臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：戰略三角理論在「爭霸」過程中的應用與修正：以冷戰時期美蘇中與未來美中臺關係為例
書刊名：中國行政評論
作者：蘇軍瑋
作者(外文)：Su, Chun-wei
出版日期：2018
卷期：24:2
頁次：頁1-24
主題關鍵詞：戰略三角；中國大陸；蘇聯；一邊倒政策；Strategic triangle；China；The Soviet Union；Leaning to one side
原始連結：連回原系統網址new window
相關次數：
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:153
  • 點閱點閱:17
源自心理學與社會學的戰略三角理論，應用至國關理論時產生若干變化，其中最為顯著的是行為者對於策略選擇偏好的改變。在國關理論中，由於行為者必須考量在互動過程中策略選擇的利得，因此，「樞紐」的位置是優先於「朋友」與「夥伴」等關係。然而，其並未考慮意識型態在中間扮演的關鍵角色。本文認為，意識型態之爭，在國際局勢渾沌不明朗時（即「爭霸」過程），尤為關鍵，因此，在決定策略選擇優先順序時，似乎應該將意識型態納入考量。中共建政恰逢美蘇爭雄時期，雙方透過軍事情報甚至是戰爭互相探底，正處於二元體系初現，但整體國際格局尚未明朗的情形。從戰略三角理論來看，中共在此刻應該佔據「樞紐」的位子，但中共卻做出了「一邊倒」的決策，顯不符合理論預期。然美蘇兩國最大的區別即在於意識型態之爭，美蘇的聯盟行為基本上也依循著意識型態劃線，恰說明了中共在1970年代之前採取「一邊倒」而非搶佔「樞紐」位置的原因。在兩大強權激烈爭鬥的過程中，意圖在中間玩弄兩國的可能性極低，尤其是對中共這樣一個意識型態色彩濃厚的共產大國而言，更不可能在美蘇爭霸過程中，選擇樞紐的位置，因此，一邊倒政策，是極為理性且現實的考量。今中國大陸迅速崛起，未來必將出現某種中美爭霸局面，美中台三角關係也將有所改變。長期以來，「樞紐」位置均為台灣理性上最佳戰略位置，然未來中美激烈爭霸時，「樞紐」將逐漸成為不可能也不可得的戰略角色，而「一邊倒」政策，即戰略三角理論中的「夥伴」，勢將成為未來台灣最為可欲而且可能的戰略位置。
When we apply the strategic triangle theory, originated from psychology and sociology, to international relation, there comes into being some changes. In most international relation theories, taking the ＂hub＂ position is prior to making friendship or partnership, because actors have to consider their profits when selecting a diplomatic strategy. Therefore, the importance of ideology is underestimated. This paper suggests that when great powers compete for hegemony, which make international politics filled with uncertainty, ideology will play the crucial role in shaping strategy preference. The People's Republic of China was built in the period that the U.S. and the Soviet Union were competing for hegemony. These two big powers checked each other's ability by arm race and war, making international system gradually become bilateral structure and filled with uncertainty. According to the strategic triangle theory, China should not lean to any side but occupy the ＂hub＂ position under this situation. However, China's action was exactly opposite to the expectation of the theory. Ideology, which is the critical difference between the U.S. and the Soviet Union, had defined their ally boundary and therefore made China take ＂leaning to one side＂ policy. In such intense competition, it was very tough to straddle the fence between two great powers. As a big communist country, it was also impossible for China to stand at the ＂hub.＂ In sum, leaning to the Soviet Union was a rational and realistic choice for China. With the rapid growth of China nowadays, competing for hegemony between the U.S. and China will be indispensable in the future, so that the triangular relationship among the U.S., China, and Taiwan will accordingly change. For a long time, standing at the ＂hub＂ has been the best and most rational strategy for Taiwan. However, when the competition between the U.S. and China has gradually become intense, the ＂hub＂ will be a position that cannot stand and impossible to stand anymore. ＂Leaning to one side＂ policy, which equals the ＂partnership＂ in the strategic triangle theory, will be the best strategy that Taiwan wants to and is possible to take.
