fmpВестник Московского Университета. Серия XXV. Международные отношения и мировая политикаLomonosov World Politics Journal2076-7404Московский государственный университет имени М.В.Ломоносова10.48015/2076-7404-2025-17-1-162-202fmp-273Research ArticleНА ЗАРЕ PAX AMERICANAAT THE DAWN OF PAX AMERICANA«Тихоокеанская пактомания»: у истоков Сан-Францисской системыThe Pacific pactomania: At the origins of the San Francisco systemСидоровА. А.SidorovA. A.

Сидоров Андрей Анатольевич — кандидат исторических наук, доцент, заведующий кафедрой международных организаций и мировых политических процессов факультета мировой политики,

119991, г. Москва, Ленинские горы, 1.

Andrey A. Sidorov — PhD (History), Associate Professor, Head of the Chair of International Organizations and World Political Processes, School of World Politics,

1, Leninskie Gory, Moscow, 119991.

aas107@mail.ruФедеральное государственное бюджетное образовательное учреждение высшего образования «Московский государственный университет имени М. В. Ломоносова»Lomonosov Moscow State University202504052025171162202Copyright © Сидоров А.А., 20252025Сидоров А.А.Sidorov A.A.Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://fmp.elpub.ru/jour/article/view/273

В течение почти 80 лет после окончания Второй мировой войны военно-политические союзы Соединенных Штатов находились в центре регионального порядка как в Западной Европе, так и в Восточной Азии. В настоящее время послевоенная сеть альянсов США остается ключевым компонентом их политики в области международной безопасности, в основе которой лежит сохранение военного превосходства над нынешними и потенциальными соперниками на Евразийском континенте. При этом подходы США к выстраиванию союзнических отношений в Азиатско-Тихоокеанском регионе с самого начала отличались ярко выраженной спецификой. Чтобы лучше понять ее, а также выявить общие принципы формирования региональной политики США, представляется целесообразным обратиться к изучению генезиса так называемой Сан-Францисской системы — комплекса военно-политических договоренностей Вашингтона с азиатскими странами, сложившегося в первые годы холодной войны. Ядром этой системы стала серия соглашений между США и рядом региональных игроков, включая Японию, Филиппины, Австралию, Новую Зеландию, Республику Корея и Тайвань. В статье подробно проанализированы ход переговоров и содержание договоров между Соединенными Штатами и каждой из указанных стран. Эти договоры, по мнению автора, можно условно разделить на «гарантийные» и «перестраховочные». Примером договора первого типа служит тройственный Тихоокеанский пакт безопасности с Австралией и Новой Зеландией, который обеспечивал союзникам гарантии со стороны США в случае возрождения японского милитаризма. К «перестраховочным» следует отнести договоры о взаимной безопасности с Республикой Корея и Тайванем. Заключая их, США стремились, с одной стороны, обеспечить безопасность важных для стратегии «отбрасывания коммунизма» союзников, а с другой — застраховаться на случай авантюрных шагов их руководителей, минимизировав риск собственного вовлечения в ядерную войну с «коммунистическим блоком». Для описания получившейся структуры союзнических отношений стали использовать образ «колеса с втулкой и спицами». Такая «геометрия» связей «тихоокеанского кольца» оказалась достаточно устойчивой, и, как следствие, Сан-Францисская система, которая первоначально носила ситуативный характер, продолжает, пусть и в несколько измененном виде, существовать по сей день.

For almost 80 years after the end of World War II, the U.S. military and political alliances formed the core of the regional order in both Western Europe and East Asia. Nowadays, the post-war network of American alliances remains a key component of their international security policy, aimed at ensuring military superiority over existing and potential rivals on the Eurasian continent. At the same time, the U.S. approaches to alliance building in the Pacific had certain peculiarities from the very beginning. In order to better understand them, as well as to identify the general principles of U.S. regional policymaking, it seems appropriate to study the genesis of the so-called San Francisco system, a complex of military-political arrangements between the United States and Asian states that developed in the early years of the Cold War. The core of this system is a series of agreements between the United States and a number of regional actors, including Japan, the Philippines, Australia, New Zealand, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan. The article examines the course of negotiations and the content of agreements between the United States and each of these countries. According to the author, these agreements can be roughly divided into ‘guarantee’ and ‘reinsurance’ treaties. The former can be exemplified by the triple Pacific Security Treaty engaging Australia and New Zealand, which provided the allies with U.S. guarantees in the event of resurging Japanese militarism; mutual security agreements with the Republic of Korea and Taiwan stand for the latter. By concluding them, the United States sought, on the one hand, to guarantee the security of the allies crucial for the ‘Roll-back of Communism’ strategy, and, on the other, to ensure against any reckless steps by their leaders, minimizing the risk of the U.S. involvement in a nuclear war with the ‘Communist bloc’. The image of a ‘wheel with a hub and spokes’ was used to describe the established structure of allied relations. This ‘geometry’ of the links within the Pacific Rim appeared to be quite stable and, as a result, the San Francisco system, which was initially ad hoc, continues to exist today, albeit in a somewhat modified form.

