This thesis seeks to understand the current dynamics of misperceptions in Southeast Asia. The paper would focus on three actors in the region: China, the U.S., and a representative state of ASEAN, Vietnam. The actors would be examined in the context of the South China Sea disputes. The essential goal of U.S. policymakers it to achieve peace and stability in the region by building a liberal order, but the existence of misperceptions makes it highly challenging. The misperceptions stem from the fact that each actor has to predict what paradigm what other actors’ actions are based on in the region. In order to reduce misperception, there must be a high level of trust derived from consistent rhetoric accompanied with actions. The paper finds that the problem lies in the fact that to achieve a coherent foreign policy that other actors can interpret consistently, there must be a convergence of domestic politics and other states’ actions that allows each actor to have a positive and constructive interpretation of its options. The paper examines how domestic politics can often hinder a coherent foreign policy that eliminates confusion for other actors. Furthermore, in the case study between the three actors, China, the U.S., and Vietnam, will demonstrate how actors’ behaviors and actions can be changing due to other actors and domestic politics. Therefore, the paper suggests several policies that the U.S. needs to take in order to reduce the tension between domestic politics and other states’ actions.

自二十世紀四○年代末期以來，菲律賓對中共的外交政策與菲中關係經歷了戲劇性的變化，大致可以分為4個時期：從二十世紀四○年代末到六○年代末和七○年代初的近20年，親美主義與反共的意識形態形成了這一時期菲律賓的對外政策，意識形態與國家安全則是菲國對中共政策的主要考量，菲律賓奉行對中共完全「隔離」的冷戰政策；從七○年代初到九○年代初的近20年中，隨著冷戰體系的逐漸坍塌，菲律賓對外政策從重意識形態和政治轉向為發展外交，從而決定與中共建交，而國家安全在菲中關係中的作用則下降；從九○年代初到二十一世紀初，菲中關係由於後冷戰時期東亞地區格局的變動，以及菲中在南海的爭端，菲國再次評估中共對其國家安全的影響，從而又一次調整與美國的關係，希望借助美國的力量來制衡中共；而自2001年亞羅育總統上台以來，開啟了菲中關係的新時代，雙方建立了戰略合作伙伴關係，步入了雙邊關係的「黃金時期」，並延續至現任總統艾奎若三世。 在菲中關係的4個歷史時期，意識形態、美國因素、共產黨活動、歷史遺產、華僑華人、領海爭端、臺灣問題、政治結構、經濟關係等一系列因素從國內與國際的層面相互關聯和作用，此消彼長，共同影響了菲律賓的對中共外交政策。 就菲中關係發展的未來趨勢而言，菲中關係將主要受菲國國內政治的影響，傳統的美國因素仍不容忽視，同時，雙方在南海上的爭端儘管暫時擱置，但仍充滿不確定性，這些因素都限制了菲中關係的發展，但中共仍然可以在很大程度上利用菲律賓國內的政治、經濟需求來主導未來菲中關係的發展。 / Philippines’ China Policy and Philippines-Sino relations have undergone dramatic changes since the World WarII., and can be divided into four phrases. During the first period, from the late 1940s to the late 1960s and early 70s, the Pro-U.S. principal and anti-communist ideology, two factors formed the Philippines’ foreign policy. Ideology and national security were Philippines’ prime considerations, Philippines pursued a fully isolation Policy towards China. During the second phrase, from the early 1970s and the early 1990s, with the gradual collapse of the Cold War system, Philippines’ foreign policy has shifted from ideology-centric to politics-centric, the development of diplomacy has become the leading foreign policy thought, the above policy based on national security and ideology was declined, in this context, Philippines finally opened its door to People Republic of China. The third phrase started from the early 1990s and ended at the beginning of the21st century, during which Philippines’ idea on national security was reshaped the new structure of East Asia in the post-Cold War times, and the dispute between Philippines and PRC, Philippines re-evaluated PRC’s influence to her national security. Philippines hoped to introduce USA’s power to balance China in this region. A new time for Philippines-Sino was activated since President Arroyo came into power in 2001, in this period, both sides agreed to establish strategic partner relations in 2004. The Philippine-Sino relation has reached the “Golden Era” and continued up to now the president Aquino III. In the four stages of Philippines-Sino relations, ideology, the United States, the Communist Party of the Philippines and its rebellion, historical heritage, and overseas Chinese, territorial dispute, Taiwan issue, Philippines’ political structure, economic relations and other factors, interact and intersect from the international level and national level, and finally decide Philippines’ China Policy. As far as the future of bilateral relations between Philippines and PRC is concerned, though mostly decided by domestic politics, Philippines-Sino relations cannot yet break away from historic factors like America. And even though the two sides have put away the South China Sea dispute, it still remained so many uncertainties. All these factors have limited the developments of Philippines-Sino relations. Anyway, China still can, to great extend, lead the to-be relations through its strong economic and political power.

