143, Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1990, p.125-127.
④转引自何俊志等编译《新制度主义政治学译文精选》,天津：天津人民出版社,2007年4月,第170页。
① Ikenberry.G J., After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.72.
②James M. Buchanan, The Limits of Liberty, Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1975, chap.5.
① Oran R. Young, Political Leadership and Regime formation:On the Development of Institutions in International Society, International Organization Vol.45, No.3,1991, pp.281-308.
②俞新天：《强大的无形力量——文化对当代国际关系的作用》,上海：上海人民出版社,第212页。
② Robert D. Putnam, Diplomacy and Domestic Politics:The Logic of Two-Level Games, International Organization, Vol.42, No.3,1988, pp.427-60.
① Robert O. Keohane, Empathy and International Regimes, in Beyond Self-Interest, edited by Jane Mansbridge, Chicago: University of Chicago Press,1990, pp.227-236.
② Goldstein Judith and Robert O. Keohane, eds., Ideas and Foreign Policy:Beliefs, Institutions and Political Change, Ithaca, N.Y.:Cornell University Press,1993, p.12-17.
③ James L. Gibson, A Sober Second Thought:An Experiment in Persuading Russians to Tolerate, American Journal of Political Science, Vol.42, No.3,1998, pp.19-50.
④ Diana C. Mutz, Paul M. Sniderman, and Richard A. Brody, eds., Political Persuasion and Attitude Change, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press,1996, p.8.
① Zimbardo, Philip G, and Michael R. Leippe, The Psychology of Attitude Change and Social Influence, New York: McGraw Hill,1991, p.225.
② Egeberg, Morten, Transcending Intergovernmentalism? Identity and Role Perceptions of National Officials in EU Decision-Making, Journal of European Public Policy, Vol.6, No.3,1999, pp.456-474.
③ Elster. Jon. ed. Deliberative Democracy. New York:Cambridge University Press,1998, pp.109-111.
④参见[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第259-260页。
①同注释①
② Francisco Ramirez, Yasemin Soysal,and Suzanne Shanahan, The Changing Logic of Political Citizenship: Cross-National Acquisition of Women's Suffrage Rights,1890-1990, American Sociological Review, Vol.62, No.2, pp.735-45.
③ Robert Axelrod, An Evolutionary Approach toNorms. American Political Review, Vol.80, No.41986, pp.1095-1111.
①田野：《国际关系中的制度选择：一种交易成本的视角》,上海：上海人民出版社,2006年版,第6页。
② James N Rosenau, Before Cooperation:Hegemony, Regimes, and Habit-Driven Actors in World Politics, International Organization, Vol.40, No.4,1986, pp.849-894.
③Oran Young, Political Leadership and Regime Formation:On the Development of Institutions in International Society, International Organization, Vol.45, No.3,1991, p.131.
① Slaughter, Anne-Marie, International Law in a Word of Liberal States, European Journal of International Law, Vol.6, No.1,1995, pp.530-538.
②参见[加]阿米塔·阿查亚：《建构安全共同体：东盟与地区秩序》,王正毅冯怀新译,上海：上海人民出版社,2004年版,第5页。
③俞新天：《强大的无形力量——文化对当代国际关系的作用》,上海：上海人民出版社,第210页。
④同上第211页。
①阿瑟·斯坦：《协调与合作：无政府世界中的制度》,载于大卫·鲍德温主编：《新现实主义与新自由主义》,肖欢荣／译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2001年版,第50页。
②王逸舟：《探寻全球主义国际关系》,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版,第24页。
③ G. John Ikenberry, Institutions, Strategic Restraint, and the Persistence of American Postwar Order, International Security, Vol.23, No.3(Winter 1998/1999), pp.43-78
① Barbara Koremenos, Charles Lipson, and Duncan Snidal, the Rational Design of International Institutions, International Organization,Vol.55, No.4,22001, pp.761-799, p.767.
② Thomas W., Gilligan and Keith Krehbiel, Organization of Information of Informative Committees by A Rational Legislature, American Journal of Political Science, Vol.34, No.2,1990, pp.531-64.
① T.V.Paul and Johan A.Hall, International Order and the Future of World Politics, Cambridge University Press 1999, p.2.
②本文并不旨在分析民主和平论,而是分析国家间信仰、规范、文化对国家交往的影响,重点是国家间的社会互动和交流。
①Kenneth W.Abbott and Duncan Snidal, Why States Act Through Formal International Organization, Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol.42, No.l,1998. pp.3-32.
②Kratochwil,Friedrich V.,and John Gerard Ruggie, International Organization:A State of the Art on an Art of the State. International Organization, Vol.40, No.4,1986, pp.753-775; Ness, G D., and S. R. Brechin, Bridging the Gap: International Organizations as Organizations, International Organization Vol.42, No.2,1988, pp.245-273.
①[美]贝思·西蒙斯主编：《国际制度》,黄仁伟等译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第45页。
②转引自薛晓源,陈家刚等编译：《全球化与新制度主义》,北京：社会科学文献出版社,2004年版,第280页。
③ Jeffrey T. Checkel, International Institutions and Socialization in Europe:Introduction and Framework, International Organization, Vol.59, No.3,2005, pp 801-826.
① Acheson, Dean, Statement on the North Atlantic Treaty. Department of State Bulletin,1949, in Why is There No NATO in Asia? Collective Identity, Regionalism, and the Origins of Multilateralism, by Hemmer, Christopher, Katzenstein, Peter J, International Organization, Vol.56, No.3, Summer2002, pp.575-607.
②参考[美]马莎·芬尼莫尔凯瑟琳·斯金克：《国际规范的动力与政治变革》,载于[美]彼得.卡赞斯坦,罗伯特.基欧汉,斯蒂芬.卡拉斯纳编《世界政治理论的探索与争鸣》秦亚青,苏长和,门洪华魏玲译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第297页；Frank. Schimmelfennig, The EU, NATO, and the Integration of Europe:Rules and Rhetoric. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2003, p.199.
① G John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, pp.23-32.
② Jon Elster, Claus Offe, and Ulrich K.Preuss, Institutional Design in Post-Communist Societies:Rebuilding the Ship at Sea, New York:Cambridge University Press,1998, pp.12-17.
③ Holmes, Passions and Constraint, On the Theory of Liberal Democracy, Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1995.
④[美]道格拉斯·c·诺思：《制度、制度变迁与经济绩效》,上海：上海三联书店,1994年版,第100-102页。
① John J. Mearsheimer, The False Promise of International Institutions, International Security, Vol.19, No.3. Winter, 1994-1995, pp.5-49.
① G.John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.20.
② Ikenberry,GJ., After Victory:institutions,strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of oerder after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, P44a.
③ Kalevi J.Holsti, Peace and War:Armed Conflicts and International Order,1648-1989, New York:Cambridge University Press,1991,chapter two.
④ Robert H.Jackson, Quasi-States:Sovereignty, International Relations and the Third World, New York:Cambridge University Press,1990.
⑤ Michael Sheehan, The Balance of Power:History and Theory, London:Routledge,1996.
① G John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.p163.
② David Fromkia, In the Time of the Americans:The Generation That Changed America's Role in the World, New York: Alfred A-Knoph,1995.
③[美]罗伯特.吉尔平：《世界政治中的战争与变革》,宋新宁译,上海：上海人民出版社,2007年版,第56-57页。
③Peter J.Katzenstein, International Relations Theory and the Analysis of Change, in Global Changes and Theoretical Challenges, edited by Ernst-Otto Czempiel and James N.Rosenau, Lexington, Mass:Lexington Books,1989, p.296.
① G John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.166.
② Roland Dannreuther and John Peterson, Security Strategy and Transatlantic Relations, Routledge:Taylor& John Francis Group,2006, p.6.
③ Robert Jervis, A Political Science Perspective on the Balance of Power and the Concert, American Historical Review, Vol.97, No.3, June 1992, p.723.
① Stephen Krasner, American Policy and Global Economic Stability, in America in a Changing World Political Economy, edited by Willianm P. Avery and David P.Rapkin, New York:Longman,1982.
② G John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press.2001, p.57.
③ G.John Ikenberry and Charles Kupchan, Socialization and Hegemonic Power. International Organization, Vol.44, No.3, 1990,pp.283-315.
④ Alexander Thompson, Coercion Through IOs:The Security Council and the Logic of Information Transmission, International Organization, Vol.60, No.l,2006, pp.1-34.
① Michael S. Sherry, In the Shadow of War:The United States since the 1930s, New Haven:Yale University Press,1995, Preface.
②转引自Norman Graebner, America as a World Power:A Realist Appraisal from Wilson to Reagan, Wilmington, Del.: Scholarly Resources,1984, p.275.
③ Paul Bairoch, International Industrialization Levels from 1750 to 1980, Journal of European Economic History, Vol.11, No.2,1982, p.304.
① Joseph M.Grico,Realist International Theory and the Study of World Politics, in New Thinking in International Relations Theory, edited by Michael Doyle and GJohn Ikenberry, Bouldet,Colo:Westview Press,1997,pp.163-201.
②G John Ikenberry and Charles Kupchan, Socialization and Hegemonic Power.International Organization, Vol.44, No.3, 1990,pp.283-315.
③ Duncan Snidal, The Limits of Hegemonic Stability Theory, International Organization, Vol.39, No.4,1985, pp.579-614.
④ Terry Moe, Political Institutions:The Neglected Side of the Story, Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Vol.6, No.2,1990, pp.227-228.
① Albert Hirschman, National Power and the Structure of Foreign Trade, Berkeley and los Angeles:University of California Press,1980, p.29.
② George Kennan, Memorandum by the Director of the Policy Planning Staff to the Secretary of State and the Under Secretary of State Lovett, FRUS,1948, Vol.1, Washington, D.C.:Government Printing Office, February 24,1948, p. 524.
③Lisa Martin, The Rational State Choice of Multilateralism, in Multilateralism Matters:The Theory and Praxis of an Institution, edited by John Gerard Ruggie, New York:Columbia University Press,1993, p1 10.
① Peter Foot, America and the Origins of the Atlantic Alliance:A Reappraisal, in The Origins of NATO, edited by Joseph Smith, Exeter: University of Exeter Press,1990, p.83.
② John Gerard Ruggie, Winning the Peace:America and World Order in the New Era, New York:Columbia University Press,1996, chap.5.
③[美]朱迪斯戈尔茨坦,罗伯特·O·基欧汉：《观念和外交政策：信仰、制度与政治变迁》,刘东国于军译,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版,第85页。
④ George Kennan, Summary of Discussion on Problem of Relief, Rehabilitation and Reconstruction of Europe,29 May 1947, FRUS.1947, Vol.3, p.235.
⑤ Geir Lundestad, Empire by Invitation'in the American Century, Diplomatic History, Vol.23, No.2,1999, pp.189-217.
⑥ Robert Art, Why Western Europe Needs the United States and NATO, Political Science Quarterly, Vol.111, No.1,1996, pp.1-39.
① Peter Schmidt, European Conception of the Transatlantic Relationship:Historical Overview and Some Conceptual Issues, in A Hybrid Relationship:Transatlantic Security Cooperation beyond NATO, edited by Peter Schmidt, Peter Lang GmbH, Internationaler Verlag der Wissenschaften, Frankfurt am Main,2008, p.27.
② G John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.55.
③ Lawrence S.Kaplan, NATO 1948:the Birth of the Transatlantic Alliance, Rowman& Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2007, p.232.
① Geir Lundestad, Empire by Invitation? The United States and Western Europe.1945-1952, Journal of Peace Research, Vol.23, No.3,1986, pp.263-277.
②[美]曼瑟尔·奥尔森：《集体行动的逻辑》,陈郁等译,上海：上海三联出版社,2007年版,第41页。
③秦亚青主编：《理性与国际合作：自由主义国际关系理论研究》,北京：世界知识出版社,2008年版,第45页。
④ Hemmer, Christopher, Katzenstein, Peter J, Why is There No NATO in Asia? Collective Identity, Regionalism, and the Origins of Multilateralism, International Organization, Vol.56, No.3,2002, pp.575-607.
⑤ Jon Elster, Rational Choice, Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1986 pp.1-33.
①秦亚青主编：《理性与国际合作：自由主义国际关系理论研究》,北京：世界知识出版社,2008年版,第46页。
② David P.Calleo."The EU and US Geopolitical interests are no longer the same",Europe'World, Summer 2008.摘自: http://www.europesworld.org/ewEnglish/Home/Article/tabid/191/ArticleType/articleview/ArticleID/21156/Default.aspx
③ James N. Rosenau, Before Cooperation:Hegemony, Regimes, and Habit-Driven Actors in World Politics, International Organization, Vol.40, No.4,1986, p.861.
④ Martha Finnemore:Norms, Culture, and world Politic:insight from sociology's institutionalism, International Organization, Vol.50, No.2,1996, pp.325-347, p.330.
⑤叶江等编：《解读美欧——欧洲一体化进程中的美欧关系》,上海：上海三联出版社,1999年版,第279页。
① Acheson, Dean, Statement on the North Atlantic Treaty. Department of State Bulletin 20 (508),385,1949, Awaiable at Hemmer, Christopher, Katzenstein, Peter J, Why is There No NATO in Asia? Collective Identity, Regionalism, and the Origins of Multilateralism, International Organization, Vol.56, No.3,2002, pp.575-607.
②王逸舟：《西方国际政治学：历史与理论》,上海：上海人民出版社,2006年版,第224页。
③同上,第217页。
④ Alexandra Gheciu, NATO's History:The Politics of "Securing the West" Since 1949. Ph.D. diss. draft, Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y.,2001, pp.3-5.
⑤ Martha Finnemore:Norms, Culture, and world Politic:insight from sociology's institutionalism, International Organization, Vol.50, No.2,1996, pp.325-347, p.325.
⑥ Barry Buzan, From International System to International Society:Structural Realism and Regime Theory Meet the English School, International Organization, Vol.47, No.3,1993, pp.327-352.
① Randolph M.Siverson and Juliann Emmons, Birds of Feather:Democratic Political System and Alliance Choices in the Twentieth Century, Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol.35, No.2,1991, pp.285-306.
② Joseph M.Grieco, Anarchy and the Limits of Cooperation:A Realist Critique of the Newest Liberal Institutionalism, International Organization, Vol.42, No.3,1988, pp.485-507.
③ Peter Cowhey, Domestic Institutions and the Credibility of International Commitments:Japan and the United States, International Organization, Vol.47, No.2,1993, pp.299-326.
④ David Reynolds, America's Europe, Europe's America:Image, Influence, and Interaction,1933-1958, Diplomatic History, Vol.20, No.4,1996, pp.651-662.
①例如在对柏林占领区的管理,对希腊和土耳其危机的政策,对1947年欧洲经济危机的应对措施,欧洲国家尤其是英国给美国的决策施加了很多影响。
② John Lewis Gaddis, We Now Know:Rethinking Cold War History, New York:Oxford University Press,1997, p.205.
③ Patrick Thaddeus Jackson, Occidentalism:Rhetoric, Process, and Postwar German Reconstruction. Ph.D. diss., Columbia University, New York,2001, pp.428-429, see Hemmer, Christopher, Katzenstein, Peter J, Why is There No NATO in Asia? Collective Identity, Regionalism, and the Origins of Multilateralism, International Organization, Vol.56, No.3,2002, pp.575-607.
④[美]罗伯特·杰维斯：《世界政治研究中的现实主义》,载于[美]彼得·卡赞斯坦,罗伯特·基欧汉,斯蒂芬·卡拉斯纳主编：《世界政治理论的探索与争鸣》,秦亚青等译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第410页。
⑤ See Thomas Risse-Kappen, Cooperation among Democracies——the European Influence on U.S. Foreign Policy, 1995, Princeton, New Jersey:Princeton Press, pp.204-206.
