| Abstract: | 在中國不斷崛起背景之下，中國在國際社會中的行為導致國際社會的不確定性增加。解釋中國對外行為以及中國與他國關係日益蒙受各國重視，尤其周邊國家旨在尋出適當的回應。對於越南而言，雙方關係雖然不斷發展，但是歷史遺留的問題仍然尚未得以解決。這使得越南決策者必須深思對中政策、越南南海政策。在此過程中，越南智庫扮演了重要的角色。這意味著分析中國相關問題，包括中國南海政策成為越南智庫研究重點之一。值得注意的是從越南對中政策，越南南海政策之中可看出越南智庫在內的越南不同社群對中國形象的認知。基本上，此形象可透過反映出越南智庫學者對中國南海政策的看法。
本論文透過建構主義中信念、規範、以及認同等若干核心概念與知識社群的諸多論述，同時，採用不同越南智庫學者具備不同的訓練背景和教育方式使得他們對中國南形象的認知有所不同，但是對中國南海政策卻持有相同的看法、越南智庫分析中國南海政策出發角度不同，使得他們對中國南海政策的看法不同等兩大命題來找出越南智庫對中國形象的認知以及其影響因素。在本論文中，核心的論點就是越南智庫學者對中國形象較為複雜；既正面又疑慮。雖然越南智庫學者對中國總體形象持有正面的認知，但是在南海問題中，越南智庫學者對中國南海政策的目標以及其推動方式的認知具有一定程度疑慮的特點。此類複雜認知取決於越南智庫學者教育背景，越南內外的政治結構，越南社會發展脈絡，以及越南智庫學者之間和他們與研究對象。從而，具備不同的教育背景、分析視角和層次使得身為研究中國重鎮之越南外交學院學者與越南社科院中國研究所學者對中國形象的認知所以異同；這兩家智庫學者對中國南海政策的疑慮態度彰顯有所不同。此類不同的彰顯使得越南智庫學者在越南高層決策者制定對中政策過程中提供多樣、不同的選項。這些不同政策選項反映了越南回應中國的靈活特點。越南智庫學者所提供的政策建議不非完全相對立，反而，提供若干多元觀點。多元觀點就是存在越南內部中。
Against the backdrop of China’s rapid rise, China’s behaviors in international affairs are significant and cause various uncertainties in international communities. That rises the demand of China peripheral states, for studying the impacts of China-related behaviors on themselves. For Vietnam, although Vietnam- China relations have developed dramatically for several decades, both sides still have to confront with various historical issues such as sovereignty dispute. These issues induce Vietnam policy actors to take careful considerations regarding Vietnam’s China policy and Vietnam’s East Sea one (South China Sea in English, hereinafter: SCS). In this respect, Vietnamese think –tank takes important roles. It means that exploring China- related issues, including China’s SCS, is regarded as one of the most crucial tasks of Vietnamese think- tank. It is noteworthy that Vietnamese different groups, including Vietnamese think-tank’s perceptions of China’s image are likely to observe through Vietnam’s China policy and Vietnam’s SCS one. Also, such perceptions of China’s image reflect Vietnamese think-tank’s attitude toward China SCS policy.
This research, through applying various core conceptions and epistemic communities of constructivism, aims to map out Vietnamese think-tank’s perception of China’s image, including that in SCS issues. There are two major prepositions adopted to elucidate the factors that shape such perceptions. The main argument of the research reveals that Vietnamese think-tank’s perceptions of China’s image are complicated with both positive and concerned characteristics. Despite describing an overall Chinese image with positive characteristic, Vietnamese think-tanks rise their concerns about China’s goals and tools regarding the SCS issues to the certain extent. Such sophisticated perceptions result from Vietnamese think-tank affiliated scholars’ educational background, Vietnam political structure, the development’s Vietnamese society, their connection network and so on. In this respect, the educational backgrounds and analysis approaches lead Diplomacy Academy of Vietnam (DAV) and Institute of China studies from Vietnam Academy of Social Sciences to echo their attitude toward China’s SCS policy in different ways. Despite of that, these two prominent Chinese-studied think-tank posse similar concern about China’s SCS policy. The similarities and differences of DAV and ICS provide diverse policy suggestions to Vietnam policy actors. That enables Vietnam to respond flexibly to China’s behaviors. The China related suggestions of Vietnam think-tanks that are not quite paradox. In reality, they reflect various diverse opinions regarding China’s SCS policy from Vietnamese think tank. |
