登录 | 注册
当前位置: 首页 > 察哈尔评论
双语 | 达巍:中国对美战略假设是否仍然可以成立?
发布时间:2019年12月06日  来源:中美聚焦网  作者:达巍  阅读:297

  过去十年,美国战略界一直在讨论一个问题,即美国对华“接触”战略的前提假设是否仍然存在。

Over the past decade, strategic circles in the United States have been debating one question: Does the assumption of China-U.S. engagement still hold?



  这一战略假设的内容大致是,只要美国对华保持接触,中国的政治经济体制会越来越自由化。从2007年《洛杉矶时报》前驻华记者孟捷慕(James Mann)出版的《中国幻想曲》(China Fantasy),到2017年底特朗普政府的第一份美国《国家安全战略报告》,越来越多的美国人质疑这一前提假设已经不再存在,从民间逐渐扩展到官方,俨然已经成为共识。
It has been argued that as long as the U.S. clings to its engagement policy with China, the Chinese political and economic systems will become increasingly liberalized. But between 2007, when the book “China Fantasy” by former Los Angeles Times correspondent in China James Mann came out, and 2017, when the first national security strategy of the Trump administration was released, the idea seemed to be gaining traction that the engagement assumption was no longer valid. In the U.S., government and academia alike coalesced around this understanding.



  不过,很少有人问故事的另外一边:过去几十年,中国对美国的战略有没有一个前提假设呢?如果有,这个战略今天还存在吗?
Nevertheless, people rarely look at the other side of the story. Was there any assumption on the part of China in its dealings with the U.S.? If so, in the same vein, does the assumption still hold today?



  实际上,过去几十年,中国对美国的战略也是存在一个前提假设的。这一假设是通过中国反复强调的“和平发展”战略来表述的。“和平发展”战略实际上表达了这样一种信念:如果中国对整个世界、尤其对美国采取一种整体合作性的态度,采取一种融入式的战略取向,那么这个世界将会允许中国和平发展。换言之,今天我们所处的国际体系与过去的体系不太一样,后发国家不需要通过战争、殖民等手段,就可以在体系内和平发展起来。

As a matter of fact, China has had its own basic assumption in formulating its strategy toward the U.S. over the decades: If China pursues a largely cooperative approach with the U.S. and the world at large, and aims to integrate and embed itself into the international system, then the international system will accommodate China’s peaceful development. Put another way, the thinking went, the international system had reinvented itself in such a way that an emerging power could grow through peaceful development, rather than resorting to war or colonization.



  上世纪70年代末以来,中国确实经历了这样一个“和平发展”的阶段,中国通过和平的方式逐渐实现了发展与崛起。在这样的乐观情绪支配下,大概七八年前我甚至开始问自己:在和平发展之外,中国有没有可能“和平超越”?这个国际体系是否允许中国有一天比美国的经济规模更大、军力更强、科技更发达,甚至在人均水平意义上也超过美国呢?当时我给自己的回答是:好像可以。一方面也许美国不会反对,另一方面即便反对可能也无法阻止中国崛起。因为世界相互依存,即使美国的一部分人不愿意,也没有办法阻止中国的和平发展、和平超越。
Since the late 1970s, China has been in the midst of such a stage of “peaceful development,” during which it has grown into a rising power through peaceful means. On this positive note, I had been asking myself a question for the last seven or eight years: On top of peaceful development, is it possible for China to achieve a “peaceful leapfrog”? Would the current international system accommodate a China that is bigger and stronger than the U.S. in economic scale, military power, technological prowess — and even in per capita terms? My answer was tentatively affirmative at that time. I believed that the U.S. would not oppose it, and even if it would, there is no way it could stop China’s development. Because we are living in an interconnected world, a handful of pushbacks by the U.S. will not reverse China’s peaceful rise or peaceful leapfrog.



