駐美大使崔天凱：美國別幻想強加給中國另一個“廣場協議”_風聞

編者按：8月30日上午，中美貿易智庫系列對話之二“把脈當下中美關係的温度：當前狀況與未來走向”研討會由中國人民大學重陽金融研究院與美國戰略與國際問題研究中心(CSIS)在華盛頓共同主辦。中國駐美大使崔天凱出席午餐會並發表演講。經授權，將演講內容中英文獨家刊發如下：

很榮幸再次來到美國戰略與國際問題研究中心（CSIS），每次到訪這裏都讓我得到啓發，有所收穫，特別是今天在座的還有我的一些老同事、老朋友和來自中國人民大學重陽金融研究院的學者。

在英語中，“Think Tank"一詞的意思可望文生義、一目瞭然，但翻譯成中文"智庫”，則意思要更復雜些。“智庫"實際上意味着"智慧的儲備”，不僅要求思考，還要求明智地思考，今天這個討論也準確反映了這一解釋。因此，我在跟智庫交流時始終心存敬畏，態度謙遜。我在這裏並非想要提出什麼智慧的見解，只希望能與你們分享一些常識。

坦率講，當前我們面臨一個很大的問題。一些人雖然身居高位，或需要在經濟、戰略問題上向國家領導人和政府部門建言獻策，但他們卻缺乏足夠的常識。這些人相信，他們可以無視經濟規律，破壞全球供應鏈，卻不會對自身經濟造成任何損害；他們可以永遠壟斷新技術，阻止他人創新並從技術進步中獲益；他們可以通過指責別人來逃避肩負的重責，比如解決國內日益嚴重的經濟社會分化問題等；他們可以通過四處樹敵來讓自己變得"偉大"。正是這種思維方式增加了當前國際關係的不確定性，給中美雙邊關係，特別是經貿關係帶來困難。

今天午餐會的主題是"下一步"。中方對下一步該做什麼是很清楚的。我奉勸那些認為可以將另一個"廣場協議"強加給中國，認為中國會屈服於恐嚇、威脅和無端指責的人放棄幻想。與此同時，中方始終致力於在相互尊重的基礎上，採取能照顧雙方關切的平衡方式，通過嚴肅、務實和實質性的談判磋商來解決經貿問題，這個過程必須是能相互釋放善意，體現彼此誠信的。通過這樣的方式，經貿問題的解決當不至困難如斯。

當然，也有很多人關心中美關係何去何從，擔心當前局勢會對我們兩國關係的未來產生影響。存在這樣的擔憂不是沒有道理的。但我滿懷信心，只要我們對當今世界的現實有清醒的認識，對兩國共同的未來有明確的願景，我們就可以戰勝當前困難，並着眼未來建立一個更加強勁、穩定的中美關係。

人們常常談到"修昔底德陷阱"。我本人也同撰寫《必有一戰：中美是否能逃脱修昔底德陷阱》一書的作者艾利森教授有過多次很好的交流。我認為很多人對他這本書要傳遞的主要信息存在誤解或誤讀。在書中，他提到歷史上有過16起所謂"新興崛起大國"對"守成大國"構成挑戰和威脅的案例，其中12次以戰爭和衝突告終，只有4次是以相對和平的方式實現了過渡。因此有人認為，歷史上曾經發生過的事情，將在中美兩國之間重演。

但我不認為這些在歐洲歷史上發生過的事，會不可避免地在中美之間重演。對美國而言，如果相信歐洲歷史會重演，那先驅者們為什麼要開闢美洲新大陸？對中國來説，我們有悠久而獨特的文明。上述16個歷史案例所涉及的國家中，有哪個是運用綜合調理以達陰陽平衡的中醫來看病的？有哪個是協調手指使用筷子來吃飯的？有哪個是應用單字能獨立表意、組合則衍生不同含義的方塊字來表達的？

當然，我不是説中華文化一枝獨秀，而是我們確實有不同的選擇，可以找到更好的替代方式。中華文明一直強調和諧、協調、靈活、開放、寬容，如果我們能充分運用這些價值觀，相信中美兩國必能找到一條新的道路，建立新型大國關係。誠然，避免墜入"陷阱"的最好辦法就是開闢一條新路，這是我們兩國面臨的共同任務，也是我們理應擔當的國際和歷史責任。

為了實現這些目標，需要有人來指明道路並繪製路線，這就是我們需要智庫的原因。相信來自CSIS和人大重陽的專家學者們能發揮好這樣的作用。期待從各位的討論中受益。

謝謝！

附英文版

Remarks of AMB.Cui Tiankai at the

 Working Lunch of Roundtable Discussion Between CSIS and RDCY

（August 30, 2018）

It’s always been a great pleasure to come back to the Center for Strategic and International Studies(CSIS), especially with my old friends and colleagues today. I feel inspired every time I come here, particularly so as we have Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies, Renmin University of China(RDCY) with us today.

