于世华： 美国与二战后英国的殖民撤退

　　随着战后民族解放运动的蓬勃兴起，殖民统治受到猛烈冲击，英国不得不从亚太、非洲、中东地区和南美洲的殖民地不断撤退。在殖民撤退过程中，英国政府根据殖民地民族解放运动的发展状况及其与自身利害关系的不同，相应地采取了不同政策。本文主要探讨在战后（1945～1963年）英国殖民撤退过程中，美国的反应、政策、作用及其后果。

　　第一章的主要内容是美国与1945年到1956年英国的殖民撤退。这段时期殖民地的民族解放运动发展势头迅猛，英国殖民统治遭遇最严峻的考验：英帝国经历了印度独立、马来亚共产党领导的民族解放运动、伊朗石油国有化和埃及收回苏伊士运河的主权等一系列事件。这段时间也是英美实现战后战略目标的初始阶段。面对英国殖民地和势力范围的民族主义诉求，美国被动地打出支持民族独立和自决的旗号，“促进”英国的殖民撤退。在英国殖民统治和影响难以为继的地区，美国尝试接管英国的势力范围，不仅成为亚太地区最大的霸权，而且加强了在中东地区的影响，成为西方利益的代言人。

　　第二章重点研究的是美国与1956年到1963年英国的殖民撤退。这段时期为麦克米伦执政时期，英美关系在经历苏伊士运河事件的短暂低谷后，迅速得到修复并到达一个新的阶段。在这个阶段，由于已经渡过战后初期民族解放运动高涨带来的困难时期，英国在处理殖民撤退问题上积累了一定的经验，对民族解放运动的态度也更为冷静。美国加强了同英国在防务方面的合作，更重视英美两国的共同利益，积极配合英国在殖民撤退方面所做的努力。除了在塞浦路斯和亚丁问题上有所分歧外，在约旦、黎巴嫩、中非联邦、英属圭亚那问题上，美国积极配合英国的做法，成为英国政策的支持者。

　　第三章通过考察1963年后美国在南非、迭戈加西亚、马尔维纳斯群岛等个案中的策略进一步深化本文主题，即在英美利益一致的前提下，美国“促进”英国的殖民撤退只是表面上的，而配合和支持英国的政策才是其政策的实质。作为与英国利益息息相关的国家，美国支持民族自决与独立与其说是原则，毋宁说只是口号。这导致美国在殖民撤退问题上所宣称的原则与实际表现存在巨大差异。美国既没有对英国形成真正的压力，也未产生实际的效果。美国在行动上采取默许或支持英国立场的做法，使英国顺利实现了被迫殖民撤退时的基本意图：殖民地政权大多如愿地转移到亲西方的民族主义者手中，在最大程度上维护了以英美为首的西方国家的整体利益。

　　ABSTRACT

　　The whole world witnessed the upsurge of the national liberation movement in the colonies in the postwar era. Britain, as the biggest colonial power in the world, was impacted tempestuously and had to retreat from its colonies and dependencies in Asia, Africa, Middle East and Latin America. During the course of colonial retreat, the British government adopted different policies according to colonies’ respective situation and its own interests. This dissertation is to explore America’s responses to Britain’s colonial retreat, its policies and the role it played during this period, the years between 1945 and 1963.

　　Chapter one focuses on the role played by the United States from 1945 to 1957. During this period, Britain underwent severe trials unprecedentedly and experienced with the independence of India, colonial retreat from Southeast Asia and Pacific area, and the end of the superiority in the Middle East. This period was also the initial stage in realizing Anglo-American objectives set for the postwar era. Confronted the nationality aspirations of the colonies, the United States were forced to accelerate Britain’s retreat by upholding principles of independence and self-determination. In the areas that the British dominancy couldn’t be sustained, the United States tried hard to take over Britain’s sphere of influence. As a result, the United States was not only emerging as the greatest power in the Asia-pacific area, but also extended its influence into the Middle East, and became the spokesman of the interests of the West in the whole world spontaneously.

　　Chapter two focuses on the performance of the United States during the British retreat in the years from 1957 to 1963, the Macmillan years. After the ebb of Anglo-American relations in the Suez Crisis, the Macmillan government’s officials and their American counterparts made great efforts to revive the special relationship. Having survived the postwar era’s difficulties, Britain learned how to handle problems in the colonies and took a more sober attitude. The United States strengthened defense relations with Britain, regarded the Anglo-American mutual interest more important, and cooperated with Britain’s efforts in colonial retreat actively. Except for the cases in Cyprus and Aden, the United States acted actually as a supporter in Britain’s dealing with the national tide in the Middle East, Central African Federation and British Guiana, avoiding criticizing the policies of Britain publicly.

　　Exploring the strategies taken by the United States in the cases of South Africa, Diego Garcia military base and Malvinas Islands, chapter three gives prominence to the topic. With the prerequisite of Anglo-American mutual interests, promoting the colonial retreat is just a superficial phenomenon, while supporting the Britain’s policy is the essence. In a hinder sight, the statements of supporting independence and self-determination by the United States are more like rhetoric than practical action. With the cooperation provided by the United States, the transfer of power in Britain’s colonies and dependencies were completed largely as Britain wished. As a result, the interest of the West as a whole was well maintained in the postwar era.