| 2,943 | 11 | 22 |
| 下载次数 | 被引频次 | 阅读次数 |
干预是美国现代外交的重要工具和组成部分。在美国外交史上,从1823年"门罗主义"提出到1920年伍德罗·威尔逊任期结束的近1个世纪,是美国对外干预的观念基础、行为模式与思想格局孕育和定型的最关键阶段,其以1898年美西战争为界又可区分为19世纪"古典"阶段与20世纪"现代"阶段。美国对外干预思想大致经历了从"早期非意识形态、不干涉主义"到"弱意识形态、干涉主义(罗斯福推论)"再到"强意识形态、干涉主义(威尔逊主义)"的演变轨迹,对外干预实践的特征相应地从"零星、非系统、维护地区霸权"演变为"大规模、系统化、建构世界秩序"。贯穿其中的表层线索是:历届总统基于变化的时代现实不断对"门罗主义""美国"及"使命"概念作出新的解释,从而为美国的对外干预进行辩护;深层脉络则是美国与外部世界关系变迁以及相应意识形态内容的生成和发展。美国对外关系中早期干预思想的缘起和演进不仅预示着现代美国外交精神品格的总体面貌,而且规定着美国与外部世界关系未来展开的基本框架。在中华民族伟大复兴梦想实现进程中和"亚洲世纪"初见端倪的今天,有关早期美国对外干预思想的系统梳理不仅填补了学界研究的一项空白,也为我们更好地思考如何经略周边、建构"亚洲命运共同体"提供了富有教益的历史镜鉴。
Abstract：Intervention is both an important tool and a component of American modern diplomacy. In American diplomatic history,the period from 1823 to 1920 witnessed the most critical stage of the origin and evolution of the ideological basis of the behavioral pattern of American foreign intervention. It can be further divided into two stages,i. e.,the “classical” stage of the 19 th century and the “modern” stage of the 20 th century,with the Spanish-American War in 1898 as the boundary line. The American thought of foreign intervention roughly experienced the evolutionary track from“non-ideology & noninterventionism”to “weak ideology & interventionism (Roosevelt Corollary)”,and then to “strong ideology & interventionism (Wilsonianism) ”. The characteristic of American foreign intervention in practice has correspondingly evolved from “sporadic, non-systematic,and maintaining regional hegemony” to “large-scale, systematic, and constructing world order ”. The superficial clue running through this process is that successive leaders of U. S. governments have constantly made new interpretations of the Monroe Doctrine and the concept of“American mission”based on the changing reality of times,thus justifying America's foreign intervention. The deep clue is the change of the relationship between the United States and the outside world as well as the development of the corresponding ideological content. The origin and evolution of the early intervention thought in American foreign relations not only foreshadows the overall appearance of the modern American diplomacy, but also shapes the future development of the relations between the United States and the outside world. At a time when the dream of the great rejuvenation of China is coming true and the Asian Century is beginning to take shape,a systematic review of the early American foreign intervention thoughts not only fills a gap in academic research,but also provides us with a historical mirror for better thinking about how to deal with the periphery and construct an “Asian Community of Shared Future”.
(1)“干预”在英语语言中的含义不仅包括国家行为的外部向度(即对外干预),也包括国家行为的内部向度(一般指政府对市场运行过程施加人为管制而非自由放任),本文主要考察干预的外部向度。因此在本文中“干预”与“对外干预”大致同义,并可互换使用。
(2)王立新:《试论美国外交史上的对外干预:兼论自由主义意识形态对美国对外干预的影响》,载《美国研究》,2005年第2期,第99页。关于“二战”后美国的“全球主义”外交,可参见Stephen E.Ambrose and Douglas G.Brinkley,Rise to Globalism:American Foreign Policy Since 1938,Penguin Books,2010.
