摘要 1980年代至90年代初期，東亞各國成為全球經濟重要的發展區域之一，泰國、馬來西亞、印尼、菲律賓等繼亞洲四小龍之後成為亞洲地區成長迅速的新興開發中國家。然而，自1995年起，東南亞各國經濟開始出現衰退現象，1997年7月泰國更出現泰銖貶值，匯價劇跌，造成泰國股市的崩盤，傳染性的匯率貶值壓力延伸至菲律賓、馬來西亞、印尼與新加坡，甚至連東北亞的韓國，日本、台灣與香港也受波及，使得整個東亞地區幾乎都遭受到金融風暴的衝擊。 因此本研究針對1984至2002年的東亞國家，採用資料包絡分析法探討亞洲金融風暴對東亞各國效率的影響，利用Malmquist指數計算分析生產力變動的來源，以研究東亞各國在歷經金融風暴後如何調整其生產力及效率。 本研究依東亞各國受金融風暴影響的程度分為金融風暴國以及非金融風暴國兩大群組，實證結果顯示，東亞地區國家之整體技術效率值以及純技術效率值於金融風暴發生後有提升的現象，相較於金融風暴國於風暴前後之整體技術效率值以及生產力變動有顯著差異，非金融風暴國則未發生此一現象。本研究利用國內固定資本形成毛額作為投入要素與實質國內生產毛額作為產出項所構成的效率前緣曲線圖，分析解釋前述現象，發現金融風暴國在風暴前確實有投資過剩的問題，風暴後金融風暴國效率的提升來自於調整其生產規模、減少不當投資。 此外，本研究發現中國大陸的生產力在金融風暴後有逐年衰退的趨勢，其主要原因是來自於規模變動的不利影響，意味著中國大陸在展現高度經濟成長的同時，似乎已產生供給過剩的現象，是否會為日後的經濟發展帶來隱憂，甚至成為二次亞洲金融風暴的起源，值得注意。 / Abstract From the1980s to early 1990s, East Asia became one of the most important areas in developing the global economy. Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, and Philippine’s economy grew up fast and became the newly developing country following the Four little Dragons in Asia. However, since 1995, the economy of various countries in Southeast Asia began to decline. In July 1997 Thailand’s Thai Baht and exchange rate depreciated dramatically and crash of the Thai stock market. Then the Tai Baht currency depreciation rapidly spread to Philippine, Malaysia, Indonesia and Singapore; even South Korea, Japan, Taiwan and Hong Kong were involved in the crisis. As a result, the whole East Asia nearly all suffered this financial storm. Today, most of Asian countries are recovered from the Asia crisis. In order to analyze how East Asian countries to overcome the Asian financial crisis and adjust their productivity and efficiency, this study uses a panel data of 15 East Asian countries through 1984 to 2002 to apply data envelopment analysis (DEA) to assess the effects of the Asia financial crisis and measure the Malmquist productivity index to analyze the sources of the change in efficiency. The study breaks down the East Asian countries into two groups, Asian-crisis countries and non-Asian-crisis countries, depending on the extent to which they were affected by the Asian financial crisis. The major findings of this paper are as follows. The full samples denote that after crisis era the overall technical efficiency and the pure technical efficiency are higher than that of before crisis era. The further analysis demonstrates that such phenomenon only can be found in Asian-crisis group. This study constructs a two dimensions efficiency frontier curve graph by using gross fixed capital formation and gross domestic product as input and output proxy to analyze the efficiency change to help to explain the above phenomenon. The frontier efficiency curves find that the Asian-crisis countries indeed have over investment problem before the crisis, and the improvement of efficiencies after crisis is due to successful downsizing, such as reducing production scale and improper investments. In addition, this study illustrates that the productivity change in China has a tendency of declining over the last couple of years. The main reason comes from the unfavorable change in scale efficiency. The high economic growth accompanies over supply in China which reveals the similar phenomenon in Asia-crisis countries before the crisis. Therefore, it is worth to take a notice that whether the growth phenomenon in China becomes the source of the second Asian financial crisis in the future.

