【新刊速递】《中国国际政治季刊》(CJIP), Vol.14, No.3, 2021
期刊简介
《中国国际政治季刊》(The Chinese Journal of International Politics)创始于2006年，现任主编孙学峰教授，是由牛津大学出版社每季度出版的经同行评议的学术期刊，旨在推进系统的和严谨的国际关系研究，提供经同行评审的原创研究文章和分析评论文章。该刊致力于为学界提供一个智识对话和反思性讨论的论坛，主要涉及但不限于与中国或东亚国际关系有关的议题，目前该刊影响因子为3.649.
本期目录
1. 中国人工智能领域的安全化
Securitization of Artificial Intelligence in China
2. 域外大国阴影下的区域主义：基于中亚及其他地区的博弈论解释
Regionalism in the Shadow of Extraregional Great Powers: A Game Theoretical Explanation of Central Asia and Beyond
3. 中美战略竞争与“透幕”的降临
China-US Strategic Competition and the Descent of a Porous Curtain
4. 中国与俄罗斯的技术合作：地缘政治、经济和政权安全
China’s Technology Cooperation with Russia: Geopolitics, Economics, and Regime Security
5. 海上丝绸之路中的代理与自主：关于吉布提多拉莱集装箱码头纠纷的考察
Agency and Autonomy in the Maritime Silk Road Initiative: An Examination of Djibouti’s Doraleh Container Terminal Disputes
01
题目：Securitization of Artificial Intelligence in China
作者：曾敬涵，英国兰卡斯特大学（Lancaster University）政治、哲学和宗教系教授，兼任兰卡斯特大学孔子学院外方院长和兰卡斯特大学国际合作主管（中国）。主要研究方向为政治和国际关系，尤其是中国崛起过程中的国内和国际政治。
摘要：本文研究的是中国人工智能(AI)的安全政治。作者以安全化为分析框架，研究了中国官方的人工智能话语，并探讨了人工智能如何成为一个安全问题。文章认为，中国中央政府正在将人工智能安全化，以动员地方政府、市场主体、知识分子和普通公众。对技术和体制安全的历史性焦虑导致了中国人工智能政治中安全话语的兴起，大国竞争引发的紧张局势也是推动因素。尽管有助于说服国内行为体，但这种安全化趋势可能不利于中国实现人工智能领域的重要目标，因为它将使其朝着一种内向的、技术民族主义的方向发展。这可能会严重损害中国的人工智能产业，并阻碍其实现领导全球的雄心。
This article studies the security politics of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in China. Using securitization as an analytical framework, it examines the official Chinese AI discourse and how AI is becoming a security matter. The article argues that the Chinese central government is securitizing AI to mobilize local states, market actors, intellectuals, and the general public. China’s historical anxieties about its technology and regime security needs are conducive to the rise of a security discourse in China’s AI politics, a trend also fuelled by tensions arising from great power competition. Although helpful in convincing domestic actors, this securitization trend could undermine Chinese key AI objectives by heading in an inward-looking, techno-nationalistic direction that may be seriously detrimental to China’s AI industry and leadership ambitions.
02
域外大国阴影下的区域主义：基于中亚及其他地区的博弈论解释
题目：Regionalism in the Shadow of Extraregional Great Powers: A Game Theoretical Explanation of Central Asia and Beyond
作者：唐世平，教育部特聘教授，复旦大学国际关系与公共事务学院陈树渠讲席教授。
摘要：本文为各种区域主义项目的演变建立了一个博弈论模型。文章认为，二战后世界的区域主义几乎总是在域外大国（extraregional great powers, EGPs）的阴影下发展：这些区域外大国通常是美国，但可以是其它的大国（比如，中国）。因此，域内大国（regional great powers, RGPs）和域内的中小国家（small-to-medium states, SMSs）在域外大国影响下的互动机制在区域主义项目的发展过程中扮演重要作用。本文以此为基础，建立了一个博弈论框架，并将这一模型应用于解释中亚区域主义项目的历史动态。本文尤其解释了为什么上海合作组织这个不被学者看好的区域主义项目能够脱颖而出，变得更加重要且富有活力。在中亚地区之外，本文也简要研究了其他三个地区的区域主义项目，进一步佐证了该模型的广泛适用性。
The article develops a game theoretical model for the evolution of various regionalism projects. It contends that regionalism in the post-World War II (WWII) world has almost always evolved in the shadow of extraregional great powers (EGPs), with the United States being the principal, but not the only, EGP. As such, how regional great powers (RGPs) and small-to-medium states (SMSs) within a region interact with each other in the shadow of EGPs are critical to the evolution of different regionalism projects. This setup leads to a game theoretical framework. Among the various regionalism projects, regionalism in Central Asia is an intriguing case. The model developed in this article implies that the sometimes competitive and sometimes cooperative interaction among SMSs, EGPs, and RGPs can best explain the historical dynamics of the regionalism project in Central Asia. In particular, the model explains why the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the regionalism project that has been proclaimed to be dead or close to be dead by many pundits, has become the more resilient and visible among the many regionalism projects within the region. The model also applies to other regionalism projects.