Сан-Францисская системаЯлтинско-Потсдамский порядокмодель «втулки и спиц»Тихоокеанский пактСШАЯпонияАНЗЮСхолодная войнаГ. ТрумэнД. ЭйзенхауэрДж.Ф. ДаллесЛи Сын МанЧан Кайшивоенный союзSan Francisco systemYalta-Potsdam orderhub-and-spoke systemPacific PactUnited StatesJapanANZUSCold WarHarry TrumanDwight EisenhowerJohn DullesSyngman RheeChiang Kai-shekmilitary allianceReferencesВербицкий С.И. Японо-американский военно-политический союз (1951–1970 гг.). М.: Наука, 1972.Verbitskii S.I. 1972. Yapono-amerikanskii voenno-politicheskii soyuz (1951– 1970 gg.) [The Japanese-American military and political alliance, 1951–1970]. Moscow, Nauka Publ. (In Russ.)История дипломатии: В 5 т. Т. 5. Кн. 1 / Под ред. В.С. Семёнова, М.А. Харламова. М.: Политиздат, 1974.Semenov V.S., Kharlamov M.A. (eds.). 1974. Istoriya diplomatii: V 5 t. Т. 5. Kn. 1 [The history of diplomacy: In 5 vols. Vol. 5. Book 1]. Moscow, Politizdat Publ. (In Russ.)Левтонова Ю.О. История Филиппин: Краткий очерк. М.: Наука, 1979.Levtonova Yu.O. 1979. Istoriya Filippin. Kratkii ocherk [History of the Philippines. A sketch]. Moscow, Nauka Publ. (In Russ.)Лукин А.Л., Коротич С.А. Между Вашингтоном и Пекином: что ждет азиатско-тихоокеанские альянсы США? // Мировая экономика и международные отношения. 2017. Т. 61. № 4. С. 5–15. DOI: 10.20542/0131-22272017-61-4-5-15.Lukin A.L., Korotich S.A. 2017. Mezhdu Vashingtonom i Pekinom: chto zhdet aziatsko-tikhookeanskie al’yansy SShA? [The Asia-Pacific alliances of the United States: Between balancing, neutralization and hedging]. World Economy and International Relations, vol. 61, no. 4, pp. 5–15. DOI: 10.20542/0131-2227-2017-61-4-5-15. (In Russ.)Нестеров С.M. США и CEATO. M.: Издательство АН СССР, 1961.Nesterov S.M. 1961. SShA i CEATO [USA and SEATO]. Moscow, Izdatel’stvo AN SSSR Publ. (In Russ.)Садаков Д.А. «На крайний случай»: США, Ли Сын Ман и операция «Everready» в годы Корейской войны (1952–1953 гг.) // Вестник Пермского университета. История. 2018. № 4 (43). С. 40–49. DOI: 10.17072/2219-31112018-4-40-49.Sadakov D.A. 2018. ‘Na krainii sluchai’: SShA, Li Syn Man i operatsiya ‘Everready’ v gody Koreiskoi voiny (1952–1953 gg.) [For the extreme case: USA, Syngman Rhee and the Everready operation in the Korean War (1952–1953)]. Perm University Herald. History, no. 4 (43), pp. 40–49. DOI: 10.17072/2219-3111-2018-4-40-49. (In Russ.)Сидоров А.А. Несостоявшийся альянс: США и Тихоокеанский пакт 1949–1951 годов // Новая и новейшая история. 2020. № 1. С. 127–146. DOI: 10.31857/S013038640008191-8.Sidorov A.A. 2020. Nesostoyavshiisya al’yans: SShA i Tikhookeanskii pakt 1949–1951 godov [Frustrated alliance: The United States and the Pacific Pact, 1949–1951]. Modern and Contemporary History, no. 1, pp. 127–146. DOI: 10.31857/S013038640008191-8. (In Russ.)Тихомиров В.Д. Корейская проблема и международные факторы (1945 — начало 80-х годов). М.: Восточная литература, 1998.Tikhomirov V.D. 1998. Koreiskaya problema i mezhdunarodnye faktory (1945 — nachalo 80-kh godov) [The Korean problem and international factors (1945 — early 80s)]. Moscow, Vostochnaya literatura Publ. (In Russ.)Уткин А.И. США — Япония: вчера, сегодня, завтра. М.: Наука, 1990.Utkin A.I. SShA — Yaponiya: vchera, segodnya, zavtra [USA — Japan: yesterday, today, tomorrow]. Moscow, Nauka. (In Russ.)Acharya A. Whose ideas matter? Agency and power in Asian regionalism. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2009.Acharya A. 2009. Whose ideas matter? Agency and power in Asian regionalism. Ithaca, Cornell University Press.Barbantan A. Pacific dream? The evolution of US strategic culture and alliances in the Indo-Pacific. Cham: Palgrave MacMillan, 2024.Barbantan A. 2024. Pacific dream? The evolution of US strategic culture and alliances in the Indo-Pacific. Cham, Palgrave MacMillan.Barclay G.St.J. Australia looks to America: The wartime relationship, 1939–1942 // Pacific Historical Review. 1977. Vol. 46. No. 2. P. 251–271. DOI: 10.2307/3637934.Barclay G.St.J. 1977. Australia looks to America: The wartime relationship, 1939–1942. Pacific Historical Review, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 251–271. DOI: 10.2307/3637934.Beisner R.L. Dean Acheson: A life. