内容提要：第二次世界大战后，日本在《日本国宪法》体制下，开始重建宪政制度。基于对“明治宪法”体系与战争的关联记忆，战后日本公法学界一度坚定推崇将英美法系下的“法治”原理应用于日本宪政制度，并逐渐在学界与社会层面形成了“法治”原理与大陆法系下的“法治主义”原理二元对立的局面。由于日本社会与英美社会存在文化基础层面的差异，基于英美制度重构战后日本宪政制度的尝试，在具体实践层面产生了适配性问题。这使得“法治”原理于现实层面脱离了公法学界对其原本的期望，反而被政治精英利用成为建构战后国家形象的意识形态符号，并被用以实现外交目的。日本政府在“价值观外交”实践过程中，并未严格遵循其于国内宪政层面对于“法治”原理的形式化认知，却利用作为意识形态符号的“法治”概念对华建构了具有针对性的负面叙事，导致“法治”问题逐渐成为日本社会对华负面情绪的触发点，甚至可能成为未来影响两国关系长期发展的不稳定因素。

关 键 词：法治  法治主义  日本国宪法  价值观外交  中日关系

作者简介：张诗奡，南京大学国际关系学院、南京大学中国南海研究协同创新中心助理研究员。

Lyu Yaodong

A Supplementary Discussion of Ryukyu/Okinawa Status (Part I)

Jiang Lifeng

Abstract: The term "Ryukyu/Okinawa status issue" pertains to the changes in national status and associated impacts on the Ryukyu/Okinawa archipelago in the East Asian or Asia-Pacifie region. As "Ryukyu" and "Okinawa" refer to the same geographical Ryukyu Islands at different stages of development, using either term alone would deviate from accuracy when narrating the entire historical development of that region. Hence, the designation "Ryukyu/Okinawa status issue" is employed to ensure comprehensive coverage. This article divides the entire developmental history of the Ryukyu Islands into five periods, namely Early Ryukyu, Ryukyu Period I, Okinawa Period I, Ryukyu Period II, and Okinawa Period II. Currently, the Ryukyu Islands are in the developmental stage of Okinawa Period II. In the pre-Ryukyu period, this paper posits that the term "Ryukyu" originally represented a nebulous concept referring to a series of islands along the outer edge of the East China Sea. It was only in the later part of the twelfth century, with the inclusion of the Osumi Islands and the Tokara Islands in the northern section of the Ryukyu Archipelago into the sphere of Japanese influence, that the configuration of the thirty-six islands of the Ryukyus began to take shape by the end of the fourteenth century. Subsequently, in the mid-seventeenth century, it transformed into a distinct and well - defined geographical concept. According to archaeological findings, the Ryukyuan people underwent independent development and cultural formation, influenced both by the southern regions and the mainland. The theory of a "common ancestry between Japan and Ryukyu" cannot be substantiated. During the Ming Dynasty in China, the Ryukyu Islands were basically in the barbaric era of the pre-feudal society. Commencing with the Sanzan period, the Ryukyu Archipelago entered the Ryukyu Period I. During this phase, Ryukyu was officially recognized and canonized by the Ming Dynasty, aligning with Ming systems and cultural norms, embracing Confucianism, and instituting rules for ritual and music. This transition marked the onset of a civilized era. Moreover, in East Asia, Ryukyu functioned as a canonized demonstration of civilization, playing a pivotal role in promoting trade. However, the stability and development of the Ryukyu Kingdom faced significant interference from neighboring Japan. In 1609, Japan forcibly seized the Amami Islands, and in 1879, through military means, Japan fully annexed Ryukyu and renamed it Okinawa, marking the beginning of Okinawa Period I. The Ryukyu Kingdom, unable to use cultural influence to counter military actions, and the Qing Dynasty failing to fulfill its responsibilities as the suzerain state, ultimately led to the demise of Ryukyu at the hands of Japanese aggression. This event paved the way for the subsequent rise of Japanese militarism and its larger-scale aggressive expansion. The lessons of history should be firmly NaNpxembered.