Uppsatsen syftar till att jämföra svenska och finska förmågor rörande ett tröskelförsvar. Tröskelförsvaret bygger på strategin om anti-access/area denial, översatt till tillträdesförsvar och kontrollbestridande försvar. Tillträdesförsvaret syftar till att hindra en överlägsen motståndare att få tillträde till ett operationsområde och kontrollbestridande försvar syftar till att förneka motståndaren kontroll över operationsområdet i händelse av en väpnad konflikt. Denna strategi diskuteras flitigt i den internationella debatten men då främst hur stormakter som USA med allierade bäst skall bemöta de förmågor som svagare nationer bygger upp, inte hur det kan byggas upp. Detta tröskelförsvar har i uppsatsen tillämpats på Östersjön i vilket svenska och finska förmågor analyserats mot de grundläggande förmågorna verkan, rörlighet och skydd. Jämförelsen visar att Sverige har en tyngdpunkt i tillträdesförsvaret baserat på förmågan att möta en motståndare tidigt med sin offensiva undervattensförmåga, smyganpassade korvetter och flygburen sjömålsrobot. De brister som finns i Sverige utgörs främst av avsaknad av långräckviddig markattackförmåga samt förmågor i det kontrollbestridande försvaret. Finland har å andra sidan sin tyngdpunkt i det kontrollbestri-dande försvaret då de alltjämt har förmåga till markbaserad långräckviddig sjömålsbekäm-pande förmåga samt ett defensivt undervattensvapen i form av sjöminförmåga. Detta är för-mågor som Sverige avvecklat sedan 2000-talets inledning. Finlands brister är i tillträdesför-svaret där den offensiva undervattensförmågan saknas helt samt det begränsade antal platt-formar som kan verka framskjutet mot sjömål. Uppsatsen visar också att indelningen av till-trädesförsvar och kontrollbestridande försvar är en bra modell för att analysera nationers försvarsförmågor.

Dispute over the sovereignty of Diaoyu Islands (Senkaku Islands) implicates peace in East Asia. These islands were under Chinese control for five hundred years in the Ming and Qing Dynasties, and were used as sailing coordinates for imperial Chinese missions to the ancient Ryūkyū Kingdom and as part of national defense. Under the control of the Qing Dynasty, the Diaoyu Islands were affiliated with Taiwan. In 1894, the Qing was defeated by Japanese in the Sino-Japanese War and was forced to secede Taiwan and its surrounding islands to Japan in 1985. After World War II, the Diaoyu islands were under the United States¡¦ occupation. In 1972, the United States reverted administrative control over these islands to Japan. The Diaoyu Islands have so far been separated from the Chinese rule for over a century. Due to the intervention of the United States, the Diaoyu Islands were not returned to China or Taiwan after the defeat of Japan in 1945. In the 21st Century, as the resources on earth are gradually depleted, the sovereignty of the Diaoyu Islands has become a ferocious competition among China, Japan, and Taiwan due to its rich ocean resources. At present, the islands are under de facto control by Japan; resolution of the problem has troubled Taiwan, China, and Japan. On September 7, 2010, ¡§Minjin Fishing Boat No. 5179¡¨ collided with Japanese Coast Guard patrol boats. This thesis uses this incident as a case to study the Sino-Japanese conflict on the Diaoyu Islands.

A current topic of international debate among western geopolitical scholars concerns whether recent demonstrations of Chinese naval power represent China's adoption of an outwardly aggressive maritime strategy which might require a reactive change of approach by western nations in dealing with Southeast Asian trading interests. This paper analyzes recent developments in Chinese maritime strategy in order to determine whether the strategy is actually offensive or defensive. Drawing on a realist interpretation of international relations, a geo- strategic evaluation of the Chinese state, and a detailed understanding of the principles of maritime strategy, this paper addresses the inherent difficulty in distinguishing between offensive and defensive maritime strategies given that maritime states naturally develop power-projection forces in order to protect their Sea Lanes of Communication and maritime commerce. In an effort to discern the strategic intent underlying China's modern naval activity, this paper establishes an independent vision of China's optimal defensive maritime strategy based on the state's current threat environment, and compares those results against recent investments in China's naval power. By examining the congruency of these two positions, this work offers a contextualized...

