An Analysis of the Origins of Overseas Research on the Communist Party of China

Overseas academic circles have long paid attention to and conducted research on the Communist Party of China (CPC), presenting a diversity of subjects and perspectives. These subjects and perspectives intertwine with one another, jointly promoting the vigorous development of the field of overseas research on the CPC. At the same time, there remains some controversy regarding the origins of overseas research on the CPC. On the one hand, we need to sort through and examine these early interpretations and evaluations, tracing their origins; on the other hand, we also need to deeply analyze the underlying reasons for different types of interpretations and evaluations, as well as the methodologies, positions, ideological concepts, and value orientations adopted by different historical subjects in the research process. Through such summarization and sorting, we can not only witness the entire process of overseas research on the CPC from germination to maturity, and then to professionalization and deepening, but also gain insight into the CPC's own development trajectory and the evolution of its status on the international stage.

海外学界对中国共产党的关注和研究由来已久，呈现出多元化的主体和视角，这些主体和视角相互交织，共同促进了海外中国共产党研究领域的蓬勃发展。与此同时，关于海外中国共产党研究的起源问题，仍然存在一定争议。一方面，我们需要梳理和审视这些早期的诠释与评价，追溯其起源；另一方面，我们还需要深入剖析不同类型的解释及评价的深层原因，以及不同历史主体在研究过程中所采用的方法论、坚持的立场、蕴含的思想观念与价值取向。通过这样的总结和梳理，我们不仅能够见证海外中国共产党研究从萌芽到成熟、再到专业化和深化的全过程，还能洞察到中国共产党自身的发展轨迹及其在国际舞台上的地位演变。

I. Three Major Origins of Overseas Research on the CPC

一、关于海外中国共产党研究的三大起源

Regarding the origins of overseas research on the CPC, domestic academia has yet to reach a consensus, and multiple viewpoints exist. However, from a macro perspective, these understandings can be roughly categorized into three major viewpoints, which this article integrates and summarizes as the "Japan-origin theory," the "Soviet Union and Comintern impetus theory," and the "United States-origin theory."

关于海外中国共产党研究的起源，国内学术界至今尚未达成共识，存在多种观点。但从宏观角度审视，这些认识大致可以归结为三大观点，本文将其整合和概括为“日本发端说”“苏联及共产国际推动说”以及“美国起源说”。

(A) Japan-Origin Theory

(一)日本发端说

Scholars who advocate that overseas research on the CPC originated in Japan believe that Japan's attention to and research on the CPC before and after World War II were relatively in-depth. Due to geographical proximity and historical and cultural ties, Japanese society had unique advantages in understanding and researching the CPC. In modern times, to realize its ambition of controlling and occupying China, Japan placed great importance on collecting intelligence and materials on China, and accordingly wrote a large number of investigation reports. Japanese scholars and intelligence agencies conducted some research on the CPC around the time of its founding, and this research laid the foundation for subsequent overseas research on the CPC.

主张海外中国共产党研究发端于日本的学者认为，日本在二战前后对中国共产党的关注与研究较为深入。由于地理位置邻近以及历史文化渊源，日本社会对中国共产党的了解与研究具有得天独厚的优势。近代以来，日本为实现其对中国进行控制和侵占的野心，极为重视对华情报和资料的搜集工作，并据此撰写了大量调查报告。日本学者和情报机构在中国共产党成立前后就对其进行了一定研究，这些研究为后续海外中国共产党研究奠定了基础。

On June 29, 1921, the Japanese *Gaiji Keisatsu Hō* (internal publication) [1]1 *Gaiji Keisatsu Hō* (外事警察報, "Foreign Affairs Police Report") was a restricted-circulation intelligence bulletin published by the Japanese Home Ministry's Police Bureau, focusing on monitoring political movements, including communist activities, in Japan and abroad. published a short article titled "The Activities of the Chinese Communist Party in Shanghai." Shortly thereafter, the newspaper also successively published lists and information on the Communist Party active in Shanghai and key figures who believed in Bolshevism. Based on the original materials of the *Gaiji Keisatsu Hō* and comparing the textual research of relevant scholars, it was found that since its inception in 1921, the newspaper had a dedicated section introducing the current situation and dynamics in China at the time, with particular focus on the rise and development of the communist movement in China. For example, issues No. 1 (May 1921) and No. 2 (June 1921) introduced the activities of "extremists" and "Bolshevization" in Beijing, Shanghai, and other places; issue No. 10 (February 1922), when introducing the situation of "extremists," mentioned the "Shanghai Communist Party meeting." As an intelligence-oriented newspaper for official internal use, the main function of the *Gaiji Keisatsu Hō* was reporting and introduction; its content was relatively brief and lacked in-depth analysis and research. Therefore, some scholars supplement from a research perspective that CPC newspapers and periodicals were also important materials for Japanese researchers to analyze China's political, economic, and military situation. "The earliest CPC newspaper and periodical to appear in Japan's field of vision currently known is *New Youth*." [2]2 *New Youth* (《新青年》, *Xin Qingnian*) was a leading Chinese intellectual magazine founded in 1915 by Chen Duxiu, which became a key platform for the New Culture Movement and later for the dissemination of Marxism. In 1921, Ujita Naoyoshi published a monograph on the study of China's New Culture Movement, *After the Republic: A Study of China*, which introduced *New Youth*, pointing out that *New Youth* was founded in Shanghai to promote new ideas and later became the "organ journal of the Faculty of Liberal Arts" of Peking University.

1921年6月29日，日本《外事警察报》(内刊)刊载了一篇题为《中国共产党在上海的行动》的短文，紧接着该报还陆续公布了有关在上海活动的共产党以及信奉布尔什维克主义的关键人物的名单与信息。综合《外事警察报》原始资料以及对比相关学者的考证，发现该报自1921年创刊起，即设立专门版块介绍当时中国的时局动态，尤其重点关注了共产主义运动在中国的开展与兴起。如第1号(1921年5月)和第2号(1921年6月)中就介绍了北京、上海等地的“过激派”和“赤化”行动；第10号(1922年2月)在介绍“过激派”情况时，提到了“上海共产党会议”。作为一份面向官方内部的情报性报纸，《外事警察报》的主要功能在于报告与介绍，内容表述较为简短，缺乏深度分析与研究。因此，也有学者从研究的视角补充道，中共报刊也是日本研究人员分析中国政治、经济与军事形势的重要资料，“目前所见最早出现在日本视野中的中共报刊是《新青年》”。1921年，宇治田直义出版了研究中国新文化运动的专著《共和以后：支那研究》,对《新青年》进行了介绍，指出《新青年》为宣传新思想而在上海创刊，后成为北京大学这一“文科大学的机关杂志”。

In addition, there were some research results specifically focused on the CPC. For example, Norisugi Yoshihisa's "Trends and Comments on the Chinese Communist Party," which was completed on July 25, 1923, and subsequently published in the September issue of *Tōyō* magazine, No. 9. This article is considered by domestic scholars to be "the earliest known Japanese specialized research paper on the history of the CPC collected so far, and also the earliest research achievement both domestically and internationally with the Chinese Communist Party as its theme." In April 1926, Sasaki Tōichi published *The History and Analysis of the Chinese Nationalist Party*, the fourth part of which was titled "The Communist Nationalist Party" and the fifth part "The Rise of Anti-Communism." In July of the same year, Nagano Akira's book *Social Movements in China* was published, with five chapters studying the CPC and its relationship with the Nationalist Party between 1920 and 1926. Some domestic scholars also consider this "the earliest achievement of Japan's research on the CPC and its history." Before the disclosure of the above historical materials, domestic scholars generally traced the origin of Japanese research on the history of the CPC back to December 1926, when Itō Takeo published *The Chinese Revolution and Proletarian Parties*, which was considered "Japan's earliest monograph on the study of the history of the CPC."

此外，还有一些专注于中国共产党的研究成果。如乘杉义久的《中国共产党的趋势及评论》,该文于1923年7月25日完成，随后9月在《东洋》杂志第9期上发表。该文被国内学者认为“是迄今为止所搜集到的日本最早的中共党史研究专题论文，也是国内外最早以中国共产党为主题的研究成果”。1926年4月佐佐木到一出版的《中国国民党的历史及其分析》,其中第四部分名为“共产国民党”,第五部分名为“排斥共产主义的兴起”。同年7月，长野朗《支那的社会运动》一书出版，其中有五个章节对1920年至1926年间的中国共产党及其与国民党的关系等方面进行了研究，国内也有学者认为这是“日本研究中共及其历史的最早成果”。在上述史料披露前，国内学者一般将日本对中共党史的研究溯源至1926年12月伊藤武雄发表的《支那革命与无产政党》,该书被认为是“日本最早的一部中共党史研究的专著”。

(B) Soviet Union and Comintern Impetus Theory

(二)苏联及共产国际推动说

Scholars who advocate that overseas research on the CPC originated from the Soviet Union and the Comintern believe that the Comintern spread Marxism to China and guided the founding and early construction of the CPC. Therefore, this viewpoint is usually closely related to the Soviet Union's early support and theoretical guidance for the Chinese revolution. In this process, the Comintern, as the coordinating body of the international communist movement, also played an important role.