自2014年政府提出金融業「打亞洲盃」的政策願景後，金融業開始更為積極的構思如何佈局東南亞，其中證券業因國內市場經營不易，證券市場逐漸萎縮，因此更急需往國外發展，開拓業務範圍。唯東南亞國家多因語言差異、風俗習慣隔閡，及資訊取得不易等因素，台灣證券商在缺乏資訊的情況下難以判斷應佈局於何處，以及應如何佈局，故本研究藉由蒐集各國文獻及資訊之文獻分析法，統整分析後提出台灣證券業佈局東南亞可行的策略、方向，從最基礎的經濟環境切入，分析潛在市場規模大小和未來成長潛力，找尋合適的佈局標的，擴大經營版圖，擺脫台灣證券市場萎縮之困境，並建構出適合台灣證券業之國際化經營發展策略，期能與國外證券商分庭抗禮，乃至於發展為亞洲區域型券商。 / Since Taiwan government announced that financial sectors competing across Asia in 2014, Taiwan’s financial institutions has worked more aggressively on how to reaching out to Southeast Asia. Especially for securities sectors, Taiwan’s securities firms need to expand business abroad because Taiwan’s securities market are shriveling. Because of the shortage of data and difference of languages, it is difficult for Taiwan’s securities firms to do research in finding out appropriate target market to invest in. So the purpose of this study is to find out the most appropriate target market to invest in for Taiwan’s securities firms. This study found out the best entry target and the development strategy for Taiwan securities sectors to develop into regional securities firms in Asia by case study between international level securities firm and Taiwan securities firm.

「對外發展援助」作為歐盟施展全球影響力之重要途徑，其具體作法與實際成效在於維繫歐盟「文明權力」之可信度。時值國際金融海嘯衝擊，而歐洲債信仍危機四伏之際，歐盟能否持續推動發展援助政策，已然成為新時期歐盟全球戰略之迫切問題。爰此，本研究旨在探討歐盟發展援助政策，希冀經由對此一政策形成、推動、發展與演進之分析，輔以亞洲地區援助計畫個案討論，全面檢視當代歐盟發展援助政策之實踐與展望。首先透過文獻資料蒐集與整理，系統地回顧歐盟發展援助政策之沿革，並就其相關法理基礎進行初步檢視與探索。其次探討歐盟對亞洲發展援助之架構與策略，闡述歐盟自1994年啟動《邁向亞洲新策略》以來歐亞關係之演進與變遷。最後則以南海海嘯作為分析個案，評估歐盟對亞洲發展援助政策之實踐與現況，進而分析該政策對我國影響與啟示。 / As being the essential approach for EU global influence, European development policy has maintained the credibility of EU “civil power” by its real measures and effects. After the impact of the global financial crisis and the European debt crisis, to maintain the development policy became an imminent challenge for EU global strategy in this new era. In order to explore the regional cooperation and development policy in Asia, there is a need to systematically review the background and legal basis of EU development policy, then to analyze the framework and strategy of EU development policy in Asia and the inner EU-Asia relations since 1994 “Towards A New Asian Strategy”. After all, understand the actual performance of development policy in Asia by evaluating the case study of 2004 South Asian Tsunami, which can also be infer as the policy implication for Taiwan.

