1967年中东战争与美苏的有限缓和

【作者】 葛海滨；

【导师】 王玮；

【作者基本信息】 山东师范大学 ， 世界史， 2006， 硕士

【摘要】 古巴导弹危机之后,美苏关系逐渐步入到有限缓和时期,大体时间从1963年到1968年。而在此期间,1967年爆发的中东战争及美苏对这场危机的处理更是美苏有限缓和的典型案例。本文依据可运用的历史资料,以全球史观、唯物史观为指导,采用分析、比较、归纳的方法,在美苏有限缓和的框架下对1967年中东战争做一个系统地回顾和总结,并进一步力求为认识和了解60年代的美苏关系提供一个思考和分析的框架。全文分为五部分:(一)美苏“有限缓和”的背景及其内涵。美苏关系由尖锐冷战时期向有限缓和时期的转变,其标志性事件是古巴导弹危机的发生。在古巴导弹危机中,美、苏把世界推到核战争的边缘,最后又不得不妥协,从而开创了美苏关系既对抗又对话,即斗争又妥协的新阶段。当然古巴导弹危机及核威慑不是造成尖锐冷战时期结束的唯一因素,此时国际体系中发生了一系列其他的变化,也大大地影响了这一时期的美苏关系。例如:美苏各自的冷战联盟体系的解体;在二次大战中遭受严重灾难的许多国家在经济上和政治上的全面复兴;苏联达到了与美国的战略核均势;发达国家和发展中国家都坚持民族主义;许多新兴国家有能力对苏联和中国保持自己的独立,而不必依赖美国的保护;在国际体系中经济实力的重要性日益增长;以及美国、苏联领导班子的变化。分析了美苏有限缓和的背景之后,可以从国际关系学中博奕论的角度对“有限缓和”加深理解。博奕论的一个定理是:在两人零和博奕中,任何理性策略都以最小最大理论为基础,即每个奕者都力图使他所能确保获得的最小收益达到最大限度,或者使他必须遭受的最大损失减少到最小限度。60年代美苏之间解决古巴导弹危机基本上遵循的就是这一博奕规则。(二)六月战争前美苏在中东的对抗与合作。六月战争前,其实美苏早已插足中东事务,积极扩展自己势力,扶植各自盟友。中东亦成为美苏全球较逐的重要场所。但美苏在中东都处于地域性利益和全球性利益相矛盾的尴尬境地,不愿直接卷入这一地区的政治漩涡之中,都希望避免美苏双方发生直接的军事冲突。因此,美苏有着共同的愿望:避免大规模的阿以战争。为此,美苏对于1967年战争前夕的阿以冲突危机做出了积极的反应,合作来避免战争,但双方的努力仍然受到了限制。为避免同盟国家的背叛或是被推翻,超级大国尽量对盟友予以支更多还原

