湯姆·福迪：甘當美國傀儡、挑起對華冷戰，對英國沒好處

【文/湯姆·福迪 譯/寧櫟】

最近，英國外交大臣利茲·特拉斯在倫敦發表了極具挑釁性的演講，她將矛頭指向了俄羅斯和中國。這次演講是典型的利茲式演講，竭力將全球政治打扮為民主和獨裁間的意識形態零和鬥爭，她將其描述為“自由網絡”。

然而，這次演講比以前的講話更進一步，更有侵略性，並試圖壓中國“按規則行事”，稱中國崛起“並非不可避免”。她還發誓要讓英國和北約干預台灣問題。可以説，這是有史以來英國外相最具“侵略性”的對華講話。

自英國脱歐以來，英國的外交政策一直困於錯覺，沉迷於懷念早已逝去的時代。在那個時代，“不列顛統治海洋”，擁有日不落帝國，能迫使其他國家服從。當然，中國對這個時代並不陌生。通過鴉片戰爭，英國強加給中國“百年國恥”。當時的歐洲列強發現能用其不斷增長的軍事力量，來迫使正在衰落的清朝在政治和經濟上讓步。利茲外相顯然相信倫敦有能力再幹一次，並且渴望與北京對抗。

2021年英美外長在G7會議上（來源：法新社）

但這些誇張的言辭都沒有任何現實基礎。世界已經改變，環境不再對英國有利。英國脱歐是一個自作自受的傷口，對英國經濟產生巨大損害。脱歐造成了供應短缺、勞動力不足，通脹加劇，嚴重衝擊了服務業，還導致能源價格飆升和生活水平下降。事實是，在英國脱歐後，英中經濟關係是至關重要的，約翰遜首相早就明白，他明確表示英國不能疏遠全球最大的消費市場和貿易國。

然而，首相正在與保守黨內的極端鷹派鬥爭，這些鷹派試圖舉起英國例外主義旗號，將英國脱歐塑造成一場更廣泛的意識形態和文明之爭。這些人如利茲外相等，並沒有將英國的經濟和貿易利益建立在現實基礎上，而是放在身份政治和帝國懷舊情緒上。他們認為，英國應該主要與盎格魯撒克森國家即澳、加、新、美，以及印度進行貿易。英國也對這些國家發出了後殖民主義的懷舊呼聲，雖然這些國家不能對英國有什麼實際貢獻。

例如，根據下議院的研究，英澳自貿協定每年只會提高GDP的0.08%，同時還被廣泛批評破壞英國農業。這説明了英國政府用認同搞貿易政策與經濟現實之間的不協調。中國與英國的雙邊貿易每年達1000億英鎊，而中國被忽視了。

更進一步説，脱歐後的英國正在包庇一項純粹基於民族主義情緒和帝國懷舊感的外交政策，因此對國家的戰略現實或國家利益沒有連貫的把握，最終導致自我毀滅的決策。正如一句古語所説，瘋子管着瘋人院。

儘管英中關係有着深厚的相互依存和共同利益，但沒有什麼能比英國穿上其舊帝國的外套來施壓中國更能激怒中國人了。中國的政治意志是歷史不會重演。中國是世界第二大經濟體，GDP估計超過17萬億美元，而英國停滯不前，其未來的繁榮將取決於進入中國市場的機會。

如果英國要像其政府宣傳的那樣真正走向“全球”，那麼明智的選擇是退一步，從美國手中奪回對英國外交政策控制權，在務實、現實和獨立的條件下與中國對話。不然，狂熱的冷戰沙文主義將造成幾十年的倒退。

（本文系作者賜稿。）

Britain’s Pursuit of Cold War is Dangerous

Last week British Foreign Secretary Liz Truss pursued a highly provocative speech at a London event where she took aim at both Russia and China. The speech was typical of Liz, in that it sought to frame global politics as a zero-sum ideological struggle between democracy and authoritarianism, of which she likes to describe as a “network of liberty”. Yet, it went further than previous addresses that it was intentionally more aggressive and sought to demand that China “play by the rules” stating that its rise was “not inevitable”, with Truss also vowing to involve the UK and NATO in the Taiwan region. Arguably, it is the most single aggressive address ever given by a British foreign secretary concerning Beijing.

British Foreign Policy since Brexit has been premised on an effective delusion, that is the nostalgia of a long-gone era whereby “Britannia ruled the waves” and wielded the power of a global empire of which allowed it to impose its will on others. China of course is no stranger to that legacy. With the opium wars, Britain opened what Chinese people understand as the “century of humiliation” when European powers learnt they could use their growing military might to force political and economic concessions on a declining Qing Dynasty. Liz Truss clearly believes that London is capable of doing the same thing to China again, and is hungry for confrontation with Beijing.

But none of this fiery rhetoric has any basis in reality. The world has changed, and circumstances are no longer favourable for the UK. Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union was a self-inflicted wound which has had a huge detrimental impact on the economy across the board. It has created supply shortages, labour shortages, added to burgeoning in inflation and severely hurt services too. This has coupled with surging energy prices and shrinking standards of living. The truth is that in lieu of Brexit, Britain’s economic relationship with China is of critical importance and Boris Johnson had long understood this and made it clear. The United Kingdom cannot afford to distance itself from the largest consumer market and trading nation on Earth.

However, the Prime Minister is increasingly struggle for influence with these ultra-hawks within the Conservative Party who are attempting to mould Brexit into a broader ideological and civilizational struggle in the name of Anglophone exceptionalism. These people, such as Liz Truss, do not base Britain’s economic and trade interests on empirical realities see it also as an extension of identity politics and Imperial nostalgia. They argue that Britain should be primarily trading with the nations of the Anglosphere (Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States) as well as of course India, which Britain also heralds a post-colonial nostalgia towards, and not of course on the actual merits of what these countries can contribute to Britain.

For example, according to House of Commons Research, Britain’s “free trade agreement” with Australia will only increase GDP by 0.08% per annum (which also has been widely criticized for undermining British agriculture), illustrating the bizarre decision making of the British government premising trade on identity and economic reality. Whereas China, which has a bilateral trade with Britain in terms of £100 billion per annum, is seemingly off limits. If it wasn’t clear already, post-Brexit Britain is harbouring a foreign policy which is based purely on nationalistic sentiment and Imperial good feeling, and as a result has no coherent grasp of the country’s strategic realities or national interest, leading to self-destructive decision making. As an old saying goes: “the lunatics are in charge of the Asylum”.

Despite the deep interdependence and mutual self-interest of the British-China relationship, there is nothing that could be more offensive to the Chinese people themselves to a Britain roleplaying its Imperial past and believing that it has the right to bring China to keel, there is a political will in Beijing that history won’t be allowed to repeat itself. China is the 2nd largest economy in the world with a GDP estimated over $17 trillion, whilst the UK is a stagnating country whose future prosperity will hinge upon access to its markets. If Britain is to be truly “global” as its government markets its to be, then the sensible choice is to step back from the brink, regain control of its foreign policy from the United States, and engage with China on pragmatic, realistic and independent terms. Fanatical Cold War chauvinism will undermine decades worth of progress.

本文系觀察者網獨家稿件，文章內容純屬作者個人觀點，不代表平台觀點，未經授權，不得轉載，否則將追究法律責任。關注觀察者網微信guanchacn，每日閲讀趣味文章。