烏茲別克斯坦共和國政治現代化與民主化特點 (1991-2016)

Peculiarities of political modernization-democratization in the Republic of Uzbekistan (1991-2016)

馮耀昇(Abdurakhmonov Farkhod)

指導教授 ： 劉紀蕙

國立交通大學/人文社會學院/社會與文化研究所/博士(2019年)

摘要

本論文主要研究1991年至2016年後蘇聯時期烏茲別克斯坦政權現代化的過程。
這個研究課題的重要性是不容置疑的，因為任何國家的社會經濟發展與其政治制度和政權的本質高度相關。因此，政治現代化在政治理論和社會生活中佔有重要地位。
政治制度的現代化，或政治現代化，是一個複雜而漫長的過程，涉及政治制度質的變化和穩定民主社會的形成。就世界其他國家的迅速發展來看，四分之一世紀似乎有足夠的時間實施政治現代化，但烏茲別克斯坦在其獨立27年期間未能實現重大的政治現代化。該國的政治精英不僅沒有建立政治制度，反而只創造了裝飾性的政治機構，而國家的真正政治生活更接近於不民主的政權，有時甚至是封建制度。此外，該國一直受到嚴重的人權問題的困擾。總而言之，烏茲別克斯坦的現代政治制度，在獨立後出現並在過去27年中成形，無法建立一個現代民主國家。
本論文考察了烏茲別克斯坦政治制度現代化、民主化的特點，具體情況，指出了政治現代化的主要障礙，並提供了解決這些障礙的可能途徑。特別是，將重點分析政治現代化的製度和社會文化因素。
作者試圖回答主要問題：為什麼烏茲別克斯坦在蘇聯解體後不能建立一個民主國家，哪些因素影響了一個不民主的政權的形成和發展？
作者得出的結論是，烏茲別克斯坦非民主政權的出現植根於內部和外部因素。因此，由於烏茲別克斯坦政治現代化的失敗，非民主政治制度是在進步的幌子下建立
作者認為，政治制度的現代化應當是確實的，並著重於確保法治，權力分立，不僅充分實施公民的政治權利和社會經濟權利，也振興國家的公眾和政治生活。
因此，為了在國內建立民主政權，必須發展政治和法律文化，形成健康的公民社會，並加強國際組織的地位。
這項研究的結果可以作為分析現代國家非民主政治制度政權的框架。

關鍵字: 政治現代化，政治體制，民主，政治改革，政治精英，憲政，新文化主義，公民社會，宗族。

關鍵字

政治現代化 ； 政治體制 ； 民主 ； 政治改革 ； 政治精英 ； 憲政 ； 新文化主義 ； 公民社會 ； 宗族

並列摘要

This thesis examines the process of modernization in the post-Soviet Uzbekistan political regime from 1991 to 2016.
The importance of this research topic is beyond question because the socio-economic development of any country is primarily related to the nature of its political system and regime. Therefore, modernization of the political regime occupies an important place in political theory and in social life.
Modernization of the political regime, or political modernization, is a complex and lengthy process that involves a qualitative change in the political system and the formation of a stable democratic society. A quarter of a century may seem like a sufficient period to implement political modernization, given the rapid development of other countries around the world, but on the whole, Uzbekistan has not been able to achieve significant political modernization during its 27 years of independence. Instead of developing a political system, the country’s political elites have only created decorative political institutions while the real political life of the country is closer to an undemocratic political regime, and sometimes the feudal system. Moreover, the country has been plagued by serious human rights issues. In a word, the modern political regime of Uzbekistan, which arose after independence and took shape in the last 27 years, was unable to create a modern democratic state.
This thesis examines the peculiarities, specifics of the modernization, democratization of the political regime in Uzbekistan, identifies the main impediments to political modernization, and indicates possible ways to address them. In particular, the focus will be given to the analysis of the institutional and socio-cultural factors of political modernization.
The author attempts to answer the main question: Why couldn’t Uzbekistan create a democratic state after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, and what factors have influenced the formation and development of an undemocratic political regime?
The author comes to the conclusion that the appearance of the undemocratic regime in Uzbekistan is rooted in both internal and external factors. Therefore, as a result of the failure of political modernization in Uzbekistan, the non-democratic political regime has been established under the guise of progress. Furthermore, the author asserts that the transition from a non-democratic regime to a modern democratic regime accordingly requires internal as well as external efforts.
The author argues that the modernization of the political system should be real and focused on ensuring the rule of law, the separation of powers, the full implementation of not only political but also socio-economic rights of citizens, and the revitalization of the country's public and political life.
Therefore, in order to establish a democratic regime in the country, it is necessary to develop a political and legal culture, form a healthy civil society, and strengthen the status of international organizations.
The results of this research may be used as a framework for the analysis of non-democratic political regimes in modern states.

Keywords: Political modernization, Political regime, Democracy, Political reforms, Political Elite, Constitutionalism, Neopatrimonialism, Civil society, Clans.

並列關鍵字

Political modernization ； Political regime ； Democracy ； Political reforms ； Political Elite ； Constitutionalism ； Neopatrimonialism ； Civil society ； Clans

參考文獻

71. Erdmann G., Engel U. (2007). Neopatrimonialism Reconsidered: Critical Review and Elaboration of an Elusive Concept//Commonwealth & Comparative Politics. Vol. 45. No.1, pp. 95-119, DOI: 10.1080/14662040601135813.

137. Kandiyoti D. (2007). Post-Soviet institutional design and the paradoxes of the ‘Uzbek path’ // Central Asian Survey, Vol.26. No.1, pp.31-48. DOI: 10.1080/02634930701423426.

158. Kisangani E., Wayne E. (2007) The Political economy of State Terror// Defence and Peace Economics. Vol.18. No.5, pp. 405-414. DOI:10.1080/10242690701455433.

275. Stevens D. (2007). Political society and civil society in Uzbekistan-never the twain shall meet? //Central Asian Survey, Vol.26. No.1, pp.49-64. DOI: 10.1080/02634930701423467.

297. Urinboyev R. (2018). Corruption in Post-Soviet Uzbekistan// In: Farazmand A. (eds) Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and Governance. https://doi.org//10.1007/978-3-319-31816-5_3666-1