進階搜尋


   電子論文尚未授權公開,紙本請查館藏目錄
(※如查詢不到或館藏狀況顯示「閉架不公開」,表示該本論文不在書庫,無法取用。)
系統識別號 U0026-1508201614175400
論文名稱(中文) 前蘇聯地區國家民主化與國際/國內關係之關連性研究:比較烏克蘭與白俄羅斯
論文名稱(英文) A Research on the international and domestic factors of democratization in the post-Soviet States : Ukraine and Belarus in comparison
校院名稱 成功大學
系所名稱(中) 政治經濟研究所
系所名稱(英) Graduate Institute of Political Economy
學年度 104
學期 2
出版年 105
研究生(中文) 況正吉
研究生(英文) Chung-Chi Kuang
學號 U18961048
學位類別 博士
語文別 中文
論文頁數 149頁
口試委員 召集委員-宋興洲
指導教授-宋鎮照
口試委員-趙文志
口試委員-戴萬平
口試委員-孫國祥
口試委員-蒙志成
中文關鍵字 民主化  歐盟  歐亞經濟聯盟  總理-總統制  總統-議會制 
英文關鍵字 Democratization  European Union  Eurasian Economic Union  premier-presidential system  presidential- parliamentary system. 
學科別分類
中文摘要 蘇聯解體之後,歐亞空間範圍內出現了獨立國協、集體安全條約組織、歐亞經濟共同體等多個整合組織,但各成員國立場嚴重分歧,統合進展緩慢。獨立國協國家作為俄羅斯的傳統勢力範圍和天然緩衝地帶,對俄羅斯地區安全穩定和經濟發展都有著重要意義。但是美國和歐盟為首的西方國家不斷通透過「顏色革命」和「東部夥伴計畫」等手段不斷對獨立國協國家進行分化,意圖在於擠壓俄羅斯的戰略空間。
對於「民主」和「民主化」的解釋是政治學研究中非常重要的一個領域。大體而言,在 20 世紀 90 年代之前,關於民主化的研究基本集中於國內因素;90年代之後,學者們開始強調國際因素在民主化轉型過程中的作用。本論文經由烏克蘭與白俄羅斯的比較研究結果,以及前蘇聯地區十五個國家國內政治與國際政治的連結,累積個案研究,進一步來強化「國際-國內因素」在民主化轉型過程中的重要作用。本論文研究發現:採取參與歐盟整合的對外政策的前蘇聯地區國家,民主評比較好,同時這些國家內部都是採行或「總理-總統制」的政府體制;相對的,採取參與歐亞經濟聯盟整合的對外政策的前蘇聯地區國家,民主評比較差,這些國家內部都是採行「總統-議會制」的政府體制。
英文摘要 After the collapse of the Soviet Union, in the Eurasian space appeared many integration organizations, such as Commonwealth of Independence States, Collective Security Treaty Organizations, Eurasian Economic Community . But the position of the Member States haves serious differences, integration has been slow. CIS countries, within the traditional sphere of influence and serving as a natural buffer zone of Russia, are of great significance to the Russian regional security, stability and economic development. However, Western powers led by the United States and the European Union, keep making efforts to differentiate the CIS countries through campaigns such as “ Color Revolution” and “Eastern Partnership Program”, in order to squeeze Russia's strategic space.
The explanation of “democracy” and “democratization” is a significant field in the study of political science. Generally speaking, before the 1990s, the study of democratization was largely focused on the domestic factors, while, after the 1990s, scholars began to emphasize the functions of international factors in the democratic transition process. Using the connection of the domestic and international politics in fifteen countries of the former Soviet Union states, this study intends to adopt case-studies to stress the functions of “international-domestic factors” during the democratic transition process. It’s discovered in this study : countries that have adopted the integration with the European Union as their foreign policies have presented the better of democratic score in the pattern of "premier-presidential system.” On the contrary, the former Soviet Union states that have adopted the integration with Eurasian Economic Union have presented the worse of democratic score in the pattern of “presidential-parliamentary system.”