主张海外中国共产党研究起源于苏联及共产国际的学者们认为，共产国际将马克思主义传播到中国，指导了中国共产党的成立及早期建设，因此这一观点通常与苏联对中国革命的早期支持和理论指导紧密相关。在此过程中，作为国际共产主义运动的协调机构，共产国际也发挥了重要作用。

The Soviet Union's attention to and interest in the Chinese communist movement gradually emerged with the advancement of its in-depth research on the Chinese workers' movement. Initially, it was the staff of the Red International of Labor Unions and the Comintern who noticed the rise of the Chinese workers' movement and the founding of the CPC. Subsequently, representatives of the Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks) and the Comintern guided the ardent expectations of Chinese socialist supporters for the study and propaganda of Marxism into the practical action of founding the Chinese Communist Party, and provided valuable support in this process. In September 1920, Vilensky-Sibiryakov, in a "Brief Report on Work Among the Peoples of East Asian Countries," outlined the work plan for the branch in China, including "establishing communist groups among Chinese student organizations, similarly establishing communist groups among workers' organizations in China's coastal industrial areas, thereby promoting Party building, and conducting communist propaganda in the Chinese military," etc. Relevant personnel exchanged views on issues such as "the upcoming congress of Chinese communist organizations and the founding of the Chinese Communist Party." On May 20, 1922, in a report to the Far Eastern Department of the Comintern Executive Committee on the work situation in China, Rikin pointed out that the principled stance of the Comintern's work in China was "to rely on the most class-conscious workers to establish communist groups; then they unite to form the Chinese Communist Party." In the early days of the CPC's founding, the Comintern also assisted the CPC in clarifying its core tasks: "to struggle against both imperialist exploitation and the domestic ruling class... to lift the broad laboring masses out of their original 'prehistoric' situation." After the CPC cooperated with the Nationalist Party, some leaders and relevant scholars of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) and the Comintern paid more attention to the situation of the Chinese revolution and studied the CPC's revolutionary strategy and tactics. Subsequently, systematic research on the CPC gradually increased. For example, in the autumn of 1926, Soviet advisor to China Naumov compiled a lengthy article specifically discussing the history of the CPC, "An Overview of the History of the Chinese Communist Party," which introduced the social and political conditions in China before the First National Congress of the CPC, the process of the CPC's founding, and the evolution of the Chinese workers' movement and communist movement from the First to the Fourth National Congress of the CPC. Some domestic scholars also call Naumov "the first Soviet person to attempt to write the history of the CPC."

苏联对中国共产主义运动的关注和兴趣，随着其对中国工人运动深入研究的推进而逐渐显现。最初是赤色职工国际和共产国际的工作人员关注到中国工人运动的兴起以及中国共产党的成立。此后，俄共(布)与共产国际的代表，将中国社会主义拥护者对于马克思主义研究与宣传的热切期望引导到了成立中国共产党的实际行动上，并在此过程中给予了宝贵支持。1920年9月，维连斯基·西比利亚科夫在“关于在东亚各国人民当中的工作情况的简要报告”中表明了在中国分部的工作计划，包括“在中国学生组织中建立共产党小组，同样在中国沿海工业区的工人组织中建立共产党小组，以此推动党的建设，并在中国军队中进行共产主义宣传”等，相关人员就“即将举行的中国共产主义组织代表大会和中国共产党的成立”等问题交换了意见。1922年5月20日，利金就在华工作情况给共产国际执委会远东部的报告中指出，共产国际在华工作的原则立场就是“依靠最有觉悟的工人建立共产主义小组；然后它们联合起来组成中国共产党”。中国共产党成立初期，共产国际也协助中国共产党明确了核心任务：“既要同帝国主义的剥削作斗争，又要同本国的统治阶级作斗争……要把广大劳动群众置于原有的‘史前’的境地。”中国共产党同国民党实行合作后，联共(布)和共产国际的一些领导人和相关学者更加关注中国革命形势，研究中共的革命战略和策略问题。此后，对中国共产党的系统性研究逐渐增多。如1926年秋，苏联驻华顾问纳乌莫夫编写了专门论述中国共产党历史的长篇文章《中国共产党历史概述》,介绍了中共一大以前的中国社会政治状况、中共成立的经过，以及从中共一大至四大期间中国工人运动和共产主义运动的演进。也有国内学者称纳乌莫夫是“苏联第一个尝试撰写中共历史的人”。

(C) United States-Origin Theory

(三)美国起源说

Scholars who advocate the "United States-origin theory" believe that the formal formation of overseas research on the CPC as a discipline benefited from the contributions of American scholars. As a major center for China studies, the United States has conducted research on the CPC since the mid-20th century, and subsequently gradually promoted "overseas research on the CPC" onto the formal academic track. These studies not only advanced the overseas academic community's understanding and knowledge of the CPC but also provided important theoretical foundations and methodological guidance for subsequent related research.

主张“美国起源说”的学者认为，海外中国共产党研究作为一门学科的正式形成，得益于美国学者的贡献。作为中国问题研究的重镇，美国自20世纪中期以来就对中国共产党进行研究，此后逐步推动“海外中国共产党研究”正式走上学术化道路。这些研究不仅推动了海外学术界对中国共产党的了解与认识，也为后续相关研究提供了重要的理论基础与方法论指导。

American attention to the Chinese Communist Party began in the 1920s, initially consisting mainly of a series of reports on the Chinese revolution published by American journalists. For example, Peter Rand, in his work, recounts how American journalists such as Anna Louise Strong, Harold Isaacs, and Agnes Smedley closely observed and reported on the activities of the Chinese Communist Party. In the 1930s and 1940s, non-academic figures such as journalists and diplomats stationed in China who had personally experienced the Chinese revolution also contributed many research reports and works on the Chinese Communist Party. For instance, in 1932, American diplomat Oliver Edmund Clubb submitted to the U.S. State Department a report titled *Communism in China: A Report from Hankow, 1932*. Based on Chinese and English-language newspapers, a small number of accessible Communist Party publications, and direct testimony from missionaries and others, this report introduced the internal organizational structure of the Chinese revolutionary movement and assessed its significance. Despite some factual errors, it was a pioneering work at the time. In 1937, American journalist Edgar Snow’s work *Red Star Over China* was published in London, enabling Western society for the first time to gain an in-depth understanding of the true face of the Chinese Communist Party and the Red Army. Furthermore, the outstanding contributions of Harvard University in the field of overseas research on the Chinese Communist Party have drawn widespread attention from domestic scholars. Harvard scholar John King Fairbank is regarded as the principal founder of 20th-century American Chinese studies. Fairbank and the Harvard school of Chinese studies he represented focused on the Chinese communist movement (the Chinese revolution) and research on the Chinese Communist Party. The East Asian Research Center, founded by Fairbank, is the most outstanding modern China research institution in the entire United States and the world; it has consistently maintained the coherence of its research projects and policies, firmly occupying a leading position in the field of Chinese studies. Some domestic scholars also believe that “the formation of overseas research on the Chinese Communist Party is marked by the establishment of the East Asian Research Center at Harvard University.” [3]3 The East Asian Research Center at Harvard University was founded by John King Fairbank in 1955; it was renamed the Fairbank Center for Chinese Studies in 1977. Driven by professional teams, overseas research on the Chinese Communist Party gradually grew into an independent field. Today, after a century of inheritance and development, the United States has become the main base for overseas research on the Chinese Communist Party, possessing the largest number of research institutions and scholars, and its research results have become an important perspective and pathway for the global understanding and interpretation of China and the Chinese Communist Party.

