【新刊速递】第22期 | Security Studies Vol.29, No.1, 2020
期刊简介
《安全研究》收录出版创新性的学术稿件——无论是理论研究、实践经验分享还是两者兼而有之。安全研究包含广泛的议题，从核扩散、核威慑、军民关系、战略文化、种族冲突、流行病与国家安全、民主政治、外交决策到定性与多方法研究的发展。根据2018年的Journal Citation Reports显示，其2018年的影响因子为1.706，在91种国际关系类期刊中排名第30（30/91）。
本期编委
【编译】吕紫烟 石雨宸 邵良 徐一凡 柯孜凝 姚寰宇
【审校】李博轩 王国欣 姚寰宇
【排版】纪楷欣
本期目录
1. 收买还是直接恐吓：解释军阀民主派的选举辞令
Buying Them Off or Scaring Them Straight：Explaining Warlord Democrats’ Electoral Rhetoric
2. 马岛战争是一场转移视线战争吗？基于前景理论对阿根廷衰落的再解释
Was the Malvinas/Falklands a Diversionary War? A Prospect-Theory Reinterpretation of Argentina’s Decline
3. 内战中的战斗僵局与议和尝试
Battle Stalemates and Rebel Negotiation Attempts in Civil Wars
4. 秘密政权更迭的战略逻辑：冷战中美国支持的政权更迭行动
The Strategic Logic of Covert Regime Change: US-Backed Regime Change Campaigns during the Cold War
5. “诱捕格列佛”：美国和杀伤性地雷禁令
Entrapping Gulliver: The United States and the Antipersonnel Mine Ban
6. “In the Wider View”: The Geostrategic Determinants of Counterinsurgency Strategy and Adaptation, Evidence from the Arab and Jewish Rebellions in the Palestine Mandate
“从更广阔的视野来看”：平叛战略与调整的地缘战略决定因素——来自巴勒斯坦托管地阿拉伯人和犹太人叛乱的证据
1.
收买还是直接恐吓：解释军阀民主派的选举辞令
【题目】Buying Them Off or Scaring Them Straight：Explaining Warlord Democrats’ Electoral Rhetoric
【作者】Anders Themner，乌普萨拉大学副教授、北欧非洲研究所前高级研究员；Roxanna Sjuostedt，隆德大学副教授
【摘要】
内战后民主国家中存在激烈的选举竞争。为了确保政治关联的连续性，退伍军人出身的政客，或“军阀民主党人(WDs)”，要么使用恐怖辞令，要么运用和平辞令来缓解社会紧张。军阀民主党人所选择的辞令，可以通过改变关于暴力使用合法性的社会话语，对持久和平产生深远影响。因此，一个关键问题是：为什么一些军阀民主党人在竞选时会使用恐怖辞令，而另一些则运用和平辞令? 作者认为，辞令的选择是由军阀民主党人身上的世袭禀赋所决定的；如果缺乏分发资助所需的资源与社会网络，他们可能会转而运用恐怖辞令来团结选民。为了突出这一命题的解释价值，本文比较了2005年竞选参议员的两位利比里亚军阀民主党人——阿道弗斯多洛（Adolphus Dolo）和普林斯·约翰逊（Prince Johnson）。
Post–civil war democracies are characterized by intense electoral competition. To ensure continued political relevance, exmilitary-turned-politicians, or “warlord democrats” (WDs), can either engage in a rhetoric of fear or ease societal tensions by employing a rhetoric of peace. WDs’ choice of rhetoric can have a profound impact on durable peace by altering societal discourses concerning the legitimacy of using violence. A key question is therefore: Why do some WDs employ a rhetoric of fear, and others a rhetoric of peace, when running for office? We argue that the choice of rhetoric is a function of the patrimonial endowments WDs possess; if WDs lack the resources and social networks needed to distribute patronage, they may instead use a rhetoric of fear to rally voters. To highlight the explanatory value of this proposition, we compare two Liberian WDs who ran for the Senate in 2005—Adolphus Dolo and Prince Johnson.
