冷戰後加上後共時期的轉型促使俄羅斯與歐盟的關係日趨緊密，而俄羅斯的領導階層亦將俄歐關係視為戰略伙伴關係。俄羅斯在葉爾辛執政時期，由於決策階層對於俄歐夥伴關係缺乏清晰的認知，導致俄歐戰略夥伴關係之發展並未有重要成果。 俄羅斯對歐盟關係經過長時間的停滯不前後，在普欽執政下，歐盟逐漸成為俄羅斯外交政策的重要目標。俄羅斯與歐盟在政治、經濟、商貿及安全等領域之關係發展對於彼此均非常重要，但是雙方在民主、人權、貿易及能源等方面仍然存有許多分歧，俄羅斯與歐盟唯有透過協商及彼此妥協方能有效解決上述歧見。 / Post-Cold War and post-communist transformations had brought Russia closer to the European Union, the Russian leadership had declared that it had made a European choice and viewed EU-Russian relations as a strategic partnership. But during Yeltsin’s presidency, many Russian policy-makers seemed to lack a clear understanding of what to get from the EU-Russian partnership, the EU-Russia strategic partnership did not produce any serious results. After a decade of uncertainty about Russia’s relations to the EU, the EU has become a constant theme in Russia’s foreign policy discourse of Putin’s presidency. The relationship between Russia and the EU is very important to both parties in political, economic, business, and security terms. But there are many disputes between Russia and EU in democracy, human rights, trade, energy, etc. Russia and the EU can only solve these problems through negotiations and compromises.

俄羅斯在轉型的十年當中，所面臨的是影響層面深遠的政治制度及經濟制度的變遷。同時，由於新制度主義將制度視為內生變數，而影響政治和經濟的結果。此外，在俄羅斯的經濟轉型的過程當中，由中央計劃的經濟模式轉變成為市場經濟的模式。因此，對於民營化政策的制度設計就顯得更為重要。 經過十年的民營化，原有的決定國家經濟生活本質特徵的國家所有制在經濟生活中的統治地位已得到徹底改造，俄羅斯已經建立了市場經濟的基礎，但從新制度主義的結構來看，這一基礎尚不健全，在基本經濟制度建設中都還存在許多負面後果。因為經濟轉型的直接目的是建立市場經濟制度架構，根本目的是為了消除無效率的制度基礎，實現資源的最適化配置，促進經濟的快速增長和社會福利效用提高的極大化。按照這一標準衡量，俄羅斯的所有制改革和國有企業改革存在著嚴重的失誤，對俄羅斯經濟的發展產生了不可低估的負面影響。 俄羅斯民營化的失誤首先在於其目標和方式出了嚴重問題：民營化首先是作為一項政治綱領提出來的，具有十分明確的政治動機。特別是楚拜斯的大規模民營化計畫，首先是為了克服對轉型的政治約束，力圖通過民營化來根本改變所有制結構，以保證轉型過程的不可逆轉，同時培育和形成一個廣泛的私有者階層，成為新社會制度的政治基礎。當民營化取得政治上的收益後，其經濟意義才會顯現出來。為了實現民營化的政治目標，俄羅斯採取了強制的方法來改造國有企業，在條件不成熟的情況下把企業推向市場，由於這些企業不具備適應市場的應變能力，並不能對市場訊息做出正確的反應，沒有解決國有企業的管理機制問題，也沒有達到提高企業生產效率的目的。 民營化過程中國有資產大量流失。民營化後出現的新企業主多半曾經是黨、政府和原國有企業的精英成員，這意味著民營化使得國有企業領導人和投機者侵吞國有資產提供了一個捷徑。在探討民營化政策時，1992年開始的民營化只不過為資本向少數人手中的集中提供了法律架構。 民營化對財產在分配過程中的經濟犯罪和投機，引發了社會嚴重貧富差距，還產生了腐敗、犯罪等大量負面現象，導致了社會的不安定。民營化的一個結果是寡頭政治的出現。寡頭政治的出現，延緩了俄羅斯的民主化進程，同時也阻礙了經濟領域的公平競爭。 / The transformation of Russia over the last decade had involved wide-ranging institutional political and economic change. At the same time, with institutionalism regarded institutions as endogenous variables, it influenced political and economic outcomes .In addition, during the process of Russia economic transition from central planning economic model to market economic model. As a result, the institution design of privatization policy was guite important. For the privatization in a decade, the state ownership, which decided the former characteristics of the national economy nature, had been completely restructured. Russia had already built the foundation of market economy, but in the view of new institutionalism structure, the foundation was not sound. In the fundamental economic institutional utilities, there still would be to exist in many negative outcomes. Because the direct objective of economics transition was to build the framework of market economy institution, the basic objective for the purpose disminished inefficient institutional foundation, and to realize the resource optimal distribution, to promote economy rapid growth and specical welfare utility maximize. To measure in the standard, the ownership reform of Russia existed serious mistakes, which influenced Russia’s economy development in negative influence over estimated. The privatization of Russia, at first, made serious mistakes in objectives and forms. Privatization firstly is posed as a policital document, which had a very obvious motivation, especially in the Chubais mass privatization program. In the first place, it overcame the political constraints of transition, and attemped to change the structure of ownership to assure the process of transition to no reversion. At the same time, develop and form a private class to become a political basis for the new society institutions. When the privatization got the political revenues, the economy meaning would reveal. For the purpose of realization the political objective of privatization, Russia took compulsory measures to reform the state of enterprises, in the premature situation, to push these enterprises to the market. Owing to these enterprises not having the ability of suiting the market, they could not do the right response for the market information. And they could not solve the problems of the management mechanism of the state of enterprises, and they could not achieve the purpose of raising the efficiency of enterprise production. In the process of privatization, national assets greatly lost. After privatization, most of new enterprise owners were ever party, government, and previous state-owned enterprise elite members. It meant that privatization made state-owned enterprise leaders and opportunists a short cut to invade national assets. In discussing privatization policies, privatization, which began in 1992, merely provided the structure of laws for centerlization capital among few people. Privatization invoked seriously distance of the rich and the poorin society and resulted in corruption, crimes etc. massive nagative phenomena in the process of distribution of economic crimes and opportunities. It resulted in the unstability of society. The other consequence of privatization was the oligarchy politics came out. While the oligarchy appeared, it delayed the progress of democratization in Russia. At the same time, it prevented from fare competition in economic sphere.