(3)Robin Lindley,“The Origins of American Imperialism:An Interview with Stephen Kinzer”,2017.https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/166640.[2021-02-21]
(4)[英]佩里·安德森著,李岩译:《美国外交政策及其智囊》,北京:金城出版社,2017年,第33页。
(5)如李东燕:《评冷战后美国的干预政策》,载《世界经济与政治》,1994年第7期;时殷弘:《国际政治中的对外干预:兼论冷战后美国的对外干预》,载《美国研究》,1996年第4期;王辉:《美国对外干预的新趋向》,载《国际关系学院学报》,2000年第1期;王立新:《试论美国外交史上的对外干预:兼论自由主义意识形态对美国对外干预的影响》,载《美国研究》,2005年第2期。国外学界的系统性研究同样不多。
(6)Joseph R.Stromberg,“Imperialism,Non-interventionism,and Revolution:Opponents of the Modern American Empire”,in The Independent Review,Vol.11,No.1,Summer 2006,p.81.
(7)1898年4月,美国为了夺取西班牙在美洲和亚洲的殖民地古巴、波多黎各和菲律宾而发动了这场战争,战争最重要的结果是美国以大国地位进入世界政治舞台。
(8)C.G.Fenwick,“Intervention:Individual and Collective”,in American Journal of International Law,Vol.39,No.4,1945,p.651.
(9)Alexis Heraclides and Ada Dialla,Humanitarian Intervention in the Long Nineteenth Century:Setting the Precedent,Manchester University Press,2015,pp.197-222.
(10)Thomas Bender,“The American Way of Empire”,in World Policy Journal,Vol.23,No.1,Spring 2006,p.56.
(11)在美国外交史学上,关于1898年美西战争的“偏离说”是比米斯等“正统派”学者坚持的论点。参见Samuel Flagg Bemis,A Diplomatic History of The United States,New York:Holt,1936.
(12)王立新:《试论美国外交史上的对外干预:兼论自由主义意识形态对美国对外干预的影响》,载《美国研究》,2005年第2期,第91页。
(13)Alexis Heraclides and Ada Dialla,Humanitarian Intervention in the Long Nineteenth Century:Setting the Precedent,Manchester University Press,2015,p.197.
(14)“门罗主义”在19世纪美国对外关系史上具有本体性的地位,这是因为:(1)它概述了一种基于空间的、地区主义的世界事务观点;(2)它表达了对美国文化、历史和国家身份的一般性看法,因而确立了一个同国民特性相当一致的对外政策大框架。
(15)William Appleman Williams(ed.),The Shaping of American Diplomacy:Readings and Documents in American Foreign Relations,1750-1955 (Volume I),Chicago:Rand Mcnally & Company,1956,pp.160-161.
(16)Albert K.Weinberg,Manifest Destiny:A Study of Nationalist Expansionism in American History,Baltimore:The Johns Hopkins Press,1935,pp.416-417.
(17)[美]迈克尔·H.亨特著,褚律元译:《意识形态与美国外交政策》,北京:世界知识出版社,1998年,第68页。
(18)Albert K.Weinberg,Manifest Destiny:A Study of Nationalist Expansionism in American History,Baltimore:The Johns Hopkins Press,1935,p.417.
(19)Jay Sexton,The Monroe Doctrine:Empire and Nation in Nineteenth-Century America,Hill and Wang,2011,p.378.
(20)Joseph R.Stromberg,“Imperialism,Non-interventionism,and Revolution:Opponents of the Modern American Empire”,in The Independent Review,Vol.11,No.1,Summer 2006,p.85.
(21)南部邦联是为了自由享有其新近获取的独立而战,与当初寻求与英帝国分离的13个殖民地十分类似;北方则仅仅是为反对一场非法叛乱、维护联邦的完整性而战。
(22)由于其所具有的道德意味和意识形态特征,内战也被称为“美国第一次意识形态征服的实验”(随之而来的是美国在“国家重建”上的第一次实验——“南方重建”)。
(23)[美]罗伯特·卡根著,袁胜育等译:《危险的国家:美国从起源到20世纪初的世界地位》,北京:社会科学文献出版社,2011年,第353-394页。
(24)“归因性美国主义”的含义是:政治身份(包括有投票权和参选最高政治职位资格等完全公民身份)的赋予并非基于所有政治参与者的同意,而是建立在种族、性别和人们出生时通常不会改变的民族、宗教和文化等归因性特征之上,参见Rogers M.Smith,Civic Ideals:Conflicting Visions of Citizenship in U.S.History,Yale University Press,1997,p.3.