① Ian Clark, The Hierarchy of States:Reform and Resistance in the International Order, Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1989. p.10.
② Alex Wendt, Collective Identity Formation and the International State, American Politics Review, Vol.88, No.2,1994, pp.384-396.
③ Christian Reus-Smit, The Constitutional Structure of International Society and Nature of Fundamental Institutions, International Organization, Vol.51, No.4,1997, pp.555-589.
④ David Robertson, NATO's Future Role:A European View, Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science, Vol.39, No.1,1991, pp.164-175.
⑤ Peter Schmidt, European Conception of the Transatlantic Relationship:Historical Overview and Some Conceptual Issues, in A Hybrid Relationship:Transatlantic Security Cooperation beyond NATO, edited by Peter Schmidt, Peter Lang GmbH, Internationaler Verlag der Wissenschaften, Frankfurt am Main,2008, p.70.
⑥ Lawrence S.Kaplan, NATO 1948:the Birth of the Transatlantic Alliance, Rowman& Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2007, p.232.
⑦ Henry A. Kissinge, Diplomacy, New York:Simon and Schuster,1994, p.835.
① Thomas J.Knock, To End All Wars:Woodrow Wilson and the Quest for a New World Order, New York:Oxford University Press,1992, pp.221-222.
② See Clarence Streit. Union Now:The Proposal for Inter-Democracy Federal Union. New York:Harper and Brothers,1939.
③ Alexander Gheciu, NATO in the "New Europe":the Politics of International Socialization after the Cold War, Stanford University Press,2005, p.35.
④ U.S. Department of State, FRUS,1948, Vol.3, pp.4-6.
⑤ Wichard Woyke, The Foundation and History of NATO, in The Western Security Community, edited by Norbert Wiggershaus and Roland Foerster, Oxford:Berg,1993, p.6.
⑥ Debates of the House of Commons of Canada, Parliament of Canada (Ottawa:Library of Parliament,1948),3:2303.
① Acheson, Dean. Present at the Creation:My Life in the State Department. London:Hamish Hamilton,1970. p.493.
②托马斯·里斯：《民主共同体的集体认同：以北约为例》,载于[美]彼得·卡赞斯坦主编,《国家安全的文化：世界政治中的规范与认同》,宋伟,刘铁娃译,北京大学出版社,2009年版,第336-377页。
③转引自 Lloyd C.Gardner, A Covenant with Power:American and World Order form Wilson to Reagan, New York: Oxford University Press,1984, p.100.
④ "Minutes of the Fourth Meeting of the Washington Exploratory Talks on Security" 8 July 1948, FRUS,1948, Vol.3, pp.163-169.
⑤ "The Secretary of State to the Embassy in France,"19 October 1949, FRUS,1949, Vol.4, p.471.
①Mark Smith, NATO Enlargement during the Cold War, New York:Palgrave,2000, p.77.
②最终,1977年西班牙弗朗西斯的专制统治结束之后,西班牙正式加入北约被提上日程,并于1982年正式加入。西班牙加入欧美制度化是北约“内外双逻辑”的体现。一方面在于西班牙的战略地位的重要性是对外逻辑的中心；另一方面则是加强北约内部民主规范的动力。将西班牙纳入制度化,表明欧美国家对民主原则的支持和肯定,并以此鼓励其他国家向这方面的发展。
①Walter Russell Mead, Special Providence:American foreign policy and how it changed the world, London:Routledge, 2002, chapter 2.
① John Van Oudenaren, From Atlantic Community to Atlantic Partnership and Beyond:American Conceptions of the Transatlantic Relationship since 1945, in A Hybrid Relationship:Transatlantic Security Cooperation beyond NATO, edited by Peter Schmidt, Peter Lang GmbH, Internationaler Verlag der Wissenschaften, Frankfurt am Main,2008, pp.43-66.
② Roland Dannreuther and John Peterson, Security Strategy and Transatlantic Relations, Routledge:Taylor& John Francis Group,2006, P6.
③ Harry S. Truman, Address to Joint Session of Congress on Aid to Greece and Turkey,12 March 1947. Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States:Harry S. Truman, January 1 to December 31,1947, Washington, D.C.:United States Government Printing Office,1963, pp.176-180.
④ Harry S. Truman, Address on Foreign Economic Policy,6 March 1947, Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States:Harry S. Truman, January 1 to December 31,1947, Washington, D.C.:United States Government Printing Office, 1963, pp.167-172.
① Lloyd C.Gardener, The Atlantic Charter:Idea and Reality,1942-1945, in The Atlantic Charter, edited by Douglas Brinkley and David R. Facey-Crowther, London:Macmillan,1994, pp.45-81.
② John Foster Dulles, Peace without Platitudes, Fortune, Vol.25, No.1, January 1942, pp.42-43
③G. John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.176.
① James Robert Huntley, Uniting the Democracies:Institutions of the Emerging Atlantic-Pacific System, New York:New York University Press,1980, p.4.
② Ronald Steel, Walter Lippmann and the American Century, Boston:Little, Brown,1980, pp.404-408.
① The Director of the Policy Planning Staff [Kennan] to the Scretary of State and Under Secretary of State [Acheson],23 May 1947, FRUS,1947, Vol.3, p.225.
② Memorandum of Director of the Office of European Affairs[Hickerson] to the Secretary of State,19 January 1948, FRUS,1948, Vol.3, pp.6-7.
③ Memorandum of Director of the Policy Planning Staff[Kennan]to the Secretary of State,20 January 1948, FRUS,1948, Vol.3, pp.7-8.
④ The Undersecretary of the State [Lovett]to the British Ambassador[Inverchapel],2 February 1948, FRUS,1948, Vol.3, pp.17-18.
⑤ John Lewis Gaddis, We Now Know:Rethinking Cold War History, New York:Oxford University Press,1997, p.200.
① G. John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.193.
② Summary Record of a Meeting of United States Ambassadors at Paris,21-22 October 1949, FRUS,1949, Vol.4, p.492.
③ Memorandum of Conversation by the British Foreign Office, undated, FRUS,1947, Vol.3, pp.818-819.
④ John Baylis, Britain and the Formation of NATO," in The Origins of NATO, edited by Joseph Smith, Exeter:University of Exeter Press,1990, p.11.
⑤ The British Ambassador [Inverchapel] to the Under Secretary of State[Lovett], FRUS,1948, Vo.3, P.14.
① Geir Lundestad, An Empire by Invitation? The United States and Western Europe,1945-1952, Journal of Peace Research, Vol.23, No.3,1986, p.270.
②[美]沃·惠·罗斯托：《从第七层楼上展望世界》,国际关系学院“五七”翻译组译,北京：商务印书馆,1973年版,第61页。
①[法]戴高乐：《战争回忆录》第2卷,北京翻译社译：北京：世界知识出版社,1959年版,第649页。
②《国际条约集(1945～1947)》,世界知识出版社,1959年版,第438-439页。
①《国际条约集(1948～1949)》,世界知识出版社,1959年版,第48-52页。
②[美]哈里·杜鲁门著：《杜鲁门回忆录》第2卷,李石译,上海：三联书店,1974年版,第289页。
①《国际条约集(1948～1949)》,世界知识出版社,1959年版,第191-195页。
②转引自：Wichard Woyke, The Foundation and History of NATO, in The Western Security Community, edited by Norbert Wiggershaus and Roland Foerster, Oxford:Berg,1993, p252.
③转引自：Olav Riste, Norway's Attitude to Military Integration, in The Western Security Community, edited by Norbert Wiggershaus and Roland Foerster. Oxford Berg,1993, p.192.
① NATO. Statement by Committee One on Religion and Spiritual Values, Paris:NATO Information Division,1957, p.1.
② Robert J. Art, American Foreign Policy and the Fungibility of Force, Security Studies, Vol.5, No.4, Summer 1996, p. 28.
③ G. John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.213.
④ Mary N.Hampton, NATO at the Creation:U.S. Foreign Policy, West Germany and the Wilsonian Impulse, Security Studies, Vol.4, No.3, Spring 1995, pp.610-56.
①华盛顿政府也认识到丘吉尔的策略,总统罗斯福担心丘吉尔的提议是将美国拴在欧洲。参考：G. John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001,p.206.
②Steve Weber, Shaping the Postwar Balance of Power:Mutilateralism in NATO, International Organization, Vol.46, No.3,1992, pp.633-680.
③ Peter Schmidt, European Conception of the Transatlantic Relationship:Historical Overview and Some Conceptual Issues, in A Hybrid Relationship:Transatlantic Security Cooperation beyond NATO, edited by Peter Schmidt, Peter Lang GmbH, Internationaler Verlag der Wissenschaften, Frankfurt am Main,2008, p.69.
④ David P. Callo, Early American Views of NATO:Then and Now, in The Troubled Alliance:Atlantic Relations in the 1980's, edited by Lawrence Freedman, New York:St.Martin Press,1984, p.9.
①参见[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2008年版,第123页。
②Charles A. McClelland and Gray D:Conflict Patterns in the Interactions among Nations, in International among Nations and Foreign Policy:A Reader in Research and Theory, edited by (James N. Rosenau, New York:Free Press,
1969, pp.711-724.
③[美]詹姆斯N·罗洗瑙主编：《没有政府的治理》,张胜军,刘小林等／译,南昌：江西人民出版社,2001年版,第14页。
① Escott Reid, Time of Fear and Hope:The Making of the North Atlantic Treaty,1947-1949, Toronto:McClelland and Stewart,1977,pp.25-28.
② NATO Report, NATO Civil Organization Records,1952-1965, NATO Archives,1955, Vol.55, p.69.
③ Lunn. Simon. The Collective Parliamentary Voice of the Alliance:The Role of the North Atlantic Assembly, in NATO: 50 Years On, edited by Peter Jenner. London:Atalink,1998. pp.143-146.
① Caroline Fehl, Living with a Reluctant Hegemony:The Transatlantic Conflict Over Multilateral Arms Control, European Journal of International Relations, Vol.14, No.2,2008, pp.259-287.
② Steve Weber, Multilateralism in NATO:Shaping the Postwar Balance of Power,1945-1961, Berkeley:University of California Press,1991, p.41.
③ Peter F.Cowhey, Elect Locally-Order Globally:Domestic Politics and Multilateral Cooperation, in Multilateralism Matters:The Theory and Praxis of an Institutional Form, edited by John Gerard Ruggie, New York:Columbia University Press,1993, p.158.
① Jon Elster, Introduction, in Constitutionalism and Democracy, edited by Jon Elster and Rune Slagstad, New York: Cambridge University Press,1988, p.15.
② Joseph M.Grieco, State Interests and Institutional Rule Trajectories:A Neorealist Interpretation of the Maastricht Treaty and European Economic and Monetary Union, Security Studies, Vol.5, No.3,1996, p.288.
③ Kenneth W.Abbott and Duncan Snidal, Why States Act Through Formal International Organization, Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol.42, No.1,1998, pp.3-32.
④Peter J.Katzenstein and Yutak Tsjujinka,'Bullying','Buysing','Binding':US-Japanse Transnational Relations and Domestic Structure, in Bring Transnational Relation Back in:Non-State Actor, Domestic Structures and International Institutions, edited by Thomas Risse-Kappen, New York:Cambridge University Press,1995, pp.79-111.
⑤ Daniel Deudney, The Philadelphian System:Sovereignty, Arms Control, and Balance of Power in the American States-Union, International Organization,Vol.49, No.2,1995, pp.191-228.
① Thomas Risse-Kappen, Cooperation among Democracies——the European Influence on U.S. Foreign Policy, Princeton, New Jersey:Princeton Press,1995, p.16.
② Steve Weber, Shaping the Postwar Balance of Power:Multilateralism in NATO, in Multilateralism Matters:The Theory and Praxis of an Institutional Form, edited by John Gerard Ruggie, New York:Columbia University Press,1993, p.145.
③有人询问2008年诺贝尔和平奖获得者前芬兰总统马尔蒂.阿赫蒂萨里(Martti Ahtisaari)愿意接受什么身份：联合国工作人员、芬兰总统、欧洲领导,但是他的回答是,我更愿意别人把我看作是西方民主的推动者。致力于用 和平与民主的方式来解决国际争端。这不仅是西方的专属文化,不仅属于欧美国家之间,而应该是解决全球性冲突问题方法之一。2008年12月12日于瑞典实务研究所的报告：《Peacemaking in a Changing World》.
①[英]巴瑞·布赞,[丹麦]奥利·维夫,[丹麦]迪·怀尔德：《新安全论》,朱宁译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2003年版,第16页。
②[加]阿米塔·阿查亚：《建构安全共同体：东盟与地区秩序》,王正毅冯怀新译,上海：上海人民出版社,2004年版,第7页,第22-23页。
① Karl Deutsch, The Analysis of International Relations,3rd edition, Englewood Cliffs:NJ:Prentice Hall,1988, p.271-272.
②[加]阿米塔·阿查亚：《建构安全共同体：东盟与地区秩序》,王正毅冯怀新译,上海：上海人民出版社,2004年版,第21页。
①王逸舟：《西方国际政治学：历史与理论》,上海：上海人民出版社,2006年版,第217-223页。
②玛莎·费丽莫：《建构人道主义干涉的规范》,载于[美]彼得·卡赞斯坦主编,《国家安全的文化：世界政治中的规范与认同》,宋伟,刘铁娃译,北京大学出版社,2009年版,第149-178页。
③ Hemmer, Christopher, Katzenstein, Peter J, Why is There No NATO in Asia? Collective Identity, Regionalism, and the Origins of Multilateralism, International Organization, Vol.56, No.3,2002, pp.575-607.
④ Ronald J. Yalem, Regional Security Communities, in The Yearbook on International Affairs, edited by George W. Keeton and Geoge Scharzenberger, London:Stevens,1979, pp.217-223.
①瑞典外交部官员玛丽卡·法伦(MarikaFahlen)认为：应该将欧美之间处理国家间关系的经验向更多的区域和领域推广……,国际制度框架之内的和平协商是处理国家间关系的有效之道。于瑞典国际事务研究所。笔者对玛丽卡·法伦的采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2008年12月12日。
②[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第288页。
③“友谊”更主要的集中于安全领域,很少外溢到其他领域。因此,这也可以说明,欧美在安全领域的紧密合作,而在经济领域则是存在激烈竞争。
④参见[加]阿米塔·阿查亚：《建构安全共同体：东盟与地区秩序》,王正毅冯怀新译,上海：上海人民出版社,2004年版,第2页。
⑤ Wolf-Dieter Eberwin, The Future of International Warfare:Toward a Global Security Community, International Political Science Review, Vol.16, No.4,1995,pp.341-360, p.347.
① Emanuel Adler and Michael Barnett, Security Communities in Theoretical Perspective, in Security Communities, edited by Emanuel Adler and Michal Barnett, Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1998, p.3.
②[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第291页。
① Thomas J.Kennedy, NATO Politico-Military Consultation:Washington, D.C.:National Defense University Press,1984, p.8.
② "we do not wish our allies to desertus", by President Eisenhower in 144th NSC Meeting, May 13,1953,FRUS 1952-1954,Vol.15, pp.1014-1017.
③ Friedrich V. Kratochwil, Rules, Norms and Decisions:On the Conditions of Practical and Legal Reasoning in International Relations and Domestic Affairs, New York:Cambridge University Press,1989, p.63.
① Robert O.Keohane and Joseph S.Nye,Jr., Transgovernmental Relations and International Organizations, World Politics, Vol.27, No.11974, pp.39-62.