本論文採取改革-反改革循環研究途徑與克里姆林政治研究途徑，闡釋俄羅斯總統普欽重新定位民營化政策的驅動因素。 2000年，普欽當選總統後，以迅雷不及掩耳的霹靂手段，徹底解構金融工業集團，並將業已民營化的大型企業，特別是能源企業，收歸國有；同時，以漸進的方式，逐步推動以中小企業為主的民營化。 本論文認為，普欽重新定位俄羅斯民營化走向的主要目的在於，解構葉里欽勢力集團、拓展國際戰略空間、以及創造經濟改革條件；而這三項努力的終極目標，則在於掃除異己、改善經濟、攏絡民心、提升大國地位、從而鞏固個人政治權位。 / Applying reforms/counter-reforms cycle approach and kremlinological politics approach, the purpose of this study is aimed at exploring driving forces behind Russian president Putin’s efforts to reorient Russia’s privatization policy line. Immediately after his inauguration in 2000, Russian president, Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin, took quick and decisive steps to thoroughly undermine the financial industrial groups and renationalize those privatized big enterprises, especially, energy enterprises. At the same time, step by step, he pushed forward a new privatization policy line, concentrate on small and medium-sized enterprises. This author argues in this study that main driving forces behind Putin’s efforts to reorient Russia’s privatization policy line are identified as attempts to undermine the pro-Yel’tsin group, to develop international strategic maneuvering room, and, to create favorable conditions for economic reforms. This author contends that the ultimate aim of these efforts is to wipe out political rivals, to improve economic life in order to win support from the populace, to promote Russia’s status as a great power, and, eventually, to consolidate Putin’s personal power. Key wods: Putin, Yel’tsin, Russia’s privatization, financial oligarchs, FIG.

美俄關係的發展仍是國際關係重要的一環，雙方均足列大國，但在許多議題上的認知、利益卻經常出現矛盾，即使在冷戰結束近二十年後的今日，美俄關係對國際局勢的影響仍扮演舉足輕重的角色。自蘇聯解體以來，美俄關係呈現起伏不定的態勢，而普欽時期的美俄關係正好經歷和緩與降溫之轉變，實為研究美俄互動的良好時間點。普欽上台後不久便發生911事件，促使美俄關係迅速升溫，然而隨著分歧逐漸浮上檯面，普欽對美認知也出現轉變，雙方關係慢慢走下坡，尤其自2007年起美俄關係更是急轉直下，使得普欽任期最後兩年雙方關係屢創新低。筆者在本篇論文中將討論普欽時期美俄關係之變化，並瞭解造成各階段關係變化之因素，從中觀察美俄交往模式的轉變。另外，筆者將著重討論後普欽時期對美俄關係造成重大影響的兩個議題：北約擴大問題及東歐飛彈防禦系統問題，深入探討構成後普欽時期美俄互動的兩大主軸，分析美俄各自的考量與衝突點，並總結普欽時期俄羅斯對美態度之轉變以及美俄互動模式的改變。

本論文之研究目的在於探討1992-2000年期間俄羅斯政經環境對台俄經貿關係之影響。台灣與俄羅斯的貿易自1992年開始，貿易量雖有起伏，但大體來說仍可謂是正成長。然而，當俄羅斯開始走向市場經濟路線、施行震盪療法，經濟轉型不如預期中的順利，再加上金融風暴的發生，導致俄羅斯經濟一蹶不振。到1998年時，由於受到盧布大幅貶值，造成我國部分業者無法收到貨款或訂單被取消，使得業者暫停對俄貿易而改採觀望的態度，台俄貿易量也為之遽減。由此我們發現，俄羅斯政經狀況對台俄經貿關係有相當程度的影響。本論文認為俄羅斯的政治環境與經濟情勢是影響台俄經貿之主因；而由於當前俄羅斯的政經情勢逐漸轉好，因此可以預期未來的台俄經貿情況將會漸至佳境。此一假設命題可再引申為下列邏輯相關的子命題： （一）俄羅斯的政治環境對台俄經貿關係的影響有正、負兩方面 1. 俄羅斯的國內政治環境與對台俄經貿關係的影響為正相關 2. 中俄關係對台俄經貿關係的影響為負相關 （二）俄羅斯的經濟情勢對台俄經貿關係的影響為正相關 1. 俄羅斯的經濟改革對台俄經貿關係的影響為正相關 2. 俄羅斯的經濟體質對台俄經貿關係的影響為正相關 3. 俄羅斯的銀行體系對台俄經貿關係的影響為正相關 （三）根據H-O定理，台俄經貿仍有相當大的發展空間。加上普欽執政後，俄羅斯政經情勢逐漸改善，因此可以預期未來的台俄經貿情況必然會漸至佳境。 上述的三個子命題，構成本論文的核心論點；而對應此三個論點，本論文將分六章探討。第一章為緒論，說明研究動機與研究目的、文獻述評與研究方法、假設命題與研究架構。第二章：台俄經貿之開展及商品結構。此章分為兩節：分別為台俄經貿之開始與推展及台俄貿易之商品結構。第三章：俄羅斯之政治環境對台俄經貿關係的影響。此章分為三節：分別為俄羅斯國內政治環境對台俄經貿關係的影響、中俄關係對台俄經貿關係的影響及小結。第四章：俄羅斯之經濟情勢對台俄經貿關係的影響。本章將先說明俄羅斯的經濟改革，再從俄羅斯的經濟體質及銀行體系兩方面，探討俄羅斯之經濟環境對台俄經貿關係的影響。第五章：台俄經貿的未來走向。本章將依據三、四章之討論結果，對台俄經貿的未來走向做預測。本章分為三節：普欽執政後的政治環境、普欽執政後的經濟情勢及小結。第六章：結論。總結整個論文之重點及研究之結果。 / This thesis is to discuss the influence of Russian Political and economic environment to Taiwan-Russia economy and trade during the period of 1992-2000. Taiwan-Russia trade has started since 1992. Roughly speaking, the amount of the trade was growing. However, when Russia started to change their economic strategy, and carried out the shock therapy, the route of economic reform was not as smooth as expected. The outbreak of financial crisis leaded to the crash of Russia economy. In 1998, some Taiwanese businessmen couldn’t receive payment of goods or the orders were canceled because of the evaluation of ruble. It has made those businessmen change their attitude and stop trading with their Russian counterparts. The amount of Taiwan-Russia trade became decreasing. According to this reason, we found that Russia political and economic situations have great impact upon Taiwan-Russian economic and trade relationship. This dissertation is taking the position that Russian political environments and Russia economic situations are the main reason which influent the economy and trade relation between Taiwan and Russia’s economy and trade relation between Taiwan and Russia. The present Russia political and economic situations are getting better, so we can forecast that Taiwan-Russia economic and trade situation will be better and better in the future. This hypothesis can be further developed into the following three logically intertwined propositions： (一) The impact of Russian political environments upon Taiwan-Russia economy and trade relationship has both positive and negative sides. 1. The impact of Russian domestic political environments upon Taiwan-Russia economy and trade relationship is positive. 2. The impact of China-Russia relation upon Taiwan-Russia economy and trade relationship is negative. (二) The impact of Russian economic situation upon Taiwan-Russia economy and trade relationship is positive. 1. The impact of Russian economic reform upon Taiwan-Russia economy and trade relationship is positive. 2. The impact of Russian economic construction upon Taiwan-Russia economy and trade relationship is positive. 