- 學位論文
從北美自由貿易協定到美墨加協定：新古典現實主義中決策者認知的觀點
From NAFTA to USMCA: Neoclassical Realism and the Perception of Decision-makers
摘要
1994年生效的北美自由貿易協定和2020年生效的美墨加協定，雖然都是施行於美墨加三國，兩者的性質卻有很大的差異，前者多邊開放，後者卻顯現出保護主義；本研究採用多層次的新古典現實主義觀點，在國際因素上關注於國際權力分配的變化，國內因素則聚焦於決策者認知，探討兩個自由貿易協定的制定過程中，各自不同的國際情勢和決策者認知如何影響其政策生成，並分析兩協定呈現不同性質之原因。 本研究以歷史研究法與論述分析法，分析身為最重要決策者的柯林頓和川普兩位總統之公開發言、傳記、任內官方文件等資料，爬梳兩協定制定過程中的國際情勢及決策者認知。於決策者認知的部分，再進一步對於對國際體系、國內政治和國家利益的認知等三大部分進行分析，深入解析決策者的想法。 研究發現，北美自由貿易協定和美墨加協定的制定，皆面臨新崛起強權的競爭、認為制定新的自由貿易協定有利於美國經濟利益、且制定角度都是美國優先等。然而在決策者認知中，美國在兩個時期面對的不同國際挑戰，分別帶來開放市場及不公平貿易競爭上的威脅；以及在兩位決策者的認知中，美國在國際貿易下的犧牲者或弱勢族群有所不同，此兩大差異導致兩協定最終呈現為開放和保護主義之兩個極端。
並列摘要
Although both of North America Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) are related to free trade, the decision making process of these two agreements have different implications: while the former is open and multilateral, the latter is protective. The thesis applies neoclassical realism to discuss how international system factors and domestic factors (especially the perception of decision-makers) affect policymaking. More specifically, I compare the similarities and differences between the formulation of NAFTA and USMCA and analyze why these two free trade agreements have different implications. To explore the change of distribution of power in the international system and the perception of decision-makers, the thesis analyzes public speeches, biographies, and official documents of President Clinton and President Trump, who were the most important decision-makers, through discourse analysis. The thesis then further divides source of decision-makers’ perceptions into three parts: the perception of the international system, the evaluation of domestic politics, and the measurement of the overall national interest. After comparing the formulation of NAFTA and USMCA, the thesis finds that although the two agreements have many similarities, Clinton and Trump perceived differently about international challenges of the United States in the 1990s and 2010s. They also had different perceptions about economic victims of international trade. Due to these two reasons, Clinton and Trump formulated two free trade agreements that seem to be similar but in fact present opposite implications.