当前位置:主页 > 社科论文 > 世界历史论文 >

中苏关系中的美国因素(1949-1989)

发布时间:2018-09-11 13:00
【摘要】: 时间上讲,本课题涵盖了从新中国成立到苏东剧变之间中苏关系中的美国因素,同时较全面地反映了“冷战”时期中美苏三国关系演变的轨迹。 在纷繁复杂的“冷战”历史中,最不能回避的研究对象是美苏两个超级大国之间的持续对抗。然而,中国在冷战中的地位绝非无足轻重;在冷战发展的一些关键点和关键问题上,中国甚至占据了中心地位。因此,要深入研究“冷战”历史,就不能忽视中、美、苏三国关系的演变。而“冷战”时期中、美、苏三国关系演变的历程表现出了一个突出的特点,那就是,任何两国之间关系的变化均深受第三国因素的影响。中国之于美苏关系,苏联之于中美关系,美国之于中苏关系均有着特定的作用。因此,就中苏关系而言,除中苏双方自身的内部决策与运作之外,最不能回避的一个外部因素就是美国的影响了。中苏两国1950年同盟关系的确立,60至70年代关系的恶化和武力对峙,80年代末的关系正常化,都与美国有密切联系。 由于中、美、苏三国是冷战时期世界上的三个大国,前苏联又与中国毗邻,冷战期间美国对中、苏两国有非常重要的外部影响。今后,美国和俄罗斯也仍将是与中国密切相关的世界大国。这个课题的研究具有重要的现实战略意义。同时,国内学术界尚无系统研究1949到1989年中苏关系中的美国因素的论著问世,相关的研究仍然显得薄弱和零散,有待系统和深入。因而本选题亦具有重要的理论开拓意义。 本文试图在充分占有相关历史资料的基础上,按照时间顺序,对1949-1989年中苏关系中的美国因素进行综合论述。力图做到既宏观把握,又具体分析,以期对深化中苏关系史研究、进而对深化“冷战史”研究提供一个有价值的“观测点”。 本文除绪论和结语外,正文部分为四章。 第一章着眼于理论,探寻1949-1989年美国对中苏两国外交政策的历史文化背景,为后面论述美国针对中苏关系的政策和战略作铺垫。就美国而言,1949至1989年40年中,美国实行了反苏反共的冷战外交政策。其中除了试图成为世界领袖的时代现实考虑之外,更主要的原因是美国所具有的政治文化传统,如使命观思想、扩张意识、种族主义等政治文化传统以及反对社会主义、共产主义的历史传统对当时国家外交政策的影响。首先,它的政治文化传统主要可以概括为以下四点:1、使命观思想。这包含美国例外论、天定命运观以及美国乐善好施的思想。这种“天赋使命”的理想主义观念将基督教普世主义信仰与现实世界相结合,以独特的文化传统指引着美国外交政策的大方向。2、扩张意识。扩张主义是“种族优越论”的必然产物。大多数美国人认为扩张不是一个贬义词,是实现“天赋使命”的重要手段。3、种族主义。在美国的历史中,鼓吹白皮肤的美国人(尤其英国后裔)属于最精华的种族的盎格鲁—撒克逊主义十分流行。这种种族优越感强烈的影响着美国的国家政策,对外他们特别强调担负领导和保卫世界各自由国家的责任。4、理想主义和现实主义。理想主义和现实主义交错存在,作为既对立又统一的两极共同影响着美国的冷战政策。理想主义对美国冷战政策的影响主要在于,它结合了美国政治文化中的使命观思想,使得美国的冷战政策具有了道义的色彩。而现实主义主要强调实力尤其是军事力量在外交政策中的作用,强调维护美国的主权、安全和国家利益。其次,反共主义作为一种意识形态,成为1949-1989年美国推行反苏反共冷战政策的王牌。正是在反共主义的掩护下,美国高调展开与苏联的对抗并对新中国进行了长达20年的遏制和尖锐敌视。美国外交上的反共主义有着极为深刻的经济、政治和社会文化根源,既具有对整个资本主义世界来说共性的因素,也有美国特有的因素。同时与社会主义国家的政策失误也有一定关系。最后,第二次世界大战结束之后美国经济、军事等综合实力的迅速膨胀则在客观上为美国推行它的外交政策、实现它的扩张梦想、体现它的文化特征创造了空前的时代历史机遇。由此便有了以下三章将涉及到的1949-1989年美国因素与中苏关系的互相纠缠、互为因果的关系。 第二章对1949—1958年中苏结盟友好时期的美国因素进行了分析。这十年间,美国凭借其因为第二次世界大战而成就的世界首强的经济、政治和军事综合实力,对中苏关系施加了全面、直接的干涉。这一期间,美国对中苏关系的影响是巨大的,甚至可以用“无处不在”来形容,因为从二战战后初期到1950年中苏新约的签署、再到中苏“蜜月”友好,中苏关系的上空始终笼罩着美国这块阴云。美国的中苏战略以反苏反共为主,但同时又积极地试图分化中苏关系。这一时期美国分裂中苏关系的“楔子战略”的战略重点,由出台之初的阻止中国同苏联结盟,调整为用“高压”遏制政策迫使中苏关系分裂。这一期间美国的中苏战略的目标并未实现,因为它的战略自相矛盾,美国政策的唯一效果是将自己与社会主义的中国和苏联隔离开来;但中苏两国在亲密友好的大背景下,也潜伏着种种矛盾和危机,正是这些不和谐因素埋下了中苏关系走向分裂恶化的祸根。 第三章对1959-1978年中苏关系破裂过程中的美国因素进行了梳理。这20年,中苏关系由意识形态分歧到关系破裂,两国关系由逐渐恶化走向敌对,甚至一度濒临战争边缘。中苏关系的这种巨大变化除了与两国关系中的种种“内因”有关之外,与美国因素这个“外因”也有莫大关系。这一时期,美国始终没有放弃使用分裂中苏关系的“楔子战略”,其分裂中苏关系的愿望最终得以实现。具有讽刺意义的是,作为影响中苏关系的重要因素,美国在这一时期对中苏关系恶化分裂的反应比较迟钝,大部分时间里仍然执行对华敌视和对苏有限缓和的政策。可以说,中苏关系真正走向破裂的过程受美国因素的客观影响很大,但美国主观上并未积极施加影响。换句话说,美国引起、促成了中苏分裂,却又没有积极利用中苏分裂的现实,调整其对苏对华政策。这一时期,美国对中苏关系的认识基本准确,也就是说,它认识到了中苏关系的恶化分裂。但是它的外交战略中冷战思维过于浓重,其中苏关系战略及其对苏对华政策太过僵硬。尤其在19世纪60年代,美国夸大了“中国威胁论”而宁愿与苏实行有限缓和,甚至愿意与苏联联合,共同遏制中国,惟独不肯放松其对中国的极端敌视政策。正是由于美国因素的存在,才形成了美苏相对缓和和中美尖锐对峙的局势,这种局势对共同抗美的中苏同盟构成了严重的冲击,直至同盟的最终破裂。同样,由于美国因素的存在,中苏关系持续紧张,但又避免了战争对抗。 第四章考察了1979-1989年中苏关系正常化进程中的美国因素。其中包含卡特政府末期和里根政府的中苏政策。这十年,美国的中苏政策的主要特点是趋向强硬。具有讽刺意味的是,同三十年前很相似,美国的对苏对华政策再次使中苏两国化敌为友、握手言和,并且正常化的实现使两国关系从此走向真正的成熟。本章以美国的外交政策和中苏关系的演变为基点,梳理和分析中苏关系正常化进程中的美国因素。1979至1981年,美国的对华对苏政策由于台湾问题及苏美竞争的加剧而再次调整,它的外交政策中突出了反苏反共的冷战思维,致使中美关系出现波折,美苏关系趋向紧张。美国政府的这种政策,使中苏两国又几乎同时感到了缓和中苏关系的战略需要。这一期间的中苏关系虽无改善,但已是黎明前最后的黑暗。1981至1989年,里根政府实行“新现实主义”外交政策。在美国政策的影响下,中苏两国在总结历史经验的基础上,作出了改善关系的战略调整,顺利完成了关系正常化进程。 第五章结语 从美国因素的作用轨迹、效果、特点以及中苏关系对美国的反作用等方面,对1949-1989年中苏关系中的美国因素进行综合分析。1949年新中国成立前夕,基于阻止中苏结盟的目的,美国出台了“楔子战略”,以阻止中国倒向苏联。然而新中国成立后新的中苏同盟的确立和朝鲜战争爆发后中苏友谊的巩固以及中美两国在朝鲜战场上武力对抗局面的形成,使美国分裂中苏关系的外交战略遭遇重大挫折。