国际法研究的新自由主义理论路径

20世纪80年代以来，在全球化迅猛发展的背景下，西方国际关系研究中的新自由主义学派。从国际政治经济领域对现实主义进行批判，通过关注跨国行为体的作用，提出了一个“世界政治”的松散范式。新自由主义对非国家行为体的关注，为国际法的研究指出了一条更宽广的道路。

一、国际关系研究中的新自由主义

20世纪70年代，在政治上东西方走向更复杂的权力组合。中美关系越走越近，美苏之间则形成更复杂的既对抗又接触的局面。在经济上，布雷顿森林体系崩溃，美国实力衰弱，日本、西欧经济上升。中东石油战争，使西方意识到弱国的力量与国际间联系的敏感性与脆弱性。在此种历史背景下，19由主义重新抬头，矛头直指政治现实主义。

在近代国际关系理论中最具代表性的是政治现实主义。自汉斯·摩根索(Hans Morgenthau)1948年的《国家间政治》奠定战后西方现实主义理论以来，现实主义便战胜了理想主义，成为西方国际关系理论的主导范式。到了20 世纪70年代，随着国际政治的发展，现实主义无法解释的现象越来越多。于是各种19由主义思潮纷纷兴起。而新自由主义的真正出现， 是以1977年罗伯特·基欧汉与小约瑟夫·奈合作的《权力与相互依赖》一书的出版为标志。

从一定意义上讲。新自由主义与新现实主义是国际关系理论中最为特殊的一对。新现实主义是对摩根索的政治现实主义的继承与发展，而新自由主义是伴随与新现实主义的论争成长起来的。因此，欲明了新自由主义。需要先理解新现实主义。

新现实主义的三个基本命题，是国际社会处于无政府状态、国际关系的主要行为体是国家、国家是19私的行为体，并以国家利益为最高准则。新自由主义虽然赞成此种论断，但不承认无政府状态会导致无秩序社会。而认为制度所促成的国际合作将推动国际关系的规范化进程。缓解无政府状态的压力。新自由主义详细分析了国际制度。认为它包括三种形式，即国际组织、国际机制、国际惯例，有三个特征即权威性、制约性、关联性。国际制度的这些特征使其具有横向效应和网络效应，从而能解决合作的困境，保障合作有效。单一、理性的国家需要国际秩序才能以最小的代价取得最大的利益。经济学家所说的“经济人”因比较优势而合作。自私行为体之间的交往不一定只是冲突。新自由主义以博弈论为分析工具，得出：国家之间的实质是合作，但不是和谐状态的合作，而是无政府状态下的合作。与此相反，新现实主义认为，无政府状态下安全的稀缺不可避免地导致各国对生存的担忧，安全困境不会因为在交往过程中制度等进程上的变化而发生根本的变革。

新自由主义与新现实主义对权力与制度的关系也有不同的解释。在新现实主义看来，权力是国际政治最重要的自变量，制度只是权力的派生物，离开了权力。制度的创建、维持和作用的发挥都只能是空谈。

新自由主义则强调制度作为独立变量，认为其所起的作用并不亚于权力。因此，基欧汉指出，即使在霸权之后，制度仍然能够在维护国际秩序上发挥重要作用。

新自由主义的内涵正如《权力与相互依赖》一书的书名，即当代是一个权力与相互依赖的世界。现实主义强调的权力并未过实，但在新自由主义看来，这只是历史发展的延续性一

面。历史的另一张面孔是其变革性，这样“才不会为过去所束缚”? 。权力依然重要，国家仍然是重要行为体，但“国家中心”范式却受到日益强大的挑战。新自由主义理论家们实际上提出了“多元主义”，为国际关系研究建立了一个新的研究纲领。20世纪60年代末，他们就认识到随着相互依赖的加深、各种非国家行为体在国际舞台上越来越活跃，现实主义的“国家中心”范式无法解释变化了的现实，并忽略了对跨国关系、经济相互依赖和国际组织的研究。他们通过关注跨国行为体的作用，提出了一个“世界政治”的松散范式，从国际政治经济领域对现实主义进行批评。通过创建复合相互依赖理论，他们建立了一种看待世界政治的新方法和理解政治与经济关系、制度化合作的模式。他们认为，大量次国家和非国家行为体构成了一个远比通常仅由国家构成的世界更为复杂的世界，非国家行为体直接参与世界政治，各问题之间不再存在明确的等级区分，武力并非有效的政策工具 。他们通过引入非国家行为体，提出了无等级之分的问题。相对于现实主义的“国家中心主义”来说，确是国际关系研究领域的一次“范式”的革命。

