美国的香港政策：决策的视角（1989-2007）

发布时间：2018-07-05 02:27

本文选题：决策 + 理性行为者　；参考：《复旦大学》2008年博士论文

【摘要】： 自1989年以来,美国开始深入介入香港“一国两制”的实施。香港回归前美国出台针对香港的特殊移民政策,关注香港的民主化进程与人权,并制定《美国——香港政策法》。香港回归后,美国一直支持香港走向西方式民主,并不断介入香港的政治改革过程。这就是中美之间的“香港问题”。那么美国的香港政策是一个怎样的决策过程?美国的香港政策对香港“一国两制”的影响如何? 针对上述两个问题,本文将从对外政策研究的决策过程出发,综合分析美国香港政策生成的宏观、中观和微观三个层次的因素,即国际环境的变化、美国国内政治和社会环境、以及决策者个体特点。为了使三个层次的分析更加便于操作,本文在宏观层次引进了理性行为者模式,在中观层次引进了跨机构政治模式,在微观层次引入决策者个体特点和认知因素,来分析美国的香港的政策决策是一个怎样的过程,并比较不同决策结果所生成的美国香港政策对“一国两制”影响程度的差异。通过分析,本文发现,美国对香港这一具有国际政治经济“二元特征”地区的政策具有以下特点:老布什政府在维护美国在港利益与保持中美友好关系之间寻求平衡;克林顿政府尽管也在维护美国在港利益和维持中美关系之间寻求平衡,但这种平衡偏向于维护美国在港利益;小布什政府第一阶段出于全球反恐以及朝核问题等战略需要而急于和中国谋求发展良好关系,所以为了中美关系大局,美国的平衡是偏向维护中美关系的,而第二阶段小布什政府逐步加大了在全球推动民主的战略,尽管也有平衡,但是偏重于扩展美国在香港的利益。总之,美国的香港政策表现出确定性和不确定性。确定性的一面就是历届美国政府尽力在维护中美关系和扩展美国在香港的利益之间寻求平衡。不确定性就是这种平衡并不总是稳定的,有时候偏向于维护中美关系,有时候偏向于扩展美国在港利益。美国的香港政策为何有上述特点?理性行为者模式可以解释美国香港政策的确定性,跨机构政治模式和决策者个体因素可以解释美国香港政策的不确定性。作为理性行为者的美国政府既要维护美国在香港的利益,又要维护中美关系,所以会尽量在二者之间寻求平衡,因此理性行为者模式能够解释为什么三届美国政府都尽力在维护中美关系和维护美国在港利益之间寻求平衡;跨机构政治模式能够解释在意识形态、利益团体和党派政治等因素影响下,国会努力维护美国在港利益;决策者个体因素能够解释,当决策者个人倾向中国和重视现实战略时会维护中美关系,而决策者不倾向中国和重视国内价值时会维护美国在港利益。但这三种方式单独都不具有充分解释力。美国自1989年以来历届政府的香港政策决策过程都是这三种决策方式在综合起作用。但是不同的政府时期三种决策视角的解释力不一样。老布什政府时期理性行为者模式解释力最强,所以该政府的政策以在维护中美关系和维护美国在港利益之间寻求平衡为主。克林顿政府时期跨机构政治模式解释力最强,所以该政府的政策偏重维护美国在港利益。小布什政府时期决策者个体因素解释力最强,所以美国的香港政策体现出不稳定特点,在2003年前偏重于维护中美关系,而2003年后偏重于维护美国在港利益。就美国1989年以来历届政府的香港政策对“一国两制”的影响而言,小布什政府2003年以前的政策负面影响较小,老布什政府的政策负面影响相对较大,克林顿政府和小布什政府2003年之后的政策负面影响最大。从政策意图和政策绩效来说,当美国的对港政策目标是倾向于维护中美关系时,其政策对“一国两制”发展的负面影响较小;当美国的主要政策目标是在维护中美关系和维护美国在港利益之间寻求平衡时,其政策对“一国两制”发展的负面影响较大;当美国的主要政策目标是为了维护美国在香港的利益时,其政策对“一国两制”发展的负面影响最大。从决策视角来看,理性行为者模式主导的政策(老布什政府)对香港“一国两制”负面影响较大;跨机构模式主导的政策(克林顿政府)对香港“一国两制”负面影响最大;决策者个体因素主导的政策(小布什政府)最不稳定,决策者重视维护中美关系时,其政策对“一国两制”负面影响较小;当决策者重视维护美国在港利益时,其政策对香港“一国两制”负面影响最大。
[Abstract]:Since 1989, the United States has been deeply involved in the implementation of the "one country, two systems" in Hongkong. Before the return of Hongkong, the United States introduced special immigration policy against Hongkong, paid attention to the democratic process and human rights of Hongkong, and formulated the policy law of the United States and Hongkong. After Hongkong's return, the United States has always supported Hongkong to Western democracy and constantly intervened in Hongkong. This is the process of political reform. This is the "Hongkong question" between China and the United States. So what is the policy process of the United States' Hongkong policy? How does the Hongkong policy of the United States influence the "one country, two systems" in Hongkong?
In view of the above two problems, this paper will start from the decision-making process of foreign policy research, comprehensively analyze the three factors of the macro, meso and micro levels of the American Hongkong policy, namely, the changes in the international environment, the domestic political and social environment in the United States, and the individual specificity of the decision-makers. In order to make the analysis of the three levels more convenient to operate, This paper introduces the rational actor model at the macro level, introduces the inter institutional political model at the middle level, introduces the individual characteristics and cognitive factors of the decision-makers at the micro level, and analyzes how the policy decision of Hongkong in the United States is a process, and compares the American Hongkong policy generated by the different decision-making results to the "one country, two systems". The difference in the degree of noise.
Through the analysis, we find that the United States has the following characteristics: Hongkong, an international political and economic "two feature" region, has the following characteristics: the Bush administration seeks a balance between the interests of the United States in Hong Kong and the maintenance of the friendly relations between the United States and the United States; although the Clinton administration is also seeking peace between the United States and the United States in maintaining the interests of the United States in Hong Kong and the maintenance of Sino US relations. But this balance tends to maintain the interests of the United States in port. The George W. Bush administration is eager to develop a good relationship with China in the first stage of the Global Counter-Terrorism and the Korean nuclear issue. So the US balance is biased towards maintaining Sino US relations for the overall situation of China and the United States, and the second stage of the George W. Bush administration has gradually increased. The strategy of promoting democracy in the world, although there is a balance, is biased towards expanding the interests of the United States in Hongkong. In a word, the US policy of Hongkong shows certainty and uncertainty. The certainty is that the United States government tries to seek a balance between the maintenance of Sino US relations and the expansion of the interests of the United States in Hongkong. This is the uncertainty. Balance is not always stable. Sometimes it tends to safeguard Sino US relations. Sometimes it tends to expand the interests of the United States in Hong Kong.
