彭斯的中国政策演讲没有自圆其说

美国时间10月4日，美国副总统彭斯在哈德逊研究所就美国对华政策发表了长达一个小时的演讲。美国方面在一周前就已经为此次演讲做了预告，声称演讲将为特朗普政府的对华政策定调。中国方面担心演讲会给已经高度敏感的中美关系增加负面情绪，甚至让国际社会认为中美之间的“新冷战”已经不可避免。从彭斯演讲的内容来看，这次演讲更多出于美国国内政治目的，有意将中国作为特朗普民意支持下降的替罪羊。

On October 4, United States Vice President Mike Pence delivered a one-hour speech on the US' China policy at the Hudson Institute. The US government announced that the speech would be given a week ago, claiming that it would set the tone of the Trump administration's China policy. The Chinese government is concerned that the speech merely adds more negative sentiment to the already sensitive relationship between China and the US and that it suggests to the international community that a new Cold War between the two countries is inevitable. Judging from its content, Pence's speech served more of a domestic political purpose, as it sought to use China as a scapegoat for US President Donald Trump's falling public approval.

演讲汇集了近年来美国国内对于中国的不满、猜疑和误解，给中美关系留下了更多的困惑。如何理解这些困惑很可能将决定着中美关系的未来。

The speech touched on US feelings of dissatisfaction, suspicion, and misunderstanding toward China in recent years, creating yet more confusion around China-US relations.

第一个困惑是演讲没有说明特朗普政府对华政策的根本逻辑。演讲以“特朗普对华政策”为题，但是演讲的绝大部分内容与中美之间的互动无关，而是关于所谓的中国干涉美国内政问题。相对于两国在经贸和军事领域的诸多问题，“中国干涉美国内政问题”只是一个新近出现的、仍具争议的话题，在中美关系中所占的分量很小。这种问题如同中美两国之间出现的若干突发性危机一样，不足以决定中美关系的基本价值取向。演讲没有解决美国对华政策的根本性问题，即美国如何与中国建立一个可持续、对美国和世界和平有利的关系。彭斯在演讲中称，希望与中国建立建设性关系。如果说这种关系是以美国通过贸易、外交、军事等领域施压来“改造”中国为基本手段，那么这显然并不是建设性关系。这种做法只会加剧两国之间的对立和敌意，最终演变为不可逆转的螺旋。

The speech did not explain the logic behind the Trump administration's China policy. The speech was on Trump's policy toward China, but most of its content was unrelated to the interactions between the two countries. Rather, it was about China's so-called interference in US internal affairs. China's interference in US internal affairs is a new and still controversial topic, and it plays only a small part in China-US relations. Like the sudden crisis that has arisen between the two nations, this issue does not characterize their relationship.The speech failed to address the fundamental problem with the US' China policy, which is how the US can establish a relationship with China that is sustainable as well as favorable to the US and the rest of the world. Pence did say in his speech that he hopes to establish a constructive relationship with China. It will obviously not be constructive, though, if it consists of the US attempting to reform China through trade, diplomacy, and military pressure. Such an approach will only exacerbate the confrontation and hostility between the two countries and create an irreversible downward spiral.

第二个困惑是演讲并没有证实中国如何干预美国内政。彭斯在演讲中提出了很多所谓中国干涉美国内政的证据，例如中国国际广播电台在美国30多个电台播放对中国友好的节目；在美中国留学生建有联合会；中国试图分化美国商界、地方政府与联邦政府在中美经贸摩擦上的团结等等。但是，彭斯所列举事例带有明显的政治偏见。运用商业渠道在他国投放有利于本国国家形象的宣传片是一种国际惯例，属于软实力宣传的范畴，美国同样试图用“美国之音”等媒体对华宣传。在美中国留学生的结社自由应当得到美国法律的保护和美国政府的接受。而美国商界、地方政府与中国各级政府的互动，多数并非是由中方主动发起，而源于美国地方政府对特朗普极端贸易政策的忧虑。美国的联邦制和选举制度给了地方政府和各种利益集团充分表达其诉求的权利，这种权利是美国之所以成为美国的基石。

