顧屏山：奧巴馬能否對得起諾貝爾獎，全看此次訪華

【本文寫於奧巴馬訪華之前，從習奧會的結果來看，奧巴馬確實如基辛格所説展現了一定的誠意，但作者對奧巴馬顯然有更多期待。中美關係如要取得真正的突破，奧巴馬不僅需要落實習奧會達成的“共識”，在網絡監控、周邊偵察、恐怖主義等問題上，也需要做出更多實際的改變。本文原載於中美聚焦網，觀察者網楊晗軼譯。】

美國總統奧巴馬即將於本月10日訪華。對他來説，這是一個書寫歷史的機會，要是真能有所建樹，也算是對得起當年草率頒給他的那個諾貝爾和平獎。

奧巴馬將出席年度亞太經濟合作（APEC）峯會。此外，本月12日他還將以私人會談的形式得到中國主席習近平的接見。奧巴馬若想修復中美雙邊關係，為後任留下長期和平的政治遺產，此次訪問可能是他最好的機會——也許是最後的機會了。

截至目前為止，奧巴馬政府不但未能如諾貝爾和平獎委員會所願減少暴力衝突，全世界的人為暴行反而呈爆炸式增長：

從北到南，我們見證了：

烏克蘭對抗東部分裂勢力，俄羅斯堅定反對烏克蘭的西方盟友；

美國軍隊、軍事顧問和僱傭兵在阿富汗和伊拉克越陷越深，難以撤離；

伊斯蘭國使敍利亞和整個中東危在旦夕；

以色列和巴勒斯坦和解黯淡無光；

埃及和利比亞未能嚐到民主果實，北方的流血暴力使這些國家內部動盪遭到忽視。

此外，全球還面臨埃博拉病毒爆發的威脅。

面對這一連串悲劇，奧巴馬當自問，是否應繼續對中國保持緊張關係和虛假的“戰略模糊”？儘管中美兩國都宣稱雙邊關係正在轉暖，但它更接近於前進一步倒退一步，甚至倒退兩步。

最近的例子便是：一方面五角大樓以紅地毯迎接中國人民解放軍高級官員，而另一方面司法部起訴五名解放軍軍官網絡竊密。

美國年度國防預算加上老兵服務支出共計約9000億美元。加上國債高築，每年須還本付息4000多億美元。這兩筆開支約佔美國全年GDP的30%。在令人生畏的聯邦預算赤字面前，為對抗或遏制中國而設計的“亞洲核心戰略”必將進一步加重美國的債務負擔，奧巴馬真能為這樣的戰略辯護嗎？

奧巴馬應該瞭解，抨擊中國僅是末流政客為贏得選票慣用的手段。作為總統，他應該最清楚，美國的國家利益是在太平洋彼岸贏得一個朋友，而不是樹立一個對手，他也有能力在這個問題上積極作為。他不應再去迎合那些沒有大局觀的人。

奧巴馬需要政治勇氣，方能從無到有建立起以下六點對華新思路：

習近平帶領奧巴馬參觀中南海

1. 不要期待中國按照美國的想法出牌。尊重中國不同的視角和不同的處事方法。

2. 停止公開表述兩國分歧，而應私下坦誠交流意見。兩國領導人和辦事官員已經建立起定期的雙邊會談機制。應建設性地利用這些機制。

3. 承認中國在周邊建立影響力輻射圈的意圖，為表示善意，美國應停止向中國周邊派遣飛機進行監視偵察。讓中國與日本和其他亞洲國家妥善處理雙邊關係問題，美國不應成為“房間裏的大象”。

4. 停止單方面擬定行為準則，例如宣稱美國國家安全局的網絡監控為合法，而中國的網絡監控為非法。雙方需要坐下來分享最佳解決方案，共同商議劃定各自的底線。然後再邀請其他國家加入網絡安全討論。

5. 美國必須承認恐怖分子就是恐怖分子。只要美國將中國的恐怖分子看作潛在的自由戰士，就會造成極大的問題。只有在反恐問題上達成共識，中美兩個大國才會共同遏制瘋狂的伊斯蘭聖戰。

6. 美國應牢記冷戰已經結束。中國不是蘇聯的替身。

以上是建設全新中美雙邊關係的六條綱領。美國必須堅定地認清：中美是經濟夥伴關係，有時是競爭關係，但不是敵對關係。批評者或許認為上述新思路流於天真，但這種天真如果能夠成功，將使美國免遭不幸。當年美國人闖入伊拉克，天真地以為當地人會簞食壺漿以迎王師。這種天真給美國造成了巨大損失，最近的統計顯示，伊拉克戰爭讓美國付出了超過1萬億美元和傷亡近40000人的慘重代價。

朝鮮問題是中美共同的難題。奧巴馬至少可以從表達善意的立場出發，令人信服地提出的化解朝鮮災難的方案。

布什和奧巴馬都在朝鮮去核問題上花費了許多精力，然而最終一無所成。毫無進展的美國沮喪地舉手放棄，宣稱只有中國才能影響朝鮮的行為。

然而現實中，朝鮮也讓中國感到同樣沮喪。中國唯一的槓桿是切斷朝鮮的經濟命脈。但中國不能讓朝鮮崩潰，因為《美韓共同防禦條約》將允許美軍開到中朝邊境。

如果奧巴馬要在中美之間真正建立互信，便應許諾一旦朝韓統一，就將美軍全部撤離朝鮮半島。這樣朝鮮半島局勢將完全不同。

中國將把美國看作全球事務中的合作伙伴。朝鮮只要清楚中國不再受到美軍渡過鴨綠江的威脅，便會更加順從地加入六方會談，協商以放棄核武器換取安全保障。

韓國應當歡迎一個不那麼好戰的朝鮮，以開放的態度爭取朝韓和解，換取終止美韓軍事同盟。《美韓共同防禦條約》簽署於1953年，韓國對條約適用性的質疑起碼可以追溯到2006年。

美國將成為最大的贏家。這樣，奧巴馬既可以達成朝鮮半島無核化的目標；又建立了不斷前進的對華關係；還能從年度預算中削減30000名駐韓美軍的開支。

如果真有那一天，奧巴馬將至少使世界的這一地區更加安全，世界也會感謝他的政治遺產。他也將無愧於諾貝爾和平獎的頭銜。

（點擊下一頁，查看英語原文）

Time for Obama to Make a Peace Overture to China

George Koo

Next month President Obama will be going to Beijing and he has the opportunity to make history and finally make good on the Nobel Peace Prize given to him rather prematurely at the beginning of his first term.