Why does the American Hongkong policy have the above characteristics? The rational actor model can explain the certainty of the American Hongkong policy. The inter institutional political model and the individual factors of the decision-makers can explain the uncertainty of the American Hongkong policy. As a rational actor, the American government should maintain both the interests of the United States and the Sino US relations, In order to seek a balance between the two, the rational actor model can explain why the three U. S. government tries to maintain a balance between China and the United States in the interests of the United States and the interests of the United States in Hong Kong. The inter institutional political model can explain the efforts of Congress to maintain the beauty of ideology, interest groups and party politics. The individual factors of the policy makers can be explained by the individual factors of the decision-makers. When the decision-makers tend to be inclined to China and attach importance to the reality strategy, the policy makers will maintain the Sino US relations while the decision-makers are not inclined to China and pay attention to the domestic value. But these three ways are not fully explanatory. The three decisions are integrated in the decision-making process of the port.
However, the explanatory power of the three decision-making perspectives in different government periods is different. The rational actor mode of the Bush administration is the strongest, so the government's policy is to seek a balance between the maintenance of Sino American relations and the maintenance of American interests in Hong Kong. The Clinton administration's political model has the strongest explanatory power in the period of the government, so the government is the government. In the George W. Bush administration, the policy maker's individual factor has the strongest explanatory power, so the Hongkong policy in the United States embodies the characteristics of instability, emphasizing the maintenance of Sino US relations before 2003, while maintaining the US interest in Hong Kong after 2003.
In terms of the impact of the Hongkong policy on "one country, two systems" since 1989 in the United States, the negative impact of the George W. Bush administration's policy before 2003 is smaller, the negative impact of the policy of the Bush administration is relatively large, and the policies of the Clinton administration and the George W. Bush administration have the greatest negative impact on the policy after 2003. When American policy aims to maintain Sino US relations, its policy has little negative impact on the development of "one country, two systems". When the main policy goal of the United States is to maintain a balance between China and the United States and maintain the interests of the United States in Hong Kong, its policy has a greater negative impact on the development of "one country, two systems"; The main policy objective is to maintain the greatest negative impact on the development of one country, two systems in order to safeguard the interests of the United States in Hongkong. From the perspective of decision-making, the policy led by the rational actor model (the Bush government) has a greater negative impact on the "one country, two systems" in Hongkong; the policy led by the inter agency model (the Clinton administration) is to Hongkong ". One country, two systems "has the greatest negative impact; the policy maker's individual factor led policy (George W. Bush administration) is the most unstable. When the decision-makers attach importance to the maintenance of Sino US relations, the policy has little negative impact on" one country, two systems ". When the decision-makers attach importance to the interests of the United States in Hong Kong, the policy has the greatest negative impact on the" one country, two systems "in Hongkong.
【学位授予单位】：复旦大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2008
【分类号】：K712.5;D618

【参考文献】