The looming 100-year US-China fight
中美關係不應成為零和遊戲
Financial Times (FT中文網 中英對照)
https://tinyurl.com/y2k87a3n
Martin Wolf
英國《金融時報》首席經濟評論員
The disappearance of the Soviet Union left a big hole. The “war on terror”
was an inadequate replacement. But China ticks all boxes. For the US, it can
be the ideological, military and economic enemy many need. Here at last is a
worthwhile opponent. That was the main conclusion I drew from this year’s
Bilderberg meetings. Across-the-board rivalry with China is becoming an
organising principle of US economic, foreign and security policies.
蘇聯的消失留下了一個巨大的空子。“反恐戰爭”是一個不足以填補的接替者。但中國符
合所有條件。對美國而言，中國能夠成為很多美國人需要的那個意識形態、軍事和經濟對
手。終於出現了一個值得一較高下的對手。這是我從今年的彼爾德伯格會議(Bilderberg
Meeting)得出的主要結論。與中國進行全面對抗正在成為美國經濟、外交和安全政策的組
織性原則。
Whether it is Donald Trump’s organising principle is less important. The US
president has the gut instincts of a nationalist and protectionist. Others
provide both framework and details. The aim is US domination. The means is
control over China, or separation from China. Anybody who believes a
rules-based multilateral order, our globalised economy, or even harmonious
international relations, are likely to survive this conflict is deluded.
這是不是唐納德‧川普(Donald Trump)的組織性原則，沒那麼重要。這位美國總統天生是
一名民族主義者和保護主義者。其他人提供框架和實施細節。目標是維持美國的主導地位
。手段是控制中國，或者與中國脫鉤。任何相信基於規則的多邊秩序、經濟全球化、甚至
和諧的國際關係能夠在這場衝突中倖存的人，都是被迷惑了。
The astonishing white paper on the trade conflict, published on Sunday by
China, is proof. The — to me, depressing — fact is that on many points
Chinese positions are right. The US focus on bilateral imbalances is
economically illiterate. The view that theft of intellectual property has
caused huge damage to the US is questionable. The proposition that China has
grossly violated its commitments under its 2001 accession agreement to the
World Trade Organization is hugely exaggerated.
中國上週日針對此次經貿摩擦發佈的令人震驚的白皮書就是證明。讓我感到鬱悶的事實是
，在許多要點上，中國的立場都是正確的。美方對雙邊貿易失衡的專注體現了其經濟學上
的無知。認為知識產權盜竊對美國造成了巨大損害的看法值得懷疑。關於中國嚴重違反
2001年加入世界貿易組織(WTO)時所作承諾的說法，是嚴重誇大。
Accusing China of cheating is hypocritical when almost all trade policy
actions taken by the Trump administration are in breach of WTO rules, a fact
implicitly conceded by its determination to destroy the dispute settlement
system. The US negotiating position vis-à-vis China is that “might makes
right”. This is particularly true of insisting that the Chinese accept the
US role as judge, jury and executioner of the agreement.
當川普政府採取的幾乎所有貿易政策行動都在違反WTO規則時，指責中國“作弊”是虛偽
的。川普政府決意要摧毀這一爭端解決機制，相當於承認了自己違反WTO規則的事實。美
國對華的談判立場是“強權即公理”。在堅持要求中國接受美國同時充當協議的法官、陪
審團和執行人角色方面尤為如此。
A dispute over the terms of market opening or protection of intellectual
property might be settled with careful negotiation. Such a settlement might
even help China, since it would lighten the heavy hand of the state and
promote market-oriented reform. But the issues are now too vexed for such a
resolution. This is partly because of the bitter breakdown in negotiation. It
is still more because the US debate is increasingly over whether integration
with China’s state-led economy is desirable. The fear over Huawei focuses on
national security and technological autonomy. Liberal commerce is
increasingly seen as “trading with the enemy”.
圍繞開放市場的條件或知識產權保護的糾紛，可以通過認真協商解決。這樣的解決方案甚
至可以幫助中國，因為它將減輕國家干預的程度，推動市場化改革。但這些問題如今存在
太多爭議，以至於無法達成這樣一個解決方案。這部分是因為談判在雙方相互指責中破裂
。更重要的原因是，美國本身日益就是否值得與中國的政府主導的經濟進行融合展開爭論
。對華為(Huawei)的擔憂集中在國家安全和科技自主方面。自由商貿越來越被視為“與敵
人做交易”。
A framing of relations with China as one of zero-sum conflict is emerging.
Recent remarks by Kiron Skinner, the US state department’s policy planning
director (a job once held by cold war strategist George Kennan) are
revealing. Rivalry with Beijing, she suggested at a forum organised by New
America, is “a fight with a really different civilisation and a different
ideology, and the United States hasn’t had that before”. She added that
this would be “the first time that we will have a great power competitor
that is not Caucasian”. The war with Japan is forgotten. But the big point
is her framing of this as a civilisational and racial war and so as an
insoluble conflict. This cannot be accidental. She is also still in her job.
