本文選題：反美扶日運(yùn)動(dòng) + 國(guó)民政府�。� 參考：《浙江大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：1948年春夏之交,以日本賠償問(wèn)題為發(fā)端的,被稱為“反美扶日”運(yùn)動(dòng)(反對(duì)美國(guó)扶持日本運(yùn)動(dòng))的學(xué)生運(yùn)動(dòng),在國(guó)民政府統(tǒng)治區(qū)的各大城市爆發(fā)。正如運(yùn)動(dòng)名稱所示,運(yùn)動(dòng)主要是對(duì)戰(zhàn)后對(duì)日處理問(wèn)題中的日本賠償問(wèn)題減額等政策變化進(jìn)行了抗議,并對(duì)提出此變化的美國(guó)進(jìn)行了批判。但是,當(dāng)時(shí)國(guó)共內(nèi)戰(zhàn)中與國(guó)民政府相對(duì)抗的中國(guó)共產(chǎn)黨則在運(yùn)動(dòng)中發(fā)揮了組織作用,對(duì)負(fù)責(zé)日本賠償問(wèn)題外交交涉的國(guó)民政府進(jìn)行了批判。而美國(guó)方面則為了緩和學(xué)生情緒,由美國(guó)駐華大使司徒雷登出面,對(duì)支持運(yùn)動(dòng)的學(xué)生發(fā)表了聲明。然而由于美國(guó)對(duì)日求償政策采取了緩和的路線,加之司徒雷登否認(rèn)日本軍事再崛起,并對(duì)運(yùn)動(dòng)進(jìn)行了批判,更進(jìn)一步刺激了運(yùn)動(dòng)的升級(jí)。運(yùn)動(dòng)支持者批判美國(guó)違反波茨坦公報(bào),同時(shí)也指責(zé)國(guó)民政府對(duì)美國(guó)亦步亦趨,反對(duì)“奴才外交”。在大學(xué)校園,各大城市市中心,展開了各種集會(huì)、游行,并且召開了各種海報(bào)和漫畫展。美國(guó)對(duì)日的求償政策,在戰(zhàn)后初期本與國(guó)民政府保持一致的嚴(yán)格姿態(tài)。然而由于美國(guó)國(guó)內(nèi)的政治變化和戰(zhàn)后冷戰(zhàn)格局的逐步形成,在多重因素影響下,美國(guó)對(duì)日的求償政策逐漸緩和�！胺疵婪鋈铡边\(yùn)動(dòng)中被批判為違反波茨坦公報(bào)的美國(guó),實(shí)際上因?yàn)楦鲊?guó)對(duì)波茨坦公報(bào)的解釋不盡相同,很難斷言美國(guó)是否有違反波茨坦公報(bào)的行為。然而很明顯美國(guó)的政策轉(zhuǎn)換對(duì)中國(guó)而言則帶來(lái)了巨大的損失。另一方面,國(guó)民政府的對(duì)日求償政策則一貫保持了戰(zhàn)后初期的態(tài)度,“反美扶日”運(yùn)動(dòng)中所稱的“奴才外交”實(shí)際上是子虛烏有。國(guó)民政府在二戰(zhàn)解釋前后就早早地積極介入日本賠償問(wèn)題的構(gòu)想中,而為了實(shí)現(xiàn)構(gòu)想,國(guó)民政府內(nèi)部也提出了多種方案,并且與盟國(guó)各國(guó)保持緊密合作。此外,國(guó)民政府在國(guó)防、設(shè)備賠償?shù)葐?wèn)題相關(guān)的船舶賠償問(wèn)題上竭盡全力,甚至造成了與美國(guó)的外交對(duì)抗態(tài)勢(shì)。遠(yuǎn)東委員會(huì)在賠償?shù)姆峙溆懻撨^(guò)程中恰逢美國(guó)政策的轉(zhuǎn)換期,而國(guó)民政府下屬保持對(duì)美的持續(xù)批判也間接喚起了國(guó)內(nèi)輿論對(duì)美國(guó)的壓力,而國(guó)民政府也致力于盡快在賠償問(wèn)題上有所結(jié)果并且確保本國(guó)利益。在日本賠償問(wèn)題上美國(guó)作為單獨(dú)占領(lǐng)日本的一方有巨大的影響力,因而事態(tài)并非如國(guó)民政府預(yù)想的那樣發(fā)展。但是國(guó)民政府的對(duì)日求償政策并非是所謂的追隨美國(guó)的“奴才外交”,而是盡力使得賠償最大化,以保護(hù)本國(guó)之利益。
[Abstract]:At the turn of spring and summer of 1948, the student movement, which started with the question of Japanese compensation and was called "anti-American support Japan" movement, broke out in the major cities in the areas ruled by the national government. As the name of the movement shows, the movement mainly protested against the policy changes such as the reduction of compensation in Japan after the war, and criticized the United States which proposed this change. However, the Communist Party of China, which confronted the Kuomintang government in the KMT civil war at that time, played an organizing role in the movement, criticizing the Kuomintang government responsible for the diplomatic negotiations on the issue of compensation in Japan. The United States, for its part, made a statement to students supporting the campaign in an effort to ease students' feelings. However, because the United States adopted a detente line against Japan's claim policy, and Leighton Stuart denied Japan's military re-emergence, and criticized the movement, it further stimulated the escalation of the movement. Supporters of the movement criticized the United States for violating the Potsdam communiqu 茅 and accused the National Government of following the United States and opposing slave diplomacy. On university campuses, city centers, rallies, parades, posters and galleries. In the early postwar period, American claim policy was consistent with the national government. However, due to the political changes in the United States and the gradual formation of the post-war cold war pattern, under the influence of many factors, the American claim policy towards Japan gradually eased. The United States, which has been criticized as violating the Potsdam communique in the "anti-American-Japanese" movement, is in fact difficult to assert whether the United States has violated the Potsdam communique because of the different interpretations of the Potsdam communiqu 茅. But it is clear that the policy shift in the United States has brought huge losses to China. On the other hand, the national government's policy of claiming compensation against Japan has always maintained its attitude in the early postwar period, and the "slave diplomacy" called "slave diplomacy" in the "anti-American support Japan" movement is in fact null and void. Before and after World War II, the National Government actively intervened in the idea of Japanese compensation problem, and in order to realize the idea, it also put forward a variety of plans, and maintained close cooperation with the allied countries. In addition, the national government made every effort on ship compensation related to national defense and equipment compensation, and even caused diplomatic confrontation with the United States. The far East Commission's discussion on the distribution of compensation coincided with the transition period of US policy, and the sustained criticism of the United States by members of the National Government indirectly aroused the pressure of domestic public opinion on the United States. And the national government is committed to finding results on the issue of compensation as soon as possible and ensuring its own interests. The United States has great influence on the issue of Japanese compensation as a separate occupation of Japan, so the situation did not develop as expected by the national government. However, the national government's claim policy against Japan is not the so-called "slave diplomacy" to follow the United States, but to maximize compensation in order to protect the interests of the country.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：浙江大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：K266

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前2條

1 孫維騏;余輝照南疆 音苑育奇葩——評(píng)介昆明“一二·一”合唱團(tuán)演出的音樂(lè)劇[J];民族藝術(shù)研究;1989年01期

2 ;[J];;年期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 團(tuán)陽(yáng)子;“反美扶日運(yùn)動(dòng)”與國(guó)民政府的對(duì)日索賠政策[D];浙江大學(xué);2014年

2 趙惠芬;1948年中國(guó)人民反美扶日運(yùn)動(dòng)研究[D];天津大學(xué);2012年

，

本文編號(hào)：1853393