论北约转型

【作者】 陈佳；

【导师】 刘德喜；

【作者基本信息】 中共中央党校 ， 国际政治， 2009， 博士

【摘要】 本论文以历史唯物主义方法论为指导,将北约转型置于全球化和冷战后国际格局大变动的整体背景下,从影响北约转型的各种推动力量及互动关系的角度,探讨北约转型与国际格局的变更和联盟成员国利益需求变化之间的内在联系,揭示北约转型的内因与外因及北约转型对北约联盟自身与当代国际关系的影响。本论文主体部分共分为四章。第一、第二章主要研究北约从成立到迄今为止的60年里战略是如何演变的。其基本线索是把北约放在冷战时期美苏对峙的两极国际格局和冷战结束后的多极化国际格局两个不同的国际政治大背景下进行比较分析,通过对北约军事战略、政治战略、组织机制冷战前和冷战后的对比,说明北约性质、功能、战略目标和组织机制的发展变化。北约成立时,北约性质的定位是军事政治组织,是一个集体防御组织。冷战后,面对变化了的安全环境,美国和欧洲盟国对北约有两大要求:一方面希望北约成为实现欧洲统一和稳定的工具,这就要求不断强化北约的政治职能;另一方面,希望北约能够转变军事战略,应付新形势下新的安全问题,这就要求北约具备处理危机的快速反应能力。北约转型正是沿着这两条线索发展的:第一,强化北约的政治职能,在保留集体防御条款的同时,使双边和多边安全合作成为联盟的重要手段,使北约发展成为开放性的泛欧安全合作体系的基础,逐渐由集体防御组织向集体安全组织演变。第二,确立处理危机和反恐战略,突破域外行动限制,并在指挥系统和军事部署方面进行大幅度的调整。第三章主要分析和论述了北约转型的内因与外因。一方面,由于国际格局和安全环境的深刻变化,导致北约存在的理念基础、有效性基础和制度基础受到削弱,在这种情况下北约必须转型,以适应新的安全形势需要,化解生存危机。另一方面,北约转型反映了西方国家对于巩固他们在冷战结束后新的国际结构中相对权力地位,以及谋求他们自身安全利益的考虑。对于美国、英国、法国、德国等北约组织内的大国来说,不仅能够从北约中获得共同的安全利益,北约还有助于他们或实施全球战略、或强化在区域中的相对实力、或均衡其他大国的势力或提高自己在国际体系中的地位和影响力。因此,美欧共同推动北约转型。就北约转型的外部变量俄罗斯因素来说,俄罗斯因素不仅是北约构建欧洲新安全秩序所必须要考虑的,也是影响北约存在和扩大的关键性变量。第四章主要分析了北约转型的影响与挑战。就北约转型的影响来说,它不仅关系到北约在新的历史条件下自身的存在,而且也引出了有关欧亚大陆战略角逐、美俄欧三角、中国在美“两洋”战略中的地缘战略处境等一系列重大问题的讨论,其影响是深远的。就北约转型面临的内外挑战来看,由于美欧在北约内部的矛盾与分歧,以及俄罗斯与北约在北约扩大和对欧洲安全格局主导权的争夺中存在着不可调和的矛盾,再加上国际机制和国际格局的制约,注定北约转型的进程不会是一帆风顺的。就北约未来的发展趋势来说,由于美欧双方都有改善、加强双方关系的需求,这就决定了未来美欧联盟总体的稳定性与可持续性,美欧关系将呈现出战略性合作与战术性分歧并存的特点;就北约扩大的步伐将迈向何方来看,未来北约的扩大将会沿着两个方向进行,一是面向西巴尔干地区;二是沿着乌克兰-外高加索-中亚一线,甚至可能推向蒙古。就北约与俄罗斯的关系来看,双方的关系只能是遏制与反遏制、冲突与合作并存,坚持“斗而不破”的底线。论文的结论部分指出,一方面,北约转型的成功与否将在根本上取决于它是否能够满足北约各国,尤其是其主要成员国所理解的各自对外战略和国家利益的需要。当他们认为该联盟不能满足于这些需要时,这一联盟的作用乃至它持续存在的前景是令人怀疑的。另一方面,北约唯有顺应国际社会发展大势,其转型之路才能越走越宽,否则必将难以为继,走入“死胡同”。更多还原

