[討論] 澳大利亞的平衡術，值得美國學習

[EOSD60 (unknown)]

http://www.guancha.cn/AndrewBallen/2016_08_27_372627.shtml

博大龍

普林斯頓大學伍德羅‧‧威爾遜學者，電視節目制作人
發表時間：2016-08-27 09:23:32
字號：A-AA+745

關鍵字: 中美關系中澳關系中國崛起重返亞太亞太再平衡中美關系走向何方選邊站

親愛的澳大利亞：

我曾花費大量時間在澳大利亞拍攝由我主持的旅游節目──《車游天下》, 該節目在東
方衛視和CCTV上播出。如果不是在中國當電視主持人，我恐怕永遠沒机會見証澳大利亞
的美麗。當然，我寫這封信，為的不是記錄我在中國与澳洲的見聞，而是誠心地向你討
一些直言不諱的建議。作為美國的朋友和盟友，你怎么看待接下來的這些問題？

美國雖然是我的祖國，但她似乎忘記了，世界不屬于美國，也不能任其為所欲為。這個
世界從未像現在這樣的緊密連接，它時刻處在巨變當中，令人在時代的漩渦中眼花繚亂
。如果“和平”和“繁衍”是人類的主要任務，那么全球性變革必須符合公開交流的原
則，适應多极化解決方案，要讓各方都真切地感到全球事務与自己息息相關。

网絡這面鏡子，不應讓我們對自己（對同類）心生厭惡，而應對彼此心怀怜憫。在這個
喧囂的世界上，媒体制造輿論，謾罵到處橫行，軍工复合体推動人們錯誤地互相批判，
而這一切的基礎是“胜者為王”的思想。我堅信必須遠离它，革除這种思維范式，擁抱
新思維。我們必須跳出充斥著季度收入、資本積累和官商勾結的零和游戲，用高尚的同
理心和真誠的對話取而代之。

澳大利亞一直堅信，看似完全對立的体制和世界觀能對接起來，共同創造出更美好的未
來。而我目睹了澳大利亞如何本著這种態度，設身處地地建立對話。人類文明沒有唯一
的真理，而有許多套并行不悖的故事，在一個真正的多元化世界中，我們必須意識到這
一點，才能在此基礎上构建對話。作為曾經主導世界的西方，我們必須盡力去听、去尊
重其他文明的故事，并融入人類文明的整体。要做到這樣，并不簡單，需要智慧、謙遜
和耐心。我由衷地贊美澳大利亞這個先驅者，并懇求你和你的伙伴──新西蘭──為駐
扎在亞太地區的其他西方力量提供指導，幫助美國完成從自說自話到開啟對話的重大轉
變。尤其當人類目前處于歷史的十字路口，面臨著自然与地緣政治的雙重威脅，這种轉
變更加意義非凡。

在對待澳洲土著人的問題上，白人移民表現得謙遜、耐心和冷靜。美國也有著類似的經
歷。早在美國建立之前，“北美土著”納瓦霍印第安人就已經在這片大陸上繁衍生息了
。他們的文化里流傳著一句美麗的話：“這個世界不屬于我們中的任何一個人，而屬于
我們所有人。”就像大多數土著智慧一樣，這句真理言簡意賅、寓意深遠。英國曾經雄
踞一時，后來卻沒落了，原因就在于它太晚才意識到這個真理。不過還好不算太遲，英
國和艾森豪威爾時期的美國建立了“特殊關系”，這在很大程度上讓英國在衰落過程中
保存了一定的風度。如今，世界領導者的火炬即將再次易主，美國應該同誰建立“特殊
關系”呢？出乎意料地，澳大利亞可能是最好的選擇，對美國來說，再沒有比澳大利亞
更堅定的盟友了。美國和澳大利亞肩并肩，一起在二戰中穿越過婆羅洲的叢林，一起跋
涉過朝鮮半島貧瘠的荒野，一起匍匐穿過戰火連天的越南。無論對錯，澳大利亞在原則
上總和美國站在同一站線，盡管有時它不同意美國的干涉主義。

伊拉克和敘利亞就是兩個最近的例子。澳大利亞曾質疑過美國的外交政策，但這并不影
響它們長期維持堅定的同盟關系。澳大利亞一如既往地保持她不急不躁的姿態，樂觀地
認為只要假以時日，美國也將听從理性的聲音：世界改變的號角將被吹響，不論曾經行
善或作惡，西方必須采取一种更為謙卑的態度，因為世界人口的三分之一提出要求，把
她們的敘事、歷史和現實納入到關于全球共同未來的討論中去。我認為這個信息最好由
美國最信任、最久經考驗的盟友傳達給她。在美國240年的歷史里，從沒有任何時刻比
現在──重返亞太的節骨眼上──更需要盟友的諫言，一步行差踏錯，便會因為缺乏溝
通、一味張揚民族主義激情，而引發意料之外的沖突。

