基於德國在第一次世界大戰之後所被加諸的屈辱與枷鎖，Carl Schmitt試圖構作「受節制的戰爭」與「總體戰爭」這兩個彼此對立的概念，藉此去主張德國所遭受的待遇是不公的。他試圖鋪陳前者的優點及後者的缺點；而前一種戰爭的特徵，就是不追問發動戰爭的理由，所以發動戰爭者就算是戰敗，也不會被追究責任；Schmitt認爲這對和平的締造是有益的。另外，Schmitt還建構一套「地緣法學」解釋上述兩種不同的戰爭理念分別源自「陸地」與「海洋」這兩種地理性格；而歐陸與英倫，分別代表這兩種文化性格。最後，海洋性文化獲得全面的勝利，造就英美帝國主義對全球的宰制。本文將對Schmitt此一學說加以詳細檢視與批判。 Due to the humiliation and the burden imposed on Germany after the First World War Carl Schmitt intended to set up a contrast between the "Bracketing of War" and the "Total War". He could thereby assert that his fatherland has been treated unjustly. Schmitt described the merits of the former idea as well as the defects of the later one. The characteristic of the "Bracketed War" is the complete ignorance of the reasons for starting war. Therefore, the country starting war should never be punished, even though later it becomes the loser. Schmitt meant that this is beneficial for the reestablishment of international peace. Besides, Schmitt constructed a "Geojurisprudence" to explain the origins of the above-mentioned two adversarial ideas about war-waging. In his opinion these two different ideas represented by European continent and Great Britain have been rooted in the two contradictory geographical elements, namely the land and the sea. Finally, as Schmitt asserted, the culture of the sea has thoroughly defeated the culture of the land. This has consequently resulted in the domination of the "Anglo-American people" over the whole world. In this paper the doctrines of Schmitt will be examined and criticized in detail.
臺灣國際法季刊=Taiwan International Law Quarterly 6(4)，頁105-170