English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Items with full text/Total items : 51317/86412 (59%)
Visitors : 8179266      Online Users : 81
RC Version 7.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library & TKU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://tkuir.lib.tku.edu.tw:8080/dspace/handle/987654321/101807


    Title: 新現實主義下歐盟共同外交及安全政策之發展與前景
    Other Titles: The development and prospect of the common foreign and security policy of the European Union :
    Authors: 沈娟娟;Shen, Jiuan-Jiuan
    Contributors: 淡江大學歐洲研究所博士班
    鄒忠科
    Keywords: 共同外交及安全政策;里斯本條約;歐洲安全;新現實主義;大西洋聯盟;CFSP;Lisbon Treaty;European security;Neo-realism;transatlantic alliance
    Date: 2014
    Issue Date: 2015-05-04 09:18:44 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 馬斯垂克條約建立了共同外交及安全政策、將合作擴展至具有軍事意涵的安全議題上、以及後續的共同外交及安全政策相關的條約改革,都必須從特別的安全考量以及全面的政治背景檢視。國際政治環境-包括國際體系結構、跨大西洋兩岸的關係、以及整體的歐洲安全議題等-和歐洲統合運動的進程都對共同外交及安全政策產生相當大的影響。
      本文將採取新現實主義的途徑進行。新現實主義主張國家會試圖透過權力最大化的方式,確保其自身安全。然而如果採取權力最大化的作法會使其反而陷入不安全的風險中,則國家將轉而只追求安全的最大化,同時也不再追求領土占領目標,而改為追求環境型塑的目標。在無政府的自助國際體系裡,強權們有三個主要的政策選項:平衡策略、諉責策略、以及扈從策略。在檢視共同外交及安全政策的歷史、制度、及政治背景之後,本文發現,歐盟會員國在共同外交及安全政策底下的合作比較像是集體進行環境型塑的計劃行動,企圖透過平衡策略、諉責策略、以及扈從策略三者的彈性使用,達到其安全最大化之目的。本文同時也發現,歐盟國家對於共同外交及安全政策的進展相當謹慎,擔心其發展有可能傷害到國家的外交政策自主性與主權,因此抗拒其改革合理化的進行。因此,歐盟會員國阻礙共同外交及安全政策功能最佳化的政治意志,也是何以共同外交及安全政策的進展表現差強人意的重要原因之一。這一點,從本文對於歐盟對外行動部的發展過程以及在第二柱石下的歐盟反恐建制的分析,都可以看到:會員國仍以本國而非歐盟為中心思考歐洲安全問題,而美國和大西洋聯盟這兩個因素從冷戰至今仍左右著共同外交及安全政策的發展方向。
    The creation of the Common Foreign and Security Policy in the Maastricht Treaty, the idea of expanding the cooperation to security issues with military meanings and the follow-up treaty reforms on CFSP must be viewed both against the specific security as well as the general political background. The international political environment -including the structure of the international system, the transatlantic relationship and European security issues as a whole- and the progress of European integration both have strong impact on the development of CFSP.
    This study will proceed through the lens of neo-realism. Neo-realism claims states will try to assure their security by maximizing power, but if doing so would risk undermining their security, they will only focus on security maximization and pursue milieu goals instead of possession goals. In anarchical self-help system, great powers have three main options: balancing, buckpassing and bandwagoning. After examining the historical, institutional and political background of the CFSP, this study find that EU member states’ cooperation in CFSP is more like a collective attempt at milieu shaping, seeking to maximize their security through the flexible uses of balancing, buckpassing and bandwagoning strategies. This study also find that the member states’ political wills to prevent the CFSP from being best equipped may be an important reason why CFSP has progressed poorly.
    Appears in Collections:[歐洲研究所] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File SizeFormat
    index.html0KbHTML96View/Open

    All items in 機構典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library & TKU Library IR teams. Copyright ©   - Feedback