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.Beisner R.L. 2006. Dean Acheson: A life. Oxford, Oxford University Press.Cha V.D. Powerplay: The origins of the American alliance system in Asia. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2016.Cha V.D. 2016. Powerplay: The origins of the American alliance system in Asia. Princeton, Princeton University Press.Cha V.D. Powerplay: Origins of the U.S. alliance system in Asia // International Security. 2010. Vol. 34. No. 3. P. 158–196. DOI: 10.1162/isec.2010.34.3.158.Cha V.D. 2010. Powerplay: Origins of the U.S. alliance system in Asia. International Security, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 158–196. DOI: 10.1162/isec.2010.34.3.158.Clough R.N. Island China. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1978.Clough R.N. 1978. Island China. Cambridge, Harvard University Press.Denmark A.M. U.S. strategy in the Asian century: Empowering allies and partners. New York: Columbia University Press, 2020.Denmark A.M. 2020. U.S. strategy in the Asian century: Empowering allies and partners. New York, Columbia University Press.Gaddis J.L. The long peace: Inquiries into the history of the Cold War. New York: Oxford University Press, 1987.Gaddis J.L. 1987. The long peace: Inquiries into the history of the Cold War. New York, Oxford University Press.Gallicchio M.S. The best defense is a good offense: The evolution of American strategy in East Asia, 1953–1960 // The great powers in East Asia, 1953–1960 / Ed. by W.I. Cohen, A. Iriye. New York: Columbia University Press, 1990.Gallicchio M.S. 1990. The best defense is a good offense: The evolution of American strategy in East Asia, 1953–1960. In: Cohen W.I., Iriye A. (eds.). The great powers in East Asia, 1953–1960. New York, Columbia University Press.Garver J.W. The Sino-American alliance: Nationalist China and American Cold War strategy in Asia. Armonk: M.E. Sharpe, 1997.Garver J.W. 1997. The Sino-American alliance: Nationalist China and American Cold War strategy in Asia. Armonk, M.E. Sharpe.Hamm T.-Y. Arming the two Koreas: State, capital, and military power. London: Routledge, 1999.Hamm T.-Y. 1999. Arming the two Koreas: State, capital, and military power. London, Routledge.Hemmer Ch., Katzenstein P.J. Why is there no NATO in Asia? Collective identity, regionalism, and the origins of multilateralism // International Organization. 2002. Vol. 56. No. 3. P. 575–607. DOI: 10.1162/002081802760199890.Hemmer Ch., Katzenstein P.J. 2002. Why is there no NATO in Asia? Collective identity, regionalism, and the origins of multilateralism. International Organization, vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 575–607. DOI: 10.1162/002081802760199890.Izumikawa Y. Network connections and the emergence of the hub-andspokes alliance system in East Asia // International Security. 2020. Vol. 45. No. 2. P. 7–50. DOI: 10.1162/isec_a_00389.Izumikawa Y. 2020. Network connections and the emergence of the huband-spokes alliance system in East Asia. International Security, vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 7–50. DOI: 10.1162/isec_a_00389.Kelly A.M. ANZUS and the early Cold War: Strategy and diplomacy between Australia, New Zealand and the United States, 1945–1956. Cambridge: Open Book Publishers, 2018.Kelly A.M. 2018. ANZUS and the early Cold War: Strategy and diplomacy between Australia, New Zealand and the United States, 1945–1956. Cambridge, Open Book Publishers.Kim S. J.-W. Master of manipulation: Syngman Rhee and the SeoulWashington alliance, 1953–1960. Seoul: Yonsei University Press, 2001.Kim S. J.-W. 2001. Master of manipulation: Syngman Rhee and the SeoulWashington alliance, 1953–1960. Seoul, Yonsei University Press.Kotch J. The origins of the American security commitment to Korea // Child of conflict: The Korean-American relationship, 1943–1953 / Ed. by B. Cumings. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1983. P. 239–259.Kotch J. 1983. The origins of the American security commitment to Korea. In: Cumings B. (ed.). Child of conflict: The Korean-American relationship, 1943–1953. Seattle, University of Washington Press, рр. 239–259.Kusunoki A. Yoshida Shigeru to Anzenhosho Seisaku no Keisei. Kyoto: Minerva, 2009. (In Japan.)Kusunoki A. 2009. Yoshida Shigeru to Anzenhosho Seisaku no Keisei [Shigeru Yoshida and the formation of security policy]. Kyoto, Minerva. (In Japan.)Lin H.