【作者】 高尚涛；

【导师】 韩玉贵；

【作者基本信息】 山东师范大学 ， 马克思主义理论与思想政治教育， 2003， 硕士

【摘要】 世界和平从其诞生的那一天起，就主要是发生在国家之间或国家内部的诸派别之间的“对等和平”。在“对等和平”时期，和平实现的手段主要是设法制止对等各方——国家之间或国内诸派别之间的冲突和战争，和平实现的途径和世界和平的内容也主要是消除国家间的或一国内部的战争、实现国家间的或一国内部的和平。 当代恐怖主义的崛起对传统的“对等和平”提出了挑战。当代恐怖主义组织通过针对国家的“不对等”战争，极大的改变了世界和平的内容，提出了世界和平的新概念。现在，恐怕己很难简单地说所谓“和平”就是国家之间或者国家内部的诸派别之间的非战争状态。因为在恐怖主义的进攻下，国家之间或者国家内部的诸派别之间的非战争状态已不足以保证世界的和平，传统的世界和平的内涵现在已不再适用，原有的“对等和平”应该加上“不对等和平”的内容。也许，我们应该这样重新界定和平：所谓和平，包括对等和平与不对等和平，对等和平是指国家之间或者国家内部的诸派别之间的非战争状态，不对等和平是指国际恐怖组织与国家之间的非战争状态。这两种非战争状态的任何一种遭到破坏，都足以引起世界的不和平。 通过对建构恐怖主义身份的实质因素的分析，从实用性战略分析的层面上看，本文认为，当代恐怖主义是20世纪70年代以来形成的一股系统的思潮和运动，是一种意识形态或信仰，它不仅大量采取杀伤无辜的攻击战略，而且政治目标日益庞大。它主要是指一定的行为体(个人、团体或国家)为使受到压制的一定政治、经济、文化等利益能够实现，在仇恨和报复性动机的驱使下，通过特定的个人或小集团采用突然的、难以预料的非常规方式，利用一切可能危害对方的、常常是暴力殃及无辜或蓄意滥杀无辜等足以产生巨大社会恐慌效果的手段打击对方的一种信仰或意识形态。这种信仰或意识形态认为，通过不择手段的、背后袭击和滥杀无辜的方式打击对方所造成的社会恐慌和影响，可以带给对方强大的压力，从而迫使对方放弃对自己一定利益实现的阻挠并可能帮助自己解决问题，有的还可以同时达到复仇宣泄的目的。 在恐怖主义的冲击下，传统的国家安全观念，也开始受到挑战。传统的国家安全观念是以实力和对抗为基础的，主要用于对付来自敌对国家的威胁。但二战结束以来，尤其是随着冷战的终结，整个世界的安全环境发生了巨大变化，国家间的相互依存加深，国家之间，尤其是大国之间的冲突已逐渐减少并不再是一国安全的主要威胁。另一方面，当代恐怖主义对国家的威胁日益加大。在这种情况下， 传统的国家安全观念应该相应做出改变，以适应国家安全形势的新需要。首先， 传统的以实力和对抗为基础的对付国家间冲突的安全观念和安全机制应该加入 “互信、互利、平等、合作”的新安全观内容，以“合作安全”适应当代国家安 全的新形势。其次，传统的国家安全观念和安全机制与当前恐怖主义的盛行存在 着直接联系，新的安全观念和安全机制必须在原来的基础上向应对恐怖分子发动 的“不对等战争”的方向演变和延伸，并开始强调“大众安全观念”。 恐怖主义在全世界的蔓延严重地危害了世界的和平与安全，世界各国都开始 着手打击恐怖主义，但对恐怖主义的打击绝不是一件容易的事情。国际恐怖活动 的特点诀定了打击恐怖主义必须采取正确的国际战略并开展广泛和有效的国际合 作。 从当代恐怖主义的活动上看，它主要有三个方面的特点。一是导致进行恐怖 活动的原因不是某种宗教或极端意识本身，而是宗教狂热或极端意识所支持的某 种政治仇恨，所以，应强调运用“文化认同政治原理”分析和指导国家安全。二 是恐怖活动是一种政治战。三是恐怖份于的组织和活动分散在世界各国，而且其 行动隐蔽性强。这要求各国在反对恐怖主义时，必须在设法解诀各种重大的国际 不公和利益差距的同时，组成广泛和有效的国际反恐怖战线。“ 9·11”事件以后 世界各国尤其是各个大国从战略上调整了与美国的关系，大体形成了在反恐基础 上的、配合美国打击恐怖主义并有利于自己政治需要的、空前的国际反恐合作阵 线。 在历史上，国际社会一度形不成有效的国际反恐怖合作。进入20世纪90年 代以后，国际社会开始寻求合作打击恐怖主义，并建立一些双边和多边的国际反 恐怖合作机制。1995年以后，国际反恐怖合作的范围不断扩大，双边和多边合作 取得进一步的进展。联合国是世界上最重要的全球反恐怖合作机制，但它作为一 个机制发挥实际作用仅是近十年的事。随着全球反恐合作的不断深入，联合国的 作用日益受到重视c“上海合作组织”也己经成为国际上区域性反恐怖合作组织的 典范，其签署的《打击恐怖主义、分裂主义和极端主义上海公约》，己经成更多还原

