後冷戰時期之終結
The End of Post-Cold War

一場九一一攻擊事件顛覆了美國長久以來的核武政策。以往美國對於核子武器的使用，主要是把核子武器當作是嚇阻敵國（或潛在威脅者）對美國使用大規模毀滅性武器。在過去的二十年之間，美國曾經三次調整核武政策，一次是一九八一年雷根政府時期，雷根總統要求美國的核武可以「在長期核戰當中取得優勢」，1第二次是柯林頓政府時期，一九九七年柯林頓總統要求美國不用贏得核戰，而是美國要有足夠的反應能力來毀滅發動戰爭的國家，從而預防戰爭。第三次是小布希政府時期，二○○二年美國國防部向國會提出「單一整合行動計畫」，也稱為「核武態勢報告」，2主要是「為了符合廿一世紀的嚇阻需求，整合攻擊與防禦、核武及非核武力量」，也就是針對美國在第三世界所受到的威脅動用核武來攻擊，並試圖研發低當量的核武，來消滅隱藏在地底下的武器。
911 terrorism attacks have overthrown US nuclear weapon policy. For years, the U.S. has regarded nuclear weapons as the deterrence force towards enemy countries (or potential adversaries) that are likely to use weapons of massive destruction (WMD) to threaten her. During the past twenty years, the U.S. has changed her nuclear weapon policy three times. Firstly, ex-president Ronald Reagan, in 1981, required the U.S. army to use nuclear weapons to gain the advantage during the long-term nuclear war.1 Secondly, in 1997, former president Bill Clinton alleged that it was not necessary for America to win the unclear war, but America should have enough responsive ability to destroy the countries that start the war, to further prevent the war. Thirdly, at the administration of George W. Bush, Department of Defense, in 2002, releases a ‘Single Integrated Operational Plan’ (SIOP) to Congress (it also named Nuclear Posture Review).2 This plan is aimed to combine attack and defense, nuclear power and non-nuclear power to response to the deterrence demands of the 21st century. To restrain the enemy countries who are likely to use nuclear weapons to assault the third world, Department of Defense will try to research new generation of deep-penetrating nuclear weapons to destroy enemies’ weapons hidden deep underground.

美國前國務卿艾奇遜曾經說過：在人類社會之中，核子武器比圓輪的發現更具有革命性的發明，倘若這項發明持續地發展，並且被當作毀滅性的工具，將沒有任何勝利者，也沒有任何文明得以倖存。3因而，自從一九四五年第二次世界大戰結束以來，人類一直在尋求減少爆發核武戰爭的可能性，而核武擴散問題更成為冷戰結束後國際社會上眾所關注的焦點之一。全球化的進程，雖然象徵東西方軍事對立的和緩，然此同時卻引發出新的威脅，大規模毀滅性武器的擴散正是這類新威脅之一。4由於某些國家在冷戰後積極購置或研發核生化武器，或尋求製造此種武器的技術與核生化原料，甚至亦被當作恐怖主義者的武器，使得國際社會仍未能擺脫核武的「世界末日」。
American ex-Secretary of State Dean Acheson has said, “In human society, nuclear weapons are more revolutionary inventions than the discovery of round wheel. If the former are continuously proliferated and are used as a devastating means, then there will be no winners, and no civilizations will survive.”3 Therefore, since the end of the World War II in 1945, the human being has kept on decreasing the possibility of nuclear war explosion. In addition, WMD proliferation has become an international society’s concerned topics after the cold war world. The processing of globalization means the thaw of military confrontation between the eastern world and the western world, but in
the meantime, it brings out new threats. And the WMD proliferation is just one of the new threats.4 After the cold war, some countries have strenuously purchased or done researches on nuclear/biological/chemical weapons, looking for the producing skills and materials for the said weapons and associating with terrorisms. In this situation, the international society is still unable to stay away from the shade of nuclear “Armageddon”.