3. The impact of Russian banking system upon Taiwan-Russia economy and trade relationship is positive. (三) According to H-O therapy, the economy and trade between Taiwan and Russia still have large potential. After Putin took power, the Russia political and economic situation gets better. Therefore, we can forecast that Taiwan-Russia economic and trade situation will be better and better in the future. These three interwoven propositions above constitute the core points of this thesis. In accordance with these points, this thesis will be discussed in six chapters. Chapter 1 is introduction, it will explain the motivation, purpose, method, hypothesis and framework of this study. Chapter 2：The start and goods structure of Taiwan-Russia economic and trade. This chapter has two sections, they are the start of Taiwan-Russia economy and trade and the structure of Taiwan-Russia economic and trade. Chapter 3：The impact of Russian political environment to Taiwan-Russia economy and trade relation. This chapter has three sections, including the impact of Russian domestic political environment upon Taiwan-Russia economy and trade relationship, the impact of China-Russia relation upon Taiwan-Russia economy and trade relationship, and the initial conclusion. Chapter 4：The impact of Russian economic situation upon Taiwan-Russia economy and trade relationship. In this chapter, first we explain the Russian economic reform. Then we discuss Taiwan-Russia economic and trade relation through the aspects of Russian economic construction and the Russian banking system. Chapter 5：The trend of Taiwan-Russia economic and trade relation in the future. This chapter will make a forecast to the trend of Taiwan-Russia economy and trade relation. This chapter has three sections, including the political environment after Putin took power, the economic situation after Putin took power, and the initial conclusion. Chapter 6：Conclusion.

本文旨在透過克里姆林宮政治研究途徑，來探討俄羅斯總統普欽對媒體政策之走向。本文認為普欽的媒體改革，為其鞏固政權的一環。 本文認為，1990年代俄羅斯媒體帝國崛起的主要驅動因素，乃是葉里欽企圖藉助於金融寡頭及其所掌控的媒體，以掃除蘇聯遺留下來的保守勢力，從而鞏固其政權；而普欽任內致力解構媒體帝國的主要驅動因素，則是普欽企圖以打擊經濟犯罪為名，打擊金融寡頭，藉以收攬人心，並從而解構葉里欽遺留下來的 「家族」集團勢力，建立以國家安全團隊為主幹的執政團隊，鞏固其政權基礎。 因此，本文認為： 一˙府會之爭導致「震盪療法」改革迅速失敗，繼之而起的執政團隊推動以大型企業為主軸的民營化改革導致金融工業集團應運而生。而官僚派系掠奪國家資產以擴張政治版圖，導致金融寡頭坐大進而建立媒體帝國。葉里欽為了鞏固政權競選連任與金融寡頭建立聯盟進而收編媒體帝國。 二˙普欽於2000年當選總統後，藉由剷除金融寡頭來收回國家資產以收攬人心；藉由剷除金融寡頭以鏟除葉里欽人馬所憑藉的權力堡壘；藉由剷除金融寡頭以接收媒體帝國從而鞏固政權。 / The main purpose of this study is to explore, through the Kremlin politics approach, the orientation of Russia’s policy on media under Vladimir Putin. In this study, the author argues that Putin’s media reforms constitute an indispensable link for the consolidation of his power. It is hypothesized in this study that the driving forces behind the rise and fall of Russia’s media empire are the efforts by Boris Yel’tsin and Vladimir Putin to consolidate their power respectively. Allying with the financial-industrial oligarchs, who had controlled Russian mess media, Yel’tsin strove for wiping out the conservative forces left by the Soviet regime in order to consolidate his power. On the contrary, Putin has sought to wipe out the oligarchs and restructure the media empire, in order to rally the popular support, to wipe out the “Family” forces left by Yel’tsin’s regime and replace them with a new ruling command of national security elite, and, consequently, to consolidate his own power. The above-mentioned hypothesized proposition can be further developed into the following logically consequential sub-propositions: First of all, in the wake of the “shock therapy” ruined by the conflict between the parliament and the Kremlin, the following privatization reforms orienting on the creation of big enterprises gave rise to the creation of financial-industrial groups. Consequently, the corruption committed by bureaucrats who preyed upon state-owned enterprises led to the expansion of oligarchs’ strength so as to establish influential enormous media empire. Thereafter, aiming at consolidating his power and winning the coming presidential election, Yel’tsin formed an alliance with the financial oligarchs and thus put the newly-established media empire on his orbit. Secondly, after Putin was elected president in 2000, he strove for wiping out the financial oligarchs in order to accomplish the following three tasks: to renationalize the state properties in order to rally popular support; to wipe out Yeltsin’s power base; and, to take over and restructure media empire in order to consolidate his regime. Key words: Kremlin politics approach, Oligarchy, Putin, Russia’s media

本論文試圖透過戰略三角政治研究途徑和克里姆林宮政治研究途徑，探討普欽時期的俄羅斯對美國政策。 蘇聯解體後，俄羅斯對外政策路線的走向，由葉里欽執政初期的一面倒向以美國為首的親西方之大西洋主義政策路線，轉向為葉里欽執政後期的拉攏中國抗衡美國的東西平衡對外政策路線；到了普欽執政時期，又重新定位為與美國進行戰略和解，進而進行戰略合作的全方位對外政策路線, 以擺脫俄中戰略協作夥伴關係所導致的戰略羈絆之制約。本文試圖探討，驅動普欽時期此一俄羅斯對美國政策路線轉變的內外在因素。 本論文認為，普欽執政期間，俄羅斯對美政策之形成，乃是在承襲葉里欽對外政策的遺緒，在普欽的強勢領導之下，俄羅斯之決策菁英，以俄羅斯的國家安全及國家利益為訴求，援引包括戰略三角互動、美國的政策與做為、俄羅斯經濟發展與政治生態互動等俄羅斯內外在環境因素，作為其政策辯論的依據，透過克里姆林宮政治的互動形塑而成。 上述假設命題可以引申出下列邏輯相關的子命題： 一•普欽的對美政策，受到包括戰略三角互動與美國的政策與做為等俄羅斯外在環境因素之影響形塑而成。 1999年普欽上台前夕，科索佛戰爭及北約戰略新概念的提出，加深了俄羅斯的安全疑慮；而2001年4月，美中軍機擦撞事件，則加深了中美關係的裂痕；此一發展促使俄中戰略夥伴關係趨於密切。2001年6月中國主導「上海合作組織」的成立，以及7月俄中睦鄰友好合作條約的簽訂，就是此一發展邏輯的結果。然而，隨著中國在□海地區爭霸戰中影響力的增長，有關中國威脅論的聲音，也在俄羅斯安全決策階層引起越來越多的迴響。而此一發展，則促使俄羅斯尋求與美國進行戰略和解，以防範中國之威脅。另一方面，蘇聯解體後，中國勢力快速崛起，美國不再視俄羅斯為其戰略對手，轉而防範中國之威脅。911事件之後，美國面臨反恐之戰以及分散油源之需求，小布希總統調整了對俄政策，讓普欽得以順利與美國進行戰略和解；從而，普欽得以擺脫俄中戰略協作夥伴關係所導致之戰略羈絆的制約。 