冷戰(zhàn)后美國對華人權(quán)政策的國內(nèi)政治分析（1989-1996）
發(fā)布時間：2018-10-20 19:15
【摘要】：冷戰(zhàn)后的美國對華人權(quán)政策從1989年到1996年經(jīng)歷了罕見的戲劇性變化：從布什政府上臺之初的“安靜外交”,到天安門事件后的“懲罰外交”,從克林頓就任伊始的“掛鉤外交”,到不久之后的“脫鉤”和對華人權(quán)新政策。這一時期的美國對華人權(quán)政策充分展現(xiàn)了國內(nèi)外因素對美國外交決策的影響力,值得學(xué)者重視和深入研究。 本文從美國國內(nèi)政治的視角出發(fā)分析冷戰(zhàn)后的美國對華人權(quán)政策。影響美國對華人權(quán)政策的主要國內(nèi)變量包括思想觀念和決策程序兩大部分,前者主要涵蓋理想主義與現(xiàn)實主義的理念辯論,后者主要涉及總統(tǒng)與國會的權(quán)力斗爭,同時也不能忽視非政府組織、利益集團(tuán)、新聞媒體、大眾輿論等外部行為體對政策的塑造作用。而在政策的具體實施過程中,人權(quán)關(guān)切與其他重大國家利益之間的取舍也是一個困擾決策者的重大變數(shù)。 通過研究,本文發(fā)現(xiàn)：(1)在指導(dǎo)美國對華人權(quán)政策的外交理念的辯論中,理想主義雖一度占得上風(fēng),但現(xiàn)實主義還是重新占據(jù)了主導(dǎo)美國對華人權(quán)政策的優(yōu)勢地位。美國對華人權(quán)政策是平衡理想主義和現(xiàn)實主義的產(chǎn)物,但后者的影響更加突出。(2)在制定美國對華人權(quán)政策的行為主體的斗爭中,國會的優(yōu)勢雖一度被放大,但總統(tǒng)畢竟是最重要的外交事務(wù)決策者,他仍然能夠排除國會和其他行為體的干擾,繼續(xù)主導(dǎo)美國對華人權(quán)政策。(3)在實施美國對華人權(quán)政策的利益偏好的排序中,人權(quán)關(guān)切雖一度占據(jù)優(yōu)先地位,但事實證明,當(dāng)追求人權(quán)目標(biāo)需要以美國的其他重大國家利益為代價時,這項人權(quán)政策就是不可持續(xù)的。 在經(jīng)歷了1989年至1996年的劇烈震蕩后,美國對華人權(quán)政策已經(jīng)進(jìn)入了一個相對平衡和穩(wěn)定的時期,即主要由總統(tǒng)主導(dǎo)、更體現(xiàn)現(xiàn)實主義精神,更注重與美國其他外交政策目標(biāo)相協(xié)調(diào)。美國對華人權(quán)外交政策的這種務(wù)實走勢一直延續(xù)到了今天。
[Abstract]:The human rights policy of the United States towards China after the Cold War experienced a rare dramatic change from 1989 to 1996: from the "quiet diplomacy" of the Bush administration at the beginning of its coming to power, to the "punitive diplomacy" after the Tiananmen Square incident. From Clinton's "linked diplomacy" at the beginning of his term of office, to the "decoupling" and the new human rights policy toward China not long after. The human rights policy of the United States towards China during this period fully demonstrated the influence of domestic and foreign factors on American foreign policy, and it is worthy of scholars' attention and in-depth study. From the perspective of American domestic politics, this paper analyzes the American human rights policy towards China after the Cold War. The main domestic variables that influence the US human rights policy towards China include two parts: ideology, ideas, and decision-making procedures. The former mainly covers idealism and realism, while the latter involves the power struggle between the President and Congress. At the same time, the role of external actors such as NGOs, interest groups, news media and public opinion in shaping policy should not be ignored. The trade-off between human rights concerns and other vital national interests is also a major variable that haunts policymakers in the implementation of policies. This paper finds that: (1) although idealism once prevailed in the debate on the foreign policy of guiding American human rights policy toward China, realism re-occupied the dominant position of the United States' human rights policy towards China. The United States' human rights policy towards China is the product of balancing idealism and realism, but the latter's influence is even more prominent. (2) in the struggle of the main actors in formulating the United States' human rights policy towards China, the advantages of Congress were once magnified. But after all, the President is the most important foreign policy maker. He can still rule out the interference of Congress and other actors and continue to dominate U.S. human rights policy toward China. (3) in the ranking of the interests preferences of the United States in implementing its human rights policy on China, While human rights concerns were once a priority, the human rights policy proved unsustainable when pursuing human rights goals at the expense of other major national interests of the United States. After experiencing the violent shocks from 1989 to 1996, the United States' human rights policy towards China has entered a period of relative balance and stability, that is, mainly led by the President, which embodies the spirit of realism. More emphasis is placed on aligning with other US foreign policy objectives. This pragmatic trend of US human rights foreign policy towards China has continued to this day.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：復(fù)旦大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號】：D871.2
