【作者】 李朋；

【导师】 朱寰；

【作者基本信息】 东北师范大学 ， 世界史， 2007， 博士

【摘要】 美国对东北亚国际关系的发展与变化有重要的影响和作用,因此研究美国的东北亚政策具有重大的现实意义和历史意义。美国东北亚政策表现出很强的“阶段性”,同时也有很强的“继承性”,对于我们研究美国当今的“东北亚区域国际关系的政策”具有重要的参考价值。本文旨在揭示美国在东北亚国际关系中的政策内涵及其规律,以便我们在处理东北亚区域国际关系中准确了解和理解美国的政策,更有效地利用美国这个区域外因素;为了鉴往知来,做一些有裨益的前期研究工作。论文写作路径:以东北亚区域国际关系格局的变迁为线索,通过对美国在不同“时代”的“东北亚政策”的梳理、归纳、总结,描绘出一条显性的“政策链条”,显现出美国在东北亚的“区域性”政策的内容、特征及规律,揭示美国在东北亚区域国际关系中的特殊地位、作用及其原因。全文由三部分,共六章组成。第一部分为绪论。阐述论文写作的意义、写作宗旨、主要观点、方法与路径、重点与难点、研究动态、概念界定以及论文结构概述。第二部分为主体部分。阐述美国不同阶段的东北亚政策,由二、三、四、五、六章组成。第一个阶段:在传统东方秩序——“华夷秩序”衰落时期的政策(1784-1894)。即从“中国皇后号”首航中国广州至中日甲午战争前后。此时政策内容不明确,也不详尽,处于摸索阶段,表现为:用有限的国家力量帮助私人商业势力获取贸易机会。不过这个时期在东北亚的利益毕竟没有构成美国国家利益的重心,不能成为其外交政策的主要目标,所以很少得到国家力量的倾力支持。在政策制订的依据、机制方面也非常粗糙、不规范,有时显得有些混乱;从国家层面的政策目标认定、手段选择等方面都比较保守、谨慎。第二阶段:在“华夷秩序”崩溃时期的政策(1894-1903)。即从中日甲午战争至日俄战争爆发前。随着实力增强及在东北亚的利益增加,美国的政策也逐渐明晰,试图在区域国际政治中发挥重要影响,最后形成“门户开放”政策。虽然还是优先考量经济利益,但已经开始重视政治问题,注意营造符合美国利益的东北亚政治格局。但是,在内战和重建之后,急剧膨胀的空间再次吸收了美国国力增长的冲击波,在东北亚的国际事件中,美国都表现出积极参与、试图主导,但又力不从心的势态。第三阶段:在东北亚格局大调整时期的政策(1904-1914)。即从日俄战争后至第一次世界大战前。此间美国政策由挺日、拒俄、建立均势,到制日、抗日,再到向日本妥协。对日关系成为了美国东北亚政策的核心问题。自中日甲午战后,日本发展成为一支强大的国际力量,开始参与到东北亚的国际博弈的大棋局中来。在20世纪初的东北亚国际争端中,以日本为主动力的中、日、俄关系成为了主旋律。在日、俄争夺中,美国的政策表现为:小心地建构“均势”,竭力阻止该区域中“超强国家”脱颖而出。第四阶段:在一战前后混乱格局时期的政策(1912-1922)。清朝灭亡、沙俄覆灭、传统帝国主义列强失去了在东北亚的争霸地位,日本在东北亚国际政治博弈中取得优势地位,导致了东北亚格局陷于空前混乱之中。此间威尔逊政府试图要在新格局中大有作为,但是由于没有战略上的根本调整,政策无所依托。结果,其政策在实践中大多又是转攻为守,以妥协告终。美国政策表现为:患得患失,既不愿意放弃受到威胁的既得利益,可又没有有效的应对手段;既不愿意向挑战者让步,可是又不能够认清现实,联合现有的和潜在的同盟,以便与均势格局的破坏者对抗;既不能调整利益重心,改变“欧洲优先”的战略,又不愿从具有重要前景的东北亚区域收缩和退出。这样美国的政策就陷入了一种“两难”局面。而日本作为美国的竞争对手,则是全神贯注地致力于争夺东北亚的区域霸权,在政治、经济、军事、文化等各个方面倾注全国之力谋求该区域的国际格局的新突破。这些决定了东北亚国际关系的天平必然地向日本方面倾斜下去。直到1922年,美国才联合其他国家,试图阻止东北亚的天平倾斜。第五阶段:在“凡尔赛-华盛顿体系”时期的政策(1919-1931)。此间美国的东北亚政策貌似雄心勃勃,实际上却陷入了政策目标不明确、战略利益判断游移不定的战略误区。特别是此时出现了“反共”“意识形态”问题。在这个问题上的消耗,让美国的稳定东北亚局面的努力化为泡影。美国的政策只有再经历30年代整整10年的嬗变,才实现其决定性的转折。一个时代结束了。第三部分为结语。综合分析美国20世纪30年代以前的东北亚政策的全貌和形成机制及原因,总结出美国东北亚政策的发展规律和实质。更多还原