-T. U.S.-Taiwan military diplomacy revisited: Chiang Kai-shek, Baituan, and the 1954 Mutual Defense Pact // Diplomatic History. 2013. Vol. 37. No. 5. P. 971–994. DOI: 10.1093/dh/dht047.Lin H.-T. 2013. U.S.-Taiwan military diplomacy revisited: Chiang Kaishek, Baituan, and the 1954 Mutual Defense Pact. Diplomatic History, vol. 37, no. 5, pp. 971–994. DOI: 10.1093/dh/dht047.Mabon D.W. Elusive agreements: The Pacific Pact proposals of 1949–1951 // Pacific-Historical Review. 1988. Vol. 57. No. 2. P. 147–177. DOI: 10.2307/4492264.Mabon D.W. 1988. Elusive agreements: The Pacific Pact proposals of 1949–1951. Pacific-Historical Review, vol. 57, no. 2, pp. 147–177. DOI: 10.2307/4492264.McIntyre W.D. Background to the ANZUS pact: Policy-makers, strategy and diplomacy, 1945–55. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 1995.McIntyre W.D. 1995. Background to the ANZUS pact: Policy-makers, strategy and diplomacy, 1945–55. London, Palgrave Macmillan.McMahon R.J. The Cold War on the periphery: The United States, India and Pakistan. New York: Columbia University Press, 1996.McMahon R.J. 1996. The Cold War on the periphery: The United States, India and Pakistan. New York, Columbia University Press.Nester W.R. The reverse course, 1947–52 // Power across the Pacific: A diplomatic history of American relations with Japan / W.R. Nester. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 1996. P. 224–260.Nester W.R. 1996. The reverse course, 1947–52. In: Nester W.R. Power across the Pacific: A diplomatic history of American relations with Japan. London, Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 224–260.Ovendale R. The English-speaking alliance: Britain, the United States, the dominions and the Cold War, 1945–1951. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1985.Ovendale R. 1985. The English-speaking alliance: Britain, the United States, the dominions and the Cold War, 1945–1951. London, George Allen & Unwin.Park C.J. The influence of small states upon the superpowers // World Politics. 1975. Vol. 28. No. 1. P. 97–117. DOI: 10.2307/2010031.Park C.J. 1975. The influence of small states upon the superpowers. World Politics, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 97–117. DOI: 10.2307/2010031.Prados J. Assessing Dien Bien Phu // The first Vietnam War: Colonial conflict and Cold War crisis / Ed. by M.A. Lawrence, F. Logevall. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2007. P. 215–239.Prados J. 2007. Assessing Dien Bien Phu. In: Lawrence M.A., Logevall F. (eds.). The first Vietnam War: Colonial conflict and Cold War crisis. Cambridge, Harvard University Press, pp. 215–239.Prados J. Vietnam: The history of an unwinnable war, 1945–1975. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2009.Prados J. 2009. Vietnam: The history of an unwinnable war, 1945–1975. Lawrence, University Press of Kansas.Press-Barnathan G. Organizing the world: The United States and regional cooperation in Asia and Europe. New York: Routledge, 2003.Press-Barnathan G. 2003. Organizing the world: The United States and regional cooperation in Asia and Europe. New York, Routledge.Qiang Z. The dragon, the lion, and the eagle: Chinese-British-American relations, 1945–1958. Kent: Kent State University Press, 1994.Qiang Z. 1994. The dragon, the lion, and the eagle: Chinese-BritishAmerican relations, 1945–1958. Kent, Kent State University Press.Rethinking the San Francisco System in Indo-Pacific security: Enduring legacies, structural contradictions and geopolitical rivalry / Ed. by Y. Sugita, V. Teo. Singapore: Palgrave Macmillan, 2022.Sugita Y., Teo V. (eds.). 2022. Rethinking the San Francisco System in Indo-Pacific security: Enduring legacies, structural contradictions and geopolitical rivalry. Singapore, Palgrave Macmillan.Robb T.K., Gill D.J. The ANZUS treaty during the Cold War: A reinterpretation of U.S. diplomacy in the Southwest Pacific // Journal of Cold War Studies. 