中共與歐盟自1975年建交至今已滿30年，兩者已建立成熟的合作夥伴關係。尤其，在後冷戰時期國際體系已轉化為「一超多強」，中共與歐盟作為兩支在國際舞台上正在崛起的重要力量，均具有長遠的戰略目標，以實現各自的國家利益。故本論文乃藉由攻、守勢現實主義理論，探究後冷戰時期中共對歐盟之戰略。 基本上，中共與歐體(歐盟前身)雖於1975建交，但在當時冷戰的內外條件下，雙方都將不可能發展經貿關係，作為具根本意義的戰略選擇。直到1978年底中共改革開放實施，同時歐盟整合亦不斷深化及廣化，雙方關係才日趨緊密。然而，1989年六四天安門事件，卻使得中(共)歐關係嚴重倒退。1990年代中期，由於中共經濟實力快速成長及國際地位日漸提高，因此歐盟在政治、經濟等多重因素考量下，重新體會到亞洲和中共之重要性，並於1995年對中共發表《歐盟對中國長期政策》第一份文件，其後又相繼發表《歐盟對華新戰略》(1996年)、《與中國建立全面夥伴關係》(1998年)、《國家戰略文件2002-2006：中國》(2002年)、《歐中關係的共同利益與挑戰－走向成熟的夥伴關係》(2003年)等四篇文件，並視中共為其全球六大戰略伙伴之一。而中共亦於2003年10月13日發表有史以來第一份對外關係文件－《中國對歐盟政策文件》，公開闡明中共在中(共)歐關係中的國家利益與目標，更標誌著中(共)歐總體關係邁向一個新階段。 由於歐盟欲透過政治與人權對話、經濟及貿易關係、安全合作計畫之三大途徑來達成其所規劃之中共政策目標。因此，中共對在追求經濟發展和國際地位提昇之國家發展目標下，亦欣然接受。同時，中共在國家內部和對外皆做出許多彈性調整，以進一步發展與歐盟的友好關係。 進而言之，中(共)歐雙邊關係迅速提升，以2004年為例，歐盟已超越美國，成為中共的第一大貿易夥伴。然而，中共對於歐盟重視的人權問題等有所堅持，故在經貿利益上，雙邊呈現是利益互補、各取所需之態，但對於普世人權價值卻呈現「同床異夢」現象。另外，在國際安全上，雖然中共與歐盟兩者並無直接威脅及利益衝突，且皆共同主張多極化，但為維持「和平發展」的國際環境，實現其「三步走」戰略目標，故筆者認為中共對歐盟戰略目前乃採取「明聯歐，暗制美」的積極守勢戰略。

隨著冷戰後中國經濟上的快速成長，中國權力在東亞的崛起已是不可逆轉的趨勢，在這股趨勢下，日本首當其衝的要面對中國的壓力。中日之間在東亞地區權力結構的變化，以及東亞權力結構轉移對日本國家行為的影響，又可以具體而微的從東海爭議近20年來衝突的升高來觀察。 因此，本文試圖經由中日東海爭議這一案例，來分析中國崛起與東海爭議升高之間的關聯。並以結構現實主義的兩大分支：攻/守勢現實主義作為本研究的理論架構，透過驗證指標的設計，來檢視中日在東海的立場與作為，比較符合攻勢或守勢現實主義的理論期待。 透過指標的驗證，本文的研究發現中國在東海爭議的立場與作為上，比較符合攻勢現實主義的期待，但卻仍存在部分符合守勢現實主義理論期待的作為。相對於中國，日本在東海爭議上的立場與作為更能夠符合攻勢現實主義的期待。關於海權國日本在東海爭議中展現出比陸權國中國更強烈的攻勢作為的解釋，本文認為這與爭議焦點有關，當海洋成為問題焦點時，海上力量的對比才是權力最主要的內容。儘管日本在整體權力的競逐上逐漸落在中國後面，但在當前仍然擁有不遜於中國的海洋力量，以及美日安保作為後盾的日本，自然能夠在東海爭議中展現出比中國更強烈的攻勢作為。

本論文的中心命題是：冷戰後的中國是尋求向外擴張、還是自我防禦的國家？為了檢視此一命題，本論文從守勢現實主義（defensive realism）的理論中推論出維持現狀、嚇阻戰略與昂貴信號，以作為檢視冷戰後中共安全行為的指標。本論文分別檢視中共領導人的政策宣示、1995-96年台海危機以及冷戰後中共與南海爭議的個案，證明：第一、中共對國際環境的認知會符合守勢現實主義關於良性的國際結構與安全充足的觀點；第二、中共的外交政策旨在維持既有的國際秩序，所以其對外的行為以維持現狀為主，避免改變現狀的情形發生；第三、中共的國防政策屬於防禦性的，因此其戰略以嚇阻為主，避免使用武力直接與敵人衝突；第四、為了表示防禦性、維持現狀或者是合作的意圖，中共採取昂貴信號的作法，以避免被其他國家所誤解。所以，本論文論證出冷戰後的中國是一個追求自我防禦的國家，其安全政策是屬於防禦性的。 / The central question of this thesis is: Is China an expansionist or a self-preserving state in the Post-Cold War era? From defensive realism theory, I infer status quo policy, deterrence strategy, and costly signal to estimate Post-Cold War PRC security behavior. Empirically, I examine Chinese leaders’ statements, the Taiwan Strait crisis in 1995-96, and South China Sea disputes in the Post-Cold War era. I reach the conclusion that: First, PRC’s perception of international environment is consistent with defensive realism’s argument that international structure is benign and security is plentiful. Second, China engages status quo foreign policy to maintain the international order. Third, China’s defense policy emphasizes on deterrence strategy to avoid direct conflict with the enemy. Fourth, China adopted costly signals to unfold its defensive, status quo, or cooperative intention to prevent other countries’ misunderstanding. I argue that, therefore, Post-Cold War China is a self-protecting state with the defensive security policy.

