本文探討的主要對象「德意志猶太人」，指的並非住在德國的猶太人，而是精神上認同德意志的猶太人，這些猶太人經歷生存的考驗，在他鄉生根之後，努力「同化自己」，使其融入德國社會並獲得認同。 研究的時代背景為十九世紀到威瑪共和時期的柏林。經過第一次世界大戰、政治的巨大變革，以及經濟與社會結構的改變，柏林呈現一個新舊交雜的景象。另一方面，「威瑪文化」被視為現代主義的典範，同時也是各種學術與藝術領域上的一個高峰，在多方面都表現出極具活力的面貌。除了美術、音樂、電影等領域的現代主義、表現主義作品，大都會的發展與大眾生活亦符合「現代」意義，而共和首都柏林即為威瑪文化的中心。 文章先鋪陳威瑪共和文化，接著陳述柏林城市的發展，其中包含猶太人遷居的經過。在經濟與社會地位逐漸獲得提升後，猶太人開始追求文化與精神上的卓越以及身份的認同。然而經過共和的失敗與種種累積已久的因素，「德意志猶太人」的自我認同終究不被承認，對其而言這是很大的矛盾與衝突。種族主義與繼之而起的納粹政權，更將猶太人驅逐消滅，包括他們建立的文化與成就。然而即使幻滅，在「德意志猶太人」生活與創造的歷史中，我們仍能看見他們如何為德意志社會帶來豐富的內涵與文化。

第二次世界大戰於1945年結束後，德國由同盟國加以接管，並遭分割為四個佔領區 (美、英、法、蘇) 而喪失國家主權。直至1949年5月，西德在西方同盟國的許可下，制定了作為立國基礎的「基本法」(das Grundgesetz)，使其重新獲得國家主權以及治權，國家所需要的政治體系，如政府、國會、政黨、選舉制度等儼然成型；由此，包含美、英、法三國佔領區的德國領土在穩定中建立了符合西方民主體制精神的「德意志聯邦共和國」(Bundesrepublik Deutschland，以下簡稱「西德」)。 西德建國後之首任總理艾德諾 (Konrad Adenauer) 被賦予艱鉅的任務，帶領著已成為斷垣殘壁的國家和人民朝向嶄新的民主社會前進。在成立西德外交體系時，艾德諾面臨專業外交人員短缺之窘境，故仍須延攬前納粹時期之外交官員，卻因此等官員於大戰期間曾直接參與違反人道和戰爭之罪刑，使得新政府在民主化的過程中出現不穩定的因子。立基於西方民主制度的西德任用此等人士，除了衍生外交部的人事問題外，艾德諾政府另須就德國的國家主權以及未來在國際社會中的地位周旋於同盟國之間，此有別於一般的「雙層賽局」(Two-Level Games – 即國內政治與外交之間的相互影響)，而可謂身處「三層賽局」(Three-Level Games) – 即國際、國家及組織內部之間即競爭又合作，且錯綜複雜的交互作用關係。 此外，戰勝的四個同盟國之間彼此為了鞏固在德國及歐陸的勢力各懷鬼胎，對未來的德國亦抱持著不同的態度。同盟國與艾德諾政府之間就戰犯處置和政府人事規劃所達成的協議甚或妥協，不僅對日後德國的政局發展有關鍵性的影響力，在東西兩大陣營之間的零和遊戲中也扮演了既微妙且重要的角色。 本文將針對西德外交部成立初期之人事政策以及艾德諾之德國和外交政策做一深入探討，並就西德建國後之發展，包含自同盟國的掌控當中取回國家主權以及因應西德加入「北大西洋公約組織」(NATO) 而重新建軍的過程進行分析；此外亦將由西德、美國、英國、法國及蘇聯的立場，來分析諸此國家在中歐地區的地緣戰略，並評論艾德諾內政及外交政策上的得失。 / After the World War II in 1945 Germany had been occupied by the Allies (USA, Great Britain, France and USSR) and dismembered into four occupation zones which led to the lost of the Germany’s sovereignty. With the consent of the Allies Germany developed the “Grundgesetz” (Basic Law) in May 1949 as the foundation of an independent state with sovereignty and the right to rule; a complete political institution of a nation with a government, parliament, political parties and election system was neatly arranged, hence the Federal Republic of Germany, also called West-Germany, which consisted of the occupation zones of the USA, Great Britain and France, was built up with western democratic ideals in a stable period. The first Germany’s chancellor Konrad Adenauer was assigned to lead the people and the desolate country towards a democratic society. While he was about to re-construct the foreign affairs the lack of professional diplomats was such of remarkable critical that a recruitment of former Nazi-diplomats was inevitable who were directly or indirectly involved in crimes against humanity or in war crimes and symbolized an unstable factor in the Germany’s democratic development for Adenauer. Besides these personnel problems, Adenauer had also to negotiate the sovereignty and the future international status of West Germany with the Allies which seems not to be an usual “Two-Level Games” (i. e. the two-way influence between the domestic politics and the foreign policy) but a so-called “Three-Level Games” which means one more party (the governmental organizations) to the “Two-Level Games” with competitive-cooperative and complicated complex of influences. On the other hand, the four great powers of the Allies held different attitudes on the future of Germany and they had their each own to consolidate the force in the respective occupation zone and on the European continent. The agreements or even compromises between the Allies and Adenauer’s administration on the punishment of war criminals and on the government’s personnel planning not only affected the West-Germany’s continuing political development but also played a profound and important role in the zero-sum-game between the western and eastern camps. The themes of this research focus on the personnel, the Deutschlandpolitik (the Germany-Policy) and foreign policy of Adenauer after the establishment of the West German government and the process of re-building the national sovereignty combining the re-armament of West Germany through the accession to the NATO. Furthermore, the Geo-politics of the countries West Germany, USA, Great Britain, France and USSR in the central European continent, and the gains and losses of the domestic and foreign policies of Adnenauer will be discussed and analyzed.