The speech also did not specify how China has interfered in US internal affairs. Pence cited a lot of supposed evidence of China's interference, for example China Radio International broadcasting Beijing-friendly programming on over 30 US radio stations, the presence of Chinese Students and Scholars Associations set up by Chinese students in the US, and attempts by China to exploit divisions between businesses and federal- and local-level governments on issues like trade to advance its political influence. But the examples cited by Pence reflect obvious political bias. The use of commercial channels to promote one's own country is an international normal practice. The US, for example, uses voice of America and other forms of media to conduct propaganda in China. The right of Chinese students to freedom of association in the US should be protected by US law and accepted by the US government. And many of the interactions between US businesses and local government and the Chinese government at various levels are not initiated by people in China but are the result of the concerns of local governments in the US over Trump's extreme trade policies. Ultimately, the US federal and electoral system give local governments and various interest groups the right to fully express their desires. This right is a cornerstone of US political life.

第三个困惑是演讲让特朗普政府的对华表述更加令人费解。彭斯的演讲延续了特朗普总统在对华表述上的一贯矛盾：特朗普既希望与中国领导人建立良好友谊，又毫无忌惮地批驳中国的对外战略，将中国国内经济和社会政策描绘为可怕的阴谋。特朗普既不愿意看到中国经济遭殃，又把让中国股市大幅下跌、中国国内投资者损失惨重作为其贸易政策有效的证据。这些相互矛盾的表述损害了美国政府在中国的信誉，使中国难以确信与美国的谈判能够得到长期有效的结果。

The speech obfuscated the Trump administration's stance on China. Pence's speech perpetuated Trump's consistently contradictory approach to dealings with China: on the one hand, he wants to build a close friendship with China's leader， but, on the other, he has no qualms about criticizing China's foreign policies and portraying China's domestic economic and social policies as appalling conspiracies. Trump ignores the economic downturn in China but considers the sharp fall in Chinese stock markets and the heavy losses suffered by Chinese investors as evidence of the effectiveness of his trade policy. His contradictory statements have undermined the credibility of the US government in China, making it difficult to believe that negotiations with the US can yield long-term results.

第四个困惑是演讲提出了一个双重的公平、对等和尊重标准。彭斯认为，中美关系重新回到以合作为主的渠道需要双方以公平、对等和尊重重建信任。但是，从彭斯的表述来看，这种所谓的公平、对等和尊重标准是以中国在各方面的无条件让步为前提。美国可以随意挑战中国在南海的海洋权益，却不准中国拥有自卫能力；美国可以增加对台湾的军事援助，干涉中国内政问题，却不允许中国在美国投放商业广告宣传本国形象；美国可以在印太地区推出大规模基建机会，却不允许中国继续推动其“一带一路”倡议。这种双重标准源于美国的优越感和“美国例外论”，这与公平、对等和尊重的精神是矛盾的。彭斯希望中国把美国视为“他同我们也一样”，但他所提出的要求却表明美国希望中国把美国称为“圣上”。

Pence suggested that for China-US relations to return to a state of cooperation, the two sides' relationship must be grounded in fairness, reciprocity, and respect. But it seems from what Pence said this means China making unconditional concessions. The US is allowed to challenge China's maritime rights and interests in the South China Sea, but China is not allowed to have self-defense capabilities. The US is allowed to step-up its military assistance to Taiwan and thus interfere in China's internal affairs, but China is not allowed to run commercial advertisements in the US to promote itself. The US is allowed to launch large-scale infrastructure projects in the Indo-Pacific, but China is not allowed to continue promoting its Belt and Road Initiative. Such double standards stem from US feelings of superiority and the ideology of American exceptionalism, which are in stark contradiction to the spirit of fairness, reciprocity, and fairness touted by its leaders. Pence said that he hopes China will treat the US as an equal, but his demands suggest that the US wants China to treat it as an emperor.

