【作者简介】何亚非，外交部原副部长、国务院侨办原副主任、南京大学华智全球治理研究院高级顾问；大卫 · 兰普顿（David Lampton）, 美国著名中国问题研究专家、约翰斯 · 霍普金斯大学教授
【文章来源】《中美聚焦》
按：随着新冠疫情继续分裂国际社会，有关中美两国正走向危险对抗的担忧日益增加。2020年6月25日，中国资深外交官、南京大学华智研究院高级顾问何亚非大使和美国著名中国问题研究专家、约翰斯·霍普金斯大学大卫·兰普顿教授就中美关系若干问题展开对话，《中美聚焦》特约编辑周柳建成主持对话。以下为对话实录中英对照版，观看完整对话，请访问 ：www.chinausfocus.com/videos。
周柳建成：
非常感谢何亚非大使和大卫·兰普顿教授的到来。我们知道，目前的世界形势既复杂微妙，又充满挑战。我们正在经历全球疫情，美国还爆发了大规模抗议活动。有很多不确定性，一切都在变化当中。在此期间，中美两国在夏威夷举行高级别会晤，会晤双方是迈克·蓬佩奥和杨洁篪。我们首先有请何亚非大使，谈谈为什么举行这次高级别会晤，您对此有何看法？
James Chau :
Ambassador He Yafei and Professor David Lampton, thanks very much for joining us. You know the world is complex and nuanced and challenged, all at the same time. We’ve got a global pandemic. We have mass protests over in the United States. We have a lot of uncertainty, and in changing settings as well. And within all that, a summit took place in Hawaii between China and the United States — between Mike Pompeo and Yang Jiechi. Let’s start with Ambassador He Yafei. Tell us, why did this summit take place? And what do you take from it?
何亚非：
这次夏威夷会晤的内容没有公开披露。不过我相信，对话总比不对话要好。我猜测在很多共同关心的重要问题上，两国进行了广泛的意见交换。他们可能就某些事务达成共识，在某些事务上存有分歧，这些我们不知道，但我看到对话开始有良好的势头。您提到了新冠疫情，我认为这只是催化剂，新冠疫情引发中美关系中更深层次的摩擦。我想主要是因为中美之间的权力平衡发生变化，中美关系可能正往不好的方向发展，这是从现实主义者的视角观察国际关系，兰普顿教授是这方面的专家。当权力平衡发生变化，如果一方正在崛起，另一方为守成国时，大国之间的冲突会增加。对两国来说，这是场无法避免的考验。
He Yafei:
There is no public disclosure of what had been discussed in the meeting in Hawaii. But I believe talking is always better than not talking. So, my guess is that there was extensive exchange of views on very critical issues concerning both countries. They may have agreed on something or disagreed on something else—we don’t know. But I can see a beginning of good momentum in talking. You mentioned COVID-19, I think this is only an accelerator. It [COVID-19] exposed some of the deeper frictions in the relationship. For one thing, I think it’s mostly the relationship going in a bad direction, because the balance of power has changed. This is, you know—Professor Lampton is an expert—from a realist point of view on international relations. When the balance of power changes, relations between major powers – if one is rising, the other is the incumbent power – the frictions will increase. It’s a test for both countries, but it’s inevitable.
周柳建成：
兰普顿教授，您怎样看？您也如此认为吗？
James Chau:
Professor Lampton, what do you think? Do you share that same take?
大卫·兰普顿：
我确实认为，随着权力关系变化，摩擦不可避免。但我不认为每一方都不可控。其次，我不认为权力关系的走向总是让人一目了然。换句话说，短期内可能会遇到经济问题，但从长远来看，会有个充满创新和活力的社会。因此，准确判断国家间的权力平衡既是一门艺术，也是一门学问。我们有很多方式来处理变化中的权力平衡。不过，我认为现在双方处理得都不是很好。
David Lampton:
Well, I do think that friction as power relationships change is inevitable. But I don’t think it’s inevitable how each side will manage that shift. And secondly, I don’t think it’s always obvious what direction the power relationship is going. In other words, you could have economic problems in the short run, but have a very innovative and dynamic society for the long run. And so, judging exactly the state of the balance of power between countries is as much an art as it is a science. And I think, furthermore, on how we manage this changing balance of power, is that there are multiple ways to handle it. And right now, I don’t think either side is handling it very well.
