漢唐崛起對周邊的「衝突－回應」模式

The "Challenge-Reaction" Pattern in the Rise of the Han and Tang Dynasties

10.6166/TJPS.202306_(96).0002

蘇軍瑋(Chun-wei Su)

關係 ； 藩屬國 ； 漢朝 ； 唐朝 ； 衝突處理模式 ； Guanxi ； Vassal State ； Han Dynasty ； Tang Dynasty ； Rise of China ； Chinese World Order ； Conflict Resolution Model

政治科學論叢

96期（2023 / 06 / 01）

53 - 92

繁體中文;英文

漢朝與唐朝作為中國歷史上一個統一的大帝國，僅用不到數十年時間便使其帝國到達鼎盛，並與周邊維繫著穩定的宗藩關係，期間必然經歷各種衝突與危機，對手國包括甫崛起時面對的現狀霸權以及體系穩固後的周邊各國。本文透過檢視漢唐兩代與周邊衝突的回應策略出發，據以了解當一個大國（統一且強盛）面對來自周邊的挑戰時，大國如何抉擇回應方式以及動武規模，歸納出一個可資依循的大國「衝突－回應」決策路徑。本文指出在漢唐崛起之初、權力轉移時期，作為崛起國的漢唐並未對現狀霸權國做出更多挑戰，基本遵循守勢現實主義的預期以政權安全存續為首要考量。另一方面，當漢唐帝國處於盛世時，其所建立的宗藩體系中一旦出現來自藩屬國的挑戰時，中原王朝會因對方並未恪守本分而施以最強烈的懲罰。此與儒家和平論中強調儒家文明圈內會相對和平的論述不盡相同，甚至儒家文明內部的衝突強度可能遠強於儒家與其他文明的衝突，突顯一旦出現衝突時中國對關係較親近者的強硬態度，並將朝貢體系理論與關係理論相互結合並加以衍伸，進而完善歷史中國的「衝突－回應」決策模式。

As unified empires in China's history, the rising Han and Tang Dynasties both maintained stable tributary systems in their surrounding areas. During these periods, they inevitably experienced various conflicts and crises with both the existing status quo hegemons which they faced upon their rise (Han Dynasty versus the Huns / Tang Dynasty versus the Turks) and with their neighboring countries. Based on the historical facts of Han and Tang China, this article reviews the process through which unified and prosperous great powers chose their modes of reaction and the scale of forces used to deal with challenges from surrounding states. The main argument of this article is that at the beginning of the rise of the Han and Tang Dynasties and the periods of power transition, the Han and Tang Dynasties did not frequently challenge the hegemony of the status quo powers, and basically followed the expectations of defensive realism by prioritizing the security of their regimes. On the other hand, when the Han and Tang Empires were in their prosperous eras, once there was a challenge from a vassal state, the "Central Kingdom" would impose the severest punishment on those vassal states which failed to abide by their duties within the hegemonic order. This differs from the theme of Confucian peace theory, which emphasizes that relative peace exists within the Confucian cultural circle. In actuality, the intensity of the conflict between the countries within this order may even be far stronger than the conflict between the Confucianist civilization and other civilizations. This article shows that China maintains a tough attitude toward the countries that it is closest with in the event of conflict. By combining and extending the tributary system theory and the "guanxi" theory, we can better understand the "challenge-reaction" decision-making pattern in historical China.