综上所述，首先，新现实主义者是在“混乱”、“无序”这个意义上理解“无政府世界”的含义，因此他们把世界看作是悲观的、对抗的，而新自由主义者则在 “作为一种秩序”的意义上理解无政府世界的意义，因而他们认为世界是可协调的、乐观的。在新自由主义看来，无政府状态仍然是一种有序的状态。“说世界政治是无政府的，并不因此就意味着世界政治是完全缺少组织的。”E31~H果制度不再是权力的派生物或因变量。而成为一个自变量，那么国际政治发展路径必然会产生重要的转变。也就是说，即使国际政治权力发生变动，制度化的国际政治仍会将权力发生消长的国家或地区纳入国际政治的秩序中，或者说制度化的国际政治现实会成为国家追求自身利益的最便捷的路径。权力变化的国家并不必然挑战国际政治的现有秩序。如果能从现有制度化政治现实中获益，权力变化的国家反而有可能采取继续维护该体系的努力。其次。新自由主义强调“多元主义”的世界政治范式，认为世界政治的舞台上，国家不再是永恒的主角，各种行为体都将在世界政治舞台上扮演角色。新自由主义无疑拓宽了国际关系研究的视角，使国际政治研究不再局限于国家层面，而是扩展到了各种行为体及个人。这就意味着国际政治主体研究的纵向扩张，进而促使国际政治研究的横向发展成为可能与必要。

二、从新自由主义角度看国际法的效力

对于将本体论视为纯粹物质主义的新现实主义来说，处于无政府状态的国际体系显然是一种“物质结构”，国际关系状况主要取决于各国在国际社会中所处的相对位置，以及它们之间物质的实力分配状况：而作为非物质力量的国际法，自然在体系结构中一36没有什么存在与作用的空间¨4]。与此相比，新自由主义者虽然承认无政府状态的国际体系的“物质结构”，但认为国际法的客观存在使国家在获取其利益时，无论是出于主动还是被动，都必须去顺应或利用它，国际法获得了与权力平起平坐的主体地位。也就是说，国家如果想要参与到国际关系交往的游戏中获取更多更持久的利益。就必须首先按规则出牌。

Since the 1980 s, under the background of the rapid development of globalization, western new liberalism economics in the study of international relations. From the international political and economic fields to critical realism, by focusing on the role of international actors, proposed a "world politics" loose paradigm. Non-state actors to the attention of a new liberalism, for the study of international law is pointed out that a wider road.

One, the new liberalism in the study of international relations

In the 1970 s, in the east and west to more complex political power combination. Closer china-us relations between the United States and the Soviet union is a more complicated both confrontation and contact. Economically, the collapse of the bretton woods system, weak in the United States, Japan, Western Europe economic rise. Oil war in the Middle East, western realize the power of the weak and the sensitivity and fragility of international links. In such a historical background, the 19 by renewed, directed at political realism.

In the modern international relations theory is the most representative political realism. Since Hans Morgenthau (Hans Morgenthau) "politics among countries" in 1948 laid the post-war western realism theory, realism and defeated idealism, the western theories of international relations has become the dominant paradigm. In the 1970 s, with the development of international politics, realism cannot explain the phenomenon of more and more. So all kinds of 19 by socialist ideological trend in succession. And new liberalism really appeared, in 1977 Robert keohane, han cooperation with small Joseph nye, the publication of the book power and interdependence.

In a sense. New liberalism and new realism is the most special of the international relations theory. Morgenthau to new realism is the succession and development of the political realism, and the new liberalism is to accompany grow up with a new realism debate. As a result, to clear the new liberalism. Need to understand the new realism.