論文摘要 Reiner（1992）說明投資人對他國投資股票時，除了關心外國股價風險外，也關切匯率變動的風險，所以他提出了匯率連動選擇權，來規避匯率風險。另外，對於規避股價風險方面，Bouaziz, Briys and Crouhy（1994；以下簡稱BBC（1994））為了防止商品受人為操縱或其他原因而產生不合理的股價風險，提出遠期生效亞洲選擇權。以及Gray及Whaley（1999）提出了重設型賣權，它不但具有一般賣權的基本特徵，也能使投資人於購買股票時，同時買進一個重設型賣權。它不但可規避股價下跌的風險，在股價上升時，因賣權的重設使得保險的底值（Floor）向上提昇而鎖住股價上漲的資本利得。 本論文分別結合上述兩種選擇權的特徵（規避匯率風險與股價風險）而設計出兩種新金融商品，分別是：「匯率連動遠期生效亞洲選擇權」與「匯率連動重設型賣權」。它們的優點為：（1）可提供投資人同時對外國股價風險及匯率風險進行避險。（2）同時，評價模型的簡單化（類似Black-Scholes模型）以及避險操作的簡易性，使發行券商（或銀行）可獲得風險控管，因此可降低避險損失，提昇利潤。

印度不首先使用核武器以及不對無核國家使用核武器的原則，這項宣示對周邊無核國家具有政治上的穩定意義。其實，印度的傳統軍事力量優於巴基斯坦，當然就認為沒必要對巴國首先使用或威脅使用核武器，而傳統軍力相對較弱的巴基斯坦拒絕宣佈不首先使用核武，也是在情理之中，眾所周知，一個傳統武裝力量較弱的國家需要依靠核武器來防禦並嚇阻更強的國家。最小核武嚇阻是一個絕對的概念，不是相對概念，印度清晰的表明其核武戰略態勢，可在降低成本和風險的基礎上，使其核武器發揮出最大的作用，而且也不至於因過度擴充核武軍備，導致影響印度的經濟發展與長遠的政治目標。 雖然印美雙方在「禁止核武擴散條約」（NPT）與「全面禁止核子試驗條約」（CTBT）上存在分歧問題，但是並沒有妨礙雙方在核能方面的合作。儘管卡特總統於1978年3月簽署頒佈「核不擴散法案」（Nuclear Nonproliferation Act），嚴格規定核子出口許可證發放條件，致使印度獲得核電廠燃料受阻；但是1982年7月英迪拉•甘地訪問華盛頓時，印美雙方就核供應問題達成協議，由法國替代供應印度塔拉普核電廠所需的燃料。總體而言，雖然印度有1974 年的核子試爆和80年代開始的導彈計畫；但是美國在整個冷戰時期，對於印度在核子問題上的反應卻是相當的溫和，因為美國為了與前蘇聯對抗，爭奪南亞戰略要域，並不願意對印度作出過度反應，以免影響其戰略利益。 冷戰結束後，美國居於世界主宰地位，並根據其在亞洲的利益而調整對外戰略，其重心是構築以美國為支柱的各種類型的雙邊或多邊安全體系；在這個過程中，印度在南亞地區的作用和地位逐漸突出，雖然印度核子試爆的破壞性因素，曾經暫時打斷這個進程，但在美國的總體戰略考量下，印美關係已從昔日的起伏不定和核子試爆後的制裁，迅速發展到目前在政治、經濟、軍事上多層次且多面向的合作。美國不但取消對印度的所有制裁，而且還對印度出售尖端軍事技術和武器系統；另外，兩國在和平利用核能、航太技術等高科技方面也在進行多管道的合作，2005年7月印度總理曼莫漢•辛哈（Manmohan Singh）拜會布希總統後，美國同意取消對印度民用核能發電計畫的限制，並允許印度在國際市場購買鈾燃料。在印美關係發展的進程中，印度認為美國是其維護國家安全、發展經貿合作和實現大國謀略的最大助力；而其最終目標是要取得在國際上與美國平起平坐的地位，成為世界體系的力量中心，這也正是印度長期以來追求的國家目標。 中國對印度1998年核子試爆採取譴責，但不制裁的立場，是基於其國家利益的考量，因為中國的首要安全利益在東亞，而非南亞；對中國而言，台海問題、能源安全與南海主權問題才是中國關切的要項，所以中國必須力求在東亞與美、日等國達到戰略平衡；因此，中國在南亞的利益顯然僅是維護該區域的和平穩定，使其能無後顧之憂，得以將其有限的國防力量集中運用在東亞利益的追求上。印中雙方在許多議題上，都擁有共同的立場與利益，譬如發展公平合理的國際政治以及經濟新秩序等議題；而且兩國都試圖透過改善現有的國內經濟體系，從而減少貧富不均的局面，又同為發展中國家，兩者都希望能夠在給與國內企業充足的保護下，實現國內經濟與全球經濟體系的融合接軌。另一方面，兩國都在尋求建構一個多極世界，期使可以在國際舞臺上發揮更大作用，當前印度正在積極爭取成為安理會常任理事國，北京政府也已經同意給予支持。此外，印度也企圖透過與中國的密切交往關係，影響中國長期支援巴基斯坦的意願，達到孤立巴基斯坦的戰略目標。 由於蘇聯的解體，印蘇聯盟已無法適應國際環境變化的需要，也不符合印俄兩國的國情需求與戰略利益。因此，印俄必須對以往的外交政策及戰略做出新的定位，1993年1月葉爾欽訪問印度，簽訂「印俄友好條約」取代了冷戰時期的「印蘇友好合作條約」，新條約也取消軍事同盟性質的條款，印俄關係從此從盟友變為合作夥伴關係。1998年印度核子試爆也未影響印俄夥伴關係的發展，使印度能夠抓住有利的時機，充分利用與俄羅斯的傳統關係，為其進入中亞地區創造條件；同時，印度在經濟領域也獲得俄羅斯在石油天然氣的開採權和高科技方面的合作；尤其在軍事領域方面，印度從購買武器模式，已躍升到聯合投資和共同開發研製新型武器系統的時代，這不但表明印度綜合國力的提升，同時也證實印俄兩國已邁向戰略夥伴關係。印俄關係的定調，不但提高印度在國際上的地位，同時印俄的聯合也使它們成為21世紀多極世界中，兩個具有特殊關係的力量。 隨著經濟實力的增強，印度提出建立南盟自由貿易區，簽署「南亞自由貿易協定」。根據該協定，從2006年1月起，南盟7國將分兩個階段實施減免關稅計畫，這是一種共贏策略，印度可以近距離找到原料供應產地和銷售市場，而其他6國則可以運用印度的經濟和技術，提升其經濟發展，改善國民生活，消除貧窮。