國際經濟大變局：各國還能在同一個棋盤下棋嗎？_風聞

　　**Club提要：**8月24日至25日，由中國公共外交協會指導、北京對話主辦的“金磚國家與多極世界2024對話會”在北京舉行。來自15個國家和南方中心等國際組織的近40位專家學者，就金磚國家構建貨幣體系、參與多極世界構建、增強經濟韌性與合作等議題，進行了深入研討。

　　俄羅斯國際事務委員會學術主任安德烈•科爾圖諾夫在發言中強調，國際治理體系已經走到了重要歷史關頭，必須就如何前進做出決定。需要關注以下三點：首先，多極化必須輔之以多邊主義概念；其次，多極化在世界政治的不同領域具有不對稱性；第三，金磚國家需要解決包容性與排他性相匹配的問題。

　　以下為科爾圖諾夫發言：

　　請允許我就當前 “打破一極 ”和多極化普遍面臨的戰略困境發表一些看法。我認為，國際體系如今已經到了一個重要的歷史關頭，必須就如何繼續前進做出重要的決定。

　　科爾圖諾夫（圖源：烏拉爾聯邦大學官網）

　　請允許我談三點看法。首先，我們傾向於強調多極化是一個反映世界力量平衡變化的進程，最終要使國際體系更具包容性和民主性。然而，這並不一定意味着國際體系會變得更加穩定，更能抵禦各種破壞穩定的衝動，**因為多極化並沒有告訴我們不同的極之間關係的性質。這些關係可以是合作性的，也可以是對抗性的，可能意味着結盟，也可能意味着衝突甚至戰爭。這就是為什麼多極化的概念必須輔之以多邊主義的概念。**然而，金磚國家在這方面並沒有很多可以借鑑的歷史經驗。

　　從歷史上看，大多數金磚國家都回避做出任何限制其主權的多邊承諾。外交政策的決定是獨立的，這是很自然的，因為長期以來，這些國家都是各自地區的領導者。他們並不像歐盟或東盟國家那樣習慣於限制國家主權的多邊主義，這也是他們必須面對的兩難選擇之一：要麼繼續作為一個辯論俱樂部，要麼引入更嚴格的程序和決定，即擴大互惠原則和下放一定的權力，以支持國家邊界。

　　我要強調的第二個問題是不對稱問題。**我們總是討論“多極化”，但在世界政治的不同領域，多極化的具體表現形式卻大相徑庭。**以全球經濟為例，如果從戰略層面來看，我們仍然可以看到蘇美或美俄兩極化的一些殘留因素，特別是在核領域。在軍事領域和地緣政治領域，世界顯然正朝着多極化的方向發展，但在國際經濟領域，情況卻未必如此，因為有兩個超級大國在許多重要方面遙遙領先於其他參與者——在經濟上，中美兩極化的道路可以説是越走越遠。

　　而在國際金融等領域，**由美國管理、以美元為主導的國際金融機構仍主導着金融領域的許多方面，世界依舊是相當單極的。這就意味着，統一、普遍的遊戲規則將不再存在，各國不是在一個棋盤上下棋，而是要在許多棋盤上下棋。**對於發展前景暗淡的國家來説，選擇能夠提供更多附加值的領域和特定棋盤將是非常重要的。

　　我們還應該談談非常規的安全問題和國際金融體系的特殊變化——這一體系將變得截然不同。

　　最後，金磚國家面臨的挑戰之一是如何使包容性和排他性相匹配。如果想要組建一個國際俱樂部，那麼這個俱樂部就應該是特殊的，為俱樂部成員提供某些特權，以吸引新成員加入。但如果把俱樂部封閉起來，它就會淪為一個宗派。那麼，如何管理開放的大門和更嚴格的入會標準呢？

　　有一段時間，北京和莫斯科提出了“金磚+”的想法，即不需要增加成員數量，而是應該通過具體機制，在這些國家願意接受的層面上，為各國創造與金磚國家接觸的機會。但金磚國家最近擴員之後，“金磚+”的概念可能不再像以前那麼重要了。

　　我們必須思考，是否可以使加入程序更加規範，是否可以有一個更加透明和開放的金磚國家成員標準，以及如何計劃平衡該體系的深化和擴展。

　　我認為，這對每一個國際集團來説都是一個非常嚴峻的挑戰。顯然，金磚國家也不例外。儘管存在這些挑戰和問題，但金磚組織的對外開放仍有很大潛力。今年正值俄羅斯擔任金磚國家主席國，我真心希望這將成為金磚組織的一個重要里程碑，有助於加強金磚國家在未來發揮國際性作用。

　　（翻譯：毛琪    核譯：李雨琪）

　　以下為英文發言原文：

　　Let me express some of my ideas on the strategic dilemmas that breaks I and multipolarity in generally faces these days. I think that right now, the institution has come to an important historic juncture at which it will have to make very important decisions on how to move forward.