中共一直沒有放棄以武力作為解決「臺灣問題」的選項，「統一臺灣」是中共建軍備戰主要目標之一，而國軍自然是共軍的主要假想敵。但是在1996年美國派遣兩支航母戰鬥群干預臺海軍事危機後，使中共體認美軍才是解決「臺灣問題」的最強大對手，開始深入思考如何阻止擁有高科技優勢的美軍介入臺海軍事衝突。防止美軍在中國大陸周邊地區進行作戰行動，是目前中共軍事現代化的主要發展方向，美國官學界將其稱為「反介入與區域拒止」軍事戰略，一時之間已成為研究中共軍事發展者之主要觀察指標。 中共「反介入與區域拒止」軍事戰略的主要著眼，在於建構能防止美國運用軍力涉入中國大陸周邊事務的能力，中共相信即使強大如美軍也不可能擁有全方位的優勢，其「反介入與區域拒止」軍事戰略主要依據地理環境、地緣戰略、美軍作戰特性及弱點等要素，並憑藉共軍數量與質量俱增的現代化武器，希望在西太平洋地區可能的軍事衝突中壓制美軍的作戰行動，或迫使美軍由較遠的基地發起軍事行動，並且阻止美軍後續的兵力增援，這可能使美軍在西太平洋作戰中遭到中共擊敗，或是迫使美國付出其不願意承擔的重大代價，此將導致中共可以達成其軍事和政治目標，同時也阻止美國全部或部分的軍事和政治目標。 中共軍力在「反介入與區域拒止」軍事戰略的帶動下快速成長，使美軍在西太平洋地區面臨重大挑戰和風險，並使美國區域盟邦有遭受侵略或被迫接受強制手段之虞，美軍為因應中共的挑戰，已確立「空海一體戰」的新型作戰概念，並著手發展相關能力。「空海一體戰」係以美軍現有軍力優勢為基礎，再經由西太平洋軍力部署的重組、海空作戰力量的整合、新型武器裝備的研發，並且加強與盟邦的軍事合作，希望建構一個多層次立體作戰體系，俾遏制中共的軍事擴張。在中、美兩強「反介入與區域拒止」和「空海一體戰」軍事戰略的競逐下，臺灣的自處之道和所應扮演的角色，亦為吾人應予深思的課題。 / The People’s Republic of China has never given up the use of military force as an option to solve the “Taiwan issue”, and the “unification with Taiwan” has also been one of the PLA’s objectives in its military buildup, which naturally makes the ROC military as the PLA’s hypothetical enemy. However, after the US sending two of its aircraft carrier battle groups to intervene a military crisis across the Taiwan Strait in 1996, the PRC started to realize that US military is its strongest opponent in solving the Taiwan issue and began to think how to deny the high-tech US military force from stepping into a military confrontation across the Taiwan strait. The prevention of US military operation in surrounding areas of China has been leading the modernization of China’s military, and officials and academia in the US have been calling this phenomenon “anti-access and area-denial” strategy which all of a sudden becomes an observation index when studying the PRC’s military development. The main focus of China’s “anti-access and area-denial” strategy is to develop the capability of preventing the US military from intervening affairs taking place in surrounding areas of China. China believes that no matter how powerful the US military is, it is unable to gain a comprehensive advantage in this region. By the PLA’s increasing modernized weapons, the anti-access and area-denial strategy, based on the geographic environment, geostrategy, and characteristics and weakness of the US military, aims to suppress US military activities in possible military conflicts in the western Pacific region, or to compel the US military to launch its force from bases further away and to stop its reinforcement. The success of this strategy will make the US military be defeated by the PLA or force the US to pay a price that it is unwilling to afford, and then China is able to achieve its military and political objectives and at the same time stops the US, entirely or partially, from achieving its military and political objectives. The anti-access and area-denial strategy has led to a rapid military development in China, which poses a great challenge and risk to the US military in the western Pacific region and makes allies of the US in this region in the fear of being invaded or coerced. In responding to China’s challenges, the US military has developed a new operational concept -- “AirSea Battle” and begins the development relating to this new concept. The “AirSea Battle” concept, building on current US military supremacy and the integration of air-sea combat powers as well as the reorganization of US force in the western Pacific region and the development of new weapons, looks to enhance the military cooperation between the US and its allies to establish a multilevel operation system which is able to contain Chinese military expansion. Amid the competition between China’s “anti-access and area-denial” strategy and US “AirSea Battle” concept, Taiwan’s responses and the role that Taiwan should play is a subject that we must deliberate thoroughly.