【作者】 任克佳；

【导师】 王萍；

【作者基本信息】 南开大学 ， 世界史， 2013， 博士

【摘要】 南美太平洋战争是1879年至1883年发生在智利与秘鲁-玻利维亚联盟之间的一场地区战争,是19世纪拉丁美洲历史上的重大事件之一。交战双方为了获得太平洋沿岸丰富的硝石资源而展开激烈争夺,最后以智利的胜利而告结束。战前,南美洲是美国在拉丁美洲政治经济影响力较为薄弱的地区,南美太平洋战争的爆发为美国向该地区进行扩张提供了机遇。虽然美国不是战争的直接参战方,但它却一直是战争中最为活跃的外部力量。为了最大程度地谋求国家利益,实现称霸西半球的野心,在门罗主义指引下,美国三届政府根据形势的发展变化,在战争不同阶段采取了不同的政策,对战争的进程发挥了不可忽视的影响。战争爆发后,海斯政府的国务卿埃瓦茨宣布中立,企图在维护自身利益的同时通过强调交战国权利打击欧洲势力。此后,美国的政策经历了一个从秘密调停到公开调停的转变,这种调停活动到“阿里卡会议”时达到了顶峰。出于对欧洲主要是英国势力将因智利的胜利而在南美洲扩张的担心,加菲尔德政府的国务卿布莱恩开始采取“扶秘抑智”政策,在泛美主义口号下干涉双方谈判,反对智利割占秘鲁土地。为此,布莱恩派出特使前往南美,并不惜使用武力进行威胁。在其去职后,阿瑟内阁的国务卿弗里林海森继续保持干涉,只是他放弃了布莱恩的强硬政策,转而寻求“中间路线”,意图在不过分刺激智利的情况下劝其放弃领土要求。最后,美国的这些调停活动都以失败收场。本文在参阅美国有关外交档案的基础上,通过全面考察美国的南美太平洋战争政策,试图得出以下结论：尽管美国三届政府应对战争的政策各有不同,但其出发点都是门罗主义；在美国从大陆扩张向海洋扩张过渡期间,门罗主义在南美洲开始日益“活跃”,美国对南美太平洋战争的政策反映出门罗主义新的时代特征；南美太平洋战争及后来的美拉关系历史证明,美国始终没有放弃通过干涉来控制拉丁美洲,这是造成美拉之间发展差距的一个重要原因。更多还原

【Abstract】 The War of the Pacific is a regional war between Chile and Peru-Bolivia Union in1879-1883, It was one of the most important events in the history of Latin America in the19th century. In order to get the rich nitrates resources of the Pacific coast, two sides had a fierce competition, finally Chile won. Before the war, United States’s political and economic influence in South America is relatively weak, the outbreak of the War of the Pacific offered an opportunity for the United States to expand in the region. Although the United States is not a direct warring party, it has been the most active external force in the war. In order to dominate the Western Hemisphere and pursue national interests as far as possible, under the guidance of the Monroe Doctrine, three United States governments took different policies in different stages of the war, and it’s effect can not be ignored. After the war outbreak, as the Secretary of State of Hayes administration, Evarts declared neutral, wishing to safeguard United States interests, at the same time, by emphasizing the belligerent rights against European powers. Since then, the policy of the United States has experienced a shift, first offer good offices secretly and then publicly, the Arica Conference was the peak of such activities. Considering the Chile’s victory may bring the expansion of Europe especially Britain in South America, President Garfield’s Secretary of State Blaine began to take the policy of "back Peru, restrain Chile", interfered the negotiations in the Pan-American slogans and against Chile annex Peruvian territory. To this end, Blaine sent a special envoy to South America, and even threated to use force. After he resigned, Frelinghuysen became the new Secretary of State of Arthur Cabinet. He maintained interference in the affair, but gave up Blaine’s hard-line policy. Instead, he turned to a "middle-line" policy, with intent to persuade Chile giving up her territorial claims and avoiding irritate her at the same time. But finally, all these mediation activities of the United States ended in failure.Based on19th century American diplomatic archives, this paper reviewed the United States’s policy towards War of the Pacific, and drew the conclusions that: Although the policies of three United States governments were quite different, all of them stemed from the Monroe Doctrine; In the period of expansion from land to ocean, the Monroe Doctrine in South America became "active" increasingly, and the United States’s policy towards War of the Pacific reflected the emergence of new characteristics of Monroe Doctrine; War of the Pacific and other subsequent events in U.S.-Latin American relations proved that the United States had never given up control Latin America by interfering, which was an important reason for the formation development gap between the United States and Latin America.更多还原