冷戰結束後，以往來自敵國或他國以軍事、政治和外交等面向，對國家安全（national security）及人類生存構成影響的「傳統安全」（Traditional Security）威脅因素，已隨著全球化帶來的效應產生轉變，全球面臨非傳統安全（Non-Traditional Security）的挑戰，包括經濟安全、金融安全、環境安全、能源安全、文化安全等威脅均大幅上升，其中能源是工業建設、經濟活動與國家發展不可或缺的戰略資源，是國家發展環節中最要要的關鍵，而石油即將耗竭也是全球將面臨的嚴重課題，近百年來因爭奪石油引發多次的區域衝突，並擴散成為全球的能源危機，石油已成為影響國家安全的最直接戰略威脅。 1970年代的能源危機使美國警覺石油的重要戰略地位，長期以來透過其國際強權的地位，積極對全球主要的石油生產區採取戰略佈局；1970年代後期起，中國的改革獲得耀眼的成效，經濟的成長帶動能源的龐大需求，1993年中國更成為石油淨進口國。中國逐漸正視到石油將是關係未來經濟持續成長的關鍵，於是挾以經濟、外交、政治等手段向中東、中亞、拉丁美洲乃至於非洲積極佈局展開油源開發觸角，引發西方國家對「中國能源威脅論」之隱憂。 石油已經成為維繫國家穩定發展的重要因素，石油安全既是經濟問題，更是政治問題、國家安全的核心。因此，爭奪石油成為地區衝突的導火線，隨著中國經濟崛起後政經力量的茁壯，中國透過各種手段在主要產油國甚至美國國內相關企業著力日深，已對美國的利益產生嚴重威脅，中、美都在極力的爭取石油主導權，希望透過石油的控制力量，從而獲得對全球經濟的操控能力。 石油安全往往牽動國際政治問題，愈發凸顯石油在國家安全戰略地位的重要性。長期仰賴石油進口，對我國國家安全容易受國際局勢影響，中美雙方在各種國際活動中，因石油產生的競合關係，恐令我國隨中美的互動關係產生轉變，因此對中美在石油安全競合的過程中，其雙方的發展與效應及對我國國家安全的影響，值得我們加以觀察與探討。

The day of September 11, 2001 which was primarily seen like an ordinary day was significantly written into the world's history. The worst terrorist attack of all ages were commited in the United States, nearly 3.000 people were killed during the attacks. American administration in response to the attacks declared the "war on terorr", which was mainly represented by military interventions to Afghanistan 2001 and Iraq 2003. Inseparable part of Bush's foreign policy was National Security Strategy, which is the strategic basis for invasion to Iraq, approved on September 2002. This concept of this analysis is dealing with these three concrete events of american foreign policy which are specified on the background of Just War Theory JWT. Concretely on the basis of category jus ad bellum - right to war. The main aim of this work is to explore compatibility of these missions with the principles of just war and find out whether operations were launched justly according to JWT. National Security Strategy NSS - which is discussable in the current international system with the regard of the controversial concept of preemption - is important part of the research too. Pre-emptive strategy is confronted with the just war theory, primarily in the sence whether it is possible to consider preemption like just cause...

論及影響美國外交政策產出的因素，地緣政治一向扮演著重要角色。無論是馬漢的海權論、肯楠的圍堵理論，乃至後冷戰時期布里辛斯基的歐亞大棋盤、杭亭頓的文明衝突論，都是地緣政治學門裡獨到的見解。而地緣政治基本要素—空間、邊界、權力—的交互作用也已然內化於外交政策制訂中，深刻影響美國對外政策走向。冷戰後在缺乏明顯單一的敵對目標、本身又成為超級大國的情況下，美國面對的是更為複雜難測的國際局勢：區域衝突、文化糾葛、全球化進程與波折、世界經濟體系萎縮等等問題，外交政策維護國家利益的功能也隨之彰顯。 本研究以911事件為轉捩點，觀察美國對中亞五國外交政策的調整，分析導致政策轉變的地緣因素與動機。本研究指出，中亞地區在蘇聯解體之後，政治局勢長期呈現真空狀態，基於能源安全的考量，中亞豐富的油氣資源是吸引美國聚焦於此區的關鍵。輸油管道計畫提供政治框架讓美國影響力得以介入，而反恐作戰則正式讓美國勢力進駐此一政治真空帶。中亞五國位處具有重大地緣政治意義的心臟地帶，但獨立時間尚短，國內民主建制、經濟發展未臻完備，伊斯蘭基本教義派與分離主義是導致此區紛擾不斷的主因。美國藉由反恐合作，對此區提撥大量經濟挹注與軍事協助，中亞五國的重要性在911事件之後陡升，美國也成為此區優勢領導者。簡言之，美國在911事件後更加強對區域穩定的關注，全面揚棄冷戰時代的圍堵思維，採取主動的先發制人戰略，企圖在中亞掌握政治、經濟主控權，鞏固國家安全與保障美國在此區的國家利益。