The term “think tank” is very clear and easy to understand in English. But its Chinese equivalent 智庫（“Zhiku”）is more sophisticated. It literally means a reservoir with wisdom. It not only requires people to think, but also to think wisely. I am sure this is how we should describe the discussions today, which makes me a little bit humbled and scared whenever I am invited to speak to think tanks. I do not intend to offer you anything of wisdom, but rather something that carries common sense.

Honestly speaking, we are facing a big problem. Some people who are in high places or are advising the government and leaders on economic and strategic issues don’t have sufficient common sense. For instance, they believe that they could disrupt the global supply chain in defiance of all the economic imperatives without any damage to their own economy. They believe that they might keep monopoly of innovation forever and prevent others from making innovations and benefiting from technological progress. They believe that they could point finger at others and escape the heavy responsibility of addressing the increasing economic and social divides at home. They believe that they could make themselves great by making everyone else their enemies. I think it is such a mindset that could go a long way to account for the current uncertainties in international relations and difficulties in our bilateral relations, especially on trade and economic issues.

The topic for lunch is “Next Steps”. On what to do next, for China it is very clear. I wish to advise people to give up the illusion that another Plaza Accord could be imposed on China. They should give up the illusion that China will ever give in to intimidation, coercion or groundless accusation. But at the same time, China is always ready to engage in serious, substantive and pragmatic negotiations and consultations to address the economic and trade issues on the basis of mutual respect and a balanced approach to resolve the concerns of both sides. This has to be a process of goodwill for goodwill and good faith for good faith. If we can reach an agreement through this approach, I don’t think the current economic and trade issues would be that difficult.

And of course many people are worried about the impact the current situation would have on the future of our relations and where the China-U.S. relationship is going.

I think they have very good reasons to be worried.But I’m still confident that our two countries would be able to overcome the difficulties and build a strong and steady relationship for the future, as long as we have a clear understanding of today’s world, as long as we have a clear vision of our common future.

People now talk a lot about the so-called “Thucydides Trap”. I have had several very long conversations with Prof. Graham Allison, the author of  Destined for War: Can America and China Escape Thucydides’s Trap? I think the key message in this book has been misread and misinterpreted by so many people.In the book, he mentioned 16 cases in history of the relations between the so-called“rising power” and the “existing power”. Out of the 16 cases, 12 ended up in wars and conflicts. Only 4 of them experienced relatively peaceful transitions.So some people believe that what happened in the past would recur between our two countries.

But I don’t think what happened in the past in Europe is inevitable for our two countries. For America, if you believe so, then why did the American founding fathers come to the New Continent in the first place? For China, it has its own long history of civilization. Out of all the countries in these 16 historical cases, how many of them practice a type of medicine that takes the body as an integral whole with achieving balance as the key? How many of them use chopsticks that emphasize the coordination of fingers?How many of them use characters in their languages and each character standing on its own would need a good structure, but together they could make numerous combinations in a very flexible way and mean a lot of different things.

I am not suggesting that the Chinese culture is exceptional; what I am saying is that we do have a different choice; we do have a good alternative. The Chinese civilization and culture has all along stressed the values of harmony, cohesion, flexibility, openness and tolerance.If we give full play to all these values, I am sure our two countries can find a new path and build a new type of relations between major countries. And indeed, the best way of avoiding a trap is to open a new path. And this is I believe a common task for our two countries and our shared responsibility to the world and to history. Of course, in order to achieve these goals, we need people to show us the way forward, we need people to draw up the roadmaps.That’s why we need people in think tanks, people in CSIS and in RDCY to help us and guide us. I look forward to benefiting from your discussions here today.

 Thank you!