ABSTRACT

A longstanding view in realist studies of international relations has been that within the context of great power competition, lesser states must choose between balancing or bandwagoning. However, a third option is also available: strategic hedging, which provides a means of explaining foreign policy strategies that do not traditionally fit within this standard binary. This article seeks to explain the Kingdom of Siam’s (modern-day Thailand) foreign policy during the nineteenth century when growing competition between European powers, namely France and Britain, manifested itself in aggressive and competitive intervention into South East Asia. Siam presents a unique case study, as it is one of only two states in Asia to resist direct colonization during that period. This article explores how, through a flexible foreign policy of strategic hedging in which complementary and mutually counteracting actions were undertaken within a wider context of great power competition, Siam maintained independence as a sovereign state.

摘要

国际关系现实主义研究的一个长期观点是，在大国竞争的背景下，小国必须在制衡或随波逐流之间做出选择。然而，还有第三种选择：战略对冲，它提供了一种解释传统上不适合该标准二进制文件的外交政策战略的方法。本文旨在解释暹罗王国（现代泰国）在 19 世纪的外交政策，当时欧洲列强（即法国和英国）之间日益激烈的竞争表现为对东南亚的侵略性和竞争性干预。暹罗提供了一个独特的案例研究，因为它是那个时期亚洲仅有的两个抵制直接殖民化的国家之一。本文探讨了如何，