期刊論文
1.White, Gordon(1994)。Democratization and Economic Reform in China。The Australian Journal of Chinese Affairs，31，73-92。  new window
2.Haass, Richard N.(2008)。The Age of Nonpolarity: What Will Follow U.S. Dominance?。Foreign Affairs，87(3)，44-56。  new window
3.Chu, Yun-han(2003)。Power Transition and the Making of Beijing's Policy Towards Taiwan。The China Quarterly，176，960-980。  new window
4.Zhang, Baohui(2011)。Taiwan's New Grand Strategy。Journal of Contemporary China，20(69)，269-285。  new window
5.Christensen, Thomas J.(2006)。Fostering Stability or Creating a Monster? The Rise of China and U.S. Policy toward East Asia。International Security，31(1)，81-126。  new window
6.Gittings, John(1969)。The Great-Power Triangle and Chinese Foreign Policy。The China Quarterly，39，41-54。  new window
7.Friedberg, Aaron L.(2005)。The Future of U.S.-China Relations: Is Conflict Inevitable?。International Security，30(2)，7-45。  new window
8.Brown, G. Roger(1976)。Chinese politics and American policy: a new look at the triangle。Foreign Policy，23，3-24。  new window
9.Segal, Gerald(1981)。China's Strategic Posture and the Great-Power Triangle。Pacific Affairs，53，682-697。  new window
10.Shambaugh, David(2005)。China Engages Asia: Reshaping the Regional Order。International Security，29(3)，64-99。  new window
11.Taylor, Howard F.(1967)。Balance and change in the two-person group。Sociometry，30(3)，262-279。  new window
12.Dittmer, Lowell(1981)。The Strategic Triangle: An Elementary Game-Theoretical Analysis。World Politics，33(4)，485-515。  new window
13.Kang, David C.(2003)。Getting Asia Wrong: The Need For New Analytical Frameworks。International Security，27(4)，57-85。  new window
14.吳玉山(20000600)。非自願的樞紐：美國在華盛頓-臺北-北京之間的地位。政治科學論叢，12，189-221。new window  延伸查詢new window
會議論文
1.Wu, Yu-Shan(2010)。Power Transition, Strategic Triangle, and Alliance Shift。The 39th Taiwan-US Conference on Contemporary China，(會議日期: December 9-10)。Taipei：Institute of International Relations。  new window
圖書
1.Tatu, Michel(1970)。The Great Power Triangle: Washington-Moscow-Peking。Atlantic Institute。  new window
2.Hall, David L.、Ames, Roger T.(1999)。The Democracy of the Dead: Dewey, Confucius, and the Hope for Democracy in China。Open Court Publishing Company。  new window
3.Bell, Daniel A.、李萬全(2009)。超越自由民主。上海：上海三聯書店。  延伸查詢new window
4.尹慶耀(1984)。中共的統戰外交。台北：幼獅文化事業公司。  延伸查詢new window
5.Bell, Daniel A.、孔新峰、張言亮(2009)。民主先生在中國：東方與西方的人權與民主對話。左岸文化事業有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
6.Gilley, Bruce(2004)。China's Democratic Future: How It Will Happen and Where It Will Lead。New York：Columbia University Press。  new window
7.Bernstein, Richard、Munro, Ross H.(1997)。The Coming Conflict with China。New York：Alfred A. Knopf。  new window
8.沈志華、李濱(2010)。脆弱的聯盟--冷戰與中蘇關係。北京：社會科學文獻出版社。  延伸查詢new window
9.牛軍(2006)。冷戰時期的美蘇關係。北京：北京大學出版社。  延伸查詢new window
10.吳玉山(1997)。抗衡與扈從：兩岸關係新詮。臺北：正中。  延伸查詢new window
11.包宗和、吳玉山(2009)。重新檢視爭辯中的兩岸關係理論。臺北：五南。new window  延伸查詢new window
12.沈志華(2011)。中蘇關係史綱--1917-1991年中蘇關係若干問題再探討。社會科學文獻出版社。  延伸查詢new window
13.Shambaugh, David(2002)。Modernizing China's Military: Progress, Problems, and Prospects。University of California Press。  new window
14.Swaine, Michael D.、Tellis, Ashley J.(2000)。Interpreting China's Grand Strategy: Past, Present, and Future。RAND Corporation。  new window
15.Nathan, Andrew J.、Ross, Robert S.(1997)。The Great Wall and the Empty Fortress: China's Search for Security。New York：W. W. Norton & Company。  new window