尤為突出的是，2004年南盟7國共同加強合作應對突發危機的能力；2月，南盟在印度首都新德里舉行「預防禽流感緊急會議」；12月，席捲印度洋的海嘯造成巨大的人員和財產損失，印度不僅派出4艘艦艇、6架直升飛機、數支醫療隊前往斯里蘭卡協助救援工作，而且率先建立海嘯研究基金，提高地區的預警和應對能力。另外，2004年的國際油價上漲對南亞這個嚴重依賴油品進口的地區帶來巨大影響，為商討因應國際油價上漲的對策，南盟能源專家小組於12月召開會議，並在2005年3月召開南盟能源部長會議，制定具體應對措施。綜上所述，印度已經在發揮其大國的影響力，從國家安全、南亞區域安全以及各國的經濟發展等面向，積極帶領著南亞各國走出戰亂與貧窮的陰霾。 印度自90年代初實行經濟體制改革以來，經濟和科技實力顯著增強，軍事力量的發展更是令人矚目，尤其是1998年進行的核子試爆，使印度成為事實上的核武國家。印度綜合國力的發展，使其實現世界大國的願望更加強烈，而東協隨著成員國的增加，以及內部快速的經濟、政治整合進度，整體實力也已大為提昇；印度和東協都力圖提高各自的國際地位，因此印度從地緣政治考量東協的國際影響力日益增強，而實施的「東向政策」，即是以東協為突破口，積極參與亞太地區的事務，努力擴大其在亞太地區的影響，以達到提升其國際政治地位的目標。隨著東協和印度政治經濟上的密切合作，使東協和印度在安全上有許多的共同利益，都想維持和平與穩定的周邊環境，也都想確保各自臨近海域的安全和經濟利益；因此，印度先後與東協的印尼、馬來西亞、新加坡、泰國實施海軍聯合演習，並有計畫地向東協國家出口武器，以加強雙方軍事領域的合作；隨著印度國家實力的增強，東協把印度作為維護地區安全的重要力量，藉以維護印度洋海上通道與東南亞地區的安全。 關鍵字：印度核武發展、核武戰略、印美關係、印中關係、印俄關係、印巴關係、南亞區域安全、亞洲安全

東南亞國家自十五世紀以來即置於歐洲列強統治之下。第二次世界大戰結束，同時對東南亞與歐洲之發展造成影響。東南亞各國於二次大戰期間，逐漸經由民族自覺形成區域主義，終於在一九六七年建立「東南亞國家協會」（ASEAN，以下簡稱東協）；歐洲各國則基於經濟合作之考量而逐步建立「歐洲共同體」（EC，以下簡稱歐體）。 經由東方歷史薰陶與村莊文化，尤其是馬來文化中協商討論與共識的影響，形成東協於國際組織中特殊之共識決外交政策，並以一致之立場反映於國際間。歐體發展較早且組織亦較東協成熟，惟各國基於本身利益之考量，對於國際議題往往意見相左，使歐體於國際間之團結程度反而不若東協。 一九七二年開始，東協與歐體雙方展開接觸，東協需要來自歐體之經貿優惠、技術轉讓、合作開發與政治支持，歐體則需要來自東協提供之原料與市場，雙方基於實際利益考量而進行合作是相當自然的，彼此於一九七八年正式展開部長級會議並於一九八零年簽訂合作協定。此後，雙方將合作範疇逐步擴大，並針對多項國際議題進行具體合作。 冷戰結束後，國際局勢有新的發展，東協與歐體皆有擴增，歐體進一步發展成「歐洲聯盟」（EU，以下簡稱歐盟），東協亦朝向十國組織邁進，彼此合作更為密切，亦促成兩次「亞歐高峰會」（ASEM）之召開。但雙方亦因緬甸之加入東協與東帝汶等人權議題產生歧見。 整體而言，東協對歐盟之政策係以彼此共識為基礎，以整體立場對歐盟尋求最大利益。展望未來，東協與歐盟之合作關係，將於現今基礎上繼續擴展其他包括安全面向之合作。 / Southeast Asia had been dominated by European Powers since 15thcntury until the second world war. After the second world war, thenewly independent states emerge in the southeast asia region, andASEAN was founded in 1967. ASEAN is famous of its decision-making process, well known as"common decision", every member's opinion must be heared by theothers, and "feelers technique" do help each other on understandingmutually. According to common interests, ASEAN and EC begin dialoguessince 1978, and signed an agreement on cooperation in 1980. As the Cold War ended in 1990s, ASEAN and EC both expandedthemselves, and under the urges of both sides, the ASEM was held inBangkok and London 1996 and 1998, to get mutual understandings andto promote the common interests for bothsides. The most difference between ASEAN and EC is the human rights issue,especially on Burma and East Timor. Fortunately, ASEAN and EC will intense their cooperativerelationship in the foreseenable future.