論文目次 第一章:緒  論 ----------------------------------------------- 3
   第一節:研究動機與目的 4
   第二節:研究範圍與架構 5
   第三節:比較政治研究法 6
   第四節:相關文獻的分析 9
一、民主化的國際因素相關文獻 9
    二、民主化的國內因素相關文獻 11
三、憲政制度研究相關文獻 14
    四、烏克蘭與白俄羅斯研究相關文獻 17
第五節:研究架構之建立 22

第二章:前蘇聯地區國家民主化進程的探討 ---------------- 27
   第一節:民主政治的界定 27
   第二節:第三波民主化浪潮 28
   第三節:前蘇聯地區國家的民主轉型 32
    第四節:前蘇聯地區國家的憲政體制與民主 34
第五節:前蘇聯地區國家的政黨政治 41

第三章:歐盟與俄羅斯對於前蘇聯地區國家政治與經濟發展
的影響 ---------------------------------------------------- 51
   第一節:歐洲聯盟的影響因素 51
     一、歐盟的「歐洲睦鄰政策」 43
    二、歐盟的「東部夥伴關係」 54
三、歐盟對外民主擴展的分析 56
   第二節:俄羅斯的影響因素 59
    一、俄哈白三國關稅聯盟與歐亞經濟共同體 59
    二、歐亞經濟聯盟 62
  第四章:前蘇聯地區國家的分析:以烏克蘭為例 ---------- 71
   第一節:語言、民族和宗教的差異 71
   第二節:烏克蘭國家認同的分歧 74
第三節:烏克蘭的對外政策 77
    一、烏克蘭與歐盟的關係 77
    二、烏克蘭與俄羅斯的關係 80
   第四節:烏克蘭的政府體制和政治發展 82
第五節:烏克蘭危機演變與憲法變革趨勢 89
一、危機的爆發 89
    二、克里米亞脫烏入俄 91
三、兩次的停火協議 92

第五章:前蘇聯地區國家的分析:以白俄羅斯為例 ------- 99
   第一節:語言、民族和宗教的差異 99
第二節:白俄羅斯的對外政策 102
    一、白俄羅斯與俄羅斯的關係 103
    二、白俄羅斯與歐盟的關係 105
第三節:白俄羅斯的政府體制和政治發展 108
第四節:白俄羅斯在歐亞經濟聯盟的角色 113

第六章:前蘇聯地區國家對外政策與政府體制的差異:比較
分析烏克蘭和白俄羅斯 ------------------------------- 117
   第一節:比較烏克蘭與白俄羅斯對外政策的差異 ------ 117
   第二節:比較烏克蘭與白俄羅斯政府體制的差異 ------ 123
第三節:分析前蘇聯國家參與國際區域整合與國內
政府體制的差異 ------------------------------------ 125

第七章:結 論 --------------------------------------------------- 133
第一節:研究回顧 133
   第二節:研究發現 135
  第三節:後續研究 138

參考書目 (中文、英文、俄文資料) ------------------------- 141
參考文獻 一、中文資料
吳玉山,2007,〈顏色革命的許諾與局限〉,《台灣民主季刊》,4 (2):67-112。
吳玉山,2011,〈半總統制:全球發展與研究議程〉,《政治科學論叢》,47:1-32。
宋黎磊,2015,〈歐盟與 “東部夥伴關係” 計畫:意圖、推進與問題〉,《國際問題研究》,2:85-102。
宋鎮照等 合著,2012,《茉莉花革命浪潮下的新世紀民主化課題與前景:經濟發展、資訊傳播與政治民主》,台北:五南圖書公司。
洪美蘭,2008,〈從轉型政策效應論獨協國家之顏色革命〉,《東吳政治學報》,26 (3):149-196。
松里公孝,2010,〈半總統制的邏輯原理和後共產主義政治〉,《俄羅斯研究》,165:36-50。
紀舜傑,2015,《國家認同之比較研究》,台北:翰蘆圖書出版公司。
紀舜傑,2015,〈烏克蘭的國家認同-民族、民主、與地緣政治之作用〉,《台灣國際研究季刊》,11 (3):155-172。
郝培芝,2013,〈半總統制的演化:總統化與內閣不穩定〉,《問題與研究》,52 (1):101-141。
施正鋒 主編,2014,《動亂中的烏克蘭》,台北:翰蘆圖書出版公司。
楊三億,2008,〈歐盟睦鄰政策與其對烏克蘭政策實踐〉,《問題與研究》,47 (3):105-134。
楊三億,2008,〈前蘇聯地區內部改革與對外政策偏好關係:以烏克蘭、白俄羅斯與摩爾多瓦為例〉,《問題與研究》,48 (3):97-121。
楊三億,2014,〈歐盟對烏克蘭政策之外溢效果〉,《問題與研究》,53 (1):1-34。
楊 恕、王樹森,2014,〈俄白哈關稅同盟的發展及其影響〉,《國際問題研究》,4:87-96。
趙竹成,2007,〈認同的選擇以 ─「境外俄羅斯人」為案例分析〉,《問題與研究》,46 (2):53-81。
蔡榮祥、石鵬翔,2011,〈總理總統制與政治穩定 ─ 以烏克蘭、羅馬尼亞為例〉,《政治科學論叢》,47:65-106。
蘇子喬,2015,〈半總統制如何實現共識民主〉,《政治科學論叢》,65:1-30。
蘇子喬,2013,〈「兼容並蓄或拼裝上路? : 從從內閣制與總統制優劣辯論檢視半總統制的利弊〉,《台灣民主季刊》,10 (4):1-48。
張芳華,2015,〈制度因素與非制度因素對民主崩潰的影響:46個半總統制國家的經驗研究〉,《政治科學論叢》,65:111-146。
魏百谷,2012,〈烏克蘭語俄羅斯經貿關係的變遷與展望〉,《台灣國際研究季刊》,8 (3):99-117。

二、英文資料
Almond, Gabriel A., and Bingham Powell, Jr., (1978). Comparative Politics : System, Process, and Policy. Boston : Little, Brown.
Barro, Robert J., (1999). “Determinants of Democracy,” The Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 107, No. 6 (December):158~183.
