首页> 外文学位 >Strategic ambiguity: Thoughtful engagement or a reckless gamble? The factors of the 1995--96 Taiwan strait crisis.
【24h】

Strategic ambiguity: Thoughtful engagement or a reckless gamble? The factors of the 1995--96 Taiwan strait crisis.

机译:战略上的模棱两可:周到的参与还是鲁ck的赌博? 1995--96年台湾海峡危机的因素。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

The United States has used strategic ambiguity as a means to deter war and prevent conflict between China and Taiwan since 1950. The closest these actors came to war was arguably the 1995-96 Crisis in the Taiwan Strait. The research question I investigate in this paper is: Was the United States' use of strategic ambiguity the major factor preventing war in the 1995-96 Taiwan Strait Crisis? To determine the presence of strategic ambiguity (the deliberate refusal to explicitly state one's plans and intentions) in the crisis, I analyzed major actions of the United States, China and Taiwan; determined their impacts based on press reporting, official government statements or speeches in response to these actions and observed military action; and found that ambiguous actions resulted in a decrease in tension whereas clear actions resulted in an increase in tension between the actors. Alternatively, I researched other factors (China's domestic and economic situation, China's status in the international community, and China's demonstrated capability to wage war) to determine their role in preventing war. I found that these factors also had a role in preventing war but could not disprove that strategic ambiguity was the major factor. The strategy of ambiguity was found to be of utility still today and should continue to be used by the United States in its policies with China and Taiwan, or other three party relationships.
机译:自1950年以来,美国就一直以战略模糊性作为威慑战争和防止中国与台湾之间冲突的手段。这些参与者之间最亲近战争的当属1995-96年台湾海峡危机。我在本文中研究的研究问题是:美国对战略歧义的使用是否是阻止1995-96年台湾海峡危机中战争的主要因素?为了确定在危机中是否存在战略歧义(故意拒绝明确陈述自己的计划和意图),我分析了美国,中国和台湾的主要行动;根据新闻报道,政府官方声明或针对这些行动的讲话和观察到的军事行动,确定其影响;并发现模棱两可的行为导致紧张感减少,而明确的行为导致行为者之间的紧张感增加。另外,我研究了其他因素(中国的国内和经济状况,中国在国际社会中的地位以及中国表现出的发动战争的能力)以确定其在预防战争中的作用。我发现这些因素在防止战争中也有作用,但不能证明战略歧义是主要因素。人们发现歧义策略在今天仍然有用,在美国与中国和台湾的政策或其他三党关系中应继续使用歧义策略。

著录项

  • 作者

    Ogden, Thomas M.;

  • 作者单位

    Georgetown University.;

  • 授予单位 Georgetown University.;
  • 学科 Asian Studies.;Political Science International Relations.
  • 学位 M.A.
  • 年度 2010
  • 页码 59 p.
  • 总页数 59
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号