During the 2024 US presidential election, a new round of debate emerged within the US strategic community regarding the “end state” of its strategy toward China. The main viewpoints in the debate include “regime-based end state” narrative, “order-based end state” narrative, “policy-based end state” narrative, and “no end state” narrative. The debate indicates that the US strategic perception of China is becoming increasingly negative. At this point in time, it is difficult to predict which of these viewpoints will be adopted by the Trump administration should he assume office. A consensus on the “end state” within the US strategic community is still far from being formed.
John Gaddis,a famous Cold War historian in the United States,has been involved in the study of grand strategy since the mid-1970s. In the 1980s,he put forward the challenging propositions that strategies of containment include two modes of “symmetry”and “asymmetry”and that “Cold War is a long peace”. After the end of the Cold War,in his research on theories of grand strategy,he emphasized that excellent grand strategists and historians should share a series of interconnected ideas and working principles,and these principles were internalized in his academic reflections on the American international political theories in the Cold War era. Based on his own research,Gaddis has put forward many strategic suggestions to the American government in different periods. His grand strategic thoughts vividly show the anxious mentality of some contemporary American intellectual elites on the issue of maintaining American hegemony,but this academic practice also provides a practical and operational starting point for breaking the traditional barriers between disciplines.
The increasing urgency and complexity of the Arctic issue has given it an increasing priority on the U.S. government’s agenda. Scientists and research institutions involved in Arctic research have Arctic expertise and play an important role in the formation of U. S. policy. Direct ways for scientists to participate in the formulation of U.S. Arctic policy include serving in government agencies,attending congressional hearings to provide legislative advice,and indirectly influencing Arctic policy as advisors through NGOs,the media,and other channels. The effective participation of U. S.scientists in Arctic affairs has promoted the establishment of the U.S． “Arctic Power”,clarified U. S. Arctic interests,and promoted the creation of international norms to safeguard U. S. Arctic interests. The process of U. S.scientists’ participation in Arctic policy is also affected by factors such as U.S. political polarization,pressure from interest groups,and the questioning of scientific authority.
Traditionally,global value chain restructuring has been based on longterm changes in national competitiveness. Today,when the competition and game of major powers have intensified significantly,the return and use of industrial policy as a national competitive strategy tool and means enables the state to intervene and strongly reconstruct the global value chain through domestic policies,among which the industrial policy of the United States has changed most significantly and directly. Throughout the periodic fluctuation and change of American industrial policies,its intention to serve the U. S.national strategy is very obvious. At present,the implementation of a targeted industrial policy through the global value chain is not only due to the need to improve its own industrial structural capacity,but also reflects the United States’ maintenance and competition for global value chain power.Given the existence of U. S. capacity in the global value chain,the implementation of U.S. industrial policy will destroy the existing efficient division of labor in the global value chain and hinder the smooth connection of the global value chain network,which in turn may promote the emergence of a“dual structure”in the global value chain and drive the transformation of the global value chain into a national strategic value chain.
The United States is not yet a state party of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea（ UNCLOS）,but the Convention is an important part of its discourse system for seas and oceans. During the third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea,the U.S. promoted and largely dominated the negotiation of various parts of UNCLOS and the drafting of the texts,especially the dispute settlement mechanism. The U. S. established its clear policy objectives for the dispute settlement mechanism of UNCLOS before the beginning of the Conference,including the overall design and framework of the mechanism of the dispute settlement. The U. S.delegation to the Conference was guided by U.S. interests; they adhered to their own ideas,but made appropriate compromises if necessary. The final texts of UNCLOS not only basically met the interests of the U.S.,but were also welcomed by the other countries. Several U.S. delegates also played an important role in the process. The interests of the U. S. have been deeply embedded in the relevant provisions of UNCLOS,and the U. S. can enjoy institutional privileges through these rules. Accordingly,no matter whether it acceded to the Convention or not,the U.S. would enjoy these institutional privileges.
Since originally declared in 1950,U. S. ADIZ rules have changed greatly,and a lot of provisions have been significantly modified. Despite numerous adjustments,U.S. ADIZ rules have consistently covered the airspace over not only its land,territorial waters and the high seas or exclusive economic zones adjacent to its coast,but also undisputed territorial airspace of other neighboring countries to date. At first,the U. S. blurred the distinction between civil and military aircraft in terms of ADIZ rules applicability,but from 1961 to 2003 it made clear that the rules only apply to civil aircraft. Though in 2004 U.S. ADIZ regulations were amended to indicate that the rules applied to “all aircraft”,it can be inferred from practice and related domestic legal documents that the regulations are not applicable to foreign military aircraft. In terms of applicable conditions,U. S. ADIZ rules have been restricted since the 1961 amendment — the application to aircraft “merely transiting”has been explicitly excluded,and “into,within,or out of the United States through an ADIZ”has hitherto existed as a restrictive condition. U.S. ADIZ practice is unified with its interpretation of international law on “freedom of navigation,”relying on its powerful military might,and mainly utilizing “the method of exclusion”to identify “real security threats”,the U. S. has striven to achieve an offense-defense balance in the areas beyond its own territorial airspace as well as other countries’ airspace.