【Abstract】 This paper, under the guidance of historical materialism, by putting NATO’s transformation under the background of globalization and changes of international patterns after cold war, by taking all driving forces affecting NATO’s transformation and their interrelations into account, analyzed the interrelations between NATO’s transformation, changes of international patterns and changes of the interest of its member countries, internal and external causes of NATO’s transformation, and influences of NATO’s transformation on the alliance and contemporary international relations.This paper includes four chapters.The first two chapters mainly discussed the evolution of NATO’s strategy in the past 60 years since its establishment. The first two chapters, by putting NATO into two different international political backgrounds, namely the US-Soviet bipolar pattern in cold war and multi-polar pattern after cold war, by comparative analysis on NATO’s military strategies, political strategies and organizational mechanisms in cold war and after cold war, explained changes and developments of NATO’s nature, function, strategic objectives and organizational mechanisms. After its establishment, NATO had been a military-political organization, an organization for collective defense. After cold war, in the face of the changed security environment, the US and its European alliances set two objectives for NATO: on one hand, NATO was expected to be the tool for unifying and stabilizing Europe, which means that NATO’s political function shall be strengthened ceaselessly; on the other hand, NATO was expected to change its military strategy in order to deal with new security issues under new situation, namely NATO was required to have quick reaction capabilities for handling crisis. NATO’s transformation developed along with these two directions. First, NATO’s political function had been strengthened, together with reserving its collective defense article, bilateral and multi-lateral security cooperation had become the alliance’s main tools, and NATO had been the base of an opening trans-European cooperative security system, and it had changed from a collective defense organization into a collective security organization. Second, NATO had set crisis handling and anti-terrorism strategy, broken through restrictions on actions out of defense zone, and greatly adjusted its command system and military deployment. The third chapter mainly analyzed and discussed the internal and external causes of NATO’s transformation. On one hand, due to the profound changes of international patterns and security environment, NATO’s theoretical foundation, validity foundation and systematic foundation had been weaken, therefore, NATO was expected to transform in order to fulfill the requirement of new security situation and deal with its existential crisis. On the other hand, NATO’s transformation reflected western countries’desire to consolidate their relative superiority in international pattern after cold war and pursue their security interests. For the US, U.K., France, Germany and other big powers in NATO, on one hand, they could pursue their common security interests through NATO; on the other hand, NATO was helpful for them to implement their global strategy, or strengthen their relative power in their own region, or balance other powers’influence, or improve their status and influences in international system. Thus, both American and Europeans drove NATO to transform after cold war. For Russia, one of the external causes for NATO’s transformation, it not only had influences on NATO’s effort for constructing new security order in Europe, but also had key influences on NATO’s existence and enlargement.The fourth chapter mainly analyzed the influences and challenges of NATO’s transformation. For its influences, NATO’s transformation not only had influences on NATO’s existence, but also led discussions on several key issues, like strategic games on Eurasia, triangle relations among the US, Russia and the European Union, and China’s geo-strategic role in US’s bi-oceanic strategy, and etc. Its influences were profound. For internal and external challenges in NATO’s transformation, since both the US and European Union had the requirement to improve and strengthen bilateral relations, the US-EU alliance would maintain stable and sustainable generally in the future, US-EU relations would characterize as a mixture of strategic cooperation and tactical disputes. For NATO’s enlargement, it would continue its enlargement towards two directions, one would be western Balkans, the other would be Ukraine-Transcaucasia-Central Asia, and even Mongolia. For the NATO-Russia relations, both parties had no option but to continue to contain and anti-contain, conflict and cooperate, they would maintain their conflict but without complete break.The conclusion was that, on one hand, the success or not of NATO’s transformation would mainly lie on its satisfaction or not with its member countries’particularly its key members’diplomatic strategies and requirements on national interests. If they did not satisfy with the alliance’s actions, the function and future of the alliance would be doubtful; on the other hand, NATO had no option but to go along with world trends so as to continue its transformation, or it would go into cul-de-sac.更多还原