本文編號：2284126
[Abstract]:The human rights policy of the United States towards China after the Cold War experienced a rare dramatic change from 1989 to 1996: from the "quiet diplomacy" of the Bush administration at the beginning of its coming to power, to the "punitive diplomacy" after the Tiananmen Square incident. From Clinton's "linked diplomacy" at the beginning of his term of office, to the "decoupling" and the new human rights policy toward China not long after. The human rights policy of the United States towards China during this period fully demonstrated the influence of domestic and foreign factors on American foreign policy, and it is worthy of scholars' attention and in-depth study. From the perspective of American domestic politics, this paper analyzes the American human rights policy towards China after the Cold War. The main domestic variables that influence the US human rights policy towards China include two parts: ideology, ideas, and decision-making procedures. The former mainly covers idealism and realism, while the latter involves the power struggle between the President and Congress. At the same time, the role of external actors such as NGOs, interest groups, news media and public opinion in shaping policy should not be ignored. The trade-off between human rights concerns and other vital national interests is also a major variable that haunts policymakers in the implementation of policies. This paper finds that: (1) although idealism once prevailed in the debate on the foreign policy of guiding American human rights policy toward China, realism re-occupied the dominant position of the United States' human rights policy towards China. The United States' human rights policy towards China is the product of balancing idealism and realism, but the latter's influence is even more prominent. (2) in the struggle of the main actors in formulating the United States' human rights policy towards China, the advantages of Congress were once magnified. But after all, the President is the most important foreign policy maker. He can still rule out the interference of Congress and other actors and continue to dominate U.S. human rights policy toward China. (3) in the ranking of the interests preferences of the United States in implementing its human rights policy on China, While human rights concerns were once a priority, the human rights policy proved unsustainable when pursuing human rights goals at the expense of other major national interests of the United States. After experiencing the violent shocks from 1989 to 1996, the United States' human rights policy towards China has entered a period of relative balance and stability, that is, mainly led by the President, which embodies the spirit of realism. More emphasis is placed on aligning with other US foreign policy objectives. This pragmatic trend of US human rights foreign policy towards China has continued to this day.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：復(fù)旦大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號】：D871.2
【參考文獻(xiàn)】
中國期刊全文數(shù)據(jù)庫 前10條
1 劉桂芬;中美人權(quán)問題:從對抗轉(zhuǎn)向?qū)υ抂J];國際觀察;2000年01期
2 邱美榮,倪世雄;文化與政治——淺析中美關(guān)系中的人權(quán)問題[J];國際觀察;2002年01期
3 羅艷華;;美國對中國的人權(quán)外交[J];國際政治研究;1993年03期
4 羅艷華;中國外交戰(zhàn)略調(diào)整中的“人權(quán)問題”[J];國際政治研究;2001年01期
5 崔存明;;美國的中國觀——新樂觀主義和一些歷史性的考察[J];國外理論動態(tài);2007年09期
6 王明進(jìn);美國學(xué)者談美國的人權(quán)問題[J];國外理論動態(tài);1999年05期
7 谷春德;;30年來的中國人權(quán)理論研究與創(chuàng)新[J];高校理論戰(zhàn)線;2009年02期
8 李世安;美國《年度國別人權(quán)報告》與人權(quán)外交[J];世界歷史;2001年01期
9 王立新;試論美國人中國觀的演變(18世紀(jì)—1950)[J];世界歷史;1998年01期
10 張驥;論中美關(guān)系中的人權(quán)問題分歧與斗爭[J];科學(xué)社會主義;1997年01期
，本文編號：2284126
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/shekelunwen/waijiao/2284126.html
最近更新
教材專著