03
中美战略竞争与“透幕”的降临
题目：China-US Strategic Competition and the Descent of a Porous Curtain
作者：Jue Zhang（章珏）, 北京大学国际关系学院博士研究生；Jin Xu（徐进）, 中国社会科学院世界经济与政治研究所研究员。
摘要：自2019新冠肺炎（COVID-19）全球疫情爆发以来，中美战略对抗戏剧性地上升至一个新高度。在此期间，关于中美两国是否已开启“新冷战”的讨论也随之升温。围绕这一讨论形成了以下三项主要意见：第一种观点认为中美确实已经进入了“新冷战”的状态；第二种观点认为中美处在迈向“新冷战”的过程中；第三种观点则认为中美两国不会陷入“新冷战”。以上不同的观点反映了对“冷战”这一概念核心特征存在不同的学理性认识。从本质上来看，“冷战”的两个核心特征是意识形态对抗和代理人战争。然而，考虑到当前的中美战略竞争聚焦于技术领域而非意识形态领域，且任何一方都未发动任何代理人战争，使用“新冷战”这一概念是不合适的。相比之下，用“透幕”（Porous Curtain）来形容当前的中美关系则更为恰当。中美之间持续缩小的权力差距无疑促使了美国政府采取封锁与遏制的政策来抑制中国的大国崛起。然而，国际体系的深度融合和中美互动的历史惯性阻碍了美国对中国的全方位孤立。这一现象导致双边关系更具有渗透性的特征。虽然中美双边关系的未来或许不会乐观，但竞争并不必然导致冲突。正是基于这一原因，处理双边竞争关系以及在竞争中争取双边共存应当成为两国的主要任务。
Since the onset of the Coronavirus Disease 2019(COVID-19) global pandemic, Sino–US strategic rivalry has dramatically heightened to a pitch where there is a mounting discussion over whether or not China and the United States have embarked on a “new Cold War.” There are three main views in this regard. The first is that China and the United States have indeed entered a new Cold War; the second is that China and the United States are heading for a new Cold War; and the third is that China and the United States will not descend into a new Cold War. Different views reflect different scholarly understandings of the essential properties of the Cold War concept. Fundamentally, the two core features of the Cold War were ideological confrontation and proxy war. Considering that current US–China strategic competition is in the technological rather than ideological domain, and that neither side has instigated any proxy war; however, the phrase “new Cold War” is inappropriate; that of “Porous Curtain” is more apt. The ever-narrowing power gap between China and the United States has undoubtedly prompted the US government’s adoption of a policy of blockade and containment to curb China’s rising power. However, the deep integration of the international system and historical inertia of US–China interaction preclude the US’s complete isolation from China. This has resulted in bilateral relations of a more porous nature. Although the future may not be promising, competition does not necessarily lead to conflict. For this reason, managing the bilateral competitive relationship and striving towards coexistence under competition should be the key task of both countries.