大規模毀滅性武器擴散之所以受到世人的關注，有數點理由：大規模毀滅性武器擴散可能引發區域性甚或全球性的危機，特別是當大規模毀滅性武器的擁有 者為恐怖主義團體，或者落在一些政治軍事形勢不穩定、或具有侵略性國家的手中時，造成核子意外或被非理性決策者誤用的可能性增加；而且更難以嚇阻擁有大規模毀滅性武器的國家採取侵略行為，甚至藉由大規模毀滅性武器來威脅鄰近國家；以美國而言，防止大規模毀滅性武器擴散更牽連到美國的外交政策，影響美國的軍事防禦計畫以及軍事作戰計畫，5以及限制美國在全球事務的行動自由。6
There are some reasons why WMD proliferation catches the world’s attentions, because the WMD is possible to cause regional or global crisis. Especially, if WMD is held in the hands of terrorism groups or aggressive countries that have unstable politic and military, at this circumstance, the possibility of nuclear accidences or insane decision-makers’ abuse will rise accordingly. In addition, it is much more difficult to stop the countries that possess WMD taking military actions. And it is more possible for them to threaten its neighborhood countries by using WMD. Take America as an example, prevention of WMD proliferation gets deeply involved in her diplomatic policy, affecting her military defense plans and military operation plans, 5 and restricting her actions free on global affairs.6

原本冷戰的結束讓世界主要朝兩種趨勢發展，一種是國際間大型衝突的減少以及相關的國際建制逐漸被認同與遵守，一種則是失敗國家的國內政治不安定時，不見得有能力維護國內秩序時，結果常導致地域性的衝突發生，或進一步來自其他國家的干預或侵略時，以聖戰為名的戰爭便會展開，伊斯蘭聖戰或美國聖戰的呼聲紛紛出籠，從國際無政府的世界與國內的秩序向著國際秩序與國內無政府的狀態來修正。7
When the cold war ended, there were two trends were developing. One was the decrease of major conflicts worldwide and the recognition and observation over relevant international regimes. The other was when failed states had unstable politics and were not able to control their domestic order; as a result, the regional conflicts occurred. On the other hands, when other countries were interfered or invaded, the war in the name of ‘Holy war’ was waged. So, the Islam-jihad and American-jihad were surging, and there was an amendment from international anarchy and domestic order to international
order and domestic anarchy.7

在冷戰時期，美國核武戰略的主軸是以威脅做為建軍備戰的基礎，主要是針對前蘇聯來做出種種的戰略規劃。而在美國新的核武態勢報告當中，不再信任以往對於大規模毀滅性武器的國際建制，轉向以能力為基礎，遂有美國新核武態勢報告的出台。
During the cold war period, US nuclear weapon strategies were based on the aim of intimidation – a strategy against ex-Soviet Union. Yet in the latest Nuclear Posture Review, WMD of international regime is no more considered and attractive, but the capabilities-based is the major highlight and concerns.

核武政策與其說是「最終」的國防政策，毋寧說是一種政治哲學或世界觀—對人性與道德的悲觀，對人類是否能建立一個自由與和平世界的質疑。在核子武器出現之前，戰略家都試圖規劃出贏得戰爭的方式，就如同柏郎迪教授所言，「軍事力量建立的目的就是在於贏得戰爭，但是從現在開始，軍事力量的目的變成避免戰爭，而且還沒有其他有用的目的」。8
Instead of regarding unclear policy as an ultimate defense policy, it is better to describe it as a political philosophy or an ideology. That is to say it is a cynical pessimism over the humanity and ethic or a doubt if human being can construct a free and peaceful world. Before the show-up of nuclear weapons, strategists have done their best to figure out the maneuvers to win wars. Just like Bernard Brodie had said that, ‘Thus far the chief purpose of a military establishment has been to win wars. From now on its chief purpose must be to avert them. It can have no other useful purpose.”8

