摘 要 布希政府2003 年揮兵伊拉克後引發全球反美聲浪，反美主義與新保守 主義頓時成為國際關係研究的熱門議題。反美主義內涵多元且具歷史性，學 者對此議題多有不同解讀，傾向支持布希外交政策者往往將其視為一種敵視 美國的偏見，而批判布希政策者則將其視為國際上對美國不當外交政策的合 理反應。經由探討歐洲、拉丁美洲以及中東地區的反美主義的緣起梗概，本 文說明了反美主義的發展過程中的確涉及對美國的偏見，但也不乏對美國強權 外交的抨擊。此外，反美主義的討論也關係著美國國內自由與保守兩派對布希 外交政策的爭論，左右兩派觀點迥異突顯出美國社會對此議題的意見分歧。 布希在2002 年9 月宣示美國為了維護國家安全可以發動先制攻擊，這 被稱為「布希理論」的外交政策完全呼應了新保守主義的外交主張，強調美 國擁有史無前例的超強軍力與影響力，並應以此為後盾來維護國際和平與秩 序。九一一後，布希政府展現單邊主義外交作風，表明美國不願受到國際組 織或規範牽制。新保守主義重視意識形態，具有強烈道德觀與民主使命感， 認為美國在單極國際體系中應採取強勢外交政策，甚至主張建立善良霸權或 是帝國來維護國際社會的和平繁榮，並以美國價值觀為基準建構國際社會。此種思維簡化了國際問題的複雜性，也高估了美國軍事力量的有效性，以致 布希政府的反恐戰爭不但遭遇國際反彈，也在國內引發自由主義學者的大肆 批判。但隨著伊拉克與阿富汗戰爭陷入泥淖，美國又引發國際金融與經濟危 機，布希政府期滿黯然下臺，新保守主義一時將難再主導美國外交政策，而 反美主義遂有可能逐漸趨弱。

Abstract In the wake of the Iraq War in 2003, an outburst of anti-Americanism was witnessed around the globe. Suddenly anti-Americanism and Neoconservatism became hot topics of academic study and discussion in the field of international relations. While it is difficult to characterize and define the nature of Anti-Americanism due to its diversity, scholars tend to interpret the issue differently according to their own political views. Those who hold a favorable view of George W. Bush’s foreign polices tend to see anti-Americanism as a bias, while those who disapprove of Bush’s policies see it as a legitimate international response. After giving a brief overview of the development of anti-Americanism in Europe, Latin America, and the Middle East, this paper finds both views to be partially true. The conflicting views of the issue also reflect the deep schism that exists between liberals and conservatives in the United States. With the so-called Bush Doctrine, announced in September 2002 after the 911 attack, President Bush made it clear that in order to protect its national security the US had the right to engage in preventive war. The doctrine, echoing Neoconservative ideas, emphasized that the U.S. possessed unprecedented—and unequaled—strength and influence in the world and should use it to establish international peace and order. After 911, the Bush administration had unequivocally demonstrated its desire to evade theconstraints of international rules and institutions, operating with a unilateral diplomatic style. Neoconservatism stresses ideology and upholds moral and democratic values, and its proponents believe that the US should act decisively in a unipolar environment. Moreover, Neoconservatives do not shun from talking about a benign American hegemony or Pax-Americana, and they consider American values to be its core element. However, Neoconservatism has underestimated the complexity of international problems and overestimated the effectiveness of American military prowess, consequently provoking an international backlash and strong liberal criticism on the domestic front. As wars in Iraq and Afghanistan drag on, and the world economy languishes in recession caused by an American financial crisis, the Bush administration has bid farewell to its discontented constituency. With Neoconservatism on the wane in the American political scene, anti-Americanism appears likely to recede.