【作者】 许善品；

【导师】 汪诗明；

【作者基本信息】 华东师范大学 ， 国际关系， 2014， 博士

【摘要】 澳大利亚是被错放在亚洲的欧洲国家。在地理位置上,澳大利亚与东亚国家为邻,在地理上可以被视为东南亚地区的自然延伸,但却对亚洲国家缺乏认同感。在历史文化上,澳大利亚是毫无疑问的西方国家,澳大利亚的社会文化、政治制度和生活方式都来源于英国,但是位于亚洲的地理现实使澳大利亚正在经历着“亚洲化”。如何应对地理位置与历史文化的冲突、如何实现从“欧洲的海外部分”向亚太国家的转变是澳大利亚难以回避的难题。在欧洲主宰亚洲命运的殖民主义时代,澳大利亚尚可以通过背对亚洲、依附于英国来回避身份难题。在世界权力重心由欧洲向亚洲转移的背景下,澳大利亚必须正视亚洲的存在,认真思考澳大利亚在亚洲的位置。面向亚洲、融入亚洲是澳大利亚克服地理位置与历史文化冲突的最佳途径。不过,澳大利亚融入亚洲一直面临着来自本国国内和亚洲国家两方面的阻力,如何平稳、顺利的融入亚洲是澳大利亚面临的重要难题。本文以1972年惠特拉姆政府开始融入亚洲为时间起点,以澳大利亚历届政府在融入亚洲方面实施的重大举措为主线,结合当时的国内外情境,尤其是世界权力重心由欧洲向亚洲转移的背景,分析澳大利亚融入亚洲的动力、障碍、前景,揭示澳大利亚融入亚洲战略形成、发展的过程及特征,力求将澳大利亚融入亚洲的全景呈现出来。澳大利亚融入亚洲经历了从一维到多维、由模糊到清晰的演进过程。二战爆发之前,澳大利亚实际上奉行了“背对亚洲”、“绕过亚洲”的政策,故意对近在咫尺的亚洲视而不见。二战结束后,由于安全上的关系,澳大利亚开始重视亚洲的安全屏障作用。20世纪60年代末至70年代初,美国和英国在东亚地区实行战略收缩、中美开始外交接触,澳大利亚所处的外部环境发生了深刻的变化。为了适应变化了的国际和地区形势,惠特拉姆政府将外交重心由欧洲转移到了亚太,正式开启了融入亚洲的进程。20世纪80年代,随着亚洲经济的腾飞、澳亚贸易的兴旺发达,澳大利亚的外贸重心也由欧洲转移到亚洲。冷战结束后,基廷总理提出“全面融入亚洲”目标,主张澳大利亚不仅要在经济上融入亚洲,也应该具备亚太国家身份。由此,基廷政府使澳大利亚融入亚洲具有了身份转变的意义。虽然保守的霍华德政府在融入亚洲政策上举棋不定,但是澳大利亚融入亚洲已是人心所向、不可抗拒。无可奈何之下,实用主义色彩浓厚的霍华德政府决定继续推动融入亚洲进程。进入21世纪后,澳大利亚希望在“亚洲世纪”下融入亚洲,成为“最了解亚洲的欧洲国家”。在历届政府的共同努力下,澳大利亚融入亚洲逐渐由原先的摇摆不定、模糊不清走向成熟稳定、清晰可辨；由集中于经贸投资单一领域向地区合作、安全防务、文化交流、身份认同等多个领域全面发展。在澳大利亚融入亚洲的过程中,澳大利亚与亚洲由相互忽视走向相互依赖,彼此间的误解和错觉在减少,相互信任和“我们感”在增强。对澳大利亚融入亚洲过程进行分析、归纳后可以发现：首先,澳大利亚融入亚洲是手段,而不是目的。澳大利亚并不希望“脱欧入亚”,而是希望借助融入亚洲提高民族竞争力、重新确立澳大利亚国家身份。其次,经济动力是澳大利亚融入亚洲的主要动力,但不是唯一动力。澳大利亚还有在亚太地区寻找战略伙伴、塑造有利的外部环境、确保澳大利亚国家安全、提高澳大利亚国际地位的考虑。再次,澳大利亚融入亚洲并不是功利性、策略性的政策调整,而是长期性、战略性的外交转折,是世界文明发展的题中之义、是经济全球化的内在要求。虽然不会成为彻底的亚洲国家,但是澳大利亚将不可避免的“亚洲化”。虽然融入亚洲仍然面临着重重障碍,但是在世界权力重心由欧洲向亚洲加速转移的大背景下,澳大利亚融入亚洲已经是大势所趋、不可逆转。更多还原