就世界的結構觀點而言，如果冷戰的終結代表兩極對抗體系的瓦解，讓後冷戰時期的國際政治成為強權的「和解」，9而以二○○二年美俄達成裁減戰略核武的協議與北約收編俄羅斯，讓俄羅斯成為北約的戰略伙伴，10結束後冷戰時期的多極紛擾世界。在美國遭受恐怖攻擊之後，不僅同時開啟了後冷戰時期的終結，也觸動了美國的軍事全球化，其戰略目標乃為終結國際恐怖組織與企圖獲得大規模毀滅性武器的「邪惡」國家，以核武作為絕對的嚇阻與打擊力量，來進行軍事的全球收編，擴張美國的戰略版圖。
In light of international structure, if the end of cold ear represented the dissolution of two poles confronting mechanism and further made the machtpolitiks compromise in international politics during the post cold war. 9 In 2002, America and Russia made an agreement to reduce strategic nuclear weapons. North Atlantic Treaty Organizations (NATO) invited Russia to be a strategic partner.10 Given the above, all these actions terminated the multiple disorder world of the post cold war. After America had suffered from 911 terrorism attacks, the termination of post Cold War was reopened. Also, it started US military globalization, which intends to demolish terrorism group and the ‘evil’ countries striving to gain WMD. This globalization plans to use nuclear weapons as absolute deterrence and fighting powers, to reunify global military and to expand US strategic scales.

軍事全球化
Military Globalization

現今作為世界資本主義體系變動的新階段，最為顯著的特徵就是「地理的終結」所帶來的趨勢。當九○年代開始之際，一些社會主義國家慢慢接受資本主義的生產與生活方式，全球統一市場開始成形。這種新趨勢的出現，以經濟的流通打破過去以人為所構築的地理藩籬，從垂直與水平層面穿透原本的主權國家體系，任何國家或任何人都不知不覺的接受經濟對於個人生活、社會生活乃至於政治的重要性。於是，經濟全球化的進展造成了全球統一市場的形成。當全球金融、經貿體制日趨密切之後，同時讓國家形成對於遠距離危機的心理震撼與影響。隨著資本主義生產方式成為普世的價值，政治的全球化、文化的全球化乃至於軍事全球化逐漸成為新世界典範。
Nowadays, it is a new fluctuating stage for worldwide capitalism systems, and the most obvious feature is ‘the end of geography.’ From the inception of 1990’s, some socialistic nations gradually accepted the production and life style of capitalism. Hence, the global integrated markets were starting to emerge. When this new tendency has shown up, circulating economy broke through the geographical boundary built by the human beings themselves, and vertically and horizontally penetrated the original sovereignties. Any country and any individual both unconsciously recognize the importance which economy brings to personal living, society life, and even the politic. Thereafter,
economy globalization has formed the global integrated markets. When global finance and economic & trading systems move closer, it will bring some psychological shocks and influences over the long-distance crisis to some countries. Following the production of capitalism has turned into the worldwide value; politic globalization, culture globalization, and military globalization are going to evolve a brand new world paradigm.

軍事全球化可以視為在世界體系之中，政治單位間軍事關係互動的程度，與擴張性增加的一種過程。隨著長時間的發展，軍事全球化將世界建構成一個單一地理的戰略空間。11當軍事全球化拓展之際，國家安全所面臨的威脅，也逐漸趨於多樣性。使得大規模毀滅性武器的擴散對於所有國家均構成威脅。但是有一部份擴散的驅動力是軍事事務革命下的產物。特別是普及世界的軍事技術，往往由先進的軍事技術國所制訂，當某些國家形成軍事技術的壟斷時，對於其他國家又會陷入安全兩難，使得軍事全球化形成另外的邏輯：全球的武器貿易體系，直接貫穿軍事技術與權力的擴散。
Military globalization in the international system can be regards as a military relation interactive outcome of political institutions and a procession of increasing extension. After the long development, military globalization has changed the world to a single geographical strategic space.11 When military globalization is extending, nation security is simultaneously encountering diversified threats. In the meantime, MWD proliferation also threatens many countries in the world. But motivations of partial MWD proliferation are the offspring of Revolutionary Military Affairs (RMA). Particularly, the countries
that have advanced military technologies have always stipulated popularized military technologies. When some countries make a monopoly of military technologies, it makes other countries fall into the security dilemma. Hence, military globalization evolves a new logic, say, global arms trading system directly stabs through the proliferation of military technologies and authorities.