成年以后，我在亞洲生活多年，深受澳大利亞的触動。因為即使澳大利亞因冷戰時期結
下的戰略同盟，而不得不做出与新時期安全經濟現狀不相符的表態，她也能与鄰國保持
基本和諧。澳大利亞堅定而富于變化的芭蕾舞步，成為了她在國際政治舞台上的招牌。
這一點最好的例証莫過于中國如今已成為、并將在可預見的未來持續作為澳大利亞最大
的貿易和文化交流伙伴。澳大利亞在波詭云譎的國際政治鋼索上走得那么穩，美國應該
怀著謙虛的心態，虛心向老牌盟友吸取經驗。

現在，中美兩國又陷入新一輪無謂的政治博弈中，而与此同時，中澳關系卻迎來了史上
最甜蜜時刻。盡管澳大利亞与世界排前兩位的大國都走得很近，但卻從未丟失自己的身
份；盡管澳大利亞与伙伴們偶爾會遇到小坎坷，但對方終究還是能感受到她追求平等對
話的誠意。各個國家都贊同國家間的對話是有意義的。澳大利亞這份獨特的能力，意味
著她對中美兩國都具有無比重大的价值。在文化上，澳大利亞更接近美國，但她能在价
值多元、關系复雜的亞太地區如魚得水，既實現自身發展，又促進地區內其他國家的發
展。澳大利亞以及她的人民不認為她們在亞太的地理位置和她們的西方傳統之間有任何
沖突，相反，她們在這矛盾之中看到了眾多机遇。

在大宗商品价格不斷下跌的背景下，澳大利亞還能保持GDP每年以3%的速度增長，并与
中國、東盟、美國、以及世界其他國家保持穩定的關系。澳大利亞人深知不恥下問的道
理。澳大利亞比美國更了解中國，并且愿意通過對話消除分歧，因此和中國打起交道來
暢通無阻。現在來看，澳大利亞熱衷于和中國開展更多合作。單憑這一點，我們就應該
從中獲得一些啟發。

在澳大利亞的世界觀中，增長、繁榮和進步不是零和博弈。她走了一條澳大利亞特色的
道路，但誰說美國就不能從中借鑒，來改善与中國的關系呢？我對此保持樂觀。

連不經意的旁觀者都能明顯感覺到，2016年的美國面臨著一場深刻而又困惑的自省。作
為世界大國，這不是美國首次陷入看似無解的國內外亂局：美國獨立戰爭、南北戰爭和
越南戰爭都是歷史上的反例。在劍拔弩張的上世紀70年代，美國從一開始的模棱兩可，
到后來与中國重修外交關系，最終以尼克松總統与毛主席、周總理的“世紀大會面”，
宣告中美化敵為友。

在共同利益上取得一致，為后來中美成為重要貿易伙伴打下基礎。鄧小平先是南巡深圳
，然后訪問美國，使中國的改革開放政策舉世皆知。中美在短短30年內成為彼此的頭號
貿易伙伴，著實應為此感到驕傲，歷史也將銘記：中國以世界前所未見的方式崛起，迎
接新的榮光。共同的歷史教育我們，如果外交能夠多多傾听、伸出雙手、保持開放心態
，便能創造變革、能夠跨越看似不可逾越的鴻溝。要達成這一點，澳大利亞等西方國家
就必須真心誠意地接受一個事實：西方的世界觀和歐美國家數十年甚至上百年前建立的
各种机构，如世界銀行、國際貨幣基金組織等，已無法繼續擔當國際事務的基礎框架了
。中美世界觀存在一個長期被忽視的重大差异，即美國政策制定者一直假定：中國在未
來某個時候，總歸會全盤接受歐美制定的國際准則，而這些規則完全是為歐美公司和政
治利益量身打造的。對于這一點，中國已多次明确地表示反對。西方的世界觀不再占絕
對領導權，它只是思想市場上的一員，与其他世界觀平起平坐。


如今，全球領導范式的變革速度遠超人們的預期，作為美國人，我能体會美國經受的陣
痛──這和衛冕冠軍面對現實時的無奈并無二致。在冷戰及其后的一段時間內，人們從
未想到世界經濟“組隊競爭”的節奏竟會以如此之快，彼此之間的聯系竟會如此之緊密
。新的規則和傳統尚未形成，新的競爭者帶著各自的新思路，加入了這場競賽。作為帶
著舊傷的衛冕冠軍，美國很難像澳大利亞那樣，恭順地迎接迅捷的后起之秀 (這個后起
之秀正在重歸本屬于她的位置，至少從元朝開始，中國就是全球文化和經濟的領導者)，
但美國應該盡早認識到后冷戰時期的舊范式已經一去不复返了。事實証明，新思想框架
的建立是個不可阻擋的趨勢，而且也不見得是件坏事。在堅持原則的前提下，美國是時
候虛心听取中國故事，去了解中國為科學發展作出的承諾了。科學發展是跨越意識形態
的，是根据現有條件因地制宜，拋開成見尋找最佳出路的探索精神。澳大利亞在与中國
打交道的過程中，努力去适應中國的方式，值得我們為她喝彩。只要堅持不預設立場，
實事求是，必然能取得良好的結果。

