教學大綱 Syllabus

每周課程進度與作業要求 Course Schedule & Requirements

教學週次Course Week	彈性補充教學週次Flexible Supplemental Instruction Week	彈性補充教學類別Flexible Supplemental Instruction Type
18週18 weeks	無彈性補充教學週No flexible supplemental instruction week

第一講（9/12）課堂導論

 

第一階段：凝視東南亞的新結構與大趨勢

 

第二講（9/19）東南亞國際關係的兩個導向：國家中心論與社會中心論

 

第三講（9/26）疫災，從中國到全球，從全球到東南亞

 

本週主題：疫後世界的新現實

 

CSIS 2021/8/9 Pandemic Paradox, now what? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmU8BWpGGuM（請關注疫災的治理與疫後影響）。

請留意10月11、12日的玉山論壇中新南向政策與疫後亞洲新藍圖的設定與方向。

 

 

第四講（10/3）學期講座：Sana Hashmi（台亞基金會博士後研究員、印度籍學者）

 

本週主題：東南亞怎麼看待各國(包括台灣)的東南亞戰略？

 

請各組（各個博士生）分別搜尋一篇最具代表性的各國印太戰略文獻（評論或專文分析），於本週向講者提問討論。請聚焦於：韓國的新南方政策、台灣的新南向政策、日本的印太戰略、印度的印太戰略、美國的印太戰略、以及東南亞的印太戰略。

 

第二階段：檢視東南亞研究的理論與方法

 

第五講（10/17）重探東南亞研究的本體：國家、區域與社會

 

本週主題：東南亞國際關係除了國家政府關係之外還有什麼？

 

1. Victor T. King, 2006,2 “Southeast Asia: Personal Reflections on a Region,” in Cynthia Chou and Vincent Houben, eds. Southeast Asian Studies: Debates and New Direction. Singapore: ISEAS, pp. 23-44.
2. Robert Cribb, 2006, “Region, Academic Dynamics, and Promise of Comparitivism: Beyond Studying ‘Southeast Asia’?”  in Cynthia Chou and Vincent Houben, eds. Southeast Asian Studies: Debates and New Direction. Singapore: ISEAS, pp. 45-64.
3. Wang Gungwu, 2005, “Two Perspectives of Southeast Asian Studies: Singapore and China,” in Paul H. Kratosha, Remco Raben, and Henk Schulte Nordholt, eds., Locating Southeast Asia: Geographies of Knowledge and Politics of Space, pp. 60-81.
4. David Martin Jones and M.L.R. Smith, 2006, “The Delusions of ASEANology: Exploring the Sovietology of Southeast Asian Studies,” in ASEAN and East Asian International Relations: Regional Delusion, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 16-43.

 

第六講（10/24; 10/31）理論與東南亞研究：知識的鋪陳

 

本週主題：哪一套理論適用於東南亞國際關係研究？

 

1. 《東亞的理論與理論的東亞》，導論（頁1-20）、第一章（頁21-44）、第八章（頁175-200）、第九章（頁201-228）、第十章（頁229-258）。
2. Zheng Rongnian and Liu Bojian, 2020. “Non-western Realism” in Takashi Inoguhi , ed. The Sage Handbook of Asian Foreign Policy(Vol.1), London, Sage Publications, pp. 51-74. （需精讀）
3. Etel Solingen, 2010. “Multilateralism, Regionalism, and Bilateralism: Conceptual Overview from International Relations Theory,” in N. Ganesan and Ramses Amer, eds., International Relations in Southeast Asia: Between Bilateralism and Multilateralism. Singapore: ISEAS, pp. 3-36. （需精讀）
4. Sheldon W. Simon, 2010. “Southeast Asian International Relations: Is there Institutional Traction?” in N. Ganesan and Ramses Amer, eds., International Relations in Southeast Asia: Between Bilateralism and Multilateralism. Singapore: ISEAS, pp. 37-66. （需精讀）
5. See Seng Tan, 2009, “Southeast Asia: Theory and Praxis in International Relations,” in Arlene B. Tickner and Ole Weaver, eds., International Relations Scholarship around the World. London: Routledge, pp. 120-133.
6. Mark Beeson, 2002, “Theorising Institutional Change in East Asia,” in Mark Beeson, ed., Reconfiguring East Asia: Regional Institutions and Organizations after the Crisis, London: RoutledgeCurzon, pp. 7-27

