美日1997年簽訂防衛合作新指針後之東北亞安全新趨勢

• Main Authors: 穆仁國, Mu, Jen-Kuo
• Language: 中文
• Published: 國立政治大學
• Online Access: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/cgi-bin/cdrfb3/gsweb.cgi?o=dstdcdr&i=sid=%22A2002000579%22.

基於中華民國位於東北亞的南緣，以及研究者對東北亞地緣的興趣，本篇論文以美日1997年簽訂「防衛合作新指針」為藍本及時間之切入點，期能透過研究分析，找出關鍵因素，提出有價值之論點，勾勒出東北亞安全之新趨勢。另雖有許多學者對上述相關問題已提出卓越的見解，惟「防衛合作新指針」簽訂迄今四年餘，此期間東北亞區域安全情勢的發展一中共、俄羅斯、朝鮮半島與美、日之間已產生相當之變化，期藉前人之論述及近期之事證，一窺美、日簽訂「新指針」後東北亞安全趨勢之全貌，蓋為研究本論文之動機與目的。 本篇論文係以權力平衡理論作為研究方法，根據克勞德(InisClaude)的見解，權力平衡代表的是三種不同的意義：政策(policy)、制度(system)和情況(situation)。所謂的政策意指國家的外交政策以追求平衡為目標。換言之，所有國家均認為不平衡的權力關係是危險的。所以，當權力平衡發生變化，而這項變化是對於敵國有利時，該國必然要執行新的政策，以恢復平衡。所謂的情況是一種認知，也是決策人士的判斷。最簡單的說法是，當兩個國家的力量相當，權力平衡的情況便會出現。假如一方增加力量，而另一方不增加，不平衡的情況就會出現。所以，所謂平衡與否完全依照力量的分配情形而定。這種力量的計算根據兩種因素：一為有形的因素，例如國家的軍事力量、經濟實力、行政效率；二為無形的因素，例如國家的形象、民心士氣和政治風氣。客觀的計算比較不曾發生錯誤，主觀的判斷則難免產生誤判。 相關之研究發現概述如次： 一、美日簽訂新指針之目的，就美國而言，是為了確保其在亞太乃至全球之優勢地位。就日本而言，為其介入國際政治，成為政軍大國之最佳途徑。 二、由於中共在未來20年內，總體國力仍趕不上美國，依照權力平衡理論，中共仍無力挑戰美國。所以未來十數年內，中美關係將依然維持著穩定的狀況。 三、中、美、日、俄在朝鮮半島不發生根本變化的情況下，將在「力求和平」的框架下繼續穩定發展。如果南北韓因和解而發生改變，則大國的關係結構也會出現較大的調整，其影響對美國較為不利。 四、在東北亞區域權力結構變化方面，美日與中俄兩大基本格局的特點，將繼續保持相當長的時間。然此一格局之變化有兩大關鍵因素：第一，由美國的觀點看，中共崛起為區域霸權，美國能接受的範圍是什麼？第二，日本追求界定其為全球性角色之際，無可避免的將擴大軍備。美國、中共、俄羅斯又將如何應付此一後果？上述兩點均將衍生周邊國家的不安與軍備競賽。 五、至於台海安全未來之發展，「一個中國」的問題是關鍵因素，為戰與和約兩難抉擇。 最後建議中華民國政府，善用權力平衡，以保有外交政策的最大自由度，運用小國外交的效能，降低外交成本，在中、美、日、俄四強之間找出其弱點，台灣可由其中獲得實質利益。在戰略上要秉持台灣優先，不但要優先於中共，也要優先於美日，與中共交往獲得豐厚的經濟利益，與美目交往獲得廉價之安全保障，以確保台灣永續生存。 === This paper uses, as the blueprint and cutting point, the US-Japan Security Guideline signed in 1997 to make analyses and to find key factors in an effort to locate valuable points to determine the new trend in the northeast Asia's security, taking into account the location of the Republic of China in the southern edge of the northeast Asia and the writer's interest in the geopolitics of the area. Though there have been ample literature on relevant issues listed above, the US-Japan Security Guideline has been signed for years during which the situations regarding the development of northeast Asia security － the vicissitude among China, Russia, the Korean Peninsula, Japan and US － have drastically changed. By making the best of related previous literature and recent events, this paper overlooks the general picture of the security trend in Northeast Asia. These are the motive and purpose of this paper. This paper adopts the Theory of Power Balance as the research approach. According to Inis Claude, the balance of Power bears three different meanings: policy, system and situation. In other words, every nation recognizes that imbalance of power relations is hazardous. In consequence, if alteration of the balance of power occurs in favor of the adversary, a nation inevitably will have to implement different policies to restore the balance. A situation is a perception. It is also a judgment by policy makers. Simply put, when power of two nations matches, balance of power happens. If the power of a nation increases and the other's doesn't, an imbalance appears. Balance and imbalance, therefore, are determined by distribution of power. Calculation of power are based upon two factors: one is tangible, among which are a nation's military might, economic development and administrative efficiency; the other is intangible, with such examples as the national image, the social morale and the political culture. Objective calculations will be less error-prone, while subjective calculations will unavoidably lead to misjudgment. Related research findings are stated in brief as follows: 1. The purpose of the new guideline signed by the US and Japan is for the US to maintain its predominance in the Asia-Pacific and the whole world. For Japan, it serves the aim of a best approach to involvement in international affairs and to becorning a political military power. 2. In viewing of the reality that PRC's over-all national power will short of matching that of the US in the next two decades, US will remain unrivalled, based upon the theory of balance of power. Sino-US relations, as a result, will still be relatively stable. 3. Without a fundamental change in situations on the Korean Peninsula, relations between China, US, Japan and Russia will continue to develop in stability under the framework of "Seeking Peace." If the reunification of the South and the North Koreas prods situational changes, the relation structure among the global powers will also see a adjustment of a larger scale, which will not be in US's favor. 4. With respect to changes in the power structure in the Northeast Asia, The basic formation of US-Japan versus Sino-Russia will hold for a rather long period of time. The presence of two major elements will bring changes to this primary partitioning. The first is how far would the US let PRC go in becoming a regional hegemony. The second is that the prerequisite for Japan to redefine itself as a global player is to remilitarize itself. How would US, China and Russia tolerate this situation is another nerve-racking problem. 5. As to the future development of cross-strait security issues, the "one-China" principle continues to be the sticky point. For peace or for war is the dilemma. In the end, a recommendation is rendered to the ROC government to make best use of the theory of balance of power if it is to retain the maximum of initiative. Careful application of the diplomatic capabilities that are available to a small nation will lower the diplomatic cost. Substantial interests can be obtained if a foothold among the four strong powers － PRC, US, Japan and Russia － can be secured. Strategically, Taiwan's sustained survival can be assured by maintaining a high priority, priority over not only PRC, but also US and Japan. Connections with PRC will guarantee abundant economic gains and those with US and Japan affordable assurance in security.