(25)例如,在当时流行的种族主义叙事中,“盎格鲁—撒克逊种族”,尤其是美国人,被视为“优越的种族”,非洲人和美洲印第安人的地位最低,而拉丁人(如西班牙人)处于两个极端之间。
(26)[美]罗伯特·卡根著,袁胜育等译:《危险的国家:美国从起源到20世纪初的世界地位》,北京:社会科学文献出版社,2011年,第388-394页。
(27)Rogers M.Smith,Civic Ideals:Conflicting Visions of Citizenship in U.S.History,Yale University Press,1997,p.355.
(28)Josiah Strong,Our Country:Its Possible Future and Its Present Crisis,The American Home Missionary Society,1885,pp.159-180.
(29)John Fiske,“Manifest Destiny”,in The Harpers Monthly,March 1885,p.588.
(30)19世纪末,英属圭亚那和委内瑞拉就边境问题发生了外交争端。1887年,美国国务院提出对边界纠纷进行仲裁,但被英国拒绝。1895年,美国国务卿理查德·奥尔尼发布了一份措辞严厉的公报,两国一度濒临战争边缘。后来,美国与英国改善了关系,双方于1897年签订的条约规定对边界纠纷进行仲裁。
(31)Edward Weisband,Ideology of American Foreign Policy:A Paradigm of Lockian Liberalism,Sage Publications Inc.,1973,p.29.
(32)在美国外交史上,这是统治阶层关于美国主权位阶事实上高于拉美国家的首次官方宣示。
(33)同年,伦敦出版的《经济学人》杂志犀利地指出:“在‘门罗主义’的指导下,她(美国)已经把整个美洲大陆都当作自己的保护国。”
(34)Edward Weisband,Ideology of American Foreign Policy:A Paradigm of Lockian Liberalism,Sage Publications Inc.,1973,p.30.
(35)关于西奥多·罗斯福的现实主义外交思想,可参见刘飞涛著:《美国“现实政治”传统的缔造:亚历山大·汉密尔顿、亚伯拉罕·林肯、西奥多·罗斯福的外交及战略思想》,北京:世界知识出版社,2015年。
(36)Adam Quinn,US Foreign Policy in Context:National Ideology from the Founders to the Bush Doctrine,Routledge,2010,p.74.
(37)Ronald E.Powaski,Toward an Entangling Alliance:American Isolationism,Internationalism,and Europe,1901-1950,Greenwood Press,1991,p.2.
(38)朱卫斌著:《西奥多·罗斯福与中国:对华“门户开放”政策的困境》,天津:天津古籍出版社,2005年,第23页。
(39)James R.Holmes,Theodore Roosevelt and World Order:Police Power in International Relations,Potomac Books,Inc.,2006,p.102.
(40)Clarence A.Renouard,“Basic Foreign Policy Concepts of Theodore Roosevelt”,unpublished dissertations,A.M.,The University of Chicago,1959,p.31.
(41)胡欣著:《美国帝国思想的对外政策含义:对国家身份、意识形态和国际秩序观的历史解读》,南京:江苏人民出版社,2016年,第309页。
(42)Perry E.Gianakos and Albert Karson (eds.),American Diplomacy and the Sense of Destiny,1885-1966,Vol.1,Belmont,California:Wadsworth Publishing Company,Inc.,1966,p.47.
(43)James Holmes,“Police Power:Theodore Roosevelt,American Diplomacy,and World Order”,in The Fletcher Forum of World Affairs,Vol.27,No.I,Winter/Spring 2003.
