【作者】 郭铁；

【导师】 刘德斌；

【作者基本信息】 吉林大学 ， 世界近现代史， 2007， 硕士

【副题名】卡特、里根政府时期美国对南非种族隔离的政策

【摘要】 南非拥有重要的战略地位和丰富的矿产资源,控制南非对美国势力渗入南部非洲,插手非洲事务具有重要的意义。但由于南非实行臭名昭著的种族隔离政策遭到全世界人民的反对,美国难以与之发展正常的对外关系,美国对南非种族隔离的政策亦成为美对南政策的风向标。卡特、里根政府时期美国对南非政策前后变化明显,两届政府有时甚至出现完全相反、相互矛盾的政策,这种政策变化可以说是二战后美国对南非种族隔离政策变化的代表与缩影。对这段时期美国对南非种族隔离政策发展变化的研究有以下几点意义:首先,有助于我们进一步了解二战结束以后,美对南非种族隔离政策的历史演变,与此相连的美非关系,以及美国与前苏联在非洲的争斗。其次,美对南政策的变化作为美国对外政策的一个个案,有助于我们对美国的全球战略有着进一步的认识。第三,有助于我们了解非洲的情况,更好地支持非洲国家并与之发展睦邻友好的国家关系。更多还原

【Abstract】 South Africa is a great power in Africa and there is a lot of rare mineral resource in South Africa. If U.S. would control South Africa, the United States would prevents the expansion of Soviet in the Africa. It will be beneficial to the United States.South Africa is strategically important to the United States. Firstly, It is important geopolitically for the west to maintain control of the sea lanes around the Cape of Good Hope. Secondly, South Africa is a bulwark against the Soviet/Cuban threat to Southern Africa. Thirdly, South Africa is the dominant military power in Africa. It may even be a nuclear power. It has bases and facilities that potentially could be extremely useful to the United States and other Western countries if there was a major conventional war in the Middle East or Indian Ocean region. Lastly, South Africa uniquely possesses key minerals that are increasingly critical to the economies of the industrial democracies. Assuring this continued access is thus seen as a central consideration is any policy formulation toward South Africa.However, apartheid is so unpopular that the world people opposes it intensely. It is not convenient for U.S. to develop diplomatic relations with South Africa.Apartheid has conditioned US policy toward the Republic of South Africa in ways that are unique to U.S. relations with South Africa. Variously denominated by Pretoria as“separate development,”“separate freedoms,”“parallel development,”“multi-national development,”and“differentiation,”apartheid is a carefully detailed blueprint for racial compartmentalization of South African society. Whereas racial discrimination in South Africa go back some three centuries, apartheid has been official South African Government policy only since the 1948 election victory of the Afrikaner-dominated Nationalist Party, Apartheid constitutes the foundation of apolitical system through which four million whites have exercised deliberate control over the lives of eighteen million black, 2.3million“coloreds”(mixed race) and 700,000 Asians.Interests determine policies. Policies appear confused or ambiguous, when the interests themselves are in conflict. A policy that promotes on particular interest may threaten other interest. This interrelationship of interests and policies is of unusual significance in the case of U.S. policies toward south Africa.While Vietnam war and WaterGates produced strong shifts in opinion, many of people do not believe the government. Under such circumstance, Carter entered White House. Then he tried to recover from the trauma of Watergate and the Vietnam debacle, so he did some changes which were based upon an intense moralism and an“internalist”critique of past policies. The Carter Administration drew up human rights policy. Carter’s emphasis on human rights was a failed attempt to invest a fundamentally pragmatic set of foreign policies with some moral core. Human rights, however, proved too far removed from concrete interests to play an effective legitimizing role. Carter’s reform may have been doomed to failure from the start. As some have asserted, the problem with the Carter Administration was too moralistic that it hurted the interests the country.However, During the Reagan Administration period, the world situation changed drastically. Some people thought“new cold war”period would arrive. U.S. Reappraised the value of South Africa and adjusted the policy. The Reagan administration’s policy toward South Africa would change. On august 29, 1981, Chester Crocker, assistant secretary of state for Africa, asserted“in south Africa…it is not our task to choose between black and white.”This statement has been widely construed as a retreat from President Carter’s policy. The Reagan Administration adopted the“constructive engagement”policy.The Reagan Administration supported South Africa secretly to hope South Africa can prevents expansion of Soviet. U.S.―the self-proclaimed holder of the torch of human rights and human freedom, close its eyes to the policy which meant the slow genocide of the black people of South Africa.Ironically, when the American and Soviet relations relaxes and South Africa lost its important strategical position, U.S. got rid of South Africa. No eternal friends, and no eternal enemy,There is only the benefit. From the policies changes form the Carter Administration to the Reagan Administration, we can learn some thing from the foreign policy of the United States.更多还原