Blanchard, Olivier. (1997). The Economics of Post-Communist Transition. Oxford : Oxford University Press.
Borishpolets, Ksenia. and Stanislav Chernyavsky. (2012). The Common Economic Space of Russia, Belarus, and Kazakhstan: Present and Future. Central Asia and the Caucasus, 13, 1: 120-129.
Brzezinski, Zbigniew. (1998). The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives. NewYork:A Member of the Perseus Books Group.
Bunce, Valerie. (2000).“Comparative Democratization : Big and Bounded Generalizations”, Comparative Political Studies, 33, 6-7 (August-September) : 703~734 .
Bunce, Valerie. (1999). Subversive Institution : The Design and the Destruction of Socialism and the State . Cambridge : Cambridge University Press .
Burkhart, Ross E., and Michael S. Lewis-Beck, (1994). “Comparative Democracy:The Economic Development Thesis,” The American Political Science Review, 88, 4 (December):903~910.
Cameron, D. R., and M. A. Orenstein. (2012). Post-Soviet Authoritarianism: The Influence of Russia in Its Near Abroad. Post-Soviet Affairs, 28, 1: 1-44.
Chaisty, Paul. and Svitlana Chernykh. (2015). Coalitional presidentialism and legislative control in post-Soviet Ukraine. Post-Soviet Affairs, 31, 3 : 177-200.
Dahl, Robert A., (1999). On Democracy. New Haven and London : Yale University Press.
Daron, Acemoglu. Simon Johnson, James A., Robinson, and Pierre Yared. (2008). “Income and Democracy,” The American Economic Review, 98, 3 (June):808-842.
Diamond, Larry. (1999). Developing Democracy : Toward Consolidation. Baltimore and London : The John Hopkins University Press.
Dragneva, Rilka. and Kataryna Wolczuk. (2014). The EU-Ukraine Association Agreement and the Challenges of Inter- Regionalism, Review of Central and East European Law, 39, 3-4:213-244 .
Dragneva, Rilka. and Kataryna Wolczuk. eds., (2013). Eurasian Economic Integration:Laws, Policy and Politics. London : Edward Elgar.
Duverger, Maurice. (1980). A New Political System Model: Semi-Presidential Government. European Journal of Political Research, 8, 2:165-187.
Elgie, Robert. (1999). Semi-Presidentialism in Europe. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Elgie, Robert. (2007). Varieties of Semi-Presidentialism and Their Impact on Nascent Democracies. Taiwan Journal of Democracy, 3, 2: 53-71.
Elgie, Robert. (2011). Semi-Presidentialism:Sub-Types and Democracy. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Elster, Jon. Claus Offe, and Ulrich K. Presuss, (1998). Institutional Design in Post-communist Societies. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
Eisele, Katharina. and Anja Wiesbrock. (2011). “Enhancing Mobility in the European Neighborhood Policy ? The Case of Moldova and Georgia,” Review of Central and East European Law, Vol. 36, No. 3-4:127-155.
