中国优雅而又有缺陷的大战略 [日本媒体]

每人一小段，翻译我也行！
每日新素材，等你来认领！ http://www.ltaaa.com/translation/ 

-------------译者：snx-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------



China is a country with more than a billion people, but as Ross Terrill observed, when we ask what China wants, we are really attempting to discern the goals of the nine “male engineers” who make up the Standing Committee of the Politburo of the Chinese Communist Party. This clarification makes the answer straightforward: Like any bureaucracy or interest group the CCP wants to ensure its survival, which depends on maintaining legitimacy with the Chinese people. To meet this goal, the CCP under President Xi Jinping has articulated a strategy of peaceful development; however, increasing Chinese military capabilities and strategic coercion will cause other states to balance against China, making it harder for the CCP to protect its core interests and continue its economic and strategic rise.

中国是一个人口超过十亿的国家，但如同罗斯特瑞尔所观察的，当我们问中国到底想要什么时，我们是真的试图分辨出由九位“男性工程师”组成的中共中央政治局常务委员会的目标是什么。这个澄清的回答让答案简单明了：如同其他任何机构或利益组织一样，中国共产党想要确保自己的生存，要依靠于维持中国人民对政权合法性的认同。为了实现这个目标，由习近平领导的中国共产党明确阐述了和平发展的战略，然而，中国日益增长的军事实力和战略强制会导致其他国家不得不平衡中国的发展，使中国共产党更难保护其核心利益以及继续其经济和战略崛起。


-------------译者：龙腾翻译总管-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

Oro Invictus • 2 days ago
As with most quandaries involving government, the CPC has only itself to blame in its geopolitical difficulties. While any state, as it accumulates influence, will naturally find resistance from others, the CPC did itself no favours by fomenting so much nationalist rhetoric for so long. They left no space for themselves to negotiate with others, only the creation of as imperious as attitude as the 19th century US; just as the US supposedly had (and still, to a lesser extent, has) its "god-given" right to power and influence, so too is the "natural order" of (East) Asia to have the PRC be predominant. The PRC's willingness to treat others as equals is inversely proportional to what import the PRC places on whatever the matter of concern is, irrespective of what value the other party places on it.

Let us consider the matter of non-interference, for example. It's already well-established that while Beijing does offer economic deals sans political preconditions, at least, as long as those politics don't concern the PRC (more on that in a moment), it does levy hefty economic ones; while more palatable to governments in the near-term, I suspect just as much chafing (if not more) will result from these deals in the long-term as the political sanctimony of the "West" and their deals. As such, we see that this "non-interference" does not extend to economic matters, but surely political matters are still sacrosanct?

正如政府所陷入的大部分困境一样，中国在地缘政治上的困境只能怪自己。任何国家，随着影响力的增长，难免受到他国的反抗，中共长久以来不断煽动民族主义情绪，这对中共来说一点好处没有。他们在和他人谈判时不给自己留有余地，其态度如19世纪的美国一样蛮横；就像美国认为上天赋予自己权力一样，现在的中共也认为东亚的主宰势力应该是中国。在中共越是看重的问题上，它就越不把对方看成平等的对象，不论他人多么看重该相关议题。

比如，我们来看看所谓的“不干涉”原则。众所周知，虽然北京在不附加政治条件的情况下和他国签订经济协议（前提是这其中的政治问题不是中共所关心的），但是在经济上确实施加了很多前提条件；虽然在短期上更受对方政府欢迎，但是长期来看这些协议会产生同样多的不利，因为受到西方及其协议的政治伪善的伤害。所以，这所谓的“不干涉”原则并不适于经济事务，当然了，因为政治更加的神圣不可侵犯？

-------------译者：龙腾翻译总管-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

Well, no. The classic exceptions in this matter are, of course, things like Taiwan and the SCS where Beijing has decided there is no other side. Effectively, there is no interference, there is no dispute, because the PRC said so. Sure, lots of other states have done this, but they mainly did so when a cut-off ear or poaching a pig was (ostensibly) valid justification for a war. If you were living in the same neighborhood as such a state, wouldn't you be slightly nervous?

But it goes further then that even: From movies to murals, the PRC's notion of non-interference seems less like an actual principle and more like the US claiming it did "X" for "democracy".

This is the problem the PRC faces: It seeks to gain power as an alternative model to the US. The problem for the PRC is that, thus far, it has been an alternative in name only, not only acting much like the US, but the US of a hundred years ago. Thus, while plenty of states are willing to take the opportunities the PRC's economic growth offers, they are mostly reticent to grant it the acceptance on which it can truly emerge as a "Great Power". Despite this, the CPC persists in promulgating a narrative that conditions the citizenry to see any compromise as tantamount to being "victimized", which suggests to me that the CPC either is A) Sticking with the easy route, because it's simple or because they have gone down the road too far to stop now or B) They believe that, like the US of yesteryear, it can simply power through the objections of others. The latter is particularly troubling, not only because of its hubris, but because of how much chaos was required for the US' ascendancy in that epoch.