【Abstract】 Australia is a European country which is misplaced in Asia. Geographically speaking, Australia is very far away from Europe, and so close to the East Asian nations that it can be thought of as the natural extension of Southeast Asia. Historically and culturally speaking, Australia is without doubt a Western country. The society, the culture, the political system and the life style of Australia all originate from Britain and Australian culture can be considered as the result of the localization of the British culture. It is inevitable for Australia to solve the contradiction between its geographical location and its history and culture, and to change its identity from being the oversea territory of Europe to becoming an Asia-Pacific country. During the colonial times, when Europe could dominate the fate of Asia, Australia could resort to turning its back to Asia and being attached to Britain so as to avoid its identity dilemma. However, when the focus of the world power is gradually transferred from Europe to Asia, it is a must for Australia to face up to the existence of Asia and carefully think of its own position in Asia. Facing up to and engaging with Asia are the best ways for Australia to overcome the conflict between its geographical location and its history and culture. Nevertheless, Australia’s engagement with Asia encounters with the resistance from both its internal environment and Asia. It is essential for Australia to engage with Asia in a steady and successful way. This dissertation follows the timeframe starting from Whitlam administration’s beginning to engage with Asia in1972. It focuses on the major initiatives taken by the previous Australian administrations during its engagement with Asia. It analyzes the motives, obstacles and prospects of Australia’s engagement with Asia under the circumstances at its home and abroad at that time, and especially under the background of the focus of the world power transferring from Europe to Asia. It tries to present a panoramic view of Australia’s engagement with Asia through revealing the formation, development process and characteristics of its strategy of the engagement with Asia.Australia’s engagement with Asia experiences the progressive process from being one-dimensional to becoming multi-dimensional and from being vague to becoming clear-cut. Before the breakout of the Second World War, Australia took the policies of turning its back to Asia and circumventing Asia, totally ignoring its close neighbor Asia. After WWII ended, Australia began to pay attention to Asia’s barrier function out of the consideration of its own security. During the end of1960s and the beginning of1970s, both America and Britain performed the strategic contraction and People’s Republic of China and America began their diplomatic contacts, which meant that Australia’s external environment had deeply changed. In order to adapt itself to the changed international and regional conditions, Whitlam administration transferred its diplomatic focus from Europe to Asia-Pacific region and formally started its process of engagement with Asia. In1980s, the focus of Australia’s foreign trade was also transferred from Europe to Asia because of the taking off of Asian economies and the trade prosperity between Australia and Asia. After the Cold War ended, Prime Minister Keating put forth the target of the full integration with Asia, which proposed that Australia should engage with Asia economically, and at the same time, it should have the identity of an Asia-Pacific country. Although the conservative Howard administration had two minds in its policy of the engagement with Asia, the engagement had become a popular idea and could not be reversed. Entering the21st century, Australia hopes to become the European country that knows Asia most, engage with Asia in the Asian Century, and enter the new historical phase of its engagement with Asia. With the concerted efforts of the administrations, Australia’s engagement with Asia changes from being vacillating and vague to becoming mature, steady and clear. The engagement is no longer focused only on the singular field of economic and trade investment, but instead it is comprehensively developed in the fields of regional cooperation, security and defense, cultural exchanges and identity. During the process of Australia’s engagement with Asia, the relationship between Australia and Asia changes from being mutually ignorant to becoming interdependent. The mutual misunderstanding and the illusion are decreasing and the mutual trust and the sense of "us" are improving.It can be concluded from the analysis of and the induction from Australia’s engagement with Asia:firstly, the engagement is the means instead of the aim. Australia does not want to detach itself from Europe and integrate into Asia. Instead, it hopes to raise its level of competition and reestablish the national identity through its engagement. Secondly, economic motive is the major driving force for the engagement, but it is not the only force. Australia also considers finding strategic partners in the Asia-Pacific region, creating favorable external environment, guaranteeing its national security and improving its international status. Thirdly, the engagement is not the utilitarian and tactic policy adjustment, but the long-term and strategic diplomatic transition. It is the theme of the development of the world civilizations and the internal requirement of the economic globalization. Although it will never become a complete Asian country, Australia will be inevitably Asianized. Though the engagement will face up to many obstacles, it is an irreversible general trend under the background of the speedy transferring of the focus of the world power from Europe to Asia.更多还原