检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:崔子恒 杨守明[1] CUI Ziheng;YANG Shouming(School of Public Administration,Nanjing Normal University,Nanjing 210000,China)
机构地区:[1]南京师范大学公共管理学院,江苏南京210000
出 处:《郑州航空工业管理学院学报(社会科学版)》2022年第5期28-35,共8页Journal of Zhengzhou University of Aeronautics(Social Science Edition)
基 金:教育部哲学社会科学研究重大课题攻关项目(20JZD009)。
摘 要:美国最初以“打击恐怖主义”名义发动的阿富汗战争曾得到了国际社会的普遍支持,然而在战争中乃至结束之后却一直饱受其他国家的口诛笔伐,究其根源主要是美国发动的阿富汗战争逐渐不再被外界纯粹定位为“反恐战争”。深入分析阿富汗战争的性质,可将“新干涉主义”作为主要研究视角。通过审视整个战争中内战、反恐和重建三个阶段的战略演变,进而验证阿富汗“反恐战争”背后实际上蕴藏着“新干涉主义”特质;从权力、制度以及观念三个维度出发,透视出阿富汗战争的失败预示着美国新干涉主义战略已然深陷困局。The United States initially launched the Afghan war in the name of “combating terrorism” and received universal support from the international community, but in the middle of the war and even after the end of the war, it has been criticized by other countries. The main reason is that the US War in Afghanistan is gradually no longer purely positioned as the “war on terrorism” by the outside world. In-depth analysis of the nature of the Afghan war can take the new interventionism as the main research perspective. Through examining the strategic evolution of the three stages of civil war, counter-terrorism and reconstruction of throughout the war, it is verified that there is actually a “new interventionism” characteristic behind the Afghan war on terrorism, and from the three dimensions of power, system and concept, the failure of the Afghan war indicates that the United States has been deeply trapped in the implementation of the new interventionist strategy.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:3.142.43.181