区域研究在21 世纪经历了深刻的变革。一些变革与社会科学学科的变革同时进行,比如单极/ 多极化、全球化和移民等对当今时代有影响的主题。在这些变革背后,既存在一个痛苦的批评与自我批评的过程,也促成了区域研究独有的新理论与新方法的出现。本研究将绘制全球范围区域研究的新图景,并介绍新的理论和方法论范式。通过主流区域研究、比较区域研究与批判区域研究三种路径,本文将介绍区域研究在21 世纪的发展、这三种路径为区域研究的固有问题提供的解决方案,以及它们相互之间的关系。本文将探讨不同的研究范式如何解决特殊性与普遍性、理论与实证数据等基本张力,它们生产了哪些类别的知识,以及如何从本体论的角度对区域研究的基本对象“区域”进行概念化。

《屏幕炮弹：以色列和巴勒斯坦镜头下的国家暴力》一书记录了21 世纪以来巴以冲突背景中摄影机的持续“在场”,数码影像的技术革新不仅改变了人们对于国家暴力的观察方式,也改变了政治领域中日常见证和评估核实的相关做法。基于人类学对“影像的社会过程”的研究转向,丽贝卡·斯坦（Rebecca L. Stein）聚焦于影像作为一种政治工具普及前所遭遇的种种境况,将“影像见证”和“政治否认”作为本书两条潜在的逻辑线,分别阐明了影像见证在军事占领框架中的局限性,以及政治否认在视觉占领逻辑中的通用性。冲突地区的不同个人和机构都赋予影像及其网络传播以政治理想的功能,这些影像使得相机成为日常生活现实的瞄准器,成为真实事件的档案记录,也成为巴以冲突的政治占位符,而个人和机构的行动和焦虑则反映了“将影像作为一种政治工具,梦想往往可能会落空”。

2022 年 9 月 14 日，国务院学位委员会、教育部发布《研究生 教育学科专业目录（2022 年）》和《研究生教育学科专业目录管理 办法》。新版学科专业目录中的一级学科“扩员”尤其令人瞩目。其 中，“交叉学科”正式确立，下设 7 个一级学科：集成电路科学与工 程、国家安全学、设计学、遥感科学与技术、智能科学与技术、纳米 科学与工程和区域国别学。教育部研究生学科专业目录的公布意味着 持续数年关于建立“区域国别学”作为一个独立一级学科的讨论在中 国国家教育体系中暂告一段落，从而进入具体实施阶段。本文尝试将 中国近年来推动“区域国别学”作为独立学科的过程本身作为考察和 分析的对象，将这个学科建设的过程作为国家知识体系建设的一部 分，审视这个过程如何嵌入中国政治经济体系内部，以及由此给中国 “区域国别学”赋予的特性。通过分析推动独立学科建设背后的政治 经济过程，我们可以更好地理解中国的“区域国别学”的性质、内在 悖论以及未来发展的可能路径，其结论也可以延伸到更广的中国国家 知识生产体系的性质和未来前景。

编者按：2022 年是“清华大学发展中国家研究博士项目”创立十 周年暨清华大学国际与地区研究院成立五周年。同年，“区域国别学” 被国家增设为交叉学科门类下的一级学科。一级学科的设立为区域国 别研究学人提出了新的挑战，学界亟需就区域国别学的研究对象、研 究方法、研究理论、人才培养、学科方向设置、课程体系建设等方面 问题进行深入讨论，加快完善区域国别学学科建设，提升其水平。 值此之际，清华大学国际与地区研究院邀请对东南亚、拉丁美洲 和加勒比、南亚、欧亚、撒哈拉以南非洲和西亚北非六个地区进行过 深入研究，且具有经济学、法学、文学、历史学等不同学科背景的十 位区域国别研究专家齐聚清华园，就区域国别学的学科建设问题进行 对话与讨论，共同探讨区域国别学一级学科的发展路径和行动方针。

The article discusses the relationship between countries. Generally speaking, whether between two or more countries, the idealized state of affairs is to act in a mutually beneficial manner, i.e., if we do so, we hope that you or your side will do the same, so that everyone can win or win more. However, the reality is often not what we want, and what we are concerned about is not necessarily what the other side is concerned about, and what we think is a win is not necessarily accepted by the other side. Therefore, it is often not possible to work in the same direction. At the time of the establishment of the first-level discipline of area studies, we should change our thinking and act in a way that we understand the other side instead of just moving towards each other. Thus, we can anticipate the other side's reaction, and take the initiative or even act unilaterally to ensure that we win, or even achieve a win-win or multi-win situation.

 

This puts forward new requirements for new disciplines and area studies. First, the new discipline should be defined correctly. I think, area studies is a regional-based field, the region refers to geography, environment, space, and the field refers to the discipline, multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary, cross-disciplinary. Secondly, the new discipline comes with new environment. Innovation is the most important, the purpose, mode and method of talent training all need to be innovative; internationalization is also very important, we need to go out and invite in, it is not feasible to close the door for discipline construction. In the context of the two major situations in the new era, it is necessary to have area studies talents with “three perspectives”, namely, global vision, Chinese perspective and the perspective of the other side. Such talents should treat the earth as a whole and humanity as a community of destiny; they should have knowledge of traditional Chinese culture and be patriotic but not narrow-minded; they should have a deep and comprehensive understanding of the target countries and be able to see them from each other's perspective.

 

As can be expected, due to the pluralistic world and different concerns, it is better to understand each other than to move towards each other, it is better to be conscious and active than to be blind and passive. Compared with the ideal state of moving towards each other, understanding the other is a more pragmatic and rational orientation.

Starting from the book Between Nation-States and Area Studies, this dialogue discusses the academic boom and disciplinary construction of Area Studies in China. By analyzing the historical development of country and area studies, Wu Xiao’an points out that Orientalism, colonial studies, and postwar American-led international and Area Studies are three important intellectual sources of country and area studies in China today. Between Nation-States and Area Studies addresses the question of how to do scholarship under new historical conditions and in the midst of new sequence of academic history and paradigm shifts. In particular, Wu emphasizes that, based on international Area Studies findings, area studies with Chinese characteristics need to take into account two important basic points: first, starting from Chinese historical and academic traditions and national interests; second, relating Chinese characteristics to the Global South. To be truly meaningful, interdisciplinary and disciplinary constructions must be based on one disciplinary norm (Discipline) and original deeply researched case studies. During the dialogue, Wu Xiao'an enthusiastically shared his experience of decades of area studies and research with the young scholars.