大卫·兰普顿：
我同意何大使的看法，也就是从总体上来说，势头，我认为他使用的是这个词，正在朝向负面方向发展，这让我很关心这次夏威夷高级别会晤。我会更多谈谈我对美方的理解，而不是对中方的理解。不过坦白地说，我认为它不是很成功。我不代表美国政府说话，也没有咨询过美国政府，我说的都是我自己的想法。特朗普总统正在竞选连任，他不希望自己的少数外交政策成就之一，也就是“第一阶段贸易协议”，被认为是失败的。另一方面，他通过对中国的强硬姿态，塑造了自己的政治品牌。我认为召开这次高级别会晤，是出于“战术”原因，就是表面上对中国很强硬，但不会破坏贸易协议这一标志性成就。所以，我想会晤主要是服务于国内政治，而不是从根本上解决中美之间存在的问题。最后，是的，我认为我们两国之间的摩擦不可避免。过去40年间，我们摩擦不断。当然，在冷战期间，我们有很大的分歧。但我想说，在特朗普政府之前的40年，以及在习主席之前的40年时间里，中美对困难的处理要比我们现在成功得多。
David Lampton:
But I agree with Ambassador He that, overall, the momentum (I think was the word he used) is going in a negative direction, which brings me to the Hawaii summit. And I`ll speak more about my understanding of the American side than the Chinese side. But frankly, I don’t think it was very successful. I don’t think it’s solved any problems, frankly. I think at least—I don`t speak for the U.S. government, I don’t consult with the U.S. government at the current time, so I’m speaking my own mind – but I think, frankly speaking, President Trump is running for re-election. And he does not want one of the few accomplishments he has in foreign policy—the phase one trade deal—to be seen as unsuccessful. And on the other hand, he’s built his political brand on being tough on China. So, I think he wanted to use the summit for what I would call “tactical” reasons; to look tough on China, but not destroy his signature achievement, namely the trade deal. So, I think it served mostly domestic political purposes. But it did not fundamentally address the issues between China and the United States. And just to wind up, I do think, yes, friction between our two countries is inevitable. We’ve had that friction for the last 40 years. And of course, in the Cold War, we had big frictions, but I would say the last 40 years prior to the Trump administration, and frankly, in the time prior to President Xi, we were much more successful in managing difficulties than we are now.
周柳建成：
何大使，对中国来说，有望取得的成果是什么？为什么中国想参加这次会晤？
James Chau:
Ambassador He, what was the dangling fruit for China? Why would they want to go for this summit?
何亚非：
对这么长时间以来的第一轮谈判，大家显然不能对成果期望过高。人们说“哇，我们之间有很多摩擦，有些摩擦根深蒂固，也很棘手。”所以对我来说，我更想看看双方能否找出两国之间存在哪些主要摩擦，以及兰普顿教授所说的，如何更好地处理这些摩擦。我认为，第一个问题是经济领域脱钩。在美国方面，有人出于地缘政治等方面的考虑推动脱钩。我不想夸大其词，但是中美经济脱钩正在发生，尤其是在高科技领域。不过我个人认为，短期内不可能完全脱钩。第二个问题是意识形态冲突与摩擦。我们都知道，中美是不同的国家，拥有不同的政治体系和不同的意识形态。但现在，这种意识形态上的冲突和摩擦日益凸显。中国被贴上各种标签，就差点说中国是邪恶国家了。几乎所有不好的名声都与中国有关，中国当然不会高兴，在中国就有人作出反击，讲些美国的事情。因此，脱钩和意识形态冲突，或者意识形态战争是最危险的事情，这只能加深中美之间的不信任。
He Yafei:
You cannot obviously expect that the first round of talks in so long to be so productive. People say, “wow, there were so many frictions and some are very deep and dangerous.” So, for me, I would turn, rather to see whether we can identify some of the major frictions between our two countries now, and how, as Professor Lampton said, “how can we manage it better?” I think the first one, in the economic field, is decoupling. Decoupling was pushed, again, on the U.S. side, by some people out of geopolitical considerations, etc. I don’t want to overstate that, but decoupling is happening, especially in the high-tech area. But personally, I do not believe a full decoupling will soon become a reality. The second thing is [about] ideological conflict and friction. We all know China and the U.S. are different countries. They have different political systems, believe in different ideologies. But now, this ideological conflict and friction comes to the fore. You know, China has been labeled as whatever, short of an evil country. Almost every bad name has been attached to China. And China, of course, is not happy, and you have people reacting to that and saying things about the United States. So, decoupling and ideological conflict, or ideological war, are most dangerous because it will only deepen the mistrust.