50年代初,即朝鲜战争爆发后,美国对分裂中苏关系的“楔子战略”进行了第一次调整,其战略重点由出台之初的企图“拉”中国脱离苏联,调整为“压”中国脱离苏联,美国的遏制政策由针对苏联一国,变成了针对中苏两国,它的对华政策的基本内容也相应变为孤立、封锁和包围。1958年前后,基于对中苏两国不同的认识,美国对分裂中苏关系的“楔子战略”进行了第二次调整,它在继续保持对中国的高压遏制政策的同时开始对苏联实施有限缓和政策;到60年代中后期,甚至在一定程度上形成了美苏联合对付中国的局面。美国这种“一压一和”的中苏战略持续了十几年,直至1978年底中美关系实现正常化才告一段落。具有讽刺意味的是,中苏两国因为对美战略的分歧而分道扬镳,直至武力对峙,但美国并未因为美苏冷战的大格局或中苏关系分裂恶化的现实,而改变其对中苏两国的政策。相反它仍一味坚持敌视中国的政策。因此可以说,在中苏关系从分歧走向破裂的过程中,美国因素客观上起了重要作用,但主观上美国的反应是迟钝的,甚至与其美苏冷战对抗的全球战略是相矛盾的。1979至1989年十年间,由于美国的对苏对华政策进一步调整、中美关系正常化的实现、中国政局的变动以及美苏冷战的加剧等因素的影响,中苏两国的关系在对抗中逐渐酝酿转向,最终在1989年实现了正常化。 概而言之,1949-1989年中苏关系中的美国因素具有以下特点: 其一,这40年里美国对中苏两国的政策,是服从于美国的冷战全球战略的,以冷战思想为指导。在两极格局下,美国的对华政策更多地服从于其对苏政策,中国不过是其冷战全球战略大棋局中的一颗重要棋子。无论是“拉”中国脱离苏联、“压”中国与苏联分裂,还是“拉”苏联“压”中国,美国的战略目的都是削弱社会主义阵营的力量,都是为其全球战略服务的。尽管纵向地看,美国的中苏政策和战略在60年代末以后是渐趋理性的,但整体来说,这期间的美国对苏对华政策充满了浓厚的反苏反共的意识形态特征。 其二,这40年中美国对中苏两国的政策始终以美国的国家利益为基础。对国家利益的追求是美国对外政策的基础,这一时期美国的中苏政策也不例外。 其三,这一时期中苏关系中的美国因素具有动态性特征。受国际国内诸多因素的影响,美国的对苏对华政策及其中苏战略几经调整。除了意识形态和国家利益的考虑,美国的对苏对华政策及其中苏战略的制定还受到诸多因素的影响,其中既包括美国的全球战略、美苏关系、美中关系等国际因素的影响,也包括政府组织机制、官僚政治等国内因素影响,同时经济因素在七十年代以后逐渐成为影响美国对苏尤其是对华政策的非常重要的因素。 总之,一方面,1949至1989年美国达到了它要分化中苏关系的战略目的,在诸种美国因素的影响下,中苏关系由友好同盟逐渐走向了分裂恶化。从这个角度看,美国因素在中苏关系的发展演变过程中起了重要作用,中苏两国对美国的政策非常重视。另一方面,考察1949至1989年中苏关系中的美国因素,又不能说它是完美的,因为整个美国外交政策中反苏反共的意识形态色彩非常浓厚,五六十年代美国的对华政策尤其尖锐和充满敌视。
[Abstract]:In terms of time, this topic covers the American factors in Sino-Soviet relations from the founding of New China to the upheaval of the Soviet Union and East China, and reflects the evolution of Sino-Soviet relations during the Cold War.
In the complicated history of the Cold War, the most unavoidable object of study is the continuous confrontation between the two superpowers. However, China's position in the Cold War is by no means insignificant. China even occupies a central position in some key points and key issues of the development of the Cold War. The evolution of the relations among China, the United States and the Soviet Union can not be ignored. During the Cold War, the evolution of the relations between the United States and the Soviet Union showed a prominent feature, that is, the changes in the relations between any two countries were deeply influenced by the third country factors. The establishment of the Sino-Soviet alliance in 1950, the deterioration of relations between the 1960s and the 1970s, the armed confrontation, and the normalization of relations in the late 1980s are all closely related to the United States. Contact.
Since China, the United States and the Soviet Union were the three great powers in the world during the cold war, and the former Soviet Union was adjacent to China, the United States had a very important external influence on China and the Soviet Union during the cold war. There is no systematic study of the American factors in Sino-Soviet relations from 1949 to 1989 in the academic circles. The relevant research is still weak and scattered, and needs to be systematic and in-depth.
This paper attempts to make a comprehensive exposition of the American factors in Sino-Soviet relations from 1949 to 1989 on the basis of full possession of relevant historical data, in accordance with the chronological order. It tries to grasp both macroscopically and concretely, with a view to deepening the study of Sino-Soviet relations and furthermore providing a valuable "observation point" for deepening the study of the history of the Cold War.
