“印太”战略对东盟在亚太区域合作中“中心地位”的影响
|
摘要
随着西太平洋和印度洋地区经济的快速发展,特别是中国和印度的快速崛起,"印太"地区的重要性不断上升。"印太"战略既是相关国家为了分享"印太"地区经济高速发展带来的红利,也是为了遏制快速崛起的中国。在亚太区域合作机制中居于"中心地位"的东盟本可成为"印太"战略的重要支柱,但因该战略遏制中国的目的与东盟的宗旨存在矛盾以及东盟运行模式的原因,使其并未成为"印太"战略的重要支柱。不过,鉴于东盟在"印太"战略中的重要地位,"印太"战略还是力图把东盟部分国家纳入其中。"印太"战略企图越过以东盟为中心的亚太区域合作机制来围堵和防范中国,一方面它会加重地区紧张局势,弱化东盟在亚太区域合作机制中的"中心地位",另一方面它将加剧东盟内部的分歧和矛盾。
With the rapid economic development of the western Pacific and Indian Ocean region, especially the rapid rise of China and India, the importance of the Indo-Pacific region has been increasing. "Indo-Pacific" strategy is not only for relevant countries to share the benefits brought by the rapid economic development of the "Indo-Pacific" region, but also for the purpose of containing the rapidly rising China. The "ASEAN centrality" in the Asia-Pacific regional cooperation mechanism could have been an important pillar of the "Indo-Pacific" strategy. However, due to the contradiction between the purpose of the "Indo-Pacific" strategy to contain China and the purpose of ASEAN, ASEAN has not become an important pillar of the "Indo-Pacific" strategy. However,in view of the importance of ASEAN in the "Indo-Pacific" strategy, the "Indo-Pacific" strategy is still seeking to embrace some countries in ASEAN. The "Indo-Pacific" strategy attempts to bypass the ASEAN-centered regional cooperation mechanism to contain China, it will aggravate regional tensions and weaken ASEAN centrality in the regional cooperation mechanism.
With the rapid economic development of the western Pacific and Indian Ocean region, especially the rapid rise of China and India, the importance of the Indo-Pacific region has been increasing. "Indo-Pacific" strategy is not only for relevant countries to share the benefits brought by the rapid economic development of the "Indo-Pacific" region, but also for the purpose of containing the rapidly rising China. The "ASEAN centrality" in the Asia-Pacific regional cooperation mechanism could have been an important pillar of the "Indo-Pacific" strategy. However, due to the contradiction between the purpose of the "Indo-Pacific" strategy to contain China and the purpose of ASEAN, ASEAN has not become an important pillar of the "Indo-Pacific" strategy. However,in view of the importance of ASEAN in the "Indo-Pacific" strategy, the "Indo-Pacific" strategy is still seeking to embrace some countries in ASEAN. The "Indo-Pacific" strategy attempts to bypass the ASEAN-centered regional cooperation mechanism to contain China, it will aggravate regional tensions and weaken ASEAN centrality in the regional cooperation mechanism.
引文
(1)东盟“中心地位”既是东盟国家一体化程度加深及东盟国家参与东亚地区合作的结果,也是东亚地区大国博弈格局下对东盟在该地区地位的认可。该概念首次提出的正式文件是2007年举行的第12届东盟峰会通过的《关于加速于2015年建立东盟共同体的宿务宣言》和《第12届东盟峰会主席声明》,并写入《东盟宪章》。
(1)(2)张蕴岭:《东盟50年--在行进中探索和进步》,载于《世界经济与政治》2017年第7期。
(3) Chitriya Pinthong,"The Evolving Regional Architecture for the Asia-Pacific:toward an Indo-Pacific Idea",RJSH,Vol.2,No.1,January-June,2015,p.20.
(4) Mely Caballero-Anthony,"Understanding ASEAN's Centrality:Bases and Prospects in an Evolving Regional Architecture",The Pacific Review,Vol.27,No.4,2014,pp.563-584;Richard Stubbs,"ASEAN's Leadership in East Asian Region-Building:Strength in Weakness",The Pacific Review,Vol.27,No.4,2014,pp.523-541.