(44)David H.Burton,Theodore Roosevelt:Confident Imperialist,Philadelphia:University of Pennsylvania Press,1968,p.146.
(45)Jeffrey A.Engel,“The Democratic Language of American Imperialism:Race,Order,and Theodore Roosevelt’s Personifications of Foreign Policy Evil”,in Diplomacy & Statecraft,Vol.19,2008,p.671.
(46)Ronald E.Powaski,Toward an Entangling Alliance:American Isolationism,Internationalism,and Europe,1901-1950,Greenwood Press,1991,pp.1-2.
(47)Albert K.Weinberg,Manifest Destiny:A Study of Nationalist Expansionism in American History,Baltimore:The Johns Hopkins Press,1935,p.427.
(48)David H.Burton,“Theodore Roosevelt:Confident Imperialist”,in The Review of Politics,Vol.23,No.3,July 1961,pp.363-370.
(49)Arthur S.Link and William M.Leary,Jr.(eds.),The Diplomacy of World Power:The United States,1889-920,New York:St.Martin’s Press,1970,p.75.“罗斯福推论”与此前提出的“门户开放”照会一起框定了20世纪美国新型帝国主义模式的基本内容:不以获取有形殖民地和构建排他性势力范围为目的,相反其以美国超群的经济和军事实力为后盾,意在为工业—金融资本在全世界无障碍地获取原料和进入市场进行背书。这两大要素在伍德罗·威尔逊发表的“十四点计划”中最终结合为一个有机的整体。
(50)Jeffrey A.Engel,“The Democratic Language of American Imperialism:Race,Order,and Theodore Roosevelt’s Personifications of Foreign Policy Evil”,in Diplomacy & Statecraft,Vol.19,2008,pp.683-684.
(51)Frank Ninkovich,The Global Republic:America’s Inadvertent Rise to World Power,Chicago:The University of Chicago Press,2014,p.81.
(52)1906年,罗斯福被迫再次介入以解决“独立”的古巴的混乱局面,他怒气冲冲地说:“我们只希望他们能规规矩矩、富裕幸福,这样我们就不会干涉他们了。”参见Adam Quinn,US Foreign Policy in Context:National Ideology from the Founders to the Bush Doctrine,Routledge,2010,p.77.
(53)Arthur S.Link and William M.Leary,Jr.(eds.),The Diplomacy of World Power:The United States,1889-1920,New York:St.Martin’s Press,1970,p.75.
(54)Adam Quinn,US Foreign Policy in Context:National Ideology from the Founders to the Bush Doctrine,Routledge,2010,p.75.
(55)Edward Weisband,Ideology of American Foreign Policy:A Paradigm of Lockian Liberalism,Sage Publications Inc.,1973,p.32.
(56)Alex Bryne,The Monroe Doctrine and United States:National Security in the Early Twentieth Century,Palgrave Macmillan,2020,pp.52-53.
(57)Marco Mariano,“Identity,Alterity,and the ‘Growing Plant’ of Monroeism in U.S.Foreign Policy Ideology,” in Michael Cullinane and David Ryan (eds.),U.S.Foreign Policy and the Other,New York:Berghahn Books,2015,p.65.
(58)“罗斯福推论”是多种观念的合成物——其揭示了罗斯福本人潜意识中逐渐与“门罗主义”联系起来的系列主题:文明与非文明民族之间不可避免的冲突;美国作为西半球领导者、法官和监护人的权利(以及潜在的盎格鲁—撒克逊种族优越于西班牙裔种族的等级意识);反对和排斥美国势力范围内的任何帝国主义竞争;美国作为“文明”的欧洲在拉美地区利益的代理人和对抗拉丁美洲革命的保护者;美国在西半球特别是中美洲和加勒比地区的所谓“特殊利益”。就连“天定命运”等形而上的要素也在潜意识里发挥了“神法优于实证法”原则曾经发挥过的那种效果。
(59)James Holmes,Police Power:Theodore Roosevelt,American Diplomacy,and World Order,Potomac Books,Inc.,2006.