本論文主要研究台灣學生本土宣言與香港學生宣言的相似處，且提供了此兩社群跨國界合作的機會。香港與台灣兩地的活動家在西元2014年1月13日正式接洽。香港及台灣泛民主團體的學生與政治家在台北舉行為期一周的會談，標誌著倡議民主的雙方首次接觸。 本次爭議以地方來說，主要是反對當地政府，以國際來講，則是反對中華人民共和國。此活動有利於民主、自決與身分認同。因此，兩次社會運動與兩方社群推行相似的目標及面對共同的敵人。會談後，雙方新階段的合作展現於台灣「太陽花學運」和香港「讓愛與和平佔領中環活動」。世界正在目睹跨國家社會運動間，為了加強其宣言力量而興起的趨勢。 本研究論點是基於社會運動影響理論，隨機在羅伯特·普特曼雙層賽局理論中，採用了道格·麥克亞當的集體行動間動態交互模型。該理論框架指出，一個國家的社會運動（香港或台灣）可以作為另一個社會的參考，尋求由地方政府創造「國際機會」（如：反對地方政策或一個國家：中華人民共和國）。這種情況已經出現於2014年9月28日，在香港突然出現的抗議活動。而且，幾乎立刻，近4000人聚集在台北的自由廣場以表支持。這樣一大群人，他們大多數為學生，在如此短的時間內聚集，此現象提供了本論文研究基礎，探討是否此情緒也在台灣學生中蔓延。 / The present thesis argues that the resemblance found between Taiwanese students in their local claims and those of Hong Kong students, has provided an opportunity for both societies to start collaborating at a transnational level. The first formal approach between Hong Kong and Taiwan activists came in January 13, 2014. Pro-democracy groups of students and politicians from Hong Kong and Taiwan gathered in Taipei for a weekend of talks. This marked the first real approach between both democratic advocates. Locally the struggle was directed at the governments and internationally against the PRC. The objectives of these movements favor democracy, identity and self-determination. Therefore, both social movements and societies push for similar objectives and share a common foe. After the meeting a new level of cooperation was reached between the two sides that was shown during the Sunflower movement in Taiwan and the Occupy the Central with Love and Peace OCLP in Hong Kong. The world is witnessing the dawn of a cross-national approach between social movements that seek to strengthen the force of their claims. The argument of the present study is based on the Social Movements Impact theory, using Professor’s Doug McAdam’s dynamic interactive model of a collective action, in a Robert Putman’s "Two Level-game" case of opportunity. This theoretical framework suggests that a social movement of one country (Hong Kong or Taiwan) can be used as a reference the society of another to renew the “international opportunity” (rejection of a local policy or a country: PRC) created by the local government. This case was seen on the on September 28, 2014 when abruptly emerged the protests in Hong Kong and, almost immediately, near four thousand people gathered at Taipei’s Liberty Square to show their support. The fact that such a large group of people, most of them students, gathered in so short period of time, provides the ground for the present study to explore if the sentiment is spread in the Taiwanese student community.