不管美國追求怎樣的民族精神，它至少應該肯定中國過去几十年內取得的成就（帶領八
億人脫离了极度貧困）。這种成績背后的組織能力、努力和國家意志，簡直是人類歷史
上前所未有的奇跡。如果我們先驗地認為中國在某些方面不配做我們的老師，那么我們
需要捫心自問，是否已被偏見和固執蒙蔽了雙眼。中國通過一套完全不同于西方的政治
傳統和經濟理論，取得了巨大的經濟和文化成就，這不應該讓我們感到恐懼（澳大利亞
就沒有害怕），相反我們應倍感鼓舞，与全世界的伙伴一起集思廣益，跳出固有的思維
模式，深信做事情的方式方法絕不只一种，正如中國所展現出來的那樣。因此，我們必
須掙脫舊話語的束縛，團結全人類共同面對不遠將來的重大挑戰。

著名思想家和未來主義者艾爾文‧托夫勒曾說：“21世紀的文盲不是那些不會讀寫的人
，而是那些不會學習、摒棄重新學習的人。”在互聯互通越來越緊密的世界上，我們要
造福子孫后代，就必須學習、摒棄學習誤區、重新學習并管理變化，這些能力可能是世
上少數恒定的東西了。

對的，變革是唯一不變的東西。大膽的變革！我認為，西方固然不能忘本，但應該不帶
偏見地歡迎其他人取得优勢。西方固然應該保持自身的文化遺產，但也應該注意是否影
響了其他民族的遺產和權益，比如澳大利亞在土著和亞洲問題上邊保持了相當高的敏感
度。一方面，我們要跟隨心靈，去堅守不變的原則；另一方面，也要有寬大的胸襟去接
受人類文明各种平等的形態，這是全球社區多樣性的本質所在。學會支持俄羅斯，學會
為中國喝彩──只有當我們的心靈和思想都足夠強大，能平等對待那些曾經蔑視的對象
，贊美它們的成功；我們才能希望和期待世界對西方報以同樣的善意。當世界同舟共濟
去面對危險時，和諧相處就不再是一則童話，而是關乎人類生存的必須品。

個人自由是一种目標，是一种語義符號，但不是終點，作為民主國家，我們最根本的目
標是實現人民自治。我們應該明白，悠久的歷史教會了中國人以長遠眼光看待歷史軌跡
，懂得變革之路道阻且長的道理，不但需要深入理解目標，還得拿出咬定青山不放松的
持久戰精神。在這方面，中國比西方認識深刻。既然中國人都能拿出不恥下問的精神，
去吸收西方思想的精華，我們憑什么不愿向中國學習？

在我們堅持認為民主是實現人民自治之必要條件的同時，必須謙遜地記住，如果選民消
息閉塞、教育程度低下、對政治冷漠疏离，那么“民主”二字便是毫無意義的空中樓閣
。在我們實現民主理想之前，應該保持低調，少對其他國家品頭論足，只要它們走在通
往正義社會的道路上，便無可厚非。西方沒有時間對全世界進行道德評判，我們不是教
導主任，而是各國測試新思想的合作伙伴。否則，美國將很快喪失全球領導地位而尚不
自知。

在此引用我最愛的好萊塢大片《黑客帝國》中的一句台詞：“命運總難免帶有一絲諷刺
的意味。”

美國人是否生活在黑客帝國的“母体”中？只要剝去政治宣傳的人造假象，西方人就會
意識到，中國從來沒有為了商業利益遠渡重洋去武力殖民。西方國家呢？中國從來沒有
給大批大批的人戴上鐐銬，把他們運往陌生的大陸，強迫他們去田間地頭勞作，讓她們
修建長城和大廈。西方國家呢？中國作為一個統一的民族，從未以經濟或者文化征服為
目標，參与國界以外的沖突，西方國家呢？中國是一片祥和、統治者全心為民的烏托邦
嗎？不，目前還不是，但這是個東西方都必須經歷的過程。反觀以美國為首的西方民主
國家，難道它們是人民自治、社會正義和人權的模范嗎？我相信任何一個誠實的人都會
說“不”。如果是這樣，我們在宣揚民主制度优越性的時候，或許應該對人類發展道路
上的各种思想模式保持謙遜、開放的態度。

誠實地說，中國才是現代歷史上第一個不走西方剝削殖民老路崛起的國家。中國的崛起
，完全遵照自身的意愿；符合自己塑造的范式；在自主選擇發展模式和時代的同時，還
保持了主權獨立性。我們必須承認，中國崛起的這些特質，都值得西方反思、喝彩、仰
慕。這正是澳大利亞所做的。

沒有哪個國家、哪种文化有資格說自己掌握了唯一的真理，或擁有唯一正确的意識形態
。相反，我們應該推進全人類的對話，加深理解，彼此支持扶助而不是互相拆台。我們
必須擁抱這种同理心的新思維。在多极化、緊密連接、快節奏的世界里，這种思維將給
我們帶來好處。不管哪种膚色、哪個种族的人民，對后代的關愛、對洁淨飲用水的渴望
、對和平富足的希冀，都是相同的。我們都屬于人類這個大家庭。

