论俄罗斯中亚战略的现实基础

20世纪90年代初,苏联发生巨大的政治裂变,联盟解体,中亚地区独立成为五个国家。中亚地区这一地缘政治版图的巨变,使该地区开始了真正意义上的主权国家的历史。面对中亚新的政治版图,俄罗斯及时制定并实施了新的中亚战略。传统的地缘战略空间理念,挥之不去的"中亚情结",是俄罗斯中亚战略的出发点和惯性思维;国家安全的需要,是俄罗斯实施新的中亚战略的现实需求;经济利益、特殊利益和邻国的关系是俄罗斯中亚战略必然考虑的重要因素。     

朝鲜半岛的地缘战略特征

朝鲜半岛的地缘战略特征陆俊元朝鲜半岛是我国安全的重要战略侧翼,同时也关系到日本、俄罗斯、美国等大国的战略利益。历史上,它是帝国主义、霸权主义势力争夺的场所和进攻中国的通道。战后,半岛发展为举世瞩目的热点地区。冷战期间,半岛上形成了以中、苏、美、日四大...     

浅议美俄关系的现状及前景

近年来,因美国在东欧部署导弹防御系统而引发美俄各种矛盾骤然激化,美俄关系降至冷战结束后的冰点。美国对俄罗斯持续不断的挤压使俄国内反美情绪上升;美俄之间面临着新的矛盾并出现了新的特点。然而,美俄关系不会重新回到冷战,而正在形成对抗加合作的模式。     

美国国家安全战略中的地缘政治思想

地缘政治在美国影响深远,根植于人们的意识中,成为政治家、战略家们观察国际事务、思考战略问题的一种习惯性观念。在美国的国家安全战略中,始终隐含和贯穿着深厚的地缘政治思想,它的战略是以稳定的地理考虑为基础的。本文以《美国国家安全战略报告》为据,阐明这种特征。     

蒙古国地缘特性及其国际关系

在国际关系格局中,从力量和影响来看,蒙古不是一个十分有地位的国家。然而,由于蒙古国的地缘政治位置的特殊性,在大国战略关系中,蒙古就象一个砝码,它能使亚太战略结构的天平产生倾斜。蒙古对中国、俄罗斯、美国、日本等大国均有重大战略价值,它的对外政策取向将对这些大国之间构成的复杂的战略关系产生深刻影响。同时,蒙古处于有关大国之间形成的地缘政治结构中,蒙古的国家战略和对外关系受到大国关系的严重制约,具有清晰的地缘政治特点与模式。     

试论冷战结束以来美国的南海政策

美国南海政策是基于美国地缘战略构想生发而成。基于多位地缘政治家的理论,根据冷战结束之后亚太地区的新形势,美国在南海地区实施以加强军事存在、强化舆论战为主要内容的对外政策,其目的就是插手南海事务,攫取在亚太地区海洋利益。冷战结束之后,美国实施的南海政策,影响了南海地区局势的稳定、有引发地区军备竞赛的危险、引发了亚太地区地缘政治格局的新变动。     

试论新时期媒体对俄传播的人才素养

时代发展到21世纪,信息化高速运转,信息的更新速度越来越快,对新闻事件的报道越来越及时,各领域的交往日益频繁,对外传播领域的竞争已趋白热化。以俄罗斯为例,为谋求重树在世界舞台的地位,并扩大在中东地区的政治、经济影响力,俄计划投资3500万美元开设一家阿拉伯语电视台,而中东地区是包括美、英和其他一些欧洲国家主要新闻台较量的热地;被称为“俄罗斯版CNN”的英语新闻电视台——“今日俄罗斯”电视台已在2006年3月正式开播,     

论地缘战略的主体间性——兼论中国地缘战略抉择

主体间性一词是20世纪西方哲学凸显出来的一个重要概念,对这一问题的研究有助于解决本体论、认识论和伦理学等多方面的问题。简单来说,主体间性就是主体之间的交互作用。主体间性具有物质性、实践性、历史性和社会性,其存在于集体主体之中,可以通过"教化"获得。据此,本文通过对四个经典地缘政治理论,即国家有机体论、海权论、陆权论和边缘地带论的历史分析,挖掘了隐含在其中的主体间性。并以美国对苏联和中国实施的地缘战略围堵为例,通过分析同一地缘战略所导致的截然不同结果,表明了地缘战略的构建、制定和实施都必须遵循主体间性。最后根据主体间性提出中国未来地缘战略抉择。     

