南海衝突與美菲同盟之轉變

Abstract

2016年杜特蒂上台後，美菲關係面臨惡化的跡象。新的菲律賓政府對於美國其中一項的批評，即是歐巴馬在南海衝突事件的消極不作為。然而，若實際比較1990年代的南海衝突，歐巴馬政府在2010年代的南海衝突事件上可說是較柯林頓政府積極，但在危機後卻造成同盟關係的退化。對於這樣的現象，本文試圖從美國的大戰略與亞太政策切入，剖析兩個時段美國對南海問題的立場，同時援引聯盟理論中不對稱同盟可能的矛盾立場，試圖尋找可能導致此種差距的原因。根據研究結果，儘管歐巴馬政府在南海問題上確實採取較積極的動作，但由於其訊號傳遞的模糊性以及中國崛起，導致缺乏對中國有效的嚇阻元素，未能有效解決中國實質控制南海島礁的事實，進而使作為同盟的菲律賓未能如柯林頓時期獲得充分安全感，故產生對美國的質疑。

After President Rodrigo Duterte came to power in 2016, the relationship between the U.S. and the Philippines soon faced serious challenges. Besides the different attitudes on “War on Drug” and human rights, the biggest criticism came from the new Philippines government was that the Obama administration acted passively in the South China Sea. However, comparing it with what Clinton administration did in 1990s, Obama was believed to play more active role in the region. To explain the phenomenon, the thesis examines the U.S. grand strategies and its Asia-Pacific policies to analyze the American attitude toward South China Sea disputes in 1990s and 2010s. Also, the thesis uses alliance theories to find out the possible conflicts inside the asymmetric alliance. According to the evidences, despite the fact that Obama administration took active military measures to challenge China’s territorial claim, the Chinese growing military power and Obama’s vague signal made it harder to deter China from occupying islands and rocks in the South China Sea than before. Therefore, the Philippines felt insecure and dissatisfied after yielding numerous privileges on VFA and EDCA in order to get the security commitment from the United States.