中国经济繁荣之后，为什么美国不把中国当盟友？ [美国媒体]

What was the reason that the US never accepted China as an ally after the Chinese economic boom?

中国经济繁荣之后，为什么美国不把中国当盟友？



Paul Denlinger, Have lived in US, Asia, Europe and am interested in the field
The general political consensus among leading US political think tanks until the Trump administration was that as China’s economy developed, it would become more democratic, and eventually develop into a democratic society.
This line of thinking was denounced as wishful thinking by President Trump, and was rendered moot by the rise of President Xi Jinping. Instead of heading towards more social and political diversity, President Xi Jinping has re-asserted the primacy of the Chinese Communist Party, even though the Chinese private sector provides most jobs, and commands a larger part of the economy than SOEs. This has given ammunition to President Trump and his hardline supporters, notable Robert Lighthizer and Peter Navarro, who where the initial and strongest advocates for tariffs on Chinese products. Their aim is to destroy Chinese consumer confidence and slow down China’s economic growth as punishment for the Chinese Communist Party’s refusal to introduce economic and political reforms.

在特朗普政府之前，美国主要政治智囊团的普遍政治共识是，随着中国经济的发展，中国将变得更加民主，并最终发展成为一个民主社会。
特朗普总统谴责这种想法是一厢情愿的想法，西景平的崛起也让这种想法失去了实际意义。 中国没有走向更多的社会和政治多样性，而是重申了北京的首要地位，尽管中国私营部门提供了大部分就业机会，而且比国有企业掌控着经济更大的部分。
这给特朗普总统及其强硬支持者、着名的罗伯特 · 莱特希泽(Robert Lighthizer)和彼得 · 纳瓦罗(Peter Navarro)提供了弹药，他们最初和最强烈的主张是对中国产品征收关税，他们的目的是摧毁中国消费者的信心，减缓中国的经济增长，作为拒绝引入经济和政治改革的惩罚。

Wen Ling, IBKR Investment Advisor (2015-present)
China will never be an ally to USA, because it means China is junior partner of USA. It simply cannot happen.
CPC is NOT KMT, which was happy to be a junior partner. For example, the direct reason that USSR and China broke up on 1959 was because China was a junior partner in those alliance. Currently Russia and China runs well because after Cold War they treat each other with parity, otherwise it won’t be like these now.
USA used to want China to be a “responsible stakeholder”, or part of Chinamerica, both of which were explicitly or implicitly rejected by China. why? Because both terms meant that China should be forever junior partner in USA led world political system!
Believe me, China will never accept that position! Good luck for some USA elites’ wishful thinking.
Of course, it also does not mean China wants to topple the current USA built system totally, which is why China and Russia are named by USA ‘revisionist powers’

中国永远不会成为美国的盟友，因为这意味着中国是美国的次要伙伴，这是根本不可能的。
北京不是国民党，乐意成为一个小伙伴。
例如，苏联和中国在1959年分道扬镳的直接原因就是要求中国在这个联盟中成为一个次要的合作伙伴。
目前俄罗斯和中国关系良好，因为冷战后他们彼此平等对待对方，否则就不会像现在这样。

美国曾经希望中国成为一个"负责任的利益相关者"，或者说是 Chinamerica 的一部分，而这两者都被中国明确或暗地拒绝了，为什么？ 因为这两个词都意味着中国在美国领导的世界政治体系中应该永远是次要的伙伴！

相信我，中国永远不会接受这一立场！ 祝一些美国精英一厢情愿的想法好运。
当然，这也并不意味着中国想要完全推翻美国目前建立的体系，这就是为什么中国和俄罗斯被美国称为修正主义国家。

Zhou Linwen, MSc of Management from Solvay Business School
The biggest reason is the lack of common enemy who can serious threat the security of both, in a way USSR did in the cold war. China and US normalized diplomatic relation in the 1970s and entered a quasi-alliance against USSR, at the height of the Cold War, which illustrated the realist nature of foreign policy decision-making of both sides: they form alliance or quasi-alliance only out of necessity, regardless of the seemingly huge ideological difference. Those who argues that it’s the authoritarian nature of the Chinese regime prevents the US forming alliance may do well think about the case of Saudi Arabia. History provides another reference in that, during the WWII, China actually was an US ally fighting against Imperial Japan, when the Chinese Nationalist regime was equally authoritarian and even more corrupted than today’s. Consideration of ideology, or values, is always secondary to national interests, which puts security, and the desire for national wealth and power on the central stage.