不。这个事情中的经典例外包括了台湾和南海问题，北京认为在这两个问题上都不存在争议。所以也就没有干涉的说法，没有争议，因为中共这么说。当然，很多其他国家也这么做过，当时，耳朵被砍下或者野猪被狩猎都可以成为发起战争的理由。所以如果你住在这样的社区里，你一点都不会感到紧张吗？

但是远远不止如此：从电影到壁画，中共的不干涉概念看起来不像是个实际的原则，更像是美国所称之为的对“民主”的“反对”。

这正是中国所面临的问题：中国试图获取权力，以成为美国之外的另一个世界榜样。中国所面临的问题是目前为止也只是在名义上成为了美国的替代榜样，不仅行为像美国，而且还是100年前的美国。因此，虽然很多国家愿意抓住中共经济发展所提供的机会，但是这些国家在接受中国成为“强国”上持谨慎态度。尽管如此，中共依然不断的进行政治宣传，让自己的人民以为妥协就相当于“受到迫害”，所以在我看来，中共不是在采取一种简单的路线（因为简单，而且中共这么做已经很久了，所以现在没办法停下来）就是认为自己可以像以前的美国那样通过权力压制他人的反对。后者尤其让人感到麻烦，不仅仅是因为其傲慢自大，更是因为美国在那么做时引发了多少的混乱。

-------------译者：龙腾翻译总管-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

firemagnet  Oro Invictus • a day ago
"The problem for the PRC is that, thus far, it has been an alternative in name only, not only acting much like the US, but the US of a hundred years ago."

Exactly, and it's because the national discourse in the PRC is that it was entirely the fault of the foreigners (and not inept governance on the part of the Qing) that saw China stripped of its position as "the nation which swayed all others." This is further reinforced by the notion that China can only rejuvenate if it held the same position it once did--as a world power unmatched by others. It's the PRC's equivalent of "manifest destiny," and like manifest destiny it relies on myths and tropes about other peoples which are not true, such as the Chinese notion that--fundamentally--national character does not change. Therefore, according to the logic of the PRC, if the US and the European nations were rapacious in the past, they are still as such today. Similarly, China is in this schema entirely justified in pursuing its own blatantly imperial ambitions, as they are perceived as as a "just" reclamation of what is "China's by birthright."

My opinion of such logic is, appropriately, that you "cannot reason someone out of what they did not reason themselves into."

“中国所面临的问题是目前为止也只是在名义上成为了美国的替代榜样，不仅行为像美国，而且还是100年前的美国。”

说得对。在中国的民族话语中，中国作为一个国家失去了影响所有其他国家的力量，那都是外国人的错（而不是无能的清政府的错）。中国人还认为中国只有重获以前的地位（即成为一个无人匹敌的世界强国），才有可能复兴。这就是中国版本的“天定命运“，像所有的”天定命运“一样，其都依赖于有关其他民族的不真实的神话和比喻，比如在中国人看来，一个国家的民族性根本上是无法改变的。因此，根据中国的逻辑，如果美国和欧洲国家在历史上是掠夺性的国家，那么这些国家在如今也依然是这样的德性。所以在这样的中国逻辑之下，中国公然追求自己的帝国野心就是完全合理的行为，因为这样的帝国野心被视为中国与生俱来的权利。

我对这种中国逻辑的看法是“如果某人是没有逻辑的，那么你就无法用逻辑来说服他”。

-------------译者：龙腾翻译总管-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

Mishmael  Oro Invictus • a day ago
Look, it is obvious that China's actions are driving a security dilemma in Asia, but it is unclear whether China truly has any other alternative. For you see, it is not just China that is rising, but petty much all the other states in Asia as well. China giving strategic way to a more accommodating foreign policy will likely encourage other rising states or Japan to be more strident in their already strident policy of confronting China, which will anger the Chinese people even outside the realm of ultra-nationalism and then threaten the status of the CPC.

I think most Chinese and most of the CPC would gladly be thought of in strategic terms as "just another USA" if it meant that their core goals of reunification, non-interference in domestic affairs, and securitization of their international investment interests was achieved.

