國際關係學科中最具代表性的現實主義，長久以來皆為初學該門學科的必然「洗禮」。事實上，西方社會並無任何思想學派與本身所屬學科之間的關係，會如現實主義和國際關係享有緊密的重疊關係。第二次世界大戰後十年之間，歐美所設立的國際關係學系總是將現實主義的研究議題視為國際關係的當然內涵，迄至現實主義主導的局面式微後，國際關係學術社群方關注到整個國際關係學科的假設，乃根深蒂固的源於現實主義。雖然現實主義本身即為論文的探究焦點，但是本文試圖藉由解釋我國自身關切的南海問題，作為頗析現實主義解釋力的證明。 現實主義和許多著名的政治理論或意識形態一般，皆蘊涵相當多樣性的內涵。換言之，有多少現實主義學派的理論家，即有多少類型的現實主義理論。本文並非挑戰該各類現實主義理論，而是綜合性的運用，亦即在現實主義基本假設的屋頂之下，企圖尋找對南海現實國際政治的現實主義解釋。 研究結果發現，現實主義的基本假設已經被現實主義家族所推翻，擴大解釋的現實主義亦侵蝕國際政治與國內政治的區別之處，影響整體學科的發展甚深。對於南海爭端而言，現實主義的思考不啻為解析爭端的第一刀，但經過深入探討後，尚須加以思考南海的「地理因素」和「時間因素」方可較為完整的解釋南海爭端國與相關國家的行為。

自二十世紀四○年代末期以來，菲律賓對中共的外交政策與菲中關係經歷了戲劇性的變化，大致可以分為4個時期：從二十世紀四○年代末到六○年代末和七○年代初的近20年，親美主義與反共的意識形態形成了這一時期菲律賓的對外政策，意識形態與國家安全則是菲國對中共政策的主要考量，菲律賓奉行對中共完全「隔離」的冷戰政策；從七○年代初到九○年代初的近20年中，隨著冷戰體系的逐漸坍塌，菲律賓對外政策從重意識形態和政治轉向為發展外交，從而決定與中共建交，而國家安全在菲中關係中的作用則下降；從九○年代初到二十一世紀初，菲中關係由於後冷戰時期東亞地區格局的變動，以及菲中在南海的爭端，菲國再次評估中共對其國家安全的影響，從而又一次調整與美國的關係，希望借助美國的力量來制衡中共；而自2001年亞羅育總統上台以來，開啟了菲中關係的新時代，雙方建立了戰略合作伙伴關係，步入了雙邊關係的「黃金時期」，並延續至現任總統艾奎若三世。 在菲中關係的4個歷史時期，意識形態、美國因素、共產黨活動、歷史遺產、華僑華人、領海爭端、臺灣問題、政治結構、經濟關係等一系列因素從國內與國際的層面相互關聯和作用，此消彼長，共同影響了菲律賓的對中共外交政策。 就菲中關係發展的未來趨勢而言，菲中關係將主要受菲國國內政治的影響，傳統的美國因素仍不容忽視，同時，雙方在南海上的爭端儘管暫時擱置，但仍充滿不確定性，這些因素都限制了菲中關係的發展，但中共仍然可以在很大程度上利用菲律賓國內的政治、經濟需求來主導未來菲中關係的發展。 / Philippines’ China Policy and Philippines-Sino relations have undergone dramatic changes since the World WarII., and can be divided into four phrases. During the first period, from the late 1940s to the late 1960s and early 70s, the Pro-U.S. principal and anti-communist ideology, two factors formed the Philippines’ foreign policy. Ideology and national security were Philippines’ prime considerations, Philippines pursued a fully isolation Policy towards China. During the second phrase, from the early 1970s and the early 1990s, with the gradual collapse of the Cold War system, Philippines’ foreign policy has shifted from ideology-centric to politics-centric, the development of diplomacy has become the leading foreign policy thought, the above policy based on national security and ideology was declined, in this context, Philippines finally opened its door to People Republic of China. The third phrase started from the early 1990s and ended at the beginning of the21st century, during which Philippines’ idea on national security was reshaped the new structure of East Asia in the post-Cold War times, and the dispute between Philippines and PRC, Philippines re-evaluated PRC’s influence to her national security. Philippines hoped to introduce USA’s power to balance China in this region. A new time for Philippines-Sino was activated since President Arroyo came into power in 2001, in this period, both sides agreed to establish strategic partner relations in 2004. The Philippine-Sino relation has reached the “Golden Era” and continued up to now the president Aquino III. In the four stages of Philippines-Sino relations, ideology, the United States, the Communist Party of the Philippines and its rebellion, historical heritage, and overseas Chinese, territorial dispute, Taiwan issue, Philippines’ political structure, economic relations and other factors, interact and intersect from the international level and national level, and finally decide Philippines’ China Policy. As far as the future of bilateral relations between Philippines and PRC is concerned, though mostly decided by domestic politics, Philippines-Sino relations cannot yet break away from historic factors like America. And even though the two sides have put away the South China Sea dispute, it still remained so many uncertainties. All these factors have limited the developments of Philippines-Sino relations. Anyway, China still can, to great extend, lead the to-be relations through its strong economic and political power.