一種將對華關係定義為零和衝突的框架正在形成。美國國務院政策規劃司司長凱潤‧斯金
納(Kiron Skinner)近來發表的一些言論令人深思（冷戰時期的戰略家喬治‧凱南
(George Kennan)曾擔任這一職務）。斯金納表示，與北京的較量是“與一種完全不同的
文明和不同意識形態的鬥爭，美國以前從未經歷過”。她還說，這將是“我們第一次面臨
一個非白人的強大競爭對手”。她忘記了美國與日本的戰爭。但關鍵問題在於她將之定義
為一場文明與種族之戰，因而是一場無法化解的衝突。這不可能是偶然事件。她也沒有被
停職。
Others present the conflict as one over ideology and power. Those emphasising
the former point to President Xi Jinping’s Marxist rhetoric and the
reinforced role of the Communist party. Those emphasising the latter point to
China’s rising economic might. Both perspectives suggest perpetual conflict.
另一些人則認為這是一場圍繞意識形態和權力的衝突。強調前者的人士指向中國國家主席
習近平的馬克思主義言論、以及共產黨進一步被強化的角色。強調後者的人士指向中國不
斷崛起的經濟實力。這兩種看法都指向無休止的衝突。
This is the most important geopolitical development of our era. Not least, it
will increasingly force everybody else to take sides or fight hard for
neutrality. But it is not only important. It is dangerous. It risks turning a
manageable, albeit vexed, relationship into all-embracing conflict, for no
good reason. China’s ideology is not a threat to liberal democracy in the
way the Soviet Union’s was. Rightwing demagogues are far more dangerous. An
effort to halt China’s economic and technological rise is almost certain to
fail. Worse, it will foment deep hostility in the Chinese people. In the long
run, the demands of an increasingly prosperous and well-educated people for
control over their lives might still win out. But that is far less likely if
China’s natural rise is threatened. Moreover, the rise of China is not an
important cause of western malaise. That reflects far more the indifference
and incompetence of domestic elites. What is seen as theft of intellectual
property reflects, in large part, the inevitable attempt of a rising economy
to master the technologies of the day. Above all, an attempt to preserve the
domination of 4 per cent of humanity over the rest is illegitimate.
這是我們這個時代最重要的地緣政治發展。尤其是，它將日益迫使其他所有國家選邊站，
或努力爭取中立。但它不僅僅事關重大，而且還危險。它有可能毫無緣由地將一種可控（
儘管棘手）的關係轉變為一場全面的衝突。中國的意識形態並不像蘇聯那樣對自由民主構
成威脅。蠱惑民心的右翼政客危險得多。阻止中國經濟和科技崛起的努力幾乎一定會失敗
。更糟的是，這樣做將激起中國人民深深的敵意。因為長遠來看，一個日益富裕且受過良
好教育的民族對主導自身命運的需求，仍將壓倒一切。但如果中國自然的崛起受到威脅，
實現這一點的可能性就會大大降低。此外，西方的弊病也並非由中國崛起引發。西方的弊
病更多地是反映了西方國內精英的冷漠和無能。被視為盜竊知識產權的做法，在很大程度
上反映了一個崛起中的經濟體為掌握最新科技而進行的必然嘗試。最重要的是，企圖維持
僅佔全球人口4%的人對其他所有人的支配，是不合理的。
This certainly does not mean accepting everything China does or says. On the
contrary, the best way for the west to deal with China is to insist on the
abiding values of freedom, democracy, rules-based multilateralism and global
co-operation. These ideas made many around the globe supporters of the US in
the past. They still captivate many Chinese people today. It is quite
possible to uphold these ideas, indeed insist upon them far more strongly,
while co-operating with a rising China where that is essential, as over
protecting the natural environment, commerce and peace.
當然，這並不意味著西方要接受中國的所有言行。相反，西方與中國打交道的最佳方式是
堅持自由、民主、基於規則的多邊主義以及全球合作等永恆價值觀。這些理念過去曾在世
界各地為美國贏得了眾多支持者。時至今日，它們仍吸引著許多中國人。在合作至關重要
的領域，如保護自然環境、商業與和平，在與崛起的中國合作時，高舉這些理念、甚至更
強有力地堅守這些理念是完全可能的。
A blend of competition with co-operation is the right way forward. Such an
approach to managing China’s rise must include co-operating closely with
like-minded allies and treating China with respect. The tragedy in what is
now happening is that the administration is simultaneously launching a
conflict between the two powers, attacking its allies and destroying the
institutions of the postwar US-led order. Today’s attack on China is the
wrong war, fought in the wrong way, on the wrong terrain. Alas, this is where
we now are.
正確的道路是將競爭與合作結合起來。這種應對中國崛起的方式，必須包括與志同道合的
盟友密切合作，以及用尊重的態度對待中國。當前亂局的悲劇之處在於川普政府同時三面
出擊：在美中兩個大國之間挑起衝突，攻擊美國盟友，摧毀支撐美國領導的戰後秩序的機
構。今天對中國的攻擊是在錯誤的領域、以錯誤的方式發起的一場錯誤的戰爭。可悲，這
就是我們當前的處境。