2008年北京奧運之舉辦，之所以引發世人之關注，吾人認為必然存在所謂結構的條件。因此本文除了從公共政策的觀點分析，也從新制度主義的角度，分析中共舉辦奧運其背後所擁有的內外環境與制度條件。 從外環境來看，中國崛起勢必帶來國際輿論的各種疑慮，為了消弭中國威脅的負面形象，在「和平論述」的基本架構下，中共推動了所謂「軟實力外交」的各項作為，因此奧運的舉辦，各視為其理念與政策結合的產物。就內環境而言，改革開放以來由於傾斜式的發展模式，造成嚴重的經濟社會衝突與矛盾。為了化解執政危機、凝聚內部民心，中共透過奧運的舉辦，展現其國家能力與愛國主義的動員力量。 為了加強論文的深度，本論文以「柏林奧運」與「漢城奧運」兩項個案作為基礎，進行制度性的比較以及奧運政經轉型效應的分析。即便兩者皆為非民主政體，但前者奧運後卻走向戰爭，後者則走向經濟現代化與政治民主化。本研究發現其關鍵在於「國際社會的態度」與「國內政治菁英的行動」。由此作為延伸，舉辦奧運後的中國其政經發展，由於受到全球輿論的關注，遂構成其政經轉型轉型的外在動力；但為了避免出現類似和平演變的結果，中共將更加強化對於國內異議人士的控制。 Since the 2008 Beijing Olympics has aroused the attention of the public, I have been concerning the structural conditions – from public policy to new institutionalism approach – to analyze the external and internal circumstances of such great event.
From external circumstances, the rise of China has brought the tremendous concerns and anxieties that China has been working to eliminate the negative effects of the “yellow perils” ideas throughout the “soft power diplomacy” under “peace discourse” framework. Moreover, the 2008 Beijing Olympics has become the creature of such idea and policy. From internal, the uneven development since the reform has caused the great economic and social conflicts that the Chinese government must take this event to deal with the crisis and coerce the nation throughout the mobilization of state capacity and patriotism.
To enhance the discussion, I try to take the “1933 Berlin Olympics” and “1986 Seoul Olympics” to make institutional comparisons and transformational analyses. Even though the Third Reich and South Korea were yet democratic regimes, the former went to war and the latter went to modernization and democratization. From the previous two cases, how should China develop after the 2008 Beijing Olympics? An external force to push her into transformation or a weapon to suppress the dissidents?