试论新时期媒体对俄传播的人才素养

<正>时代发展到21世纪,信息化高速运转,信息的更新速度越来越快,对新闻事件的报道越来越及时,各领域的交往日益频繁,对外传播领域的竞争已趋白热化。以俄罗斯为例,为谋求重树在世界舞台的地位,并扩大在中东地区的政治、经济影响力,俄计划投资3500万美元开设一家阿拉伯语电视台,而中东地区是包括美、英和其他一些欧洲国家主要新闻台较量的热地;被称为"俄罗斯版CNN"的英语新闻电视     

斯诺登引爆美俄情报战

揭秘者斯诺登,已在俄罗斯的谢列梅捷沃机场滞留一周多。一周来,美俄两国在斯诺登的去留问题上持续交锋,互不退让。美国政府表示,斯诺登的行为已触犯了《间谍法》,希望俄罗斯方面能继续"在各种问题上合作的历史",遣送斯诺登回国;俄罗斯方面则坚持,俄美之间没有引渡协议,斯诺登也没有在俄境内犯罪,因此不会将他交给美国。斯诺登事件发生后,尽管俄罗斯一再表示,自己的情报部门人员没有和他接触,但不少美     

Strategic Reassertion in Russia's Central Asia Policy

President Putin has presided over a proactive, hard-headed and relatively effective Russian policy in Central Asia and the Caspian region since at least the summer of 2002, which aims both to support Russia's revival as an economic and military power and to help tackle at source new security challenges from the volatile south. In line with rising domestic nationalist thinking and the growing influence of officials with a security service or military background, Moscow has been searching for a rationale to support a more assertive policy in the region. Meanwhile, Russian and American views on the scope and conduct of the war on terrorism have diverged in important respects. Russia lacks an overall regional strategy for Central Asia, but is seeking to mesh together geopolitical, security and energy policy goals. It is seeking to reinvigorate its military–security influence in Central Asia under the banner of counterterrorism and at the same time has achieved long-term agreements for energy transit and purchases that make Central Asian states increasingly dependent on Russia in energy policy. Overall, a dynamic of competition is displacing the potential for cooperation between Russia and western states, especially the United States, in Central Asia. The prospects for a fully-fledged strategic partnership in the region are fading but the reality of security threats from Afghanistan and within Central Asia might eventually reconcile Moscow to a lower profile but long-term western strategic presence in the region.     

Russia resurgent? Moscow's campaign to ‘coerce Georgia to peace’

Russia's military incursion into Georgia in August 2008 and formal recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia raise fundamental questions about Russian regional policy, strategic objectives and attitudes to the use of armed force. The spectacle of maneouvre warfare on the periphery of Europe could form a watershed in post‐Cold War Russian relations with its neighbourhood and the wider international community. The speed and scale with which Russia's initial ‘defensive’ intervention to ‘coerce Georgia to peace’ led to a broad occupation of many Georgian regions focuses attention on the motivations behind Russian military preparations for war and the political gains Moscow expected from such a broad offensive. Russia has failed to advance a convincing legal case for its operations and its ‘peace operations’ discourse has been essentially rhetorical. Some Russian goals may be inferred: the creation of military protectorates in South Ossetia and Abkhazia; inducing Georgian compliance, especially to block its path towards NATO; and creating a climate of uncertainty over energy routes in the South Caucasus. Moscow's warning that it will defend its ‘citizens’ (nationals) at all costs broadens the scope of concerns to Russia's other neighbour states, especially Ukraine. Yet an overreaction to alarmist scenarios of a new era of coercive diplomacy may only encourage Russian insistence that its status, that of an aspirant global power, be respected. This will continue to be fuelled by internal political and psychological considerations in Russia. Careful attention will need to be given to the role Russia attributes to military power in pursuing its revisionist stance in the international system.     