本論文以守勢現實主義的論點，觀察中共建構「中美新型大國關係」的相關作為，證明中共自冷戰後期以來，是以尋求防禦為主的國家。同時，近年中共領導人提出中美新型大國關係的倡議，符合以「溝通合作」和「維持現況」為主的守勢現實主義論述，以應對美國重返亞太政策，並藉此消除「中國威脅論」與「修昔底德陷阱」的疑慮，為中共創造出安全的國家發展空間。 針對守勢現實主義的論述，本論文設訂「溝通合作」、「維持現況」與「威脅平衡」三個項目，作為驗證中共對美外交政策的指標。同時，分別針對「中美軍事交流」、「南海問題」與「臺灣問題」三個熱點案例予以探討，以中共具體的作為加以驗證。最終發現依據守勢現實主義的觀點，可由先前設定的三個指標，來解釋中共現行推動「中美新型大國關係」的相關作為，符合守勢現實主義的論點。 最後，本文得到的結論是：一、中共推動中美新型大國關係可避免安全困境的發生。二、中共建構中美新型大國關係訴求維持現況的局面。三、中美新型大國關係下的臺灣問題易邊緣化。四、中美新型大國關係下的兩軍關係是未來發展重點。 / This dissertation, based on the arguments of defensive realism, observes China's efforts to construct "a new type of great power relations between China and the United States," and proves that China has been seeking a defense-oriented country since the end of the Cold War. In recent years, the Chinese leaders proposed the new type of great power relations between China and the United States, defensive realism based on "communication and cooperation" and "maintaining the status quo" in response to the United States policy of returning to the Asia-Pacific region and thereby eliminating the "China threat theory" and " Thucydides trap "suspicions for China to create a safe space for national development. In view of defensive realism, this article sets three items of "communication and cooperation", "maintaining the status quo" and "threat balance" as the indicators to verify China's foreign policy toward the United States. Three cases of "Sino-US military exchange", "South China Sea issue" and "Taiwan issue" were explored. Finally, according to the viewpoint of defensive realism, the three indicators set beforehand can be used to explain the relevant current China's efforts to promote the " new type of great power relations ," and to conform to defensive realism. Finally, the conclusion of this article is: First, China's promotion of the relations between the new type of great powers can avoid the security dilemma. Second, the new-type relations between China and the United States appeal to maintain the status quo. Third, the Taiwan issue under the relations between the new big powers of China and the United States is easily marginalized. Fourth, the relations between the two armies under the relations between the new great powers of China and the United States are the focus of future development.