② Robert Putnam, Diplomacy and domestic politics:The logic of two-level games, International Organization, Vol.42, No.3,1988, pp.427-460.
③ Emanuel Adler, Seizing the Middle Ground:Constructivism in World Politics, European Journal of International Relations, Vol.3, No.3,1997, p.345.
④ Emanuel Adler and Michael Bamett, A Framework for the Study of Security Communities, in Security Communities, edited by Emanuel Adler and Michal Barnett, Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1998, pp.43-44.
① Hemmer, Christopher, Katzenstein, Peter J, Why is There No NATO in Asia? Collective Identity, Regionalism, and the Origins of Multilateralism, International Organization, Vol.56, No.3,2002, pp.575-607.
②参见[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第224页。
① See G. John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.52.
②郭树勇：《大国成长的逻辑：西方大国崛起的国际政治社会学分析》：北京：北京大学出版社,2006年版,第74页。
⑤ Alexander Wendt, The Agent Structure Problem in International Relations Theory, International Organization, Vol.41, No.3,1987, pp.335-370.
①参见[美]约瑟夫.S.奈, 《硬权力与软权力》,门洪华译,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年。
② Frank. Schimmelfennig, The EU, NATO, and the Integration of Europe:Rules and Rhetoric. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2003, p.4.
③ Frank. Schimmelfennig, The EU, NATO, and the Integration of Europe:Rules and Rhetoric. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2003, p.6.
① Friedrich V. Kratochwil, Rules, Norms and Decisions:On the Conditions of Practical and Legal Reasoning in International Relations and Domestic Affairs, New York:Cambridge University Press,1989, p.63.
② Thomas Risse-Kappen, Cooperation among Democracies——the European Influence on U.S. Foreign Policy, Princeton, New Jersey:Princeton Press,1995, p.207.
① Sir Oliver Frank, in Listener,14 June 1956. Quoted in John W. Wheeler-Bennett and Anthony Nicholls, The Semblance of Peace:The Political Settlement after the Second World War, London:Macmillan,1972, p.573.
② G John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.263.
③ George Kennan, Review of Current Trends-U.S. Foreign Policy,24 February 1948. FRUS, Washington, D.C.:U.S. Government Printing Office,1948, Vol.1, Part 2, pp.515-517.
①门洪华：《霸权之翼：美国国际制度战略》,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版,第250页.
① G. John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.210.
② "Summary Record of a Meeting of United States Ambassadors at Paris," 21-22 October 1949, FRUS, Washington, D.C.:U.S. Government Printing Office,1949, Vol.4, p.485.
① G. John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.212.
② Statement of the Secretary of State to the North Atlantic Council, FRUS,1952-54, Washington, D.C.:U.S. Government Printing Office, Vol.5,P,461.
① Andei Kozyrev, Partnership or Cold Peace? Foreign Policy, No.99,1995, PP.3-14.
② "United Nations:Address before the 39th Session of the General Assembly, "24 September 1984, Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents, Vol.20, No.38,1 October 1984, Washington, D.C.:Office of the Federal Register, p.1359.
③ Raynond L.Garthoff, The Great Transition:American-Soviet Relation and the End of the Cold War, Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institute,1994, p.247.
④ See G. John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.297.
① G. John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.6.
②同上p.216.
① Pierre Hassner, Europe beyond Partition and Unity:Disintegration or Reconstruction?, International Affairs, Vol.66, No.3,1990, pp.461-475; Pierre Hassner, Europe beyond Partition and Unity:Disintegration or Reconstruction? International Affairs, Vol.66,1990, pp.461-75.
② Micheal Mastanduno, Preserving the Unipolar Moment:Realist Theories and U.S. Grand Strategy after the Cold War, International Security, Vol.21, No.4,1997, pp.49-88.
③Chirtopher Layne, The Unipolar Illusion, International Security, Vol.17, No.4,1993, pp.5-51.
④ Stephen Walt, The Origins of Alliance, Ithaca,N.Y.:Cornell University Press,1990, preface.
⑤ John Mearsheimer, Back to the Future:Instability of Europe after the Cold War, International Security, Vol.15, No.4, 1990,pp.5-57
⑥ Kenneth Waltz, Structural Realism after the Cold War, International Security, Vol.25, No.1,2000, p.19.
① John Duffield, NATO's Function after the Cold War, Political Science Quarterly, Vol.199, No.5,1994/1995, pp.763-87.
② Stephen Walt, The Origins of Alliance, Ithaca,N.Y.:Cornell University Press,1990, preface.
③ John Mearsheimer, Back to the Future:Instability of Europe after the Cold War, International Security, Vol.15, No.4, 1990, pp.5-57
① Roger Cohen, France to Rejoin Military Command of NATO Alliance, New York Times,6 December 1995, Al.
② Josef Joffe, Where Germany Has Never Been Before, National Interest, No.56,1999, pp.45-53.
③ G. John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.215.
④ Stephen Flanagan, NATO and Central and Eastern Europe, Washington Quarterly, Vol.15, No.2,1992, pp.141-151.
⑤ Robert B.McCalla, NATO's Persistence after the Cold War, International Organization, Vol.50, No.3,1996, pp.445-475.
⑥ Bill Clinton, American Foreign Policy and the Democratic Ideal, Campaign speech, Pabst Theater, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Octoberl,1992; Steven A. Holmes, Choice for National Security Adviser Has a Long-Awaited Chance to Lead, New York Times, January 3,1993.
⑦笔者对瑞典外交部官员玛丽卡·法伦(Marika Fahlen)的采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2008年12月12。
① Claries A. Kupchan, Reviving the West, Foreign Affairs, Vol.75,No.3,1996, pp.92-104.
② James Dobbins, New Direction for Transatlantic Security Cooperation, Survival, Vol.47, No.4,2005-2006, pp.39-54.
③ Thomas M. Leonard, NATO EXPANSION:ROMANIA AND BULGRARIA WITHIN THE LARGER CONTEXT, East European Quarterly, XXXIII, No.4, January,2000, pp.517-544.
④托马斯·里斯：《民主共同体的集体认同：以北约为例》,载于[美]彼得·卡赞斯坦主编,《国家安全的文化：世界政治中的规范与认同》,宋伟,刘铁娃译,北京：北京大学出版社,2009年版,第336-377页。
④ Peter Schmidt, European Conception of the Transatlantic Relationship:Historical Overview and Some Conceptual Issues, in A Hybrid Relationship:Transatlantic Security Cooperation beyond NATO, edited by Peter Schmidt, Peter Lang GmbH, Internationaler Verlag der Wissenschaften, Frankfurt am Main,2008, p.74.
⑥笔者对比利时皇家国际关系研究所研究员、欧洲学院教授比斯科普(SvenBiscop)的采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2009年4月21。
① David C.Gompert and F.Stephen Larrabee edited, America and Europe:A Partnership for A New Era, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1997, pp.6-12.
②笔者对美国波拖马可政策研究协会(Potomac Institute for Policy Studies)高级研究员亚历山大(Yonah Alexander)的采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2008年10月21日。
③ Daniel Hamilton, Charles Barry, Hans Binnendijk, Stephen Flanagan, Julianne Smith, James Townsend, The Washington NATO Project:Alliance Reborn:An Atlantic Compact for the 21st Century, February 2009, p.20. Daniel Hamilton, Charles Barry, Hans Binnendijk, Stephen Flanagan, Julianne Smith, James Townsend. The Washington NATO Project:Alliance Reborn:An Atlantic Compact for the 21st Century, January 2009, p.52. Available at www.acus.org/publication/alliance-reborn-atlantic-compact-21st-century.7
① Barbara Koremenos, Charles Lipson, and Duncan Snidal, the Rational Design of International Institutions, International Organization, Vol.55, No.4,2001, pp.761-799.
② Celeste A. Wallander, Institutional Assets and Adaptability:NATO After the Cold War, International Organization, Vol.54, No.4,2000, pp.705-735, p.731.
③ James D. Morrow, Modeling the Forms of International Cooperation:Distribution Versus Information. International Organization, Vol.48, No.3,1994, pp.387-423.
①笔者对瑞典国际事务研究所研究员玛尔雷(Ulrika Moller)的采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2008年10月26日。
②Celeste A. Wallander, Institutional Assets and Adaptability:NATO After the Cold War, International Organization, Vol.54, No.4,2000, pp.705-735, p.717.
① Celeste A. Wallander, Institutional Assets and Adaptability:NATO After the Cold War, International Organization, Vol.54, No.4,2000, pp.705-735,
① Anthony Lake, From Containment to Enlargement, Vital Speeches of the Day, Vol.60, No.1,15, October,1993, pp.13-19.
② Robert A. Pastor, Forward to the Beginning:Widening the Scope for Global Collective Action, in Emerging Norm, of Justified Intervention, edited by Laura W. Reed and Carl Kaysen, Cambridge, MA:Committee on International Security Studies,1993, pp.122-126.
③例如“统一联合特遣部队(Combined Joint Task Forces.简称CJTFs)的建立：不仅仅是为了共同防御,而且是为了危机管理,安全秩序维持等等。
① NATO, Study on NATO Enlargement, Brussels:the NATO Information and Press Office, September 1995, para.3.
② Madeleine Albright, Enlarging NATO, The Economist,15 February 1997, p.22.
③ "Founding Act on Mutual Relations, Cooperation and Security between the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the Russian Federation", Paris,27 May 1997, available in NATO Review, vol.45, no.4, July-August 1997.
④ Peter Schmidt, European Conception of the Transatlantic Relationship:Historical Overview and Some Conceptual Issues, in A Hybrid Relationship:Transatlantic Security Cooperation beyond NATO, edited by Peter Schmidt, Peter Lang GmbH, Internationaler Verlag der Wissenschaften, Frankfurt am Main,2008, p.17.
⑤ Speech at 41st Munich Conference on Security Policy,13 February 2005, Available at www.securityconference.de/konferenzen/rede.2005.
⑥ Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, Global NATO:Overdue or Overstretch? Speech at SDA Conference, Brussels,6 November 2006, p.2, Available at www.nato.int/docu/speech/2006/s061106a.htm.
① Daniel Hamilton, Charles Barry, Hans Binnendijk, Stephen Flanagan, Julianne Smith, James Townsend. The Washington NATO Project:Alliance Reborn:An Atlantic Compact for the 21st Century, January 2009, p.52. Available at www.acus.org/publication/alliance-reborn-atlantic-compact-21 st-century.
② Cheryl Shanks, Harold K. Jacobson, and Jeffrey H. Kaplan, Inertia and Change in the Constellation of International Governmental Organization,1981-1992, International Organization, Vol.50, No.4, Autumn 1996, pp.593-628.
① NATO, Transatlantic Transformation:Building a NATO-ED Security Architecture, Washington, DC:Atlantic Council of the U.S., March 2006.Available at http://www.acus.org/docs/0603-Transatlantic Transformation.pdf.
② David C.Gompert and F.Stephen Larrabee edited, America and Europe:A Partnership for A New Era, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1997, p.15.
① Knut Kirste, NATO's Security Agenda after Enlargement, Baltic Defense Review, No.11, Vol.1,2004, pp.97-103.
② Marten H.A. van Heuven, The Atlantic Council of the United States:NATO in 2010. July,1999. Available at www.acus.org/files/publication_pdfs/82/9908-NATO_2010.pdf.
① David C.Gompert and F.Stephen Larrabee edited, America and Europe:A Partnership for A New Era, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1997, p.3.
② Franklin D. Kramer and Simon Serfaty, Recasting the Euro-Atlantic Partnership, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Washington, D.C. February 1,2007. Available at www.csis.org/media/csis/pubs/csis_euroatlantic_feb07.pdf.
③ Malcolm Chalmers, Beyond the Alliance System, World Policy, Vol.7, No.2,1990, pp.215-50.
① Clarles A. Kupchan, Reviving the West', Foreign Affairs, Vol.75, No.3, May-June 1996, pp.97-98.
② Jose Maria Aznar, NATO:An Alliance for Freedom, Madrid:FAES,2005. Available at www.washingtonspeakers.com/prod_images/pdfs/AznarJose.NATOAnAllianceForFreedom.11.29.05.pdf.
③ Ronald D. Asmus, Richard K.Kugler, and F. Stephen Larrabee, NATO Expansion:The Next Steps, Survival, Vo'.37, No.1,1995,pp.7-33.
④ Julian Lindley-French, NATO and the EU:Terms of Engagement or Estrangement?, in A Recast Partnership? Institutional Dimensions of Transatlantic Relations, edited by Simon Safety, Washington, DC:CSIS,2008.
⑤ Anthony Lake, From Containment to Enlargement, Vital Speeches of the Day, Vol.60, No.1,1993; Douglas Brinkley, Democratic Enlargement:the Clinton Doctrine, Foreign Policy, No.106,1997, pp.111-127.
① White House, A National Security of Engagement and Enlargement, Washington, D.C.:White House, July 1994, p.6.
② James M. Goldgeier, Not Whether but When:The U.S. Decision to Enlarge NATO, Washington, D.C.:Brookings Institution,1999, p.236.
③ Secretary of State Madeline K. Albright, Statement on NATO Enlargement before the Senate Foreign Relation Committee,24 February 1998, as released by the Office of the Spokesman, U.S. Department of State, p.6.
④ NATO, Study on NATO Enlargement, Brussels:NATO Press Office,1995, p.7.
⑤ Christopher Jones, NATO Enlargement:Brussels as the Heir of Moscow, Problems of Post-Communism, Vol.45, No.4, 1998, p.52.
⑥ Pat Towell, "Aspiring NATO Newcomers Face Long Road to Integration," Congressional Quarterly, Vol.56, NO.6(7 February 1998, p.275.)
⑦ Ronald D. Asmus, Richard K.Kugler, and F. Stephen Larrabee, NATO Expansion:The Next Steps, Survival, Vol.37, No.1,1995, pp.7-33.
① Secretary of State Madeline K. Albright, Statement on NATO Enlargement before the Senate Foreign Relation Committee,24 February 1998, as released by the Office of the Spokesman, U.S. Department of State, pp.2-3. ② Strobe Talbott, Why NATO Should Grow, New York Review Books, Vol.42, No.13,1995, pp.217-30. ③ Madeline K. Albright, Why Bigger Is Better, Economist, Vol.342,1997, pp.21-23. ④ Javier Solana, Preparing for the Madrid Summit, NATO Review, Vol.45, No.2,1997, p.3.
⑤ Strobe Talbott, Why the Transformed NATO Deserves to Survive and Enlarge, International Herald Tribune,19 February 1997, p.8.
⑥ Ronald Asmus, Stop Fussing About NATO Enlargement and Get On With It, International Herald Tribune,9 December 1996, p.8.
⑦ Valclav Havel, The Euro-American Alliance Needs to Deepen as it Expands, International Herald Tribune,15 May 1997, p.8.
① James M. Goldgeier, NATO Expansion:The Anatomy of a Decision, Washington Quarterly, Vol.21, No.1,1998, pp. 86-87.
② Cited in Schimmelfennig, Frank. NATO Enlargement:to the East:An Analysis of Collective Decision-Making. EAPC-NATO Fellowship Report,1998-2000. Brussels:NATO Library,2000.p.225.
③ Madeleine Korbel Albright, Speech at the North Atlantic Council Ministerial Meeting in Sintra,29 May 1997, cited in http://www.nato.int/usa/special/970529-a.htm
④ Rachel A. Epstein, NATO Enlargement and the Spread of Democracy:Evidence and Expectations, Security Studies, Vol.14, No.1,2005, pp.63-105.
