美國“大規(guī)模報復戰(zhàn)略”興衰成因研究
發(fā)布時間：2018-09-09 19:22
【摘要】： 大規(guī)模報復戰(zhàn)略”是美國政府外交與軍事“新面貌”政策的核心,是20世紀50年代美國外交與軍事政策的一項重要內容。它是美國軍事戰(zhàn)略從以常規(guī)威懾轉向以核威懾為主的標志。該戰(zhàn)略出臺之后,倍受學者關注。無論在東西方之間,美國與其盟國之間,還是在美國國內,它都引起了極大的非議。學術界對此展開了激烈的辯論,學者們大多從國際政治學、軍事學、社會學的角度對其進行剖析,但缺乏歷史學的宏觀思考;大多對該戰(zhàn)略出臺和演變的進程、特點、影響加以關注,而對其興衰的原因著墨較少,缺乏系統(tǒng)研究。 “大規(guī)模報復戰(zhàn)略”興衰是冷戰(zhàn)過程中的一個重要的歷史現(xiàn)象,對該戰(zhàn)略興衰原因的探討具有重要的歷史意義;同時,剖析“大規(guī)模報復戰(zhàn)略”為“靈活反應戰(zhàn)略”所取代的原因,既可探尋美國軍事戰(zhàn)略演變的軌跡,總結美國軍事戰(zhàn)略演變的規(guī)律,又可研究影響美國軍事戰(zhàn)略轉變的諸因素,為破解美國軍事戰(zhàn)略提供一定的經(jīng)驗與教訓。因此,該研究又具有重要的理論價值與現(xiàn)實意義。 “大規(guī)模報復戰(zhàn)略”出臺的原因主要有四個方面。首先,它是時代的產物,即冷戰(zhàn)的產物。其次,它是由戰(zhàn)后美國兩黨斗爭、麥卡錫主義等諸多政治因素的壓力促成。再次,它也是戰(zhàn)后美國經(jīng)濟發(fā)展中經(jīng)濟波動壓力的結果。最后,美國核武器及運載系統(tǒng)等方面軍事技術的領先,是其出臺的技術基礎。 其衰落原因同樣有四:第一,戰(zhàn)略本身的缺陷以及由此帶來的各種批評與內部分歧使其漸入困境。第二,蘇聯(lián)陸�？铡叭灰惑w”的戰(zhàn)略核力量的形成使其失去了存在的物質技術基礎。第三,以羅素和愛因斯坦倡導的反核反戰(zhàn)運動在一定程度上推動了美國軍事戰(zhàn)略的轉變。第四,美國的盟友對該戰(zhàn)略效能的懷疑與在歷次危機中對美國用強的反對,使美國不得不改弦易轍。
[Abstract]:The strategy of large-scale retaliation is the core of the American government's foreign and military "new appearance" policy, and is an important part of the American foreign and military policy in the 1950s. It is the symbol of US military strategy from conventional deterrence to nuclear deterrence. After the introduction of this strategy, scholars pay close attention to it. Between East and West, between the United States and its allies, and within the United States, it has aroused great criticism. There is a heated debate in academic circles, most of which are analyzed from the angle of international political science, military science and sociology, but lack of historical macroscopic thinking. Influence should be paid attention to, but the reason of its rise and fall is less, lack of systematic research. The rise and fall of the strategy of mass retaliation is an important historical phenomenon in the course of the cold war, and it is of great historical significance to explore the reasons for the rise and fall of the strategy. Analyzing the reasons why "large-scale retaliation strategy" has been replaced by "flexible response strategy" can not only explore the evolution track of American military strategy, summarize the law of US military strategic evolution, but also study the factors that influence the change of US military strategy. To provide certain experience and lessons for unraveling the US military strategy. Therefore, the research has important theoretical value and practical significance. There are four main reasons for the introduction of the strategy of mass retaliation. First of all, it is the product of the times, that is, the product of the cold war. Second, it was driven by pressure from political factors such as the two-party struggle and McCarthyism in the United States after the war. Thirdly, it is also the result of the economic fluctuation pressure in the postwar American economic development. Finally, the United States nuclear weapons and delivery systems and other aspects of the military technology leadership, it was introduced the technical basis. There are also four reasons for its decline: first, the shortcomings of the strategy itself and the resulting criticism and internal differences make it into a difficult situation. Second, the formation of the strategic nuclear force of the Soviet Union, land, sea and air made it lose the material and technical basis of its existence. Thirdly, the anti-nuclear anti-war movement advocated by Russell and Einstein promoted the change of American military strategy to some extent. Fourth, America's allies' scepticism about the effectiveness of the strategy and its strong opposition to the United States in previous crises have forced the United States to change course.