南海爭端近幾年區域緊張情勢不斷升高。中國已將南海列為「核心利益」，而美國則將南海視為「國家利益」。基此，這顯現中美兩國在南海議題的積極作為，雙方在其處理南海議題的戰略架構下，兩國主要舉措均在外交與軍事層面上針鋒相對。外交上中國以「睦鄰外交」，穩定周邊局勢，美國則運用「前沿部署外交」拉攏東亞各國；兩國對於東協國家的態度將更為重視，亦是雙方外交戰略的重點所在，渠等均希望藉由東協國家的支持在南海議題上更有話語權。而軍事上中國以「反介入/區域拒止」的軍事作為防止域外國家介入其主權議題，而美國研擬「空海一體戰」除運用其強大的軍事科技實力外，欲結合各盟邦的力量，與其一同牽制中國的軍事行動。 綜上，在中美兩國相互的競逐作為下，佐以米爾斯海默之攻勢現實主義觀點，檢視中美兩國在南海之未來互動關係。潛在霸權國中國擁有眾多的人口與快速成長的經濟，並在南海整軍經武，試圖強化與東協甚或是東亞諸國的經貿互賴程度，且於處理亞洲事務中將美國排除在外，以取代美國擔任亞洲關鍵角色，尤其在南海的不妥協性，顯現出中國在此區域的主導性。另外，既存霸權國美國面對中國綜合國力崛起，則扮演「離岸平衡者」，融合「推諉卸責」、「均勢」之概念，拉攏東協及日本、印度等相關國家，共同制衡南海區域的權力失衡狀態，鞏固霸權地位。中美雙方皆將南海問題的層級提高，並且均欲爭取南海區域之領導地位，因此兩國在此區域未來將趨於競爭關係。 / The tension caused by the South China Sea dispute has been rising in recent years. China has listed the South China Sea as her “core interest”, while the U.S. considers the South China Sea as “national interest”. This, shows that both China and the U.S. have been acting aggressively on the South China Sea issue. Both sides, under their own strategic frames in dealing with the issues, square off over each other’s diplomatic and military acts. Diplomatically, China practices “Good Neighboring Diplomacy” to stabilize the relations with her surrounding neighbors, while the U.S. applies “Forward-Deployed Diplomacy” to bring together each country in East Asia to fight against China. The two countries value the attitude of the ASEAN members more than ever, and this is also the main focus of their diplomatic strategies; both desire to have more say on the South China Sea issue by gaining support from members of the ASEAN. In terms of military operation, China practices “Anti-Access/Area-Denial” to prevent other countries from intervening her sovereignty issues, while the U.S. crafts “Air-Sea Battle”, in which the U.S. applies her devastating military and technology power, and combines the force of each ally to rein China’s military operation. All in all, with the China-U.S. competition as the backdrop, and by referring to John Mearsheimer’s offensive realism, this study examines the future Sino-American relations in the South China Sea. China, as a potential hegemon, possesses a large population and a fast-growing economy; the state also conducts military operations in the South China Sea, with a view to consolidating the mutual economic and trade dependence of China and the ASEAN, even countries in East Asia. Moreover, China excludes the U.S. from dealing with tasks in Asia for the purpose of replacing the U.S. as the Asia’s key player. China’s intransigency in the South China Sea particularly reveals her dominance in the region. Besides, in facing China’s rise in all aspects, the U.S., as the current hegemon, plays the role of “The Off-shore Balancer”. By mixing "Buck-Passing" with "Balancing", the U.S. brings together countries involved in the issue such as the members of ASEAN, Japan, and India to collectively rein the power imbalance in the South China Sea, so as to consolidate her dominance. Both China and the U.S. have raised the level of the South China Sea issue, and have scrambled to gain the dominance in the South China Sea. Therefore, in the future, the two countries will become more of two competitors in this region.