(5)王明国:《国际制度复杂性与东亚一体化进程》,载于《当代亚太》2013年第1期。
(1) Kristy Hsu,"ASEAN Centrality:A Quest for Leadership Role in East Asian Economic Integration",Asian Leadership in Policy and Governance,28 Aug 2015,pp.69-105(http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/S2053-769720150000024004).
(2)张伯伟、温祁平:《东盟地位的历史变迁--区域经济一体化视角的考察》,载于《亚太经济》2010年第5期。
(3) James N.Mattis,John Chipman,"Remarks by Secretary Mattis at Plenary Session of the 2018 Shangri-La Dialogue",U.S.Department of Defense,June2,2018(https://www.defense.gov/News/Transcripts/Transcript-View/Article/1538599/remarks-by-secretary-mattis-at-plenary-session-of-the-2018-shangri-la-dialogue/).
(1)张艳杰:《试论二战以来美国东南亚政策中的大国关系因素》,暨南大学硕士论文,2008年。
(2)(3)根据东盟公布的相关数据统计所得,详细数据请参见(https://w w w.aseanstats.org/.)
(1)《2017年中国-东盟贸易额突破5千亿美元》,中国东盟自由贸易区网站(http://www.cafta.org.cn/show.php?contentid=83257.)
(2)参见王玉主:《RCEP倡议与东盟“中心地位”》,载于《国际问题研究》2013年第5期;祁怀高:《东亚区域合作领导权模式构想:东盟机制下的中美日合作领导模式》,载于《东南亚研究》2011年第4期。
(3)美国宣布退出TPP后,2017年11月原TPP11国签署新的自由贸易协定,其名称改为“全面且先进的TPP”。
(1)吴兆礼:《“印太”的缘起与多国战略博弈》,载于《太平洋学报》2014年第1期。
(2)《特朗普的“印太战略”前景如何》,《中国青年报》,2017年11月16日。
(3) Prakash Panneerselvam,"Advancing India's Relationship with Japan and South Korea:Quest for Middle-Power Cooperation",IPCS Issue Brief 262,August 2016.
(4) Hillary Clinton,"Remarks on Regional Architecture in Asia:Principles and Priorities",Hawaii,January12,2010,USDepartment of State(https://2009-2017.state.gov/secretary/20092013clinton/rm/2010/01/135090.htm.)
(5) Ron Huisken,"Civilizing the Anarchical Society:Multilateral Security Processes in the Asia-Pacific",Contemporary Southeast Asia,Vol.24,No.2,2002,pp.187-202.
(6)史田一:《地区风险与东盟国家对冲战略》,载于《世界经济与政治》2016年第5期。
(7) Ankit Panda,"U.S.,Japan,India,and Australia Hold Working-Level Quadrilateral Meeting on Regional Cooperation",The Diplomat,No.13,2017(https://thediplomat.com/2017/11/us-japan-india-and-australia-hold-workinglevel-quadrilateral-meeting-on-regionalcooperation/.)
(1)王明国:《东亚地区治理机制的有效性评估与未来发展》,载于《当代亚太》2014年第2期。
(2) Declaration of ASEAN ConcordⅡ(http://www.aseansec.org/115159.htm.)
(3) Ian Storey,Malcolm Cook,"The Trump Administration and Southeast Asia:Enhanced Engagement",YusofIshak Institute,No.87,2017.
(4)《特朗普的“印太战略”前景如何》,《中国青年报》,2017年11月16日。
(1) Evan Laksmana,"An Indo-Pacific Construct with‘Indonesian Characteristics’",Feb 6,2018(https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/indo-pacific-construct-indonesian-characteristics/.)
(2) Hon Julie Bishop,Minister for Foreign Affairs,"ASEAN:The Nexus of the Indo-Pacific",Asia Society Speech,New York,March 8,2018(https://foreignminister.gov.au/speeches/Pages/2018/jb_sp_180308.aspx.)
(1)(2)张蕴岭:《东盟50年--在行进中探索和进步》,载于《世界经济与政治》2017年第7期。
(3) Chitriya Pinthong,"The Evolving Regional Architecture for the Asia-Pacific:toward an Indo-Pacific Idea",RJSH,Vol.2,No.1,January-June,2015,p.20.