1. 張啟雄, Chi-hsiung(2013)。東西國際秩序原理的差異－「藩屬體系」對「殖民體系」。中央研究院近代史研究所集刊，79，47-86。
   連結：
2. 鄭端耀, Tuan-Y.(2003)。國際關係攻勢與守勢現實主義理論爭辯之評析。問題與研究，42(2)，1-21。
   連結：
3. Andreski, S.(1968).Military Organization and Society.Berkeley:University of California Press.
4. Fravel, T.(2005).Regime Insecurity and International Cooperation: Explaining China’s Compromises in Territorial Disputes.International Security,30(2),46-83.
5. Jervis, R.(1978).Cooperation under the Security Dilemma.World Politics,30(2),167-214.
6. Kang, D.(2003).Getting Asia Wrong: The Need for New Analytical Framework.International Security,27(4),57-85.
7. Kang, D.(2007).China Rising: Peace, Power and Order in East Asia.New York:Columbia University Press.
8. Kelly, R.(2012).A ‘Confucian Long Peace’ in Pre-Western East Asia?.European Journal of International Relations,18(3),407-430.
9. Mearsheimer, J.(2001).The Tragedy of Great Power Politics.New York:W. W. Norton & Company.
10. Nathan, A.,Ross, R.(1997).The Great Wall and the Empty Fortress: China’s Search for Security.New York:Norton.
11. Organski, A. F. K.(1958).World Politics.New York:Alfred A. Knopf.
12. Organski, A. F. K.,Kugler, J.(1980).The War Ledger.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
13. Tammen, R. L.,Kugler, J.(2006).Power Transition and China-US Conflicts.The Chinese Journal of International Politics,1(1),35-55.
14. Tammen, R. L.,Kugler, J.,Lemke, D.,Stam, A. C., III,Abdollahian, M.,Alsharabti, C.,Efird, B.,Organski, A. F. K.(2000).Power Transitions: Strategies for the 21st Century.New York:Chatham House Publishers of Seven Bridges Press.
15. Walt, S.(1987).The Origins of Alliance.Ithaca:Cornell University Press.
16. Wang, Yuan-kang(2010).Harmony and War: Confucian Culture and Chinese Power Politics.New York:Columbia University Press.
17. 文崇一（編）, Chung-I(ed.),蕭新煌（編）, Hsin-huang Michael(ed.)(1998).中國人：觀念與行為.臺北=Taipei:巨流=Chuliu Book Co., LTD..
18. 王日華, Ri-hua(2011)。孔子主義國際關係理論與中國外交。現代國際關係，2011(5)，47-54。
19. 王日華, Ri-hua(2016)。崛起國與霸權國無直接戰爭的根源。國際政治科學，1(2)，37-73。
20. 王貞平, Zhen-ping(2020).多極亞洲中的唐朝.上海=Shanghai:上海文化出版=Shanghai Culture Publishing House.
21. 包宗和（編）, Tzong-ho(ed.)(2010).國際關係理論.臺北=Taipei:五南=Wunan.
22. 石之瑜, Chih-yu(2020)。國際關係中的「關係」理論與「後華性」實踐。東南亞研究，3，1-17。
23. 何友暉, You-hui,彭泗清, Si-qing,趙志裕, Zhi-yu(2007).世道人心：對中國人心理的探索.北京=Beijing:北京大學出版社=Peking University Press.
24. 李彬, Bin(2009)。墨子的國家間政治思想研究。國際政治科學，2009(18)，61-87。
25. 林恩顯, En-shean(1988).突厥研究.臺北=Taipei:臺灣商務印書館=The Commercial Press, Ltd..
26. 林幹, Gan(1986).匈奴通史.北京=Beijing:人民出版社=People’s Publishing House.
27. 徐進, Jin(2009)。孟子的國家間政治思想及啟示。世界經濟與政治，2009(1)，6-16。
28. 時殷弘, Yin-hong(2011)。武裝的中國：千年戰略傳統及其外交意蘊。世界經濟與政治，2011(6)，4-33。
29. 張榮芳, Rongfang,黃淼章, Miao-zhang(1991).南越國史.廣東=Guangzhou:廣東人民出版社=Guangdong People’s Publishing House Co., Ltd.
30. 張鋒, Feng(2012)。中國國際關係研究中的清華路徑。國際政治科學，2012(32)，125-156。
31. 陳康令, Kang-lin(2015)。傳統東亞秩序的歷史演進與禮制穩定－以「塔形結構」的建構發展為例。國際關係研究，5，22-38。
32. 陳康令, Kang-lin(2015)。試析傳統東亞秩序『禮治下的和平』。國際觀察，2015(4)，73-86。
33. 黃曬莉, Li-li(2006).人際和諧與衝突：本土化的理論與研究.臺北=Taipei:揚智=Yang-Chih Book Co., Ltd..
34. 楊中芳, Chong-fang(2001).如何理解中國人.臺北=Taipei:遠流=Yuan-Liou Publishing Co., Ltd..
35. 劉學銚, Xueyao(2019).突厥汗國.西安=Xian:陝西人民出版社=Shanxi People’s Publishing House.
36. 蕭焯, Zhuo(2017).西域簡史.海南=Hai kou:南海出版社=Hainan Publishing House Co., Ltd..