⑤ Daniel Deudney and G John Ikenberry, The Logic of the West, World Policy Journal, Vol.10, No.4, Winter 1993/94, pp, 17-25.
⑥ Judy Dempsey, US Rebuffs dermany on Plan for NATO, International Herald Tribune,15 February,2005. Online. Available:http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/02/14/news/munich.php(accessed 14 December 2005.
⑦ Judy Dempsey, For EU and NATO, a race for influence, International Herald Tribune,18 February,2005. Online. Available:http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/02/14/news/munich.php(accessed 14 December 2005.
① Solana, Javier, Preparing for the Madrid Summit, NATO Review, Vol.45, No.2,1997, p.3.
② David C.Gompert and F.Stephen Larrabee edited, America and Europe:A Partnership for A New Era, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1997, p.233.
③ Jose Maria Aznar, NATO:An Alliance for Freedom, speech at the AEI, The Spain Herald, November 17,2005.
④ John Duffield, NATO's Function after the Cold War, Political Science Quarterly, Vol.109, No.5,1994/1995, pp. 763-787, p.781.
⑤ See Roland Dannreuther and John Peterson, Security Strategy and Transatlantic Relations, Routledge:Taylor& John Francis Group,2006, p.56.
① Celeste A. Wallander, Institutional Assets and Adaptability:NATO after the Cold War, International Organization, Vol. 54, No.4,2000, pp.705-735, p.731.
② Waterman Harvey, Zagorcheva Dessie and Reiter, Dan, Correspondence:NATO and Democracy, International Security, Vol.26, No.3,2001, pp.221-235.
③ Simon Lunn, The Collective Parliamentary Voice of the Alliance:The Role of the North Atlantic Assembly, in NATO: 50 Years On, edited by Peter Jenner. London:Atalink,1998, p.145.
④ Cahen, Alfred, The Role of the Non-Governmental Organizations, in NATO:50 Years On, edited by Peter Jenner. London:Atalink,1998. p.148.
⑤ Thomas Risse-Kappen, Cooperation among Democracies——the European Influence on U.S. Foreign Policy, Princeton, New Jersey:Princeton Press,1995, p.224.
① Ronald Asmus, Stop Fussing About NATO Enlargement and Get On With It, International Herald Tribune,9 December 1996, p.8.
② Celeste A. Wallander, Institutional Assets and Adaptability:NATO after the Cold War, International Organization, Vol.54, No.4,2000, pp.705-735, p.729.
③ Daniel Hamilton, Charles Barry, Hans Binnendijk, Stephen Flanagan, Julianne Smith, James Townsend. The Washington NATO Project:Alliance Reborn:An Atlantic Compact for the 21st Century, January 2009, p.39. Available at www.acus.org/publicationyalliance-reborn-atlantic-compact-21st-century.
④ Franklin D. Kramer and Simon Serfaty, Recasting the Euro-Atlantic Partnership, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Washington, D.C., February 1,2007, p.3. http://www.csis.org/media/csis/pubs/csis_euroatlantic_feb07.pdf.
① Frances G Burwell, The Indispensable Partnership:Launching a New NATO-EU Relationship at Riga, the Atlantic council of the United States, Transatlantic Relations Program, November,2006, p.4.
② Robert B.McCalla, NATO's Persistence after the Cold War, International Organization, Vol.50, No.3,1996, pp.445-475.
③ Andre Blais and Stephane Dion, The budget maximizing bureaucrat:Appraisals and Evidence. Pittsburgh, Penn.: University of Pittsburgh Press,1991, pp.3-12.
④ Richard H. Hall, Organizations:Structures, processes and outcomes,5th ed. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:Prentice-Hall, 1991, pp.277-292.
① Josef Joffe, Europe's American Pacifier, Foreign Policy, No.54,1984, pp.64-82.
② United States Department of State, Bureau of Public Affairs, Office of Public Communications, The New Transatlantic Agenda:Joint U.S.-European Union Action Plan,Washington,D.C.,3 December 1995. Available at http://ec.europa.eu/extemal_relations/us/docs/new_transatlantic_agenda_en.pdf
③ A Security Europe in a Better World, European Security Strategy, Brussels,12 December 2003, Available at http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cmsUpload/78367.pdf
④ Robert B.McCalla, NATO's Persistence after the Cold War, International Organization, Vol.50, No.3,1996, pp.445-475, p,479.
⑤ David S. Yost, NATO and International Organizations, Rome:NATO Defense College,2007, p.6.
① Robert J. Lieber, No Transatlantic Divorce in the Offing, Orbis, Vol.44, No.4,2000, pp.571-584.
② Jonathan Dean, Is NATO's Past Also Its Future?, Arm Control Today, Vo.22, No.1,1992, p.54.
③ John J. Mearsheimer. "The False Promise of International Institutions", International Security, Vol.19, No.3, 1994-1995, pp.5-49, p.6.
① Ronald D. Asmus, Richard L. Kugler, and F. Stephen Larrabee, Building a New NATO, Foreign Affairs, Vol.72, No.4, 1993,pp.28-40,p.36.
② Waterman Harvey, Zagorcheva Dessie and Reiter Dan, Correspondence:NATO and Democracy, International Security, Vol.26, No.3,2001, pp.221-235.
③ John Duffield, NATO's Function after the Cold War, Political Science Quarterly, Vol.109, No.5,1994/1995, pp. 763-787, p.768.
① Franklin Kramer and John Lyman, Transatlantic Cooperation for Sustainable Energy Security:A Report of the CSIS Global Dialogue Between the EU and the US, January 2009. Available at http：//csis.org/publication/transatlantic-cooperation-sustainable-energy-security
②笔者对阿尔卡拉比(Issam al-Chalabi)的采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2008年11月10日。
③ Francis Fukuyama, State Building:Governance and World Order in the 21st Century, Ithaca, N.Y.:Cornell Univ. Press, 2004, chapter one.
④ John Duffield, NATO's Function after the Cold War, Political Science Quarterly, Vol.109, No.5,1994/1995, pp. 763-787, p.775.
⑤ Johan Jorgen Hoist, The Future of NATO, The Norwegian Atlantic Committee Series, No.154,1993, pp.14-15.
① Charles L. Glaser, Why NATO is Still Best:Future Security Arrangements for Europe, International Security, Vol.18, No.1,1993, pp.5-50, p.19.
② Lawrence S.Kaplan, NATO 1948:the Birth of the Transatlantic Alliance, Rowman& Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2007, p.238.
③[美]罗伯特·阿特：《美国大战略》,郭树勇译,北京：北京大学出版社,2006年版,第4页。
③ (NATO's Persistence after the Cold War) Robert B.McCalla (International Organization), Vol.50, No.3.(Summer, 19%), pp.445-475P455c-38
④ Stem Rynning, NATO Renewed, The Power and Purpose of Transatlantic Cooperation, New York,2005, pp.179-84.
⑤ European Union, A Secure Europe in a Better World:The European Security Strategy,12 December 2003, Available at http://ue.eu.int/uedocs/cmsUpload/78367.pdf; George W. Bush, The National Security Strategy of the United States, Washington:The White House, March 2006. Available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss/2006/
① Zachary Selden, Stabilization and Democratization:Renewing the Transatlantic Alliance, Parameters:US Army War College, Vol.37, No.4,2007, pp.85-98.
② William C. Wohlforth, The Stability ofa Unipolar World, International Security, Vol.24, No.1,1999, pp.5-41. ③ G John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars,
Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.234.
④ G John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press.2001, p.234.
①美国国防大学教授墨斯(Kenneth Moss)认为,当前全球性挑战,需要欧美联盟承担更多的责任。但他同时警告,北约不要成为一个世界警察,反对北约的全球化。笔者对墨斯的采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2009年4月14日。
② Stanley R. Sloan, US Perspectives on NATO's Future, International Affairs, Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944-, Vol.71, No.2,1995, pp.217-231.
③ Joseph S. Nye, US Power and Strategy after Iraq, Foreign Affairs, Vol.82, No.4,2003, pp.60-73.
④ See Daniel S. Hamilton ed., Transatlantic Transformation:equipping NATO for the 21" century, Washington,DC:Center for Transatlantic Relations, Brookings Institution Press,2004.
⑤ David A. Lake, Beyond Anarchy—The Importance of Security Institutions, International Security, Vol.26, No.1,2001, pp.129-160.
⑥ Michael T. Klare, For Oil and Empire? Rethinking War with Iraq, Current History, Vol.102, No.662,2003, p.135.
①[美]M.沃尔兹著,于海青摘译：《存在一个美利坚帝国吗?》,《国外社会科学》,2004年第3期,第44-45页。
②[美]J.B.福斯特著,高静宇摘译：《帝国主义新时代》,《国外社会科学》,2004第3期,第42页。
③刘丰：《联盟、制度与后冷战时代的北约》,《国际论坛》,2005年第2期。
② Mark T. Berger, From Pax Romana to Pax Americana? The history and future of the new American Empire.
①赵怀普：《论冷战后美欧关系的调整》,《世界经济与政治》,2003年第4期。International Politics, Vol.46, No.2/3, pp.140-156.
③ Thomas F. Madden, Empire of Trust:How Rome Built-and America is Building-a New World. New York:Dutton, 2008,pp.5-6.
④ George C. Herring, From Colony to Superpower:US Foreign Relations since 1776, New York:Oxford University Press,2008, p.966.
⑤ Robert Gilpin, U.S. Power and Multinational Corporation:The Political Economy of Foreign Direct Investment, New York:Basic Books,1975, p.85.
⑥门洪华：《霸权之翼：美国国际制度战略》：北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版,第66页。
① Stephen M. Walt, The Case for Finite Containment:Analyzing U.S. Grand Strategy, International Security, Vol.14, No. 1,1989, pp.5-49.
② Christopher Layne, Tragedy in the Balkans, New York Times, June 5,1992, p.15.
③ Stephen Van Evera, Why Europe Matters, Why the Third World Doesn't:American Grand Strategy After the Cold War, Journal of Strategic Studies, Vol.13, No.2,1990, pp.2-12.
④ Fareed Zakaria, The Future of American Power. Foreign Affairs, Vol.87, No.3,2008, pp.18-43.
⑤ David C.Gompert and F.Stephen Larrabee edited, America and Europe:A Partnership for A New Era, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1997, p.3.
⑥ United States Information Agency, The New European Security Architecture, USIA Office of Research and Media Reaction, Washington, D.C., September 1995, pp.7-35.
⑦ Roland Dannreuther and John Peterson, Security Strategy and Transatlantic Relations, Routledge:Taylor& John Francis Group,2006, p.2.
① Gunther Helmann and Reinhand Wolf, Neorealism, Neoliberal Institutionalism, and the Future of NATO, Security Studies, Vol.3, No.l,1993, p.11.
② Kenneth N. Waltz, Structual Realism after the Cold War, International Security, Vol.25, No.1,2000, pp.5-41.
③[美]罗伯特·阿特：《美国大战略》,郭树勇译,北京：北京大学出版社,2006年版,第9页。
③ Barry James, The EU Counterweight to American Influence, International Herald Tribune, June 16,2000, p.4.
④ Robert J. Lieber, Persistent primacy and the future of the American era, International Politics, Vol.46, No.2/3,2009, pp.119-139.
① Nicholas Burns, Expanding the Alliance of Democracies, The Wall Street Journal,29 March 2004.
② William Drozdiak, Even Allies Resent U.S. Dominance, Washington Post,4 November 1997, pp.Al, A13.
③美国因黄金储备剧减而被迫宣布停止黄金和美元的自由兑换,从此,主要国家之间的汇率开始自由浮动,布雷顿体系的主要特点不复存在,这被称为造成的著名的“尼克松震荡”。
③ Michael Mastanduno, Preserving the Unipolar Moment:Realist Theories and U.S. Grand Strategy after the Cold War, International Security, Vol.21, No.4,1997, p.58.
① Glaser, Charles, Why NATO Is Still Best:Future Security Arrangements for Europe, International Security, Vol.18, No.1,1993, pp.5-50, p.21.
② Robert. Art, Why Western Europe Needs the United States and NATO, Political Science Quarterly, Vol.111, No.1,1996, pp.1-39.
③ Waterman Harvey, Zagorcheva Dessie and Reiter, Dan, Correspondence:NATO and Democracy, International Security, Vol.26, No.3,2001, pp.221-235.
④ Celeste A. Wallander, Institutional Assets and Adaptability:NATO after the Cold War, International Organization, Vol. 54, No.4,2000, pp.705-735.
⑤ Josef Joffe, Europe's American Pacifier, Foreign Policy, No.54,1984, pp.64-82, p.68.
⑥ Jan Willem Honing, The'Renationalization'of Western European Defense, Security Studies, Vol.2, No.1,1992, pp.122-139.
① Anand Menon, Anthony Forster, and William Wallace, A Common European Defense?" Survival, Vol.34,1992, pp.98-119.
② Josef Joffe, Europe's American Pacifier, Foreign Policy, No.54,1984, pp.64-82, p.74.
③ Ivan G. Tyulin, The Future of NATO in a Changing Europe, in The Future of European Security, edited by Beverly Crawford, Berkeley:University of California, International and Area Studies,1992, p.51.
④ Jan Perlez, Larger NA TO Seen as Lid on Germany, International Herald Tribune,8 December 1997.
① David Robertson, NATO's Future Role:A European View, Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science, Vol.38, No.1, The New Europe:Revolution in East-West Relations,1991, pp.164-175.
② Gregory F. Treverton, Elements of a New European Security Order, Journal of International Affairs, Vol.45, No.1,1991, p.102.
③ James E. Goodby, Peacekeeping in the New Europe, Washington Quarterly, Vol.15, No.2,1992, pp.154-155.
④ Jenonne Walker, No More Yugoslavia, New York Times, May 20,1992, p.15.
⑤ Stephen J. Flapagan, NATO and Central and Eastern Europe:From Liaison to Security Partnership, Washington Quarterly, Vol.15, No.2,1992, pp.141-151.
①笔者对俄罗斯议会副议长安德烈·克里莫夫(Andrei Klimov)的采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2009年6月16日。
② Roland Dannreuther and John Peterson, Security Strategy and Transatlantic Relations, Routledge:Taylor& John Francis Group,2006, p.55.
③丁原洪：《北约走向何方?》,《和平与发展》,2008年第3期,第33-37页。
④笔者对的捷克共和国外交部政策计划处主任霍宾格尔(Vaclav Hubinger)采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2009年2月16日。
⑤ Volker Heise, European Security and Defense Policy in Transatlantic Relations, in A Hybrid Relationship: Transatlantic Security Cooperation beyond NATO, edited by Peter Schmidt, Peter Lang GmbH, Internationaler Verlag der Wissenschaften, Frankfurt am Main,2008, p.31.
① Karl Lowe and Thomas-Durell Young, Multinational corps in NATO, Survival, Vol.33, No.1,1991, pp.66-77.
②芬兰外长亚历山大·斯塔博(H.E. Mr. Alexander Stubb)的报告：《Strengthening theEU's Global Role》,斯德哥
尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2009年6月9日。
③ Glaser, Charles, Why NATO Is Still Best:Future Security Arrangements for Europe, International Security, Vol.18, No.1,1993, pp.5-50.
④ Celeste A. Wallander, Institutional Assets and Adaptability:NATO after the Cold War, International Organization, Vol.54, No.4,2000, pp.705-735.
⑤ Celeste A. Wallander, Russian Transimperialism and its Implications, in Global Powers in the 21st Century:Strategies and Relations, edited by Alexander T.J. Lennon and Amanda Kozlowski, Cambridge MA:MIT Press,2008, pp.217-235.
