由复旦大学美国研究中心、CNA公司与美国夏威夷太平洋论坛共同组织的“中美关系与地区安全”国际会议于2005年8月17-19日在夏威夷召开。我中心倪世雄、吴心伯、孙哲教授参加了此次会议。这是1999年以来复旦大学美国研究中心与太平洋论坛发起的中美学者第六次对话。
Executive Summary
The United States-China relationship continues to evolve. Both countries are debating the nature of relations with the other, but no firm conclusions are possible as they try to assess and manage highly dynamic and potentially unstable change, both internally and externally. The sixth round of the annual U.S.-China workshop that was sponsored this year by the Pacific Forum CSIS, the Center for American Studies at Fudan University, and the CNA Corporation studied the forces at work on the relationship and focused on ways to build and maintain positive relations between the two countries.
The dominant view in the U.S. is that China is rising and the U.S. must work with that country. At the same time, however, there is unease about the economic impact of that rise, Beijing’s economic policies, and a military modernization program that seems disproportionate to threats; these fears are exacerbated by a lack of transparency regarding Chinese capabilities and intentions. China’s relations with “rogue regimes” also generate concern. President Bush is trying to contain these pressures and work with Beijing to build a positive and constructive relationship. Significantly, there’s a growing sense that the U.S.-China relationship is the most important bilateral relationship for the U.S.
From a Chinese perspective, the relationship is stable, but complicated. Chinese insist the core issue is how the U.S. will view China’s rise. They argue that China’s U.S. policy will be determined by the U.S. debate. They insist Washington should accommodate a rising China, but China must learn to become a responsible state and fulfill its international obligations. Americans counter that China must acknowledge and take responsibility for its behavior. Beijing cannot suggest it is a passive player in that process or in its relationship with the U.S. Its behavior and actions shape the U.S. debate and U.S. responses to China.
In this environment, trust is paramount. Despite the positive rhetoric, distrust is high and mutual confidence is a precious commodity. Chinese still fear the U.S. is attempting to block its rise or will contain China once it has risen; Americans fear China aims to supplant it as the dominant power in the Asia-Pacific. Neither is reassured by the other’s assurances that those fears are ungrounded. Opening a senior-level dialogue is a good step, but progress rather than posturing is needed to develop the relationship.
The military dimension is a perplexing element of the relationship. China is the only country that the U.S. has a normal relationship with, yet both militaries also engage in planning, games, and exercises aimed at the other. And this is despite growing mil-mil relations. Beijing’s unwillingness to renounce the use of force in the event of a declaration of independence by Taiwan means that the possibility of conflict between the U.S. and China remains very real. Taiwan focuses Chinese military modernization on the need to deter the U.S., and the capabilities needed to prevail in a cross-Strait conflict could be used to protect Chinese interests elsewhere in the region.
Chinese are more confident when it comes to cross-Strait relations: they feel the situation has changed fundamentally in their favor. They warn that U.S. policy toward Taiwan will be read as a signal of U.S. intentions. For China, the task now is keeping cross-Strait relations moving in their current direction and maintaining existing momentum. While the U.S. is pleased with the new optimism, Americans argue the failure of the Chinese government to reach out to Chen Shui-bian and the Taiwan government (and not just to opposition leaders) is a mistake.
Seeming progress in the Six-Party Talks has helped the U.S.-China relationship, although there are questions about China’s role in the negotiations. Chinese insist Beijing has not been a passive presence in the negotiating process – as some Americans allege – and has worked to push all parties toward a solution. Americans remain skeptical.
Views are divided on East Asian integration. The process will be difficult but Chinese argue progress will benefit the entire region and the U.S. Therefore, Washington should support community-building efforts. The U.S. is not worried about the East Asian Summit, mostly because it is unclear what the summit is or its purpose. The U.S. remains in a wait-and-see mode, and is closely watching Beijing’s behavior. All agree that East Asian integration is a good idea, but much depends on how it’s put into practice.
Existing cooperation on counterterrorism, North Korea, and Taiwan provides a foundation for building stronger relations. Persistent strategic mistrust will continue to be a concern: transparency is good, but hedging will continue. The two countries must work harder to manage China’s rise and Americans called on Chinese leaders to better understand other countries’ concerns and to do more to ease them.
There is a need for a new vision for the U.S.-China relationship. The description of the relationship as “candid, constructive, cooperative – and complicated” is no longer sufficient. Chinese participants suggested the two countries start using the word “partnership.” This requires a better understanding of the goals the two countries wish to achieve, the burdens they share, and how responsibilities will be apportioned. And that requires a far more direct and honest dialogue than has been the case thus far. China must explain how it will use its power as it rises. Americans will demand that the relationship be more than process and produce substantive results. It will look for Beijing to provide positive contributions to issues of mutual concern, consistent with international norms.
China and the U.S. are struggling to define their relationship as China undergoes an unprecedented transition. The U.S. is prepared to accept China’s rise – it has no choice – but it seeks to ensure that the China that emerges will be a good global citizen, will not challenge the existing order, and will work with the U.S. to ensure that both nations’ interests – and those of the entire world – are protected and advanced. Both nations are uncertain about how they will relate to each other as their relationship intensifies and becomes more complex.
