周波：AUKUS毫無疑問是針對中國的，澳大利亞總是在打別人的仗（中英對照）_風聞

Club提要：日前，清華大學戰略與安全研究中心研究員周波接受澳大利亞廣播公司（ABC）採訪，就中國如何看待澳英美三邊安全夥伴關係（AUKUS）發表見解。

ABC近期推出了系列採訪報道，聚焦公眾對AUKUS的疑慮，涉及成本、就業、核安全、戰略、軍事和地緣政治等多個領域。當前，澳大利亞正積極探討如何應對中國崛起帶來的潛在安全挑戰，尤其就AUKUS是否是最佳應對方式及其戰略影響方面展開廣泛討論。

周波的採訪是該系列第三期博客節目“AUKUS與中國”的一部分。

Club Briefing: Recently, Zhou Bo, a senior fellow at the Center for International Security and Strategy at Tsinghua University, was interviewed by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), where he shared his views on how China perceives the AUKUS trilateral security partnershipbetween Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

ABC has launched a series of interviews exploring public concerns over AUKUS, covering a wide range of issues including cost, employment, nuclear safety, strategy, military affairs, and geopolitics. As Australia grapples with the potential security challenges posed by China’s rise, the debate has intensified over whether AUKUS is the best response—and what its broader strategic implications might be.

Zhou Bo’s interview appears in the third episode of the series’ podcast, titled “AUKUS and China.”

澳大利亞陸軍軍官培訓學院鄧特倫（圖源：澳大利亞國防部）

**A****BC：**周波大校不僅是中國最資深的安全分析家之一，而且他對澳大利亞十分了解。早在1999年，他曾在澳大利亞陸軍軍官培訓學院鄧特倫（Duntroon）學習3個月。我很想知道，中國是如何看待AUKUS的？

**周波：**我們不喜歡AUKUS。近年來，印太地區出現了兩個重要動向：一個是四邊安全對話（QUAD），另一個是AUKUS。我的看法很簡單：QUAD的出現是因為中國，而AUKUS則是針對中國。

**ABC：**那麼，在你和中國決策者的心目中，中國無疑認為自己是AUKUS的主要針對目標，是嗎？

**周波：**是的，AUKUS毫無疑問是針對中國的。這在中國任何人看來都是毋庸置疑的。我們從一開始就不喜歡它，並認為它不應繼續發展。但即使它繼續發展，也不會產生太大影響，因為它並未改變規則。

**ABC：**為什麼？

**周波：**因為澳大利亞大概要花20年的時間才能擁有8艘核潛艇。即使20年後全部建成，與中國的軍事發展相比，到那個時候中國人民解放軍海軍不知道會達到什麼水平——畢竟中國海軍已經是世界上最大的海軍了。

**ABC：**你的回答恰恰反映了AUKUS的成立原因。中國軍事快速發展，海軍規模不斷壯大，成為世界上最大的海軍。你能理解像澳大利亞這樣的國家覺得面對這種重大變局時，需要有所準備嗎？

AUKUS潛艇效果圖（圖源：英國海軍）

**周波：**這是AUKUS毫無疑問是針對中國的沒有道理的。我可以告訴你，在過去的40年裏，中國的軍費開支只佔GDP的1.5%左右，有時會低於這個數字，但從來沒有超過GDP的2%。是的，中國的經濟體量很大，因此1.5%可能很大，但中國希望以可持續的方式穩步發展軍隊，因此我們沒有與任何人進行軍備競賽，中國在按照自己的節奏和邏輯發展軍隊。

**ABC：**AUKUS是否在你參與的中國會議中被討論過？

**周波：**AUKUS在中國經常被提及和討論，這並不是秘密。我的看法是，AUKUS基本上是美國讓盟國為其軍費分擔成本的一種努力。很明顯，美國現在更加依賴盟友。這是拜登政府的外交核心理念之一。特朗普政府的口號是“美國優先”，但對拜登來説，可能是“盟友優先”。拜登政府為什麼如此重視盟友？因為美國意識到自身已無法單獨維持全球存在，需要盟友的支持。