美国对中国共产党的关注始于20世纪20年代，最初主要是美国新闻记者发布了一系列有关中国革命的报道。如彼得·兰德在其著作中讲述了安娜·路易斯·斯特朗、伊罗生、艾格尼丝·史沫特莱等美国记者如何近距离观察并报道中国共产党相关活动的历程。20世纪30-40年代，那些亲历中国革命的驻华记者和外交官等非学术界人士，也贡献了许多关于中国共产党的研究报告和著作。如1932年，美国外交官柯乐博向美国国务院报送了《共产主义在中国——1932年来自汉口的报告》。该报告基于中文及英文报纸、少量可获取的共产党出版物资料，以及传教士和其他人士提供的直接证词，介绍了中国革命运动的内部组织架构，并评估了其重要性。尽管存在部分史实错误，但在当时也是一项开创性的工作。1937年，美国记者埃德加·斯诺的著作《红星照耀中国》(又名《西行漫记》)在英国伦敦出版，使得西方社会得以首次深入了解中国共产党和红军的真实面貌。此外，哈佛大学在海外中国共产党研究领域的卓越贡献引起了国内学者的广泛关注。哈佛大学学者费正清被称为美国20世纪中国学的主要开创者。费正清及其所代表的哈佛大学中国学研究，聚焦于中国共产主义运动(中国革命)及中国共产党研究。由费正清创立的东亚中心是整个美国乃至全世界最为卓越的现代中国研究机构，东亚中心始终保持着自身研究项目和政策的连贯性，稳居中国研究领域的领军位置。国内也有学者认为，“海外中国共产党研究的形成以哈佛大学东亚中心的成立为标志”。在专业化队伍的推动下，海外中国共产党研究逐步成长为独立领域。时至今日，历经一个世纪的传承与发展，美国已成为海外中国共产党研究的主要阵地，拥有最多的研究机构和学者，其研究成果也已成为全球理解和解读中国和中国共产党的重要视角与途径。

In addition, other countries and regions also showed varying degrees of early attention to the Chinese Communist Party. For example, Swiss-born British missionary Rudolf Alfred Bosshardt marched with the Red Army during the Long March and published *The Restraining Hand: Captivity for Christ in China* in 1936, which became one of the earliest monographs in the Western world to introduce the Red Army’s Long March. James Bertram was the first British journalist to visit Yan’an; after the Xi’an Incident, he quickly compiled materials and published *First Act in China: The Story of the Sian Mutiny* in 1937. [4]4 The Xi’an Incident (December 1936) was a kidnapping of Chiang Kai-shek by two of his generals, Zhang Xueliang and Yang Hucheng, who sought to force him to form a united front with the CPC against Japan. The CPC mediated a peaceful resolution. This book, from an objective and fair perspective, provided a detailed introduction to the true course of the Xi’an Incident and the Chinese Communist Party’s policy of peaceful resolution, becoming the only monograph on the Xi’an Incident written by a foreigner. At the same time, Latin America began to see reports on the Chinese revolution and reference materials on Mao Zedong’s works as early as the 1930s. However, these early attentions and studies from other countries and regions were often scattered within the broader framework of Asian, especially East Asian, area studies. They were mostly limited to brief introductions and reports on the Chinese revolution and Chinese Communist Party leaders, or served as supplementary materials for research on specific Chinese Communist Party leaders. Relatively speaking, the scale and influence of research in these countries and regions were rather limited.

此外，其他国家和地区早期对中国共产党也有不同程度的关注。如瑞士籍的英国传教士勃沙特在长征期间随红军行进，并于1936年出版了《神灵之手——一个西方传教士随红军长征亲历记》,该书成为西方世界最早介绍红军长征的专著之一。詹姆斯·贝特兰则是首位访问延安的英国记者，西安事变发生后，他迅速整理资料，并于1937年出版了《中国的第一幕：西安兵变真相》。该书以客观公正的视角，翔实介绍了西安事变的真实经过，以及中国共产党和平解决事变的方针，成为唯一由外国人撰写的关于西安事变的专著。与此同时，拉丁美洲在20世纪30年代就开始出现有关中国革命的报道，以及关于毛泽东著作的参考资料等。但这些早期来自其他国家和地区的关注与研究，往往零散地分布于更广泛的亚洲，尤其是东亚的区域研究之中。它们大多局限于对中国革命及中共领导人的简要介绍和报告，或是作为对特定中共领导人研究的辅助材料，相对而言，这些国家和地区研究规模与影响力都比较有限。

II. Comparison and Analysis of the Three Origins of Overseas Research on the Chinese Communist Party

二、海外中国共产党研究三大起源的比较与辨析

The question of when, where, and by whom the earliest overseas research on the Chinese Communist Party began remains open to discussion. However, if the focus is limited solely to tracing the time and place of the research’s emergence, one can only rely on historical materials yet to be uncovered. This article attempts to analyze three origins, not only sorting out the basis for each viewpoint but also focusing on exploring the different characteristics of the relevant historical materials, in order to reveal the diverse landscape of this research field.

海外最早的中国共产党研究始于何时何地何人，此议题尚存讨论空间。但若将焦点仅限于追溯研究的诞生时间与地点，便只能依赖于尚待发掘的史料。本文试图辨析三种起源，不仅梳理各观点的依据，更着重探讨相关史料的不同特点，以期展示这一研究领域的多元面貌。

(I) Comparison of Research Motivations and Historical Backgrounds

(一)研究动机与历史背景比较

The attention to and research on the Chinese Communist Party by various countries, due to their unique and complex historical backgrounds, cultural traditions, and political systems, exhibited significant differences from the very beginning. For example, Japan and the Soviet Union had close historical ties with the Chinese revolution, so their research on the Chinese Communist Party began earlier. In contrast, research in the United States and other Western countries was nurtured within the overall development of Western social sciences, especially area studies, and thus started relatively later. Overall, the development of the three origins was also closely related to their different political needs.

各国对中国共产党的关注和研究，由于各自独特且复杂的历史背景、文化传统以及政治体制，导致在起始阶段便展现出显著的差异性。例如，日本和苏联与中国革命有着紧密的历史联系，因此对中国共产党的研究工作开展较早。相比之下，美国及其他西方国家的研究孕育于西方社会科学的总体发展尤其是区域研究中，研究起步相对较晚。总体来看，三种起源的发展也与其不同的政治需求密切相关。

On the Japanese side, due to geographical proximity to China and shared elements of traditional culture, Japan naturally possessed advantageous conditions for researching the Chinese Communist Party. Early Japanese research on the Chinese Communist Party had direct and clear motivations, with a distinct political color, mainly stemming from the political need to oppose and prevent communism, as well as practical considerations for implementing aggression against China. Therefore, early Japanese attention to the Chinese Communist Party primarily came from various intelligence agencies serving the war of aggression against China. Within Japan’s diplomatic intelligence system, the Intelligence Bureau of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs was the main agency for carrying out intelligence collection work. According to incomplete statistics from domestic scholars, from 1920 to 1948, the Intelligence Bureau of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs compiled over 30 books specifically for intelligence research on the Chinese Communist Party, including six professional works on Party history. [5]5 The Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ Intelligence Bureau was a key agency for gathering political and military intelligence on China during the pre-war and wartime periods. Of course, besides various intelligence agencies, Japanese scholars also paid attention to the Chinese Communist Party during this period, but the more direct and realistic driving force remained serving Japan’s war of aggression against China. As Japanese scholar Kuwabara Jitsuzō stated when discussing the tasks of Japanese Sinology, research on China was to adapt to the situation where “the great powers are about to set foot on Chinese soil.” [6]6 Kuwabara Jitsuzō (1871–1931) was a prominent Japanese historian of China whose work was often used to justify Japanese expansionism. Additionally, some Japanese scholars at the time were commissioned by the Ministry of Home Affairs to conduct investigations in China. For example, Naitō Konan, commissioned by the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, conducted investigative research in Northeast China, with the aim of gathering evidence to prove that the Yanbian Korean Autonomous Prefecture in Jilin Province, China, bordering Korea, was not Chinese territory. After his investigation report was submitted to the Ministry of Home Affairs, it actually provided important groundwork for the acts of aggression against China. [7]7 Naitō Konan (1866–1934) was a leading Japanese Sinologist whose research on Chinese history and society was frequently enlisted to support Japanese imperialist claims in East Asia.