軍事力量一直是人類歷史主要的核心。一般國家的軍事力量都被當做是防衛或攻擊的手段。攻擊性的軍事力量為求改變現狀，防衛性的軍事權力則為了要維持現狀。然而在全球化的時代當中，軍事力量依然在國際關係中扮演重要的角色，安全仍是國家國防政策重要的原則。全球化尚未能把國際政治轉型到一個新型相互依賴的國際政治，原因之一就是資訊的普及反而造就了技術的擴散，而既存的政治與軍事權力也制約著許多資源。另一項理由則是在民主國家地區之外的國家，這些國家尚未能達到完全相互依賴的關係。因而在許多領域當中，依現實主義來假設軍事權力與安全議題的重要性仍然有效。12
Military forces have always been the central parts of human history. General countries consider military forces as the means for defense or attack. Offensive military forces are to change the status quo, but defensive ones to maintain the existence. Nevertheless, in the contemporary globalization era, military forces remain playing an important role in the international relationships. So far, globalization has not transformed international politics into new type interdependent ones. The main reasons are popularized information makes the technique proliferated, and the existing political and military powers also control numerous resources. And the other reason is a number of countries that are not in the democratic states region cannot attain the interdependent relationships. Thus, the
importance on military powers and security topics presumed by realism remains persuadable and effective within various issues.12

國際經濟的發展攸關美國國家利益，所以華盛頓在推動經濟全球化與開放貿易政策時，透過軍事力量來保有與促進經濟和外交上對於全球的影響力。
The development of international economy has much to do with American interests. So, when Washington pushes economy globalization and liberates trade policy, it will still maintain its own military and political influences worldwide.

軍事全球化更指涉武力、威脅或威脅使用武力以及軍事的部署，透過遠距離的網絡來展現。也就是說，軍事全球化是基於國家對於大規模毀滅性武器擴散的危險與恐怖主義結合的威脅，促使了對於全球在軍事上的聯繫。
Military globalization means that a country displays its arms, threats, intimidation with powers and military deployment via long-distance networks. In other words, envisaging the combining threats of WMD proliferation and terrorism, military globalization is to link the world together via military means.

現今國際關係中主權國家體系最重要的維持者是美國，而足以代表體現美國軍事全球化就是美國的核武力量。因為在不同的國際結構之下，軍事力量成為一種方式，政府領袖可以憑藉此種方式，使反對者或潛在威脅者屈服於本身的願望與影響力之下，使其遵從於國家利益的需求。無論是談判或威脅，軍事力量都是可以成為靜默的「巨棒」而強化說服的力量。
Today, America is the most momentous leader amidst the sovereignties of the international relations. And its nuclear weapon powers are just able to realize her military globalization. Within international different structures, military power is a useful method for a government or a leader to make his opponents or potential enemies be subject to his willing and influence, so as to suit his countries’ interests. By means of either negotiation or threat, military forces will definitely become a silent ‘giant stick’ to strengthen the persuasion.

防止核武擴散終極的手段便是使用軍事行動。在軍事行動的光譜上，又可以區分為五項等級，從威脅使用武力到使用軍事武力。第一：在核子武器尚未研發完成時，立刻破壞該國製造核武的軍事設施，如在一九八一年時，以色列的空軍就曾經摧毀伊拉克位於奧賽瑞克的核能反應爐。第二：在核子武器未使用之前，即將之摧毀。第三：採用防禦性的方式，如發展飛彈或防禦系統，如雷根政府時期的星戰計畫（戰略防衛機先），或柯林頓政府的戰區彈道防衛。第四：則是從聯合國安全理事會六八七號決議案引伸而來，對於擴散國可以使用武力或者威脅使用武力迫其就範。第五：乾脆促成該國政府的改變，利用各種方式推翻該國政府，扶植願意遵守
國際規範的政府。13
The final means to prevent WMD proliferation is to take military actions. In the spectrum of military actions, they can be divided into five grades, which are from intimidation with powers to military operation. Firstly, prior to the completion of nuclear weapon research, immediately destroy the military base for generating nuclear weapons. For example, in 1981, Israel Air Force smashed Iraqi nuclear reactors located at Osirak. Secondly, before the usage of nuclear weapons, demolish them as soon as possible. Thirdly, adopt the defensive methods such as missile or defense systems. For instance,
there were Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) of Ronald Reagan’s administration and Theatre Missile Defense (TMD) of Bill Cliton’s administration. Fourthly, citing the resolution no. 687 of United Nations Security Council, constrain the countries proliferating nuclear weapons by means of military forces or intimidation with powers. Fifthly, directly overthrow the regime; help the country change to a new government, which is willing to abide by the international regulations.13

