【摘要】： 在愛爾蘭“年輕”的外交史中,愛爾蘭在二戰(zhàn)時期實行的中立外交具有重要的地位,并對二戰(zhàn)后的外交政策產(chǎn)生了深遠(yuǎn)的影響。愛爾蘭在二戰(zhàn)時期的中立是在特定的歷史環(huán)境下由一系列原因造成的,作為一個海洋國家、一個英聯(lián)邦成員國、一個與英國關(guān)系如此密切的國家,它在二戰(zhàn)時期的中立具有明顯不同于其它國家之處,它的背景原因、中立政策和戰(zhàn)爭中的地位變化均有自己的特色。 本文試圖將小國外交放到一個宏觀的歷史背景下,通過對二戰(zhàn)進(jìn)程的演變及大國戰(zhàn)略目標(biāo)的變化的闡述,理解這樣一個地緣戰(zhàn)略位置極其重要但又國微勢弱的中立國在面對戰(zhàn)爭及動亂時,如何在大國的夾縫中求生存、圖自保。從而一方面,可以在較宏觀地理解二戰(zhàn)全景的同時,更深刻地理解戰(zhàn)爭中的中立及中立外交;另一方面,在給當(dāng)代戰(zhàn)爭與和平問題給予啟示的同時,也可以以一種換位思考的方式來正確認(rèn)識大國與小國的利益關(guān)系。除緒論外,本文分三個部分進(jìn)行論述。 緒論部分主要論述本文的研究意義,簡單介紹了國內(nèi)外對本課題的學(xué)術(shù)研究情況,并就本文的“愛爾蘭”、“中立”概念做簡單界定。 第一部分,簡述二戰(zhàn)爆發(fā)后,愛爾蘭中立政策的實施及原因,。中立的原因主要包括愛爾蘭國微勢弱的小國特性、政策制訂、實施者的個人因素、歷史上與英國的糾葛以及與北愛爾蘭分裂的問題等。 第二部分,主要闡述愛爾蘭的中立政策在二戰(zhàn)中推行的過程。根據(jù)戰(zhàn)爭進(jìn)程、大國戰(zhàn)略目標(biāo)及愛爾蘭政策的變化可以將該過程分為三個階段:從德國入侵波蘭到德國進(jìn)攻低地國家時的“假戰(zhàn)爭”時期的中立;從德國入侵法國到德國在斯大林格勒會戰(zhàn)中的失敗即“愛爾蘭危急”時期的愛爾蘭中立;從德國在斯大林格勒會戰(zhàn)的失敗到德國投降這一階段的“納粹德國失敗”時期的愛爾蘭中立。 第三部分,簡述二戰(zhàn)結(jié)束后,愛爾蘭中立的結(jié)果,并對這一中立政策分階段作簡要的評價,進(jìn)而得出愛爾蘭的中立具有“有固定偏向但較完整的戰(zhàn)時中立”性質(zhì)及四個典型特點的結(jié)論。 結(jié)束語里主要認(rèn)為愛爾蘭全程堅持的中立并非明智之舉,進(jìn)而反思國家身份地位與國家利益的關(guān)系。
[Abstract]:In the history of "young" Irish diplomacy, Ireland's neutral diplomacy during World War II played an important role and had a profound influence on its foreign policy after World War II. Ireland's neutrality during World War II was caused by a number of factors in a given historical context, as a maritime nation, a member of the Commonwealth, a country so close to Britain. Its neutrality during World War II is obviously different from other countries, and its background reasons, neutral policy and the change of its position in the war have its own characteristics. This paper attempts to put the diplomacy of small countries in a macro historical background, through the evolution of the process of World War II and the changes in the strategic objectives of the great powers. To understand how a neutral country with such a geo-strategic position is extremely important but weak in the face of war and turmoil how to survive in the gap between the great powers is an attempt to protect itself. Thus, on the one hand, we can understand the panorama of World War II at the same time, we can have a deeper understanding of neutrality and neutral diplomacy in war; on the other hand, we can give enlightenment to contemporary issues of war and peace at the same time. It is also possible to correctly understand the interests of large and small countries in a way of transposing thinking. In addition to the introduction, this paper is divided into three parts to discuss. The introduction part mainly discusses the research significance of this paper, briefly introduces the academic research situation of this subject at home and abroad, and makes a simple definition of the concepts of "Ireland" and "neutrality" in this paper. The first part briefly describes the implementation and reasons of Ireland's neutrality policy after the outbreak of World War II. The main reasons for neutrality include the small and weak state of Ireland, the policy making, the personal factors of the implementers, the historical disputes with Britain and the problem of division with Northern Ireland. The second part mainly expounds the process of Ireland's neutral policy in World War II. According to the process of war, the strategic goal of great powers and the change of Irish policy can be divided into three stages: from the German invasion of Poland to the neutrality of the "false war" period when Germany attacked the lowland countries; From the German invasion of France to Germany's defeat in the Battle of Stalingrad, Ireland was neutral during the "Irish crisis"; From the defeat of Germany in Stalingrad to the neutrality of Ireland in the stage of Nazi Germany's defeat. The third part briefly describes the results of Ireland's neutrality after World War II, and gives a brief evaluation of this neutrality policy in stages. The conclusion that Ireland's neutrality has the character of "fixed bias but complete wartime neutrality" and four typical characteristics is obtained. In the concluding remarks, the author thinks that it is not wise for Ireland to insist on neutrality all the time, and then to reflect on the relationship between national status and national interests.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：首都師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2009
【分類號】：K562.5

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前9條

1 劉帥;;鏡花水月——二戰(zhàn)中的中立國[J];世界博覽;2005年12期

2 許東濤;佛朗哥政權(quán)的西班牙中立[J];福建廣播電視大學(xué)學(xué)報;2004年05期

3 陳安全;析二戰(zhàn)中西班牙之中立[J];淮北煤師院學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);1997年01期

4 高志平,劉勁松;中立外交發(fā)展演變的歷史考察[J];湖北師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);2003年01期

5 金重遠(yuǎn);評佛朗哥在二戰(zhàn)中的“中立”政策[J];世界歷史;1991年06期

6 續(xù)建宜;瑞士中立政策的歷史與現(xiàn)狀[J];解放軍外語學(xué)院學(xué)報;1995年02期

7 陳安全;評二戰(zhàn)時期瑞典的“中立”[J];軍事歷史研究;2005年01期

8 于海濤;試析二戰(zhàn)期間西班牙中立的原因[J];軍事歷史;1999年02期

9 陳安全;析二戰(zhàn)歐洲中立國之“中立”[J];史林;2004年02期

，

本文編號：2207443