1895-1900年间日本对华政策演变研究

【外文题名】A study on the changes of Japanese China policy:1895-1900

【作者】 唐奇芳

【关键词】 甲午战争 义和团事件 日本对华政策

【外文关键词】 Sino Japan War 1894 1895 Boxer Uprising Japanese China Policy

【导师姓名】许振洲

【学位名称】博士

【学位年度】2006

【学位授予单位】北京大学

【分类号】D831.3

【录入时间】2006-01-01

【全文挂接】

【摘要】绕朝鲜问题的博弈中，日本处于与中国对等的地位、甚至占有相对的主动权。日本对华政策的制定属于主动前瞻模式。在第二阶段中，日本在东亚侵略扩张活动中所遇到的主要矛盾变成和其他同样在中国进行侵略的帝国主义列强之间的矛盾。三国干涉还辽及其以后，日本在与西方列强围绕中国问题的博弈中处于被动地位，它的对华政策与其说是按预定的计划来发展的，毋宁说是对形势发展的回应，日本对华政策的制定变成了被动反应模式。日本利用镇压义和团时间的出兵机会，获得了与西方列强在争夺中国中的“对等地位”，日本对华政策的制定又变回主动前瞻模式，明确地提出了对华政策的纲领。从甲午战争到义和团事件之间，日本对华政策发生上述演变的原因主要在于以下三个：第一，根本的原因在于日本国力的增强；第二，东亚国际关系形势的发展为日本提供了有利的机会；第三，日本政府具有充分利用机会的策略技巧。日本与西方列强在侵略中国上的矛盾的主要在于日本对华独占性侵略扩张目标与西方列强争夺中国这一现实情况之间的矛盾。如何处理这个矛盾是日本对华政策制定中所面临的主要问题。从甲午战争到义和团事件之间，日本对华政策的演变过程，就是日本政府探索在西方列强争夺甚至瓜分中国的情况下，如何实现对华独占性侵略扩张目标的过程。本文的目的就是通过对甲午战争到义和团事件期间日本对华政策的形成和演变过程的分析，寻找日本如何处理上述矛盾、推动对华侵略扩张的轨迹，并力图探究其背后的动因。本文在整体的研究方法上采取政治学方法和历史学方法的结合。政治学方法主要是指从政策制定的角度来分析日本对华政策的发展及其动因，历史学方法主要指利用第一手史料，对从甲午战争到义和团事件的日本对华政策发展进行连续性的整理。在分析日本对华政策的制定时，本文还引入了一些博弈论和管理学的概念。如果本文能够稍微具有启发和创新意义，可能出现在以下三点：第一，从政策制定模式的角度来考察从甲午战争到义和团事件期间的日本对华政策的演变过程。本文力图对从甲午战争到义和团事件期间的日本对华政策演变过程进行一个连贯性的总结和阐述。第二，强调义和团事件在日本对华政策发展中的作用和意义。日本政府在义和团事件中明确提出对华政策的纲领，这在甲午战争后是第一次，可以看作日本在帝国主义阶段对华政策初步确定的标志。第三，重估戊戌变法在日本对华政策上的影响。与戊戌政变直接相联系的日本对华政策思想中“脱亚主义”和“亚洲主义”两条路线的合流，是日俄战争后逐渐成为日本对华侵略政策指导思想的“大亚细亚主义”的开端之一，对日本对华政策的发展具有深远的影响。

【外文摘要】The Japanese invasion and expansion in East Asia since the Meiji Restoration could be divided into two periods, by the Sino-Japan War from 1894 to 1895. The main target of Japanese invasion changed from Korea in the first period to China in the second. In the first period, the principle contradiction in the Japanese invasion and expansion was the one between China and Japan. The main point of Japanese China policy was making preparation for the Sino-Japan War and the Chinese factor itself was taken as the most important one in policy-making. In the Chess Game between the two countries, Japan took a reciprocal position with China, and the Japanese China policy making process in this period could be regarded as an Initiative Forecasting Model.In the second period, the principle contradiction changed to the one between Japan and other Imperialist countries that invaded China as well. Since Triple Intervention, Japan was landed in a passive position in the Chess Game with the western powers. And its China policy making process was changed into a Passive Reacting Model.Taking the chance of Boxer Uprising, Japan got the so called reciprocal position as the western powers in the competition over interests in China, by sending the majority of the Eight Nation Alliance Army. The Japanese China policy making process changed back to the Initiative Forecasting Model. There are three reasons why the Japanese China policy had changed as mentioned above include. The first one is the increasing power of Japan, the second is the favorable chance to Japan provided by the development of the international relations in East Asia and the third is the skills of Japanese government to make full use of the chance.The goal of Japanese invasion in China was to set up an exclusive control, but the reality was that China was confronted with the crisis of being divided by the western powers. The contradiction between the two points above was the main problem of Japanese China policy making. The intention of this dissertation is to make it clear how Japanese government dealt with the contradiction above, by analyzing the process of Japanese China policy’s change and to try to find out the reasons behind. The possible creative points of this dissertation are as following: Firstly, it tries to make an analysis in the process of Japanese China policy’s changes from the point of policy making model. It could bring a new view. Secondly, it emphasizes on the importance of Boxer Uprising...