中国学界对美国环境外交的研究

环境不仅作为一个社会问题引起各界的重视,同时也作为外交的内容被纳入各国的外交政策之中。作为环境大国,美国也日益重视环境在其外交中的地位,并利用环境问题制约他国。本文从四个方面综合评述中国学界对美国环境外交的研究：整体性研究、政府环境外交政策研究、环境外交中具体案例的研究以及美国与他国环境外交的博弈的研究。通过对现有研究的梳理,希望加强对美国环境外交的深入研究,更好地了解美国环境外交的走向。     

Empire by denial: the strange case of the United States

The issue of empire has once again become a major political question in American foreign policy discourse. But whereas in the 1960s the discussion was one that mainly concerned the radical left, over the past few years the debate has largely been conducted within neo-conservative circles. The discussion is one that should be taken seriously-in part because of its intrinsically interesting character and in part because of what it tells us about the Bush grand strategy. In the end, though, the issue of whether or not there is-or is not- an American empire, is perhaps of less importance than the fact that most Americans deny that such an empire exists. This has consequences both for the conduct of American foreign policy and for its successful execution.     

The institutional odyssey of the Italian Parliamentary Republic

This article examines the Italian foreign policy of the second Berlusconi government. The first section focuses on the episodes that critics have used to argue that, under the second Berlusconi government, there has occurred a process of ‘Americanization’ of Italian foreign policy, and provides an interpretation of their significance. The second section looks at these episodes against the historical background of Italian?–?American relations since the end of World War II and argues that, from this perspective, very little, if anything, has changed in Italian?–?American relations or Italian foreign policy in general.     

1990年代《美国历史评论》的中国研究

作为美国社会中一个较大的学术群体,美国历史学家的中国研究对于我们了解美国知识分子的中国观具有很大的参照意义。最权威的美国史学刊物——《美国历史评论》——在20世纪90年代所发表的中国研究文章便从一个极为重要的角度展示了美国史学界的中国研究在最近十年的主要线索:中国的传统儒家思维方式左右着中国近现代的社会发展和对外交往。     

U.S. Foreign Policy and the Arab Spring: Balancing Values and Interests

The rapid and unpredictable changes in the Middle East collectively known as the “Arab Spring” are posing tremendous challenges to U.S. policy formation and action. This article will explore and evaluate evolving U.S. policy in the Middle East and its potential implications. There has always been a tension in American foreign policy between pursuing American “values” (foreign policy idealism) and protecting American “interests” (foreign policy realism). For decades, the United States has sought to “make the world safe for democracy,” while at the same time often supporting repressive, nondemocratic regimes because of national security or economic self‐interest. The tension between these two fundamentally distinct policy orientations has become even more pronounced as the United States tries to respond to the Arab Spring uprisings. Why did the United States actively support the rebels in Libya but not the protestors in Syria or Bahrain? Is there an emerging, coherent “Obama Doctrine” on intervention in Arab countries, or was Libya just a “one‐off” event? These are some of the questions that this article will attempt to answer.     

Shale gas and the revival of American power: debunking decline?

The spectre of American decline is once again animating both observers and practitioners of US foreign policy. The global financial crisis, a faltering American economy and continued costly and controversial military engagements overseas have been presented as conclusive proof that American foreign policy will soon lack the resources needed to sustain its previous international hegemony. Arguments of domestic weakness have been linked to analyses of the economic vitality of America's competitors to demonstrate a seemingly watertight case for relative decline. The inexorable rise of China has been presented from various quarters as evidence that the American era will soon be drawing to a close. Yet, such declinist arguments continue to suffer from fundamental weaknesses, overestimating the likely future strength of America's rivals while concurrently downplaying the capacity of the US to rejuvenate its economy and thus revivify its liberal universalist creed. The most interesting development in this regard has been the sudden resurgence of the US energy sector. Written off less than a decade ago as being in terminal decline, the American oil and gas industry has staged a remarkable recovery. Vast reserves of shale gas and accompanying tight oil offer the potential to aid the revival of the American economy, with some forecasts pointing to US energy self‐sufficiency within two decades. Notions of US relative decline may yet prove premature. The geopolitical impact of American energy self‐sufficiency is likely to be very significant, making an important contribution to a reversal of the US trade deficit, a revival of America's industrial base, and the possibility of a corresponding relative decline in power for conventional fossil fuel exporters.     