04
中国与俄罗斯的技术合作：地缘政治、经济和政权安全
题目：China’s Technology Cooperation with Russia: Geopolitics, Economics, and Regime Security
作者：Christopher Weidacher Hsiung，瑞典国防研究局亚洲和中东项目研究员。
摘要：长期以来，技术合作一直是中国与俄罗斯双边交往的重要组成部分。然而近年来，中俄技术合作的显著增加，并且双方现在将这种互动视为当前和未来战略伙伴关系发展的一个核心层面。作者对两国的技术合作进行了分析，并尤为关注中俄两国在新兴技术和战略领域的合作。文章指出，对于中国加强与俄罗斯的接触可以有三种理解：（1）与美国的战略竞争加剧；（2）为扩大与俄罗斯的全面贸易和经济关系；（3）国内政权安全的激励。总的来说，尽管存在一些挑战，但加强技术合作将有助于继续扩大并加强中俄战略伙伴关系。需要注意的是，尽管这并不意味着中国和俄罗斯将正式结盟，但是技术合作将成为两国关系的一个关键组成部分，因为这类合作不仅减少了两国对西方技术的依赖，而且进一步巩固了已有的双边关系。
Technology cooperation has long constituted an important part in China’s bilateral engagement with Russia. In recent years, however, Sino-Russian technology cooperation has seen a remarkable increase and both sides now view such interaction as a core dimension in the current and future development of the strategic partnership. This article examines the two countries’ technological collaboration, focusing in particular on China’s engagement with Russia in emerging technologies and strategic domains. The article argues that three explanations account to explain closer engagement from China: (i) intensified strategic competition with the USA, (ii) broader efforts to expand the overall trade and economic relationship with Russia, and (iii) domestic regime security incentives. Overall, while there exist several challenges and obstacles, increased technology cooperation will continue to expand and also enhance the Sino-Russian strategic partnership. This does not mean that China and Russia will form a formal alliance, but technology cooperation will constitute a critical component in their bilateral relationship, as it reduces their dependence on Western technology, and further consolidates an already well-grounded bilateral relationship.
05
海上丝绸之路中的代理与自主：关于吉布提多拉莱集装箱码头纠纷的考察
题目：Agency and Autonomy in the Maritime Silk Road Initiative: An Examination of Djibouti’s Doraleh Container Terminal Disputes
作者：Benjamin Barton，诺丁汉大学马来西亚校区政治、历史与国际关系学院（PHIR）助理教授。
摘要：迪拜环球港务集团（DP World）和中国招商局港口集团（China Merchants Port）就位于吉布提的多拉莱集装箱码头（Doraleh Container Terminal）在香港高等法院持续的法律纠纷被草率地解读为中国经济治国方略的又一举动，并被宣传为斯里兰卡汉班托塔债转股协议的重演。然而，如果更仔细地审视这场争端就会发现，具体的细节似乎并不能为那些鼓吹中国利用“债务陷阱”以换取政治影响力的观点提供佐证。本文通过将吉布提精英代理和招商局的企业自主性相结合作为主要变量，批判了那些将中国国家大战略作为这场法律纠纷背后驱动力的错误观念。本研究主要利用从与多拉莱集装箱码头相关的各种法律纠纷中获得的未经研究的公开数据来证明这一点。
Touted as the second coming of the Hambantota debt-for-equity swap deal, the ongoing legal dispute pitting Dubai Ports (DP) World (United Arab Emirates) and China Merchants Port (CMP) over the Doraleh Container Terminal (DCT) (Djibouti) in front of the Hong Kong High Courts has been hastily interpreted as yet another act of Chinese economic statecraft. Yet, when looking more closely at the specifics of this dispute, it would appear that the evidence does not lend itself favourably to those who advocate the power of Chinese political leverage in return for “debt traps”. This article debunks the myth of Chinese grand strategy as the driving force behind the legal dispute over the DCT, by instead placing the combination of Djiboutian elite agency and CMP’s entrepreneurial autonomy as the primary causal variables. It does so by predominantly drawing on unexplored publicly available data obtained from the various legal disputes pertaining to the DCT.
编译 | 陈勇 常佳艺 赖永祯 董诗 谢菁
审校 | 姚博闻 陈想
排版 | 黄紫蓝 云琪布日
文章观点不代表本平台观点，本平台评译分享的文章均出于专业学习之用, 不以任何盈利为目的，内容主要呈现对原文的介绍，原文内容请通过各高校购买的数据库自行下载。
好好学习，天天“在看”