(60)Albert K.Weinberg,Manifest Destiny:A Study of Nationalist Expansionism in American History,Baltimore:The Johns Hopkins Press,1935,pp.428-429.
(61)David Ryan,U.S.Foreign Policy in World History,London:Routledge,2000,pp.77-78.
(62)Frank Ninkovich,“Theodore Roosevelt:Civilization as Ideology”,in Diplomatic History,Vol.10,Issue 3,July 1986,p.240.
(63)[美]罗伯特·西格著,刘学成等译:《马汉》,北京:解放军出版社,1989年,第501页。
(64)一般认为,“进步主义运动”是为应对19世纪末20世纪初美国工业化和城市化带来的全新社会和经济状况而发展起来的;时间跨度大致为19世纪90年代至1920年伍德罗·威尔逊总统任期结束。
(65)Arthur A.Ekirch,Jr.,Progressivism in America:A Study of the Era from Theodore Roosevelt to Woodrow Wilson,New Viewpoints,1974,p.19.
(66)Walter McDougall,Promised Land,Crusader State:The American Encounter with the World Since 1776,Mariner Books,1997,p.121.
(67)Jonathan Monten,“The Roots of the Bush Doctrine:Power,Nationalism,and Democracy Promotion in U.S.Strategy”,in International Security,Vol.29,No.4,2005,pp.127-146.
(68)Rogers M.Smith,Civic Ideals:Conflicting Visions of Citizenship in U.S.History,Yale University Press,1997,p.431.
(69)Walter L.Hixson,The Myth of American Diplomacy:National Identity and U.S.Foreign Policy,Yale University Press,2008,p.116.
(70)由于美国的“使命”理念是古罗马、清教传统、启蒙思想、浪漫民族主义、社会福音理想和现代帝国主义等多种元素的混合物,因此它的形象、象征、隐喻和词汇的确切来源很难真正厘清。
(71)Lloyd E.Ambrosius,Woodrow Wilson and American Internationalism,Cambridge University Press,2017,p.104.
(72)Tony Smith,Why Wilson Matters:The Origin of American Liberal Internationalism and Its Crisis Today,Princeton University Press,2017,p.135.
(73)Richard M.Gamble,“Savior Nation:Woodrow Wilson and the Gospel of Service”,in Humanitas,Vol.XIV,No.1,2001,pp.6-7.
(74)威尔逊出生于美国南方一个牧师家庭,在一个绝对服从上帝意志的环境中长大,因此宗教对他的影响非常大。
(75)Milan Babik,Statecraft and Salvation:Wilsonian Liberal Internationalism as Secularized Eschatology,Baylor University Press,2013,p.222.
(76)John Kane,Between Virtue and Power:The Persistent Moral Dilemma of U.S.Foreign Policy,Yale University Press,2008,pp.148-150.
(77)David W.Noble,The Progressive Mind:1890-1917,Burgess Publishing Company,1981,p.183.
(78)Milan Babik,Statecraft and Salvation:Wilsonian Liberal Internationalism as Secularized Eschatology,Baylor University Press,2013,p.3.
(79)Anders Stephanson,Manifest Destiny:American Expansion and the Empire of Right,New York:Hill and Wang,1995,p.114.
(80)Robert Nisbet,The Present Age:Progress and Anarchy in Modern America,New York:Harper & Row,1988,p.31.关于美国对外关系史“旧约”与“新约”的划分,可参见Walter McDougall,Promised Land,Crusader State:The American Encounter with the World Since 1776,Mariner Books,1997.
(81)Niels A.Thorsen,The Political Thought of Woodrow Wilson,1875-1910,Princeton University Press,1988,pp.162-164.
(82)转引自Tony Smith,Why Wilson Matters:The Origin of American Liberal Internationalism and Its Crisis Today,Princeton University Press,2017,pp.67-68.