日本方面，由于地理位置与中国邻近及传统文化的共同性，天然具备研究中国共产党的优势条件。早期日本对中国共产党的研究动机直接且明确，带有鲜明政治色彩，主要源于反共防共的政治需求以及对华实施侵略的现实考量等。因此，早期日本对中国共产党的关注主要来源于服务于侵华战争的各类情报机关。在日本外交情报系统中，外务省情报部是实施情报搜集工作的主要机构。据国内学者不完全统计，从1920年至1948年，外务省情报部编写的专门针对中国共产党进行情报研究的书籍就达到了30余种，其中包括6部专业性的党史著作。当然，除各类情报机关外，日本学者在这一时期也对中国共产党给予了关注，但更为直接和现实的推动力仍然是服务日本的侵华战争。正如日本学者桑原骘藏在论述日本中国学任务时指出，对中国的研究就是为了适应“列强即将踏上中国土地”的局面。此外，当时一些日本学者也受内务府委托对中国进行调查。如内藤湖南曾接受日本外务省的委托，对中国东北地区进行了调查研究，目的就是搜集证据以证明与朝鲜接壤的中国吉林省延边朝鲜族地区并非中国领土。其调查报告提交至内务省后，实际上也为侵华行径提供了重要铺垫。

On the side of the Soviet Union and the Comintern, early attention to the Chinese Communist Party was influenced not only by practical factors such as geographical location and strategic considerations but also by the idealistic pursuit of ideology and revolutionary mission. On the one hand, from a geopolitical perspective, the Soviet Union shared geographical similarities with Japan, both bordering China. On the other hand, as the organization of the international communist movement under the leadership of the Soviet Union, the development of the Chinese Communist Party was directly related to the development of the international communist movement. The Comintern’s attention to and assistance for the Chinese Communist Party were partly based on the vision of promoting global communist revolution and partly on the need to call on various countries to establish and develop a world anti-fascist united front. Among them, many Party cadres engaged in Far Eastern diplomatic work, Party newspaper reporters, political workers on the Eastern front, and relevant staff seconded to the Comintern actively conducted research on the national liberation movements of Eastern countries and the Chinese revolution. This produced the first batch of research results on the Chinese Communist Party written using the Marxist methodology. After the Chinese Communist Party joined the Comintern in 1922, both the Chinese and Soviet Parties were placed under the leadership of the Comintern. Many scholars, adhering to the spirit of revolutionary internationalism and combining it with the basic principles of the Chinese revolutionary movement, put forward many guiding suggestions for the Chinese Communist Party.

苏联和共产国际方面，对中国共产党的早期关注，既受到地理位置和战略考量的现实因素影响，还源于意识形态和革命使命的理想追求。一方面，从地缘政治的角度看，苏联与日本在地理位置上存在相似性，均与中国毗邻。另一方面，共产国际作为苏联领导下的国际共产主义运动组织，中国共产党的发展也直接关系到国际共产主义运动的发展。共产国际对中国共产党的关注和援助，部分基于推动全球共产主义革命的愿景，部分也是出于号召各国建立和发展世界反法西斯统一战线的需要。其中，许多从事远东外交工作的党的干部、党报记者和东方战线的政工人员，以及派驻共产国际的有关工作人员，积极开展对东方各国民族解放运动问题和中国革命问题的研究，出现了第一批用马克思主义方法论写成的中国共产党研究成果。中国共产党于1922年加入共产国际后，中苏两党均置身于共产国际的领导下，众多学者秉承革命的国际主义精神，结合中国革命运动的基本原则，对中国共产党提出了许多具有指导意义的建议。

On the American side, research on China has been closely linked to foreign policy formulation and the implementation of strategies toward China. Therefore, since the early 20th century, American attention to the Communist Party of China has

美国方面，对中国的研究与外交政策制定和对华战略实施紧密相连。因此，自20世纪初以来，美国对中国共产党的关注始终带有明显的功利主义色彩。第一次世界大战期间，尽管汉学研究是学术主流，美国却利用欧洲列强无暇东顾的时机，大力扩张其在中国的势力，美国的垄断资本也开始设立各种基金会资助对海外包括对中国的研究。第二次世界大战期间，为适应战时国际斗争和美国国家利益的需要，美国汉学研究经历了分化，并最终使得中国研究(包括中国共产党研究)从传统汉学研究的框架中完全独立出来，被纳入了“区域研究”的范畴。与艰深的“汉学”研究相比，美国的中国共产党研究不仅承载着学术探索的使命，更侧重于实用性，聚焦于中美关系现实问题的剖析。实际上，它“是由于帝国主义的需要而产生的研究”,承担着为美国政府制定对华政策提供智力支持的角色。但当时的美国学者们无法完全解答中国现实中出现的诸多问题，因此以斯诺为代表的左翼进步新闻记者便成了美国战时中国共产党研究的实践者和拓荒者。在此之后，随着现实政治需求的不断增长，美国的中国共产党研究逐渐由“新闻报道式关注”转向“学术论证式研究”,研究开始步入规范化和系统化的轨道。

In a comparative analysis of the three different origins of research, one can clearly observe differences in their research motivations and historical backgrounds. Early Japanese attention to and research motivation regarding the Chinese Communist Party were closely linked to its expansionist and militarist policies, while the Soviet Union was more based on considerations of ideology and strategic interests. In contrast, the research motivation of the United States was more complex, involving not only assessments of the communist threat but also predictions and preparations for future trends in Sino-American relations. These different research motivations and backgrounds have had a profound impact on subsequent studies of the Chinese Communist Party in various countries.

在对比分析三个不同起源的研究时，可以明显观察到其研究动机与历史背景均存在差异。早期日本对中国共产党的关注与研究动机与其扩张主义及军国主义政策紧密相关，而苏联则更多基于意识形态与战略利益的考量。相较之下，美国的研究动机更为复杂，不仅涉及对共产主义威胁的评估，还包括对中美关系未来发展趋势的预测与准备。这些不同的研究动机与背景，对各国后续关于中国共产党的研究产生了深远的影响。

(II) Comparison of Research Methods and Academic Characteristics

(二)研究方法与学术特色比较

As representatives of different social systems and academic research, the three major origins of research on the Chinese Communist Party each have their own characteristics. Throughout their long development, they have not only maintained their own features but have also influenced research in other countries and regions.

作为不同社会制度和学术研究的代表，三大不同起源的中国共产党研究各具特色。在其漫长的发展历程中，不仅保持了各自的特色，还影响了其他国家和地区的研究。

Regarding Japan: first, Japan underwent a shift from militarist needs to academic research, with a large amount of early intelligence materials providing primary sources for Japan’s understanding and knowledge of the Chinese Communist Party. These materials are rich in content, including not only early Japanese perceptions of the Chinese Communist Party but also continuing to provide new research material for Japanese studies of the Chinese Communist Party to this day, possessing significant reference value for Party history documents. Second, Japan has consistently attached importance to the collection and compilation of documents from the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party. For example, *Document Collection: History of the Chinese Communist Party* (7 volumes), compiled by Hatano Kenichi and published in 1961; *Collection of Historical Materials on the Chinese Communist Party* (12 volumes), compiled by the Japan Institute of International Affairs and published between 1970 and 1975; and between 1985 and 1986, Keiso Shobo in Japan published *The Latest Collection of Materials on the Chinese Communist Party*, co-edited by Ota Katsuhiro and others. At the same time, Japan has also made significant efforts in publishing Japanese translations of Mao Zedong’s works. According to statistics from domestic scholars, the publication and distribution of Japanese translations of Mao Zedong’s works can be traced back as early as 1929, and they continued to accumulate over subsequent decades. Furthermore, Japan has always valued field surveys and oral interviews, such as the relevant surveys conducted by institutions like the South Manchuria Railway Company’s Research Department and the East Asia Research Institute during World War II, which preserved a large number of oral materials, documents, and statistical data. Since the normalization of Sino-Japanese diplomatic relations and China’s reform and opening up, many scholars have also collected a large amount of materials and conducted field surveys in China. After the 1990s, Japanese academia increasingly recognized the necessity of conducting oral interviews with Chinese researchers, and many works with an oral history character emerged.

日本方面，首先，日本经历了军国主义需要到学术研究的转向，早期大量情报资料为日本了解、认识中国共产党提供了一手文献。这些资料内容丰富，不仅包括了早期日本对中国共产党的认识，而且至今仍为日本的中共研究提供新的研究素材，具有重要的党史文献参考价值。其次，日本一直重视对中共中央文件的收集和编辑。如1961年出版的由波多野乾一编著的《资料集成：中国共产党史》(共7卷),1970年至1975年间出版的日本国际问题研究所编纂的《中国共产党史资料集》(共12卷)等。1985年至1986年间，日本劲草书房又出版了由太田胜洪等人合编的《中国共产党最新资料集》等。同时，日本在出版毛泽东著作日译本方面也作出了显著努力。根据国内学者统计，毛泽东著作日译本的出版和发行最早可追溯至1929年，且在随后的数十年间持续累积。此外，日本素来重视田野调查和口述访谈，如满铁调查部和东亚研究所等机构在二战期间开展的相关调查，保留了大量口述资料、文献和统计数据等成果。中日邦交正常化及中国实行改革开放以来，许多学者也在中国收集大量资料并进行实地调查。20世纪90年代后，日本学界越发意识到对中国研究者进行口述访谈的必要性，许多带有口述史色彩的成果面世。

Regarding the Soviet Union: first, during the period of China’s New Democratic Revolution and the golden age of friendly Sino-Soviet exchanges, Soviet scholars and research institutions were able to obtain a large number of precious original historical materials from China, which provided indispensable original sources for the Soviet academic community to conduct in-depth research on the history, theory, and practice of the Chinese Communist Party. Moreover, Soviet scholars also enjoyed the unique advantage of direct access to the archives of the Communist International, the archives of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, and the archives of the Soviet Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which were preserved in Moscow. Second was the application of Marxist methodology to the study of the Chinese Communist Party. This characteristic actually originated from the Soviet Union and the Communist International. For example, the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Soviet Academy of Sciences held multiple large-scale seminars on topics such as the nature of Chinese society and the Asiatic mode of production. These activities promoted the Soviet academic community’s establishment of an independent academic system based on the Marxist theory of socio-economic formations. However, in the early period of Soviet research on the Chinese Communist Party, the political coloring was too strong. Coupled with the later evolution of relations between the two parties and two countries from differences of opinion to rupture and conflict, many research results bore the imprint of political and ideological debates between the leadership of the Chinese and Soviet parties. It was not until the 1980s that the Soviet historical community began to advocate for a deep and comprehensive grasp of dialectical materialism as the methodological basis for studying Chinese issues, and this characteristic was further strengthened. In the early 1990s, with the declassification of some Soviet archival materials, the subsequent Russian academic community also reflected on and revised the Soviet-era research on the Chinese Communist Party.