2015. Vol. 17. No. 4. P. 109–157. DOI: 10.1162/JCWS_a_00599.Robb T.K., Gill D.J. 2015. The ANZUS treaty during the Cold War: A reinterpretation of U.S. diplomacy in the Southwest Pacific. Journal of Cold War Studies, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 109–157. DOI: 10.1162/JCWS_a_00599.The San Francisco System and its legacies: Continuation, transformation, and historical reconciliation in the Asia-Pacific / Ed. by H. Kimie. New York: Routledge, 2015.Kimie H. (ed.). 2015. The San Francisco System and its legacies: Continuation, transformation, and historical reconciliation in the Asia-Pacific. New York, Routledge.Schonberger H.B. Aftermath of war: Americans and the remaking of Japan, 1945–1952. Kent: Kent State University Press, 1989.Schonberger H.B. 1989. Aftermath of war: Americans and the remaking of Japan, 1945–1952. Kent, Kent State University Press.Shin G.-W., Sneider D. Divergent memories: Opinion leaders and the Asia-Pacific war. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2016.Shin G.-W., Sneider D. 2016. Divergent memories: Opinion leaders and the Asia-Pacific war. Stanford, Stanford University Press.Tang T. America’s failure in China, 1941–1950. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1967.Tang T. 1967. America’s failure in China, 1941–1950. Chicago, University of Chicago Press.Theeravit K. Thailand: An overview of politics and foreign relations // Southeast Asian Affairs. 1979. Vol. 6. No. 1. P. 299–311.Theeravit K. 1979. Thailand: An overview of politics and foreign relations. Southeast Asian Affairs, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 299–311.Thompson S. The evolution of Southeast Asian regionalism: Security, economic development, and foreign power support for regional initiatives, 1947–77 // JAS (Journal of ASEAN Studies). 2017. Vol. 5. No. 1. P. 1–22. DOI: 10.21512/jas.v5i1.4160.Thompson S. 2017. The evolution of Southeast Asian regionalism: Security, economic development, and foreign power support for regional initiatives, 1947–77. JAS (Journal of ASEAN Studies), vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 1–22. DOI: 10.21512/jas.v5i1.4160.Tow W.T., Anwar Z. Why has the San Francisco System survived? Historical and theoretical perspectives // Asian Politics & Policy. 2020. Vol. 12. No. 1. P. 8–26. DOI: 10.1111/aspp.12515.Tow W.T., Anwar Z. 2020. Why has the San Francisco System survived? Historical and theoretical perspectives. Asian Politics & Policy, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 8–26. DOI: 10.1111/aspp.12515.Tucker N.B. Тaiwan, Hong Kong, and the United States, 1945–1992: Uncertain friendships. New York: Twayne Publishers, 1994.Tucker N.B. 1994. Тaiwan, Hong Kong, and the United States, 1945–1992: Uncertain friendships. New York, Twayne Publishers.Vucetic S. The Anglosphere: A genealogy of a racialized identity in international relations. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2011.Vucetic S. 2011. The Anglosphere: A genealogy of a racialized identity in international relations. Stanford, Stanford University Press.Watt A. The evolution of Australian foreign policy, 1938–1965. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967.Watt A. 1967. The evolution of Australian foreign policy, 1938–1965. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Welfield J. An empire in eclipse: Japan in the postwar American alliance system. London: The Athlone Press, 1988.Welfield J. 1988. An empire in eclipse: Japan in the postwar American alliance system. London, The Athlone Press.Xiang L. The recognition controversy: Anglo-American relations in China, 1949 // Journal of Contemporary History. 1992. Vol. 27. No. 2. P. 319–343. DOI: 10.1177/002200949202700206.Xiang L. 1992. The recognition controversy: Anglo-American relations in China, 1949. Journal of Contemporary History, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 319–343. DOI: 10.1177/002200949202700206.Zelizer J.E. Arsenal of democracy: The politics of national security — From World War II to the war on terrorism. New York: Basic Books, 2010.Zelizer J.E. 2010. Arsenal of democracy: The politics of national security — From World War II to the war on terrorism. New York, Basic Books.

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.