【编译】吕紫烟
【校对】王国欣
2.
马岛战争是一场转移视线战争吗？基于前景理论对阿根廷衰落的再解释
【题目】Was the Malvinas/Falklands a Diversionary War? A Prospect-Theory Reinterpretation of Argentina’s Decline
【作者】Luis L. Schenoni , 圣母大学博士研究生；Sean Braniff, 美国空军战争学院助理教授；Jorge Battaglino，阿根廷国家科学与技术研究理事会(CONICET)研究员，托尔夸托·迪特拉大学副教授
【摘要】
为什么阿根廷冒险在1982年用武力夺取马尔维纳斯群岛，挑起这场反对英国的战争呢？这一案例的应用价值是什么呢？本文使用反事实的分析方法来解读最新解密的由参与马岛战争决策的高级官员发表的声明，进而回顾这一具有深远影响的事件。并因此对既有解释中的战争转移论和误判论提出质疑。资料表明，长期的权力动态变化和前景理论可以更好地解释阿根廷挑起战争的外交政策行为。由于对有形损失的厌恶，阿根廷等衰退国家的领导人更倾向于采取冒险的军事战略，尽管其预期效用很低。而如果决策群体规模很小且不受去偏影响，上述偏好极有可能引发战争。本文说明了前景理论在理解为什么某些衰落国家会表现的更具侵略性上的价值，以及面对反事实分析时能更好地解释马岛战争。
Why did Argentina risk seizing the Malvinas/Falkland Islands by force in 1982, provoking a war against Great Britain, and what are the larger implications of this case? We revisit this influential episode using counterfactual analysis to interpret newly declassified declarations of high-ranking state officials involved in the decision to occupy the islands. These sources cast doubt on the diversionary-war and miscalculation theses of the Malvinas/Falklands War, among other extant interpretations. Evidence suggests long-term power dynamics and prospect theory better explain Argentine foreign policy behavior leading to the war. Due to aversion to tangible losses, the leadership of waning states like Argentina might favor risky military strategies despite their low expected utility. These biases may provoke a war if decision-making groups are small and isolated from de-biasing influences. Our explanation illustrates the value of prospect theory to understand why certain declining states behave aggressively and more plausibly explains the Malvinas/Falklands War when confronted to set-theoretic counterfactual analysis.
【编译】石雨宸
【校对】王国欣
3.
内战中的战斗僵局与议和尝试
【题目】Battle Stalemates and Rebel Negotiation Attempts in Civil Wars
【作者】Anna O. Pechenkina，犹他州立大学政治学系助理教授；Jakana L. Thomas, 密歇根州立大学政治学系副教授
【摘要】
本文研究了战场事件如何影响内战中交战双方议和的抉择。我们认为，接连不断的僵局最有可能促使叛军寻求谈判，因为僵局为各方提供了达成妥协的机会和意愿。与叛军的失败相比，僵持的战斗表明叛军可以继续同政府军进行武装斗争。然而，与叛军的胜利相比，平局并不能提高叛军赢得战争最后胜利的期望。本文研究了1997-2010年非洲63组案例中叛军议和要求和战斗结果的月度数据，发现这些数据支持上述观点，即战斗僵局越多，叛军提出议和的用时越短。此外，我们还研究了同样的战场动态能否解释正式谈判的启动。研究结果显示，只有叛军的胜利与谈判启动之间存在关联。对比上述不同的研究结果可知，叛军和政府方面可能对战斗结果，特别对是战斗僵局有不同的看法。尽管叛军从战斗僵局中看到了机会之窗，但叛军的战斗胜利更可能影响政府的决定。
This manuscript examines how battlefield events influence belligerents' pursuit of negotiated settlements in civil wars. We argue that successive stalemates are most likely to precipitate rebel demands for negotiations because they offer groups both the opportunity and willingness to push for a compromise settlement. Unlike rebel losses, stalemated battles demonstrate that rebels can offer military resistance to the state. Yet, unlike rebel battle gains, draws do not raise the prospects of a rebel war victory. Using monthly data on rebel demands for negotiations and battle outcomes for 63 African dyads fighting between 1997 and 2010, we find support for this argument; more battlefield stalemates decrease the time until a proposal to negotiate by rebels. Additionally, we examine whether the same battlefield dynamics explain the onset of formal negotiations. The results reveal only a relationship between rebel battle gains and the onset of talks. The contrast in these findings suggests that rebels and governments may conceive of battlefield outcomes, especially stalemates, differently. Although rebels perceive a window of opportunity from a battlefield deadlock, governments appear to be influenced most by rebel gains.
