「一帶一路」與中國的中亞戰略 ：以中國和哈薩克斯坦與烏茲別克斯坦的經濟合作爲例

Abstract

蘇聯解體之後的新產生的中亞國家，給中國及其西部國界帶來了不穩定性。為了緩解這種不穩定因素，中國展開了許多融合與制度性的建設，從而加強了與中亞的互聯。2013年，中國宣佈了過程性的「一帶一路」戰略——一個基于中國的改革開放經驗的大規模發展方針。該戰略不但針對中亞國家與中國的共同發展，也涉及到了全球的發展，因而沒有合作範圍及領域的特定限制。 本研究在「一帶一路」戰略的背景下，就中國與哈薩克斯坦和烏茲別克斯坦的能源合作進行分析。為了更好的解釋中國的相关行動，本文引用John Mearsheimer的結構現實主義（Structural Realism）以及Robert Keohane 和Lisa Martin 的自由制度主義（Liberal Institutionalism）。前者用於解釋中國在合作上反映出的結構性經濟力量與影響力，而後者則著重於國家之間的制度不同引起的相對利益的積極結果。儘管到目前為止合作有很多有效的成果，但是兩邊合作歷史顯示，中國在一些方面沒有遵守戰略所設定的規則或標準。從現實主義的角度，中國的計劃面臨著中亞國家設立的多變法律條款所造成的種種障礙與限制。而從制度主義的角度來講，中亞國家與中國之間的制度建設有著促進中國與各國合作的功能性作用，但是無法達成兩邊都能夠平等獲益的結果。

After the breakdown of the Soviet Union, the newly emerged Central Asian countries left China with a feeling of uncertainty and insecurity to its Western frontier. In order to alleviate possible instabilities, China launched a number of integrational and institutional concepts, thus increasing its interlinkage with Central Asia. In 2013, China propagated the procedure-based One Belt One Road-strategy, a large scale development initiative which also relies on the Chinese Reform and Opening experience. The strategy not only targets the mutual development of Central Asia and China itself, but is of a world-wide extent without given limits in scope or field of cooperation area. This thesis analyses the performance of China within its energy cooperation along with Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan in terms of the One Belt One Road-strategy. In order to provide further explanations for the Chinese engagement, the thesis makes use of John Mearsheimer’s Structural Realism, as well as Robert Keohane and Lisa Martin’s Liberal Institutionalism. The first theory focuses on the structural economic power and influence reflected by the Chinese economy within the cooperation, whereas the second one focuses on the positive outcome of relative gains created by institutions between the respective countries. On the one hand, although the cooperation has gained a large variety of achievements, its past record has shown that China in certain respects didn’t abide by or correspond to its own rules and standards assumed for the strategy. From a realist perspective, there are obstacles and restrictions to the Chinese approach created by the Central Asian countries and also given by their various legal identities. From an institutionalist perspective however, institutions created for or within the cooperation are rather functional in terms of the fulfillment of the cooperation with every single country, but do not create outcomes both sides can equally profit from.