本文關(guān)鍵詞：緬甸軍人政權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)型原因研究（1988-2015年）　出處：《清華大學(xué)》2016年博士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

  更多相關(guān)文章： 緬甸軍人政權(quán) 政治轉(zhuǎn)型 利益目標(biāo) 保障條件 根本原因

【摘要】：雖然目前學(xué)界對緬甸是否徹底轉(zhuǎn)型成為民主政體尚存爭議,但緬甸已完成了從“純軍人政權(quán)”向“軍人為主—文官為輔政權(quán)”轉(zhuǎn)型的開啟,繼而到“文官為主—軍人為輔政權(quán)”轉(zhuǎn)型的深化,卻是一個不爭的事實。本文研究的問題是:緬甸軍人政權(quán)為什么愿意放松對權(quán)力的控制而推動政權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)型?軍人政權(quán)推動自身轉(zhuǎn)型的條件是什么?關(guān)于緬甸軍人政權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)型的解釋主要有四種:“內(nèi)外壓力說”、“國際形勢說”、“精英決定說”和“軍人利益說”。本文在芬納(Finer)、亨廷頓(Huntington)、阿西蒙哥魯(Acemoglu)和羅賓遜(Robinson)等學(xué)者提出的關(guān)于軍人政權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)型原因觀點的啟發(fā)下,借鑒諾斯(D.C.North)等人提出的邁向“開放介入社會”的“三個門檻條件”,發(fā)展“精英決定說”和“軍人利益說”的觀點,提出利益目標(biāo)的改變和保障條件的完備共同促使緬甸軍方放松對權(quán)力的控制,從而開啟和深化政治轉(zhuǎn)型。具體來看,緬甸軍方追求的目標(biāo)從追求對政權(quán)的完全控制轉(zhuǎn)變到追求關(guān)鍵控制,關(guān)鍵控制相對于完全控制或不控制能夠使得軍方獲得最大的凈收益,特別是制度保障、組織保障和軍事保障這三項保障條件的具備極大降低了軍方追求關(guān)鍵控制目標(biāo)的風(fēng)險。如果利益目標(biāo)不變,那么軍人政權(quán)就沒有轉(zhuǎn)型的動力;如果保障條件不完備,那么政權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)型的風(fēng)險就高,這個轉(zhuǎn)型風(fēng)險成本的不可控性導(dǎo)致軍人政權(quán)不敢冒巨大的風(fēng)險從而拒絕轉(zhuǎn)型。因此,緬甸軍人政權(quán)選擇放松對權(quán)力的控制是理性選擇的結(jié)果。本文采用案例比較的研究方法,選取了一反、兩正一共三個案例進(jìn)行分析。這三個案例是:蘇貌軍政權(quán)(1988—1992年)拒絕轉(zhuǎn)型、丹瑞軍政權(quán)(1992—2011年)開啟轉(zhuǎn)型和吳登盛“軍人為主—文官為輔”政權(quán)(2011—2015年)深化轉(zhuǎn)型,并以1990、2010和2015年三次大選為關(guān)鍵時間點。通過對這三個案例的比較研究發(fā)現(xiàn):緬甸軍方放松對權(quán)力控制之時并不是緬甸面臨外部壓力最大的時候,也不是在其經(jīng)濟增長最緩慢和社會壓力最大的時候;相反,軍方拒絕放松對權(quán)力控制之時才是內(nèi)外壓力最大之時。這個結(jié)論排除了“內(nèi)外壓力說”這個主要競爭性解釋,從而論證了本文的研究假設(shè)。本文建構(gòu)了一個解釋緬甸整個軍人政權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)型時期(1988—2015年)的較為完整和系統(tǒng)的理論框架。這一框架有助于理解緬甸軍政權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)型的本質(zhì),也幫助理解緬甸轉(zhuǎn)型后的政治行為的邏輯。緬甸這個階段的轉(zhuǎn)型之后,昂山素季和吳廷覺領(lǐng)導(dǎo)的民盟執(zhí)政將對中緬關(guān)系產(chǎn)生深遠(yuǎn)影響。
[Abstract]:Although the academic circles on whether Burma completely transformed into a democracy is controversial, but Burma has completed the "pure military regime" to "military - civilian for the colonial power" transformation "to open, then the civilian - military power for the colonial transformation deepening, it is an indisputable fact. The question is: why Burma military regime is willing to relax the control on power and promote the transformation of the military regime to promote regime? What is their transition conditions? There are mainly four Burma military regime transition explained: "external pressure", "the international situation", "elite decision" and "military interests say". In this paper, Fenner (Finer), Huntington (Huntington), Asif Montgomery and Robinson Lu (Acemoglu) (Robinson) and other scholars on the causes of transformation of the military regime inspired ideas, from the North (D.C.North) proposed to "open access society" and "three threshold conditions", "the development of elite decision" and "military interests" point of view, proposed to change the interests and guarantee conditions common to complete the Burma military loosened its grip on power, thereby opening and deepening political restructuring. Specifically, Burma's military goal from the pursuit of full control of regime change to the pursuit of key control, key control to completely control or control can make the military to get maximum net income, especially with the security of the three security conditions of system security, organizational security and military greatly reduces the risk of military pursuit of key control objectives the. If the interest goal remains unchanged, then the military regime will not have the power of transformation. If the guarantee conditions are incomplete, the risk of regime transformation will be high. The uncontrollable risk cost of the transformation will lead the military regime to dare to take huge risks and refuse to transform. Therefore, the choice of the Burma military regime to relax the control of power is the result of rational choice. In this paper, a case comparison method is used to analyze three cases of one counter and two cases. The three cases are: the Soviet military regime (1988 to 1992) refused to transform, the Shwe army regime (1992 to 2011) opened up the transformation and Wu Dengsheng's "serviceman and civil official as a supplement" regime (2011 to 2015) deepened the transformation, and took 1990, 2010 and 2015 three elections as the key point. Through a comparative study of the three cases found: Burma's military power to relax control when not in Burma when facing the biggest external pressure, nor the largest in its economic growth and the slow social pressure; instead, the military refused to relax the power control is maximum when the pressure inside and outside. This conclusion excludes the main competitive explanation of the "internal and external pressure theory", which demonstrates the hypothesis of this study. This paper constructs a more complete and systematic theoretical framework to explain the transition period of the whole military regime in Burma (1988 - 2015). This framework will help to understand the essence of the transformation of the Burma military regime and help to understand the logic of the political behavior after the transformation of Burma. After the transformation of this stage in Burma, the ruling of Aung San Suu Kyi and Wu Tingjue led by the NLD will have a profound impact on China Myanmar relations.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：清華大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2016
【分類號】：D733.7
，

本文編號：1345956