2008年的俄喬戰爭是俄羅斯自解體以來第一次境外用兵，本文試圖透過守勢現實主義 ( defensive realism ) 的角度來解釋這一場俄羅斯的對外衝突。守勢現實主義國家的行為模式包括維持守勢現狀、對外尋求合作，因此得以處理安全困境難題，而在威脅等級過高時可能採取預防性戰爭來消除威脅。本文藉由守勢現實主義的觀點與行為模式來解釋俄羅斯的外交行為，透過檢視俄羅斯自解體以來的國家行為模式確立俄羅斯為守勢現實主義國家。再者藉由探討俄喬衝突中分離主義問題與俄喬關係中的矛盾以說明衝突的遠因與近因。最後探討俄羅斯在外高加索地區的利益與衝突以解釋俄羅斯在俄喬戰爭中的出兵動機。俄羅斯在解體之後的外交政策大多採取不衝突與合作的策略，隨著喬治亞的政權更替，俄羅斯對喬治亞的關係從合作走向以政策制衡，最後基於俄羅斯南部的地緣安全與北約東擴等等來自西方的威脅之下，俄羅斯採取了協助喬治亞分離地區的軍事行動來解決自身威脅。本論文認為俄羅斯不僅在2008年前屬於守勢現實主義國家，以守勢現實主義的觀點來看，俄喬戰爭更是一場為了應對歐美威脅的防禦性戰爭。 / The 2008 Russo – Georgian war was the first military action outside borders since the collapse of USSR. In this thesis, I describe the conflict using the perspective of Defensive Realism. The behavior of a state using a defensive realism perspective includes remain status-quo of defensive, seeking cooperation, therefore are able to manage the security dilemma. When the threat level is too high, a state using a defensive realism perspective may launch a preventive war to eliminate the threat. First, by examining Russia’s state behavior between 1992 to 2008. We are able to determine that Russia follows defensive realism behavior. Secondly, by studying the separatism of South Ossetia and Abkhazia in Georgia and the change of relationship between Russia and Georgia, we are able to elucidate the factors that caused the Russo-Georgian war. Finally, we explore Russia’s interests and threats in South Caucasus area that reveal the motivation for Russia the launch the counter strike against Georgia. Russia has tended to take the non-conflict route and cooperative strategy in diplomacy after Soviet-era ended. Due to the regime change in Georgia, Russia changed its policy toward Georgia from cooperative to containment. Finally, as the threat from the West rose and another round of NATO enlargement occurred, while it’s threating the geopolitical security of the southern border, Russia decided to launch a preventive war to assist the separatist states within Georgia. In conclusion, not only Russia is a defensive realism state, from the perspective of defensive realism, the 2008 Russo-Georgia war is a preventive war against the threat of the West.

現實主義的理論特色在於偏好以權力的角度理解國際政治（特別是國家的行為）並且認為在一個處處充滿衝突的無政府狀態體系中，國家是最主要的分析單元。惟類此觀點不僅是一般研究者對於現實主義的誤認，更是現實主義對自我認知的不完備。雖然現實主義將法律或規範置於權力的概念之下，認為國際法只是國家可有可無的一項工具，但事實上國際法律規範與權力卻經常彼此相互影響。 本論文之目的並非要否定現實主義，而是欲對之進行修正及反省。由國際秩序此項議題作為起點，作者處理了下列幾個問題：首先，在國家所組成的國際社中，現實主義維持秩序的策略及其效果為何？其次，若此方法不具成效或有所疏漏，吾人是否有其它的選項可供作為維持國間家往來關係穩定與和平的方法？藉由探索國家創建國際法律規範的原因以及國際法的法源等諸問題，吾人發現國際法律規範之創立往往並沒有一套如同國內法那般正式且專責的機制，但被國家承認為規範或被接受為法律者的方式（例如：國家間的共識），卻不可反駁地存在於國際社會，在這些形成法律規範的方式中，國家（或其他行為者）可以清楚的認知到規範內容中所要求的義務與責任。 因此，儘管現實主義認為國際法不具重要性，但吾人仍應探就國家為何有時願意遵守法律規範的原因。並且設法釐清在現實主義是項研究典範中不同流派的現實主義理論，對於客觀存在的國際法律規範之評價與認知。基於現實主義並非單一的理論而是為一研究典範，故本文在內容上分別從古典現實主義、結構現實主義（包括守勢與攻勢兩種現實主義）、新古典現實主義，以及較為一般人忽略的英國學派等現實主義理論的派別中去探討國際法律規範在國際政治中的地位及功能。文中指出，長期以來人們對於現實主義的理解受限於權力政治這樣的標籤，從而視現實主義與國際制度或國際法為水火而不相容！但事實上，採用現實主義理解國際關係，不意謂著就必須對國際法持以否定的態度。毋寧，在現實主義與國際法律規範之間，存在的不是一種絕對的互斥關係。非結構理論型的現實主義，如古典現實主義，對於國際法即是採取正面肯定其功能的態度。 當瞭解現實主義的秩序觀及其維持秩序策略（權力平衡）的疏漏所在之後，本文解釋了國際法律規範形成的原因以及不同流派現實主義理論對於它的評價和觀點。接著，作者就國際政治的變遷情形做了觀察和檢驗，國際政治自冷戰結束後有了鉅幅轉變，雖然體系的本質依舊如昔，即由主權國家所組成的無政府狀態體系；但是體系內部已有了不同以往的發展和變革。舉例來說，全球化現象已經從經濟領域擴展到政治和文化等其它層面，並向傳統的國家主權及其權力提出挑戰。其它諸如民族分離運動、環境生態等問題也對冷戰後的國際政治造成衝擊，這些影響主要體現在：行為體之間高度的互賴性、行為體之間差異性的擴大，以及對國際法律規範的迫切需要。上述事實使得傳統現實主義以國家作為主體的國際政治體系正朝向一個近似中世紀主義的新政治體系在形成。在此體系中，國家將喪失其原本在體系中的優勢主導性地位，而國際法律規範的發展也將相應的有所提升及調整。 事實上，並非所有行為者的行為皆忠實反映現實主義關於國際法無用論的主張。學者布爾即就國際法律規範所具有的三項政治性功能來解釋國際政治與法律規範間的關係：一、幫助國家認同與瞭解在他們彼此間所形成的「社會」事實；二、在國家和其他行為者間定訂一套基本的互動規則；三、裨益國際社會的成員達成進一步的共識與承諾。結論指出，國際法律規範是國際政治中一項不可獲缺的部分，為了克服傳統現實主義及以結構理論為核心的現實主義在解釋上的不足，「國際社會」的概念必須被深入瞭解和應用在現實主義的理論建構中。同時，吾人應投入心力展開對全球性議題的研究，例如：人權與環保，因為在這些領域中，一項現實主義最為核心的思考—國家主權的獨立與完整，將會遭遇到越來越多的挑戰並使國家藉口主權作為脫逸國際法律規範的可能性大為減低。 / The characteristic feature of Realism is its use of the power concept to explain the course of international politics (especially the behavior of state). The primary unit of analysis is the State which is regarded as operating in an anarchical system dominated by conflict. However, both notions above are misunderstood not only by general students, but the partial of Realism itself as well. Although Realism aligns norms or law with power in so far as international law is considered a tool at the disposal of the most powerful. Yet international legal norms and power also frequently do interact actually. This thesis doesn’t mean to deny the value of Realism, instead, tries to modify and introspect its viewpoints. Starting at the issue of