| Abstract: | 冷戰結束後，對國際和平與安全最大的威脅，不再來自國家之間的爭端或衝突，而是一國內部的族群衝突、內戰或是政府失靈所造成的人道災難，促使新干預主義(New Interventionism)主張興起：要求國際社會突破不干涉他國內政的原則與武力使用之限制，以處理諸如波士尼亞、盧安達、科索沃、東帝汶、蘇丹、剛果、海地等人道災難問題。隨著不同的衝突發生，新干預主義的內涵透過聯合國祕書長的報告和安理會的決議，以及學者筆下不斷修正與擴增下，建構了一套從預防、解決到防止一國內部衝突再生的策略。
一九九九年六月柯隆歐盟高峰會，歐盟決定發展歐盟的自主軍事能力，建立共同安全暨防禦政策(EU Common Security and Defence Policy, CSDP)，俾使歐盟成為具有經濟、政治和軍事特性的全方面國際組織，並於二００三年在前南斯拉夫馬其頓共和國進行首次的軍事干預行動。
本論文結合上面兩個論述，以新干預主義做為研究途徑，檢證歐盟的軍事干預。歐盟軍事干預政策的本質不是集體防禦，而是循著新干預主義脈絡進行軍事任務，以維護國際和平與安全。本文透過五個個案：馬其頓協和行動(Operation Concordia)、波士尼亞阿爾西亞行動(EUFOR Althea)、剛果阿蒂米絲行動(Artemis)、剛果重建行動(EUFOR RD Congo)以及查德／中非軍事行動(EUFOR Tchad/RCA)，檢證新干預主義的理論與實際，並評估歐盟的軍事行動成果和能力，探討其是否能成為有效、穩定且可信賴的維持和平力量。
本論文認為，新干預主義在落實上或有缺失或被濫用的危險性，但當一國內部危機不斷威脅國際和平與安全時，強調使用武力必要性的新干預主義仍是最佳主張。雖然新干預主義接受正當性干預，但歐盟的軍事干預行動，仍會以合法，尤其是取得聯合國安理會授權為前提。而以歐盟的戰略文化和會員國偏好來看，歐盟在可預見的未來，仍無法發展至北約那樣的軍事能力，所以強制和平的軍事行動不會是歐盟的選項，而會走向兩個模式：在柏林附加協定下，接手北約的任務，以及支援聯合國的維和部隊。
Since the end of the Cold War, the most threat to international peace and security, not from a dispute or conflict between countries, but a humanitarian catastrophe within a country caused by ethnic conflict, civil war or state failure. The New Interventionism is to break the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs, and by use of force to address issues such as Bosnia, Rwanda, Kosovo, East Timor, Sudan, Congo, Haiti and other humanitarian catastrophes. According to the reports of United Nations Secretary-General and the resolutions of United Nations Secretary Council, as well as scholars’ researches, the New Interventionism has become a security strategy to prevent and resolve conflicts, as well as to reconstruct in post-conflict within a country.
In June 1999 the Cologne EU Council decided to develop an autonomous capacity to launch the EU Common Security and Defence Policy, thus giving EU as full role on the international stage. In 2003, EU launched its first military intervention in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.
This dissertation discusses the combination of the above two, through the New Interventionism as a research approach of validating EU''s military intervention. The policy of EU military intervention is not collective defense in essence, but one for the maintenance of international peace and security in the New Interventionism. Through these five cases: Operation Concordia in FYROM, EUFOR Althea in Bosnia, Artemis in Congo, EUFOR RD Congo and EUFOR Tchad / RCA, this dissertation will validate the New Interventionism in theory and practice and evaluate the results and capacity of the EU''s military operations, and explore whether EU can be an effective, stable and creditable peace-keeping force.
The New Interventionism is still the best idea to deal with a country's internal crisis continuing to constitute a threat to international peace and security, even if it could be abused. And EU's military intervention will be legal as a precondition, especially under the authority of UN, although the New Interventionism tolerates use of force based on legitimacy. Because of the strategic culture and preferences of the Member States, in the foreseeable future, EU is hardly to develop the same military capabilities as NATO''s; the peace-enforcing operation will not be the EU''s option. EU will go toward two modes in military intervention: to take over NATO''s mission under Berlin Arrangement, and support the United Nations peacekeeping force. |