自從1995年菲律賓與中共在美濟礁發生衝突以來，雙方在南海主權議題上時而緊張、時而和緩。歷經羅慕斯時期(1992年~1998年)的對峙衝撞、埃斯特拉達 (1998年~2001年)的冷靜淡化、亞羅育 (2001年~2010年)的低調迴避，步入艾奎諾三世時期(2010年~)之後訴諸國際法庭的法律戰，菲、中關係轉為對立緊繃。 冷戰後的4位菲律賓總統大致是採行「避險」策略，以便在中、美的拉扯下夾縫求生。菲國的策略揉合了「扈從」與「制衡」的概念，此與東協各國盛行的「大國平衡」策略相近，既要拉攏美國與日本，也要扯進中國大陸。菲律賓國家政策堅守「區域安全仰仗美國」與「經濟發展緊抓中共」兩大主軸，難以避免地會陷入「地緣政治」與「地緣經濟」的角力之中。至於中共在處理與鄰國的南海爭端上，則是秉持「鬥而不破」的原則，對付菲律賓的各種挑釁行為，採取的是「裁剪式」策略，為菲律賓量身打造相應的各種手段與方法。 宥於菲國薄弱的軍事實力，以及菲、美同盟的夥伴關係，可以預期的，在艾奎諾三世任期結束之前，菲律賓在南海議題上仍會不斷發聲，並且以法律戰持續與中共抗衡，以便獲取更多籌碼來維護國家利益。至於艾氏的繼任者，預測將會大幅修補對中關係，擺回「親中」的外交路線。 / Since the Mischief Reef dispute broke out between the Philippines and China in 1995, the relations between the two countries have been unstable when it comes to sovereignty issues over South China Sea. From the confrontation period of Fidel Valdes Ramos (1992~1998), the relaxation strategy of Joseoh Ejercito Estrada (1998~2001), the avoidance attitude of Gloria Macapagal Arroyo (2001~2010), to the Law War Stage of Benigno S. Aquino III (2010~ ), now the China-Philippines relation has turned into an antagonistic one. The 4 Philippines presidents after the end of the cold war have roughly adopted hedging strategies in order to survive from the tug-of-war between China and America. The Philippines employs a strategy that combines bandwagoning and balancing, similar to ASEAN’s equilibrium strategy among big countries, drawing America and Japan over to its side and forcing mainland China to get involved. The Philippine national policy sticks to two principles: “Relying on America for Regional Security” and “Grasping China for Economic Development”. The policy unavoidably makes the country fall into the wrestling of “Geo-Politics” and “Geo-Economics.” As for China, it maintains the principle of fighting over core interests but will not break the relationship. Facing the various provocative actions of the Philippines, China adopts a tailored strategy with corresponding means and methods to handle the Philippines. Due to the weak military capabilities and the alliance relations with America, it is predictable that before Benigno S. Aquino III finish his term as the Philippines president, the country will continue to bark on South China Sea issues and try to contend with China by law so as to obtain more advantages in protecting its national interests. As for Aquino’s successor, predictably he/she will substantially repair the relations with China and regain pro-china policies.