⑥ Stephen Sestanovich, What has Moscow Done? Rebuilding U.S.-Russian Relations, Foreign Affairs, Vol.87, No.6,(November/December 2008), pp.12.
⑦ Walter B. Slocombe, Europe, Russia and American Missile Defense, Survival, Vol.50, No.2,19-24.
⑧笔者对德国外交委员的主任拉尔(Alexander Rahr)的采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2009年6月 7日。
① NATO, The Alliance's Strategic Concept Agreed by the Heads of States and Government Participating in the Meeting of the North Atlantic Council. Rome, November 8,1991. http://www. nato.int/docu/basictxt/b911108.htm.
② Waterman Harvey, Zagorcheva Dessie and Reiter, Dan, Correspondence:NATO and Democracy, International Security, Vol.26, No.3,2001, pp.221-235.
③ United States:Department of State. Bureau of European and Canadian Affairs, Report to Congress on the Enlargement of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization:Rationale, Benefits, Costs and Implications, February 24,1997.
④ Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents, Washington, D.C.:Government Printing Office, May 31 and July 7, 1997.
⑤ Clinton's NATO Effort Risky:President's Vision Rests on Historic Rationale, Washington Post, July 8.1997.
⑥ Americans Not Yet Sold On Need For Larger NATO, Washington Post, July 3,1997, p.14.
① Alexander Gheciu, NATO in the "New Europe ":The Politics of International Socialization after the Cold War, Stanford University Press,2005, p.529.
② Gabriel Popescu, Diaspora Geopolitics:Romanian-Americans and NATO Expansion, Routledge&Francis Group,2005, p.475.
③ What Romania wants from NATO and why they might not get it. http://alina_stefanescu.typepad.com/romania_revealed/2009/04/the-latest-on-the-upcoming-moldovan-elections-that-coul d-push-the-communists-from-power.html.
④ NATO General Says Romania"Key Partner," Rompres (in English), July 8,1998.
⑤ Tom Gallagher, Balkan But Different:Romania and Bulgaria's Contrasting Paths to NATO Membership 1994-2002, Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics, Vol.20, No.4,2004, pp.1-19.
⑥ Andrew Cottey, East-Central Europe after the Cold War. Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary in Search of Security, Basingstoke:Macmillan,1995, p.94.
① Jonathan Eyal, NATO's Enlargement:Anatomy of a Decision, International Affairs, Vol.73, No.4,1997, pp.711-712.
② Vaclav Havel, A Call for Sacrifice:The Co-Responsibility of the West, Foreign Affairs, Vol.74, No.4,1994, pp.2-6.
③ Lawrence S.Kaplan, NATO 1948:the Birth of the Transatlantic Alliance, Rowman& Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2007, p.239.
④ Robert. Art, Why Western Europe Needs the United States and NATO, Political Science Quarterly, Vol.111, No.1,1996, pp.1-39.
⑤[美]罗伯特·阿特：《美国大战略》,郭树勇译,北京：北京大学出版社,2006年6月,p.179.
⑤ Frank Schimmelfennig, The EU, NATO, and the Integration of Europe:Rules and Rhetoric, Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2003, p.39.
①挪威外交部次长海尔基辛认为,现在全球应该向欧美间的制度化学习,吸收和学习民主规范,利用和平方式解决冲突。其中,对于当今的发展中国家,其成长是一个学习和吸收“良性”政治体系和政治规范的过程。笔者对海尔基辛的采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2008年12月12日。
② Radu Bogdan, Romanian Reflections, NATO Review, Vol.48, No.2,2000, pp.23-25.
③ Ian Clark, Another "Double Movement":The Great Transformation after the Cold War? Review of International Studies, Vol.27, No.5,2001, pp.237-255.
①有人的学者曾经支持,冷战的结束、欧美共同敌人的消失,使得欧美利益的界定模糊不清。但是二者对民主自由规范的认知为欧美联盟的维持和发展提供底线。参见[美]彼得·卡赞斯坦,《国家安全的文化：世界政治中的规范与认同》,宋伟,刘铁娃译,北京：北京大学出版社,2009年版,前言,第63页。
② David C.Gompert and F.Stephen Larrabee edited, America and Europe:A Partnership for A New Era, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1997, p.14.
③ Gunther Hellmann and Reinhard Wolf, Neorealism, Neoliberal Institutionalism, and Future of NATO, Security Studies, Vol.3,No.1,1993, p.17.
④ Stephen M.Walt, Why Alliance Endure or Collapse, Survival, Vol.39, No.1,1997, p.173.
① Thomas Bernauer, Full Membership or Full Club? Expansion of NATO and the Future Security Organization of Europe, in Towards a New Europe. Stops and Starts in Regional Integration, edited by Gerald Schneider, Patricia A. Weitsman, and Thomas Bernauer, Wesrport, Conn.:Prager,1995, pp.186-187.
② Stanley R. Sloan, US Perspectives on NATO's Future, International Affairs, Royal Institute of International Affairs
1944-, Vol.71, No.2,1995, p.221.
③ Secretary of State Madeline K. Albright, Statement on NATO Enlargement before the Senate Foreign Relation Committee,24 February 1998, as released by the Office of the Spokesman, U.S. Department of State, p.3.
④ Strobe Talbott, Why NATO Should Grow, New York Review Books, Vol.42, No.13,1995, p.27.
① Mary N.Hampton, NATO at the Creation:U.S. Foreign Policy, West Germany and the Wilsonian Impulse, Security Studies, Vol.4, No.3,1995, pp.610-56.
②王军：《朋友还是对手——冷战后的欧美关系解读》,北京：人民出版社,2006年版,第79页。
② Robert B. McCalla, NATO's Persistence after the Cold War, International Organization, Vol.50, No.3,1996, pp.445-475, p.462.
③ Alexander Wendt, Collective Identity Formation and the International State, American Political Science Review, Vol.88, No.2,1994, pp.384-385.
④ Alexander Gheciu, NATO in the "New Europe":The Politics of International Socialization after the Cold War, Stanford:Stanford University Press,2005, p,232.
⑤ Frank Schimmelfennig, The EU, NATO, and the Integration of Europe:Rules and Rhetoric, Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2003, p.39.
① Philip H. Gordon, Bridging the Atlantic Divide, Foreign Affairs, January/February 2003, p.4.
② John Van Oudenaren, From Atlantic Community to Atlantic Partnership and Beyond:American Conceptions of the Transatlantic Relationship since 1945, in A Hybrid Relationship:Transatlantic Security Cooperation beyond NATO, edited by Peter Schmidt, Peter Lang GmbH, Internationaler Verlag der Wissenschaften, Frankfurt am Main,2008, pp.43-66.
③[美]理查德·尼克松著：《透视新世界》,刘庸安等译,北京：中国言实出版社,2000年版,第105页。
① "Financial and Economic Data Relating to NATO Defense," NATO Press Release M-DPC-2(01)156,18 December 2001.
② Johanna Granville, The Many Paradoxes of NATO Enlargement, Current History, Vol.98, No.627,1999, pp.165-170.
③ Andrew Cottey, East-Central Europe after the Cold War. Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary in Search of Security, Basingstoke:Macmillan,1995, p.37.
④ "NATO and the U.S. Commitment to Europe," address given by President George H. W. Bush at the Oklahoma State University Commencement, Stillwater, Oklahoma, May 4,1990. Cited in Honing, Jan Willem. "NATO:An Institution under Threat?" Occasional Paper, no.22. New York:Institute for East-West Security Studies,1991, p.5.
① James M. Goldgeier, Not Whether but When:The U.S. Decision to Enlarge NATO, Washington, D.C.:Brookings Institution,1999, p.23.
② Lawrence S.Kaplan, NATO 1948:the Birth of the Transatlantic Alliance, Rowman& Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2007, p.204.
③ Frank Schimmelfennig, NATO Enlargement a Constructivist Explanation, Security Studies,Vol.8, No.2/3, 1998/1999-Spring 1999, pp.198-234.
④ Strobe Talbott, Why NATO Should Grow, New York Review Books, Vol.42, No.13,1995, pp.217-30.
⑤ Vaclav Havel, A Call for Sacrifice:The Co-Responsibility of the West, Foreign Affairs, Vol.74, No.4,1994, pp.2-6.
① Adrian G. V Hyde-Price, Democratization in Eastern Europe. The External Dimension, in Democratization in Eastern Europe:Domestic and International Perspectives, edited by Geoffrey Pridham and Tatu Vanhanen, London:Routledge, 1994, pp.220-52.
② Brian Knowlton, Top General Defends U.S. Choices for NATO, International Herald Tribune,17 June 1997, p.2.
③ William Drozdiak, Europeans Protest Clinton's Limit on Widening NATO, International Herald Tribune,12 June 1997 p.1 and p.11.
④ Javier Solana, Preparing for the Madrid Summit, NATO Review, Vol.45, No.2,1997 pp.3-6. Available at http://www.nato.int/docu/review
⑤ Frank. Schimmelfennig, The EU, NATO, and the Integration of Europe:Rules and Rhetoric. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2003, p.153.
⑥ Speech at the North Atlantic Council Ministerial Meeting in Sintra,29 May 1997. Available at http:// www.nato.int/usa/special/970529-a.htm
①转引自童世骏：《老欧洲新欧洲——“9.11”以来欧洲复兴思潮对英美单边主义的批判》,上海：华东师范大学出版社,2004年版,第69页。
② International Institute for Strategies Studies, Transatlantic Relations:Persistent predicaments, Strategic Comments, Vol.11, No.7, September,2005.Available at http://www.iiss.org/newsite/showsubpdfsarchive.php?scID=239&type=iiss.pdf(accessed 4 January 2006
① Joseph S. Nye, US Power and Strategy after Iraq, Foreign Affairs, Vol.82, No.4,2003, pp.60-73.
②参见[美]约瑟夫·奈：《美国霸权的困惑：为什么美国不能独断专行》,何治国等译,北京：世界知识出版社,2002年版,第165页。
② William J.Perry, The Enduring Dynamic Relationship That Is NATO, Defense Viewpoint, Vol.10, No.9,1995. Available at http://www.defenselink.mil/speeches/1995/s19950205-perry.html.
③ See Tom Gallagher, Balkan But Different:Romania and Bulgaria's Contrasting Paths to NATO Membership 1994-2002, Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics, Vol.20, No.4,2004, pp.1-19.
① Rachel A. Epstein, NATO Enlargement and the Spread of Democracy:Evidence and Expectations, Security Studies, Vol.14, No.1,2005, pp.63-105.
② Dan Reiter and Allan C. Stam Ⅲ, Democracy, War Initiation, and Victory, American Political Science Review, Vol.92, No.2,1998, pp.377-389.
③ Alexander Gheciu, NATO in the "New Europe":the Politics of International Socialization after the Cold War, Stanford University Press,2005, pp.80-82.
④ Johnston, Alastair Iain, Treating International Institutes as Social Environments, International Studies Quarterly, Vol.45, No.4,2001, pp.487-515.
① Jeffrey T. Checkel, Why Comply? Social Learning and European Identity Change, International Organization, Vol.55, No3,2001,pp.553-588.
② Johnston, Alastair Iain, Treating International Institutes as Social Environments, International Studies Quarterly, Vol.45, No.4,2001, pp.487-515, p.498.
① Teodor Melescanu, Security in Central Europe:A Positive-Sum Game, NATO Review, Vol.41, No.5,1993, pp.12-18.
②同注释②.
③ Ceslovas V. Stankevicius, NATO Enlargement and the Indivisibility of Security in Europe:A View from Lithuania, NATO Review, Vol.44, No.5,1996, pp.21-25.
④Clay Clemens ed., NATOandthe Quest for Post-Cold War Security, Basingstoke:Macmillan,1997, p,112.
⑤Jonathan Eyal, NATO's Enlargement:Anatomy of a Decision, International Affairs, Vol.73, No.4,1997, pp.695-719.
① Waterman Harvey, Zagorcheva Dessie and Reiter, Dan, Correspondence:NATO and Democracy, International Security, Vol.26, No.3,2001, pp.221-235.
② James M Golddeier, Not Whether but when. The US Decision to Enlarge NATO, Washington, DC:Brooking Institution Press,1999, p.20.
③ Gale A Mattox, NATO:Past and Future, in NATO Expansion (Miller Center Series on A New World Order, edited by, Kenneth W. Thompson, Lanham, MD:University Press of America,1998, p.27.
④Douglas Brinkley, Democratic Enlargement:The Clinton Doctrine, Foreign Policy, Vol.106,1997, pp.113-114.
① Ruhe, Volker, Shaping Euro-Atlantic Policies:A Grand Strategy for a New Era, Survival, Vol.35, No.2,1993, pp.133-134.
② Remarks by the President to the House of Parliament," 29 November 1995. Available at http://www.pub. whitehouse.gov/publications.
③ "Top Ten Question on NATO Enlargement", Fact Sheet Released by the NATO Enlargement Ratification Office, US Department of State, February 19,1998. Available at http://www.state.gov/www/regions/eur/fs_980219_natoqanda.html
④ Pavel NECAS:Beyond Tradition:A New Strategic Concept for NATO? Available at http://www.ndc.nato.int/download/publications/necas.pdf
⑤ Asmus, Ronald D. and Larrabee, F. Stephen, NATO and the Have-Nots:Reassurance after Enlargement, Foreign Affairs, Vol.75,1996, pp.13-20.
① See Frank. Schimmelfennig, The EU, NATO, and the Integration of Europe:Rules and Rhetoric. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2003, pp.177-187.
②笔者对的福特汉姆大学(Fordham University)选举政治和民主研究中心(Center for Electoral Politics and Democracy)考斯塔斯·潘那古普鲁斯博士的采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2009年1月18日。
① Ruhe, Volker, Shaping Euro-Atlantic Policies:A Grand Strategy for a New Era, Survival, Vol.35, No.2,1993, pp.133-134.
①[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第115-123页。
② Goldstein Judith and Robert O. Keohane, eds., Ideas and Foreign Policy:Beliefs, Institutions and Political Change, Ithaca, N.Y.:Cornell University Press,1993, p.27.
② Levy, Jack, Learning and Foreign Policy:Sweeping A Conceptual Minefield, International Organization, Vol.48, No.2, 1994, pp.279-312.
③ Ian Hurd, Legitimacy and Authority in International Politics, International Organization, Vol.53, No.2,1999, pp.379-408.
④ Haas,Ernst B, Words Can Hurt You or Who Said What to Whom About Regimes, in International Regimes, edited by Stephen D.Krasner, Ithca, N.Y.Lcornell University Press,1983, pp.23-59.
①参见[美]玛莎·费丽莫,《国家社会中的国家利益》,袁正清译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2001年版,第44-58页。
② G John Ikenberry and Charles Kupchan, Socialization and Hegemonic Power. International Organization, Vol.44, No.3, 1990,pp.283-315,p.292.
③[美]亚历山大·温特,《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第141页。
④ David M. Kreps, Corporate Culture and Economic Theory, in Perspectives on Positive Political Economy,edited by James E.Alt and Shepsle,pp.90-143.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1990, pp.125-127.
①参见何俊志等编译《新制度主义政治学译文精选》,天津：天津人民出版社,2007年4月,第170页。
②Washington Post,July 12,1997,A1.
① Jennifer Milliken, The Study of Discourse in International Relations:A Critique of Research and Methods, European Journal of International Relations, Vol.5, No.2,1999, pp.225-254.
② Kennedy, Robert.1998. Educating Leaders for the 21st Century:A Snapshot of the Marshall Center for Security Studies. NATO Review 46 (4). Available at:(http://www.nato.int/docu/review/1998/9804-08.htm).