Evera, Stephen Van. (1997). Guide to Method for Students of Political Science. New York:Cornell University Press.
Goldthau, Andreas. and Tim Boersma. (2014). The 2014 Ukraine-Russia Crisis:Implications for energy markets and scholarship. Energy Research & Social Science, 3:13-15.
Goodin, Robert E., and Han-Dieter Klingemann, eds., (1996). A New Handbook of Political Science. Oxford : Oxford University Press.
Grugel, Jean. (2002). Democratization: A Critical Introduction. New York : Palgrave Macmillan.
Huntington, Samuel P., (1991). The Third Wave: Democratization in the late Twentieth Lentury. Norman : University of Oklahoma Press.
Huntington, Samuel P., (1993). “Democracy's Third wave ? ” Journal of Democracy, 4, 3 (October) : 31~42 .
Ioffe, Grigory. (2008). Understanding Belarus and how Western Foreign Policy Misses the Mark. New York:Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Ioffe, Grigory. (2014). Reassessing Lukashenka : Belarus in Cultural and Geopolitical Context. London:Palgrave Macmillan.
Lopez-Cordova, Ernesto. and Meissner Christopher, (1999). “The Impact of International Trade Democracy:A Long-Run Perspective,” World Politics, 52, 1 (October 1999):539- 575.
Isaak, Alan C., (1985). Scope and Methods of Political Science : an introduction to the Methodology of Political inquiry. Illinois : The Dorsey Press.
Jones, Laurence F., and Edward C. Olson, (1996). Political Science Research : A Handbook of Scope and Method. New York : Longman.
Kappeler, Andreas. (2014). Ukraine and Russia:Legacies of the imperial past and competing memories. Journal of Eurasian Studies, 5, 2:107-115.
Kamrava, Mehrran. 1996. Understanding Comparative Politics : A framework for Analysis. London and New York : Routledge .
Khmelko, Irina. and Yevgen Pereguda. (2014). An Anatomy of Mass Protests:The Orange Revolution and Euromaydan Compared. Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 47, 2:227-236.
Kornai, János. 1992. The Socialist System : The Political Economy of Communism . Princeton, New Jersey : Princeton University Press .
Korostelina, Karina V. (2013). Mapping national identity narratives in Ukraine. Nationalities Papers, 41, 2:293-315.
Korostelina, Karina V. (2013). Ukraine twenty years after independence:Concept models of the society. Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 46, 1:53-64.
Knell, Mark. ed. 1996. Economics of Transition : Structural Adjustments and Growth Prospects in Eastern Europe. London : Edward Elgar .
Kubicek, Paul. (2000.)“Post-Communist Political Studies : Ten Years Later, Twenty Years Behind”, Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 33, 3 (September) : 295~309.
Kudelia, S., (2014). The House That Yanukovych Built. Journal of Democracy, 25, 3: 19-34.
Kuzio, Taras. (2013). Yushchenko versus Tymoshenko: Why Ukraine’s National Democracy Are Divided. The Journal of Post-Soviet Democratization, 21, 2: 215- 240.
Kuzio, Taras. (2012). Twenty years as an independent state:Ukraine’s ten logical inconsistence. Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 45, 3-4:429-438.
Kuzio, Taras. (1997).“NATO Enlargement : The View From the East”, European Security, 6,1 (Spring) : 48~62 .
Landman, Todd. (2008). Issues and Methods in Comparative Politics: An Introduction . London and NY : Routledge.
Lankina, Tomila. Alexander Libman and Anastassia Obydenkova, (2016). “Authoritarian and Democratic Diffusion in Post-Communist Regions,”Comparative Political Studies, 56, 2 (February):1-31.
Levitsky, Steven, and Lucan A. Way, (2010). Competitive Authoritarianism:Hybrid Regimes After the Cold War. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Lijphart, Arend. (1999). Patterns of Democracy : Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-Six Countries . New Haven and London : Yale University Press .
Lijphart, Arend. (1971).“Comparative Politics and the Comparative Method”, The American Political Science Review, 65 (3) (September) : 3 ~18 .