 

 

11/7期中測驗周

 

第七講（11/14）還是要了解一下主要國家的外交政策

 

本週主題：民主東南亞國家的外交政策？

 

1. Pongphidoot Busbarat, 2020. “Thailand’s Foreign Policy in the Post-Cold War Era: From Potentials to Disarrays,” in Takashi Inoguhi , ed. The Sage Handbook of Asian Foreign Policy(Vol.1), London, Sage Publications, pp. 687-708. . （需精讀）
2. Carlyle Thayer, 2020. “Vietnam’s Foreign Policy,” in Takashi Inoguhi , ed. The Sage Handbook of Asian Foreign Policy(Vol.2), London, Sage Publications, pp. 709-729. . （需精讀）
3. Maung Aung Myoe, 2020. “Myanmar Foreign Policy: Principles and Practices,” in Takashi Inoguhi , ed. The Sage Handbook of Asian Foreign Policy(Vol.2), London, Sage Publications, pp. 767-788. . （需精讀）

 

 

第八講（11/21）作為社會的區域：國際社會化的理論與實踐

 

本週主題：東南亞會走歐洲老路嗎？把區域作為社會環境的特色與挑戰各自為何？

 

1. Charlotte Epstein. 2012. “Stop Telling Us How to Behave: Socialization or Infantilization? International Studies Perspectives, 13: 135-145.
2. Frank Schimmelfennig. 2000. “International Socialization in the New Europe: Rational Action in an Institutional Environment.” European Journal of International Relations, 6 (1): 109-139. （需精讀）
3. Trine Flockhart. 2006. “’Complex Socialization’: A Framework for the State of State Socialization,” European Journal of International Relations, 12 (1): 89-118.
4. Alexander Wendt. 2004. “The State as Person in International Theory,” Review of International Studies, 30: 289-316.
5. Alastair Iain Johnston. 2003. “Socialization in International Institutions: The ASEAN Way and International Relations Theory.” (Chapter 3). （需精讀）
6. David Martin Jones and Michael L.R. Smith. 2007. “Constructing Communities: the Curious Case of East Asian Regionalism,” Review of International Studies, 33: 165-186.
7. G. John Ikenberry and Charles A. Kupchan. 1990. “Socialization and Hegemonic Power,” International Organization 44 (3): 283-315. （需精讀）

 

第三階段：從事東南亞研究的定位問題

 

第九講（11/28）歷史與東南亞國際關係

 

本週主題：亞洲的地中海的過去、現在與未來？

 

1. 《東亞的理論與理論的東亞》，第三章（頁45-68）、第十二章（頁301-330）。
2. Kenneth R. Hall, 1985, Maritime Trade and State Development in Early Southeast Asia. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, pp. 1-47.
3. Jonathan Rigg, 1991, Southeast Asia: A Region in Transition. London: Unwin Hyman Ltd., pp. 1-32 (chapter 1 and chapter 2). （需精讀）
4. Donald E. Weatherbee, ed., 2005, “ASEAN and Regionalism in Southeast Asia,” in Donald E. Weatherbee, ed., International Relations in Southeast Asia: the Struggle for Autonomy, Lanham: Rowan and Littlefield Publishers, pp. 88-119.
5. Jennifer Cushman and Wang Gungwu, eds., 1988. Changing Identities of the Southeast Asian Chinese since World War II, Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, pp. 1-32.

 

第十講（12/5）東亞與東南亞國際關係

 

本週主題：東南亞的東亞versus東亞的東南亞？

 

1. Kent E. Calder and Francis Fukuyama, 2008, “Introduction” and “Conclusion,” in East Asian Multilateralism: Prospect for Regional Stability. Baltimore: the Johns Hopkins University Press, 1-12, 255-266.
2. 《東亞的理論與理論的東亞》，第十三章（頁331-358）。
3. Mark Shelden, 2015, ”National Regional and Global Dynamics in East Asia: Historical Legacies and Contemporary Forces,” in Yasemin Nuhoglu Soysal, ed. Transnational Trajectories in East Asia: Nation, Citizenship, and Region. London: Routledge, pp. 254-270.
4. Peter A. Petri and Michael G. Plummer. 2014. ASEAN Centrality and the ASEAN-US Economic Relationship. East-West Center Policy Studies. No. 60, pp. 1-68. （需精讀）