周柳建成：
如果把世界看做一个整体，在我们的政府和机构中，不信任（就像何大使刚刚说的）已经成为一种常态，而不是例外。那么，我们应该对所看到的这些感到警惕吗？
James Chau:
If you look at the world as a whole, mistrust (as Ambassador He says just there) in our governments, and in our institutions, has become something of the norm rather than the exception. So, should we be alarmed by what we are seeing?
大卫·兰普顿：
我确实认为存在一股全球趋势，并且在我们双边关系中也有股趋势。全球范围内的趋势是，世界各地有越来越多的民粹主义领导人出现。有些人试图替那些在全球化中掉队的人发声，以此来建立政治强人地位。我坚信，全球化1.0改善了全世界人民的生活，大概85%到90%的人生活得更好了。不过在每个社会中，都有人被甩在后面，肯定也有人认为自己有资格过得更好，因而对现实不满。如今在世界各地，每个社会都有领导人利用各种不满情绪，包括中国这样的新兴大国，认为美国的动作不够快，在国际体系中没有及时给中国腾出地方。更糟糕的是，甚至希望减缓中国的增长和发展。因此，我认为这是全球趋势，这也反映在美中关系中。
David Lampton:
Well, I do think there are global trends, and then there are the trends in our bilateral relationship. And I think there is a global trend towards more populist leaders around the world. [There are] people who try to build strongman political positions by speaking to the grievances of those left behind by globalization. I firmly believe that globalization 1.0 improves the livelihood of people around the world, probably 85-90% of people are better off. But in each of our societies, there are people who have been left behind, or certainly people who think they were entitled to do better, and they have grievances. And now around the world, we have leaders in each of our societies that play to these grievances of various sorts, including a rising power such as China that believes the United States is not moving rapidly enough to make room for China in the international system, or worse yet, even desires to slow China’s growth and development down. So, I think these are the global trends that are also reflected in US-China relations.
大卫·兰普顿：
事实上，大约三年多的时间以来，我们一直没有进行系统的全面对话，现在我们没有对话渠道了。我们需要发展对话渠道，这是最重要的事情。
David Lampton:
The reality is, that for about three-plus years, we’ve virtually had no, what we call, systemic, system-wide dialogues on an ongoing basis. And now we don’t have those avenues of dialogue and I think we need to develop them. So, that’d be the first thing.
大卫·兰普顿：
第二，我认为脱钩问题，坦白地说，确实有很多美国人不太懂经济却在谈论脱钩。新冠疫情引发了依赖他国提供商品这一问题，比如抗生素或者个人防护装备。正如何大使所言，在安全领域，高科技变得日益敏感。但是我想说的是，并不只有美国这么想，在中国也能听到同样的想法。我们对彼此信任越来越少，我们都不愿依赖对方，来为自己的经济或者战略系统中提供必要的投入。所以，两国都有人想要脱钩。我认为，我们有必要回到所谓的全球化2.0，也就是不要放弃比较优势，不要放弃我们彼此需要的想法。不过，我们应该让全球化对国内或全世界那20%的人更友好。
David Lampton:
Secondly, I think this issue of decoupling… Quite frankly, yes, there are a lot of Americans who incidentally probably don’t know much about economics, that talk about decoupling and, certainly, the COVID pandemic raises the issue of reliance on other countries to provide commodities, such as antibiotics or personal protective equipment. And also, as Ambassador He said, in the security area, high technology has become sensitive. But the point I want to make is, it’s not just the United States making this point. Well, you hear that in China too, because as we become less trustful of each other, we’re each less willing to rely on the other for essential inputs into our economic or strategic systems. So, I would say that on decoupling is that there are people thinking this way in both societies. I think we need to get back to what I might call globalization 2.0. And that is, don’t throw out comparative advantage. Don’t throw out the idea that we each need each other. But let’s make globalization more friendly to that 20% of the populations in our countries or around the world.
周柳建成：
有可能控制更大范围脱钩的讨论吗？有可能阻止脱钩吗？
James Chau:
Is it possible to manage this talk of a broader decoupling? Is it possible to forestall that decline?