第五个困惑是演讲没有给出美国对华政策的清晰前景。彭斯称美国向中国伸出了手，希望与中国共同迎接未来。但是，彭斯的演讲并没有解决中美竞争的一些关键性问题。例如，中美关系的下限在哪里？中美之间是否需要遵守一些共同规则？中美是否应当共同避免陷入某种形式的“新冷战”？中美之间如何在当前形势下相向而行？美国希望通过怎样的机制来解决中美关系中的新问题？等等。

The speech did not present a clear vision of the US's policy toward China. Pence said that America is reaching out its hand to China and that it hopes China will reach back in the future. But his speech did not address the key issue of China-US competition. For example, what is the lower limit of China-US relations? Should the US and China adhere to a set of common rules? Should China and the US try to avoid falling into some form of new Cold War? How can China and the US move in the same direction? What sort of mechanism does the US hope to use to solve new problems in China-US relations?

这些困惑表明彭斯讲话并没有给特朗普对华政策画下句点，没有标志着美国对华新共识的形成，没有预示着中美新冷战必然发生。如何看待、处理这些困惑给中美关系的未来带来了机遇和挑战。

These omissions show that Pence's speech did not help to clarify Trump's China policy; it did not mark the creation of a new US consensus on China and it did not indicate that a new Cold War between the US and China is inevitable. Dealing with these areas of confusion presents both opportunities and challenges for future China-US relations.

在积极方面，这些困惑意味着美国对华政策的良好期望并没有完全消失。彭斯所提出的问题不少是中美关系中的长期性问题，另一些则是由于政治、意识形态因素带来的新误解。中美双方仍然有可能通过澄清误解、在利益冲突问题上展开务实对话来解决大部分问题，并且将一些难以短期内解决的问题留给将来。这种将问题分解、逐一沟通、分阶段解决的方式是1972年以来两国形成的较为成熟的模式。在解决问题的过程中，双方也有机会通过沟通寻找共同利益和创造新的合作机遇。中国官方对于彭斯讲话的回应已表明，中国没有放弃与美国建立建设性关系，不希望让当前中美关系的紧张局面放任自流。

On the upside, this means that the US has not abandoned its positive expectations for its China policy. Many of the issues raised by Pence are long-standing issues in China-US relations. Some others are misunderstandings due to political and ideological factors. It is still possible for China and the US to resolve most of these problems by dispelling misunderstandings and engaging in pragmatic dialogue on conflicts of interest, while leaving some issues that are difficult to resolve in the short term for future discussions. This way of breaking down problems, discussing them one-by-one, and solving them in stages is a relatively mature model used by the two countries since 1972. In the process of communicating to solve such issues, both parties can also discover common interests and create new opportunities for cooperation. China's official response to Pence's speech has shown that China has not abandoned its constructive relationship with the US and does not want to let the current tensions in China-US relations get out of hand.

在消极方面，这些困惑意味着美国方面仍然有可能采取更单边的措施来表明美国对华政策的有效性。由于美国缺乏通过中美良性互动的方式解决中美关系诸多问题的意愿，美国更可能采取一些突发性、可以持续升级的措施来逼迫中国让步。这种政策不仅将像“中美贸易摩擦”一样给两国关系带来超预期的消极影响，也可能给世界和平及美国经济带来反作用。除了少部分对华有深刻偏见的人士，没有人希望中美完全决裂和走向全面对抗。这种结果也将标志着特朗普“良性大国竞争”世界观的失败。

On the downside, these areas of confusion mean that the US is likely to take more unilateral measures to demonstrate the effectiveness of its China policy. Because the US lacks the will to solve many issues in China-US relations through positive engagement with China, it is more likely to adopt sudden and constantly escalating measures to force China into making concessions. This approach will not only have unexpected negative consequences for bilateral relations, as is the case with the current trade tensions, but may also have counter-productive outcomes for world peace and the US economy. Except for a small minority of people who hold deep prejudices against China, nobody wishes to see a complete breakdown in China-US relations and a move toward full-on confrontation. Such an outcome would mean the failure of Trump's worldview of “great power competition.”