最大的原因是缺乏能够对双方安全构成严重威胁的共同敌人，比如冷战时期的苏联。
上世纪70年代，中国和美国实现外交关系正常化，并在冷战高峰期结成了反对苏联的准联盟。
这说明了双方外交决策的现实性： 它们结成联盟或准联盟只是出于必要，不顾忌似乎存在的巨大意识形态差异，那些认为是中国政权的专制性质阻止了美国结盟的人，也许应该考虑一下沙特阿拉伯的情况。

历史提供了另一个参考，第二次世界大战期间，中国实际上是美国对抗日本帝国的盟友，当时中国国民党政权同样专制。
对意识形态或价值观的考虑总是次要于国家利益，国家利益将安全和对国家财富和权力的渴望置于中心舞台。

Ben Yi, studied at University of Melbourne
Another question is - would China be happy to be an ally of the states?
Look at its allies, for example, Japan and Australia. These allies have U.S military bases in their territories. Does China want this? Probably not given that the CPP wants to be its own boss.
Look at the economy, people say the U.S. sniffs, Australia coughs. A lot of major banks and other listed companies are owned or at least related to U.S companies. What is the benefit for CPP if China’s economy is heavily affected or controlled by the U.S, although, in fact, it is already happening. It could only be worse for CPP if they are allies. If the private sector gets too strong, then why they need a centralised government?
It is hard to make two lions walk along each other. The most powerful country in the world is afraid of a strong communist party and, not to mention, China is now the second most powerful country.
Allies share benefits while enemies have conflicts of interests. So in my opinion, the answer is, China and the U.S. have too many conflicts and both are too strong to be friends.

问问另一个问题，中国愿意成为美国的盟友吗？
看看它的盟友，比如日本和澳大利亚，这些盟国在他们的领土上都有美国的军事基地，中国想要这样吗？ 可能不会，因为CPP 想自己当老大。

看看经济，人们常说美国咳一咳，澳大利亚震三震，澳大利亚许多大银行和上市公司都是美国公司所有或至少与美国公司有关。
如果中国经济受到美国的严重影响或控制，CPP 能得到什么好处呢? 尽管事实上这种情况已经发生了，但如果 CPP 是盟友的话，情况只会更糟，如果私营部门变得过于强大，那为什么他们还要一个中央集权的政府？

一山不能容二虎，世界上最强大的国家害怕一个强大的中国，更不用说，中国现在是第二强大的国家。
敌人利益冲突，盟友利益共享，所以在我看来，答案是，中国和美国有太多的冲突，而且都太强大了，没法做朋友。

Joseph Boyle
Nobody proposed a formal alliance or security structure or even statement of common interest and nonconflict. Why not? The militaries were comfortable still having a potential enemy which was their previous and somewhat natural attitude. Civilian leaders were complacent, had campaigned on domestic economic development, and did not take seriously the risk of future arms race.
Without the Tiananmen incident I think there would have at least been some thought about establishing a lowest common denominator for security. Even a quiet statement that it had been under past leadership and could have been done better would have been sufficient.

没有人提出正式的联盟或提议组成安全机构，甚至没有提出基于共同利益和非冲突的声明。
为什么没有呢？ 军方对于仍然有一个潜在的敌人感到满意，这是他们以前的态度，而且是比较自然的态度，而文职领导人自成一系，为国内经济发展奔走，就没有认真考虑未来军备竞赛的风险。

Foster Winans
It would be politically awkward-to-impossible for a US administration to ally itself with a regime that is not democratically elected, does not have an independent judiciary, allows its businesses to steal technology and violate copyrights, and actively suppresses minorities, among many other behaviors and cultural attitudes that are starkly different from ours.
It’s one thing for an American president to go to Beijing, have pictures taken together with China’s leaders while the diplomats do all the work, and portray to the world a momentary impression of camaraderie. It’s quite another to declare an alliance, which implies military and business cooperation and some similarity in world view.
The president of a democracy like ours, as flawed as it is, won’t last long trying to sell to the American people a true alliance with China, or with Russia either, for that matter.