American conservatism is a trend of political thought and a “political process”that has been shaped by various factors such as the international environment,economic structures,interest groups,ethnic groups,population,and other realistic considerations. The evolution of American conservatism has been significantly influenced by the transformation of radical liberalism in the United States. The changes in American conservatism have had a profound impact on the implementation of Republican policies and have contributed to the polarization of American politics. During the Cold War,a coalition of traditional conservatives,southern conservatives and neoconservatives sought to replace the New Deal coalition. The rise of conservatism peaked under the George W. Bush administration,but has since been in decline. Donald Trump’s governing style embodies national conservatism and populist conservatism,which opposes radical liberalism and seeks to revitalize conservatism. However,Trump’s defeat in the 2020 election has created divisions within the Republican Party,which urgently needs to reconcile its factions and develop conservatism. The outcome of the2022 midterms reveals the dual nature of the Trump effect and the need to revise the Republican Party’s highly conservative social and cultural policies. The trajectory of American conservatism and future changes within the Republican Party have implications for bipartisan politics and U. S. domestic and foreign policy.
After nearly one hundred years of development,the discipline of American Studies in America has displayed its distinctive character. The United States’ American Studies is essentially a product of social changes and shifting intellectual tides. It is political by its very nature as well as academic,interdisciplinary and transnational. Under the strong influence from America’s social conflicts and intellectual currents,American Studies in the U. S. has been growing amidst questions,debates,opportunities and challenges. American Studies in America reflects its regionality in terms of disciplinary development,paradigms,approaches,research targets,purposes and tasks,and the training of students with interdisciplinary methods.In the context of great global changes,it is highly important to promote American Studies as a discipline and an area of study for both undergraduate and graduate programs in Chinese universities and colleges.
In the early summer of 2014, the U.S. news media began to pay more attention to immigrants crossing the southwest border and declared that a new “unauthorized immigration crisis” was breaking out. However, the United States has not faced a rise in illegal immigration in recent years, and the prevalence of the “immigration crisis” rhetoric reflects the widespread concern and anxiety caused by the arrival of a wave of “unaccompanied alien children” who come mainly from the three Central American Northern Triangle countries: Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras. Among the waves of “unaccompanied alien children” from Central America, the share of females and younger children has been rising in the past few years, most of whom entered through one or a few U.S. cities and voluntarily presented themselves to enforcement authorities when they reached U. S. soil. The surge of “unaccompanied alien children” from Central America is not only related to the external pull factors such as American long-term intervention in the region and the recent adjustment of American immigration policy,but also driven by the region’s internal push factors of political instability,economic disorder and rampant homicide. In addition, it is inseparable from the international smuggling organizations’ activities in the region, including deliberate propaganda. The arrival of “unaccompanied alien children” from Central America has had a profound impact on the U.S. economy and finance, party politics, border control and U. S. policy towards Central America.
The COVID-19 pandemic, the ongoing Ukraine crisis and the growing rivalry between key powers at the moment have highlighted the vulnerability of the U.S. supply chain as well as the risk confronting the global supply chain. President Biden advocated the strategy to rebuild supply chain security and resilience when he was elected to office. His strategy included promoting the redesign of local and foreign policies, reviving the U.S. manufacturing sector by moving the industrial supply chain, and encouraging“onshore outsourcing” of important sectors. Additionally, the U.S. is developing an integrated North American supply chain to support “friend-shoring” manufacturing in critical industries, strengthen collaboration with like-minded nations, and establish an international “friend-shoring” supply chain that is “de-sinicizing”. The supply chain strategy of the Biden administration demonstrates the localization, regionalization, and camp trends. The main objective is to lessen reliance on China’s supply chain by restructuring the global supply chain, strengthening U.S. industrial advantages to counteract China’s domestic supply network’s fragility, and engaging China in strategic rivalry. It takes time to reshape global supply networks, and the Biden administration is impeded by conflicting interests,interdependence issues and internal strife. The Biden administration’s plan to reshape the supply chain is in opposition to the globalization of economy.Not only will it exacerbate the uneven growth of the global economy, but it will also encourage its fragmentation, collectivism and securitization, exacerbate the fierce rivalry in the Indo-Pacific region, and cause a sharp increase in geopolitical concerns. China should respond by taking various steps to control these risks.