In addition to the introduction and conclusion, the main body consists of four chapters.
Chapter One explores the historical and cultural background of American foreign policy toward China and the Soviet Union from 1949 to 1989, laying the groundwork for the later discussion of American policy and strategy toward Sino-Soviet relations. As far as the United States is concerned, during the 40 years from 1949 to 1989, the United States carried out its Cold War foreign policy against the Soviet Union and the Communist Party, in addition to trying to become a world leader. In addition to practical considerations, the main reasons are the political and cultural traditions of the United States, such as the concept of mission, the sense of expansion, racism and other political and cultural traditions, as well as the impact of the historical traditions of anti-socialism and communism on the foreign policy of the country at that time. The idea of mission includes American exceptionalism, the idea of destiny, and the American idea of benevolence. This idealism of "natural mission" combines Christian universalism with the real world, and guides the general direction of American foreign policy with its unique cultural tradition. 2. Expansionism is "racial superiority." Most Americans believe that expansion is not a derogatory term, but an important means of fulfilling a "natural mission." 3. Racism. In American history, Anglo-Saxonism, which advocated that white-skinned Americans (especially British descendants) belonged to the most elite race, was very popular. They emphasized the responsibility of leading and defending the world's free states. 4. Idealism and realism. Idealism and realism intertwined. Idealism and realism, as opposed and unified poles, jointly influenced the Cold War policy of the United States. In addition, realism emphasizes the role of power, especially military power, in foreign policy, and emphasizes the safeguard of American sovereignty, security and national interests. Secondly, as an ideology, anti-communism became 1949-1989. It was under the cover of anti-communism that the United States launched a high-profile confrontation with the Soviet Union and carried out a 20-year-long containment and acute hostility toward New China. At the same time, it has something to do with the policy failures of the socialist countries. Finally, the rapid expansion of the US economy, military and other comprehensive strength after the end of the Second World War has objectively carried out its foreign policy for the United States, realized its dream of expansion and embodied its cultural characteristics. The levy created an unprecedented historical opportunity of the times. Thus, the following three chapters will be involved in the 1949-1989 relationship between the United States and the Soviet Union entanglement, mutual causal relationship.