何亚非：
我有几点要说。首先，正如兰普顿教授刚刚提到的，在过去三年半的时间里，中美对话减少了。我也注意到，两大国之间的对话（系统性对话）也不多，我们需要恢复它。但让我担心的是，美方对与中国系统对话的热情不高，这就是为什么我说夏威夷对话可能是个开始，我们希望夏威夷对话成为两大国之间系统性对话的开端。其次，全球化2.0是绝对必要的。最后，关于全球供应链的迁移，我不认为自力更生是对全球化的否定，中国完全支持更加深入的全球化，中国现今的进步是全球化带来的，而不是相反。
He Yafei:
[I have] several points to make: One, as Professor Lampton mentioned, there have been fewer talks in the last three and a half years. I also noticed that there is not too much talk – systemic talks – between the two major powers. We need to restore that. But my concern is that there was less enthusiasm on the part of the United States to engage in systemic talk with China. That’s why I’m saying the Hawaii talks could be a beginning. We hope it will be the beginning of a systemic talk between the two major powers. Secondly globalization 2.0 is absolutely necessary. Lastly, concerning the relocation of the global supply chain, I do not believe self-reliance is a negation of globalization. China is in full support of further globalization. Well, China’s progress so far is a product of globalization, not the other way around.
周柳建成：
有什么办法可以建立中间点吗？
James Chau:
Are there ways where halfway points can be established?
大卫·兰普顿：
在国内，我们的政治家必须重新调整利益分配，不过他们也必须努力创造一个公平的竞争环境，之前这个环境不是那么地公平，并不是所有政党在经济上都是平等的。所以，我认为这是一项非常艰巨的任务。另外，不仅是两国国内和两国之间的全球化和经济状况发生变化，从根本上说，是我们的战略姿态发生变化。过去40年来，美国和中国基本上试图消除对方的疑虑。有时我们没成功，有时我们失败，有时我们出现危机，不过总的趋势是确保彼此相信，随着两国都变得更强大，我们不会对彼此构成威胁。我认为这一基本的努力已经失败了。我们双方现在所采取的战略，就是把自己组织起来，去威慑对方。威慑意味着威胁对方，这样他们就不会做你不希望他们做的事，这是核心。只要关系建立在威胁的基础上，消除疑虑就会非常难。
David Lampton:
Our politicians have to recalibrate the distribution of benefits within their societies. But they also have to try to level the playing field that wasn’t so level before, for good reason. Not all of the parties were, you know, economically equal. So, I think it’s a very difficult task. And I would say one other thing. It`s not just globalization and economic circumstances that have changed, both within and between societies. It is basically our strategic posture. For the preceding 40 years, the United States and China basically tried to reassure each other. Sometimes we didn’t succeed at that. Sometimes we failed. Some- times we had crises. But the overall trend was to convince each other that, as we each got stronger, we did not represent a threat to each other. I think that basic effort has broken down. And what we are now both doing strategically is organizing ourselves for deterrence. And what deterrence means is to threaten the other, so they don’t do what you don’t want them to do. That’s the core. And as long as you build a relationship on threats, it’s going to be very difficult to reassure.
何亚非：
对于刚才兰普顿教授所说的国家之间的公平问题，我有几点看法。我同意，无论是经济方面还是其他方面，我们都需要一个公平的竞争环境。但是，公平竞争的环境必须是双向的。其次，我也同意您的观点，战略评估、战略判断非常重要。在2009年奥巴马访华期间，我曾负责中国方面的谈判。我们发表了联合公报，在很多问题上达成一致，在一些问题上也消除了分歧。重要的是，我们一致认为，中美应该努力建立更具前瞻性、更全面的伙伴关系。不幸的是，特朗普总统上任后，这一切都被搁置了。我们需要重新修复这段关系，并且认真参与到战略对话之中，以确保在战略竞争中不会出现“不是你死就是我亡”之类的情况。竞争并不可怕，这不是最糟糕的事情，最糟糕的就是把对方逼到死角。
He Yafei:
I have a few points in response to what the professor said about the fairness between countries, among countries. I agree we need to have a level playing field when we compete, economically or otherwise, but level playing fields have to be two-way traffic. Secondly, I also agree with you that strategic assessment, strategic judgment, is extremely important. And in the past, personally, I led the negotiation on the part of China during Obama’s visit in 2009 to China. We issued the joint communique and we’ve managed to agree on many things and managed to agree to disagree on a few things. But the important thing is that we do agree that China and the U.S. should strive to build a forward-looking, more comprehensive partner- ship. Unfortunately, that fell by the wayside when President Trump took office. We need to restore and seriously engage in strategic dialogue to make sure there will be no, you know, “either you die or I die,” that kind of thing, in the strategic competition. Competition is not scary. It’s not the worst possible thing. The worst possible thing is to try to put the other side into the corner.
