“反美扶日运动”与国民政府的对日索赔政策

发布时间：2018-05-06 18:28

本文选题：反美扶日运动 + 国民政府　；参考：《浙江大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：1948年春夏之交,以日本赔偿问题为发端的,被称为“反美扶日”运动(反对美国扶持日本运动)的学生运动,在国民政府统治区的各大城市爆发。正如运动名称所示,运动主要是对战后对日处理问题中的日本赔偿问题减额等政策变化进行了抗议,并对提出此变化的美国进行了批判。但是,当时国共内战中与国民政府相对抗的中国共产党则在运动中发挥了组织作用,对负责日本赔偿问题外交交涉的国民政府进行了批判。而美国方面则为了缓和学生情绪,由美国驻华大使司徒雷登出面,对支持运动的学生发表了声明。然而由于美国对日求偿政策采取了缓和的路线,加之司徒雷登否认日本军事再崛起,并对运动进行了批判,更进一步刺激了运动的升级。运动支持者批判美国违反波茨坦公报,同时也指责国民政府对美国亦步亦趋,反对“奴才外交”。在大学校园,各大城市市中心,展开了各种集会、游行,并且召开了各种海报和漫画展。美国对日的求偿政策,在战后初期本与国民政府保持一致的严格姿态。然而由于美国国内的政治变化和战后冷战格局的逐步形成,在多重因素影响下,美国对日的求偿政策逐渐缓和。“反美扶日”运动中被批判为违反波茨坦公报的美国,实际上因为各国对波茨坦公报的解释不尽相同,很难断言美国是否有违反波茨坦公报的行为。然而很明显美国的政策转换对中国而言则带来了巨大的损失。另一方面,国民政府的对日求偿政策则一贯保持了战后初期的态度,“反美扶日”运动中所称的“奴才外交”实际上是子虚乌有。国民政府在二战解释前后就早早地积极介入日本赔偿问题的构想中,而为了实现构想,国民政府内部也提出了多种方案,并且与盟国各国保持紧密合作。此外,国民政府在国防、设备赔偿等问题相关的船舶赔偿问题上竭尽全力,甚至造成了与美国的外交对抗态势。远东委员会在赔偿的分配讨论过程中恰逢美国政策的转换期,而国民政府下属保持对美的持续批判也间接唤起了国内舆论对美国的压力,而国民政府也致力于尽快在赔偿问题上有所结果并且确保本国利益。在日本赔偿问题上美国作为单独占领日本的一方有巨大的影响力,因而事态并非如国民政府预想的那样发展。但是国民政府的对日求偿政策并非是所谓的追随美国的“奴才外交”,而是尽力使得赔偿最大化,以保护本国之利益。
[Abstract]:At the turn of spring and summer of 1948, the student movement, which started with the question of Japanese compensation and was called "anti-American support Japan" movement, broke out in the major cities in the areas ruled by the national government. As the name of the movement shows, the movement mainly protested against the policy changes such as the reduction of compensation in Japan after the war, and criticized the United States which proposed this change. However, the Communist Party of China, which confronted the Kuomintang government in the KMT civil war at that time, played an organizing role in the movement, criticizing the Kuomintang government responsible for the diplomatic negotiations on the issue of compensation in Japan. The United States, for its part, made a statement to students supporting the campaign in an effort to ease students' feelings. However, because the United States adopted a detente line against Japan's claim policy, and Leighton Stuart denied Japan's military re-emergence, and criticized the movement, it further stimulated the escalation of the movement. Supporters of the movement criticized the United States for violating the Potsdam communiqu 茅 and accused the National Government of following the United States and opposing slave diplomacy. On university campuses, city centers, rallies, parades, posters and galleries. In the early postwar period, American claim policy was consistent with the national government. However, due to the political changes in the United States and the gradual formation of the post-war cold war pattern, under the influence of many factors, the American claim policy towards Japan gradually eased. The United States, which has been criticized as violating the Potsdam communique in the "anti-American-Japanese" movement, is in fact difficult to assert whether the United States has violated the Potsdam communique because of the different interpretations of the Potsdam communiqu 茅. But it is clear that the policy shift in the United States has brought huge losses to China. On the other hand, the national government's policy of claiming compensation against Japan has always maintained its attitude in the early postwar period, and the "slave diplomacy" called "slave diplomacy" in the "anti-American support Japan" movement is in fact null and void. Before and after World War II, the National Government actively intervened in the idea of Japanese compensation problem, and in order to realize the idea, it also put forward a variety of plans, and maintained close cooperation with the allied countries. In addition, the national government made every effort on ship compensation related to national defense and equipment compensation, and even caused diplomatic confrontation with the United States. The far East Commission's discussion on the distribution of compensation coincided with the transition period of US policy, and the sustained criticism of the United States by members of the National Government indirectly aroused the pressure of domestic public opinion on the United States. And the national government is committed to finding results on the issue of compensation as soon as possible and ensuring its own interests. The United States has great influence on the issue of Japanese compensation as a separate occupation of Japan, so the situation did not develop as expected by the national government. However, the national government's claim policy against Japan is not the so-called "slave diplomacy" to follow the United States, but to maximize compensation in order to protect the interests of the country.
【学位授予单位】：浙江大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：K266

【相似文献】