③ See http://www.PfPconsortium.org
①在瑞典国防学院研修期间,笔者曾有幸参与其举办的各类培训班。这个学院就是PSP的成员之一,每年为北约成员国的军事领导人举行各种培训班,例如“欧洲安全培训班”,“危机处理培训班”等等。
② Teodor Melescanu, Minister of Defense of Romania, Confronting New Security Challenges, NATO'S NATIONS AND PARTNERS FOR PEACE, No.4,2002, pp.96-101.
③Jeffrey T. Checkel, "Going Native " in Europe? Theorizing Social Interaction in European Institutions, Comparative Political Studies, Vol.36,2003, pp.209-231.
④ Williams, Michael C., and Iver Neumann. From Alliance to Security Community:NATO, Russia, and the Power of Security. Millennium, Vol.29, No.2,2000, pp.37-87.
① Farrell, Theo. Constructivist Security Studies:Portrait of a Research Program, International Studies Review, Vol.4, No.1,2002,pp.70-71.
② Chris Donnelly, Security in the 21st Century:New Challenges and New Response, http://www.nato.int/docu/speech/ 2003/so30605a.htm.
①刘军：《理性主义国际关系理论的困境与建构主义的挑战——以冷战后的北约东扩为例》,《国际观察》,2007年第2期。
① Alexander Gheciu, NATO in the "New Europe":the Politics of International Socialization after the Cold War, Stanford University Press,2005, p.232.
②David C.Gompert and F.Stephen Larrabee edited, America and Europe:A Partnership for A New Era, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1997, p.83.
① Thomas M Franck. The Power of Legitimacy among Nations, Oxford:Oxford University Press,1990, p.49.
② Johnston, Alastair Iain, Treating International Institutes as Social Environments, International Studies Quarterly, Vol.45, No.4,2001, pp.487-515, p.511.
① Alexandra Checkel, Security Institutions as Agents of Socialization? NATO and the "New Europe ", International Organization, Vol.59, No.4,2005, pp.973-1012.
① Robert B.McCalla, NATO's Persistence after the Cold War, International Organization, Vol.50, No.3,1996, pp.445-475, p.464.
① Roland Dannreuther and John Peterson, Security Strategy and Transatlantic Relations, Routledge:Taylor& John Francis Group,2006, p15 and p.47.
②18世纪的英国首相帕尔姆斯顿Lord Palmerston曾说过,我们没有永远的盟友,也没有永恒的朋友,只有永恒的利益。We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual.
① James Thomson, US Interests and the Fate of the Alliance, Survival, Vol.45, No.4, Winter 2003-2004, pp.207-220.
② David P.Calleo, The EU and US Geopolitical interests are no longer the same", Europe'World, Summer 2008.
① David Holley, War with Iraq:International Opinion, Los Angeles Times,13 April 2003, p.11.
② "We're not Children!", The Economist (US edition),17 May 2003, pp.44-45.
①童世骏：《老欧洲新欧洲——“9.11”以来欧洲复兴思潮对英美单边主义的批判》,上海：华东师范大学出版社,2004年版,第66-69页。
② Robert Kagan, Paradise and Power:America and Europe in the New World Order, London:Atlantic Books,2003, pp.1-2.
③赵怀普：《论冷战后美欧关系的调整》,《世界经济与政治》,2003年第4期。
④Roland Dannreuther and John Peterson, Security Strategy and Transatlantic Relations, Routledge:Taylor& John Francis Group,2006, p.182.
①王军：《朋友还是对手——冷战后的欧美关系解读》,人民出版社,2006年版,第70页。
② Thomas Risse-Kappen, Cooperation among Democracies——the European Influence on U.S. Foreign Policy, Princeton, New Jersey:Princeton Press,1995, p.3.
① Robert Cooper, Security Strategy:is Europe from Venus, America from Mars? the First Annual John Erickson Memorial Lecture, Old College, University of Edinburgh, v25 February2005, p1 82.
② Lawrence S.Kaplan, NATO 1948:the Birth of the Transatlantic Alliance, Rowman& Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2007,p.241.
③ The Baltimore Sun. November 10.2002.
④ James M.Goldgeier and Michael McFaul, A Tale of Two Worlds:Core and Periphery in the Post-Cold War Era, International Organization, Vol.46, No.3,1992, pp.467-91; Charles Kupchan and Clifford Kupchan, Concerts.Collective Security and the Future of Europe, International Security Vol.16, No.1,1991, pp.114-61; Steven Van Evera, Primed for Peace:Europe after the Cold War, International Security, Vol.15, No.3, Winter 1990-1991, pp.7-57.
①王逸舟：《探寻全球主义国际关系》,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版,第9页。
② Roland Dannreuther and John Peterson, Security Strategy and Transatlantic Relations, Routledge:Taylor& John Francis Group,2006, p.186.
① James P.Rubin, Building a New Atlantic Alliance:Restoring America's Partnership With Europe, Foreign Afferis,July/August 2008, pp.99-110.
②在选举过程中,欧洲后裔在美国选举中具有一定的影响,尤其是中东欧国家的后裔,对奥巴马高度支持,而后者保证在未来给予中东欧国家更多援助。笔者对罗格斯大学(Rutgers University)贝克博士(Ross K. Baker)的采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2008年10月28日。
③芬兰外长亚历山大·斯塔博(H.E. Mr. Alexander Stubb)的报告,《Strengthening the EU's Global Role》,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2009年6月9日。
①笔者对歌德堡大学学者帕默(Brian Palmer)的采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2008年10月28日。
② Simon Serfaty, ed., A Recast Partnership? Institutional Dimensions of Transatlantic Relations, Washington, DC:CSIS, 2008.
① David C.Gompert and F.Stephen Larrabee edited, America and Europe:A Partnership for A New Era, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1997, pp.226-228
② David C.Gompert and F.Stephen Larrabee edited, America and Europe:A Partners hip for A New Era, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1997, p.3.
③ Daniel Hamilton, American Perspectives on the European Security and Defense Policy, Danish Yearbook of International Affairs, Copenhagen:Danish Institute for International Studies,2004, available at http:/transatlantic.sais-jhu.edu/PDF/articles/DH%20Article%20from%20Dannish%20Institute.pdf.
④ Esther Brimmer, ed., The EU's Search for a Strategic Role:ESDP and its Implications for Transatlantic Relations, Washington, DC:Center for Transatlantic Relations,2002, available at http：//transatlantic.sais-jhu.edu/PDF/publications/esdp_book.pdf;
⑤ Frank Kupferschmidt, "EU and NATO as'Strategic Partners':The Balkans Experience", pp.127-146.P128b
① Atlantic council of the United States, The Indispensable Partnership:Launching a New NATO-EU Relationship at Riga, the Transatlantic Relations Program, November,2006, p.9.
② Daniel Hamilton, Charles Barry, Hans Binnendijk, Stephen Flanagan, Julianne Smith, James Townsend, The Washington NATO Project:Alliance Reborn:An Atlantic Compact for the 21st Century, February 2009, p.18.
③ Ronald D. Asmus, Richard L. Kugler, and F. Stephen Larrabee, Building a New NATO, Foreign Affairs, Vo.72, No.4, 1993,pp.28-40.
④ David C.Gompert and F.Stephen Larrabee edited, America and Europe:A Partnership for A New Era, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1997, p.231.
① Stuart Croft, Jolyon Howorth, Terry Terriff and Mark Webber, NATO's triple challenge, International Affairs, Vol.76, No.3,2000, pp.495-518.
② Thomas Risse-Kappen, Cooperation among Democracies——the European Influence on U.S. Foreign Policy, Princeton, New Jersey:Princeton Press,1995, p.195.
③笔者对丹麦皇家防务学院研究员彼特(Peter Dahl Thruelsen)的采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2009年2月16日。
③ Richard L. Kugler and Hans Binnendijk, Toward a New Transatlantic Compact, Washington, DC:Center for Technology and National Security Policy, National Defense University, August 2008.
⑤门洪华：《霸权之翼：国际制度的战略价值》,《开放导报》,2005年10月第5期。
① Daniel S. Hamilton, NATO Summit I:In area, or in trouble, International Herald Tribune, November 26,2006. Available at http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/11/26/opinion/edhamil.php
② Ivo Daalder and James Goldgeier, Global NATO, Foreign Affairs, Vol.85, No.5,2006, p.106.
③ Brinkley, Democratic Enlargement, Michael Cox, U.S. Foreign Policy after the Cold War:Superpower without a Mission?, London:Royal Institute of International Affairs,1995, p.121.
④ Secretary of State Madeline K.Albright, Statement on NATO Enlargement before the Senate Foreign Relation Committee,24 February 1998, as released by the Office of the Spokesman, U.S. Department of State, p.6.
⑤王逸舟：《西方国际政治学：历史与理论》,上海：上海人民出版社,2006年版,第223页。
⑥秦亚青主编：《理性与国际合作：自由主义国际关系理论研究》,北京：世界知识出版社,2008年版,第81页。
① Rafael L.Bardaji, NATO:An Alliance for Freedom, Madrid:FAES.2005.
② David C.Gompert and F.Stephen Larrabee edited, America and Europe:A Partnership for A New Era, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1997, p.252.
③ Lawrence S.Kaplan, NATO 1948:the Birth of the Transatlantic Alliance. Rowman& Littlefield Publishers,Inc.,2007 p242
④秦亚青主编：《理性与国际合作：自由主义国际关系理论研究》,北京：世界知识出版社,2008年版,第203页。
①[美]彼德·卡赞斯坦著：《文化规范与国家安全—战后日本警察与自卫队》,李小华译,北京：新华出版社,2002年版,中文版序言。
②[美]彼得·卡赞斯坦主编,《国家安全的文化：世界政治中的规范与认同》,宋伟,刘铁娃译,北京：北京大学出版社,2009年版,第2页。
③ Keith R.Krause edited, Culture and Security, Multilateralism:Arms Control and Security Building, Frank Cass Pulishers,1999, pp.12-17.
④托马斯·里斯：《民主共同体的集体认同：以北约为例》,载于[美]彼得·卡赞斯坦主编,《国家安全的文化：世界政治中的规范与认同》,宋伟,刘铁娃译,北京：北京大学出版社,2009年版,第336-377页。
① Jack Levy, The Causes of War:A Review of Theories and Evidence, in Behavior, Society, and Nuclear War, vol.1, edited by Philip Tetlock et al., New York:Oxford:Oxford University Press,1989, p.270.
②笔者对北约驻瑞典大使丹尼尔森(Veronika Ward Danielsson)的采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2009年2月15。
③ 2008 report of the U.S. National Intelligence Council, Global Trends 2025:A Transformed World. Available at http://www.dni.gov/nic/PDF_2025/2025_Global_Trends_Final_Report.pdf;
① Mckingley is quoted in David Fromkin, In the Time of the Americans:The Generation That Changed America's Role in the World, New York:Knopf,1995, p.23.
② Warren F. Kimball, The Juggler:Franklin Roosevelt as Wartime Statesman, Princeton, N.J.:Princeton University Press, 1991, p.96.
③[美]沃·惠·罗斯托著,《从第七层楼上展望世界》,国际关系学院“五七”翻译组译,北京：商务印书馆,1973年版,
第61页。
③ William Schneider, The New Isolationism, in Eagle Adrift:American Foreign Policy at the End of the Century, edited by Robert J. Lieber, New York:Longman,1997, pp.27-28.
① "U.S. Public Support for U.N. Unexpectedly Grows, New Poll Shows," United Nations Association of the United States of America, December 7,1995.
② James M.Goldgeier and Michael McFaul, A Tale of Two Worlds:Core and Periphery in the Post-Cold War Era, International Organization, Vol.46, No.3,1992, pp.467-491.
① G. John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.258.
① See Craig R. Whitney, NATO at 50:With Nations at Odds, Is It A Misalliance? New York Times,15 February 1999, p.A7.
② Robert B, Zoellick, The United States, in 21th Century Strategies of the Trilateral Countries:In Concert or Conflict?, edited by Zoellick, Peter D. Sutherland, and Hisashi Owada, New York:Trilateral Commission,1999, p.5
③ Flora Lewis, Uncomfortable with U.S. Power, Real or Illusory, International Herald Tribune,14 May 1999, p.5.
④ See Craig R. Whitney, NATO at 50:With Nations at Odds, Is It A Misalliance?, New York Times,15 February 1999, p.A7.
① Adam Przeworski, Democracy as a Contigent Outcome of Conflict, in Constitutionalism and Democracy, edited by Jon Elster and Rune Slagstad, New York:Cambridge University Press,1988, P267.
② G John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.268.
① Transatlantic Transformation:Building a NATO-EU Security Architecture, Washington, DC:Atlantic Council of the U.S., March 2006, available at http://www.acus.org/docs/0603-Transatlantic_Transformation.pdf;
② Marten H.A. van Heuven, THE ATLANTIC COUNCIL OF THE UNITED STATES:NATO IN 2010, OCCASIONAL PAPER. July,1999.
③ Alvaro de Vasconcelos and Marcin Zaborowski, The EU and the world in 2009:European perspectives on the new American foreign policy agenda, Paris:EU ISS Report No.4, January 2009.
④ Teodor Melescanu, Minister of Defence of Romania, Confronting New Security Challenges, NATO'S NATIONS AND PARTNERS FOR PEACE, No.4,2002, pp.96-101.
⑤ We will engage. We will listen. We will consult. America needs the world, just as I believe the world needs America.
⑥ See http://www.securityconference.de/konferenzen/2009/index.php?menu_2009==&menu_konferenzen=&
⑦丹尼尔森的报告：《阿富汗重建——一个加拿大的视角》,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2009年2月25日。
⑧ Steven McGuire and Michael Smith, The European Union and the United States:competition and convergence in the global arena, Palgravc Macmillan,2008, p.6.
① http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%AE%AA%E6%94%BF%E4%B8%BB%E4%B9%89
② Christian Reus-Smit, The Constitutional Structure of International Society and the Nature of Fundamental Institutions, International Organization, Vol.51, No.4,1997, p.560.
③ Jon Elster, Claus Offe, and Ulrich K.Preuss, Institutional Design in Post-Communist Societies:Rebuilding the Ship at Sea, New York:Cambridge University Press,1998, p.63.
① Giovanni Satori, Comparative Constitutional Engineering:An Inquiry into Structure, Incentives and Outcomes, London:Macmillan,1994, p.198.
② Stephen D.Krasner, Compromising Westphalia, International Security, Vol.20, No.3, Winter 1995/96, p.117.
③ Stephen Holmes, Passions and Constraint:On the Theory of Liberal Democracy, Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1995, pp.152-177.
④ Daniel Hamilton, Charles Barry, Hans Binnendijk, Stephen Flanagan, Julianne Smith, James Townsend, The Washington NATO Project:Alliance Reborn:An Atlantic Compact for the 21st Century, February 2009, p.10.
① G John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.48.
②参见[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2008年版,第297页。
③ Stephen D. Krasner, Global Communication and National Power:Life on the Pareto Frontier, World Politics, Vol.43, No.3,1991, pp.336-366
④ Oran Young, Political Leadership and Regime Formation:On the Development of Institutions in International Society, International Organization, Vol.45, No.3,1991, p.282.
⑤ G. John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001, p.58.
① John Gerard Ruggie, "Multilateralism:The Anatomy of an Institution," in Multilateralism Matters:the Theory and Praxis of an Institutional Form, edited by Ruggie, New York:Columbia University Press,1993, pp.3-50.