簡言之，為了超越時空的限制與獲得可預測性，軍事戰略理論必須考量到戰略環境的無窮變化以及戰爭的本質。倘若要在軍事理論與實際之間達成均衡，就要如同 霍華爵士所言的，「看清時代的趨勢變化」。軍事全球化就成為典範轉移的趨勢之一。
In short, exceeding the limitation of time and space and gaining the predictability, a military strategic theory must consider the variability of strategic environments and the war essence itself. If military theory has to be balanced with the substantial status, then it should be like the words of Michael Howard – should allow one to see the essential currents ahead on which to ride.

邪惡軸心：美國的語言標籤戰略
Axis of Evil: Language Label Strategy of America

語言是人類對於環境反應的一部份。語言存在的目的是作為一種符號，一種溝通的方式。在自然的狀態之下，人類經由社會化的方式學習語言，透過語言來學習社會的各項安排、規範與制度。逐漸的，人類察覺到語言的變異、語彙風格的選擇，甚至聲音，在使用者之間反映著不同的權力、地位與凝聚力。14於是，語言也被視為工具，動員多數的群眾來取得政治上的情感與想像認同。
Language is one part of human being’s reflections toward environments. The existing goal of language is a symbol as well as a communication way. In natural circumstance, humans learn their languages with socialization. Meanwhile, they know social practices, norms and institutions through language. Gradually, humans are aware of language variation, word style, even the tone can reveal the differences in power, status, and centripetal force among the users.14 Therefore, language consciously articulates political goal requiring the political mobilization of significant numbers of people.

尼布爾在一九四○年代就曾教導過，歷史的問題在於邪惡長期蓋過了善良，而且引導善良走向腐敗。15例如，美國甘迺迪總統對知識份子談話時，就很喜歡用一些誇大的字眼。例如他談及前蘇聯時，將他們視作大石頭以及無情的陰謀集團企圖征服整個世界。16一九八三年美國前總統雷根更把前蘇聯稱為邪惡帝國。17由於雷根在好萊塢的經驗，讓他瞭解到宣傳的重要性，他知道沒有善與惡，只有人民（或黨）的勝利，沒有是與非，只有歷史。
Reinhold Niebuhr taught the generation of the 1940’s that the problem of history was the persistent power of evil surpassing over good, even corrupting the good.15 For instance, American ex-president John F. Kennedy tended to talk more to intellectuals so he put it in bigger words. As he described the ex-Soviet Union as a monolithic and a ruthless conspiracy that intended to conquer the world.16 In 1983, ex-president Ronald Reagan named ex-Soviet Union an evil empire.17 In compliance with his experiences in Hollywood, he deeply believed in the importance of propaganda. So he realized that
there is no good or evil, except the triumph of people (party), and there is no right or wrong, only history.