The History and Historiography of American Diplomacy: Principles, Traditions and Values

The Council on Foreign Relations in New York is known throughout the world both as a leading centre for the study of international affairs and as having an influential voice in current debates on the future global role of the United States. Since the First World War the Council has promoted these goals through organizing working groups, sponsoring specialized monographs, and publishing a number of journals and yearbooks. The Council has now sponsored the publication of a multivolume encyclopaedic dictionary of American foreign relations. Michael Dunne's review of these four volumes concentrates on the broad themes which run through the many hundreds of essays, and asks whether the study of the American diplomatic past can help us to understand the special features of the course and conduct of US foreign relations.     

The Internal Security Acts of 1798: The Founding Generation and the Judiciary during America's First National Security Crisis

It is a truism that a nation must protect itself from internal enemies as well as foreign threats of aggression and invasion. But that is not the entire matter. Our American democracy has striven, with mixed success, to be careful that the justified ends of the American experiment—freedom, justice, and the rule of law—are not sacrificed on the altar of the means to protect these ends.     

The American system: US foreign and domestic politics since the Second World War

Historians, like politicians, need to find a language and frame of reference to connect with their audience or readership. In the current US presidential campaign the candidates, Senators John McCain and Barack Obama, are offering the voters a bridge between the troubled past and a more hopeful future. The works under consideration in this review article employ a similar method. All the authors share the widely held view of the broad shape of US foreign relations since the Second World War, in particular the ideological struggle with the Soviet Union known as the Cold War followed by the more amorphous attempt to maintain American primacy, which has characterized the last two decades. Throughout this longer period the processes and goals of US foreign policy have been controversial: there has not, of course, been complete consensus. One topic which was and remains debated is the role and value of individuals, either high‐level politicians or senior diplomats, in the conduct of foreign policy. Another area of debate, often fierce argument, is the impact of domestic forces upon policy‐making. In the present case the leading example is provided by the amalgam of influences which determine US policy towards that nexus of competing interests often optimistically short‐handed as the Arab–Israeli peace process. One link between these two topics is the role of the US in multilateral bodies; and American actions within the United Nations and towards other international organizations are also examined. These and other related issues are contextualized geographically through an examination of American policies in the Greater Middle East, in particular the predominantly Muslim states which stretch eastwards from Egypt to India. While not providing a partisan political programme for the incoming president to follow, the collective message of these texts offers guidelines, even injunctions for the future conduct of US foreign policy.     

Myths, Motivations and 'Misunderestimations': the Bush Administration and Iraq

This article explores the myths and motivations behind US foreign policy towards Iraq in America's 'war on terrorism'. It argues that the foreign policy of the Bush administration is widely misunderstood and that much of the debate about Iraq policy that has taken place has been conducted at an unhelpful level of analysis. It addresses arguments that the Bush administration is motivated by oil, revenge or hubris as well as the more mainstream arguments that an attack on Iraq would provoke instability through the entire Middle East, as well as encouraging further acts of and support for murderous terrorism; that there is no urgency to act against Iraq as containment and deterrence remain adequate means to manage this threat; and that Iraq should be a lower priority than dealing with North Korea. It does this by analysing the development of American foreign policy thinking on the war on terrorism, what motivates it, and why it rejects the arguments of its critics. The article explains the intellectual process by which the US decided upon this course of action and how Europe's failure to understand this process added to its incomprehension of American policy. It does not argue that European's opposition would have been swept aside had they better understood the Bush administration, the central disagreement about the necessity and prudence of military action versus containment remains, but that such an understanding would have allowed for a better and more focused level of debate than the one which has got us to this point. Nor does it argue that the Bush administration approach is necessarily persuasive or justified, merely that its case is reasoned and explicable in terms of America's foreign policy traditions.     