近十年來，中共海軍力量的發展如同其經濟成長情形一樣快速起飛，很自然成為西方矚目焦點，特別是建立遠洋艦隊的企圖，更引起外界高度關注。依中共海軍規劃，希望在2050年具備並達到遂行遠洋作戰的能力和目標。 冷戰結束後，中共被視為崛起的新興區域強權。「中國威脅論」也一度甚囂塵上。雖然中共極力反駁，但是一個經濟高度發展、致力於富國強兵的中共，不可避免的為亞太地區的安全帶來極大的陰影。中共對於亞太地區的影響力，除了經濟因素外，終究還是以軍事力量最為明顯，使得對中共軍事力量備感壓力的亞太各國，對中共以國防現代化來突顯國力，更加的敏感。在經濟建設成果日盛的情況下，中共為擴大其沿海地區經濟的發展，及符合大國身份所推動國防現代化，都將影響亞太地區的安全。 隨著綜合國力的提升，中共以更具實力與自信處理有關核心利益的爭端。面對中共政治、經濟、軍事的全面崛起，身為全球霸權的美國謀求確保東亞區域秩序的穩定。但儘管美國在2009年7月宣布重返亞洲，中共和鄰國在領土主權問題上依舊衝突不斷。 中共之擴張已使東亞國家充滿不安全感，亞太國家仍陷入一場軍備競賽之中，並進一步鼓勵同盟體之出現及刺激日本加強軍備以求自保。不管亞太地區是進入軍備競賽之權力平衡體系，或是其他國家聯合對抗中共之態勢，對亞太地區建構中之多邊安全體系都是一種打擊。 / In the past decade, the development of PRC’s navy power has grown as fast as its economical trowth. Naturally, such rapid growth attracts the attention of western countries. PRC’s attempt to build a far sea fleet is especially highly concerned by international community. According to PRC’s own plan, it hopes to achieve the previous goals in 2050. After cold war, China has been determined a newly-rising-power country, and has started trying to conquer all the power left in the Asia Pacific area after the seperation of USSR, and along with their motivation, the rumar of the “China Threaten Theory” has once spreaded out in the world. Thought China has rejected this kind of rumar, but it is still a well-known economic and army developed country and unavoidably, affects the Pan Asia area. Generaly, economics of China is the influence to the Pan Asia area, but actually, the quick army-building is the main effect; as a matter of fact, this influence (modernized China military) has become a big pressure to Pan Asia countries. In order to follow the quick progression of economics in China, it is also trying to build the coastal area and modernize its national defense. This motivation will badly affect the safty of Pan Asia countries. As China’s comprehensive national power rises with its rapid economic growth, it becomes more capable of protecting its core interests. As a global hegemon, the U.S. strives to wecure regional stability in East Asia. Although the U.S. proposed “the U.S. Retrun to Asia” strategy in July 2009, confrontation in the South China Sea between China and other claimants still continues. This thesis discusses the impact of the U.S. return to Asia on China’s South China Sea policy. East Asia counties are new feel not safe at all due to China’s military development,and the Pan Asia countries are still playing in a game of purchasing military equipments, and moreover, China even tell Janpan to purchase more gears for their own good. It doesn’t matter what kind of system that Pan Asia countries are in , either the military competition, or united with other countries to fight China, it all will become an impact to the vivid safty system that Pan Asia countries have built.