如果美国政府与一个非民主选举、没有独立司法机构、允许企业窃取技术、侵犯版权、积极镇压少数族裔等许多与我们截然不同的行为和文化态度的政权结盟，在政治上会很尴尬，甚至不可能。

对美国总统来说，访问北京，与中国领导人一起拍照，这是一回事，而外交官们的工作，向世界展示一个暂时的友好印象，这是一回事，但宣布结盟完全是另一回事，结盟意味着军事上和商业上的合作，以及世界观上的某些相似之处。
像我们这样的民主国家的总统，尽管有缺陷，却不会长久地试图向美国人民兜售与中国或俄罗斯的真正联盟。

Joseph Wang, studied at Ph.D Astronomy UT Austin, Physics MIT
Because China doesn't do allies, and really neither does the US. The last time the US did an alliance of equals was World War II with the UK.
Since WW2, US allies have been expected to have the US lead, and subordinate their foreign policy to US interests, and China is not interested in that (and for that matter neither is India).
The other issue is if you have an alliance who is that alliance directed against?

因为中国不搞联盟，美国也不，美国上一次与英国结成平等的联盟是在二战期间。
自二战以来，美国的盟友以美国为首，并将其外交政策置于美国利益之下，而中国对此不感兴趣(印度也不感兴趣)。
另一个问题是，如果你有一个联盟，谁是该联盟的目标？

Chen Xu
You know, once UK was US ally and US tore down all their colonies around the world, and completely crippled UK.
USSR also has been US ally and US hated them more than Nazis.
Japan is US ally since the end of WWII and there was Plaza Accord.
Mexico is still US ally and US turns them into the biggest drug producer.
…
The list can go on but you shall know one has to be really stupid to be US ally.

你知道，英国曾一度是美国的盟友，美国摧毁了他们在世界各地的所有殖民地，并完全瘫痪了英国。
苏联也是美国的盟友，美国比纳粹更痛恨他们。
自二战结束以来，日本一直是美国的盟友，并且签订了广场协议。
墨西哥仍然是美国的盟友，美国把它们变成了最大的毒品生产国。
…
名单还可以继续，但你应该知道，一个人必须是真蠢，才会去做美国的盟友。

Mark Shainblum, Award-winning Canadian science fiction author (1984-present)
China never offered to become a U.S. ally. It has seen itself as a rival of the U.S. since the Communists took over in 1949, and that hasn’t changed just because China is wealthier now.

中国从来没有提出要成为美国的盟友。自1949年执政以来，中国一直将自己视为美国的竞争对手，这一点并没有因为中国现在更富裕而改变。

Samuel Liu, Born in Berkeley, pay annual taxes
The question should provide dates to get an answer that is better suited.
China’s economic boom was either 2004–08 or 13.
Either times, President Obama had been conciliatory and respectful to China’s central government as a global power.
Chinese leader Xi was not respectful of Obama in the nontruths he uttered to the Chinese press on his 2015 tour of Seattle and Washington DC. And also the distasteful treatment Obama received in the 2016 Hangzhou G20 summit.
The question should be: Why has China’s leader Xi Jinping continued or increased China’s disrespect for the USA’s global leadership with such contention that a demagogue as Trump should come to power.

这个问题应该提供一个更适合提供答案的日期。
中国的经济繁荣发生在2004-08年，或者13年。
无论哪一次，奥巴马都表现出了和解的姿态，并且尊重中国，尊重其作为一个全球大国的地位。

在2015年访问西雅图和华盛顿期间中国领导人对中国媒体说了一些不真实的话，这是对奥巴马的不尊重，还有奥巴马在2016年杭州 G20峰会上受到的令人反感的对待。
问题应该是: 为什么中国领导人继续或加剧中国对美国全球领导地位的不尊重，认为像特朗普这样的煽动者应该上台。

Bryan Shoemaker, Administration Training. at Adult Residential Facility (2010-present)
simple because they are communist. Mister Clinton during the 90s remove the Tariff off of China. Many said that it was a very bad idea but he gave China the benefit of a doubt. It turned out to be a very bad thing. I guess we had to try at least once but it proved exactly what many had said back then. You cannot trust a communist country.

很简单，因为他们是GC主义者，克林顿在90年代取消了对中国的关税，许多人说，这是一个非常糟糕的主意，但他毫无疑问给了中国好处，事实证明这是一件非常糟糕的事情，我想我们至少尝试过一次，但结果却恰恰证明了当时许多人所说的话是对的，你不能信任一个GC主义国家。