冷战后美国对华人权政策的国内政治分析（1989-1996）
发布时间：2018-10-20 19:15
【摘要】：冷战后的美国对华人权政策从1989年到1996年经历了罕见的戏剧性变化：从布什政府上台之初的“安静外交”,到天安门事件后的“惩罚外交”,从克林顿就任伊始的“挂钩外交”,到不久之后的“脱钩”和对华人权新政策。这一时期的美国对华人权政策充分展现了国内外因素对美国外交决策的影响力,值得学者重视和深入研究。 本文从美国国内政治的视角出发分析冷战后的美国对华人权政策。影响美国对华人权政策的主要国内变量包括思想观念和决策程序两大部分,前者主要涵盖理想主义与现实主义的理念辩论,后者主要涉及总统与国会的权力斗争,同时也不能忽视非政府组织、利益集团、新闻媒体、大众舆论等外部行为体对政策的塑造作用。而在政策的具体实施过程中,人权关切与其他重大国家利益之间的取舍也是一个困扰决策者的重大变数。 通过研究,本文发现：(1)在指导美国对华人权政策的外交理念的辩论中,理想主义虽一度占得上风,但现实主义还是重新占据了主导美国对华人权政策的优势地位。美国对华人权政策是平衡理想主义和现实主义的产物,但后者的影响更加突出。(2)在制定美国对华人权政策的行为主体的斗争中,国会的优势虽一度被放大,但总统毕竟是最重要的外交事务决策者,他仍然能够排除国会和其他行为体的干扰,继续主导美国对华人权政策。(3)在实施美国对华人权政策的利益偏好的排序中,人权关切虽一度占据优先地位,但事实证明,当追求人权目标需要以美国的其他重大国家利益为代价时,这项人权政策就是不可持续的。 在经历了1989年至1996年的剧烈震荡后,美国对华人权政策已经进入了一个相对平衡和稳定的时期,即主要由总统主导、更体现现实主义精神,更注重与美国其他外交政策目标相协调。美国对华人权外交政策的这种务实走势一直延续到了今天。
[Abstract]:The human rights policy of the United States towards China after the Cold War experienced a rare dramatic change from 1989 to 1996: from the "quiet diplomacy" of the Bush administration at the beginning of its coming to power, to the "punitive diplomacy" after the Tiananmen Square incident. From Clinton's "linked diplomacy" at the beginning of his term of office, to the "decoupling" and the new human rights policy toward China not long after. The human rights policy of the United States towards China during this period fully demonstrated the influence of domestic and foreign factors on American foreign policy, and it is worthy of scholars' attention and in-depth study. From the perspective of American domestic politics, this paper analyzes the American human rights policy towards China after the Cold War. The main domestic variables that influence the US human rights policy towards China include two parts: ideology, ideas, and decision-making procedures. The former mainly covers idealism and realism, while the latter involves the power struggle between the President and Congress. At the same time, the role of external actors such as NGOs, interest groups, news media and public opinion in shaping policy should not be ignored. The trade-off between human rights concerns and other vital national interests is also a major variable that haunts policymakers in the implementation of policies. This paper finds that: (1) although idealism once prevailed in the debate on the foreign policy of guiding American human rights policy toward China, realism re-occupied the dominant position of the United States' human rights policy towards China. The United States' human rights policy towards China is the product of balancing idealism and realism, but the latter's influence is even more prominent. (2) in the struggle of the main actors in formulating the United States' human rights policy towards China, the advantages of Congress were once magnified. But after all, the President is the most important foreign policy maker. He can still rule out the interference of Congress and other actors and continue to dominate U.S. human rights policy toward China. (3) in the ranking of the interests preferences of the United States in implementing its human rights policy on China, While human rights concerns were once a priority, the human rights policy proved unsustainable when pursuing human rights goals at the expense of other major national interests of the United States. After experiencing the violent shocks from 1989 to 1996, the United States' human rights policy towards China has entered a period of relative balance and stability, that is, mainly led by the President, which embodies the spirit of realism. More emphasis is placed on aligning with other US foreign policy objectives. This pragmatic trend of US human rights foreign policy towards China has continued to this day.
【学位授予单位】：复旦大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：D871.2
本文编号：2284126
[Abstract]:The human rights policy of the United States towards China after the Cold War experienced a rare dramatic change from 1989 to 1996: from the "quiet diplomacy" of the Bush administration at the beginning of its coming to power, to the "punitive diplomacy" after the Tiananmen Square incident. From Clinton's "linked diplomacy" at the beginning of his term of office, to the "decoupling" and the new human rights policy toward China not long after. The human rights policy of the United States towards China during this period fully demonstrated the influence of domestic and foreign factors on American foreign policy, and it is worthy of scholars' attention and in-depth study. From the perspective of American domestic politics, this paper analyzes the American human rights policy towards China after the Cold War. The main domestic variables that influence the US human rights policy towards China include two parts: ideology, ideas, and decision-making procedures. The former mainly covers idealism and realism, while the latter involves the power struggle between the President and Congress. At the same time, the role of external actors such as NGOs, interest groups, news media and public opinion in shaping policy should not be ignored. The trade-off between human rights concerns and other vital national interests is also a major variable that haunts policymakers in the implementation of policies. This paper finds that: (1) although idealism once prevailed in the debate on the foreign policy of guiding American human rights policy toward China, realism re-occupied the dominant position of the United States' human rights policy towards China. The United States' human rights policy towards China is the product of balancing idealism and realism, but the latter's influence is even more prominent. (2) in the struggle of the main actors in formulating the United States' human rights policy towards China, the advantages of Congress were once magnified. But after all, the President is the most important foreign policy maker. He can still rule out the interference of Congress and other actors and continue to dominate U.S. human rights policy toward China. (3) in the ranking of the interests preferences of the United States in implementing its human rights policy on China, While human rights concerns were once a priority, the human rights policy proved unsustainable when pursuing human rights goals at the expense of other major national interests of the United States. After experiencing the violent shocks from 1989 to 1996, the United States' human rights policy towards China has entered a period of relative balance and stability, that is, mainly led by the President, which embodies the spirit of realism. More emphasis is placed on aligning with other US foreign policy objectives. This pragmatic trend of US human rights foreign policy towards China has continued to this day.
【学位授予单位】：复旦大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：D871.2
【参考文献】
中国期刊全文数据库 前10条
1 刘桂芬;中美人权问题:从对抗转向对话[J];国际观察;2000年01期
2 邱美荣,倪世雄;文化与政治——浅析中美关系中的人权问题[J];国际观察;2002年01期
3 罗艳华;;美国对中国的人权外交[J];国际政治研究;1993年03期
4 罗艳华;中国外交战略调整中的“人权问题”[J];国际政治研究;2001年01期
5 崔存明;;美国的中国观——新乐观主义和一些历史性的考察[J];国外理论动态;2007年09期
6 王明进;美国学者谈美国的人权问题[J];国外理论动态;1999年05期
7 谷春德;;30年来的中国人权理论研究与创新[J];高校理论战线;2009年02期
8 李世安;美国《年度国别人权报告》与人权外交[J];世界历史;2001年01期
9 王立新;试论美国人中国观的演变(18世纪—1950)[J];世界历史;1998年01期
10 张骥;论中美关系中的人权问题分歧与斗争[J];科学社会主义;1997年01期
，本文编号：2284126
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/shekelunwen/waijiao/2284126.html