 

分組作業：請分別尋找韓國、日本、中國、美國、新加坡、越南與印尼對於東亞共同體的定位、看法與主張，進行小組報告。

 

 

第四階段：從事東南亞國際關係研究的議題探索

第十一講（12/12）發展政治與東南亞國際關係

 

本週主題：東南亞為誰發展？國家？社會？人民？還是大國？

1. Ben Boer, Philip Hirsch, Fleur Johns, Ben Saul, and Natalia Scurrah, 2016, The Mekong: A Socio-legal Approach to River Basin Development. London: Routledge, pp. 61-86, pp. 87-113. （需精讀）
2. Jonathan Rigg, 2016, Challenging Southeast Asian Development: The Shadows of Success. London: Routledge, pp. 199-232. （需精讀）
3. Anne Decobert, 2016, The Politics of Aid to Burma: A Humanitarian Struggle on the Thai-Burmese Border. London: Routledge, pp. 19-52.
4. Andrew Macintyre and Barry Naughton, 2005, “The Decline of a Japan-Led Model of East Asian Economy,” in T.J. Pempel, ed., Remapping East Asia: The Construction of a Region. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, pp. 77-100.
5. John D. Ciorciari. 2015. “A Chinese Model for Patron–client Relations? The Sino-Cambodian Partnership.” International Relations of Asia-Pacific.

 

第十一講（12/19）抵抗還是順從的東南亞國際關係

 

本週主題：誰為了什麼、要抵抗誰？

1. James C. Scott, 2009. The Art of Not Being Governed: An Anarchist History of Upland Southeast Asia. New Heaven: Yale University Press.
2. 張珈健、楊昊，東南亞抵抗政治，中國大陸研究，2021年9月。

 

分組作業：請分別尋找中國對於泰國、越南、柬埔寨、印尼、菲律賓、馬來西亞、緬甸以及寮國的外援與投資案例，檢視其成功或失敗的原因，進行個人或小組報告。

 

 

期末報告預報 （12/26）提供學期論文簡報檔並於課堂發表

 

第十二講 （1/2）海事政治與東南亞國際關係

 

本週主題：海事安全是傳統安全還是非傳統安全？

1. Rizal Sukma, 2012, “Maritime Security in Southeast Asia: Human Security Dimension,” in Carolina G. Hernandex, ed., Mainstreaming Human Security in ASEAN Integration: Regional Public Goods and Human Security. Quezon City: ISDS, Inc., pp. 35-52. （需精讀）
2. Shicun Wu and Keyuan Zou, 2014, “Non-Traditional Security Issues in the South China Sea: Seeking More Effective Means for Cooperation,” in Non-Traditional Security Issues and the South China Sea: Shaping a New Framework for Cooperation. Surrey: Ashgate, pp. 3-16.
3. Ramses Amer, 2014, “The Dispute Management Approach of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN): What Relevance for the South China Sea situation?” in Non-Traditional Security Issues and the South China Sea: Shaping a New Framework for Cooperation. Surrey: Ashgate, pp. 47-74.

 

分組作業：檢視美國、中國、菲律賓、越南、印尼、馬來西亞與臺灣在2020年至2021年間對於南海爭端的表態與政策論述。

 

第十三講（1/9）結語: 環境政治與東南亞國際關係

 

本週主題：什麼是韌性（resilience）？是誰的韌性？

1. Nathanial Matthews and Kim Geheb, 2015, Hydropower Development in the Mekong Region: Political, Socio-economic, and Environmental Perspectives. London: Routledge, pp. 1-16, 17-31.
2. Gerald Shively and Tim Smith, 2015, “Natural Resources, the Environment, and Economic Development in Southeast Asia,” in Handbook of Southeast Asian Economics. London: Routledge, pp. 114-135.
3. 楊昊、蘇義淵，2013，〈政策社群的東南亞研究：以水資源安全為例〉，載於楊昊、陳琮淵主編，《臺灣東南亞研究新論：圖象與路向》。臺北：洪葉文化，頁225-240。
4. Lorraine Elliott and Mely Caballero-Anthony, 2013, Human Security and Climate Change in Southeast Asia: Managing Risk and Resilience. London: Routledge, pp. 43-61, 131-150. （需精讀）

 

報告繳交（1/31）