  但经过过去两年,我已经不再有过去的乐观。当我看到美国对华为等中国高科技公司的大肆打压却拿不出什么像样的证据时,当我听到斯蒂夫·班农公开谈论对中国的“政权更迭”时,我已经不再像过去那样自信了。在这个问题上,中国国内绝大多数人比我要现实主义得多。现在中国国内的主流意见是,美国对华战略目标已经明确,就是不让中国超越自己。虽然我个人认为这只是美国国内一小部分人的想法,并非美国战略界的共识,但是面对那么多来自美国的负面言行,我和中国其他的“美国问题专家”感到很难说服我的同胞。
But the development of China-U.S. relations in the past two years has diminished my optimism. I am less sure when I see bashing of Huawei and other Chinese high-tech companies, on scanty evidence, if any; and when I hear Steve Bannon talking up “regime change” in China in public.Most people in China are more realistic than I am. There is an emerging mainstream view that the U.S. has a crystal clear goal — to keep China down. Having heard and seen so much negative rhetoric and action from the U.S. toward China, and though I believe “keeping China down” is an idea held by a small minority in the U.S., it’s hard for Chinese experts on the U.S. like me to convince Chinese people that this is not a long-term strategic goal of the U.S.

  对中国、美国以及全世界来说,这都是一个非常大也非常关键的问题。对这个问题的回答,关系到中国未来整个国家对外战略的设定,关系到我们对美战略的设定,也关系到其他所有后发国家对世界体系的判断。学术界应该好好讨论这个问题,就是今天国际体系的性质是什么,我们是否正在重新返回民族国家组成的丛林?现实主义理论在多大程度上可以解释这个国际体系的性质?作为自由主义国际秩序的领导国家,美国的言行如果让越来越多的国家得出结论,即我在这个体系内永远无法真正地实现发展和超越,那么这一体系必然会分崩离析。

For China, the U.S. and the rest of the world, this is an issue of fundamental importance and consequence. Much is at stake, including China’s strategic vision for external relations, and strategies toward the U.S. And it bears on how other latecomer countries see the international system. Academic circles need to discuss these questions: Is the nature of the current international system the same as it was in the past? Are we experiencing a throwback to a jungle of nation states? How relevant and applicable is the theory of realism in the context of the current international system? What the U.S. says and does as the leader of the liberal international order, prompts more countries to conclude that they could never achieve development and leapfrog in the current system — a perception that augurs ill for the international system.



  特朗普政府现在宣称要与中国“战略竞争”,然而“竞争”这一术语的指向太多样了。竞争可以是良性的,也可以是是恶性的,竞争可以有各种形式。美国政府现在谈论的“战略竞争”是什么性质,在什么领域以何种形式展开,这些都是不清楚的。北京语言大学黄靖教授最近提出一个问题,中美的竞争究竟是“高下之争”、“胜负之争”,还是“生死之争”?我认为这是非常好的问题,或许我们的美国朋友可以给出更准确的回答。

The Trump administration claims that the U.S. will engage in “strategic competition” with China. But the word “competition” carries different connotations. Competition could be benign or malicious, and it comes in many shapes and forms. What kind of competition the U.S. government has in mind has yet to become clear.Professor Jing Huang of Beijing Language and Culture University poses a worthy question: What is the China-U.S. competition about? Is it about who has the upper hand(高下之争)? Or about who prevails over the other(胜负之争)? Or about who lives at the expense of the other(生死之争)? Maybe our friends across the Pacific could help supply a somewhat accurate answer.



责任编辑/康巳鋆 顾心阳



作者:达巍,察哈尔学会中美关系全国委员会委员,国际关系学院教授
来源:中美聚焦网,2019-12-04
原文链接:http://cn.chinausfocus.com/foreign-policy/20191204/41660.html(中)

https://www.chinausfocus.com/foreign-policy/does-the-china-us-engagement-assumption-still-hold-(英)

用户名:
密码:
换一张
评论 (0
加入收藏
打印