16.Nathan, Andrew J.(1985)。Chinese Democracy。University of California Press。  new window
17.Thomas, Raju G. C.(1983)。The Great Power Triangle and Asian Security。Lexington, Mass.：Lexington Books。  new window
18.Oksenberg, Michel、Economy, Elizabeth(1999)。China Joins the World: Progress and Prospects。New York：Council on Foreign Relations Press。  new window
19.桂立(2005)。蘇美關係七十年。北京：人民出版社。  延伸查詢new window
20.He, Baogang(1996)。The Democratization of China。Routledge。  new window
21.Kim, Ilpyong J.(1987)。The Strategic Triangle: China, the United States, and the Soviet Union。New York：Paragon House。  new window
22.包宗和、吳玉山(2006)。爭辯中的兩岸關係理論。台北：五南。new window  延伸查詢new window
23.吳玉山(1998)。共產世界的變遷--四個共產政權的比較。台北：東大。new window  延伸查詢new window
24.張蘊嶺(2009)。中國對外關係：回顧與思考（1949-2009）。北京：中國社會科學院國際研究學部。  延伸查詢new window
25.奧鮑鮑里索夫、鮑特柯洛斯科夫(1982)。蘇中關係1945-1980。北京：三聯書局。  延伸查詢new window
26.LaFeber, Walter(2008)。America, Russia, and the Cold War, 1945-2002。Boston：McGraw-Hill。  new window
27.Lilley, James R.、Shambaugh, David(1999)。China's Military Faces the Future。American Enterprise Institute。  new window
28.Liu, Drew(1999)。Gadflying China: A Democratic Perspective。Washington, D.C.：China Strategic Institute。  new window
29.Oye, Kenneth A.、Rothchild, Donald、Lieber, Robert J.(1979)。Eagle Entangled: U.S. Foreign Policy in a Complex World。New York：Longman。  new window
30.Pei, Minxin(2006)。China's Trapped Transition: The Limits of Development Autocracy。Cambridge, MA：Harvard University Press。  new window
31.Zheng, Yongnian(2004)。Will China become democratic?: Elite, class and regime transition。Eastern University Press。  new window
32.Kang, David C.(2007)。China Rising: Peace, Power, and Order in East Asia。Columbia University Press。  new window
33.Mearsheimer, John J.、Alterman, G.(2001)。The Tragedy of Great Power Politics。W. W. Norton & Company。  new window
34.Russett, Bruce M.、Oneal, John R.(2001)。Triangulating Peace: Democracy, Interdependence, and International Organizations。New York：W. W. Norton & Company。  new window
35.Yang, Dali L.(2004)。Remaking the Chinese Leviathan: Market transition and the politics of governance in China。Stanford University Press。  new window
36.Hu, Shaohua(2000)。Explaining Chinese Democratization。Westport, Conn.：Praeger。  new window
圖書論文
1.Dittmer, Lowell(1987)。The Strategic Triangle: A Critical Review。The Strategic Triangle: China, the United States and the Soviet Union。New York：Paragon House Publisher。  new window
2.Johnston, Alastair Iain、Evans, Paul(1999)。China's Engagement with Multilateral Security Institutions。Engaging China: The Management of An Emerging Power。New York：Routledge。  new window
3.呂德良、葉青(2010)。不期而遇的局面：1969年中蘇美三角關係論析。脆弱的聯盟--冷戰與中蘇關係。北京：社會科學文獻出版社。  延伸查詢new window
4.Garrett, Banning(1979)。China Policy and the Strategic Triangle。Eagle Entangled: U.S. Foreign Policy in a Complex World。New York：Longman。  new window
5.李丹慧(2010)。失去的機遇？赫魯雪夫下台後中蘇實現和解的新嘗試。脆弱的聯盟--冷戰與中蘇關係。北京：社會科學文獻出版社。  延伸查詢new window
6.戴超武(2010)。中印邊界衝突與蘇聯的反應和政策。脆弱的聯盟--冷戰與中蘇關係。北京：社會科學文獻出版社。  延伸查詢new window
7.Goodman, David S. G.(1988)。Communism in East Asia--The Production Imperative, Legitimacy and Reform。Communism and Reform in East Asia。London：Frank Cass。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
無相關點閱
 
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：656（臺灣：655，外國：1） ／ 本年度總使用人次：1806188 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67602892
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上