international order, there are several tasks having been done: what is the strategy for Realism to keep order in the society of states and how does it work? Then, if the way for keeping order in Realism wasn’t constructive or in vain, do we have other choices to retain the relationship among the states stable and peaceful? By way of finding out why the states created international law and what the sources of international law are, we can think that the making process of international legal norms and norms itself don’t possess one formal mechanism responsible for law creation like the domestic law, but there are recognized and accepted methods by which legal norms or rules came into existence, for example, the consent of states. In those methods the precise content of legal norms can be identified by states (or other actors). Despite, therefore, the realist perspective deems international law to have no significance in its own right but we still have to seek to ascertain why do the States obey international law sometimes, if not always, but at least. And make it clear to know what the appraisal and perception in different schools under the Realism Paradigm. As we have known the Realism is not a single theory but a research paradigm, the author investigated respectively the different schools of Realism; they are Classical Realism, Structural Realism (including Offensive and Defensive Realism), Neoclassical Realism and Realism in English School. As the content points out, people whose stereotype of Realism has been limited to power politics are used to thinking that international institutions (and regimes) or international law is incompatible with the Realism, usually. However, it’s not absolute for us to consider that Realism turns down international law necessarily. For one instance, Realism without using structural concept, like Classical Realism, takes the positive attitude toward the role and the functions of international legal norms. After realizing the Realism’s conception of order and what the flaw of its strategy (Balance of Power) to maintain order is, this thesis then mentioned about the reasons why international law is created, and how different school under the Realism Paradigm evaluates international law. Following up, the author inspected the change in international politics. In the post Cold War era, though the nature of international system is still like what it used to be, a Anarchical system, the different and new phenomena do really happen. Globalization, for instance, is one momentous challenge to the sovereignty of States and their political power. The rest like separatist movements, environmental problems are also influential to international politics. The central issues of those influences are the interdependence among actors, the dissimilarities among actors and the yearning for international legal norms. Under the perceptions like this, the traditional state-centric international system of Realism has been being toward a Neo-Medieval system. In that system, state actors will lose their predominant and leading stand. On the other hand, the development of international legal norms will adjust itself to the new world and become more important. In fact, the behavior of international actors does not seem to bear out the realist assumption of the impotence of international law. Bull, for example, explains the international law-international politics relationship in terms of three political functions fulfilled by international law: to identify the idea of a society of sovereign States, to state the interactive basic rules of coexistence among States and international actors, and to help mobilize compliance with the rules of international society. As the conclusion in this thesis pointed out, international legal norms is one part of international politics. In order to overcome the inadequacies of the traditional and structural realist interpretation, the concept of ‘International Society’ must be dealt and applied explicitly and deeply in constructing theory of Realism. Meanwhile, people should spend more time researching the global issues, such as human rights and environmental protection, because in these sectors, the most core of realist thinking, independence and integrity of sovereignty, will get into plight and encounter more and more challenges, and the possibility for the States to get rid of international legal norms in the name of sovereignty becomes less and less.