【Abstract】 The importance of studying US policy in Northeast Asia lies in that the US policy had a crucial influence in the development and changes of Northeast Asian international relations. The US policy in Northeastern Asia showed a strong“staging”and“inheriting”features which are valuable in our research in the present US international relation policy in Northeast Asia. With a review of the past, this dissertation tends to provide insights to the present ever-growing complications in Northeast Asia international relations by exploring the US—an out-of-region influential power—policies. The dissertation outlines“regional”policy of the US in Northeast Asia by searching the changes of Northeast Asia international relation pattern, summaries an overt“policy chain”designed by US at different“times”so as to show the contents, features and regulations of the US policies in Northeast Asia.The dissertation is composed of 3 parts with 6 chapters.The First Part is the introduction of briefing the significance of study, goal, points of argument, method of study, outlines, special focus, difficult researching parts, literature review, definitions and structure of the dissertation.Being the main body, the second part (composed of chapter 2,3,4,5 and 6) concerns different US Northeast Asia policies in order of time.The First Phase: traditional oriental order– policies made in the falling time of“Hua-Yi Order”(1784-1894),the 100 years with the starting time of“Empress of China’s”maiden voyage to Guangzhou till the Sino-Japanese War of 1894-1895. US Policies in this time showed vague goals and detail-less and probing features: by exploiting the limited US national power to offer aids to private institutions for seizing business opportunities. The special features of the times were that the policy was not strongly supported as the interests in Northeastern Asia did not become the center of the US national interests thus forming no main goal in the government diplomatic relations. The policies made at the time were crude, non-regulated and sometime even out of order as they were baseless and non-mechanized. Also, the policies showed cautious, conservative features in goal deciding and way of achieving.The Second Phase:“Hua-Yi Order”collapsing time policy (1894-1903) which was the 10 year time from the Sino-Japanese War of 1894-1895 till the break of Japan-Russia War. With the economic power enhanced and interests increased in Northeast Asia, US policies become more explicit trying to shed influences in the regional politics, thus forming“Open-door Policy”. Though economic interest was the primary concern, US began to lay stress on political aspects, trying to nurture a pattern that fit the US interests. But after the civil war and reconstruction, the rapid expansion in space in America absorbs the shock-wave of US economic increase. Thus, the US involvement in international events in Northeast Asia, although with active and leading idea, was far from being up to their ambition.The Third Phase: policies in the great adjustment time of Northeast Asia (1904-1914) which was the 10 year time from the post Japan-Russia War till the outbreak of the World War I. During this period, the US policies changed from supporting Japan, resisting Russia and forming balanced power to limiting Japan, fighting Japan and to once again compromising Japan. Thus, US-Japan relation became the core issue of the US Northeast Asia policy making. Since the China-Japan War of 1894-1895, Japan developed into a powerful international nation, beginning to get more and more involved in the international chess game in Northeast Asia after Russia. At the beginning of the 20th century, the tune turned is played by China, Japan and Russia with Japan playing the key instruments. In the competition between Japan and Russia, USA showed a policy of carefully constructing“balance”, trying all out to stop the upstart of the“superpower nation”in the region.The Fourth Phase: the policies during the time of disorder after the World War I (1912-1922). With the downfall of Qing Dynasty and Tsar Russia, and the lost of competing position of the traditional powers, Japan gained the advantage in the political realm in Northeast Asia leading to the unprecedented chaos in the region. In the new regional political pattern, Wilson Administration tried to shed influence, but they finally turned from offensiveness to defensiveness due to their non-adjustment in strategy and basis-less policy making and finally resulted in compromise. The US policy at the time had the features that they weighed too much on the losses and gains and was not willing to give up the gained interests in face of thread, but did not have effective measures, that they did not want to compromise to the challenger, but at the at time did not have a clear idea of the situation, and did not look for the potential allies so as to form an united power to cope with the challenger, and that they did not adjust the focal position of interest to change the“European Priority”strategy, but at the same time not willing to withdraw or concentrate power in Northeast Asia with promising interests prospect. All these put USA in dilemma in its foreign policy. On the contrary, Japanese aimed at forming allies with the powerful nations in Northeast Asia and searching for new internationally breakthrough in political, economic, military, cultural realms with all Japanese national power. The results were seen as a tilted scale favoring Japanese. It was not until 1922 when US stopped the tilting of the scale in the region by allying other nations.The Fifth Phase:“Versailles-Washington”time policy. The time showed the aspiring trend in US policy making, but it actually fell into the strategic mistake with unclear, wandering goals in strategic interests in Northeast Asia policies. Especially, the rise in“anti-communist”and“ideological”issues wore greatly the economic and political energy, which made the desire of stabilizing Northeast Asia a dream. The United States were to have more than 10 years in the 30s of the 20th century of painful and total change before the real decisive turnover could appear. A time was over.The Third Part: conclusion. This part provides comprehensive analysis and review on the forming mechanism and causes of the US Northeast Asia policies since 30s of the 20th century, and summarizes the law and essence of the US Northeast Asia policies.更多还原