He will be in China to attend the summit of the annual Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation. In addition, he will also have a private meeting with China’s President Xi. This trip could be Obama’s best chance and possibly the last chance to radically alter the bumpy bilateral relations and leave a lasting legacy of genuine peace.

During his administration so far, instead of a tapering of violent conflicts that the peace committee had anticipated, the world’s arc of manmade mayhem has exploded.

From north to south, we now have:

Ukraine confronting its eastern secessionists with Russia squarely opposing Ukraine’s western allies;

Afghanistan and Iraq becoming tar babies where American troops/advisors/mercenaries can’t extricate;

ISIS threatening the very existence of Syria and the entire Middle East;

Israel and Palestine making no progress towards even a faint glimmer for peace;

Egypt and Libya enjoying none of the fruits of democracy, while their worsening instability has been largely overlooked because of the more bloody violence to their north.

On top of all that, a worldwide Ebola outbreak threatens.

Given the litany of woes, Obama should be asking why he would want to maintain the tension and pretense of “strategic ambiguity” with China. Despite both sides claiming a warming of bilateral relations, it has been more of one step forward and one step backward, sometimes even two steps back.

The latest example was for the Pentagon to give a senior PLA official the red carpet treatment while the Justice Department was very publicly indicting 5 PLA soldiers alleging illegal cyber attack.

The current U.S. annual defense budget plus the cost of veteran services is around $900 billion. Annual debt service of the mounting national debt is more than $400 billion. Together, the total represents about 30% of the GDP. While facing the daunting task of taming the federal budget deficit, can Obama justify adding to the nation’s financial burden with a “pivot” to Asia designed to confront if not to contain China?

Obama should understand that petty politicians take pot shots at China for perceived profit at the polls. Of all people, as president, he should see that it is in America’s national interest to have a friend and not an adversary across the Pacific and he can do something proactive about it. He should stop pandering to those that do not see the big picture.

All it takes is political courage and a start from scratch with a new approach to China. The new approach should include the following:

1.Stop expecting China to do what we want them to do. Respect that they have a different point of view and a different way of getting things done.

2.Stop articulating differences publicly but by all means discuss them frankly but in private. Already in place are regularly occurring bilateral meetings between leaders and working level officials. Use them constructively.

3.Recognize that China wishes to establish its sphere of influence around its borders, and as an act of good faith, stop surveillance flights near China. Let China work out their bilateral relations with Japan and other Asian states without the U.S. being the elephant in the room.

4.Stop writing rules of conduct unilaterally, such as proclaiming that cyber activity by the NSA is legitimate but any from China is not. Instead both sides need to sit down together, share best practices and agree on lines on the sand that neither side would cross. Then invite other nations to join in the discussion.

5.Agree that terrorists are terrorists. So long as the U.S. sees terrorists in China as possible freedom fighters, there is a big problem. Agreement on the other hand would allow the two major powers to work together in stemming the jihadist madness.

6.Remember that the Cold War is over. China is not a stand-in for the former Soviet Union.

The above six basic planks for developing a new bilateral relations with China represent an affirmation that China is a economic partner, sometimes a competitor but not an adversary. Critics might consider the proposed approach naïve. But the naiveté if it succeeds will save America from grief. In contrast when Americans charged into Iraq expecting a liberating hero’s welcome, that naiveté cost the U.S. dearly, last count exceeding $1 trillion and close to 40,000 casualties.

At least starting from a position of goodwill, Obama can credibly propose resolving the North Korea debacle as a common problem to tackle between friends.

Both Bush and Obama had expended a lot of energy on getting North Korea to undo their nuclear program to no avail. When the lack of progress frustrated the U.S., they would throw up their hands and proclaimed that only China can influence the North Koreans to behave.

In reality China has been just as frustrated by North Korea. China’s only leverage is to sever the economic lifeline that has been keeping North Korea alive. China can’t afford to let North Korea collapse because the existing treaty between the U.S. and South Korea would allow American troops to move right up to the China/North Korea border.

If Obama were to build real mutual trust between China and the U.S. and, in the context of building trust, pledge to withdraw all U.S. troops from the Korean peninsula upon the reunification of Korea, there would be a whole new ball game.

China would look at the U.S. as a real working partner in the global arena. North Korea, knowing that the prospect of American soldiers leering across the Yalu River no longer works as a threat to China, would have to be more amenable to joining the 6 party talks and negotiate for security assurances in exchange for giving up the bomb.

South Korea should welcome a less belligerent north and be open to reconciliation in exchange for the cancelling the military alliance with the U.S. The treaty was established in 1953 and the South Koreans have been questioning the relevancy of the treaty since at least 2006.

The U.S. would be the biggest winner of all. Obama can claim to finally achieve a nuclear free Korean peninsula, have created go-forward progressive relations with China, and deduct the cost of stationing 30,000 troops in South Korea from the annual budget.

The world will thank him for the legacy of at least making one part of the world safer then he found it. He can then rightfully be a Nobel laureate.