遏制VS不設限的對話与接触

中國是擁有13億人口的大國，而美國的對華政策是“遏制”。這個詞本身不但標志著一
种退步，更是對中國人（以及其他國家人民）的一种冒犯。“遏制”中國絕不是長久之
道，它無法解決任何問題，而且缺乏道德和倫理基礎。美國做不到、也不應該試圖“遏
制”全世界五分之一人口的抱負。無論是為了延續冷戰時期的戰略同盟，還是為了助長
日本越南等新盟友的民族主義狂熱情緒，都無法构成美國“遏制”中國的借口。這种策
略表現出美國目光短淺和自私，它注定是要失敗的。在自身240年的歷史中，強國夢、
革命性變革以及反抗外部干預，一直美國追求的東西，所以美國最應該理解中國的目標
和發展軌道。雖然中國崛起与美國崛起的歷史背景不同，但畢竟這條路是美國曾經走過
的。美國應該贊許中國的抱負和勇气，而不是抱著怀疑或惶恐的態度。“遏制”中國是
种偏見，是不合邏輯的。

中美兩個大國固然是彼此的對手，但它們之間更存在龐大的共同利益。在全球气候變化
問題上，中美兩國都為保護地球盡心盡力。作為非可再生能源的兩大消費國，中美有義
務推進綠色科技和可再生能源的研發。能源短缺問題不容小覷，它可能引起新一輪的國
際爭端，中國南海問題就是個鮮明的例子。此外，中美必須合力打擊极端主義和國際恐
怖主義。澳大利亞和中美結成伙伴，三方都能從快速的、符合倫理標准的科技進步中獲
益。在各种發展工具和挑戰的促進下，世界各國有良心的領導人聚集到一起，形成一個
更大家庭，而他們是全人類的家長。

不要讓刺耳的民族主義助長零和博弈──它們毫無意義、只會徒增爭端

在伊拉克、利比亞和敘利亞等主權國家推行所謂的和平繁榮政策后，美國正式公布新的
戰略目標：“重返亞洲”或“亞洲再平衡”。如果美國在中東地區的“成功”是中國和
世界其他國家衡量美國的標尺，那么所有人都會發現，美國這些年交出的成績單并不理
想。不管美國認不認同中國在某些事情上的強硬立場，至少沒人能怪罪中國表達合理的
關切。因為美國管得太寬，中國自然要做好准備。

從霸主寶座上跌落，其實沒什么可恥的。勇敢的人總有行差踏錯的時候，固步自封堅持
錯誤政策才是可恥的。今年的里約奧運會首次允許無國籍運動員組成難民隊參賽。這個
隊伍的運動員大多來自中東地區，戰火剝奪了他們的家園，讓他們沒有國家可以代表。
公平地說，難民代表團的存在完全是拜美國所賜。

是的，面對自己帶來的一系列災難性事件，美國應該放低姿態，進行深刻的反思。同時
，美國也需要像國際上的伙伴們表示感謝，包括那些与我們偶有不和的國家（例如中國
），以及那些還沒有因為我們糟糕的外交政策而拋棄我們的堅定盟友（例如澳大利亞）
。天可怜見，澳大利亞等友國、盟國沒有拋棄我們，但它們時常也會猜測美國將如何收
拾中東的爛攤子，以及“重返亞洲”戰略將對亞太地區造成什么影響。承認錯誤總是困
難的，但是美國必須要明确自己人民的集体意圖；我們必須進行改革，并且向世界解釋
這些改革的內容和意義。

或許，美國首先應該在重返亞洲之前，還世界一個公開道歉。

在要求別人按我們的標准行事的時候，我們必須要放低姿態、謹小慎微。公開道歉是打
開過往症結的第一步，在9‧11事件后，盡管我們出于善意地想要幫助解決中東爭端，
但卻導致數以百万計的無辜百姓丟了性命。不管合理与否，中國都能夠聲稱美國在9‧11
之后破坏全球和平繁榮，失去了領導世界的“天命”。無論我們道不道歉，只要美國“
重返亞太”還想照搬過去20年的對外政策，那么全世界都有正當的理由表達擔憂并質問
我們。

一般來說，當某人不斷重复同一件事，卻期待產生迥异的結果，他恐怕已患上“失心瘋
”。現在的美國已經十分接近這种狀態了。國際上，美國選擇了中國、俄羅斯等其他國
家成為替罪羊，仿佛它們通過某种方式阻止美國再次走向偉大。美國或許應該先想想，
是什么讓自己變得“不再偉大”，想清楚這個問題對我們不無裨益。關于這方面的討論
已經變得很封閉和聲名狼藉，許多清醒者因此認為美國政治主流變得缺乏遠見和歷史觀
，甚至不具備承認跌倒、站起來重新出發的勇气。