苏联方面，首先，在中国新民主主义革命时期以及中苏友好交往的黄金年代，苏联学者及研究机构得以从中国获取大量珍贵的原始历史资料，这些资料为苏联学界深入研究中国共产党的历史、理论与实践提供了不可或缺的原始素材。并且，苏联学者还享有直接利用保存在莫斯科的共产国际档案、苏共中央政治局档案以及苏联外交部档案的独特优势。其次是将马克思主义方法论应用于中国共产党研究。这一特点实际上起源于苏联与共产国际，如苏联科学院东方学研究所曾多次举办关于中国社会性质及亚细亚生产方式等议题的大型研讨会。这些活动推动了苏联学界以马克思主义的社会经济形态理论为基石，构建起一套独立的学术体系。但苏联早期研究中国共产党时，政治色彩过于浓重，加之后期两党两国关系从意见分歧演变为破裂和冲突，导致许多研究成果带有中苏两党领导层之间政治思想论战的烙印。直到20世纪80年代，苏联史学界才开始倡导深入且全面地掌握唯物辩证法，将其作为研究中国问题的方法论基础，这一特点才得到了进一步的强化。20世纪90年代初，随着部分苏联档案资料的解密，之后的俄罗斯学界也对苏联时期的中国共产党研究进行了反思和修正。

The United States was the first to adopt an interdisciplinary approach in its research on the Chinese Communist Party. During World War II, the U.S. government established the Office of Strategic Services, where the comprehensive application of various social science research methods was fully practiced in the field of intelligence analysis. This had a profound and lasting impact on John King Fairbank’s China studies. After the war, Fairbank applied these methods in his first monograph, *The United States and China*. Therefore, some scholars believe that the China studies pioneered by Fairbank marked the first paradigm shift in Western China research since traditional Sinology. This shift also had a profound impact on subsequent overseas research on the Chinese Communist Party, with numerous disciplines becoming involved in the field. This interdisciplinary approach also deeply influenced other countries. For example, Japanese scholar Ando Hikotaro pointed out, “Because it is necessary to raise new questions, it is necessary to open up new fields, and therefore it is necessary to conduct interdisciplinary research in various fields and synthesize them.” Furthermore, in the 1970s, the United States began to emphasize comparative studies of China. For example, Mark Selden compared Chinese and Western development perspectives, arguing that “the record of the Chinese revolution challenges universal assumptions about the problems and prospects of human development in the West, some Third World countries, and socialist societies.” It is noteworthy that the United States has attached great importance to talent cultivation and academic inheritance, providing a more comprehensive analytical framework and a more professional academic team for the study of the Chinese Communist Party. Through this mentorship-based talent cultivation mechanism, overseas research on the Chinese Communist Party in the United States has been able to transmit deep academic accumulation, ensuring continuity and developmental momentum, and further promoting theoretical development in this field.

美国在研究中国共产党时率先采用了跨学科的方法。二战期间，美国政府成立了战略情报局，多种社会科学研究方法的综合应用在情报分析领域得到了充分实践。这对费正清的中国学研究产生了深远且持久的影响，战后费正清将这些方法应用在其首部专著《美国与中国》中。因此，一些学者认为费正清开创的中国学标志着西方中国研究自传统汉学以来的首次范式转变。这一转变亦对后续的海外中国共产党研究产生了深刻的影响，众多学科纷纷涉足中国共产党研究领域。这种跨学科的方法也深刻影响了其他国家。如日本学者安藤彦太郎指出，“因为要提出新的问题，就必须要开拓新的领域，因而就必须在各个领域里进行跨学科的研究，并把他们综合起来”。此外，20世纪70年代，美国开始重视对中国的比较研究。例如马克·塞尔登就将中国和西方的发展观点进行了比较，认为“中国革命的记录挑战了西方、一些第三世界国家和社会主义社会关于人类发展问题和前景的普遍假设”。值得注意的是，美国对人才培养与学术传承给予了高度重视，为中国共产党研究提供了更为全面的分析框架和更为专业的学术团队。通过这种师承关系式的人才培养机制，美国的海外中国共产党研究得以传递深厚的学术积累，确保了连贯性和发展动力，进一步推动了该领域的理论发展。

The characteristic of Japanese research lies in the collection, sorting, and compilation of documentary materials, as well as the emphasis on oral history. The Soviet Union, as an ally of the socialist camp at the time, had clear advantages in the use of original materials and the application of Marxist methodology. In contrast, the United States, largely based on practical needs, employed interdisciplinary research methods, which also greatly broadened the scope of overseas research on the Chinese Communist Party. These research methods and academic characteristics have had a profound impact on the research focus and academic development trends of various countries.

日本的研究特点在于对文献资料的搜集、整理、编纂以及对口述历史学的重视。而当时作为社会主义阵营盟友的苏联，在原始资料的利用及马克思主义方法论的应用上具有明显优势。相较之下，美国多基于现实需求，运用跨学科研究方法，也极大拓宽了海外中国共产党研究的广度。这些研究方法与学术特色，对各国研究重点及学术发展走向产生了深远影响。

(III) Comparison of Research Focus and Academic Trends

(三)研究重点与学术走向比较

When studying the Chinese Communist Party, the work of overseas scholars is often influenced by their own countries’ national interests and strategic considerations, and their research directions and emphases differ accordingly. Research on relations with China and on important historical figures has been continuous, but specific research hotspots and peaks are usually closely related to major historical events.

在研究中国共产党时，海外学者的工作常常受到本国的国家利益和战略考量的影响，其研究方向和侧重点有所不同。对于和中国之间的关系以及重要历史人物的研究是一直持续的，但具体研究热点和峰值通常又与重大历史事件紧密相关。

In Japan, research on the Chinese Communist Party was greatly influenced by the Japanese war of aggression against China. Until the mid-1940s to the mid-1950s, that is, Japan’s unconditional surrender and the early post-war period, Japanese research on the Chinese Communist Party was mainly directly or indirectly related to Japanese militarism’s “continental policy.” [14]14 The “continental policy” (大陆政策) was the Japanese imperial strategy of territorial expansion onto the Asian mainland, which culminated in the invasion of China from 1937. With the end of the war, Japanese society began to reflect on past acts of aggression and transformed this reflection into a motivation to introduce and study the Chinese revolution. Many scholars witnessed the rise of the socialist camp represented by the Soviet Union and China; against this backdrop, they were eager to discover common ground between the Communist International and Mao Zedong’s theory of the Chinese revolution. In the 1960s, Japan’s economy began to grow rapidly, while China entered a complex historical period including the “Cultural Revolution.” [15]15 The Cultural Revolution (1966–1976) was a mass socio-political movement launched by Mao Zedong to purge capitalist and traditional elements from Chinese society, which led to widespread upheaval. During this time, Japan’s research on the modern Chinese Communist Party relied mainly on news published in Chinese newspapers and periodicals, and there were many differences in ideological understanding and political stance. However, with the implementation of the reform and opening up policy, exchanges of visits and international students between Chinese and Japanese scholars became increasingly frequent, and the research environment underwent fundamental changes. During this period, the number of comparative studies increased, and they paid more attention to China’s influence on neighboring countries. Nevertheless, we must also note that current Japanese Sinology is in decline, a trend that also poses challenges for Japanese scholars studying the Chinese Communist Party. This is because post-war Japan’s foreign policy and basic policies have all been related to the United States. Americans control all important information, and Japan can only passively receive intelligence from them. Specifically regarding research on the Chinese Communist Party, Japanese scholars only have scattered raw facts, presented in the form of news reports, making it difficult for researchers to form a systematic understanding of the Chinese Communist Party.