The second chapter analyzes the American factors during the period of Sino-Soviet alliance and friendship from 1949 to 1958. During this decade, the United States, by virtue of its comprehensive economic, political and military strength, exerted a comprehensive and direct interference in Sino-Soviet relations. During this period, the United States exerted a tremendous influence on Sino-Soviet relations. From the beginning of World War II to the signing of the New Covenant between China and the Soviet Union in 1950 to the honeymoon friendship between China and the Soviet Union, the clouds over Sino-Soviet relations have always covered the United States. The strategic focus of the "wedge strategy" to split Sino-Soviet relations was changed from preventing China from aligning with the Soviet Union at the beginning of its promulgation to forcing the separation of Sino-Soviet relations through the "high-pressure" containment policy. During this period, the goal of the Sino-Soviet strategy of the United States was not achieved because of its contradictory strategy, and the only effect of the United States policy was to force itself and the social owner. China and the Soviet Union are separated, but under the background of close friendship, China and the Soviet Union are also lurking in various contradictions and crises. It is these disharmonious factors that have buried the root of the deterioration of Sino-Soviet relations.
In the last 20 years, Sino-Soviet relations have changed from ideological divergence to disintegration, and the relations between the two countries have gradually deteriorated to hostility, even once on the brink of war. In this period, the United States never abandoned the use of the "wedge strategy" to split Sino-Soviet relations, and its desire to split Sino-Soviet relations was finally realized. Ironically, as an important factor affecting Sino-Soviet relations, the deterioration of Sino-Soviet relations during this period was a significant factor. It can be said that the real process of the rupture of Sino-Soviet relations was greatly influenced by the objective factors of the United States, but the United States did not exert active influence subjectively. In other words, the United States caused the split of the Soviet Union, but did not actively use it. During this period, the United States recognized the deterioration and division of Sino-Soviet relations, but its diplomatic strategy was too strong in the Cold War thinking, in which the Soviet relations strategy and its policy toward China were too rigid. The United States has exaggerated the "China threat theory" and preferred a limited mitigation with the Soviet Union, or even a joint effort with the Soviet Union to contain China, but refused to relax its policy of extreme hostility toward China. It is precisely because of the existence of the United States that a situation of relative relaxation between the United States and the Soviet Union and the sharp confrontation between China and the United States has emerged. The Soviet Union constituted a serious shock until the alliance finally broke down. Similarly, because of the presence of the United States, Sino-Soviet relations continued to be tense, but War confrontation was avoided.
