Bandwagoning for Profit: Bringing the Revisionist State Back In
Bandwagoning for Profit: Bringing the Revisionist State Back In
复制标题
追逐利润：让修正主义国家回归
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
1994
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Randall L. Schweller
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Randall L. Schweller
在盟友国家中，通常是与弱者还是与强者发生冲突？用国际关系理论的话来说：国家是倾向于平衡崛起的国家或联盟，还是倾向于迎合崛起的国家或联盟？回答这个问题，对制定大战略、界定切身利益至关重要。如果各国通过联合起来纠正平衡来抵制邻国的收益，那么征服是没有回报的，为了捍卫遥远的承诺而进行的干预不仅是不必要的，而且往往会适得其反，导致地方政府联合起来对抗插手干预的大国及其门徒。相反，如果国家被权力扩张所吸引，那么潮流就会滚滚，多米诺骨牌就会倒下，大国将会发现，即使以流血和财富为代价，保卫对其国家利益几乎没有内在价值的偏远地区也是明智的。2虽然国际关系学者传统上接受这样的观点，即国家平衡权力的威胁增长，但自相矛盾的是，从业者历来对国际政治持有一种追逐的形象。正如杰克·斯奈德所说，“大多数帝国战略家都在捍卫远大的承诺，害怕多米诺骨牌倒下，而大多数崛起的战略家--
often with the weaker or with the stronger side in Do states ally more a conflict? In the parlance of international relations theory: do states tend to balance against or bandwagon with a rising state or coalition? The answer to this question is critical to the formulation of grand strategy and the definition of vital interests. If states resist the gains of their neighbors by drawing together to redress the balance, then conquest does not pay’ and interventions to defend far-flung commitments are not only unnecessary, but often counterproductive in causing local states to unite against the meddling great power and its protege. Conversely, if states gravitate to expanding power, then bandwagons will roll, dominoes will fall, and great powers will find it wise, even at the cost of blood and treasure, to defend remote areas of little or no intrinsic value to their national interests.2 While international relations scholars have traditionally accepted the view that states balance against threatening increases of power, paradoxically, practitioners through the ages have held a bandwagoning image of international politics. As Jack Snyder remarks, “most imperial strategists defending far-flung commitments have feared falling dominoes, and most rising chal-