二•普欽的對美政策，受到包括經濟發展考量與政治生態互動等俄羅斯內在環境因素之影響形塑而成。 面對俄羅斯國內的經濟窘境，普欽認為，唯有與美國進行戰略和解，才能儘快加入世界貿易組織、增加歐美的投資和援助、減輕外債負擔、從而促進經濟發展。另一方面，普欽的強勢領導地位以及務實的政治手腕，使得普欽得以操控國內政治生態的互動，主導俄羅斯國家安全概念的重新定位；從而，得以順利推動全方位對外政策路線，與美國進行戰略和解，藉以擺脫葉里欽後期所建立的俄中戰略協作夥伴關係所導致之戰略羈絆的制約。 / The purpose of this study is aimed at exploring Russia’s policy toward the United States under Bladimir Putin, 2000-2003. The strategic triangle politics approach and the Kremlin politics approach are applied in this study. After the Soviet Union’s collapse, Russia’s line of foreign policy had been shifted from the one-sided pro-Western Atlanticism in the early stage of Boris Yel’tsin’s administration toward the East-West balanced strategy, attempting to draw China on the same front against the United States, in the latter stage of Yel’tsin’s regime. After Putin had come to power, Russia’s line of foreign policy was reoriented as a comprehensive one, engaging in strategic reconciliation and strategic cooperation with the U.S. and, consequently, getting rid of the strategic entanglement resulted from the establishment of the partnership of strategic coordination between China and Russia. Against this background, this study attempts to investigate the internal and external factors that drive this shift in Russia’s line of foreign policy under Putin. The hypothesis of this study is as follows: Shadowed by Yel’tsin’s legacy of foreign policy and forged under Putin’s strong leadership, Russia’s policy toward the United States under Putin has been shaped by the interaction of Kremlin politics, engaged by Russian decision-making elites, who appeal to Russia’s national security and national interests in their policy debates, referring to Russia’s external and internal factors, such as the interaction of strategic triangle politics, the US policies and conduct, Russia’s economic developments, and domestic political ecological changes in Russia. This hypothesis can be further developed into the following logically consequential sub-propositions: 1•The formulation of Russia’s policy toward the United States under Putin has been driven by Russia’s external factors, such as the interaction of strategic triangle politics and the US policies and conduct. In the spring of 1999, on the eve of Putin’s coming to power, the breakout of War in Kosovo and the pronunciation of NATO’s new Strategic Concept had created serious concerns for Russians about their national security. And in April 2001, the collision of US-Chinese military aircrafts above the South China Sea had deepen the Sino-US fissures. Consequently, the development of these events had pushed closer the Partnership of Russo-Chinese Strategic Coordination. As a result, the creation of Chinese-initiated Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) in June 2001 and the conclusion of the Treaty of Good-Neighborhood, Friendship and Cooperation between China and Russia in the following month were only a logical outcome. However, accompanying the growth of China’s influence in the area of Caspian Sea, the voice of “China threat” has received more and more attention in the circle of Russia’s national security decision-makers. These developments, in turn, had forced Russia to search for strategic reconciliation with the United States in order to prevent China from becoming a threat. On the other hand, with the collapse of the Soviet Union and the rapid rise of China’s influence, the United States no longer treat Russia as a strategic rival; instead, they shift their efforts to prevent China from becoming a threat. In the wake of the terrorist attack on 11 September 2001, in order to meet the needs for engaging campaigns against terrorism and for deconcentrating the sources of petroleum, President Bush has readjusted US policy toward Russian. As a consequence, these shifts in US policy provide Putin with a golden opportunity to engage in strategic reconciliation with the United States and thus get rid of strategic entanglements derived from the establishment of partnership of strategic coordination with China. 2•The formulation of Russia’s policy toward the United States under Putin has been driven by Russia’s internal factors, such as the economic development and the political ecological changes in Russia. In the face of Russia’s economic predicament, in Putin’s opinion, the only way to promote economic development is the strategic reconciliation with the United States, which will accelerate the process for Russia to obtain the access to the World Trade Organization (WTO) and in turn to gain the access to investments and financial assistance from the West and to lessen the burden of foreign loans. In addition, with his strong leadership and his pragmatic political skills, Putin has been able to maneuver the interaction of domestic political econlogies in favor of the reorientation of Russia’s concept of national security. As a result, Putin has been able to forge a comprehensive line of foreign policy and, accordingly, to conduct strategic reconciliation with the United States. Consequently, he has been able to get rid of the strategic entanglements derived from the establishment of partnership of strategic Coordination with China in the latter stage of Yel’tsin’s regime.

No description available.