如果亞洲和中國南海爭端逐漸升級為武力沖突，從許多方面來說責任應該落在美國失敗
的中東干預政策上：它在地區爭端中的“作為”（事先預謀的入侵、干涉和企業重商主
義）和“不作為”（沒有給當地選民提供恰當的信息和教育；我必須再次強調“如果沒
有見多識廣、受過教育和專注的選民作為基礎，那么‘民主’二字沒有任何意義”）都
造成了災難。

這個世界不屬于我們任何一個人，而屬于我們每一個人。

澳大利亞，你怎么看？現在，美國比任何一個時刻都需要盟友的建議。

大龍
（大龍是普林斯頓大學伍德羅‧威爾遜公共与國際事務學院國際關系學者、中美媒体文
化關系專家）



Dear Australia,

I have spent much time in Australia shooting episodes for my China Dragon
and CCTV-aired travel show, Getaway. Had I not become a TV host in China I
may have never seen the wonder of Australia. But this article isn’t intended
to be about my sojourns in China or Australia; it is to ask a friend and ally
for some candid advice. A penny for your thoughts Australia?

The country of my birth, The United States, seems to have lost touch with the
realization that the world is not ours alone to do with as we please. If
peace and posterity are the primary tasks of this generation, then this
hyper-connected, radically shifting, vertigo-inducing moment of global change
must be geared and optimized for open communication and the development of
multi-polar solutions in which all players believe they have an authentic
stake.

We must not feel revulsion as we see ourselves (in one another) through the
mirror that is the internet. We must instead feel compassion. We must
decrease our addiction to an obstreperous media-induced, invective-laced.
Military- industrial- complex fomented false critique founded on a “winner
takes all mentality”. I believe that firmly. This thought paradigm must be
replaced with something altogether new- as Australia has been trying to do.
“Replace it with what?” One might ask. With the sublime power empathy and
genuine dialogue in lieu of an obsession with zero-sum games of quarterly
earnings, corporate capital accumulation and corporations generally
incestuous relationships with the governments who regulate them.

This emphatic dialogue that I see Australia working to build through its
incessant mantra that seemingly diametrically opposed systems and
world-views can work together to create better. Dialogue in a truly
multi-polar context must be built on the bedrock realization that there is
no single valid truth that may hold sway in the sea of humanity, there are
instead a series of equally valid stories we, in the formerly dominant
West, must try mightily to hear, respect and incorporate as part of the
new whole. This is hard work, and I applaud Australia for being at the
vanguard. This will require wisdom, humility, and patience. I would
further beseech them and their partners New Zealand in an effort to provide
other Western outposts in Asia Pacific to provide counsel, leadership, and
advice on how America can begin to make the all critical transition from
the sole paradigm to the dialogue necessary to develop the next one, at a
time when threats both natural and geopolitical, make this an inflection
point in the annals of our species.

Australia is still dealing with humility, patience and to my mind great
aplomb with the aboriginal issues their arrival on the Australian continent
presented. We too in America share a similar experience. The Navajo Indians
“native Americans” who existed long before there was an America per se,
have a beautiful saying: “The world does not belong to any of us, it
belongs to all of us.” That truth, like much aboriginal wisdom, is simple
as it is profound. Britain and its managed that simple realization too late
to stem its demise, but it did manage its fall from grace with some degree
of poise, largely because Eisenhower’s America formed with the UK a
“special relationship.” But as the torch of global leadership passes this
time, to whom will America look to form such a special bond? Surprisingly,
it may well be Australia. America has no more staunch ally than Australia.
From the jungles of Borneo in WWII to the barren fields of Korea, and again
in the conflicted jungles of Vietnam, Australia has, for good or ill, stood
with America on principle, even when she has questioned the ultimate wisdom
of America’s interventionist decisions.

Iraq and Syria are two recent examples. Australia has at times been
rightfully hesitant about American foreign policy (they have also usually
been prescient!) but they remain ever a stalwart ally. Australia keeps her
calm, ever optimistic that, given time, America will begin to listen to
voices of reason, the clarion that our world is changing and dominant
Western vices and institutions, to remain both helpful and legitimate for
the incredible good they do, must begin to adopt a profile rooted in
humility as 1/3 of the world begins to require that its narrative and
history and everyday reality be included in discussions of our shared
global future. This message to America is, I think, best conveyed by
trusted, time-tested allies. America needs this today more than at any
time in 240-year history; especially as our pivot to the Asia-Pacific
raises the very real specter of unintended conflict, born largely of a
failure to communicate and unhealthy manifestations of nationalist fervor
and ego.

Having spent my entire adult life in Asia, I am touched and impressed by
Australia’s ability to maintain by and large excellent relations with all
of her regional neighbors of late. This in spite of commitments to Cold
War-era strategic alliances whose obligatory dictum sometimes run counter
to Australia’s newly evolving security and economic context. This
steadfast but dynamic ballet has become Australia’s international calling
card. This deft touch is no more obvious than in the fact that China today
and will for the foreseeable future is to be Australia’s largest trade and
cultural exchange partner, bar none. Australia walks this circus wire with
uncanny poise. As an ally who has never faltered, America should take note,
with due humility and a bent ear.