南海海域以往僅不過是來往商船的航路與漁船作業的漁場，在1960 年代末期，該區域被認定蘊藏豐富的資源後，南海周邊國家開始爭相佔領附近島礁。再加上南海是某些國家戰略物資之必經航路，南海頓時轉變為重要的戰略要域，因多方國家經濟利益交錯複雜的牽扯下，地區亦時有摩擦事件發生，南海從此成為亞太地區的熱點。 外交是內政的延續，外交政策應在維護或爭取國家利益的先決條件下制定，並主導國家整體對外的作為，謀求國家在國際地位中的生存與發展。南海問題涉及國家事務，亦屬外交政策項下之一環，所以中國大陸南海政策，亦受其外交政策指導。中國大陸因為經濟力的發展，帶動了軍事力的茁壯，而使其遠在南海海域的諸島主權得以有軍事力量予以維護。也因其在南海地區的軍力強化，造成南海聲索國 普遍的不安。相對之下，各聲索國亦增購軍備，加強南海防務。再加上美國與東協組織的介入，使南海地區各方較勁的意味濃厚。 當南海各聲索國增購軍備，加強維護其南海所佔島礁主權時，同是南海聲索國的中華民國，雖對於軍事武力的建置從未懈怠，只不過所增強的軍事武力均建置於台澎金馬區域，而對於東沙群島的東沙島及南沙群島的太平島而言，中華民國是不是應當有完善的南海軍事戰略，足以維護其安全。 / The area of the South China Sea was route of the merchant ships coming and going and fishing ground for the fishing boats in the past. In the late 1960s, after this area was found with abundant resources, the surrounding countries of the South China Sea began to occupy the nearby islands and reefs. In addition, the South China Sea is the passage of some countries’ strategic materials; hence, the South China Sea tends to be an important strategic point. Regional frictions occur under the conflict of interests involving a number of surrounding countries. This is why the South China Sea becomes the flash point of Asian-Pacific area. Diplomacy is the continuity of the internal affairs. The foreign policy should be made under the preconditions of maintaining or striving for the interests of the State as well as the guideline for the State，s foreign affairs , seeking the State，s survival and development in the international arena. The issue of the South China Sea involves the national affairs, also affected under the foreign policy, so the policy of the South China Sea should be guided by their individual foreign policies. Mainland China，s military power is supported by its economic growth and cause an uneasy atmosphere for claimant in the area. As each claimant purchases arms and equipments along with the involvement of the U.S. and Association of South-east Asian Nations, the South China Sea becomes the hub of tension. When every claimant of the South China Sea purchases the arms, strengthening to safeguard the islands and reefs sovereign right in the South China Sea, Republic of China , one of the claimants of the South China Sea, although the building of the military power has never been stopped, but the focus has been placed only in Taiwan、Penghu、Kinmen and Matsu area. For Dongsha islands and Taiping island, whether the government of Republic of China should build a complete strategy of the South China Sea to maintain its security remains debatable.

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.

自2009年起，美國透過一系列政策宣示、外交行動施行重返亞洲政策，在涉及七個聲索方的南海主權爭端之中，美國的介入將會為難解的南海爭端增添更加複雜的因子。南海爭端的動態之所以受到關注，除了中共持續增長的綜合國力、美國將焦點投注至亞洲區域、防止潛在競爭對手產生的策略，南海爭端實際上為中、美角力的縮影。未來南海問題的發展，將可能影響區域、乃至國際的和平，必須持續關注。 中國所面對的國際環境正在轉變，此將影響其對於國家利益的認知與選擇，本文將以新現實與新自由主義的論爭，檢視近年美國重返亞洲後造成南海爭端再起的案例，並探討中共參與國際建制的利益認知、瞭解中共在冷戰後的多極化國際社會中的相對定位。 本文將分文三大部分：第一部分為國際關係理論與概念分析，將從國際關係理論與國際建制的探討，到中共參與國際安全建制的理論與概況，再進一步聚焦於中共的南海政策與主張；第二部分介紹南海爭端中其他聲索方之主張，以及各聲索方與中共在南海互動歷程，並探討為處理南海爭端而建立的安全建制演變與成效；第三部分將探討國際情勢的變化對國家外交政策的影響，以南海爭端為例，說明美國因素對中共外交利益視角造成的影響。 本文所欲探討的問題為：第一、中共為何願意採取相較溫和的「擱置爭議、共同開發」政策？又，在中共積極塑造負責任大國及營造友好周邊環境的目標下，為何「南海行為準則」的談判進度遲滯？第二、從國際關係理論研究南海問題，探討兩新學派之中何者較具解釋力？第三、國際建制是否有助於國際合作？最後，針對南海爭端對我國的啟示，也將在本文末章進行討論。