日本方面，对中国共产党的研究受日本侵华战争影响很大。直到20世纪40年代中期到50年代中期，即日本宣布无条件投降以及战后初期，日本对中国共产党的研究都主要与日本军国主义的“大陆政策”直接或间接相关。随着战争结束，日本社会开始对过往的侵略行为进行反思，并将这种反思转化为对中国革命进行介绍和研究的动力。许多学者目睹了以苏中为代表的社会主义阵营的崛起，在此背景下，他们渴望发掘出共产国际与毛泽东的中国革命理论之间的共同点。20世纪60年代，日本经济开始高速增长，而中国则步入了包括“文化大革命”在内的复杂历史时期。在此期间，日本对现代中国共产党的研究主要依靠中国报刊发布的新闻，在思想认识与政治立场方面存在诸多分歧。但是随着改革开放政策的推行，中日两国学者之间的互访和留学生交流日益频繁，研究环境发生了根本性的变化。在这一时期，比较研究的数量有所增加，并且更加关注中国对邻国的影响。然而，我们也必须注意到，当前日本的中国学研究式微，这一趋势同样给日本学者研究中国共产党带来了挑战。因为战后日本的外交和基本政策都是与美国有关。美国人掌握着所有重要信息，日本只能被动地接收来自他们的情报。具体到对中国共产党的研究，日本学者仅掌握零散的原始事实，这些信息以新闻报道的形式呈现，导致研究者难以对中国共产党形成系统的认识。

On the Soviet side, research on the Chinese Communist Party was directly related to the development of the revolutionary situation in China and the evolution and trends of relations between the two parties and two countries. Around the time of the founding of the Chinese Communist Party, many scholars, adhering to the spirit of revolutionary internationalism, studied issues such as the relationship between the Chinese Communist Party and the Communist International, Sino-Soviet relations, and important leaders, putting forward many suggestions of guiding significance. Later, due to the expansion of the Great Purge [16]16 The Great Purge (1936–1938) was a campaign of political repression in the Soviet Union under Stalin that targeted alleged counter-revolutionaries, including many in the Communist Party and military. and the Great Patriotic War, [17]17 The Great Patriotic War (1941–1945) is the Russian term for the Soviet Union’s participation in World War II against Nazi Germany. relevant research stagnated somewhat. It was not until the late 1940s that research on Chinese issues resumed. Thereafter, from the founding of the People’s Republic of China to the more than ten years before the rupture of relations between the two countries, this can be called the golden age of Soviet research on the Chinese Communist Party. Friendly mutual assistance and cooperation between the two countries rapidly expanded the research team and gained an unprecedentedly broad field of activity and rich sources of material. However, during the subsequent Sino-Soviet polemics, [18]18 The Sino-Soviet polemics (1956–1966) were a series of ideological disputes between the Chinese Communist Party and the Communist Party of the Soviet Union over the interpretation of Marxism-Leninism and revolutionary strategy. Soviet research on the Chinese Communist Party was clearly influenced by the political and ideological debates between the leaderships of the two parties. It was not until the late 1980s that Soviet scholars gradually broke free from political ideological restrictions and traditional thinking patterns, re-examining and re-evaluating past research on the Chinese Communist Party. Since the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, Russian academic research on the Chinese Communist Party has become more active and diverse. The relationship between the Communist International and the Chinese revolution remains a research hotspot; at the same time, research on Sino-Soviet relations and Sino-Russian relations has been further deepened, and research on contemporary Chinese political and economic reforms under the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party is increasing day by day.

苏联方面，对中国共产党的研究与中国国内革命形势发展、中苏两党两国关系演变以及发展趋势有着直接的关系。在中国共产党成立前后，众多学者秉承革命的国际主义精神，研究了中国共产党和共产国际关系、中苏关系以及重要领导人等问题，提出了许多具有指导意义的建议。后来由于肃反扩大化和卫国战争，相关研究有所停滞。直到20世纪40年代末才恢复对中国问题的研究。此后，从中华人民共和国成立到两国关系破裂以前的十余年，可称之为苏联中国共产党研究的黄金时代。两国的友好互助合作使研究队伍迅速扩大，并且获得了空前广泛的活动场所和丰富的资料来源。然而，在随后的中苏论战期间，苏联对中国共产党的研究显然受到了中苏两党领导层间政治思想论战的影响。直至20世纪80年代后期，苏联学者才逐渐摆脱政治意识形态限制和传统思维定势，对过往的中共研究进行重新审视和评估。自1991年苏联解体以来，俄罗斯学界对中国共产党的研究变得更加活跃和多元。共产国际与中国革命的关系问题依旧是研究的热点，同时，对中苏关系以及中俄关系的研究得到进一步的深化，对中国共产党领导下的当代中国政治和经济改革等方面研究日益增多。

On the American side, the research focus in each historical period reflects the characteristics of the corresponding era. During the Second World War, research work mainly focused on China’s military situation. Both left-wing journalists and early “China hands” [19]19 “China hands” refers to American diplomats, journalists, and scholars with expertise on China, many of whom served in China in the 1940s and were later purged during the McCarthy era for alleged pro-communist sympathies. conducted some research on China’s revolutionary dynamics and political development. With the victory of the Chinese revolution, the focus of American scholars further shifted to the Chinese revolution and its communist movement. Thereafter, the United States’ investment in research on the Chinese Communist Party was undoubtedly enormous; whether government agencies, enterprises, or foundations, they were all more inclined to fund research projects related to contemporary China. As many institutions of higher learning increasingly valued Chinese studies, they cultivated numerous talents who were both capable and enthusiastic about studying the Chinese Communist Party. Since the 1960s, due to the deepening differences between the Chinese and Soviet parties, the international communist movement experienced a split. Based on its solid foundation in area studies, the United States began to increase investment in “comparative communism” research and to combine communist studies with interdisciplinary area studies. With the improvement of Sino-US relations, research results on China’s political and economic development under the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party continued to increase, and research on China’s military power also began to heat up. It is worth noting that the United States currently has the largest number of think tanks in the world, and these think tanks also play an important role in research on the Chinese Communist Party. Taking the Brookings Institution as an example, it established an independent China research center in 2006—the John L. Thornton China Center—to conduct research on China. Many well-known China scholars, such as Kenneth Lieberthal and Cheng Li, have served as directors of the center. In addition, the Brookings Institution is known for its close ties with the government; many scholars, after working at the institution, transition through the “revolving door” to become political officials, which also provides solid support for US policy toward China.

美国方面，各个历史阶段的研究焦点均体现了相应的时代特征。第二次世界大战期间，研究工作主要聚焦于中国的军事局势。无论是左翼的新闻工作者，还是早期的“中国通”们，均对中国的革命动态和政治发展进行了一定研究。随着中国革命的胜利，美国学者的关注点进一步转向了中国革命及其共产主义运动。此后，美国对中国共产党的研究投入无疑是巨大的，无论是政府机构、企业还是基金会，都更倾向于资助与当代中国相关的研究项目。随着众多高等学府对中国研究的日益重视，培养了众多既有能力又怀有研究中国共产党热情的人才。自20世纪60年代以来，由于中苏两党间分歧的加深，国际共产主义运动遭遇分裂。美国基于区域研究的深厚基础，开始加大对“比较共产主义”研究的投入，以及将共产主义研究与跨学科的区域研究相结合。随着中美关系的改善，研究中国共产党领导下中国政治经济发展的成果不断增多，对中国军事力量的研究也开始升温。值得注意的是，美国目前拥有世界上数量最多的智库，这些智库在中国共产党研究方面也发挥着重要作用。以布鲁金斯学会为例，该学会于2006年成立了独立的中国研究中心——约翰·桑顿中国中心，开展对中国的研究。许多知名中国研究学者如李侃如、李成等人都曾担任中心主任。此外，布鲁金斯学会因其与政府的紧密联系而闻名，许多学者在学会工作后通过“旋转门”转型成为政治官员，这也为美国对华政策提供了坚实的支持。

From the above introduction, it can be seen that the research focus of different countries in various historical stages has been influenced by their own national interests and strategic considerations, bearing the characteristics of the corresponding era. There are also significant differences in their current research status and future academic directions. Japan’s research on the Chinese Communist Party faces challenges, while with the gradual opening of the Comintern archives and other Russian historical archives, Russian research on the Chinese Communist Party has developed considerably. In contrast, American research places greater emphasis on the contemporary Chinese Communist Party, and its research results provide important reference for US government decision-making.