欲瞭解一個國家的行為，就必須要瞭解這個國家的整體行為，而這整體的行為所表現者，即是「文化」。從戰略文化的研究途徑做一切入點，正可深入瞭解一個國家戰爭的行為，甚而可以預測未來戰爭的發生。而維繫國防安全的軍人自當對中共戰略與戰爭模式，應有相當的了解與認知；也希望藉著對戰略文化的瞭解，探照中共對外戰爭實例，探尋中共對外戰爭的模式，進而提供國防戰略因應對策，才不愧於自己的職責所在。 就中華民國的生存發展而言，海峽對岸的中共無疑是我生存發展的最大威脅，而兩岸在軍事武力的不對稱下，中共時時以「不放棄武力」，極盡挑釁之威脅，而台灣除了默默軍事備戰外，在政治，外交生存上，也只能低調回應，這也可看出中共武力對台已具有足夠的軍事力量解決統一台灣問題。目前兩岸之間最大的障礙是由領土主權爭議所衍生的問題，而領土主權問題又很容易引起戰爭，在這種壓力下，台灣將如何去面對，這是一門重要的課題。國內學術界對於兩岸關係的研究，多偏向政策方面而較少理論方面的探討，其實，藉由理論層面的研究而詮釋海峽兩岸互動過程與未來發展，有助於強化政策建議的內涵與深度，觀諸台海兩岸未來的安全發展，若能以戰略文化研究途徑，作為觀察的理論基礎，對於台海武力衝突的可能性，及中共對於使用武力的政治目的、手段與效用或許能提供新的詮釋與政策建議，由於潛在的戰略文化，會使決策者的戰略偏好及使用兵力解決爭議的傾向產生影響，因此，武力在未來台海安全的發展中，仍會是一個關鍵的重要角色，所以透過對中共戰略文化內涵的分析與掌握的研究途徑，進而對其軍事戰略與對外戰爭模式加以研究，期能深入瞭解中共在何種情況下，會不惜一切的以戰爭來解決問題，進而思考台海雙方在既有戰略思維下審慎避免誤判或誤認，讓動武甚至檫槍走火的意外情勢均不會發生；以提供吾人從事國家安全政策及國防戰略規劃相關人員參考研究與運用。 / In order to understand the behavior of a country, it is necessary to learn its behavior in a macro scale, and the representation of such behaviors is known as the “Culture”. From the strategic culture perspective, it provides an in-depth understanding of a country’s use of military forces, as well as the prediction of future wars. Especially for the military personnel who are the key to the national security, they shall have the understanding and knowledge to the People’s Republic of China’s initiation on wars; through the study of strategic culture, examples of PRC’s use of military power, research of PRC’s initiation on wars, I shall fulfill my duty by providing recommendation towards the national security strategies in order to protect the country. To the Republic of China, the PRC from the cross strait is the biggest threat to our country’s survival and development, under the unbalance of military power, PRC constantly provokes and threatens by stating “not giving up the use of force”. In contrast, Taiwan is much more low-profile in the military preparation, politics, and diplomacy. This is a strong indicator that the PRC’s military force has the capability and could to use its power to unify Taiwan. Currently the biggest obstacle between the two sides is the territorial dispute from sovereignty, and it is a subject that can easily trigger wars. It is an important subject for Taiwan to deal with under pressure. Many of the existing academic researches focus on the policy aspect and less on the theoretical perspective. In fact, through the theoretical interpretation of cross-strait interaction and future development can strengthen the content and depth of policy recommendations, and the future safety development. Through the use of strategic culture as the research methodology, it will identify the probability of cross-strait conflict, the PRC’s political execution of military power, tactics, and effectiveness. This strategic cultural perspective may provide new definition and policy recommendation, as it studies the decision maker’s strategic preferences and their tactics. Therefore, the military power plays a significant role in the development of the cross-strait safety, and by analyzing the PRC’s strategic culture and research of its military strategy and war mode, will provide in-depth understanding of the circumstances under which the PRC will stop at nothing to solve the problem with war, and to avoid misunderstanding or misinterpretation through the strategic culture from both sides. This will further prevent wars from occurred by accidents: hence, this national security policy and defense strategic referencing may provide values to be researched and utilized by the associated members.

Historically, the USA and Russian Federation have been two world powers that used to compete for a dominant power position in the bipolar world and spread influence on less developed countries. Relationships between the USA and Russia have mostly been complex and tense,with several escalation periods during the Cold War. Relationships between the USA and Russia in the 21st century can also be characterized by complexity and ambiguousness. The issues emerged in the process of power struggle created more tension between countries. This study aims to research framing Russia in the National Security Strategy of the United States of America issued from 2002 to 2022. The thesis also includes a history of USA-Russia relationships, and a historical review of the National Security Strategy issued since 1986. The theory that is chosen for the research is social constructivism. Within a single case-study design,I use the framing analysis method to apply to data gathered from the empirical materials –original texts of the National Security Strategy of the United States of America that are total seven within the mentioned period. Along with other conclusions, I found a tendency of negative framing after 2014 when Russia annexed Crimea and the persuasive presence of such positive frames as partnership and development, and negative frames – threat, regress, economic impact and competitive nature of relationships between countries. The degree of attention of the USA towards Russia switched periodically from being reasonably even in four issues of the National Security Strategy to bringing Russia in focus. The USA brought Russia to the most attention in 2022 and was least concentrated on Russia in the 2021 report.