周柳建成：
您认为可以利用接下来的几个月做什么呢？特别是现在，世界各地正在发生人道主义危机。
James Chau:
What do you think can be done to utilize the next couple of months? Especially since we’re in the middle of a humanitarian crisis right now, in every part of the world.
大卫·兰普顿：
我认为有很多事情可以做。首先，我们启动了夏威夷高层会晤。我想说开始对话吧，在多个部门间多多交流。让我感到震惊的是，不仅高层对话几乎结束了，部分原因是疫情期间没人可以旅行，而且我认为，我们的民众与民众，我们的非政府组织与非政府组织之间的关系也快中断了。中国的非政府组织法律是部分原因，疫情是部分原因，糟糕的双边关系也是部分原因。但我认为，我们应该尽快、尽可能多地重启政府、公司，和非政府组织之间的对话。
David Lampton:
Well, I think there are a number of things. First of all, we started with the Hawaii summit. So, I would say, start talking. And I would say, start talking a lot- a dialogue among multiple sectors. And one of the things that strike me is that it’s not only top-level dialogue that has pretty [much] been ended, partly because nobody can travel in this pandemic. But I think, you know, our people, the people - our nongovernmental organization to nongovernmental organization relationships have really frayed and certainly, and the NGO law in China was part of that, the pandemic is part of that, bad bilateral relations are part of that. But I would say, as soon as possible, restart as many dialogues between as many bureaucracies, companies, and NGOs as possible.
大卫·兰普顿：
其次，坦率地说，我认为中国最大的战略失误，或者说是最大的战略失误之一，就是失去了美国商界的潜在支持。40年来，美国商界对未来一致持乐观态度。它总是有自己的问题，它总是有不开心的事情，但最后，美国商界总是说“与中国搞好关系总比搞不好强”。现在美国商界不会再这么说了，所以中国必须扭转这种局面。
David Lampton:
何亚非：
首先，我完全同意兰普顿教授的观点，我们需要对话。我们需要系统性的对话，不仅是联邦和州一级的政府之间对话，也包括民间交流。一旦疫情结束，我们需要加强人文交流，特别是要让美国商界参与到对话之中。
He Yafei:
One, I agree totally with Professor Lampton that we need to talk. We need to have systemic talk, not only government-to-government, both at federal and state levels, but also, people-to-people exchanges. Once CO- VID-19 dies away, we need to increase people-to-people exchanges, and we especially need to involve American business in our talks.
何亚非：
其次，在两国国内，中美都需要关照弱势、愤怒群体，关注那些因全球化或其他原因对经济收益分配感到不满的群体。政府要对本国国民负责。在国际方面，一段时间以来，我一直主张这样一种观点：如果有大量发展中国家被落下，那么这个世界就不会太好，全球经济就不会再增长。公平问题需要得到解决。我认为中美有共同的责任，我们需要团结，需要合作。在新冠疫情之前，我们拥有在非洲抗击传染病的成功经验，中美共同帮助非洲国家建立公共卫生应急反应体系。
He Yafei:
Secondly, both domestically, China and the United States need to take care of its groups of people who are vulnerable, who are angry, who are not happy with the distribution of gains, economic gains, whether by globalization or otherwise. Governments have responsibilities for their own people. Internationally, I’ve been advocating the view for some time now, that the world will not be a happy one, that the global economy will not grow anymore if we have a large number of developing countries being left behind. That fairness needs to be addressed. I think the U.S. and China have a common responsibility. We need to unite. We need to work together. We have some successful experience in working in Africa to combat infectious diseases – that was before COVID-19 –The U.S. and China working together to help African countries to build up a public health response system.
周柳建成：
作为主持人，我很高兴听到您二位就我认为当今世界最重要双边关系中的一些最重要问题进行讨论。感谢何亚非大使和大卫·兰普顿教授参加“太平洋对话”，期望二位有一天能再次光临。
James Chau:
Well, as the moderator, it’s been fascinating hearing you both engage on some of the most critical aspects of what I believe to be the most critical bilateral relationship in the world today. Ambassador He Yafei and Professor David Lampton, thank you for joining the Pacific Dialogue. We hope to welcome you back again one day.