(4) Mely Caballero-Anthony,"Understanding ASEAN's Centrality:Bases and Prospects in an Evolving Regional Architecture",The Pacific Review,Vol.27,No.4,2014,pp.563-584;Richard Stubbs,"ASEAN's Leadership in East Asian Region-Building:Strength in Weakness",The Pacific Review,Vol.27,No.4,2014,pp.523-541.
(5)王明国:《国际制度复杂性与东亚一体化进程》,载于《当代亚太》2013年第1期。
(1) Kristy Hsu,"ASEAN Centrality:A Quest for Leadership Role in East Asian Economic Integration",Asian Leadership in Policy and Governance,28 Aug 2015,pp.69-105(http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/S2053-769720150000024004).
(2)张伯伟、温祁平:《东盟地位的历史变迁--区域经济一体化视角的考察》,载于《亚太经济》2010年第5期。
(3) James N.Mattis,John Chipman,"Remarks by Secretary Mattis at Plenary Session of the 2018 Shangri-La Dialogue",U.S.Department of Defense,June2,2018(https://www.defense.gov/News/Transcripts/Transcript-View/Article/1538599/remarks-by-secretary-mattis-at-plenary-session-of-the-2018-shangri-la-dialogue/).
(1)张艳杰:《试论二战以来美国东南亚政策中的大国关系因素》,暨南大学硕士论文,2008年。
(2)(3)根据东盟公布的相关数据统计所得,详细数据请参见(https://w w w.aseanstats.org/.)
(1)《2017年中国-东盟贸易额突破5千亿美元》,中国东盟自由贸易区网站(http://www.cafta.org.cn/show.php?contentid=83257.)
(2)参见王玉主:《RCEP倡议与东盟“中心地位”》,载于《国际问题研究》2013年第5期;祁怀高:《东亚区域合作领导权模式构想:东盟机制下的中美日合作领导模式》,载于《东南亚研究》2011年第4期。
(3)美国宣布退出TPP后,2017年11月原TPP11国签署新的自由贸易协定,其名称改为“全面且先进的TPP”。
(1)吴兆礼:《“印太”的缘起与多国战略博弈》,载于《太平洋学报》2014年第1期。
(2)《特朗普的“印太战略”前景如何》,《中国青年报》,2017年11月16日。
(3) Prakash Panneerselvam,"Advancing India's Relationship with Japan and South Korea:Quest for Middle-Power Cooperation",IPCS Issue Brief 262,August 2016.
(4) Hillary Clinton,"Remarks on Regional Architecture in Asia:Principles and Priorities",Hawaii,January12,2010,USDepartment of State(https://2009-2017.state.gov/secretary/20092013clinton/rm/2010/01/135090.htm.)
(5) Ron Huisken,"Civilizing the Anarchical Society:Multilateral Security Processes in the Asia-Pacific",Contemporary Southeast Asia,Vol.24,No.2,2002,pp.187-202.
(6)史田一:《地区风险与东盟国家对冲战略》,载于《世界经济与政治》2016年第5期。
(7) Ankit Panda,"U.S.,Japan,India,and Australia Hold Working-Level Quadrilateral Meeting on Regional Cooperation",The Diplomat,No.13,2017(https://thediplomat.com/2017/11/us-japan-india-and-australia-hold-workinglevel-quadrilateral-meeting-on-regionalcooperation/.)
(1)王明国:《东亚地区治理机制的有效性评估与未来发展》,载于《当代亚太》2014年第2期。
(2) Declaration of ASEAN ConcordⅡ(http://www.aseansec.org/115159.htm.)
(3) Ian Storey,Malcolm Cook,"The Trump Administration and Southeast Asia:Enhanced Engagement",YusofIshak Institute,No.87,2017.
(4)《特朗普的“印太战略”前景如何》,《中国青年报》,2017年11月16日。
(1) Evan Laksmana,"An Indo-Pacific Construct with‘Indonesian Characteristics’",Feb 6,2018(https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/indo-pacific-construct-indonesian-characteristics/.)
(2) Hon Julie Bishop,Minister for Foreign Affairs,"ASEAN:The Nexus of the Indo-Pacific",Asia Society Speech,New York,March 8,2018(https://foreignminister.gov.au/speeches/Pages/2018/jb_sp_180308.aspx.)