Three basic problems of the new realism is anarchy in the international society, international relations are the main actors of the country, the country is 19 private actors, and national interests as the supreme principle. New liberalism in favor of this argument, but don't admit anarchy would result in a chaotic society. And that system will contribute to the international cooperation to promote the standardization of the international relations. Alleviate the pressure of anarchy. The new liberalism international system are analyzed in detail. Think it includes three forms, namely, international organization, the international mechanism and international practice, there are three characteristics of the authority, the conditionality, relevance. The international system of these characteristics has the transverse effects and network effects, which can solve the dilemma of cooperation, effective security cooperation. A single, rational state requires international order to maximum benefit with minimum cost. What economists call "economic man" because of comparative advantages and cooperation. Selfish behavior body not only conflict between communication. New liberalism with game theory as analysis tool, it is concluded that: is the essence of cooperation between countries, but not the harmonious state of cooperation, but cooperation under anarchy. By contrast, the new realism thinks, of security under the scarce inevitably leads to a concern about the survival, security dilemma not because in the process of communication system on the process change and fundamental change.

New liberalism and new realism on the relationship between the power and the system has a different explanation. In www.huayueting1.com www.gzjjgyw.com new realistic point of view, power is the most important independent variable, international political system is the derivative of power, out of the power. Create, maintain and function of the system of play are only empty talk.

New liberalism emphasizes system, as an independent variable, that its role is no less power. So, even after the hegemony, han said system can still play an important role in the maintenance of international order.

The connotation of the new liberalism as the title of the book power and interdependence, namely contemporary is a power and interdependence of the world. Realism stresses the power is not solid, but in the new liberal point of view, this is only the continuity of historical development. The other face of the history is the transformational, such "does not bound by the past"? . Power is still important, countries are still important behavior body, but the "national center" paradigm has been increasingly powerful challenge. New liberal theorists put forward "pluralism", actually for the study of the international relations to set up a new research programme. In the late 1960 s, and they recognize that as the interdependence of deepening, all kinds of non-state actors in the international arena is more and more active, realistic "national center" model cannot explain the changed reality, and ignoring international relations, the research of economic interdependence and international organizations. By focusing on their international behavior body, proposed a loose paradigm of world politics ", from the international political economy criticism on realism. By creating complex interdependence theory, they established a new method of view of world politics and understand the political and economic relations, the institutionalization of cooperation mode. They think, a lot of times the state and non-state actors constitute a far more than is normally composed of national world more complex world, non-state actors directly involved in the political world, between various problems no longer exist clear hierarchy, force is not effective policy tool. Through the introduction of non-state actors, and puts forward the problem of hierarchical. Relative to the realism of "national center doctrine", it is the study of international relations in the field of a "paradigm" of the revolution.

To sum up, first of all, the new realism is in the "chaos" and "disorder" in this sense the meaning of "anarchy world", so they see the world as a pessimistic, confrontation, and the new liberals are "as a kind of order" the sense of the meaning of the anarchic world, so they think the world is harmonious and optimistic. Anarchy in the new liberalism, it seems, is still a state of order. "Say the world is political anarchy, not so means that world politics is a complete lack of organization." E31 ~ H fruit power system is no longer a derivative or the dependent variable. As an independent variable, the international political development path will have important transformation. That is to say, even if the changes occurred in the international political power, the institutionalization of the international political power will ebb and flow of the country or region into the international political order, or institutional international political reality will become a country the most convenient path to pursue their own interests. Power to change the country does not necessarily challenge the existing international political order. If you can benefit from existing institutionalized political reality, power change state is likely to continue to maintain the system instead of www.jich.net www.boxuelun.com effort. Secondly. New liberalism emphasizes "pluralism" paradigm of world politics, thought the world's political stage, country no longer is eternal, all actors will play a role in the world political arena. New liberalism certainly broaden the perspective of the study of international relations, international politics is no longer limited to the national level, but extends to all kinds of actors and the individual. This means that the vertical expansion of international political subject research, prompting the transverse development of the international political research is possible and necessary.

Second, the effectiveness of the new liberalism perspective of international law

For ontology as a pure materialism new realism, in the anarchy of international system is obviously a matter structure, international relations status mainly depends on the countries in

the international community's relative position, and the strength of the material distribution between them: as a nonphysical force of international law, nature in architecture in 36 no existence and function space ¨ 4]. By contrast, the new liberal while acknowledging anarchy of international system structure of "material", but that the objective existence of international law when the country access to its interests, whether for active or passive, must to comply with or use it, and won the international law and power equal main body status. That is to say, the country if you want to participate in the international relations of the game for more more lasting benefits. You must first according to the rules of the card.