五、結(jié)論

印度的戰(zhàn)略文化同戰(zhàn)略選擇、安全行為之間有著很強(qiáng)的相關(guān)性。攻防取向兼?zhèn)涞挠《葢?zhàn)略文化構(gòu)成了戰(zhàn)略決策和安全行為的社會(huì)—文化場(chǎng)，它雖不能導(dǎo)致“有A則B”的邏輯結(jié)果，但卻扮演著框定印度戰(zhàn)略選擇范圍和國(guó)際行為方式的角色。作為一種信仰和觀念體系，戰(zhàn)略文化“為探索導(dǎo)致行為動(dòng)機(jī)的基本價(jià)值提供了一些線索。這些路標(biāo)是不可忽視的，更重要的是它在把行為指引向特定路線上的作用”。[41]印度的戰(zhàn)略文化正是以塑造戰(zhàn)略社團(tuán)和決策者賴以生存的政治文化生態(tài)和利益認(rèn)知環(huán)境作用于戰(zhàn)略選擇和安全行為的。

  [1] George K. Tanham, Indian Strategic Thought: An Interpretive Essay, R-4207-USDF, Rand, 1992, pp. 51-52.

[2]重商主義的，前沿的擴(kuò)張，帝國(guó)官僚的，革命性的技術(shù)專家，掠奪的或掠奪。 Rodney W. Jones, India’s Strategic Culture, Defense Threat Reduction Agency先進(jìn)的系統(tǒng)和概念辦事處 Advanced Systems and Concepts Office:比較戰(zhàn)略文化課程 合約編號(hào)：DTRA01-03-D-0017，技術(shù)指導(dǎo)18-06-02 Contract No. DTRA01-03-D-0017, Technical Instruction 18-06-02.

[3] Harjeet Singh, India’s Strategic Culture: The Impact of Geography, New Delhi: Knowledge World Publisher PVT Ltd., 2009, p. 2.

[4] Harjeet Singh, India’s Strategic Culture: The Impact of Geography, New Delhi: Knowledge World Publisher PVT Ltd., 2009, p. 24.

[5] Gautam Das, “George Tanham’s Views of Indian Strategic Thought: An Interpretation,” Scholar Warrior, Spring 2011, pp. 9-10.

[6] Kanti Bajpai, India’s Strategic Culture, in Kanti P. Bajpai and Amitabh Mattoo (eds), Securing India: Strategic Thought and Practice, New Delhi: Manohar Publishers, 1996, pp. 246-48.

[7] Jaswant Singh, Defending India, New York: St. Martin’s Press, Inc., 1999, Introduction (by K. Subrahmanyam) and Chapter one “Strategic Culture”.

[8] Michael Krepon, “Indian Strategic Culture,” July 21, 2010, http://krepon.armscontrolwonk.com/archive/2820/indian-strategic-culture.

[9] 杰弗里?拉格羅（Jeffrey Legro）認(rèn)為：作為干預(yù)變量的戰(zhàn)略文化同非文化因素一樣是可變的，因?yàn)槲幕歉灿诂F(xiàn)實(shí)的經(jīng)驗(yàn)，而非如早期研究者所說(shuō)的那樣深深地根植于歷史慣例和傳統(tǒng)中。見(jiàn)Jeffrey W. Legro, Cooperation under Fire: Anglo-German Restraint during World War II (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1995)。伊麗莎白?科爾（Elizabeth Kier）把軍事政治文化視為不斷變化的國(guó)內(nèi)政治環(huán)境的產(chǎn)物，內(nèi)部政治環(huán)境變化必然導(dǎo)致軍事政治文化的變遷。見(jiàn)Elizabeth Kier, Imagining War: French and British Military Doctrine Between the Wars (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1995)。顯然，拉格羅和科爾的戰(zhàn)略文化定義已經(jīng)遠(yuǎn)離了傳統(tǒng)文化觀，即“戰(zhàn)略文化是歷史經(jīng)驗(yàn)的產(chǎn)物，不同國(guó)家因歷史經(jīng)驗(yàn)上的差異展現(xiàn)出不同的戰(zhàn)略文化”。見(jiàn)Bradley S. Klein, “Hegemony and Strategic Culture: American Power Projection and Alliance Defense Politics,” Review of International Studies, Vol. 14, No. 2 (April 1988), p. 136。

[10] Alastair Iain Johnston36。, “Thinking about Strategic Culture,” International Security, vol. 19, No.4 (Spring 1995), pp. 46-48.

[11] John Duffield, World Power Forsaken, Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1998, p. 71.

[12] Valerie Hudson, Foreign Policy Analysis: Classic and Contemporary Theory, Boulder: Rowman & Little?eld, 2007, pp. 28-29.

[13] Alexander L. George, “The Operational Code: A Neglected Approach to the Study of Political Leaders and Decision Making,” International Studies Quarterly, 1969, Vol. 13, pp. 190-222.

[14] “曼荼羅”（Mandala）是孔雀王朝時(shí)代形成的一種地緣戰(zhàn)略思想，其基本假設(shè)是在某一地理空間內(nèi)的若干國(guó)家共同組成一種區(qū)域無(wú)政府社會(huì)——曼荼羅體系。對(duì)于某一國(guó)家的安全而言，距離最近的鄰國(guó)最有可能構(gòu)成現(xiàn)實(shí)或潛在的威脅，同該鄰國(guó)相鄰的另一個(gè)國(guó)家則可能成為盟友；依次外推延展，緊鄰盟友的國(guó)家就可能是非友好國(guó)家或戰(zhàn)略對(duì)手的盟國(guó)，再接著又是友好國(guó)家或友好國(guó)家的盟國(guó)……這樣形成一個(gè)戰(zhàn)略盟友和對(duì)手層層疊加的地緣戰(zhàn)略圈。在“曼荼羅”戰(zhàn)略思維中，鄰國(guó)被假定為現(xiàn)實(shí)或潛在的安全威脅。

[15] Michael Krepon, “Indian Strategic Culture,” July 21, 2010, http://krepon.armscontrolwonk.com/archive/2820/indian-strategic-culture.