对《范登堡决议案》的历史思考

《范登堡决议案》是美国大西洋联盟政策中的重要一环,在战后初期美国外交中发挥了重要作用。该决议案所确立的一些政治原则,如联合国框架下的"区域性安全"与"独立和集体自我防御"原则、"自助与相互援助"原则,成为大西洋联盟政策所尊奉的圭臬,对美国外交政策、国内政治实践、美欧联盟关系等,均产生了重要影响。但是,《范登堡决议案》也加剧了美国外交政策中的冷战对抗性;从长远看,《范登堡决议案》导致了美国内政外交的不稳定发展。     

Why peace can be as difficult as war

The book under review fills an important gap in examining American foreign policy during the years between the fall of the Berlin Wall and the events of September 11, 2001. It documents American reactions to the events during and after 1989 and explains some of the difficult foreign policy choices facing the US during the 1990s. It also describes how the mid-1990s came to be seen by some as 'an age of anxiety'. The book largely focuses on the thinking of the foreign policy elites and, in the opinion of this reviewer, might have said more about American domestic politics at this time. The rise of the conservative movement, the belief in the unfettered free market, and the seemingly unconditional support for Israel were largely rooted in domestic politics but had important foreign policy implications. One paradox, so this reviewer argues, was the way in which some in the West—the Cold War victors—seemed disorientated or even demoralized by their own victory. One underlying problem, implicit in this book, is that of achieving cohesion in the absence of a common enemy. For that reason peace can sometimes be as difficult as war.     

The perils of a trade-first US foreign policy

The end of the Cold War, the advent of globalisation, and new horizons in trade theory, all seem to point out to the need for a new American economic strategy. Indeed, for many they beg for the implementation of economism as the new US foreign policy doctrine. The managed trade policy (1993-1996) of forcibly opening foreign markets for the benefit of corporate America showed much of what is wrong with a trade-first agenda in foreign affairs: it accomplished nothing in terms of economic gain while creating dangerous spillovers into other foreign policy areas--such as political and security bilateral relationships--thus endangering the broader goals of US foreign policy. A foreign policy that puts trade at the top of the agenda is unwarranted, probably unsustainable, and ultimately counterproductive. Moreover, it is hardly the most important tool by which the economic wellbeing of most Americans can be enhanced. The return of low productivity figures and a slowing American economy may well rekindle calls for a policy of managed trade. Such calls must be rejected and the lessons of the recent past must be heeded.     

Remembering September 11: Photography as Cultural Diplomacy

American cultural diplomacy has taken on fresh significance in the wake of the September 11 attacks on the United States and there has been increasing support within the US State Department for initiatives to promote the diplomatic role of culture in the 'war against terrorism'. This article considers one such initiative: the photographic exhibition, After September 11: images from Ground Zero which is touring the world over three years with substantial support from American diplomatic missions. This exhibition is clearly intended to shape and maintain a public memory of the attacks on the World Trade Center and their aftermath. As such, it is a fascinating initiative in cultural diplomacy that echoes structures of Cold War propagandizing yet asks fresh questions about the role of visual culture in American foreign policy in the digital age. The article examines the origins of this exhibition and considers tensions that exist between its aesthetic components and the ideological framework that surrounds its implementation.     

Foreign Policy and an American Christian Democratic Party

This article explores the implications of the Judeo-Christian tradition's influence on the United States for the foreign policy of an American Christian Democratic Party. If there were to be such a party in the United States, it would not have to create a new set of ideas and principles out of whole cloth. In fact, an articulation of an American Christian Democratic foreign policy would largely consist of an effort of resourcement, rediscovering and applying anew foundational principles at the core of the American experiment. This article develops this insight in two main foreign policy areas: national security and economic.     

