歐巴馬與拜登對中政策之比較：以新古典現實主義分析

Abstract

因應中國大陸的崛起，使得美國對中政策逐漸開始產生變化，展現了與過去不同的趨勢，而拜登作為美國民主黨籍的領導人，且曾於歐巴馬擔任總統時期擔任副總統一職，在外交理念上雖與後者具有一定的相似度與延續性，但在對中政策方面卻呈現出顯著差異。歐巴馬在對中政策上，仍然選擇與中國大陸進行合作，並透過雙邊合作的方式來維繫與中國大陸之關係，進而降低美中之間衝突的風險。相反的，拜登政府在對中政策上，則呈現明顯強硬的情況，並透過與盟友間的合作，深化美國的印太戰略，以圍堵中國大陸日益增長的影響力。換言之，儘管兩任總統皆面臨到中國大陸實力擴張的挑戰，但在政策選擇方向卻有所不同。在這些變遷的背後，除了美國政府既有戰略文化之影響外，國際與國內因素也扮演了關鍵性的角色，互相影響著兩任總統在不同時期，採取不一樣的對中方針。為進一步理解前述發展，本文將以新古典現實主義的視角出發，來探討歐巴馬以及拜登兩任總統的對中政策如何產生變化。新古典現實主義認為，一個國家的外交政策，除了受到國際因素外，還會被國內政治環境牽動。在國際層次方面，本文將透過分析國際組織內中國大陸人士的變化、印太區域內的權力平衡以及兩岸局勢的變化，來解釋國際層次如何促成美國對中政策的調整。而國內層次的部份，則重點檢視美國國會的態度、美國民意的取向以及領導者個人風格等因素，如何影響對中政策的政策選擇。透過同為民主黨的歐巴馬與拜登政府之比較，本文期望能夠針對影響兩者政策差異之因素，提供更具體、更有系統的了解。The rise of the People's Republic of China has led to notable shifts in U.S. foreign policy toward China. Although both Barack Obama and Joe Biden are Democratic presidents and share a degree of continuity in diplomatic philosophy—especially considering Biden’s prior role as Vice President during the Obama administration—their respective China policies differ significantly. While Obama prioritized strategic engagement and bilateral cooperation with China to manage tensions and minimize the risk of conflict, the Bidenadministration has taken a more confrontational approach. Biden has reinforced the U.S. Indo-Pacific strategy and sought to deepen alliances in order to counter China's growing regional and global influence. Despite facing similar structural challenges posed by China’s rise, the Obama and Biden administrations adopted divergent policy responses. This variation cannot be fully explained by international systemic factors alone; rather, it underscores the interaction between international pressures and domestic political conditions. This paper adopts a neoclassical realist framework to analyze the evolution of U.S. China policy under the Obama and Biden presidencies. At the international level, it examines shifts in China’s presence in global institutions, changes in Indo-Pacific power dynamics, and developments in cross-Strait relations. At the domestic level, it investigates the influence of congressional attitudes, public opinion, and individual leadership styles. By comparing these two administrations, the study aims to offer a more systematic understanding of the key factors shaping their differing strategic approaches to China.