Russian War Propaganda in the United States during the First World War

The article examines Russian governmental efforts to positively shape public opinion in the United States towards the Russian war effort. In late 1916, a small information service, the Nord-Ziud Agency, was established in New York with the task of influencing press coverage by supplying American publications with interesting and favorable information about Russia and its army. However, meager financial support, the unwillingness of the military authorities to frankly share information, and their failure to understand what would interest American readers all undercut this novel propaganda effort.     

Perspectives on the Caspian Sea Dilemma: Russian Policies Since the Soviet Demise

An American political scientist specializing in Soviet and post-Soviet foreign affairs outlines the highlights of Russian policy in the Caspian region from 1991 to late 2003. The paper discusses and analyzes the interaction among the five littoral states (Azerbaijan, Iran, Kazakhstan, Russia, and Turkmenistan) in light of contentious disputes over the sea's demarcation, the routing of pipelines, and efforts to maximize oil and gas exports to the West. Noting instances of "gunboat diplomacy" used by Russia and Iran, as well as the American presence in the region after 9/11 and during the current war in Iraq, the author reflects on the Russian role as a stabilizing force in the region. Journal of Economic Literature, Classification Numbers: O18, Q30, Q40. 1 figure, 74 references.     

从双边到三角——冷战结束前后中美印关系的变化浅析

美中印都是对亚太事务有着重要影响的大国。冷战时期,美国的冷战结盟政策成为影响中美印间关系的主要因素。冷战结束后,随着亚太战略形势的变化,中美印渐形成了三角互动关系。三国间如何互动,将在很大程度上影响该地区的和平与稳定。     

Policing the near abroad: Russian foreign policy in the South Caucasus

This article tries to understand Russia's policies towards the South Caucasus and answer the question of whether there is a tension between Russia's interests and policies. An attempt is made to identify Russia's strategic interests in the region and the crucial factors that shape Russian policies. Based on the assumption that today's Russia gives de facto support to the secessionist regimes in Georgia, the author attempts to explain what the Kremlin's motives are in supporting the secessionist regimes. The author investigates whether Russian support for the separatist regimes in the South Caucasus is a reaction to the foreign policy orientation of the parent states or a part of Russia's security political interests. On the one hand, supporting instability in the South Caucasus cannot be a part of the Kremlin's strategic interests, because that can pose a threat to the North Caucasus. On the other hand, however, Russian policies are not designed to achieve long-term stability in the South Caucasus, and controlled instability seems to suit the Kremlin. Why Russia vies for coercive hegemony and supports secessionism are the central questions of this article.     

RUSSIA ON THE PACIFIC: THE ROLE OF THE AMUR

The key to the expansion of Russia to the Far East and to America is to be found in the loss of the valley of the Amur to China by the Treaty of Nerchinsk in 1689 and its reacquisition in the period from 1854 to 1860. R. J. Kerner, "Russian Expansion to America, Its Bibliographical Foundations, Papers of the Bibliographicul Society of America.     

美国对西属美洲独立运动政策的转变及其影响

西属美洲殖民地爆发争取独立的战争之后,处于同一半球的美国感到既是挑战也是机遇。美国一方面担心欧洲大国会乘机来填补西班牙正在美洲失去的权力"真空",另一方面却认为这场运动为美国扩大影响提供了一个良机。美国最终率先承认了拉美独立国家的政权。美国政策的转变对拉美独立运动的进程产生了积极的影响,拉开了美国把拉美地区囊括进其势力范围之内的序幕。     