【Abstract】 The world peace had ever been born to be "The matchable peace" among nations or parties of a nation. During the period of "The matchable peace", the means of achieving peace is mainlyto try to put down the conflicts and battles among the matchable sides--nations or parties of anation. The way of achieving peace is thus mainly to eliminate wars among nations or of a nation, and Peace means the peace among nations or of a nation.However, the modern terrorism is growing up to challenge the traditional "matchable peace". By "The unmatchable war" against nations, the modern terrorist organizations are changing what the world peace used to mean, and advancing a new concept of the world peace. At present, it’s hard to say that Peace is the non-warfare among nations or parties of a nation. For under the attack sponsored by terrorists, the non-warfare among nations or parties of a nation has not been enough to keep the world peaceful. The traditional connotation of the world peace is now not applicable. "The unmatchable peace" should be added to the former "matchable peace". For aught I know, we should re-define Peace in this way: so-called Peace includes the matchable peace and the unmatchable peace. The matchable peace means the non-warfare among nations or parties of a nation. The unmatchable peace means the non-warfare between terrorist organizations and nations. Is either of the both non-warfare destroyed, the world peace will be destroyed. So, to achieve peace we should try from two aspects of the matchable and the unmatchable to ensure the world to keep warless, or we’ll see no peace.By way of analyzing the essential ingredients of constructing terrorism, from the lay of practical and strategical analysis, the dissertation takes for that, the modern terrorism is a systematic trend of thought and campaign, is a faith, which not only directly kills innocent persons strategically, but also has more colossal political goals. It is mainly a faith or ideology with which some actor (an individual, a group or a nation), for the purpose of realizing some political, economic, cultural interests suppressed, driven by hatred and retaliative motivation, takes by specific and secret individual or small group unconventional extreme measures which are abrupt and unpredictable, and utilizes every means which is as harmful as possible to the opposite, and often violent enough to endanger the innocent or to massacre with malice aforethought the innocent and lead to huge social panic, to attack the opposite. The faith or ideology takes for that, the horror and the impact caused by the attack from the rear by fair means or foul, can exert enormous pressure on the opposite (usually a country), and thereby compel the opposite to give up stimying their efforts of realizing some interests and perhaps to help them to solve the problem,and sometimes can also help them to achieve the purpose of vengeance and catharsis.Under the impact of terrorism, the traditional nation security theory is being challenged. The traditional nation security theory, based on strength and confrontation, is mostly used to cope with the threat of other nations. However, after World War II .especially with the end of the Cold War, the security environment of the whole world has changed greatly. Interdependence among nations becomes deepened; conflicts among nations, especially among powers, become decreasing, not to be a main threat against a country any more. On the other hand, threat of International terrorism against nations is increasing. Under such a circumstance, the traditional nation security theory should be amended accordingly to be adapted to the new situation of the nation security. Firstly, The traditional nation security theory and its corresponding security mechanism, based on strength and confrontation, used to cope with the threat of other nations, should be added to the content of the New Security Theory of "Trust each other, Benefit each other, Be equal with each other, Cooperate with each other", and come to emphasize on更多还原