Chapter Four examines the American factors in the normalization of Sino-Soviet relations from 1979 to 1989, including the Sino-Soviet policies of the late Carter and Reagan administrations. From 1979 to 1981, the U.S. policy toward China toward the Soviet Union was strengthened by the Taiwan issue and the Soviet-American competition. The U.S. government's policy made China and the Soviet Union feel the strategic need to ease the Sino-Soviet relations almost at the same time. Darkness. From 1981 to 1989, the Reagan Administration adopted a "new realism" foreign policy. Under the influence of the American policy, China and the Soviet Union, on the basis of summing up historical experience, made strategic adjustments to improve relations and successfully completed the normalization process of relations.
The fifth chapter is conclusion.
This paper makes a comprehensive analysis of the American factors in Sino-Soviet relations from 1949 to 1989 in terms of the track, effect, characteristics of the American factors and the reactions of Sino-Soviet relations to the United States. On the eve of the founding of New China in 1949, the United States introduced a "wedge strategy" to prevent China from turning to the Soviet Union for the purpose of preventing the Sino-Soviet alliance. The establishment of the new Sino-Soviet alliance after its founding, the consolidation of Sino-Soviet friendship after the outbreak of the Korean War, and the formation of the situation of armed confrontation between the two countries in the Korean battlefield have greatly frustrated the diplomatic strategy of the United States to split Sino-Soviet relations. For the first time, its strategic focus was changed from "pulling" China out of the Soviet Union at the beginning of its promulgation to "pressing" China out of the Soviet Union. The United States'containment policy changed from targeting one country of the Soviet Union to targeting China and the Soviet Union. The basic content of its policy toward China changed accordingly into isolation, blockade and encirclement. Around 1958, it was based on China and the Soviet Union. In the middle and late 1960s, even to a certain extent, the United States and the Soviet Union joined forces to deal with China. The Sino-Soviet strategy of "One Harmony" lasted for more than ten years until the normalization of Sino-US relations at the end of 1978. Ironically, China and the Soviet Union diverged from each other because of the differences in their strategies toward the United States until they confronted each other by force. However, the United States did not change its relations because of the general pattern of the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union or the reality of the deterioration of the split of Sino-Soviet relations. On the contrary, China and the Soviet Union still insist on the policy of hostility to China. Therefore, it can be said that in the process of Sino-Soviet relations from divergence to rupture, the U.S. factor played an important role objectively, but subjectively, the U.S. response was slow, and even contradicted its global strategy of confrontation between the United States and the Soviet Union in the cold war. Normalization of Sino US relations due to further adjustment of the US policy towards China and the Soviet Union
【学位授予单位】:山东师范大学
【学位级别】:博士
【学位授予年份】:2008
【分类号】:D829;K153

【引证文献】

相关硕士学位论文 前2条

1 王晓琳;从鸥浦乡俄罗斯民族村变迁看中(苏)俄关系的演变[D];黑龙江大学;2010年

2 韩丁;中苏关系正常化中的美国因素[D];黑龙江大学;2013年



本文编号:2236756

资料下载
论文发表

本文链接:https://www.wllwen.com/shekelunwen/xifanglishiwenhua/2236756.html


Copyright(c)文论论文网All Rights Reserved | 网站地图 |

版权申明:资料由用户3356d***提供,本站仅收录摘要或目录,作者需要删除请E-mail邮箱bigeng88@qq.com