4. GLOBALIZING THE COMANCHE EMPIRE

The Comanche rose by adapting to the technological and trade opportunities brought to New Mexico by the eighteenth‐century expansion of New Spain's globally linked silver economy. They built an empire that flourished in the first half of the nineteenth century, dominating vast areas of the high plains and controlling complex trades, just as a social revolution within Mexico's wars of independence undermined the silver economy and ended its northward dynamism. Comanche power flourished between a struggling Mexico and an expanding US, until the military and industrial power of the latter combined with the ecological vulnerabilities of the Comanche economy to enable the Anglo‐American triumph in what should be called the War for North America of 1846–1848. The US claimed a continental West from an uncertain Mexican sovereignty and an assertive Comanche empire of war and trade. The expansion and collapse of New Spain, the rise and fall of the Comanche empire, and the rise of the United States all occurred within an evolving globalization. Spanish North America expanded to 1810; Comanche power rose in the eighteenth century and soared after 1810 as Mexico struggled with the challenges of nation‐making; then the United States defeated both to claim continental hegemony in the 1840s. These expansions, conflicts, and changes—all tied to larger processes of globalization—reshaped North America between 1700 and 1850.     

Book reviews

Books reviewed in this article: International Relations theory Taming the sovereigns: institutional change in international politics. By K. J. Holsti. International ethics Glimmer of a new leviathan: total war in the realism of Niebuhr, Morgenthau, and Waltz. By Campbell Craig. International law and organization The politics of international law. Edited by Christian Reus‐Smit. International justice and the International Criminal Court: between sovereignty and the rule of law. By Bruce Broomhall. Enemy aliens: double standards and constitutional freedoms in the war on terrorism. By David Cole. The UN Security Council from the Cold War to the 21st century. Edited by David M. Malone. Foreign relations An alliance at risk: the United States and Europe since September II. By Laurent Cohen‐Tanugi. Friendly fire: the near‐death of the transatlantic alliance. By Elizabeth Pond. The Middle East's relations with Asia and Russia. Edited by Hannah Carter and Anou‐shiravan Ehteshami. A dictionary of diplomacy. 2nd edn. By G. R. Berridge and Alan James. Conflict, security and armed forces Allies: the US, Britain, Europe, and the war in Iraq. By William Shawcross. Politics, democracy and social affairs Revolutionary and dissident movements of the world. 4th edn. Edited by Bogdan Szajkowski. Ethnicity and cultural politics The search for Arab democracy: discourses and counter‐discourses. By Larbi Sadiki. International and national political economy, economics and development Transatlantic economic disputes: the EU, the US, and the WTO. Edited by Ernst‐Ulrich Petersmann and Mark A. Pollack. Behind the scenes at the WTO: the real world of international trade negotiations. By Fatoumata Jawara and Eileen Kwa. In defense of globalization. By Jagdish N. Bhagwati. La mondialisation et ses ennemis. By Daniel Cohen. History Britain and Europe since 1945: historiographical perspectives on integration. By Oliver J. Daddow. Democracy and US policy in Latin America during the Truman years. By Steven Schwartzberg. Europe Toward a European army: a military power in the making? By Trevor C. Salmon and Alistair J. K. Shepherd. Inescapable questions: autobiographical notes. By Alija Izetbegovic. The demise of Yugoslavia: a political memoir. By Stipe Mesic. The future of Turkish foreign policy. Edited by Lenore G. Martin and Dimitris Keridis. Russia and the former Soviet republics Russia in search of itself. By James H. Billington. Russland und der postsowjetische Raum. Edited by Olga Alexandrova, Roland Götz and Uwe Halbach. Russian foreign policy and the CIS: theories, debates and actions. By Nicole J. Jackson. Middle East and North Africa Iran, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf: power politics in transition. By Faisal bin Salman al‐Saud. Sub‐Saharan Africa Accounting for horror: post‐genocide debates in Rwanda. By Nigel Eltringham. Politics in South Africa: from Mandela to Mbeki. By Tom Lodge. Beyond the miracle: inside the new South Africa. By Allister Sparks. Asia and Pacific Le voile et la bannière: l'avant‐garde féministe au Pakistan. By Christèle Dedebant. China's techno‐warriors: national security and strategic competition from the nuclear to the information age. By Evan A. Feigenbaum. Kim Jong‐Il: North Korea's Dear Leader. By Michael Breen. North Korea: another country. By Bruce Cumings. Latin America and Caribbean Latin American and Caribbean foreign policy. Edited by Frank O. Mora and Jeanne A. K. Hey.