Neo-conservatives and their American critics

This review article examines four recent American books relating, in very different ways, to the rise of unilateralism and neo-conservatism in the United States. Richard Perle and David Frum, former advisors to George W. Bush robustly present the 'neo-conservative' case. Max Boot, another unilateralist, argues from the experience of American history that small wars have often been as important as big wars in projecting American power; and he suggests that this experience has a present-day relevance. Ivo Daalder (who served in the Clinton administration) and his co-author James Lindsay, set out to explain the 'Bush revolution' in foreign policy and put it in context. They insist that Bush is not a mere tool of his advisors, who are in any case not homogenous. His foreign policy strategy is indeed new, although it has given rise to certain unresolved problems. Robert McNamara (a former US Defense Secretary) and James Blight, share the fear of nuclear terrorism but argue that it can only be contained through the universal elimination of weapons of mass destruction, under the supervision of a possibly reformed UN. They oppose the unilateral use of force by the US except when America itself is attacked. They also argue that the US must change its posture from 'deterrence' to 'reassurance' and show more empathy in addressing the concerns of other countries and communities.
The review concludes that America is now deeply divided over its foreign policy and that events, rather than arguments, may decide the outcome of the debate.     

The informal diplomacy of the Australian American Leadership Dialogue

After 20 years, the Australian American Leadership Dialogue has acquired enviable access to political leaders in the foreign policy establishments of both countries. The influence of the Dialogue is at earlier consensus-building stages of decision making. Its importance has been in ‘relationship maintenance’ of the bilateral alliance which it has pursued through processes of informal diplomacy. The Dialogue now faces its own challenges of organisational renewal and relevance in the wider ‘interpretative community’ of Australian think tanks, university policy institutes and opinion-formers.     

Two Solitudes Lost: Comparing and Contrasting Interwar American and Canadian Isolationisms

For many Americans during the 1930s, participation in real and potential foreign conflicts was a national dilemma as serious as the Great Depression. As the decade progressed and the possibility of war loomed larger, an ideological battle ensued between two loosely formed yet bitterly hostile camps: one favoring unilateral isolation and the other for a more active role in the international system. This period of intense public debate about national foreign policy was not an American phenomenon, though. It had a distinct northern counterpart in Canada. The core of this project is to explore isolationism as an ideology of North American themes within national varieties. Comparing an American and a Canadian example of this mindset brings a broader perspective to a subject so commonly associated with the United States alone, revealing both cross-border commonalities and national differentiations.     

Wilsonianism: the dynamics of a conflicted concept

Americans have generally seen the principles and objectives proclaimed by President Woodrow Wilson during the First World War as having continued relevance for United States foreign policy. However, they have often differed over their application to specific situations, particularly because there is likely to be a tension between a drive to establish democratic values across the globe and commitment to a universal system of collective security. Rather than seeking a pure, abstract definition of 'Wilsonianism', it is more illuminating to examine its origins and evolution in relation to the development of American foreign policy over the years. Tracing this historical process reveals that Wilson committed himself to a postwar league of nations during the period of American neutrality, but it was only as the United States became a belligerent that the spread of democratic government became a policy objective, and then only in a partial and qualified way. A similar pattern has been discernible in subsequent decades. It has been during conflicts, or the run-up to them, that the more ideological and revisionist aspects of Wilsonian principles have come to the fore, whereas it has been in the aftermath of conflicts that there has been the greatest interest in the potentialities of a universal collective security organization. There has also been a broad shift of emphasis over time. As confidence in America's power position has grown, the core of Wilson's legacy has more often come to be seen as the promotion of democracy rather than the strengthening of international institutions. The persistence of both themes may be seen as reflecting basic and enduring elements of the policy-making context—on the one hand, the interests of the United States as a status quo power, and on the other, the demands of domestic American opinion.     

Variable Geography: America's Mental Maps of a Greater Europe

American backing for the process of European enlargement into central and east Europe remains strong despite differences of strategic interest, foreign policy choices and, during the past decade, a certain US ambivalence towards the trans-atlantic relationship. Drawing on a typology of 'mental maps', the author illustrates how the many and varied American ideas of what a future Europe might look like have guided US (and European) leaders in their attempts at defining this new post-Cold War Europe. Whether these maps can combine into clear policy is debatable. Yet the overall American mental map of Europe is becoming clearer. It includes Turkey, and it may include Ukraine and even Russia. However, concerns remain among US officials that this conception of a Greater Europe, equipped with its own foreign policy and military force, may prove a mixed blessing.