Lijphart, Arend. (1975).“The Comparable Case Strategy in Comparative Research”, Comparative Political Studies , 8 (2) (June) : 158~173 .
Linz, Juan J. and Alfred Stepan. (1996).“Toward Consolidated Democracies”, Journal of Democracy, 7 ( 2 ) : 12~23.
Linz, Juan J. (1990).“The Perils of Presidentialism”, Journal of Democracy, 1 ( 1 ) : 51~ 69 .
Linz, Juan J. and Alfred, Stepan. (1996). Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation : Southern Europe, South America, and Post-Communist Europe. Baltimore : John Hopkins University Press .
Lipset, Seymour Martin. (1959). Political Man : The Social Bases of Politics. New York : Doubleday-Anchor.
Luong, Pauline Jones. (2000). “After the Break-up : Institutional Design in Transitional States,” Comparative Political Studies, 33, 5 (June):563-592.
Lopez-Cordova, Ernesto. and Meissner Christopher, (1999). “The Impact of International Trade Democracy:A Long-Run Perspective,” World Politics, 52, 1 (October):539- 575 .
Luong, Pauline Jones. (2000).“After the Break-up : Institutional Design in Transitional States”, Comparative Political Studies, 33, 5 (June) : 563~592 .
Mainwaring, Scott. and Aníbal Pérez-Liñán, (2003). “Level of Development and Democracy:Latin American Exceptionalism, 1945-1996,” Comparative Political Studies, 36, 9 (1031-1067) : 1~33.
March, James G., and Olsen, Johan P. (1984).“The New Institutionalism : Organizational Factors in Political Life”, The American Political Science Review, 78, 3 (September) : 734 ~747.
Mason, David S., (1992). Revolution in East-Central Europe : The Rise and Fall of Communism and the Cold War. Boulder : Westview Press.
Melikiam, R. (2013). The Eurasian Union, European Union, and Armenian Complementarism. Central Asia and the Caucasus, 14, 2: 46-51.
Metcalf, Lee Kendall. (2000). “Measuring Presidential Power,” Comparative Political Studies, 33, 5 (June):660-685.
Nekhay, Olexandr. Thomas Fellmann, and Stephan Hubertus Gay. (2012). A free trade agreement between Ukraine and the European Union:potential effects on agricultural markets and farmer’s revenues. Post-Communist Economies, 24, 3:351-363.
Nielsen, K. L. and M. Vilson. (2014). The Eastern Partnership: Soft Power Strategy or Policy Failure ?. European Foreign Affairs Review, 19, 2: 243-262.
Pachlovska, Oxana. (2009). Contemporary Ukraine’s Conflicting Inheritances from the Humanistic “West” and the Byzantine “East” (A Triptych). in Larissa M. L. Zaleska Onyshkevych and Maria G. Rewakowicz (eds.), Contemporary Ukraine on the Cultural Map of Europe. New York : M. E. Sharpe, 40-68.
Potter, David. David Goldblatt, Margaret kiloh and Paul Lewis, (1997) eds., Democratization. Cambridge : Polity Press.
Przeworski, Adam (1991). Democracy and the Market : political and economic reforms in Eastern Europe and Latin America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Przeworski, Adam. Stokes, Susan C. and Manin. Bernard. (1999). Democracy, Accountability, and Representation. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press .
Przeworski, Adam. Michael E. Alvarez, Jose Antonio Cheibub and Fernando Limong, Democracy and development: political institutions and well-being in the world, 1950-1990. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Pridham, Geoffrey. (1991). Encouraging Democracy:The International Context of Regime Transition in Southern Europe. Leicester/London: Leicester University Press,
Pridham, Geoffrey. (1997). Eric Herring and George Sanford, Building Democracy ?:The International Dimension Of Democratization In Eastern Europe. Leicester/London: Leicester University Press.
Proedrou, Filippos. (2010). Ukraine;s foreign policy:accounting for Ukraine’s indeterminate stance between Russia and the West. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, 10, 4:443-456.
Protsyk, Oleh. (2011). Semi-Presidentialism under Post-Communism. in R. Elgie, S. Moestrup and Y. S. Wu (eds.), Semi-Presidentialism and Democracy. London: Palgrave Macmillian, 98-116.
Pye, Lucian W., (1966). Aspect of Political Development. Boston : Little, Brown, 1966.