【编译】邵良
【校对】李博轩
4.
秘密政权更迭的战略逻辑：冷战中美国支持的政权更迭行动
【题目】The Strategic Logic of Covert Regime Change: US-Backed Regime Change Campaigns during the Cold War
【作者】Lindsey A. O’Rourke，波士顿学院（Boston College）政治学助理教授
【摘要】
秘密政权更迭（covert regime change）是经略国务的一个常用工具，用以在海外扩展国家安全利益。本研究运用了一组原创数据库，收录了冷战期间全部美国支持的秘密政权更迭企图。本文揭示了，美国有远远多于被广泛知晓的政权更迭企图，因为华盛顿通常采取秘密手段干涉他国。相较于公然干涉，秘密政权更迭企图要多得多：秘密企图高达64次，而相比之下公然企图仅有6次。在大量档案研究的基础之上，本文将理论化如下问题：美国为什么在冷战中发动政权更迭行动？何种国际争端更加可能引向外国干涉？以及，在政权更迭行动中，为何美国政策制定者压倒性地偏好秘密地干涉？本研究的结果挑战现有的关于政权更迭的理论，并且适时地对美国外交政策制定提供新见解。
Covert regime change is a common instrument of statecraft states use to promote their national security interests abroad. This study employs an original dataset of all US-backed covert regime change attempts during the Cold War. It shows that the United States attempted far more regime changes than is commonly known because Washington intervened covertly— as opposed to overtly—ten times more frequently during these missions: sixty-four covert regime change attempts versus six overt. Building upon extensive archival research, the article then theorizes why the United States launched its Cold War regime changes, which types of international disputes are most likely to spark an intervention, and why American policymakers overwhelmingly preferred to intervene covertly during their regime-change operations. The results challenge existing theories of regime change and offer timely new insights into US foreign policy decision making.
【编译】徐一凡
【校对】姚寰宇
5.
“诱捕格列佛”：美国和杀伤性地雷禁令
【题目】Entrapping Gulliver: The United States and the Antipersonnel Mine Ban
【作者】Adam Bower，英国圣安德鲁斯大学国际关系讲师。
【摘要】
2014年，奥巴马政府宣布，美国将近乎完全施行全球禁止杀伤性地雷的禁令，尽管这一决定长期以来遭到了来自军事和政治上的反对。为了解释这一令人困惑的结果，作者在文中深入扩展了最近有关修辞诱导的解释。在这些论述中，促进规范的参与者意在通过利用目标对象的言行之间的矛盾来迫使目标参与者作出改变。作者回溯美国过去25年的政策变化，以展示跨国公民社会和国内政治精英如何战略性地利用事实和规范性主张以吸引美国官员对有关杀伤性地雷的人道主义危害进行反复辩论。美国历届政府都试图通过逐渐承认支持禁令的拥护者的话语框架，而非赞同禁止武器的国际条约来减轻外部批评。这些修辞转变促使人们寻求替代技术，并逐渐改变了军事理论、战术和采购行为，从而限制了美国的政策选择，最终使得美国尽管正在全球范围内进行军事行动，还是有效地放弃了杀伤性地雷的使用。
In 2014, the Obama administration announced that the United States would almost entirely adopt the global ban on antipersonnel (AP) mines, despite longstanding military and political opposition. To explain this puzzling outcome, I expand upon recent accounts of rhetorical entrapment in which norm-promoting actors seek to compel change in a target actor by exploiting tensions between the target’s words and actions. Tracing US policy change over the past 25 years, I show how transnational civil society and domestic political elites strategically deployed factual and normative claims to draw US officials into an iterative debate concerning the humanitarian harm of AP mines. Successive US administrations have sought to mitigate external critique by gradually conceding to the discursive framing of pro-ban advocates without endorsing the international treaty prohibiting the weapons. These rhetorical shifts stimulated a search for alternative technologies and incremental changes to military doctrine, tactics, and procurement that constrained US policy choices, culminating in the effective abandonment of AP mines despite ongoing military operations around the globe.