(83)Joan Hoff,A Faustian Foreign Policy from Woodrow Wilson to George W.Bush:Dreams of Perfectibility,Cambridge University Press,2008,p.39.
(84)Tony Smith,Why Wilson Matters:The Origin of American Liberal Internationalism and Its Crisis Today,Princeton University Press,2017,p.167.
(85)Tony Smith,Why Wilson Matters:The Origin of American Liberal Internationalism and Its Crisis Today,Princeton University Press,2017,pp.69-71.
(86)特伦顿战役爆发于1776年12月26日,是在乔治·华盛顿率军强渡德拉瓦河至特伦顿后爆发的一场美国独立战争的战役。经过此次战斗,大陆军士气高涨,战争局势就此逆转。
(87)Tony Smith,Why Wilson Matters:The Origin of American Liberal Internationalism and Its Crisis Today,Princeton University Press,2017,p.73.
(88)Kendrick A.Clements,“Woodrow Wilson’s Mexican Policy,1913-15”,in Diplomatic History,Vol.4,Issue 2,April 1980,pp.117-125.
(89)Robert W.Tucker,“Woodrow Wilson’s ‘New Diplomacy’”,in World Policy Journal,Vol.21,No.2,Summer 2004,p.105.
(90)Karine V.Walther,Sacred Interests-The United States and the Islamic World,1821-1921,University of North Carolina Press,2015,p.272.
(91)② Albert K.Weinberg,Manifest Destiny:A Study of Nationalist Expansionism in American History,Baltimore:The Johns Hopkins Press,1935,p.442,pp.435-437.
(92)Joan Hoff,A Faustian Foreign Policy from Woodrow Wilson to George W.Bush:Dreams of Perfectibility,Cambridge University Press,2008,p.37.
(93)Mark T.Gilderhus,“Wilson,Carranza,and the Monroe Doctrine:A Question in Regional Organization”,in Diplomatic History,Vol.7,No.2,Spring 1983,p.107.
(94)Richard M.Gamble,“Savior Nation:Woodrow Wilson and the Gospel of Service”,in Humanitas,Vol.XIV,No.1,2001,p.11.
(95)Edward Weisband,Ideology of American Foreign Policy:A Paradigm of Lockian Liberalism,Sage Publications Inc.,1973,p.39.
(96)Frederick S.Calhoun,Power and Principle:Armed Intervention in Wilsonian Foreign Policy,The Kent State University Press,1986,p.25.
(97)Richard M.Gamble,“Savior Nation:Woodrow Wilson and the Gospel of Service”,in Humanitas,Vol.XIV,No.1,2001,pp.10-11.
(98)Walter L.Hixson,The Myth of American Diplomacy:National Identity and U.S.Foreign Policy,Yale University Press,2008,p.112.
(99)Hans Kohn,American Nationalism:An Interpretive Essay,New York:The Macmillan Company,1957,p.13.
(100)Frederick S.Calhoun,Power and Principle:Armed Intervention in Wilsonian Foreign Policy,The Kent State University Press,1986,p.23.
(101)据统计,在两届总统任期内,威尔逊一共进行了7次对外干预,这一纪录至今仍未被超越(干预古巴1次,1917年;干预多米尼加1次,1916—1924年;干预海地4次,1914年,1915—1917年,1918—1919年,1920—1924年;干预墨西哥1次,1916—1917年)。
(102)[美]亨利·基辛格著,顾淑馨等译:《大外交》,海口:海南出版社,1998年,第30-35页。
(103)Arthur M.Schlesinger,Jr.,The Cycle of American History,Boston:Mariner Books,1986,p.51.
(104)Hilde Restad,American Exceptionalism:An Idea that Made a Nation and Remade the World,Routledge,2015,p.2.
基本信息:
中图分类号:D871.2
引用信息:
[1]付文广.从门罗主义到威尔逊主义：美国对外干预思想的起源与发展[J].拉丁美洲研究,2021,43(03):126-153+157-158.
2021-04-19
2021-04-19
2021-04-19