For while America’s relationship with China is devolving into yet another
needless round of strategic confrontation, Sino-Australian relations could
hardly be better. Even as Australia walks hand-in-hand with the world’s
two preeminent powers, she does so with her identity fully intact; her
partners, even over slight bumps in the road, ultimately feeling sincerely
respected by a willingness to engage in a dialogue of equal sovereign
states. Worthy objectives, well met. This singular skill-set makes
Australia unique and invaluable to both great powers. Australia, while
culturally similar to the United States, is quite comfortable in its
Asia-Pacific “skin” able to live and let live in a diverse, highly
interconnected neighborhood. Australia and Australians see no conflict
between their Asia-Pacific geography and their Western heritage; in fact,
they view their position as ripe with opportunity.

With 3% year on year GDP growth, even in an era of declining commodity
prices, Australia’s steady, yet dynamic relationships with China, the
ASEAN community, America and the world have held her in very good stead
indeed. Australians know there is no harm in learning, and absolutely no
shame in admitting that one does not know everything. Australia understands
China better than we Americans do. Australia is willing to work on
disagreements through dialogue, and thus has no problem doing business
with China. Indeed China seems to be the power with whom Australia seem
most keen on doing more business. That alone is telling.

Growth, prosperity, and progress are not zero-sum games in the Australian
world-view. This is the Australian way; but can it help reform America’s
relations with China? I remain hopeful it can.

It is obvious to the casual observer that America in 2016 faces a moment of
soul-searching and troubled introspection. This is not the first time she as
a great power has stumbled into what looked like unrecoverable domestic and
international turmoil: The American Revolution, The Civil War, Vietnam, are
all examples. America’s ambivalence toward, then rapprochement with Chairman
Mao and China during a tense 1970s that led to Nixon’s famed meeting with
both Mao and Premier Zhou Enlai.

Mutual interests were aligned, and eventually with a future trading partner
in place Deng Xiaoping’s heralded visits to Shenzhen and then the United
States where China’s “Reform and Opening-up” policies became known to
the world. This, history will note, was followed by a success story in
which both China and America as it largest trading partner can take pride:
China’s unprecedented rise to a newer kind of glory over the past 30
years. Our shared history demonstrates clearly that if diplomacy begins with
an open ear, willing heart, and outstretched hand; we can change, we can
overcome seemingly insurmountable difference; but this can only continue if
Western powers like Australia are sincerely willing to accept that the
world-views and institutions like the World Bank and IMF created by
Americans and Europeans centuries or decades ago can no longer provide the
sole basis of global undertakings or agreements. The blind spot in US
world-view vis-a-vis China, is that American policy-makers presume China
will, over time, naturally accept wholesale previous international
constructs that were created expressly by and for European and American
corporate and political interests. To that, China has repeatedly and
unambiguously said “no.” Western world-views must now be considered as
one among many valid outlooks in the marketplace of ideas.

I as an American and understand viscerally the basic human nature for a
reigning heavyweight to experience difficulty in acknowledging that
paradigms global leadership are evolving faster than we may have
anticipated. A new faster-paced, a much more interconnected game of
economic alliances, never imagined during the cold war or its aftermath is
creating new yet unsettled rules and customs, and with it, new contenders
with their own ideas. It is hard for the bruised heavyweight champion pay
to deference to the nimble, up and comer, (indeed an up and comer that is
now assuming its normal place - a place that it has held since at least
the Yuan dynasty as a global cultural and economic leader), but as Australia
has, America should recognize that the old post-Cold war paradigms have
shifted, and that process of building new thought frameworks can be a good
thing. Besides, with the facts on the ground, the process is practically
inexorable. It is high time to move forward, principles intact, but with
ears attuned to hear the Chinese nation’s story and its commitment to
“科學發展” which I describe as trans-ideological scientific development ,
i.e. the ethos is to probe, discover, find and do what works best given
prevailing conditions, without pre-conceived notions. This Australia has
struggled mightily to adapt to as they engage their Chinese partners. And
I applaud them. Only good can come from such a methodology, if practiced
without precondition.

Whatever ethos America aspires to, it should, at minimum, acknowledge that
China’s accomplishment over the last several decades (lifting 800 million
human beings out of abject poverty) is nothing short of a miracle in
organization, effort, and National will; it is, in fact, a feat wholly
unprecedented in the annals of human history. If we determine apriori that
we’ve nothing to learn from this, then we must ask whether we ourselves
are blinded by prejudice and inflexibility. That China achieved this
economic and cultural feat in ways that diverge from Western political
traditions and economic theories, should not frighten us (it certainly
does not frighten Australia) rather it should embolden us to join with
global partners in more robust outside-of-the-box thinking, buoyed by the
confidence that humanity, as China has demonstrated, is not bound or
limited by any one fixed set or way of doing things! For we must be
willing to think beyond the rhetoric of the past in order to address the
momentous challenges we as a planet will face together in the
not-too-distant future.

