本帖最后由 千年明月 于 2010-7-2 18:41 编辑
China’s increasing leverage [4]
中国增加的影响力(中国手中的筹码越来越多)
Alongside the changes that have taken place within China, its position in the world has also shifted as a result of global shifts. China is currently reaping the benefits of several converging factors: a long period of favorable demography and steady macro-economic policies; its classification as a developing country when it is actually the world’s first trading nation and second-largest economy; and its skilful and pragmatic diplomacy, which has combined lip service to global integration and international institutions with lavish care for bilateral relations.
伴随着中国内部发生的改变,作为全球变化的结果,它的国家地位也发生了变化。中国当前正在几个焦点上获益:长期良好的人口统计结果和稳定的宏观经济政策;中国被归类为发展中国家,当它事实上是世界上第一贸易国和第二大经济体;它很有技巧和务实的外交政策随着对双边关系的过度关注,已经把口惠和全球一体化以及国际机构联合起来。 The strategy of divide-and-rule is far from new. In fact, China has played foreigners off against each other at least since the Qing emperor Qianlong fought the last Mongol empire. Similarly, the nationalist Chiang Kai-shek advocated pushing back the West by “playing barbarian against barbarian”. Republican China led – and in 1942 finally won – a struggle to end all Western extra-territorial privileges. In fact, whether it was strong or weak and whether it had allies or was strategically isolated, China has consistently had a hyper-realist strategic culture. What has changed is simply that its leverage has kept increasing 分而治之策略早已不新鲜。事实上,中国早在清朝乾隆帝国时,就已经利用外国人之间相互争斗打败了最后的蒙古帝国。与此相似,国民党蒋介石倡议通过“以夷制夷”来击退西方。民国领导——在1942年最后取得胜利——是一场结束了西方治外特权的抗争。事实上,是强是弱,是盟国还是策略性孤立,中国始终如一地实行超级现实主义战略文化。改变的仅仅是它的影响力在增加。 In the past, when China had less leverage than it does now, it made several long-term international concessions. It signed arms-control agreements between 1992 and 1998 and took steps to join the World Trade Organization between 1999 and 2001. During the same period, China also formed a new security concept that highlighted mutual trust and shared interests. Within three years, from 1996 to 1998, it also established partnerships with all of its key partners, including a “long-term and stable constructive partnership” with the EU that was agreed in April 1998. China also considered confidence-building measures with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in 1997 and proceeded to build up the Shanghai Cooperation Organization with a frst meeting in 1996 在过去,当中国的影响力比现在弱时,它制定了几项长期的国际优惠。它在1992年至1998年签署了军控协议,并且在1999年和2001年有步骤地加入了国际贸易组织。同时期,中国塑造了新的安全概念,强调相互信任并且分享利益。在3年中,从1996年到1998年,它与所有的重要伙伴建立了合作关系,包括1998年4月与欧盟签署的“长期和稳定建设性伙伴关系”。中国还在1997年考虑与东南亚联盟(ASEAN)建立互信措施,并且在1996年第一次会议上着手建立上海合作组织。
These steps toward integration into the international system prompted optimism that China as a joiner and learner would soon become a contributor and eventually a “responsible stakeholder”. But as China’s leverage has increased during the last decade, it has become more and more reluctant to sign new agreements that would have integrated it further into the international system. What was thought in the late 1990s to be a floor for further Chinese engagement in several key areas has, in fact, turned out to be a ceiling. A particularly good example is climate change policy, in which China has consistently rejected legally binding agreements since the Kyoto Protocol in 1997. In that sense, its attitude at the Copenhagen climate conference in December 2009 should have been no surprise.
这些进入国际体系的整合步骤促进了乐观想法,即中国作为加入者和学习者将很快成为一个贡献者,并最终成为一个“负责任的利益相关者”。但既然中国的影响力在过去的十年间已经增加,它越来越不愿意签署会使其与国际体系更加一体化的新协议。1990年代后期,(人们)期待在几个关键领域更进一步的与中国交往,结果却出乎意料。一个典型的好例子是气候变化政策,中国自从1997年京都议定书以来一直拒绝具法律约束力的协议。从这个意义上说,它在2009年12月哥本哈根气候大会上的态度就不足为奇了。
China’s forward-looking diplomacy has become increasingly focused on sub-regional or even bilateral rather than multilateral agreements. China’s relations with South-East Asia are the best illustration of this. In 2001 – the year it joined the WTO – China offered an innovative free trade pact to ASEAN. In 2002, it signed a (non-binding) declaration of conduct with ASEAN states to resolve peacefully maritime issues. In 2003, it signed the (also non-binding) ASEAN Treaty of Amity and Co-operation, which commits signatories to the peaceful resolution of disputes.
中国前瞻性的外交越来越集中在次区域或者甚至双边而不是多边协议。中国与东南亚的关系是这方面最好的例证。2001年——也就是中国加入世界贸易组织的那年——中国向东盟提供了一项创新的自由贸易协定。2002年,它签署了一项与东盟国家和平解决海事问题的(不具有约束性)声明。2003年,它签署了(也不具约束性的)东盟友好与合作条约,条约承诺签署了和平解决争端。 These days, however, China holds only bilateral negotiations to deal with the delimitation of maritime borders in the South China Sea. China abides by the terms of treaties it has already signed, but it is no longer willing to undertake new legal commitments. China has taken the same approach to negotiations about nuclear proliferation issues. It took part in four-party talks on North Korea in New York between 1997 and 2000, and set up the six-party talks in 2003, but it has never gone beyond its limited role as a facilitator, let alone put pressure on North Korea.
然而,这段时间以来,中国仅仅进行双边谈判以解决南中国海海上边境的东海大陆架划界问题。中国遵守它已经签署的条约的各项条款,但它不再愿意去承担新的合法承诺。中国在核不扩散谈判议题上采取了同样的方法。1997年至2000年间,它在纽约加入了朝鲜问题四方谈判,并于2003年建立了六方谈判,但它从来没有超出推动者的角色限制,更不用说对朝鲜施加压力。
China has also made it clear that it is unwilling to contemplate any binding commitment to international sanctions, apart from narrowly defined sanctions against targeted individuals. As a result, resolutions 1718 and 1874 on North Korea and resolutions 1737 and 1803 on Iran have been far less effective than they could have been.
中国还清楚地表明,它不愿意考虑对国际制裁附加任何承诺,除了狭义定义制裁目标个人。因此,(联合国)1718号和1874号对朝鲜以及1737号和1803号对伊朗决议的执行远比它应有的更低效。 There is little evidence that China will change its approach. The most one can realistically hope for is negative consent at the UN in cases in which China does not think its own “core interests” are at stake. For example, China made it clear to the US as early as October 2002 that it would not veto the use of force against Iraq.' y. F" b8 n8 G/ w 没有任何证据表明中国将改变它的姿态。实际上,只有在那些不危及中国的“核心利益”的联合国决议上,人们能指望得到中国消极的赞成。例如,中国早在2002年就对美国清楚表明,它不会投票否决对伊拉克使用武力。 |