Obydenkova, Anastassia. (2011). Comparative regionalism:Eurasian cooperation and European integration. The case for neofunctionalism?. Journal of Eurasian Studies, 2, 2:87-102.
Ranny, Austin. (1996). Governing : An Introduction to Political Science. London : Prentice-Hall.
Russian universe. (2014). Ukraine Crisis : From Identity Conflict to Civil War. at〈http://russianuverse.org/2014/06/23〉
Ryabchuk, Anastasiya. (2014). Right Revolution? Hopes and Perils of the Euromaidan Protests in Ukraine. Debatte: Journal of Contemporary Central and Eastern Europe, 22, 1: 127-133.
Sakwa, Richard. (2015). Frontline Ukraine : Crisis in the Borderlands. London:I. B. Tauris,
Samuels, David J. and Matthew S. Shugart. (2010). Presidents, Parties, and Prime Ministers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sartori, Giovanni. (1994). Comparative Constitutional Engineering : A Inquiry into Structures, Incentives, and Outcomes. New York : New York University Press.
Schneider, Christina. J. (2009). Conflict, Negotiation and European Union Enlargement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schumpeter, Joseph A., (1947). Capitaism, Socialism, and Democracy. New York : Harper.
SCRINIC, Andrei. (2014). Humanitarian aid and political aims in Eastern Ukraine:Russian involvement and European response. Eastern Journal of European Studies, 5, 2:77-89.
Shugart, Matthew S., and John M. Carey, (1992). Presidents and Assemblies : Constitutional Design and Electoral Dynamics. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Shumliansky, Stanislav. (2010). Conflicting abstractions:language groups in language politics in Ukraine. International Journal of the Sociology of language, 201:135-161.
Shulman, Stephen. (2004). The Contours of Civic and Ethnic National Identification in Ukraine. Europe-Asia Studies, 56, 1:35-56 .
Shugart, Matthew S., and John M. Carey, (1992). Presidents and Assemblies: Constitutional Design and Electoral Dynamics. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
Spiliopoulos, Odysseas. (2014). “The EU-Ukraine Association Agreement As A Framework Of Integration Between The Two Parties,” Procedia Economics and Finance, 9:256-263.
Sorensen, Georg. (1998). Democracy and Democratization: Processes and Prospects in a Changing World. Boulder: Westview Press.
Taras, Ray. (1997). ed. Post-communist Presidents. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
Teixeira, Nuno Severiano. (2008). The International Politics of Democratization : Comparative Perspectives. New York : Routledge Research.
Tymoshenko, Yuliya. (2014). Containing Russia. in Foreign Affairs editorial department (eds.), Foreign Affairs Special Collection:Crisis in Ukraine. New York : Council on Foreign Relations, 20-34.
White, Stephen. and Valentina Feklyunina. (2014). Identities and Foreign Policies in Russia, Ukraine and Belarus : The Other Europes. London:Palgrave Macmillan.
White, Stephen. Elena Korosteleva and John Lowenhardt. (2005) eds., Postcommunist Belarus, New York:Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Whitehead, Laurence. (2001). The International Dimensions of Democratization: Europe and the Americas. Oxford : Oxford University Press.
Wilson, Andrew. (2014). Ukraine Crisis:What it Means for the West. New Haven and London:Yale University Press .
Yu-Shan, Wu. 1994. Comparative Economic Transformations : Mainland China, Hungary, the Soviet Union, and Taiwan. Stanford : Stanford University Press .
三、俄文資料
Беларусь, Республика. СВЕДЕНИЯ:о результатах голосования 11 октября 2015 года.
Путин, Владимир. (2011). Новый интеграционный проект для Евразии-будущее, которое рождается сегодня // Известия. 5 октября.
Лукашенко, Алякса́ндар. О судьбах нашей интеграции// Известия.17 октября. 2011 года.
Назарбаев, Нурсултан. Союз : от идеи к истории будущего// Известия. 25 октября. 2011 года.
По данным национального опроса 15-25 августа 2006г,проведенном социологической службой “НИСЭПИ” (опрошено 1521 чел., ошибка репрезент,ативности не превышает 0.03).
論文全文使用權限
  • 同意授權校內瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2021-08-16起公開。


  • 如您有疑問,請聯絡圖書館
    聯絡電話:(06)2757575#65773
    聯絡E-mail:etds@email.ncku.edu.tw