自從1995年菲律賓與中共在美濟礁發生衝突以來，雙方在南海主權議題上時而緊張、時而和緩。歷經羅慕斯時期(1992年~1998年)的對峙衝撞、埃斯特拉達 (1998年~2001年)的冷靜淡化、亞羅育 (2001年~2010年)的低調迴避，步入艾奎諾三世時期(2010年~)之後訴諸國際法庭的法律戰，菲、中關係轉為對立緊繃。 冷戰後的4位菲律賓總統大致是採行「避險」策略，以便在中、美的拉扯下夾縫求生。菲國的策略揉合了「扈從」與「制衡」的概念，此與東協各國盛行的「大國平衡」策略相近，既要拉攏美國與日本，也要扯進中國大陸。菲律賓國家政策堅守「區域安全仰仗美國」與「經濟發展緊抓中共」兩大主軸，難以避免地會陷入「地緣政治」與「地緣經濟」的角力之中。至於中共在處理與鄰國的南海爭端上，則是秉持「鬥而不破」的原則，對付菲律賓的各種挑釁行為，採取的是「裁剪式」策略，為菲律賓量身打造相應的各種手段與方法。 宥於菲國薄弱的軍事實力，以及菲、美同盟的夥伴關係，可以預期的，在艾奎諾三世任期結束之前，菲律賓在南海議題上仍會不斷發聲，並且以法律戰持續與中共抗衡，以便獲取更多籌碼來維護國家利益。至於艾氏的繼任者，預測將會大幅修補對中關係，擺回「親中」的外交路線。 / Since the Mischief Reef dispute broke out between the Philippines and China in 1995, the relations between the two countries have been unstable when it comes to sovereignty issues over South China Sea. From the confrontation period of Fidel Valdes Ramos (1992~1998), the relaxation strategy of Joseoh Ejercito Estrada (1998~2001), the avoidance attitude of Gloria Macapagal Arroyo (2001~2010), to the Law War Stage of Benigno S. Aquino III (2010~ ), now the China-Philippines relation has turned into an antagonistic one. The 4 Philippines presidents after the end of the cold war have roughly adopted hedging strategies in order to survive from the tug-of-war between China and America. The Philippines employs a strategy that combines bandwagoning and balancing, similar to ASEAN’s equilibrium strategy among big countries, drawing America and Japan over to its side and forcing mainland China to get involved. The Philippine national policy sticks to two principles: “Relying on America for Regional Security” and “Grasping China for Economic Development”. The policy unavoidably makes the country fall into the wrestling of “Geo-Politics” and “Geo-Economics.” As for China, it maintains the principle of fighting over core interests but will not break the relationship. Facing the various provocative actions of the Philippines, China adopts a tailored strategy with corresponding means and methods to handle the Philippines. Due to the weak military capabilities and the alliance relations with America, it is predictable that before Benigno S. Aquino III finish his term as the Philippines president, the country will continue to bark on South China Sea issues and try to contend with China by law so as to obtain more advantages in protecting its national interests. As for Aquino’s successor, predictably he/she will substantially repair the relations with China and regain pro-china policies.

This dissertation aims to discover the hidden pattern and rationales behind China's South China Sea policies over the last one hundred years from the perspective of Chinese strategic culture. A historical-cultural approach is a powerful tool in uncovering deeper understandings of the Chinese way of policy making and strategy on issues such as the South China Sea. The key research questions include: first, is there any historical legitimacy in China's sovereignty claim over the South China Sea islands? Second, do Beijing's South China Sea policies in various periods have any regularity or pattern, and how did they serve China's grand strategies at the time? By utilizing extensive Chinese and English primary sources and other sources, this study conducts a comprehensive and in-depth analysis of the South China Sea issue from the framework of Chinese strategic culture.