冷戰時期，東南亞區域發展受限於美蘇軍事力量的影響而互有對峙。直至21世紀初，隨著美、蘇兩國在東南亞部署的部分軍事力量移轉，加上中國大陸持續經濟成長與綜合國力的提升，使得在深化與東南亞周邊外交關係發展上，創造出有利條件，中共藉由經濟合作與軍事手段執行其在東南亞地區的睦鄰政策，以符合其在亞太地區周邊外交的戰略作為。 中共對東南亞國家周邊外交，主要係以政治和睦、經濟互利、安全互信等三個面向為基礎目標，試圖建構一個和平穩定的亞太周邊環境。首先在政治上，主要作法是強化與周邊國家政治關係，透過領導人出訪與各領域、各層級工作會議召開以及各國政治協定的簽署，全面提升與東南亞各國雙邊關係；其次在經濟上，主要在雙邊與多邊關係上加強與周邊國家的經濟合作，推動區域經濟一體化，並透過自由貿易區的計畫，次區域合作與經濟援助，強化在東南亞的影響力，藉成立「中國-東協自由貿易區」拉攏東協各國家；再者在安全上，加強解決與周邊國家解決在領土與領海主權上的爭議，與周邊國家建立雙邊軍事互信機制，參與多邊安全機制，如：參與「東協區域論壇」，及《東南亞友好合作條約》的加入等，藉以營造區域內負責任的大國形象。 中共在周邊外交戰略中，在東南亞區域議題是基於國家周邊安全與區域安全的考量，與中美大國關係的建立重要議題。在2009年美國總統歐巴馬上任之後，宣示美國「重返亞洲」企圖，並啟動多項亞太政策，著墨於區域多邊途徑，其政策亦正逐步落實中，美國對亞太區域發展影響力隨之增加。然而因美國在亞太長期的戰略影響力，重新關注東南亞地區，並以東南亞為軍事戰略重點，也使得中共在制訂對東南亞區域戰略過程與考量，須同時考慮美國影響因素的存在性。 同時，在中國大陸本身國家安全戰略考量之下與東南亞各國家合作，將有利於其國家整體發展與國家核心利益的維持，然中共在東南亞區域的整體戰略，同時牽動中共整體的周邊外交戰略。 / During the Cold War Era, the development of Southeast Asia region was limited and caused confrontations because of the influence of military power posed by Soviet-American arm race. Not until the beginning of 21st century, Soviet Union and United States’ transition of parts of military deployment in Southeast Asia region, couple with Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) continual economic growth and developing overall national strength, have created favorable conditions for CCP in developing and deepening diplomatic relations within Southeast Asia region. Moreover, through economic cooperation and military means, CCP carries out neighborhood policy in accordance to its diplomatic strategy in Southeast Asia region. CCP’s good neighbor foreign policy in Southeast Asia region mainly focuses on political harmony, economic common benefits as well as security and mutual-trust. All the above are fundamental goals in order to construct a peaceful and stable Asia-Pacific region. First, to start with politics, CCP strengthens political relations with neighboring countries through Key leader engagements, working conferences in all fields and levels as well as signing political agreements to enhance bilateral relationship among Southeast Asia countries. Second, followed by economics, in bilateral or multi-lateral economic cooperation with neighboring states, to promote regional economy integration and strengthen the CCP’s influence in Southeast Asia by plan of free trade area, sub-regional cooperation and assistance of economy. Also, CCP establishes ASEAN–China Free Trade Area (ACFTA) in order to win ASEAN over. Third, in terms of security, CCP endeavors to resolve territory and maritime territory disputes with neighboring countries, sets up a bilateral military mutual trust mechanism, and participates in a multi-lateral security mechanism. For instance, CCP’s participation as a member of ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) and Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia (TAC) is able to create an image as a responsible rising power in the region. In CCP’s strategy of neighboring diplomacy, the issues are based on national and regional security in Southeast Asia region and how to built Sino-American relations. After the inauguration of Barack Obama in 2009, he declared the intention of pivot or rebalancing towards the Asia-Pacific region, and launched several Asia-Pacific policies describing the regional multilateral approach and gradually implementing policies as result of increasing of United States’ influence in Asia-Pacific region. However, the long-term strategic influence of United States of America in Asia, US’s pivot to Southeast Asia region, and military strategy focusing on Southeast Asia force CCP to consider the factors of influence of United States when CCP formulates Southeast Asia region strategies. In the meantime, under the consideration of CCP’s national security strategy, to cooperate with Southeast Asia countries is beneficial CCP’s overall national development and in maintaining national essential interests. In short, CCP’s overall strategy in Southeast Asia affects its neighboring diplomatic strategies simultaneously.