【Abstract】 After Cuban Missile crisis, the relation between America and the Soviet Unionmarches into a time of limited and gradual relaxation, roughly time from 1963 to 1968during which in 1967 the Middle East war erupted and the treatment of America andthe Soviet Union to this crisis were the typical case that America and the Soviet Unionlimitedly relaxed. Resting on the usable historical materials, from a global historicalviewpoint and the historical materialism as instruction, this article uses the means ofanalysis, comparison and induction, making a systematic retrospect andsummarization of the 1967 Middle East war under a relaxed frame of America and theSoviet Union. What’s more, it attempts to provide a critical and analysis frame toknow and to understand the relation between America and the Soviet Union of the1960s further.I. The background and connotation of finite relax The symbolic event of therelation between America and the Soviet Union of turning acute cold war times intofinite relax times was the occurrence of Cuban Missile crisis. In the Cuban missilecrisis, America and the Soviet Union pushed the whole world to the edge of a nuclearwar, but they compromised finally and started a new phase of confront and dialogue,that is fight and compromise. Certainly the Cuban missile crisis and the nucleusdeterrent were not the only causes of the ending of the tense cold war period, duringwhich time a series of other changes had taken place in the international system,which also affected the relation America and the Soviet Union greatly. For example:the disorganizations of America’s and the Soviet Union’s respective cold war alliancesystems;the comprehensive revival of many nations that suffered serious disasters inSecond World War economically and the politically;the Soviet Union’s reach to theequality with America in strategic nuclear parity;both the developed country and thedeveloping nation persisted nationalism. Many newly-built countries had the ability tomaintain their own independence from the Soviet Union and China and not need torely on the protection of America;the growth of the importance of economicpotentiality in the international system day by day;and the changes in the leadinggroups in America and the Soviet Union. After the analysis of the background inwhich America and the Soviet Union limitedly relaxed, a further understanding can beachieved from the perspective of “chess-playing theory” in the science ofinternational relations. One theorem was that when two people in two human of zeroand in abundant Luanevery ,rational strategy was based on the smallest and thebiggest theory, in other words, every player tries their best to guarantee his or her leastbenefits to the highest extent, or to make his or her most loss to the least degree. In the1960s America and the Soviet Union solved the Cuban missile crisis basicallyfollowed this rule.II.The confrontation and cooperation in the Middle East between America andthe Soviet Union before the June War Before the June War, America and the SovietUnion had in fact had already involved in the Middle East issue, actively expandingtheir respective influence and propping up their own allies. The Middle East alsobecame the important place where American and the Soviet Union chased in a globalbackground. However, both American and the Soviet Union were in an awkwardposition of the dilemma of local benefits and global benefit, unwilling to be involvedin this regional political swirl directly, both hoping avoid the direct military conflict.Therefore, the two parties had the common desire, the avoidance of the large-scaleArab and Israel war. As a result, American and the Soviet Union made a positiveresponse to the Arab and Israel conflict crisis in 1967 before the war and theycooperated to avoid the war, but the two parties’ efforts were restricted. Because inorder to avoid the betrayal or the overthrow of their allied nations, the twosuperpowers supported them as far as possible. This weakened the superpower tolimit their allied nations in using their military force to pursue the goals either at homeor in the region, even though these goals were inconsistent with the superpower’sgoals.III.Efforts and troubles that the superpowers held in ending the war In Junefifth, the war broke out, which shocked both American and the Soviet Union. Afterthe failure of the cooperation in avoiding the war, they faced the problem that how toavoid the military confrontation with the opposite party suddenly. In the early times ofthe war, the Israeli army fought with irresistible force in the battle field, whichresulted in a more urgent desire to seek a peaceful solution from the Soviet Union’sside than the US’. This limited the degree of effective cooperation between the twogreat nations to seek the ceasefire. Not until the later period of the war, attack ofGolan Highland in Syria from Israel aroused panic of the Soviet Union that threatenedto use military power. US had no choice but push pressure on Israel and urged a rapidconclusion of the war.IV.The postwar confrontation and cooperation between America and the SovietUnion in the Arab and Israel peace talks After the war, America suffered a decliningreputation in the Middle East and was accused of favoring Israel by the Arabic world.The continual anti-American waves were going on in this region. Under thisbackground, after the ceasefire in 1967, America made Iran, Saudi Arabia and Israelits three strategic props in Middle East. Therefore, the postwar solution of Americafavored in an achievement of the solution allowing Israel to be accepted as a memberof the Middle East and enjoy the right of possessing the Suez Canal. On the otherhand, the Soviet Union suffered a quite embarrassing position after the war. Effectedby the Sixth Day War, an anti-soviet emotion appeared in Egypt and other regions ofthe Arabic world. In order to redeem its image, after that, the Soviet Union assisted itsallies in the Middle East massively, which suggested that it make up its mind tocontinue its role as a supporter militarily and politically in the international domain tothe Arabs. This subsidizing didn’t mean the eagerness of initiating wars. Regardingthe Middle East, the Soviet leadership favored in the maintenance of one position of"No war, no peace" aspect preserve. All the factors had decided the postwar path ofAmerica and Soviet cooperative processing the conflict between Arab and Israel wasnot smooth.V.Reconsideration The first reconsideration is the improvement in the use of hotline and rules in dealing with crisis. In the process of crisis treating, as to the previousinstances, there was a distinct change, that is, the first massive use of “the hotlinebetween America and the Soviet Union”. This also symbolized a significantimprovement in the incisive rules between America and the Soviet Union in theprocess of managing the crisis. In the incisive cold war time, the rules betweenAmerica and the Soviet Union were actions as well as talks, which profit from theestablishment of “the hotline”. The second reconsideration is that in the third periodof relaxation in the Middle East, the treatment of the crisis indicated a relative rationalthinking between America and the Soviet Union, manifesting a great nation’sresponsibility consciousness in dealing with international conflicts.更多还原