由於蘇聯的解體導致冷戰結束，原本由東西兩方所撕裂的世界對立已然消 失，正所謂「飛鳥盡，良弓藏，狡兔死，走狗烹」，原本用來阻止敵對勢力侵犯的軍隊自然面臨大量裁軍與刪除鉅額預算的困境。這種情況在冷戰剛結束後的世界各國皆如此，美國四個軍種都各自終止諸多高科技武器的研發項目，並大量裁減軍隊規模，歐洲亦然，而俄國的情況更惡劣，金融方面不僅缺乏稅收，盧布也巨幅貶值，不僅軍隊的薪餉無法發放，連裁退老舊武器的資金都還得靠西方國家資助，俄國軍隊面對前所未遇的巨大難關。 同時，俄國的軍工複合體也缺乏資金，面臨無以為繼的情況。不過此時有 個巨星從破敗的俄國軍工複合體中出現，就是－Su-27 家族戰機。 由上述假設命題衍生出來下列邏輯相關的子命題： （一）為何蘇愷戰機能得到冷戰後國際軍火市場的青睞？ （二）冷戰後外銷蘇愷戰機所得之外匯對於俄國經濟有何影響？ （三）冷戰後外銷蘇愷戰機所得之外匯對於俄國航空工業之影響為何？ （四）蘇愷戰機的外銷在冷戰後的俄國對外政策中扮演何種角色？ （五）綜合以上，可得到什麼結論？ Su-27 家族戰機是蘇聯在解體之前所完成開發的兩種第四代戰機之一，而且Su-27 家族是屬於重型戰機分類，所以無論在航程、武裝搭載量上都遠勝輕型戰機甚多，同時又因為Su-27 的先天不穩定設計，使Su-27 家族的機動性大幅提高，更重要的是Su-27 家族來自幣值與消費水準相對低的俄國，使的造價也相對低廉，再者，俄國相對於美國在出售武器方面的政治限制也較低，在以上諸多因素的交互作用之下，Su-27 便暢銷世界，成為冷戰後俄國軍工產業對外軍售最成功的產品之一，俄國軍機產業也因此保存了下來。因此本文將探討為何Su-27 能在如此艱困的大環境下還能如此逆勢成長。 / The collapse of the Soviet Union means the Cold War ends. The opposition between the East and the West had been disappeared. There is so called " when the fish is caught , the net is laid aside." So all the arming forces of each country were facing the reduction inquantity and in the budget. For example, all types of American arming forces were ended a lot of R&D plans and disarmament, and the European countries were facing the same situation. In Russia, the situation became much worse than the West. Not only lack of financial taxes support, the depreciation of the ruble was also huge. Let the salary of the military troopers could not be issued. And the Russian government was also lack ofmoney to retire the expired weapons. Russian troops faced an unprecedented dilemma. Meanwhile, the military industrial complex of Russia was also lack of funds. Butthere was a super star rising from the ashes, it was the Su-27 Flanker family. This thesis will explore why the Su-27 family could become one of the best-selling fighters of the world in the post-Cold War period. Propositions derived from the above assumptions the following logical propositions: (A) Why the Sukhoi fighters could be one of the best-selling fighters in the international arms market in the post-Cold War period? (B) The foreign exchange earnings from the selling the Sukhoi fighters brings what kind of influence to the Russian economy? (C) The foreign exchange earnings from the selling the Sukhoi fighters brings what kind of influence to the Russian aviation industry? (D) The export of the Sukhoi fighters in the post-Cold War plays what kind of role in the Russian foreign policy? (E) What can we conclude from the above questions? The Su-27 Flanker family belongs to the class of heavy fighter, it has high performance and less cost compare to the Western products. And the most important is, Russia could sell it to all countries which wants to buy it. Russian government realized the potential political power of the Su-27 family so it decided to put it into the international arms market. The interaction between government and the technicaladvantage of the Su-27 family makes the Su-27 family become one of the best-selling fighters in the world.

本文將以北方造船廠與波羅的海造船廠競標軍售中國「現代級」驅逐艦訂單之個案為例，透過國家安全研究途徑、國際戰略研究途徑以及決策研究途徑 ，檢視俄羅斯軍售中國政策之形成，從而探討俄羅斯軍售政策在普欽鞏固政權過程中之角色，並研析該項發展對台海安全之意涵，研究1991年至2006年期間俄羅斯軍售中國政策，並且探討其對亞太暨台海安全之衝擊，本文將闡釋從政治、經濟以及戰略層面，探討1991年至2006年期間俄羅斯對中國軍售的內外在驅動因素，及其對亞太和台海安全之衝擊。 本文認為，俄羅斯對中國軍售政策，乃是普欽鞏固權力過程之重要一環，2000年普欽上台後，俄羅斯葉里欽幫與聖彼得堡幫互相角力，競逐政經資源，以本案為例，波羅的海造船廠之最後勝出，乃是俄羅斯軍售中國政策形成之主導權從葉里欽幫 (經濟優先派/葉里欽人馬/莫斯科幫：卡西亞諾夫˙佛洛申派) 轉移到聖彼得堡幫 (國安優先派/普欽人馬/聖彼得堡幫) 手中之必然結果，因此，俄羅斯對中國軍售政策之形成，顯然有其政經與安全之考量，而其政商互動關係則為政策形成之關鍵，至於該項政策之形成與執行過程，則往往產生派系之間爭奪資源交換利益之重大弊端；而該項政策之執行結果，勢將影響亞太地區之區域安全；從而，勢將影響台海安全之均衡情勢，因此俄羅斯對中國軍售政策之形成乃是由於克里姆林宮政治勢力在內外在環境環節關聯下互動形塑而成的。 上述假設命題衍生出來下列邏輯相關的子命題： (一) 俄羅斯對中國軍售政策之形成與執行過程，則往往產生派系之間爭奪資源交換利益之重大弊端。在軍售中國訂單的決策過程 (Decision-Making Process) 中，波羅的海造船廠(Baltiisky Zavod shipyard;Балтийский завод) 之最後勝出，乃是俄羅斯軍售中國政策形成之主導權從葉里欽幫轉移到聖彼得堡幫手中之必然結果。 (二) 軍售弊案中的派系與兩個造船廠之間政商互動關係則為俄羅斯對中國軍售政策形成之關鍵。 (三) 俄國軍售中國訂單的俄國決策階層在決策考量上及俄羅斯對中國軍售政策之形成，顯然有其政經與安全之考量，2000至2004年期間，俄羅斯對中國軍售的政策，主要是受到俄羅斯國內政治互動，經濟發展考量，以及戰略三角互動等內外在因素的驅動，俄羅斯對中國軍售政策，乃是普欽鞏固權力過程 (Consolidating Power Process) 之重要一環。 (四) 俄羅斯對中國軍售政策之執行結果，勢將影響亞太地區之區域安全；從而，勢將影響台海安全之均衡情勢。 / 本文將以北方造船廠 (Северная верфь; Severnaya Verf) 與波羅的海造船廠(Балтийский завод; Baltiisky Zavod shipyard) 競標軍售中國「現代級」驅逐艦訂單之個案為例，透過國家安全研究途徑 (National Security Approach) 、國際戰略研究途徑 (International Strategic Approach) 以及決策研究途徑 (decision-making Approach) ，檢視俄羅斯軍售中國政策之形成，從而探討俄羅斯軍售政策在普欽鞏固政權過程中之角色，並研析該項發展對台海安全之意涵，研究1991年至2006年期間俄羅斯軍售中國政策，並且探討其對亞太暨台海安全之衝擊，本文將闡釋從政治、經濟以及戰略層面，探討1991年至2006年期間俄羅斯對中國軍售的內外在驅動因素，及其對亞太和台海安全之衝擊。 本文認為，俄羅斯對中國軍售政策，乃是普欽鞏固權力過程之重要一環。2000年普欽上台後，俄羅斯葉里欽幫與聖彼得堡幫互相角力，競逐政經資源。以本案為例，波羅的海造船廠之最後勝出，乃是俄羅斯軍售中國政策形成之主導權從葉里欽幫 (經濟優先派/葉里欽人馬/莫斯科幫：卡西亞諾夫˙沃洛申派) 轉移到聖彼得堡幫 (國安優先派/普欽人馬/聖彼得堡幫) 手中之必然結果。因此，俄羅斯對中國軍售政策之形成，顯然有其政經與安全之考量，而其政商互動關係則為政策形成之關鍵，至於該項政策之形成與執行過程，則往往產生派系之間爭奪資源交換利益之重大弊端；而該項政策之執行結果，勢將影響亞太地區之區域安全；從而，勢將影響台海安全之均衡情勢。 / 因此，本文認為： (一) 俄羅斯對中國軍售政策之形成與執行過程，則往往產生派系之間爭奪資源交換利益之重大弊端，在軍售中國訂單的決策過程中，波羅的海造船廠之最後勝出，乃是俄羅斯軍售中國政策形成之主導權從葉里欽幫轉移到聖彼得堡幫手中之必然結果： 2001年4月，北廠把公司的控股賣給了俄羅斯國際工業銀行(Межотраслевой промышленный банк; Mezhprombank) ，進而使俄國造船局 (Российское агентство по судостроению; Russian Shipbuilding Agency) 在北方造船廠的事先運作下而受到影響，因此俄國造船局屬意由北廠得標，由於將自己的親信安插在俄國武器出口公司與國防部內且加強國防部在對外軍售與武器輸出管制上的權力，並且克里姆林宮在2001年底前就已宣布有關軍售中國訂單的醜聞的計劃，根據最早的計劃，俄克里姆林宮掌握了中國造艦案訂單的最早決議是由俄國造船局與北方造船廠之間所共同做出的決定，在2002年1月3日契約簽訂之前是由俄國造船局擔任訂單招標的決定機構，但在2002年1月3日契約簽訂之後，訂單招標的決定機構就變成俄國武器出口公司擔任訂單招標的決定機構，於是波羅的海造船廠的主張與策略是透過團結黨在國家杜馬議員別赫金 (Владимир Пехтин; Vladimir Pekhtin) 審查北廠漏繳國庫案，打擊北廠，並且透過對克列巴諾夫副總理的遊說，而使克列巴諾夫重新重啟招標，因此聖彼得堡幫與波廠獲取這次爭食訂單的勝利。 2000年普欽上台後，俄羅斯葉里欽幫與聖彼得堡幫互相角力，競逐政經資源。 俄羅斯對中國軍售政策之形成與執行過程，則往往產生聖彼得堡幫及葉里欽派(Yeltin bloc)之間爭奪資源交換利益之重大弊端，在波羅的海造船廠對聖彼得堡幫的遊說下且北方造船廠在葉里欽派的支持下，雙方相互爭奪俄國軍售中國武器的訂單，對兩大派系而言是爭取軍售及軍售決策政府單位的決策主導權，因此俄羅斯對中國軍售政策之形成與執行過程產生北方造船廠與波羅的海造船廠爭食訂單之重大弊端，葉里欽親信在葉里欽總統下台後頓失舞台，葉里欽親信為了保其殘存勢力的延續而與新寡頭結合，葉里欽親信與新舊寡頭結合後與普欽的親信派爭權奪利導致了俄中軍售弊案的發生。 / (二) 軍售弊案中的派系與兩個造船廠之間政商互動關係則為俄羅斯對中國軍售政策形成之關鍵： 俄國造船廠與克里姆林宮政治派系利益掛勾，在對中國軍售上為了贏得訂單而運用其政商關係，在軍售弊案中，沃洛申 (Волошину Александру; Alexander Voloshin) 集團與北方造船廠 (Северная верфь; Severnaya Verf) 之間的政商互動關係以及聖彼得堡幫 (St. peterburg bloc) 與波羅的海造船廠 (Балтийский завод; Baltiisky Zavod shipyard) 之間的政商互動關係則為俄羅斯對中國軍售政策形成之關鍵，沃洛申集團 (Voloshin clan;Yeltin clan; Economic Advice bloc (經濟優先派/葉里欽人馬/莫斯科幫：卡西亞諾夫(Касьянов Михаил Михайлович; Mihail Mihaylovich Kasyanov)與沃洛申派) 的形成與成員是以葉里欽時期金融寡頭及軍企寡頭等的親中勢力為主，聖彼得堡幫是普欽總統的人馬與派系，聖彼得堡幫的成員遍及軍企、媒體、俄國武器出口部門、國會及政府內閣與總統辦公廳內部，經濟顧問派的龍頭則為總理卡西亞諾夫：安全顧問派的龍頭則是克列巴諾夫 (Клебанова Ильи; Ilya Klebanova) ，在這兩大派系的背後，又都各擁有一個龐大的財團支持。與卡西亞諾夫聯盟的財團與公司則是波塔寧 (Потанин Владимир Олегович; Vladmir O.Potanin) 與謝爾蓋‧普加契夫 (Sergey Pugachev) 支持的北方造船廠；與克列巴諾夫聯盟的財團與公司是波羅的海造船廠。 / (三) 俄國軍售中國訂單的俄國決策階層在決策考量上及俄羅斯對中國軍售政策之形成，顯然有其政經與安全之考量，2000至2004年期間，俄羅斯對中國軍售的政策，主要是受到俄羅斯國內政治互動，經濟發展考量，以及戰略三角互動等內外在因素的驅動，俄羅斯對中國軍售政策，乃是普欽鞏固權力過程之重要一環： 1.經濟因素影響了俄國對中國軍售政策的形成： 在普欽的認知與觀點上,俄中戰略夥伴關係是用來賺錢的工具且是在俄中戰略夥伴關係架構下軍火貿易的平台上而有賺錢的機會，俄羅斯在經濟領域的國家利益是最主要的國家利益，只有在穩定發展經濟的基礎上才能解決與俄羅斯國家利益有關的問題， 俄羅斯軍售中國賺取外匯挹注經濟發展，才有可能達成軍事現代化且使俄羅斯賺取外匯以準備發展新一代核武器和高精尖武器裝備。 為了國防工業轉產、國內經濟大幅衰退、賺取外匯挹注經濟發展：軍售中國是為了因應俄羅斯國內政治生態與經濟發展互動的需求。普欽希望能爭取到軍事工業集團的支援，特別是軍工企業旗下的大批工人；因為軍售中國可以創造相當數量的就業機會。 因為俄國總統普欽希望能夠爭取到軍火利益團體的支持，在俄國國內政治勢力與俄國軍工企業向俄國政府的要求下，所以普欽政府大量的軍售中國，普欽的目的是要換取俄國軍工企業的支持， 扶持軍事工業以收攬軍工複合體(военно-промышленный комплекс; Military-Industrial Complex) 勢力是普欽經濟發展的策略之一，事實上，軍售中國是為了因應俄羅斯國內政治生態與經濟發展互動的需求，普欽希望能爭取到軍事工業集團的支援，特別是軍工企業旗下的大批工人；因為軍售中國可以創造相當數量的就業機會。 在政治因素上，俄羅斯國內的軍火工業從業人口佔有相當大的比例，普欽為了贏得下一屆總統選舉，勢必要為軍火工業製造利多消息，藉以換取軍火工業人口的選票，因此普欽企圖以軍售中國爭取軍工集團的支持，以爭取軍工企業工人選票，普欽企圖以軍售中國賺取外匯挹注經濟發展，才有可能達成軍事現代化的目標，以此訴求爭取軍方支持，軍售中國是俄國國內政治的要求，因為俄國總統普欽希望能夠爭取到軍火利益團體的支持，特別是軍火業雇用大批工人，對俄國經濟來說非常重要，此外，它也能資助俄國軍力的現代化，而這正是普欽的另一重要意圖， 普欽認為軍售中國能資助俄國軍力的現代化，因此普欽及其親信為了要擴大權勢以及要控制軍工領域而使普欽可以徹底而確實的推動一系列的的國防工業體制改革與軍事改革而須掌控軍工企業，俄羅斯希望經由對中國的武器出口交易及軍事科技轉移，來吸取中國在軍轉民用政策上的經驗，以有效掌握其技術和資金，積極推動俄國龐大的軍企在民用化方面的成效，從而改善人民的生活，增加俄軍財源，以補充其軍費， 緩解軍工企業困難，為其進一步發展積累啟動資金，增加外匯收入，緩解國內經濟危機。 