Supply chain security has become a strategic issue for U.S. domestic and foreign affairs. The shock of the Covid-19 pandemic on global supply chains and its subsequent risks for the U.S. supply chains seem to be a trigger; the hegemonic concern aroused by Sino-U.S. industrial and technological competition is at the root. Correspondingly, the Biden Administration’s national supply chain security strategy is a new exploration aimed at maintaining the U.S. hegemony. Beginning with previous scholarship in supply chain security and the interactive logic of the U. S. domestic and foreign policies, this paper establishes a theoretical framework of analytic eclecticism integrating the dual logic of domestic and foreign affairs to discuss the national supply chain security strategy. The features of this strategy include state capitalism, populism, pseudo-multilateralism, and the securitization and ideologicalization of supply chains. The national supply chain security strategy not only impacts global supply chain system, but also accelerates the process of anti-globalization and intensifies Sino-U.S. competition. It is worth noting that several structural contradictions, such as domestic economic strains, political polarization, tensions within coalitions and the distribution of industry-technology-related skills, still prohibit the implementation of the U.S. supply chain security strategy. It remains unclear whether this strategy works fairly in rivaling China in the future.
One of the major aspects of the anti-racist struggle in the USA is the movement currently conducted by left intellectuals in the cultural and educational arenas, which takes critical race theory（ CRT） and the “1619Project” as theoretical frameworks, teaching CRT and the “1619 Project”in public schools and holding mandatory diversity, equity and inclusion（DEI） training in federal agencies as major forms. The purpose is to encourage the American public to join in the fight against racism by exploring the historical, institutional and ideological reasons of the persistence of racialism in the United States. While promoting the spread of anti-racism related theory and concepts, the movement has also ignited profound political, legislative, juridical and historical disputes over issues such as whether there is systemic racism in the United States and if CRT and the “1619Project” should be taught in the public schools between the white supremacists and minor ethnicities and civil right groups, between racial liberalism and racial conservatism, and between the two major parties and intellectuals. The rise of the left intellectual anti-racism movement is a theoretical reflection for the continued existence of racialism in the United States after the 1960s civil rights movement and a push back against the rise of the white nationalist movement of the last decades, especially after Trump took power. The disputes fundamentally reflect the national identity crisis that Americans face, and also show that education and culture are becoming the lastest battle fields of racial struggles.
The U.S. Supreme Court held that a woman’s right to an abortion was protected by the U.S. Constitution inRoe v. Wadein 1973, yet the U.S. Constitution does not guarantee such a right at all according to the 2022Dobbs case. The Court has reached diametrically opposed conclusions not because the U.S. Constitution has been amended, but because the composition of the Court has changed. Since the 1980s, conservatives have replaced several liberal justices and have achieved a complete domination of the Court by 2020. This change has led the Court to issue constitutional interpretations on a variety of issues that differ from the precedents, including campaign finance, voting rights, free exercise of religion and separation of religion and state, gun control, government regulation as well as abortion,resulting in a rather comprehensive anti-liberal judicial revolution. Under the U.S. Constitution, the non-elected judicial branch is supposed to exercise its power within the constraints of a general democratic framework.Such constraints have been significantly weakened in recent years, including the emergence of “minority judges”. The rise of judicial power, coupled with the decline in such constraints, is a challenge to, and will continue to challenge the current constitutional system of the United States.
现代国际贸易体制是建立在第二次世界大战之后形成的布雷顿森林体系之上的.从起初的关税及贸易总协定到现在的世界贸易组织,美国在引领多边贸易体制构建的同时,也在不断调整自己的对外贸易政策.自特朗普政府上台后,美国频频退出一些国际组织,还对包括中国在内的部分世界贸易组织成员采取贸易保护主义政策.世界贸易组织不同于关税及贸易总协定,包括争端解决机构做出的裁决在内,世界贸易组织规则对其成员具有强制约束力.世贸组织成员任何涉及多边贸易体制和其他成员利益的举动都可能产生"牵一发而动全身"的效应.美国对其他成员采取贸易制裁措施摆脱不了世界贸易组织规则的约束.因此,从多边贸易体制视角研究美国贸易政策是一条可行的路径,而美国贸易政策的变化也为观察多边贸易体制的走向提供了一个独特的视角.