**ABC：**你是否暗指澳大利亞被視為美國的延伸？

**周波：**這可能是另一種解讀。無論如何，美國確實需要澳大利亞，因為美國知道自身力量不足。

2023年，美國、澳大利亞和英國舉辦首次AUKUS峯會（圖源：彭博社）

ABC：（AUKUS支持者）認為，這些核潛艇將起到遠程威懾作用，可能會讓正在擴軍的中國 “三思而行”，並在未來改變其戰略思維。你能理解這其中的邏輯嗎？

**周波：**完全不能理解。澳大利亞真的有人相信中國會突然以任何理由攻擊其本土嗎？顯然不會。澳大利亞唯一可能捲入衝突的地方是台灣海峽或南海。這意味着衝突將發生在離中國更近的地方，而不是相反。所以，如果我們談論威懾，威懾什麼，針對誰？這又回到了剛才的問題：美國想聯合澳大利亞，是因為自身力量不足，需要盟友幫助。

從歷史上看，坦率地説，除了二戰期間，澳大利亞幾乎總是在幫別人打仗。無論是一戰中的加里波利，還是越南、阿富汗或伊拉克。澳大利亞似乎從未學會平衡的藝術。

**ABC：**那麼，澳大利亞人應該得出什麼結論？你的意思是，我們應該認為中國是一個本質和平的國家嗎？

**周波：**我們仍未完成國家統一，因此在別無選擇的情況下，我們可能不得不通過武力解決統一問題，但這並不意味着一定會使用武力。中國人民是熱愛和平的。中國不喜歡戰爭。想一想，美國發動了多少次戰爭；而自1979年以來，中國從未在境外殺害過一個外國人，除了中印邊境的一次衝突，造成4名中國士兵和20名印度士兵死亡。但這是一場邊境衝突，涉及主權問題。你找不到一個例子，説明中國如何威脅任何國家。中國何時威脅過澳大利亞？何時干涉過南海的航行自由？你無法舉出這樣的例子。

遼寧號海軍艦隊**（圖源：法新社）**

編者按：在同期節目中，澳大利亞海軍司令馬克·哈蒙德（Mark Hammond）和澳大利亞國防部副部長休·傑弗裏（Hugh Jeffrey）也接受了採訪，後者負責AUKUS非核潛艇項目的指揮與協調工作。兩人強調，澳大利亞的國家安全高度依賴海洋自由。他們認為，AUKUS能夠讓澳大利亞更有效地威懾並應對潛在威脅，至少確保潛在對手需要“三思而行”。儘管他們承認中國可能無意攻擊澳大利亞，但與中國迅速擴張的海軍規模相比，澳大利亞的海軍力量顯得微不足道。他們還指出，許多國家都在擴充軍備，這凸顯國際環境變得更加不穩定，澳大利亞不能落伍。

對於一些批評者認為AUKUS可能“無關緊要”的觀點，兩人表示，只有通過展現自衞決心，當真正的衝突爆發時，澳大利亞才能獲得盟友的保護。同時，AUKUS將幫助澳大利亞提升自主製造核潛艇的能力，減少對外部支持的依賴。

他們還談到了澳大利亞海軍的社會和外交作用，以及AUKUS在核潛艇項目之外的其他軍事合作機遇。

以下為採訪原文：

Zhou Bo: Hi, I’m senior colonel Zhou Bo, a retired senior colonel of the PLA, and now a senior fellow of the centre for international security & strategy at Tsinghua University

ABC: Senior Colonel Zhou Bo is not only one of the best-informed security analyst in China, but he knows Australia well, having spent 3 months at Duntroon, the Australian Army’s officer training college, back in 1999. I was keen to know, what is the view inside China about AUKUS

Zhou Bo: I don’t believe we like AUKUS, because in recent years there are two developments in the Indo-Pacific: one is quad, another is AUKUS. The difference between the two, in my opinion, is very simple. Quad is because of China, and AUKUS is against China.