Renowned thinker and futurist Alvin Toffler said, “The illiterate of the
21st century will not be those who cannot read and write, but those who
cannot learn, unlearn, and relearn.” In this increasingly interconnected
world, change, and our ability to learn, unlearn, relearn and adroitly
manage change. These are the only constants, if posterity is the goal.

Yes, Change is the only constant. Bold change. The West should not,
in my opinion, discard its phylum, but it should welcome the vantage point
of others sans prejudice. The West should maintain our heritage, but be
sensitive to any effects that heritage has had on the heritage and
prerogatives of others, as Australia is with its aboriginal population
and in its engagement in Asia. Stick, where our heart tells us it must, to
unwavering principles, yet also find the heart to acknowledge that there
exist other modalities of equal validity, this is the essence of the word
diversity within a global community. Root for the Russians, and cheer for
the Chinese - for only when we become bold enough in heart and mind to cheer
with utter sincerity for the success of those who we have sometimes looked
upon with disdain, can we begin to hope and expect the same sentiment will
be sincerely returned. Harmony is not a fairy tale, it is an existential
must-have as the globe unites to save itself from perils we all share
equally.

Personal liberty is a goal, a semantic, not a destination, we as
democracies whose primary goal is ultimately the perfection of
self-governance by the People should know this: China knows the arc of
history and path to change is long and requires deep contextual
understanding, work and commitment. China, with its unrivaled historical
pedigree, understands this perhaps better than we. The Chinese certainly
have not been bashful about learning and applying what they consider the
best of Western thought, so why are some of us so uncomfortable looking to
them as a potential model?

And while we tout democracy as a sine non qua of the solution to
self-governance, we must remember with humility that the mere word
“democracy” means absolutely nothing without an informed, educated, and
engaged electorate as its functioning base. Until we ourselves have come
closer to attaining that ideal, we should be less pompous in criticizing
others for their self-determined trajectory towards what constitutes a
just society in their communities. We’ve no time to be the moral educator
or the school marm. We must become a partner or the mantle of leadership
will pass without our having realized that it is gone.

Quoting from my favorite Hollywood blockbuster, The Matrix- Fate it would
seem is not without a sense of irony.

Has American been living in the Matrix? Because once all the various
soundbites, astroturfing, and propaganda are stripped away, many
Australians and others will note that China has never forcefully
colonized far-off lands or continent for mercantilist gain. Can Western
powers say the same? China has never chained and transported hordes of
teeming humanity from distant lands to serve as free labor, till her
fields or build her great walls and edifices. Can we in the West say the
same? China as a unified community has never engaged in external conflicts
beyond her immediate borders for the purpose of economic or cultural
conquest. Can we in the West say the same? Is China a utopia of total
harmony, totally committed to the service of her people? No. Not yet;
it is a journey, for China and the West. But are Western democracies,
and especially the United States today truly exemplars of self-government,
social justice, and human rights? I think an honest observer must say no.
And if that is the case, we may do well to make our pronouncements about
the advantages of democracy with more humility and openness to other modes
of thought vis-a-vis humanity’s course of development

Let us be frank, China is the first country in modern history who, without
resorting to the West’s outdated and exploitative
“growth-via-colonization” playbook, has in unprecedented fashion
continued to rise of her own accord, under paradigms of her own shaping,
in modes and at times of her own choosing, as a single sovereign nation.
If we are honest, these too are characteristics worthy of reflection,
applause, and admiration. These points are not lost on Australia.

No. No longer can any one country or culture claim a monopoly on “truth”
or ideological rectitude, yet all can choose to advance human dialogue,
engage in deeper understanding, rooting for not against each other. This
is the sort of new empathic thinking that must be undertaken. It will pay
dividends in the multi-polar, hyper-connected, fast-paced global order to
come. All people no matter their skin color or ethnicity love their
children, all want to drink clean water and hope for a peaceful and
prosperous future for their family, the human family.
Containment vs. Unfettered Dialogue and Engagement

With China, a nation of approximately 1.3 billion people: America’s
policy toward the PRC is “containment.” The word itself is regressive
and frankly, to the Chinese (or any other people) patently offensive.
“Containment” of China cannot be the long-term solution for anything.
Beyond being impossible to do long-term, it lacks even the most basic
moral or ethical foundation. America cannot nor should it try to contain
the aspirations of 1/5 of the world’s population. Whether containment is
fomented under the guise of Cold War strategic alliances or new Asian
alliances aimed at aiding and abetting the seeds of nationalist fervor in
countries like Japan and Vietnam. These gambits are incredibly
short-sighted, self-serving and doomed to failure. America, a nation
whose own 240-year-old history is deeply rooted in Great Power aspiration,
revolutionary change, and the desire to protect itself from unwanted
foreign incursion, should of all countries on Earth quite readily
understand China’s national aims and trajectory. We too have walked that
road, even if the underlying causes were born of different history and
circumstance- China in the 21st centuries, like America as she rose in
power and prominence both boldly embraced what they considered vitally
needed security-driven change. That aspiration and courage should be
applauded and explored, not automatically viewed with suspicion or dismay.
That is prejudicial. “Containment” of China is a non-sequitur.