“21世紀海上絲綢之路”倡議與絲綢之路經濟帶的傳輸紐帶關係，發展成為“一帶一路”倡議，為中共在2013年所提出的戰略構想。 就美國而言，由於其經濟實力受金融危機影響減弱，透過積極干涉南海爭端，可協助其順利推進亞太戰略轉向，強化本國在東亞地區的權力基礎，並制約中國勢力擴張。相對於中共來說，應有效應對美國實施重返亞太戰略可能產生的各種不利影響。 本文探討對於共同建設的“21世紀海上絲綢之路”倡議，需要沿線各國與經濟體共同努力，願景需要由政治互信不斷增強，未來發展建置議程，共同促進聯合行動方案的互聯互通。 / The initiative of “One belt, one Road” means the economic belt of Land route of Silk Road connecting Mainland China with the countries of Central Asia and the transport ties of the Maritime Silk Road connecting Mainland China with the countries of ASEAN, which has been making a strategic formulation put forward by the People's Republic of China since 2013. The impact of islands disputes between China and Philippines on the security of South China Sea, as far as the United States is concerned, with its economic strength weakened by the financial crisis, by proactively interfering with that, it helps successfully reorient its regional strategy, strengthen the U.S. power base in East Asia, and prevent China from expanding further. On the other side, to the PRC., effective strategies should be put forward to all kinds of disadvantageous influences of America's returning to the Asia-Pacific region. This article argues that jointly building the initiative of the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road is required all parties to work together, the vision needs to be built for future development by increasing political mutual trust as well as development agenda so as to jointly promote inter connectivity.

摘要 近十年來，北京已轉變它在東南亞區域的外交政策，希望與東盟成員國家能維持一定的良好關係，並發展出一個和平又互利的戰略夥伴關係。1997年到2012年之間，中國與東盟從建立對話機制開始，雙方實質上的經貿投資與聯合計畫都快速增長。從多方面顯示：不僅在政治、經濟與維持區域安全等方面，中國與東盟成員都已共享務實的合作成果，近來更大力拓展雙方的互連互通與交通基礎建設，期使共同邁向實質的中國－東盟戰略夥伴關係。 南中國海周邊各國的利害與衝突不一，是個複雜的區域；而中國與東盟成員之間的對話機制與合作關係的基礎上，有助於減緩此一緊張情勢。本報將採用文獻分析的定性研究方法告指出（實際上）（1）北京的東南亞外交政策正面臨的主要挑戰是有東盟以外國家新勢力的強力介入或是舊有勢力的急速恢復，進而互相抗衡。（2）中國被稱為有過分自信的政策規劃期間，北京在推動與東盟戰略夥伴關係，實際上中國與東盟成員關系都已共享務實的合作成果。 / Abstract China-ASEAN relations have been transformed over the last decade by Beijing’s aim to create a stable neighboring environment as outlined in its state policy of peaceful development. This relationship has been embodied in a series of joint plans and statements with ASEAN between 1997 and 2012. In the three areas of politics and security, economy, and connectivity and infrastructure, the paper will show the relationship has followed a similar pattern, that is cooperation has been deepened according to China’s aims for its relationship with Southeast Asia. While relations have continued to develop in these areas, constant focus on the issues of assertiveness and territorial disputes, particularly over the last 3 years, means that progress and development in the relationship often receives little attention. The South China Sea is a complex issue, however security-related dialogue between China and ASEAN member states will be shown to have mitigated this problem to a certain extent. The paper will show that the challenges to Beijing’s policy lies with countries from outside the sub-region and their return, or growing role in Southeast Asian affairs, and that in fact during the period when China has been labeled more ‘assertive’ its relationship with ASEAN has deepened and developed as planned. In its use of materials the paper will employ the qualitative research method of document analysis.