②美国的自由多边主义有很深的历史,例如早期的“门户开放”政策,一战后的“十四点原则”等。这个原则在二战 后初期,仍受到英法两国的抵制。英法两国对殖民帝国念念不忘,都希望重新回到战争之前的国际形势,重新恢复对殖民地的统治。对此,美国最初使用了“权力”手段来推行自由多边主义。例如,1945-1946年,美国利用经济手段迫使英国放弃贸易歧视原则,并解散帝国特惠制度。美国手中的美元是最好的讨价还价的武器。马歇尔计划也是推行美国信仰规范的大好时机。正如马歇尔本人所言,美国不仅打算重建欧洲经济,而且要重新塑造欧洲的政治行为原则。推动欧洲国家放弃殖民主义政策,采取自由多边主义的行为方式。随着马歇尔计划的实施,欧洲经济的恢复,美国自由多边主义的规范也渐渐在欧洲流行。参考：David Watt, Perception of the United States in Europe,1945-1983, in The Troubled Alliance:Atlantic Relations in the 1980s, edited by Lawarence Freedman, New York: St. Martin's Press,1983, pp.29-30.
① Maria-Gabriela Manea, How and Why Interaction Matters ASEAN"s Regional Identity and Human Rights, Cooperation and Conflict:Journal of the Nordic Interactional Studies Association, Vol.44, No,1, March 2009, pp.27-49.
① Cameron G Thies, Progress, History and Identity in IR Theory:The Case of the Idealist-Realist Debate, European Journal of International Relations, Vol.8, No.4,2002, pp.147-185.
② T.V.Paul and Johan A.Hall, International Order and the Future of World Politics, Cambridge University Press,1999, p.2.
③ Oran Young, Political Leadership and Regime Formation:On the Development of Institutions in International Society, International Organization, Vol.45, No.3,1991, p.131.
④ Slaughter, Anne-Marie, International Law in a Word of Liberal States, European Journal of International Law, Vol.6, No.1,1995, pp.530-538.
① Ole Jacob Sending, Constitution, Choice and Change:Problems with the " Logic of Appropriateness" and its Use in Constructivist Theory, European Journal of International Relations, Vol.8, No.4,2002, pp.443-470.
② Maja Zehfuss, Constructivism in International Relations:The Politics of Reality, Cambridge University Press,2002, p.77.
③[加]阿米塔·阿查亚：《建构安全共同体：东盟与地区秩序》,王正毅冯怀新译,上海：上海人民出版社,2004年版,第37页。
③ Hemmer, Christopher, Katzenstein, Peter J, Why is There No NATO in Asia? Collective Identity, Regionalism, and the Origins of Multilateralism, International Organization, Vol.56, No.3,2002, pp.575-607.
① Karl Deutsch, The Analysis of International Relations,3rd edition by Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice Hall,1988, pp.271-272.
①张铭洪： 《简单路径依赖模型及其经济学含义分析》,《厦门大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》,2002年第5期,第55-61页。
②有的学者将制度的持续性回报成为制度路径依赖(path dependence)或典型形式,但这些术语都强调制度维持的积淀。参见何俊志等编译《新制度主义政治学译文精选》,天津：天津人民出版社,2007年4月,第191页。
③秦亚青主编：《理性与国际合作：自由主义国际关系理论研究》,北京：世界知识出版社,2008年版,第224页。
①[美]道格拉斯·c·诺思：《制度、制度变迁与经济绩效》,上海：上海三联书店,1994年版,第107页。
①[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版,第75页。
②[美]贝思·西蒙斯主编：《国际制度》,黄仁伟等译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版,第503页。
③[美]道格拉斯·c·诺思：《制度、制度变迁与经济绩效》,上海：上海三联书店,1994年版,第115页。
④何俊志等编译《新制度主义政治学译文精选》,天津：天津人民出版社,2007年4月,第247页。
⑤ Cheryl Shanks, Harodl K.Jacobson, and Jeffrey H.Kaplan, Inertia and Change in the Constellation of International Governmental Organization,1981-1992, International Organization, Vol.50, No.4, Autumn 1996, pp.593-628.
①[美]玛莎·费丽莫,《国家社会中的国家利益》,袁正清译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2001年版,第3页。
②门洪华：《霸权之翼：美国国际制度战略》,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版,第51页。
③Paul Pierson,When Effect Becomes Cause :Policy Feedback and Political Change,World Politics,Vol,45,No.4,1993, pp.595-628.
① G John Ikenberry, Institutions, Strategic Restraint, and the Persistence of American Postwar Order, International Security, Vol.23, No.3, Winter 1998/1999, pp.43-78.
② Maria-Gabriela Manea, How and Why Interaction Matters ASEAN's Regional Identity and Human Rights, Cooperation and Conflict:Journal of the Nordic Interactional Studies Association, Vol.44, No.1,2009. pp.27-49.
③ T T. V.Paul and Johan A.Hall, International Order and the Future of World Politics, Cambridge University Press,1999, p.2.
① Kratochwil, F. V., and J. G. Ruggie, International Organization:A State of the Art on an Art of the State, International Organization Vol.40, No.4,1986, pp.753-775.
②[美]道格拉斯·c·诺思：《制度、制度变迁与经济绩效》,上海：上海三联书店,1994年版,第117页。
① John J. Mearsheimer, The False Promise of International Institutions, International Security, Vol.19, No.3. Winter, 1994-1995, pp.5-49.
② John Duffield, NATO's Function after the Cold War, Political Science Quarterly, Vol.109, No.5,1994/1995, pp. 763-787.
③ John Gerard Ruggie, Multilateralism:The Anatomy of an Institution, in Multilateralism Matters:the Theory and Praxis of an Institutional Form, edited by Ruggie, New York:Columbia University Press,1993, pp.32-33.
① Celeste A. Wallander, Institutional Assets and Adaptability:NATO after the Cold War, International Organization, Vol.54, No.4,2000, pp.705-735.
① Acheson, Dean, Statement on the North Atlantic Treaty, Department of State Bulletin 20 (508),1949, p.385. From Hemmer, Christopher, Katzenstein, Peter J, Why is There No NATO in Asia? Collective Identity, Regionalism, and the Origins of Multilateralism, International Organization, Vol.56, No.3,2002, pp.575-607.
②建构主义国际关系理论的介入为分析北约扩大问题研究提供了新的思路与研究视角。许多国际政治学者运用建构主义的理论与方法论来分析北约及其扩大,并取得丰富的成果。参见Alexander Gheciu, NATO in the "New Europe ":The Politics of International Socialization after the Cold War, Stanford University Press,2005, p.529.
① G. John Ikenberry, Institutions. Strategic Restraint, and the Persistence of American Postwar Order, International Security, Vol.23, No.3(Winter 1998/1999), pp.43-78
②笔者对北瑞典援助阿富汗委员会(Swedish Committee for Afghanistan)委员会阿登伯格(Jenny Anderberg)的采访,斯德哥尔摩：瑞典国际事务研究所,2009年2月15日。
①[美]彼得·卡赞斯坦,《国家安全的文化：世界政治中的规范与认同》,宋伟,刘铁娃译,北京：北京大学出版社,2009年版,前言,第28页和第35页。
① John Van Oudenaren, From Atlantic Community to Atlantic Partnership and Beyond:American Conceptions of the Transatlantic Relationship since 1945, in A Hybrid Relationship:Transatlantic Security Cooperation beyond NATO, edited by Peter Schmidt, Peter Lang GmbH, Internationaler Verlag der Wissenschaften, Frankfurt am Main,2008, p.66.
郭树勇：《大国成长的逻辑：西方大国崛起的国际政治社会学分析》,北京：北京大学出版社,2006年版。何俊志等编译：《新制度主义政治学译文精选》,天津：天津人民出版社,2007年版。李小军： 《导弹扩散及其控制制度》,复旦大学2006年博士论文。卢敏：《全球化进程中的相互认可机制研究》,厦门大学2007年博士论文。门洪华：《霸权之翼：美国国际制度战略》,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版。倪世雄：《当代西方国际关系理论》,复旦大学出版社,2005年版。戚洪国： 《国际合作的制度取向》,吉林大学2007年博士论文。秦亚青：《权力、制度、文化：国际关系理论与方法研究文集》,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版。秦亚青主编：《理性与国际合作：自由主义国际关系理论研究》,北京：世界知识出版社2008年版。田野：《国际关系中的制度选择：一种交易成本的视角》,上海：上海人民出版社,2006年版。肖元恺：《世界的防线：欧洲安全与国际政治》,北京：新华出版社,2000年版。王杰主编：《国际机制论》,北京：新华出版社,2002年版。王美权：《为了谁的安全：北约军事战略大透视》,北京：新华出版社,2000年版。王逸舟：《探寻全球主义国际关系》,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版。
薛晓源,陈家刚等编译：《全球化与新制度主义》,北京：社会科学文献出版社,2004年版。
叶江等编：《解读美欧——欧洲一体化进程中的美欧关系》,上海：上海三联出版社,1999年版。
俞新天：《强大的无形力量——文化对当代国际关系的作用》,上海：上海人民出版社。
赵乾坤： 《大国权力与地区规范》,外交学院,2006年博士论文。
周宏主编：《欧洲发展报告Vol.8(2003～2004)：欧洲模式与欧美关系》,中国社会科学出版社,2004年。
[澳]克雷格.A.斯奈德等著：《当代安全与战略》,徐纬地等译,长春：吉林人民出版社,2001 年版。
[澳]约翰·伯顿：《全球冲突——国际危机的国内根源》,谭朝洁译,上海：上海人民出版社,2007年版,中文序言。
[德]贝娅特·科勒-科赫,托马斯·康策尔曼,米歇勒·克诺特：《欧洲一体化与欧盟治理》,顾俊礼等译,北京：中国社会科学出版社,2004年3月。
[加]阿米塔·阿查亚：《建构安全共同体：东盟与地区秩序》,王正毅 冯怀新译,上海：上海人民出版社,2004年版。
[美]贝思·西蒙斯主编：《国际制度》,黄仁伟等译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版。
[美]彼得.卡赞斯坦,罗伯特.基欧汉,斯蒂芬.卡拉斯纳编《世界政治理论的探索与争鸣》秦亚青,苏长和,门洪华魏玲译,上海：上海世纪出版社,2006年版。
[美]大卫·鲍德温主编：《新现实主义与新自由主义》,肖欢荣译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2001年版。
[美]道格拉斯·c·诺思,《制度、制度变迁与经济绩效》,上海三联书店,1994年版。
[美]肯尼思.华尔兹：《国际政治理论》,信强译,上海：上海人民出版社,2003年版。
[美]罗伯特·阿特：《美国大战略》,郭树勇译,北京：北京大学出版社,2006年版。
[美]罗伯特.吉尔平：《世界政治中的战争与变革》,宋新宁译,上海：上海人民出版社,2007年版。
[美]罗伯特·基欧汉、门洪华编：《局部全球化世界中的自由主义、权力和治理》,门洪华译,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版。
[美]玛莎·费丽莫,《国家社会中的国家利益》,袁正清译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2001年版。
[美]曼瑟尔·奥尔森：《集体行动的逻辑》,陈郁等译,上海：上海三联出版社,2007年版。
[美]亚历山大·温特：《国际政治的社会理论》,秦亚青译,上海：上海世纪出版社2008年版。
[美]约瑟夫·拉彼德弗里德里希·克拉托赫维尔主编：《文化和认同：国际关系回归理论》：金烨译,杭州：浙江人民出版社,2003年版。
[美]约瑟夫.S.奈, 《硬权力与软权力》,门洪华译,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年。[美]朱迪斯戈尔茨坦,罗伯特·O·基欧汉：《观念和外交政策：信仰、制度与政治变迁》,刘东国于军译,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年版。
[英]巴里·布赞：《美国和诸大国：21世纪的世界政治》,刘永涛译,上海：上海世纪出版集团,2007年版。
[英]巴瑞·布赞,[丹麦]奥利·维夫,[丹麦]迪·怀尔德：《新安全论》,朱宁译,杭州：浙江人民 出版社,2003年版。
陈晓进：《“国际制度”概念辨析》,《国际关系学院学报》,2000年第4期。
丁银河： 《冷战后欧洲一体化进程中美国因素分析》, 《湖北经济学院学报》,2006年第2期。
范菊华：《规范与国际制度安排：一种建构主义阐释》,《现代国际关系》,2002年第10期。
冯仲平：《欧洲安全观与欧美关系》,《欧洲研究》,2003年第5期。
冯仲平：《欧美关系：“合而不同”——析伊拉克战争对欧美关系的影响》,《国家安全通讯》,2003年第7期。
郭毅,徐莹,陈欣： 《新制度主义：理论评述及其对组织研究的贡献》, 《社会》,2007年第1期。
何志鹏： 《国际法的遵行机制探究》, 《东方法学》,2009年第5期。
胡淑慧,袁胜育： 《欧盟扩大与美国的政策》, 《河南师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》,2005年第2期。
郇庆治： 《伊拉克战争后的欧美关系：欧洲视点》, 《国际政治研究》,2004年第1期。
黄飞君：《跨大西洋关系的现状与未来》,《领导文萃》,2005年第3期。
黄新华： 《政治科学中的新制度主义——当代西方新制度主义政治学述评》, 《厦门大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》,2005年第3期。
贾烈英： 《国际制度的有效性：以联合国为例》, 《国际政治科学》,2006年第1期。
江西元： 《“9·11”事件后美国外交安全战略走向》, 《国际观察》,2002年第4期。
孔继萍：《欧美关系的现状及发展》,《云南师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》,2003年第2期。
匡国栋：《新大西洋关系若隐若现》,《瞭望》,2004年第27期。
李砚忠：《试析新制度主义的意识形态理论及其现代意义》,《重庆社会科学》2007年第4期。
李晓燕：《从“合作”到“和谐”：国际制度的作用趋向》,《山东师范大学学报(人文社会科学版)》,2004年第6期。
连玉如：《浅论21世纪世界新秩序与欧美关系调整》,《国际政治研究》,2003年第4期。
刘阿明： 《解读“9·11”后的法美关系》, 《国际论坛》,2003年第5期。
刘得手： 《美欧关系的变化与趋势》, 《当代世界》,2008年第2期。
刘燕： 《论新制度主义的研究方法》, 《理论探讨》,2006年第3期。
沈世顺： 《从布拉格峰会看北约的发展变化》, 《世界经济与政治》,2003年第1期。
石斌： 《相互依赖、国际制度、·全球治理——罗伯特·基欧汉的世界政治思想》, 《国际政治研究》,2005年第4期。
石凯,胡伟： 《新制度主义“新”在哪里》, 《教学与研究》,2006年第5期。
随新民：《国际制度的合法性与有效性——新现实主义、新自由制度主义和建构主义三种范式比较》,《学术探索》,2004年第6期。
孙春玲,王朝晖,杨芳：《2003年以来欧美关系研究主要资料信息》,《国际资料信息》,2003年第9期。
唐颖侠： 《试析遵守问题与国际制度的理性设计》, 《天津社会科学》,2008年第1期。
田野：《国际制度的形式选择：一个基于国家间交易成本的模型》,《经济研究》,2005年第7期。
田野： 《制度分析的层次问题与国际制度研究》, 《教学与研究》,2007年第5期。
王芳： 《新布什主义下的欧美关系》,《中国青年政治学院学报》,2005年第6期。
王红雨： 《冷战后美国对欧洲一体化政策的调整》, 《经济与社会发展》,2004年第3期。
王学东： 《国家声誉在大国崛起中的作用》, 《国际政治科学》,2005年第1期。
王学玉：《新地区主义——在国家与全球化之间架起桥梁》,《世界政治与经济》,2004年第1期。
魏妹：,《政治学中的新制度主义》, 《南京大学学报(哲学.人文科学.社会科学版)》,2002年第1期。
夏方林： 《欧美关系的新变化及其发展前景》, 《]当代世界》,1996年第2期。
叶江,谈谭：《试论国际制度的合法性及其缺陷——以国际安全制度与人权制度为例》,《世界经济与政治》,2005年第12期。
余宜斌： 《政治学：从旧制度主义到新制度主义》, 《兰州学刊》,2007年第7期。
袁正清：《交往行为理论与国际政治研究——以德国国际关系研究视角为中心的一项考察》,《世界经济与政治》,2006年第9期。、张惠玲,杨烨： 《冷战后欧美关系演变中的文化因素》,‘中共桂林市委党校学报》,2005年第1期。
张宏毅： 《美国政治价值观与世界霸权》, 《理论前沿》,2004年第4期。
张铭洪, 《简单路径依赖模型及其经济学含义分析》,《厦门大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》,2002第5期。
张琦：《权力、制度、认同——国际秩序的新理解》,《德州学院学报》,2007年第1期。
赵怀普： 《冷战后的美国—欧盟关系及存在的问题》, 《外交学院学报》,2000年第1期。
周丕启： 《国家大战略：目标与途径》,《现代国际关系》,2006年第10期。
卓越,张珉： 《新制度经济学与政治学新制度主义的三个流派》, 《教学与研究》,2007年第11期。
Alexander E. Wendt, The Agent-Structure Problem in International Relations Theory, International Organization, Vol.41, No.3,1987.