【编译】柯孜凝
【校对】李博轩
6.
“从更广阔的视野来看”：平叛战略与调整的地缘战略决定因素——来自巴勒斯坦托管地阿拉伯人和犹太人叛乱的证据
【题目】“In the Wider View”: The Geostrategic Determinants of Counterinsurgency Strategy and Adaptation, Evidence from the Arab and Jewish Rebellions in the Palestine Mandate
“从更广阔的视野来看”：平叛战略与调整的地缘战略决定因素——来自巴勒斯坦托管地阿拉伯人和犹太人叛乱的证据
【作者】Joshua R. Goodman，圣劳伦斯大学管理学院客座助理教授
【摘要】
征讨叛乱分子的人往往难以适应叛乱所带来的挑战，导致他们采取和沿用了无效的战略。现有文献往往侧重于军事偏好和文化，本文认为，文职决策者最终会从其他们顾问的建议中选择平叛策略，而策略的选择也反映了决策者的偏好。平叛运动的目标和手段在很大程度上受到政策制定者的外交政策目标和其感受到的地缘战略压力的影响和制约。当地缘战略发生转变并致使现有战略成为新的对外政策目标的负担时，战略也会随之转变；反之，当现有战略与目标一致时，战略往往会继续存在。在巴勒斯坦托管地两场极为相似的叛乱中，英国对阿拉伯叛乱（1936-39）展现出成功的战略调整，但对犹太人叛乱（1945-47）未能改变无效的战略，这揭示出地缘政治压力在二战开始和结束后所起的不同作用。
Expeditionary counterinsurgents often have trouble adapting to meet insurgent challenges, resulting in the adoption and retention of ineffective strategies. Whereas explanations often focus on military preferences and cultures, this paper argues civilian policymakers ultimately select counterinsurgency strategy from the recommendations of their advisors, and these strategies will reflect policymakers’ preferences. The goals and instruments of a counterinsurgency campaign are significantly shaped and constrained by policymakers’ foreign policy objectives and the geostrategic pressures they perceive. Strategy changes when geostrategic shifts render existing strategies liabilities for new foreign policy objectives; otherwise, existing strategies, consistent with existing goals, are likely to persist. A most similar comparison of British responses to two insurgencies in the Palestine Mandate, the Arab Rebellion (1936–39), demonstrating successful strategic adaptation, and the Jewish Rebellion (1945–47), demonstrating the failure to change ineffective strategy, reveal the role played by geostrategic pressures stemming from the onset and aftermath of World War II.
【编译】姚寰宇
【校对】李博轩
【新刊速递】第12期 | International Affairs, Vol.95, No.6，2019
【新刊速递】第13期|Chinese Journal of International Politics, No.4, 2019
【新刊速递】第14期|Chinese Journal of International Politics, No.3, 2019
【新刊速递】 第15期 | International Organization, No.4, 2019
【新刊速递】第16期 | International Studies Quarterly, No.4, 2019
【新刊速递】第17期 | World Politics, Vol.72, No.1, 2020
【新刊速递】 第18期 | Security Studies Vol.28, No.5, 2019
【新刊速递】第19期 | Review of International Studies, No.1, 2020