複雜式避險策略研究：立陶宛、匈牙利與土耳其的安全策略選擇

The Study of Complex Hedging Strategies: Security Policy Choices of Lithuania, Hungary, and Turkey

中小型國家在當前國際體系下的數目眾多，這些國家有各自國家利益與偏好，因此理解這一群國家的策略選擇可以更全面地了解國際關係發展。本文研究設計有以下幾個特色：第一，本文以歐洲的中小型國家為個案研究標的，擇立陶宛、匈牙利與土耳其三國進行分析，這三國分別位於當前東／西歐對立環境的最前沿，透過觀察這些國家可理解地緣斷層帶上中小型國家面對歐、俄強權競爭時的策略選擇。第二，由於中國近年不斷向歐洲拋射影響力，歐洲國家明顯感受到中國政策影響，歐洲的中小型國家傳統上面對歐／俄兩強環境已出現變化，由於中國不斷崛起過程帶來的影響力，將中國當成一個重要的歐洲安全境外行為者是必要的，當國際環境的強權數目大於兩個時，中小型國家避險策略將趨複雜化，傳統的策略選擇模型需隨之調整。
本文研究指出以下幾點初步觀察：首先，過往相關文獻指出加入軍事聯盟後中小型國家幾無避險空間，不過透過觀察可以發現，在抗衡、扈從、避險的多重策略中，避險策略受到高度矚目，因為避險主要目標以避免戰爭兼保護本國主權為要，有著很強的中間策略取向，中小型國家即便在加入軍事聯盟組織後仍可能透過多重途徑達成避險目標。其次，立陶宛、匈牙利與土耳其三國策略選擇分別代表了轉出、轉入與校正的三種模式，這三種模式分別說明避險策略的複雜樣貌。最後，本文同時指出作為新興的境外行為者，中國對歐洲安全的影響力正持續上升。中國作為繼美、俄兩國後重要的第三方存在，三國間如何相互調適及歐洲國家如何看待中國，將是未來歐洲安全發展的重要關鍵所在。

Small and medium-sized states constitute a substantial portion of the contemporary international system. These states possess distinct national interests and preferences; hence, examining their strategic choices provides a more nuanced understanding of the dynamics of international relations. This study is characterized by several key features. First, it focuses on European small and medium-sized states through the case studies of Lithuania, Hungary, and Turkey. These countries are situated on the geopolitical frontlines of the current East—West divide. By observing their policy behavior, we gain insights into the strategic choices made by states located in the fault lines of great power competition between Europe and Russia. Second, the growing influence of China in Europe has added complexity to the regional security environment. While European small and medium-sized states have traditionally navigated a strategic landscape shaped primarily by European and Russian power, the emergence of China as an external actor necessitates the reevaluation of conventional models. As the number of major powers in the international system increases beyond two, the hedging strategies adopted by smaller states tend to become more complex, prompting a reconsideration of existing theoretical frameworks.
This study presents several preliminary observations. First, contrary to earlier scholarship suggesting limited room for hedging once a small state joins a military alliance, the empirical cases reveal that hedging remains a highly visible and viable strategy. Within the spectrum of balancing, bandwagoning, and hedging, the latter continues to attract attention due to its aim to avoid direct conflict while preserving national sovereignty, a distinctly moderate strategic orientation. Even within alliance structures, small and medium-sized states may pursue hedging through multiple channels. Second, the strategic choices of Lithuania, Hungary, and Turkey exemplify three distinct modes of hedging: external disengagement, alignment, and recalibration, respectively. These modes illustrate the multifaceted nature of hedging strategies in a multipolar context. Finally, the paper highlights China’s growing role as an emerging external actor in European security. As China becomes a significant third force alongside the United States and Russia, how these powers mutually adjust and how European states perceive China will be critical to the future trajectory of European security.