2. 國家安全因素是俄國軍售中國訂單的俄國決策階層在決策時的考量： 普欽軍售中國的國家安全考量乃是為了挽救俄羅斯衆多的軍工企業與科研機構不致於陷入舉步維艱的境地且減少對於俄羅斯國防實力和國家安全上的直接威脅，普欽為了減低軍方在國家安全方面的疑慮，承諾軍售中國將會有所限制，中國在採購大量的俄制軍備後，有可能反噬俄羅斯，再加上中國威脅論的推波助瀾，俄羅斯未來在對中國的軍售上勢必會多加考慮。 3. 國際戰略因素是俄國軍售中國訂單的俄國決策階層在決策時的考量： 就戰略觀點來看，俄國決定銷售精密複雜的武器 (sophisticated weaponry)給中國，乃是基於俄國的國家利益 (national interests) ，及俄國的整體國家經濟 (overall economic) 和地緣政治 (Geopolitics) 等因素制約驅使所致。 俄中軍火貿易是俄中戰略協作的一環，俄羅斯當前的外交策略是東西並重，而非過去的一面倒向西方，藉由對中國的軍售來拉攏中國，以增加俄羅斯對西方世界談判的籌碼，提高國際地位，增加對國際事務的影響力，俄希望在國際軍事衝突中，交戰雙方都使用俄製武器，這樣在解決國際事務過程中手中就多了一張可討價還價的政治籌碼，有利於俄對國際事務施加影響。俄羅斯對於印度與中國兩國的軍火交易有相當大的差異，相較於印度並未與俄羅斯直接相鄰，中國與俄羅斯有相當長的國界相鄰，俄羅斯再出售武器給予中國的同時必須顧及到將來若與中國發生衝突的可能性，俄羅斯出售軍備給予中國，但不可避免的，必須去面臨日益強大的中國在俄羅斯東部所形成的威脅，因此俄羅斯在出售武器給予中國的同時也出售軍火給予印度，俄羅斯提供武器給與印度具有很大的戰略考量，俄羅斯提供給印度的武器較中國先進，對於俄羅斯來說，這樣的差異，是基於考慮到提供印度較為先進的武器可以牽制中國的勢力，俄羅斯聯合中國互為奧援，對於俄羅斯提昇國際地位的努力，不失為是一項最佳的選擇，此外，近年來俄羅斯求在經濟上有所作為，把中國視為主要的軍火銷售對象，俄中睦鄰友好合作條約 (The Russia-China Friendship and Cooperation Treaty) 的簽訂，無疑將有助於增進雙方的軍火交易， 同時由於俄國政府採取親美以削弱親中勢力的政策，2002年簽訂俄美削減攻擊性戰略武器條約 (Strategic. Offensive Reductions Treaty, STORT) ，並建立了美俄戰略夥伴關係，俄國此舉乃是為了要擺脫中國之戰略羈絆。 4.克里姆林宮政治 (Kremlin politics) 影響了俄國軍售中國訂單的俄國決策階層的決策： 俄羅斯聖彼得堡幫及葉里欽幫互相競逐俄羅斯軍售中國政策形成之主導權，雙方為了要削弱對方的勢力，普欽時期的軍企寡頭 (Arms sale oligarchy) 嚴重影響了軍售中國訂單的決策，安全體系官僚 (National Security bloc) 與經濟體系官僚 (Economic Advice bloc) 兩個派系與軍企寡頭在軍售弊案中的政商關係及利益交換影響了俄羅斯對中國軍售政策之形成，普欽整肅葉里欽遺留下來的軍企寡頭勢力，建立以國家安全團隊為主幹的軍售中國的決策執政團隊，以鞏固其政權基礎，普欽上任後有計劃得為了擴大鞏固權勢而整頓國防體制與整肅寡頭，因此將自己的親信安插在俄國武器出口公司 (Рособоронэкспортом; Rosoboronexport) 與國防部 (Министерство обороны, РФ; Ministerstvo oborony, RF) 內且加強國防部在對外軍售與武器輸出管制上的權力，在普欽於西元2000年當選俄國總統後，克里姆林宮政治勢力與新興的財團勢力相結合，成為主導莫斯科決策動向的新寡頭，普欽作為一個成功的權力平衡者，必須隨時掌握派系政治的動向，以合縱連橫的政治藝術，來鞏固其政權，普欽上任後有計劃得為了擴大鞏固權勢而整頓國防體制與整肅寡頭，因此將自己的親信安插在俄國武器出口公司與國防部內且加強國防部在對外軍售與武器輸出管制上的權力：普欽的親信人馬正在積極搶奪葉里欽派系人馬所控制的政經資源，雙方鬥爭激烈，與中國的驅逐艦合約也變成了這場鬥爭中的一個籌碼。 普欽在2000年高票當選俄國總統，普欽高票當選，地位鞏固；普欽手腕靈活，讓國家杜馬 (Gosudarstvennaya Duma;Государственная Дума) 形成親政府的穩定多數派，並使其人馬進駐國家安全強力部門；從而普欽可以順利推動對外政策方針與對中國軍售決策，兩家造船廠後面的財閥集團和官方幫助兩家造船廠積極對承辦軍售案的相關人員進行關說活動，俄羅斯對中國軍售政策之形成與執行過程，則往往產生派系之間爭奪資源交換利益之重大弊端。 俄國出售先進武器給中國似是違反俄國國家安全，但是普欽的主要目的是藉此取得國內軍火利益團體的政治支持，因為軍火業可製造較多的就業機會，有助於強化俄國的經濟以及軍事現代化， 對外軍售對於普欽 (Путин Владимир Владимирович; Vladimir Putin) 而言，也是振興經濟的選項之一，出售軍火具有經濟以及政治上的利益，在經濟上可以藉由出售軍火快速獲得大量的外匯，以此便可以暫時舒緩經濟上的困境，而在政治上，普欽以軍售挽救俄羅斯軍火工業將可以贏得軍火工廠員工的支持，而支持也將會在選舉中化為選票，同樣的，提振了經濟也有助於普欽及團結黨 (Unity) 在大選時的支持度，但是出售軍火給予中國首先必須面對軍方的強烈反彈，為此，普欽進行一連串的軍事改革及經改與軍企改革，進而普欽可以用軍售中國賺取外匯挹注經濟發展，才有可能達成軍事現代化的目標，來爭取以此訴求爭取軍方支持，普欽藉俄羅斯對中國軍售政策以鞏固政權 （Consolidating Power） 。 / (四) 俄羅斯對中國軍售政策之執行結果，勢將影響亞太地區之區域安全；從而，勢將影響台海安全之均衡情勢： 由於俄國決定軍售給中國高科技武器的決策，並且在普欽政府的控制下，包括該訂單在內的所有高科技武器將引起亞太各國的不安與影響台海安全，從而使兩岸關係進入軍備競賽且使俄國得以藉由軍售中國制衡美中關係，從而牽制中美兩國。我國的因應必須是加強我國在國防軍購上加強對美國及他國的武器購買，同時要求各國對俄國大量軍售中國一事的重視。 / The main first purpose of this study is to explore, through National Security Approach ,International Strategic Approach and decision-making Approach explore Russian arms sales scandal. The main level of The thesis is to explore and study scandal on sino-Russia arms sales by International politics system level of analysis, National system level of analysis and Decision-making level of analysis.The method of The thesis is to explore and study scandal on sino-Russia arms sales with a case study which Northern shipyard and Baltiisky Zavod shipyard struggle for order of tender for arms sales Sovremenny Class destroyers--Project 956 toward P.R.C in 2002 and the main second purpose of this study is to explore pro-China clan and pro-USA clan of Russia struggle for leading right of formation of decision-making in Russian arms sales policy toward P.R.C. and explore formation of decision-making in Russian arms sales policy