Alexander Gheciu, NATO in the "New Europe ":the Politics of International Socialization after the Cold War, Stanford University Press,2005.
Beatrice Heuser, Transatlantic Relations:Sharing Ideals and Costs. London:Royal Institute of International Affairs,1996.
Beck,P. A., and M. K. Jennings, Family Traditions, Political Periods, and the Development of Partisan Orientations, Journal of Politics, Vol.53, No.3,1991, pp.743-763.
Boli,John,and George Thomas, Constructing World Culture:International Nongovernmental Organizations Since 1875, Stanford, Calif:Stanford University Press,1998.
David A. Lake, Entangling Relations:American Foreign Policy in Its Century, Princeton, N.JPrinceton University Press,1999.
David C.Gompert and F.Stephen Larrabee edited, America and Europe:A Partnership for A New Era, Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1997.
Daniel Hamilton, Charles Barry, Hans Binnendijk, Stephen Flanagan, Julianne Smith, James Townsend, The Washington NATO Project:Alliance Reborn:An Atlantic Compact for the 21st Century, February 2009.
D.C.Mutz,P.M. Sniderman, and R.Brody, Political Persuasion and Attitude Change,, pp.1-14. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press,1996.
Elster, Jon, ed. Deliberative Democracy. New York:Cambridge University Press,1998.
Gregory Treverton, Makingthe Alliance Work:The United States and Western Europe.Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press,1985.
GW. Grayson, Strange Bedfellows:NATO Marches East, Lanham, NY:University Press of America 1999.
Fareed Zakaria, From Wealth to Power:The Unusual Origins of America's World Role, Princeton: Princeton University Press,1998.
Frank Schimmelfennig, The EU, NATO, and the Integration of Europe:Rules and Rhetoric, Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2003.
Friedrich V. Kratochwil, Rules, Norms and Decisions:On the Conditions of Practical and Legal Reasoning in International Relations and Domestic Affairs, New York:Cambridge University Press, 1989.
Geir Lundestad, "Empire" by integration:The United States and European Integration 1945-1997.London:Oxford University Press,1998.
G John Ikenberry, After Victory:institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,2001.
Haas, Ernst, When Knowledge is Power:Three Models of Change in International Organizations, Berkeley:University of California Press,1990.
Jan Hallenberg and Hakan Karlsson eds, Changing Transatlantic Security Relations, Routledge Taylor& Francis Group,2006.
Jane J. Mansbridge, Beyond Self-interest, Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1990.
John Gerard Ruggie ed., Constructing World Polity:Essays on International Institutionalization, New York:Routledge,1998.
John Peterson, Europe and America in the 1990s:The Prospects for Partnership.Aldershot: Edward El-gar,1993.
Leffler, Melvin P, A Preponderance of Power:National Security, the Truman Administration, and the Cold War. Stanford, Calif.:Stanford University Press 1992.
Mark A. Pollack and Grefory C.Shaffer, eds., Transatlantic Governance in the Global Economy, Lanham, MD:Rowman and Littlefield,2001.
Mark Smith, NATO Enlargement during the Cold War, New York:Palgrave,2000.
Martha Finnemore, National Interests in International Society, Ithaca, NY:Cornell University Press,1996.
Max Weber, Economy and Society, Vol.1.edited by Guenther Roth and Claus Wittich, Berkeley: University of California,1978.
Michael E. Smith, Europe's Foreign and Security Policy:The Institutionalization of Cooperation, New York:Cambridge University Press,2004.
Morrow,J.D., Game Theory for Political Scientists. Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press, 1994.
NATO. Study on NATO Enlargement, Brussels:NATO Press Office,1995.
Norbert Wiggershaus and Roland Foerster, The Western Security Community, Oxford:Berg,1993.
Paul Kennedy, The Rise and Fall of the Great Power:Economic Change and Military Conflict from 1500-2000, New York:Random House,1987.
Peter Jenner, NATO:50 Years On, London:Atalink,1998.
Peter Katzenstein(ed.), The Culture of National Security:Norms and Identity in World Politics, New York:Columbia University Press,1996.
Robert O. Keohane, International Institutions and State Power:Essays in International Relations Theory, Colorado:Westview Press, Inc,1989.
Roland Dannreuther and John Peterson, Security Strategy and Transatlantic Relations, Routledge:Taylor& John Francis Group,2006.
Russell Hardin, Self-interest, group identity, in A. Breton, et al., eds., Nationalism and Rationality, Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Steven McGuire and Michael Smith, The European Union and the United States:competition and convergence in the global arena, Palgrave Macmillan,2008.
Steve Weber, Multilateralism in NATO:Shaping the Postwar Balance of Power,1945-1961. Berkeley:University of California Press,1991.
Thomas Risse-Kappen, Cooperation among Democracies——the European Influence on U.S. Foreign Policy, Princeton, New Jersey:Princeton Press,1995.
T.V.Paul and Johan A.Hall, International Order and the Future of World Politics, Cambridge University Press,1999.
Zimbardo, Philip G, and Michael R. Leippe, The Psychology of Attitude Change and Social Influence. New York:McGraw Hill,1991,
Anne-Marie Slaughter, International Law in a World of Liberal States. European Journal of International Law Vol.6, No.1,1995, pp,503-538.
Alexander Thompson, Coercion Through IOs:The Security Council and the Logic of Information Transmission, International Organization, Vol.60, No.1,2006, pp.1-34.
Athony Clark Arend, Do Legal Rules Matter? International Law and International Politics, Virginia Journal of International Law, Vol38, No.2,1998, pp107-153.
Bronislaw E. Matecki, Establishment of the International Finance Corporation:A Case Study, International Organization Vol.10, No.2,1956, pp.261-275.
Bruce Cronin, From Balance to Community:Transnational Identity and Political Integration, Security Studies, Vol.8, No.2& 3,1998, pp.270-301.
Celeste A. Wallander, Institutional Assets and Adaptability:NATO after the Cold War, International Organization, Vol.54, No.4,2000, pp.705-735.
Cheryl Shanks, Harodl K.Jacobson, and Jeffrey H.Kaplan, Inertia and Change in the Constellation of International Governmental Organization,1981-1992, International Organization, Vol.50, No.4,1996, pp.593-628.
Christian Reus-Smit, The Constitutional Structure of International Society and Nature of Fundamental Institutions, International Organization, Vol.51, No.4,1997, pp.555-589.
Colin H.Kahl, Constructing a Separate Peace:Constructivism, Collective Liberal identity, and Democratic Peace, Security Studies Vol.8, No.2/3, Winter 1998/99-Spring 1999, pp.94-144.
David A. Lake, Beyond Anarchy—The Importance of Security Institutions, International Security, Vol.26, No.1,2001, pp.129-160.
David H. Bearce and Stacy Bondanella, "Intergovernmental Organizations, Socialization, and Member-State Interest Convergence", International Organization, Vol.61, No.4,2007, pp.703-733.
Finnemore, Martha, Norms, Culture, and World Politics:Insights from Sociology's Institutionalism, International Organization, Vol.50, No.2,1996, pp.323-347.
Flynn, Gregory, and Henry Farrell., Piecing Together the Democratic Peace:The CSCE, Norms, and the'Construction'of Security in Post-Cold War Europe, International Organization, Vo.53, No.3, 1999, pp.505-536.
Frank Schimmelfennig, NATO Enlargement a Constructivist Explanation, Security Studies,Vol.8, No.2/3,1998/1999-Spring 1999, pp.198-234.
Frank Schimmelfennig, Strategic Calculation and International Socialization:Membership Incentives, Party Constellations, and Sustained Compliance in Central and Eastern Europe, International Organization, Vol.59, No.4,2005, pp.827-860.
G John Ikenberry and Charles Kupchan, Socialization and Hegemonic Power. International Organization, Vol.44, No.3,1990, pp.283-315.
Helen V Milner, The Assumption of Anarchy in International Politics:A Critique. Review of International Studies, Vol.17, No1,1991, pp.67-85.
Hechter, M. and S. Kanazawa, Sociological Rational Choice Theory. Annual Review of Sociology Vol.23, No.1,1997, pp.191-214.
Ian Hurd, Legitimacy and Authority in International Politics, International Organization, Vol.53, No.2,1999, pp.379-408.
Harald Muller, Arguing, Bargaining and All That:Communicative Action, Rationalist Theory and the logic of Appropriatenss in International Relations, European Journal of International Relations, Vol. 10, No.3,2004, pp.395-435.
J. Samuel Barkin and Bruce Cronin, The State and Nation:Changing Norms and Rules of Sovereignty in International Relations, International Organization, Vol.48, No.1, pp.107-130.
James D. Morrow, Modeling the Forms of International Cooperation:Distribution Versus Information. International Organization, Vol.48, No.3,1994, pp.387-423.
James G. March, Johan P. Olsen, The New Institutionalism:Organizational Factor in Political Life, American Political Science Review, Vol.78, No.5,1984, pp.734-749.
James N. Rosenau, Before Cooperation:Hegemony, Regimes, and Habit-Driven Actors in World Politics, International Organization, Vol.40, No.4,1986, pp.849-894.
James Thomson, US Interests and the Fate of the Alliance, Survival, Vol.45, No.4, Winter 2003-2004, pp.207-220.
Jeffrey T. Checkel, International Institutions and Socialization in Europe:Introduction and Framework, International Organization, Vol.59, No.3,2005, pp 801-826.
Jeffrey T. Checkel, Social Construction and Integration, Journal of European Public Policy, Vol.6, No.4,1999, pp.545-560.
Jeffrey T. Checkel, Why Comply? Social Learning and European Identity Change, International Organization, Vol.55, No.3,2001, pp.553-588.
Jeffrey W. Legro, Which Norms Matter? Revisiting the Failure of Internationalism. International Organization, Vol.51, No.1,1997, pp.31-63.
John J. Mearsheimer, The False Promise of International Institutions, International Security, Vol.19, No.3,1994-1995, pp.5-49.
John Duffield, International Regimes and Alliance Behavior:Explaining NATO conventional Force Levels, International Organization, Vol.46, No.4,1992, pp.819-55.
John Gerard Ruggie, The Past as Prologue? Interests, Identity and American Foreign Policy, International Security, Vol.21, No.4,1997, pp.89-125.
John Gerard Ruggie, Third Try at World Order? America and Multilateralism After the Cold War, Political Science Quarterly, Vol.109, No.4,1994, pp.553-570.
John Lewis Gaddis, The Emerging Post-Revisionist Synthesis on the Origins of the Cold War, Diplomatic History, Vol.7, No.3,1983, pp.171-190.
Johnston, Alastair Iain, Treating International Institutes as Social Environments, International Studies Quarterly, Vol.45, No4,2001, pp.487-515.
Joseph M. Grieco. Anarchy and Limits of Cooperation:A Realist Critique of the Newest Liberal Institutionalism, International Organization, Vol.42, No.3,1988, pp.85-507.
Kenneth N Waltz, Structural Realism after the End of the Cold War, International Security, Vol.25, No.l,2000, pp.5-41.
Kratochwil,Friedrich V.,and John Gerard Ruggie, International Organization:A State of the Art on an Art of the State. International Organization, Vol.40, No.4,1986, pp.753-775.
Levy, Jack, Learning and Foreign Policy:Sweeping A Conceptual Minefield, International Organization, Vol.48, No.2,1994, pp.279-312.
Maria-Gabriela Manea, How and Why Interaction Matters ASEAN's Regional Identity and Human Rights, Cooperation and Conflict:Journal of the Nordic Interactional Studies Association, Vol.44, No.l, 2009. pp.27-49.
Meyer, J. W, The Structuring of a World Environmental Regime,1870-1990, International Organization, Vol.51, No.4,1997, pp.623-651.
Oran Young, Political Leadership and Regime Formation:On the Development of Institutions in International Society, International Organization, Vol.45, No.3,1991, pp:281-308.
Paul Pierson, When Effect Becomes Cause:Policy Feedback and Political Change, World Politics, Vol.45, No.4,1993, pp.595-628.
Pierre Hassner, Europe beyond Partition and Unity:Disintegration or Reconstruction?, International Affairs, Vol.66, No.3,1990, pp.461-75.
Remmer Karen L., Theoretical Decay and Theoretical Development:Resurgence of Institutional Analysis, Comparative Politics, Vol.50, No.4,1997, pp.34-61.
Richard Ashley, The Poverty of Neoliberalism, International Organization, Vol.38, No.2,1984, pp.227-251.
Richard Ullman, The U.S. and the World:An Interview with George Kennan, New York Review of Books, Vol.46, No.13,1999, pp.4-6.
Robert B.McCalla, NATO's Persistence after the Cold War, International Organization, Vol.50, No.3,1996, pp.445-475.
Robert O. Keohane, International Institutions:Two Approaches, International Studies Quarterly, Vol.32, No.4,1988, pp.379-396.
Robert O. Keohane and Lisa L. Martin, The Promise of Institutionalist Theory, International Security Vol.20, No.1.1995, pp.39-51.
Robert Powell, Absolute and Relative Gains in International Relation Theory, American Political Science Review, Vol85, No.4,1991,pp.1303-1320.
Schoppa, Leonard, The Social Context in Coercive International Bargaining, International Organization, Vol.53, No.2,1999, pp.307-342.
Stephen Walt, The Ties That Fray:Why Europe and America Are Drifting Apart, National Interest, No.54, Winter 1998/1999, pp.3-11.
Strobe Talbott, Why NATO Should Grow, New York Review Books, Vol.42, No.13,1995, pp.217-30.
Thomas Risse-Kappen, Democratic Peace-War like Democracies:A Social Constructivist Interpretation of the Liberal Argument, European Journal of International Relations, No.1,1995., Vol.1, No.4,491-517.
Thomas Risse, Let's Argue:Communicative Action in World Politics, International Organization, Vol.54, No.11,2000.pp.1-39.
Tony Evans and Peter Wilson, Regime Theory and the English School of International Relations:A Comparison, Millennium:Journal of International Studies Vol.21, No.3,1992, pp.329-51.
Underdal, Arild, Explaining Compliance and Defection:Three Models, European Journal of International Relations, Vol.4, No.1,1998, pp.5-36.