通过前述介绍可见，不同国家各个历史阶段的研究重点均受到本国的国家利益和战略考量因素的影响，带有相应时代特征。而在各自的研究现状和未来学术走向方面也大有不同，日本的中国共产党研究面临挑战，而随着共产国际档案和俄罗斯其他历史档案的逐渐开放，俄罗斯对中国共产党的研究有很大发展。相较之下，美国研究更侧重于当代中国共产党，并且其研究成果为美国政府的决策提供了重要的参考依据。

III. Insights and Reflections on the Origins of Overseas Research on the Chinese Communist Party

三、海外中国共产党研究起源的启示与反思

The international community’s perception of the Chinese Communist Party relies to a large extent on the perspectives of overseas research. For a long time in the past, Japan, the United States, and the Soviet Union and Russia were the major centers of overseas research on the Chinese Communist Party. Their research not only influenced their own countries’ policies toward China but also had a broad international impact. With the deepening development of globalization, domestic tracking of overseas research on the Chinese Communist Party also faces new challenges and opportunities. How to better serve the international community’s cognitive needs regarding the Chinese Communist Party while maintaining academic independence requires in-depth discussion. At the same time, the experiences and lessons of overseas scholars in this field also provide us with valuable opportunities for reference and reflection. On this basis, transforming these experiences into important insights and practical guidance for relevant domestic research fields in the context of the current era should be our historical responsibility.

国际社会对中国共产党的认知，很大程度上依赖于海外研究的视角。在过去的很长一段时间里，日本、美国以及苏联和俄罗斯都是海外中国共产党研究的重镇。它们的研究不仅影响了本国的对华政策，也在国际上产生了广泛影响。随着全球化的深入发展，国内对海外中国共产党研究的追踪也面临着新的挑战和机遇，如何在保持学术独立性的同时，更好地服务于国际社会对中国共产党的认知需求，需要深入探讨。同时，海外学者在该领域的经验与教训也为我们提供了宝贵的借鉴和反思机会。在此基础上，结合当今时代背景将这些经验转化为国内相关研究领域的重要启示和实践指导，应当是我们的历史担当。

(I) Value, Utilize, and Draw on Overseas Historical Documents and Their Research Methods

(一)重视、利用并借鉴海外历史文献及其研究方法

Domestic tracking of overseas research on the Chinese Communist Party is conducive to supplementing the traditional field of the history and building of the Chinese Communist Party—the so-called “stones from other hills.” [20]20 “Stones from other hills” (他山之石) is a Chinese idiom from the *Book of Songs* (《诗经》), meaning that advice or examples from others can be used to improve one’s own work. Therefore, research materials and methods from different countries and regions should be valued, and especially the content that can be used for reference should be actively applied. Only in this way can the practical utility of overseas research on the Chinese Communist Party be fully realized.

国内对海外中国共产党研究的追踪有利于对传统中共党史党建领域进行补充，即所谓的“他山之石”。因此，来自不同国家和地区的研究资料与方法都应受到重视，尤其对其中可供借鉴的内容更要积极运用，这样才能充分发挥海外中国共产党研究的实际效用。

From the perspective of historical documents, through the systematic collation of archival materials, a more accurate understanding and recognition can be formed of the role played by the Communist Party of China at different historical stages. This relies not only on domestic archival resources but should also actively expand the excavation and study of archival materials related to the Chinese revolution found in overseas literature. For example, historical documents related to the Communist Party of China held by institutions such as the National Archives of Japan, the Diplomatic Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the National Institute for Defense Studies of the Ministry of Defense can now mostly be accessed and obtained through the website of the Asia Historical Materials Center. However, there remain deficiencies in the development and utilization of these overseas materials within domestic academia. What is worthy of our study and emulation is that Japan has done a great deal of work in the collection and compilation of Central Committee documents of the CPC, the Soviet Union and Russia have achieved notable results in organizing documents related to relations with the Comintern, and the United States and Japan have also made considerable efforts in publishing collections of leaders’ writings and works. From the perspective of research methods, as research deepens, the interdisciplinary integration brought by American academia has also become a new trend in the entire overseas study of the CPC. The sociological perspective can reveal the trajectory of social change under the leadership of the CPC and the evolution of the people’s living conditions; political science theory provides a powerful analytical tool for parsing the modernization of the governance system and governance capacity; and the application of economic models helps assess the impact of economic policies on the domestic and international economic environment. This not only greatly broadens the horizons of researchers and enriches research content but also makes the analysis of the CPC more comprehensive and accurate. For Chinese scholars who are still in the exploratory and developmental stage of interdisciplinary research, this is undoubtedly an important inspiration.

从历史文献来看，通过系统化的档案资料整理，可以对中国共产党在不同历史阶段发挥的作用形成更为准确的理解和认识。这不仅依赖于国内的档案资源，还应积极拓展对海外文献中有关中国革命的档案资料的挖掘与研究。例如，日本国家档案馆、外务省外交档案馆以及防卫省防卫研究所等机构所收藏的中国共产党相关历史文献，目前大多可以通过亚洲历史资料中心网站进行查询和获取。但国内学界在这些海外资料的开发与利用方面仍存在不足。值得我们学习和借鉴的是，日本在中共中央文件的收集与编辑方面做了大量工作，苏联及俄罗斯在整理与共产国际关系的文件方面取得了显著成果，而美国和日本在出版领导人著作文集方面也做出了相当的努力。从研究方法来看，随着研究的不断深入，美国学界带来的跨学科融合也成为整个海外中共研究新的趋势。社会学的视角能够展现中国共产党领导下的社会变迁轨迹以及民众生活状态的演变，政治学理论为解析治理体系和治理能力现代化进程提供了有力的分析工具，而经济学模型的应用则有助于评估经济政策对国内外经济环境产生的影响。这不仅极大开阔了研究者的视野、丰富了研究内容，更使得对中国共产党的分析进一步全面与准确，对还处于跨学科研究探索与发展阶段的我国学者而言，无疑也是重要的启示。

(II) Dialectically Viewing the Research Achievements of Overseas Scholars

(二)辩证看待海外学者的研究成果

Significant differences in historical source materials, research methods, and historical perspectives have given rise to diverse academic achievements, and the diversity of early overseas research results on the CPC is particularly typical. Therefore, sorting out and studying the academic achievements of overseas scholars in the field of CPC research can help us expand new research perspectives. Of course, when drawing on these achievements, domestic scholars must maintain a cautious attitude and a critical spirit, examining them from a dialectical perspective.

史料依据、研究方法及历史观的显著差异，催生了各具特色的学术成果，早期海外中共研究成果的多样性更是典型。因此，梳理和研究海外学者在中共研究领域的学术成果，能够为我们拓展新的研究视角。当然，国内学者在借鉴这些成果时，必须保持审慎态度和批判精神，以辩证的视角对其进行审视。

First, many historical documents have a distinct ideological bias. For example, Japanese historical documents from before and during the war were based on the political need to oppose and prevent communism and the practical considerations of carrying out aggression against China, thus viewing issues with specific stances and viewpoints. Second, the research achievements of overseas scholars often focus on a specific issue or a particular historical event, which may lead to deviations in a comprehensive understanding of the CPC. When utilizing these achievements, one must be vigilant against distortions caused by erroneous historical perspectives, values, and political stances, while also paying attention to comparative examination and mutual corroboration with domestic documents and other foreign-language documents, carefully distinguishing truth from falsehood and bias. Furthermore, attention should be paid to the dual identity of many current overseas scholars. On the one hand, as academic researchers, they should uphold the objectivity and neutrality of academic research; on the other hand, as policy advisors or think tank experts, their views often need to reflect government will and align with national interests, inevitably possessing a utilitarian character. Balancing the objectivity of academic research with the utilitarianism of policy advice is a complex and subtle challenge. These two identities should be considered comprehensively: not only must their personal problem awareness and research fields be clarified, but also their stance and the political interests their views represent must be deeply understood. On this basis, the diversity and complexity of overseas scholars’ research achievements can be better understood. Regarding the academic value of relevant overseas literature and achievements, a dialectical attitude should also be upheld: their value must be clearly recognized, but their academic status should not be overestimated.

