国际组织应对大国“退群”行为的策略选择——以联合国教科文组织为例  

International Organization’s Strategies to Major Power’s Withdrawals:A Case Study of UNESCO

作　　者：朱杰进[1] 刘瑛琛 ZHU Jiejin;LIU Yingchen

机构地区：[1]复旦大学国际关系与公共事务学院,上海200433

出　　处：《国际展望》2025年第3期90-112,179,180,共25页Global Review

摘　　要：在世界大变局中,大国“退群”行为已成为国际组织发展进程中普遍面临的挑战,而国际组织选择应对此行为的策略差异与其所需资源的集中度及其内部主要大国的立场一致性有关。联合国教科文组织面对不同时期的美国“退群”行为,采用了不同类型的应对策略。面对1983年美国里根政府的“退群”时,教科文组织因所需资金和专业网络资源集中度较高,且其他主要大国与美国的立场较为一致,难以获得替代性资源,从而采取了适应型应对策略;而面对2017年美国特朗普政府的“退群”时,教科文组织因所需资金和专业网络资源集中度相对较低,且其他主要大国与美国的立场一致性较低,更容易获取替代性资源,从而采取了抵制型应对策略。探究国际组织应对大国“退群”行为所采取的策略选择差异及背后逻辑,对于中国更有效应对其他大国的“退群”行为具有重要意义。In an era of global upheaval,the withdrawal of major powers from international organizations has emerged as a pervasive challenge.The United Nations Educational,Scientific and Cultural Organization(UNESCO)offers a revealing case:confronted twice by U.S.exits,it has oscillated between adaptation and resistance.This variation begs explanation.Drawing on resource dependence theory,this study contends that two factors—the concentration of resources an organization requires and the degree of alignment among its major members—shape its ability to secure alternatives and,thus,its strategic response.In 1983,as the Reagan administration withdrew,UNESCO faced a stark reality:its reliance on highly concentrated financial and professional resources, coupled with broad alignment between other key powers and the United States, left little room for substitution, compelling an adaptive stance. By contrast, in 2017, when the Trump administration exited, UNESCO’s resource needs were less centralized, and major powers diverged from Washington's position, enabling access to alternative support and emboldening a resistive approach. Unpacking these strategic choices and their underlying logic not only enriches our understanding of great-power dynamics within international institutions but also offers critical insights for China as it navigates similar withdrawals by other states.

关 键 词：大国“退群” 资源集中度 大国立场一致性 联合国教科文组织 适应型策略 抵制型策略 

分 类 号：D813.2[政治法律—国际关系]