【摘要】：對于由某一族群主導(dǎo)的中央政府與國內(nèi)其他族群發(fā)生的族群沖突,通常的理論解釋主要關(guān)注后者對前者的不滿以及其武裝反抗能力。但是,這種研究路徑不能解釋為什么沖突雙方不能達(dá)成反映雙方實力對比的妥協(xié)方案以避免族群沖突。為了解答這一疑問,有必要關(guān)注沖突雙方的戰(zhàn)略互動。在戰(zhàn)略互動過程中,族群沖突雙方對彼此實力、意圖和戰(zhàn)爭決心的評估方面的信息不對稱,阻礙雙方達(dá)成基于真實實力對比的和平協(xié)議;即使雙方掌握對稱信息,但由于擔(dān)心彼此不能真正履行和平承諾,同樣阻礙和平協(xié)議的達(dá)成;更為重要的是,沖突雙方爭執(zhí)的核心問題可能具有不容妥協(xié)、不可分割的價值。和平談判的失敗意味著族群沖突的爆發(fā)。因此,要防止族群沖突的發(fā)生或重建戰(zhàn)后和平,第三方的調(diào)解和安全保證至關(guān)重要,這對于中國介入非洲的族群沖突具有重要啟示。
[Abstract]:For the ethnic conflict between the central government dominated by one ethnic group and other ethnic groups in China, the theoretical explanation mainly focuses on the latter's dissatisfaction with the former and its ability of armed resistance. However, this approach does not explain why the parties to the conflict cannot reach a compromise that reflects the strength of the two sides in order to avoid ethnic conflict. In order to answer this question, it is necessary to pay attention to the strategic interaction between the parties to the conflict. In the process of strategic interaction, the information asymmetry between the two sides of the ethnic conflict on the evaluation of each other's strength, intention and war determination prevents the two sides from reaching a peace agreement based on a true power comparison; even if the parties have symmetrical information, But the fear that they will not truly live up to their peace commitments also impedes the conclusion of a peace agreement; more importantly, the core issue of the dispute between the two parties to the conflict may have intransigent and indivisible value. The failure of the peace talks meant the outbreak of ethnic conflict. Therefore, in order to prevent the occurrence of ethnic conflicts or to re-establish post-war peace, third-party mediation and security guarantees are of great importance, which has important implications for China's involvement in ethnic conflicts in Africa.
【作者單位】： 中國社會科學(xué)雜志社;
【分類號】：D81

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 王超;郭燕茹;;關(guān)于達(dá)成兩岸和平協(xié)議的幾點思考[J];菏澤學(xué)院學(xué)報;2008年04期

2 周葉中;祝捷;;論海峽兩岸和平協(xié)議的性質(zhì)——中華民族認(rèn)同基礎(chǔ)上的法理共識[J];法學(xué)評論;2009年02期

3 周葉中;祝捷;;《海峽兩岸和平協(xié)議》(建議稿)[J];法學(xué)評論;2009年04期

4 邵宗海;;兩岸對“和平協(xié)議”的立場與前瞻[J];臺灣研究集刊;2009年03期

5 張文生;;兩岸和平協(xié)議的性質(zhì)芻議[J];臺灣研究集刊;2013年02期

6 李家泉;;達(dá)成兩岸和平協(xié)議的可行性研究[J];中央社會主義學(xué)院學(xué)報;2008年04期

7 吳學(xué)陽;張金平;;兩岸政治互信在和平協(xié)議系統(tǒng)中的功能[J];前沿;2012年16期

8 馬莫·穆契,于紅;埃厄紛爭何時了——對埃厄1998～2000年戰(zhàn)爭的反思[J];西亞非洲;2001年03期

9 張久營;寇子春;;關(guān)于兩岸商談的幾點看法[J];理論與改革;2013年02期

10 ;[J];;年期

，

本文編號：2172991