ABC: So, there is no doubt in your mind and in the minds of decision makers in China that it sees itself as the principal Target of AUKUS, does it?

Zhou Bo: Yeah, AUKUS is certainly against China, there is no doubt for anybody here in China, we don’t like it from the very beginning, and we believe it should not continue to grow, but even if it grows, it won’t matter that much, because it won’t be a game-changer.

ABC: Why not?

Zhou Bo: Because it would take Australia probably about two decades to have eight nuclear submarines, so even if you have 8 of them all together in 20 years, compared with China’s military development, what standard would the PLA navy have become by that time, because Chinese navy is already is the largest in the world.

ABC: Your very answer is the reason why this whole development is underway. Your rapid military buildup, the size of your growing Navy, it’ll become the biggest in the world, can you understand why a country like Australia would think, well we can’t be completely exposed in the light of these big changes?

Zhou Bo: That is not something justifiable. If I just can tell you that over the last four decades China’s the military expenditure is just around 1.5% of GDP, it is sometimes less than that, but it is never over 2% of GDP. Yes, China’s economy is big, so therefore 1.5% could be big, but China wants to develop its military in a sustainable way, in a steady manner, so we are not entering into arms race with anyone, I think China is developing the military according to his own tempo and logic.

ABC: I wonder whether AUKUS is ever mentioned at some of the meetings you attend, is AUKUS on the table or not?

Zhou Bo: AUKUS is frequently mentioned and discussed in China, so it is not a secret, everyone knows about it. I believe AUKUS is basically an American effort to let these allies to subsidise its military, because clearly the US now relies more on its allies, and this is almost the benchmark of the Biden administration. Now, Trump’s slogan is America first, but maybe for Biden, it’s his allies first. Then, why would Biden administration give unprecedented importance to allies? Because it knows, America knows that says United States can no longer afford a global presence, it needs allies.

ABC: You definitely say that Australia is seen as an extension of the United States.

Zhou Bo: That could be another interpretation another way, but basically you’re needed because the United States knows that its own strengths would not be enough.

ABC: We are told that the nuclear subs we’re talking about will act as a deterrent at a distance, and that in fact it might give pause to a nation that is rearming, as you talk about, and to change its strategic thinking in the future. Can you see the logic to that?

Zhou Bo: Not at all. Does anybody in Australia believe that all of a sudden China is going to launch attack against Australia for any reasons? No, the only possible scenario for a conflict involving Australia is in Taiwan Strait or in the South China Sea. That means you would have a conflict closer to our doorstep, it’s not the other way around. So if you are talking deterrence, deterrence for what, against what? So again this is the same situation: the United States wants to gang up with you, because they want you to help itself, whose strength is not enough. Historically speaking, let me be frank, Australia always fight other people’s wars, except during the second World War; apart from that, you’re always fighting other people’s wars, be it in Gallipoli, be it in Vietnam, be it in Afghanistan or Iraq. So, I don’t leave Australia has ever learnt the art of the balancing.

ABC: I wonder what a final message is to Australians then. Do we see China as inherently a peaceful country, is that what you’re saying to us?

Zhou Bo: Well,you see, we are still a country divided, so as a last resort, we may have to use force to resolve this issue for reunification, but it is not certain that we would definitely use force. But if you look at China beyond this issue, you would find that Chinese are very much peaceful. China doesn’t like war. Just think how many wars did United States launch; ever since 1979, China has not killed a single foreigners elsewhere, apart from China-India border, where we have a deadly clash, resulting in the death of four Chinese soldiers and 20 Indian soldiers, but that is about border clash, about sovereignty, you can’t just give me an example of how China has threatened anyone, and has China ever threaten Australia, and how has China ever interfere with freedom of navigation to South China Sea? You just can’t give me such an example.