The two great powers Australia deftly stands between, do have an inherent
rivalry, but they also share a vast array of common existential interests.
Both stand united in the fight to save our planet from the damning effects
of climate change before it is too late. As the two greatest consumers of
the planet’s non-renewable energy both are obligated to drive green-tech
and renewables R&D to the fore as scarcity of energy resource becomes yet
another source of potential conflict- evident today in the South China
Sea. And both countries surely must collaborate to meet the scourge of
extremism and international terrorism. Australia’s two partners, China
and the United States and she herself all stand to gain by advancing the
rapid, ethical application of technological advance. These tools and
challenges unite leaders of conscience all over the planet as
head-of-household for a much larger family; the human species.

Do Not Let Strident Nationalism Create Fictive Zero-Sum Games that Abet
Conflict.

Having completed the task of bestowing what we perceived as policies of
peace and prosperity on the once sovereign nations of Iraq, Libya and
Syria America has duly announced the new strategic aim of a massive pivot
or “Rebalance to Asia.” If America’s success in the Middle East is the
yardstick by which China and the world must assess America’s success in
engaging the Middle East, then China and others, including every honest
American must acknowledge that our recent report card is not stellar.

Whether America believes China’s assertive positioning is not completely
defensible, no one can argue that China could be blamed for voicing very
legitimate concern and preparing based on recent and ongoing examples of
American overreach.

There is no shame in falling down. Missteps are the province of the bold.
Yet there is shame in perpetuating policies that have simply not worked.
This year the Rio Olympics will have, for the first time, a team composed
of nationless and homeless athletes; it is called Team Refugee. The team
is largely composed of athletes from the Middle East who no longer have a
home country to represent. Team Refugee, it might be fairly said, is a
decidedly American legacy.

Yes, America’s litany of disaster calls for moments of self-reflection
and humility. It also calls for gestures of gratitude to our partners,
including those with whom we may disagree at times like China, and
stalwart allies like Australia neither of whom have yet disregarded us
and our abysmal foreign policy track record wholesale out of horror and
fatigue. Tenderest of mercies, our Australian and other friends and
allies, remain, but they too are left wondering what America’s grand
plan for righting this carnage in the Middle East will be, as they
imagine what America’s looming “rebalance to Asia” will mean for the
Asia-Pacific region. Humble pie is always hard to swallow, but we as
America must be clear and unambiguous in our collective intent; we must
resolve to change and explain what those changes will mean and look like.

We might, as a start, consider a public apology prior to our pivot to
Asia.

America must be unambiguous in its intent; it should resolve to exact a
lighter footprint when attempting to force others to do our bidding. And
an apology may well be a cathartic first step, for whatever we as a
well-meaning People intended to remedy in the Middle East post 9/11,
it did not work, while millions of innocents perished as a result. And
it is resulting in a trope that the Chinese can continuously use
(legitimately or not) to indicate that we have lost the Mandate of Heaven
by virtue of piss poor handling of global peace and prosperity post 9/11.
Whether or not we choose to apologize, if the last 2 decades’ US policy
pillars are to be applied again in our “Rebalance to Asia,” the entire
world has justifiable reason to ask hard questions and express grave
concern.

A common definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over
while somehow expecting to produce a markedly different result. America
is running perilously close to fitting that bill entirely.
Internationally we have again chosen to scapegoat the Chinese, the
Russians and anyone else who has somehow prevented us from “Mak(ing)
America Great Again.” So I ask, would it not profit us more to ask
ourselves what it is that mde America so un-great in the first place?
The rhetoric has become so circular and infamous, you might excuse
calmer heads for thinking a good portion of Americas political
establishment has lost a degree perspective, history and perhaps the
courage born of admitting failure, brushing off and re-engaging, wiser
for it.

If this crescendo towards outright physical conflict in Asia and the South
China Sea continues, the blame in many respects must lay at the doorstep
of America’s own bankrupt policy in the Middle East and elsewhere: both
in acts of commission (premeditated invasion, interference and corporate
mercantilism) and omission (the failure to properly inform and educate
its voting populace, for I would argue that the mere word “democracy”
means absolutely nothing without an informed, engaged, emphatic
electorate as “democracy’s” functioning base).

The world does not belong to any of us, it belongs to all of us.

A penny for your thoughts Australia? America needs the advice of good friends, now more than ever.

Andrew C. Ballen
（青年觀察者胡怡瑩譯、楊　軼校）




--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 125.88.24.34
※ 文章網址: https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/CrossStrait/M.1472294555.A.947.html
推 shryuhuai: 中國=垃圾
→ shryuhuai: 東亞二戰後的繁榮，不都是靠美國嗎
→ shryuhuai: 凡是被共產黨侵入的國家，那個有好下
→ shryuhuai: 場了
→ shryuhuai: 亞洲四小龍的共通點就是堅定反共
推 xiaohan85298: 是殺戮的太多造成這種聖母心態嗎？
→ xiaohan85298: 極惡的後代竟有了極善的存在，