【學位授予單位】：山東師范大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2007
【分類號】：K712.54
本文編號：2233332
[Abstract]:The strategy of large-scale retaliation is the core of the American government's foreign and military "new appearance" policy, and is an important part of the American foreign and military policy in the 1950s. It is the symbol of US military strategy from conventional deterrence to nuclear deterrence. After the introduction of this strategy, scholars pay close attention to it. Between East and West, between the United States and its allies, and within the United States, it has aroused great criticism. There is a heated debate in academic circles, most of which are analyzed from the angle of international political science, military science and sociology, but lack of historical macroscopic thinking. Influence should be paid attention to, but the reason of its rise and fall is less, lack of systematic research. The rise and fall of the strategy of mass retaliation is an important historical phenomenon in the course of the cold war, and it is of great historical significance to explore the reasons for the rise and fall of the strategy. Analyzing the reasons why "large-scale retaliation strategy" has been replaced by "flexible response strategy" can not only explore the evolution track of American military strategy, summarize the law of US military strategic evolution, but also study the factors that influence the change of US military strategy. To provide certain experience and lessons for unraveling the US military strategy. Therefore, the research has important theoretical value and practical significance. There are four main reasons for the introduction of the strategy of mass retaliation. First of all, it is the product of the times, that is, the product of the cold war. Second, it was driven by pressure from political factors such as the two-party struggle and McCarthyism in the United States after the war. Thirdly, it is also the result of the economic fluctuation pressure in the postwar American economic development. Finally, the United States nuclear weapons and delivery systems and other aspects of the military technology leadership, it was introduced the technical basis. There are also four reasons for its decline: first, the shortcomings of the strategy itself and the resulting criticism and internal differences make it into a difficult situation. Second, the formation of the strategic nuclear force of the Soviet Union, land, sea and air made it lose the material and technical basis of its existence. Thirdly, the anti-nuclear anti-war movement advocated by Russell and Einstein promoted the change of American military strategy to some extent. Fourth, America's allies' scepticism about the effectiveness of the strategy and its strong opposition to the United States in previous crises have forced the United States to change course.
【學位授予單位】：山東師范大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2007
【分類號】：K712.54
【共引文獻】
相關期刊論文 前1條
1 王福春;基辛格的外交思想述評[J];國際政治研究;2001年03期
相關博士學位論文 前3條
1 吳功榮;中美外交思想傳統(tǒng)的比較分析[D];中共中央黨校;2004年
2 侯銳;美國戰(zhàn)略核導彈歷史與冷戰(zhàn)進程研究（1945-1968）[D];東北師范大學;2007年
3 鄭飛;北約核分享制度：變遷與管理（1954-1966）[D];復旦大學;2007年
相關碩士學位論文 前5條
1 劉恩東;軍工復合體與冷戰(zhàn)后美國的外交政策[D];中共中央黨校;2003年
2 張樹彬;試論美國思想庫在美國對華政策決策中的作用[D];河北師范大學;2005年
3 李鵬宇;核不擴散條約若干問題芻析[D];外交學院;2007年
4 高鵬;兩德的統(tǒng)一及其影響[D];湘潭大學;2007年
5 榮正通;海上力量介入國際危機處理：一種可行的選擇？[D];上海外國語大學;2007年
，本文編號：2233332
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/shekelunwen/xifanglishiwenhua/2233332.html
最近更新
教材專著
