后“阿拉伯之春”时代的国家建构路径——基于“突尼斯模式”与“也门模式”的比较研究  

State-building Paths in the Post-Arab Spring Era:A Comparative Analysis of the “Yemeni Model” and the“Tunisian Model”

作　　者：张楚楚[1] ZHANG Chuchu(University of Cambridg)

机构地区：[1]剑桥大学政治与国际研究系

出　　处：《武汉大学学报（人文科学版）》2017年第4期101-108,共8页Wuhan University Journal (Humanity Sciences)

基　　金：国家社会科学基金一般项目(12BSS014)

摘　　要：从武装力量集中度、国家税收权威性、权力来源合法性、外部干涉程度等四个方面出发,对后革命时代的也门与突尼斯国家建构路径进行比较分析,可以发现:武装力量集中化、国家税收权威化、权力来源合法化与较低外部干预是国家建构取得成功的关键。反之,则会给建构进程带来障碍,"也门模式"便是一个例证。突尼斯虽然在武装力量整合与合法性构建方面取得巨大成绩,但革命过去五年后,国家税收能力迟迟没有得到提升,而且在经济状况因严峻的反恐形势不断恶化背景下有愈演愈烈之势。因此,目前"突尼斯模式"尚显脆弱,危机重重。The article compares the state-building paths of Yemen and Tunisia following the revolution in 2010-2011 by focusing on four variables-concentration of the armed forces, national tax authority, the legitimacy of the power source and external intervention. I contend that centralization of the armed force, strong authority of national tax, legitimate source of power and less external intervention are keys to the success of state-building. Conversely, as the Yemeni case has shown, a lack of these four elements will lead to the failure of state-building. It is worth noting that although Tunisia has acquired achievements in integrating the armed forces and building legitimacy, the government＇s tax power remains to be weak and is likely to become even worse as the Tunisian economy has deteriorated due to severe terrorist threat. Hence, the so-called ＂Tunisian model＂ is still fragile and crisi-ridden.

关 键 词：阿拉伯之春 国家建构 也门模式 突尼斯模式 

分 类 号：D815.4[政治法律—国际关系]