[16] Gautam Das, “George Tanham’s Views of Indian Strategic Thought: An Interpretation,” Scholar Warrior, Spring 2011, p. 3.

[17] B. Gascoigne, The Great Moghuls, London: Jonathan Cape, 1971, p. 227.

[18] John Keay, India: A History from the Earliest Civilizations to the Boom of the Twenty-first Century, New York: Grove Press, 2010, p. 345.

[19] Domingo Paes, Narrative of a Forgotten Empire (Vijayanagar), London: Swan Sonnen schein, 1900, Reprinted by Asian Education Services (New Delhi), 1980, pp. 246-247.

[20] John Keay, India: A History from the Earliest Civilizations to the Boom of the Twenty-first Century, New York: Grove Press, 2010, p. 305.

[21] R. C. Mujumdar et al., An Advanced History of India, London: Macmillan, 1977. p. 366.

[22] George K. Tanham, Indian Strategic Thought: An Interpretive Essay, R-4207-USDF, Rand, 1992, p.104.

[23] G. S. Sardesai, “Shivaji”, in HCIP, vol. 7, The Moghul Empire, Bombay: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, 1974, p. 246.

[24] Sri Aurobindo, The Foundations of Indian Culture, Pondicherry: Sri Aurobindo Ashram Trust, 1959, pp. 2-3.

[25] Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, The Supreme Spiritual Ideal, Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1974, p. 368.

[26] K. Subrahmanyam, “Evolution of Indian Defense Policy 1947-1964,” in A History of the Congress Party, Delhi: AICC and Vikas Publishing House, 1990.

[27] 學(xué)術(shù)界一直對(duì)阿育王柱所載內(nèi)容的真實(shí)性有不同看法。批評(píng)者認(rèn)為：孔雀王朝僅僅是北印度地區(qū)的一個(gè)主導(dǎo)者，其周邊很多衛(wèi)星國(guó)從沒(méi)有停止過(guò)武力斗爭(zhēng)，這反證了阿育王放棄武力系不實(shí)之說(shuō)。見(jiàn) John Keay,India: A History from the Earliest Civilizations to the Boom of the Twenty-first Centurypp, pp. 8-9。

[28] Shivshankar Menon, “K. Subrahmanyam and India’s Strategic Culture,” addressed at Subbu Forum Memorial Lecture, 19 January 2012.由梅 農(nóng)

[29] Rodney W. Jones, India’s Strategic Culture, Defense Threat Reduction Agency先進(jìn)的系統(tǒng)和概念辦事處 Advanced Systems and Concepts Office:比較戰(zhàn)略文化課程 合約編號(hào)：DTRA01-03-D-0017，技術(shù)指導(dǎo)18-06-02 Contract No. DTRA01-03-D-0017, Technical Instruction 18-06-02.

[30] Raja Ramanna, Years of Pilgrimage, New Delhi: Viking, 1991, p. 92.

[31] Jaswant Singh, Defending India, Jaswant Singh, Defending India, New York: St. Martin’s Press, Inc., 1999, p. 330.

[32] Jaswant Singh, Defending India, Jaswant Singh, Defending India, New York: St. Martin’s Press, Inc., 1999, p. 19.

[33] George J. Gilboy and Eric Heginbotham, “Double Trouble: A Realist View of Chinese and Indian Power,” The Washington Quarterly, Summer 2013, p. 135.

[34] Government of India, Indian Army Doctrine, Part I (Simla: Headquarters Army Training Command, October 22, 2004), Section 11:4.8 & 4.9, http://pksoi.army.mil/doctrine_concepts/documents/INDIA.

[35] Ministry of Defense [Navy], Freedom to Use the Sea: India’s Maritime Military Strategy, New Delhi: Integrated Headquarters, May 2007.

[36] Taylor Fraval, Strong Borders, Secure Nation: Cooperation and Conflict in China’s Territorial Dispute, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2008.

[37] Yeshi Choedon, “Politics and Diplomacy in the UN,” in G. P. Geshpande and Alka Acharya eds., 50 Years of India and China: Crossing a Bridge of Dreams, New Delhi: Tulika, 2000. p. 469.

[38] “The Prime Minister’s Statement That Non-alignment Does not Mean Isolation from the Rest of the World, on 22 March 1948,” in A. Appadorai ed., Select Documents on India’s Foreign Policy and Relations 1947-1972, Vol.1, London: Oxford University Press, 1982, p. 14.

[39] K. Subrahmanyam, “Evolution of Indian Defense Policy 1947-1964,” in A History of the Congress Party, Delhi: AICC and Vikas Publishing House, 1990.

[40] 蘇布拉馬尼亞姆在賈斯萬(wàn)特·辛格的《為印度辯護(hù)》一書序言中對(duì)印度戰(zhàn)略思想的評(píng)價(jià)。見(jiàn)Jaswant Singh, Defending India, Introduction。

[41] K·默頓：《科學(xué)社會(huì)學(xué)》，魯旭東譯，上海：人民出版社，2001年，第321頁(yè)。