　　Let me limit myself to only three observations. First of all, we tend to emphasize multipolarity as a process that reflects the change in the balance of powers in the world, which ultimately makes the international system more inclusive and more democratic. This is the right. However, it does not necessarily mean that the international system is going to become more stable and more resilient to various destabilizing impulses, because multipolarity does not tell us anything about the nature of the relationship between the poles. These relations can be cooperative, but they can be confrontational. They can imply joint projects. They can also imply conflicts and even wars. That’s why the concept of multipolarity has to be complemented by the concept of multilateralism. And here, BRICS countries do not have a lot of historic experience that they can use. 

　　Historically, most of BRICS countries, a return to avoid making any multilateral commitments that would limit their sovereignty, and their independence of foreign policy decisions. This is natural that for many years, even for centuries, these countries were leaders in their respective regions. And therefore, they are not as used to multilateralism as, for example, countries of the European Union or countries of ASEAN. So multilateralism is not possible without bring it in limitations on the national sovereignty. And this is one of the dilemmas that the BRICS countries will have to face, are either to stay as a discussion club or to introduce more rigid procedures and decisions that would assume diffused reciprocity and certain delegation of powers to support national borders.

　　The second problem that I would like to emphasize is the problem of asymmetry. We are talking about the multipolarity, but multipolarity manifests itself in very different ways in different areas of world politics. The global economy, for instance, if we take the strategic dimension, we still see some residual elements of the Soviet-American or US-Russian bipolarity, especially in the nuclear field. However, in the military domain and in the geopolitical domain, the world is clearly moving towards a multipolarity. This is not necessarily the case in the economic dimension of international relations, because in the economic domain, there are apparently two superpowers which are far superior to other players, are in many important dimensions. So economically, the road is the arguably moving the towards the US-China bipolarity.

　　Finally, if you take certain areas like international finance, the world is still quite unipolar in terms that the US dollar and the US managed international financial institutions still dominate a lot of the financial dimensions as of the current system. That means that there will be no integrated, universal rules of the game will have her to play, not only one chess board, but rather on many chess boards. For bleaks, it would be very important to select the areas and specific chairs boards where they can provide more value added than others. Maybe we should talk about the non-conventional security issues. Maybe we should talk about the special changes in the international financial system. But I just wanted to say that the system will be very different. And finally, let me also say that one of the challenges for BRICS, is how to match inclusivity and exclusivity. If you try to put together an international club, the club should be special. You should have a certain special privileges for club members to attract their new members. However, if you close the club, it will evolve into a sect. So how to manage open doors and more rigid criteria on membership? For some time, I remember in Beijing and also in Moscow, they entertained the idea of BRICS+, the idea was that we do not really need to increase the number of members, but rather we should create opportunities to various countries to engage with BRICS through specific mechanisms at the level that these countries are ready to take. But now after the recent enlargement of BRICS, maybe the concept of BRICS+ is no longer as relevant as it was some time ago.

　　We have to think about whether we can make the accession process more regulated, whether we can have a more transparent and more open criteria for BRICS membership, and how we plan to balance the deepening and the broadening of the institution. I think it’s a very serious challenge for every international grouping. And clearly, BRICS is not an exception. Let me conclude, I was saying that all these challenges and problems notwithstanding, the BRICS open has a lot of potential. And I do hope that this year, the year of the Russian presidency in the organization will be an important milestone for the institution. And it will help to enhance the international role for BRICS for years ahead.

　　以“磚”之名，謀“金”之實，專題對話會在京召開

　　（獨家）2035年的世界：向好還是變壞？

　　美國的全球政治權力，正因俄烏衝突而縮水