首先，许多历史文献具有鲜明的意识形态倾向，如日本在战争前后的历史文献就立足于反共防共的政治需求以及对华实施侵略的现实考量，看待问题带有特定的立场和观点。其次，海外学者的研究成果往往聚焦于某一特定问题或某一历史事件，这可能导致对中国共产党的全面理解出现偏差。在利用这些成果时，既要警惕错误的历史观、价值观以及政治立场带来的扭曲，又要重视与国内文献、其他外文文献的对比考察与相互印证，审慎地辨别其中的真伪与偏见。此外，要关注现在许多海外学者的双重身份。一方面，作为学术研究者，他们应该维护学术研究的客观性与中立性；另一方面，作为政策顾问或智库专家，他们的观点常常需体现政府意志，契合国家利益，不可避免地具有功利性。平衡学术研究的客观性与政策咨询的功利性是一个复杂而微妙的挑战，应将这两种身份综合考量，不仅要明确其个人的问题意识和研究领域，还需深入理解他们的立场及其观点所代表的政治利益。在此基础上，更好地理解海外学者研究成果的多样性和复杂性。对于海外相关文献与成果的学术价值，也要秉持辩证的态度，既要明确其价值所在，又不可过度拔高其学术地位。

(III) Strengthening Support for Domestic Re-Research

(三)强化对国内再研究的支持力度

While dialectically viewing the research achievements of overseas scholars, we also need to strengthen support for domestic re-research. Only in this way can we, on the basis of fully absorbing overseas research achievements, promote the continuous innovation and development of domestic CPC research, better serving the needs of national and social development. This means not only carefully screening and drawing on overseas research achievements but also increasing investment in domestic research in related fields and creating a more relaxed academic research environment for it. By establishing special research funds, strengthening cooperation and exchange among academic institutions, and encouraging interdisciplinary research, the level and quality of domestic research can be enhanced, enabling sustained and dynamic attention to overseas academic trends. At the same time, efforts should be made to cultivate a group of research talents with international vision and solid academic foundations, attract more scholars from different disciplinary backgrounds to join this research field, and support the growth of young scholars. In this regard, the “engagement school style” [21]21 The “engagement school style” (接触派风格) refers to an approach among some overseas scholars, particularly in the US, who advocate for direct engagement and interaction with the CPC and Chinese institutions, as opposed to a more confrontational or detached stance. and “first-hand experience characteristics” [22]22 The “first-hand experience characteristics” (亲历式特色) refers to the research approach of older overseas scholars who often had direct personal experience with China, such as living, working, or conducting fieldwork there, which informed their studies. demonstrated by the older generation of overseas scholars are also worthy of our study. When cultivating a new generation of research talents, emphasis should be placed on guiding them to broaden their international horizons and encouraging them to go abroad to participate in international exchange and cooperation. A solid academic foundation must be emphasized to ensure that they possess critical thinking and independent analytical abilities during the research process, providing solid talent support for the exchange and dialogue between domestic and international CPC research.

在辩证看待海外学者研究成果的同时，我们还需强化对国内再研究的支持力度。只有这样，才能在充分吸收海外研究成果的基础上，推动国内中国共产党研究的不断创新与发展，更好地服务于国家和社会的发展需要。这就意味着，不仅要对海外的研究成果进行审慎的筛选与借鉴，也要加强对国内相关领域研究的投入，并为其创造更为宽松的学术研究环境。通过设立专项研究基金、加强学术机构间的合作与交流、鼓励跨学科研究等方式，提升国内研究的水平与质量，才能对海外学术动向保持长久和动态的关注。同时，要注重培养一批具有国际视野和扎实学术功底的研究人才，吸引更多具有不同学科背景的学者加入这一研究领域，支持年轻学者的成长。在这一方面，老一辈海外学者所展现的“接触派风格”和“亲历式特色”同样值得我们学习。在培养新一代研究人才时，应注重引导其拓宽国际视野，鼓励他们走出国门，参与国际交流与合作。要强调扎实的学术功底，确保他们在研究过程中能够具备批判性思维和独立分析的能力，为国内外中国共产党研究的交流与对话提供坚实的人才支撑。

(IV) Confronting the Asymmetry in Domestic and International Political Party Research

(四)正视海内外政党研究的不对称性

Through the detailed introduction and in-depth analysis of the aforementioned origins, we can see that overseas scholars’ attention to and research on the CPC actually started quite early. Due to complex historical factors, our research on political parties in other countries and regions around the world started relatively late. This asymmetry is reflected not only in research resources, research methods, and research levels but also involves the degree of internationalization of research perspectives, research topics, and research achievements.

通过对上述起源的详细介绍和深入分析，我们可以看到，海外学者对中国共产党的关注和研究实际上启动得相当早。由于历史上的复杂因素，我们对世界上其他国家和地区的政党研究相对来说起步较晚。这种不对称性不仅体现在研究资源、研究方法与研究水平等方面，还涉及研究视角、研究议题与研究成果的国际化程度。

Relying on earlier involvement and sustained attention, overseas scholars have accumulated rich research materials and formed diverse research perspectives, providing a relatively comprehensive and in-depth analysis of the CPC’s history, theory, institutions, and other aspects. In contrast, domestic academia only began to gradually strengthen research on world party politics after reform and opening up. Although domestic scholars have made significant progress in recent years in fields such as comparative studies of the CPC and other political parties and the construction of party systems, asymmetry still persists. Taking the United States as an example, this asymmetry is manifested in the fact that there are many American “China hands” [23]23 “China hands” (中国通) is a term for foreign experts or specialists on China, often implying deep knowledge of Chinese language, culture, and politics. but few Chinese “America hands”; American scholars exhibit a significant advantage in both the quantity and quality of research on the CPC. Although Sino-US relations have long received much attention, domestic academia has rarely produced academic research of comparable depth and breadth in its comprehensive and in-depth analysis of American political parties. Specifically, Chinese research on the United States mostly focuses on macro-level Sino-US relations, while micro-level research on American political parties is relatively weak. Faced with this asymmetry, we must not only strengthen international academic exchange and cooperation but also increase investment in foreign research, especially in-depth research on the political parties of Western countries such as the United States, in order to narrow the research gap with overseas scholars. Furthermore, domestic academia should also attach importance to building an independent knowledge system for Chinese political party research, developing political party theories with Chinese characteristics, and enhancing China’s discourse power and influence in the international study of party politics.

海外学者凭借较早的介入和持续的关注，积累了丰富的研究资料，形成了多元化的研究视角，为中国共产党的历史、理论、制度等方面提供了较为全面且深入的剖析。相比之下，国内学界在改革开放后，才开始逐步加强对世界政党政治的研究。尽管近年来国内学者在中国共产党与其他政党比较研究、政党制度建设等领域取得了显著进展，但仍然呈现出不对称性。以美国为例，这种不对称性体现为美国的“中国通”多，而中国的“美国通”少，美国学者在中国共产党研究上的数量和质量上均展现出显著优势。尽管中美两国关系长期以来备受关注，但国内学界对于美国政党的全面、深入解析却鲜有具有同等深度和广度的学术研究。具体而言，中国对美国的研究多聚焦于宏观层面的中美关系，而对于美国各政党的微观研究则相对薄弱。面对这种不对称性，我们不仅要加强国际学术交流与合作，更要加大对外研究的投入，特别是对美国等西方国家政党政治的深入研究，以缩小与海外学者在研究上的差距。此外，国内学界还应重视构建中国政党研究的自主知识体系，发展具有中国特色的政党政治理论，提高中国在国际政党政治研究中的话语权和影响力。

After a century of accumulation, the field of overseas research on the Chinese Communist Party has amassed a wealth of research results. Looking back at these early studies, with the benefit of historical hindsight, it is not difficult to see that many of the debates among them have already reached clear conclusions. This article sorts through the origins of research from different perspectives and re-examines these early research results, not simply to directly extract information from them to support current research, nor to emphasize the advanced nature and importance of overseas research at that time, but rather to enhance understanding of the intrinsic characteristics of modern overseas research activities on the Chinese Communist Party, and to provide some reflections for continuing overseas research on the history of the Chinese Communist Party and academic exchange. In fact, the rise and development of overseas research on the Chinese Communist Party are closely intertwined with the changes in the influence of the Chinese Communist Party on the international political stage. It can be said to lie at the intersection of research on the history of the Chinese Communist Party, international relations research, and area and country studies. In-depth exploration of this field can help academia better understand the research processes and mechanisms of overseas researchers, enhance understanding of the intrinsic characteristics of modern overseas research activities on the Chinese Communist Party, and provide useful references for continuing to advance research on the history and Party building of the Chinese Communist Party.

经过一个世纪的沉淀，海外中国共产党领域已经积累了丰富的研究成果。回顾这些早期研究，借助历史的后见之明，不难发现，其中诸多论争已经有了明确的结论。本文梳理不同角度的研究起源，重新审视这些早期研究成果，并非单纯为了直接从中提取信息以支持当前研究，也不是为了强调当时海外研究的先进性和重要性，而是为了增进对近代海外中国共产党研究活动内在特征的认识，为继续海外中共党史研究和学术交流提供一些思考。实际上，海外中国共产党研究的兴起与发展，与中国共产党在国际政治舞台上影响力的变迁紧密交织，可以说处于中共党史研究、国际关系研究以及区域国别研究等的交汇地带。深入探讨这一领域，有助于学术界更好地理解海外研究者的研究过程和机制，增进对近代海外中国共产党研究活动内在特征的了解，并为继续推进中共党史党建研究提供有益参考。

(Author bios: Han Qiang, Professor at the School of Marxism, Beijing Foreign Studies University; Feng Ziyan, Doctoral Candidate at the School of International Journalism and Communication, Beijing Foreign Studies University)

（作者简介：韩强，北京外国语大学马克思主义学院教授；冯子妍，北京外国语大学国际新闻与传播学院博士研究生）

Online editor: Tong Xin

网络编辑：同心