乌克兰危机期间,拜登政府不断向国内外公众及时地、大规模地披露经过解密的国家情报.美国国家安全部门、美国私营部门,以及美国盟友或伙伴国政府及非政府组织是此次公开披露情报活动的重要参与者;拜登政府将"全政府—全社会"组织原则应用于公开披露情报,注重各色披露平台之间的协调、配合,形成以拜登政府为关键节点的公开披露平台网络.从披露的内容上看,此次公开披露情报不仅涉及俄罗斯军事能力(包括陈兵俄乌边境的人数、装备及其动态),且涉及军力部署背后的战略动机(包括俄罗斯对乌特别军事行动的前景、时间和理由).拜登政府在此次乌克兰危机期间的公开披露情报有其深刻的战略逻辑,最终服务于美国的对俄混合战争.美国对俄混合战争倚重经济制裁和外交孤立,为使这两种手段产生最佳效果,需利用信息战为强化经济制裁和外交孤立制造舆论氛围,但俄罗斯在舆论宣传领域的相对优势制约美国信息战的舆论影响.拜登政府在乌克兰危机中实施以"预先驳斥"为导向的对俄信息战,并借助公开披露情报,以国家情报的权威性和及时性助推"预先驳斥",以国家情报作为"预先驳斥"信息战的关键主题和内容的素材,并凭借协调、合作的披露平台网络,扩大、提升关键主题和内容的传播范围和速度,为制裁和外交孤立的有效实施创造条件.
《美国研究》(双月刊)创刊于1987年,是中国社会科学院美国研究所和中华美国学会联合主办的学术性刊物,主要刊登中国学者研究美国社会各个方面的文章,包括美国政治、经济、外交、军事、法律、科技、文化、历史、艺术,以及思潮等各个领域,反映中国的美国研究水平,具有相当的权威性.欢迎海内外学者赐稿,本刊不以任何形式收取版面费.
美国驻普鲁士前大使、国际法学家亨利·惠顿的《国际法原理》一书在面世后的百年间(1836～1936),通过不断再版和修订,成为国际法学科发展中的一座里程碑,对国际法学科做出了持久性的贡献.由丁韪良翻译的该书的中译本《万国公法》影响巨大,在其传播过程中,时常出现读者"只知译者丁韪良,不识作者惠顿"的情况.自20世纪80年代,我国学界有关丁韪良和《万国公法》的研究 日益增多,但对惠顿和《国际法原理》较少涉及.此外,由于缺乏对一手材料的溯源和掌握,我国学界在丁韪良翻译《万国公法》的问题上看法不一.本文主要依据惠顿和丁韪良的档案,以及《国际法原理》和《万国公法》在中国、美国、日本、加拿大的诸多现存版本等材料,梳理惠顿的生平,分析《国际法原理》的成书、评价与影响,以期厘清《万国公法》的成书过程、翻译意图、翻译蓝本等问题.
拜登总统白宫国家安全委员会中国事务主任杜如松的新著《持久战:中国取代美国秩序的大战略》引发美国内外各界广泛关注.该书基于美国霸权想象构建中国"大战略",声称中国自冷战结束以来在军事、政治和经济层面采取钝化、建制与全球扩张战略,以便实现所谓取代美国霸权秩序的长期目标.从美国政府尤其是拜登行政当局对华政策的动向来看,该书已成为美国两党政治精英制定对华政策的重要"指南".评述该书的弊端与不足,不仅有利于理解当下美国对华政策的错误之根源,而且有助于把握和研判未来较长时间内美国对华政策的大致走向.
主持人的话：2022年美国中期选举是2020年大选以来美国政坛最为重要的一次洗牌。拜登政府面对“期中大考”，而共和党人则跃跃欲试，希望凭借民意的回摆获得更多与民主党较量的政治空间。如果2020年大选的结果——特别是对特朗普的否定——初步展现出了某些新态势的话，2022年中期选举显然是一次验证这些新态势的最佳观察点。与此同时，虽然不同于大选对内外政策的重要影响，但2022年中期选举仍然为拜登政府未来两年的政策议程设定了新的华盛顿环境，而其影响也会逐渐积蓄为对2024年大选的关键牵动。
"9·11"事件构筑起美国"千禧一代"与"Z世代"青年共通的政治认同与独特的社会体验.美国青年世代的政治认同变迁体现在进步主义意识愈加明显、身份认同取代"经济—阶层"认同、心理感知取代言论自由权与妥协/磋商机制三方面;呈现出政治认同主体两极化、议题巴尔干化、渠道多元化、表达暴力化四个基本特征."美国式恐惧"未能使民众释放政治认同与团结的积极力量,反而激发出其惧外排外情绪,进而为国内极端势力的滋生提供了土壤,激化了内部对抗.政治生态的变化深刻影响着美国青年的政治认同,使其政治认同主体进一步分裂,政治认同表达方式更为激进.青年世代的政治认同与价值观问题不仅是加剧美国国内政治撕裂的原因之一,也是影响未来中美关系走向的重要因素.