受到九一一恐怖攻擊事件，小布希操作仇恨,憤怒與愛國心來對抗恐怖主義。美國先以非人化的語言稱呼恐怖主義份子，如不負責任的國家、道德痲瘋病、18惡魔帝國、邪惡帝國，而一直到了邪惡軸心才定案。19並把邪惡軸心定義為支援恐怖主義國家並積極尋求大規模毀滅性武器的國家。透過把對手妖魔化、污名化的操作作法，凝聚國內大眾的政治動員，並領導國際社會對抗恐怖主義份子。
Bush was to manipulate the grief, anger and patriotism irritated by the terrorism attacks on September 11, 2001 to counter terrorism. Suffering from 911 terrorism attacks, America called terrorists in non-humanized words, such as less-responsible states, moral leper,18 empire of the evil, alliance of haughty, axis of evil.19 Finally, America stuck the label ‘axis of evil’ on the countries that sponsor the terrorism and look for WMD. Evilizing and stigmatizing its opponents, America cemented together her people and led the international community to fight the terrorism.

在十年前蘇聯崩潰之後，當冷戰的敵人消失之際，美國的五角大廈開始尋找正當性的理由來保有軍事預算。於是，柯林頓政府建議隨時準備在面對全球兩場相似的「主要區域戰爭」中來對抗流氓國家：北韓、伊朗或伊拉克。之後，可以說，小布希把促進美國地緣政治的利益，包裹在九一一攻擊事件當中。小布希演說當中沒有提到賓拉登的死活，也很少提到蓋達組織，相對的，他提出了邪惡軸心，將北韓、伊朗、伊拉克視為美國下一階段準備對抗的國家。20
A decade ago, when the USSR collapsed, American Pentagon chiefs had to figure out a rationale to justify maintaining a military budget after a Cold War. Clinton administration suggested that U.S. military should be prepared to fight two simultaneous ‘major theater wars’ on either side of the world against ‘rogue nations,’ namely, Iraq, Iran and North Korea. We also contended Bush was wrapping American strategy in the tragedy of September 11 terrorism arracks to advance U.S. geopolitical interests. Bushdidn’t mention Osama bin Laden, whom he had wanted ‘dead or alive’ only a few
months before. He barely mentioned the al-Qaeda network. Instead, he conjured up an ‘axis of evil,’ composed of Iraq, Iran and North Korea, that the Pentagon had to be prepared to fight.20

懷貝克說，今天世界和平的最大威脅是「恐怖主義」，但不是這個字所指的意義，而是指這個字的本身。這個字是危險的，人們可以用他來套進他所痛恨的對象。自從九一一之後，這個字已經變成了美國施展其絕對的權利，用以當作攻擊任何他所不喜歡的國家。21
The greatest threat to world peace today is clearly ‘terrorism’- not the behavior to which the word is applied, but the word itself that said by John V. Whitbeck. This word is dangerous. People are able to and would like to call their enemies in this word. Starting from the 911 terrorism attacks, this word has become an absolute right of America, and is massively used to insult the countries that America does not like.21

就道德意義而言，善與惡相對立。美國往往把本身「善惡」的是非觀帶進國際關係或外交政策之中。小布希在國情諮文說，「我們已經認清我們從未懷疑的真理：邪惡確實存在，需起而攻之」。人們常從範疇的角度來處理他們的經驗，並在這些範疇的基礎上行動，這些範疇遂構成人類的世界觀。當運用這類污名化或妖魔化的語言越久，表示這些語言已逐漸感染人們的認知，逐漸用「大腦的經驗」來理解整個世界，很容易產生制約式的反應，於是邪惡軸心成為政治認識之後，隨後的政治對戰策略於焉開展。
In terms of the meaning of moral, good and evil are opposites. America has always merged her own ‘good and evil’ value into her international relationships and diplomatic practices. In Bush’s State of the Union Address, he delivered, “We now recognize the truth we have never suspected. That is the evil indeed exist, and we should demolish it.” People like to handle with their experiences in an aspect of categories, and take an action based on these categories. Subsequently, these categories have become a worldview of the people. When the evilized and stigmatized languages are massively used for a long time, it means these negative languages contaminate the humans’ recognitions. Gradually they will use ‘brain experience’ to realize the world, and this is very apt to bring out a constrain reaction. Therefore, as ‘evil of axis’ has turned into a political knowledge; accordingly, the political war strategy is coming out.