toward P.R.C.. the main third purpose of this study is to explore inner-extra cause and Context of Vladimir Putin’s arms sales policy toward P.R.C. and explore what role and funcation of Russian arms sales policy toward P.R.C. is in Consolidating Power process of Russia president Vladimir Putin. the main fourth purpose of this study is to explore the impact on Taiwan Strait security by Russia–Chain’s military exchange. It is hypothesized in this study that Russian arms sales policy toward P.R.C. is a part of Consolidating Power process of Russia president Vladimir Putin, pro-China clan and pro-USA clan of Russia struggle for leading right and resource of process of decision-making of politics and economy and each public policy,in the case study that Northern shipyard and Baltiisky Zavod shipyard struggle for order of tender for arms sales Sovremenny Class destroyers--Project 956 toward P.R.C in 2002, That Baltiisky Zavod shipyard final get the tender is leading right of formation of decision-making in Russian arms sales policy toward P.R.C. transfer to pro-USA clan (National Security bloc/ Putin Bloc/ St. Petersburg Bloc) from pro-China clan (Economic Advice bloc/ Yeltin bloc/ Moscow bloc: Kasyanov and Voloshin Bloc),therefore, Considerations on formation of decision-making of Russian arms sales policy toward P.R.C. is including of politics, economy and strategic and relations between business, oligarchy and politican in process of decision-making of Russian arms sales policy toward P.R.C. is the key-point, formation of decision-making and process of activity of Russian arms sales policy toward P.R.C. gives rise to abuses which struggle for money and political power and economy interests and exchange and collective self-interest, the final ending of the decision- activity of Russian arms sales policy toward P.R.C. ought to effects regional security in Asia Pacific area and effects Cross- Straits Security ,therefore , cause of formation of decision-making of Russian arms sales policy toward P.R.C. is that interaction of clans of Kremlin politics in the internal and external factors under Vladimir Putin. This hypothesis can be further developed into the following logically consequential sub-propositions: 1. Formation of decision-making and process of activity of Russian arms sales policy toward P.R.C. gives rise to abuses which struggle for money and political power and economy interests and exchange and collective self-interest,in decision-making of tender in Russian arms sales policy toward P.R.C., Baltiisky Zavod shipyard final get the tender is leading right of formation of decision-making in Russian arms sales policy toward P.R.C. transfer to pro-USA clan (National Security bloc/ Putin Bloc/ St. Petersburg Bloc) from pro-China clan (Economic Advice bloc/ Yeltin bloc/ Moscow bloc: Kasyanov and Voloshin Bloc). 2. Clans of arms sales scandal and relations between business, oligarchy and politican of two Shipbuilding plant is the key-point of formation of decision-making of Russian arms sales policy toward P.R.C.. 3. Considerations on formation of decision-making of decision-making level of Russian arms sales policy toward P.R.C. is including of politics, economy and strategic, During 2000-2004, Russian arms sales policy toward P.R.C. has been driven by Russia’s internal and external factors, such as the interaction of strategic triangle politics; Kremlin politics and economic development and Russian arms sales policy toward P.R.C. is a part of Consolidating Power process of Russia president Vladimir Putin. 4. the final ending of the decision- activity of Russian arms sales policy toward P.R.C. ought to effects regional security in Asia Pacific area and effects Cross- Straits Security.