显然，中国的行为正令亚洲陷入安全困境，但中国是否有其他选择，这我们无法确定。因为你看，正在崛起的不仅仅只有中国，亚洲几乎所有其他国家都正在崛起。所以如果中国实行更加随和的外交政策的话，那么这可能鼓励其他正在崛起中的国家或者日本以更加尖锐的政策来对付中国，这会激怒中国人民的，从而会威胁到中共的地位。

我认为大部分中国人和大部分中共官员乐于看到自己被称为“另一个美国”，如果那意味着他们的统一，不干涉内政以及国际投资利益的安全等核心利益能得到实现的话。

Anon  Mishmael • a day ago
That you call Japan's foreign policy post WW2 'strident' shows just how out of touch the PRC is. It is difficult to think of a nation post WW2, that was more peace driven and focused beyond its own country than Japan.
That Japan has now done so in the face of China's claims shows just how blatantly expansionist China is!

你称二战后日本的外交政策是“尖锐的”，这说明中国是多么脱节啊。很难想象二战后还有哪个国家像日本那么关注和注重和平。
现在，日本在中国的主权声明下作出这些举动，这表明了中国是一个多么扩张主义的国家！

ForensicsFighter  Anon • 12 hours ago
That is NOT true. For example they have FAILED to clean up their chemical and biologial weapons waste. It is still a threat in China today. It will still be a threat for many years. That does not show anything peaceful. If anything Japan acting like a baby victim when it was the aggressor shows how little it should be trusted as a world power.

并非如此。比如日本没能清理好自己的化学和生物武器垃圾。这些垃圾在如今的中国依然是个威胁。并且将继续成为威胁。所以这根本无法展现出日本是一个和平国家。日本本来是侵略者，却搞得自己像个受害者一样，这表明日本这样的世界强国不值得信任。

-------------译者：龙腾翻译总管-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

MingDynasty  Oro Invictus • 2 days ago
This is also going on: http://www.tomdispatch.com/blo...
 
请看以下网址： http://www.tomdispatch.com/blo...

arrotoxieta • 2 days ago
It is a bit simplistic to think that as a reaction to China's military spending we will see the economic isolation of China. Indeed, behind the facade of enhanced military spending, there is a lot of cooperation, exchange, economic integration going on, even between China and... Japan. It is unrealistic to think that the US will decide to isolate China. Even the isolation of Russia did not work very well, and had so far huge costs. Isolating China would mean throwing globalisation as we know it into the rubbish bin. Is that possible? It is certainly possible, but it would have huge costs and require a U turn in all sort of policies, which are unlikely to happen within the current political culture in the Western world.

Would an economic downturn in China cause the collapse of CCP? First, what is the CCP? They are no longer Communists, that is for sure. They're capitalists. The Chinese elite is an elite of capital owners. Does this elite want to change? I do not think so. They may want to own MORE capital. So even if the Chinese elite changed its name and was no longer the CCP, they certainly do not want to change the substance of the current political and economic arrangement. This is fundamentally different from the Soviet elite. Those people were bureaucrats in charge of publicly owned goods (factory directors etc...) who wanted to become owners, and that is why Communism in the USSR collapsed. Not only: the Soviets saw the possibility of jumping directly to a different model, the neo-liberal one (Gorbachev actually preferred the Scandinavia-style social democracy), which they did in the 1990s. Today, there are no alternative models available.

认为出于对中国军事开销的回应，中国将会受到经济的制裁，这种想法太简单了。在军事开销不断上升的表面背后，实际上也存在着很多合作，交流和经济整合，即使是中日之间。认为美国会孤立中国，这种想法是不现实的。即使是对俄罗斯的孤立也没有产生什么效果，而且还付出了巨大的代价。孤立中国意味着将全球化扔进垃圾堆。这可能吗？这绝对可能，但是要付出巨大的代价，并且所有的政策都要进行大转变，而目前西方世界的政治文化无法做到这一点。

中国的经济衰退会引起中共倒台吗？首先，何谓中共？他们已经不再是共产主义者了，这一点是肯定的。他们是资本主义者。中国的精英就是资本家精英。这些精英想要改变吗？我认为不会。他们可能想拥有更多的资本。所以即使中国精英改名换姓、不再是中国共产党，他们也不愿意对目前的政治和经济制度进行改变。这与苏联精英存在着根本上的差异。俄罗斯精英是掌控有公有物品的官僚（工厂主管等等），他们想成为所有者，这就是苏联共产主义崩塌的原因所在。苏联看到了直接跳向不同模式的可能性，即新自由主义模式（其实戈尔巴乔夫更喜欢北欧风格的社会民主），他们在90年代实行了这一模式。如今，再也没有可供选择的替代模式了。

-------------译者：ZZYYABC-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

Austronesian_Pacific • a day ago
China's touted “new type of great power relationship.”, is in fact the "Old type of great power relations." And here is why...
China "I'm big now, I want stuff"
World "We are investing, what else you need?"
China "Some land, from the little countries, plus total control of the little countries"
World "???"
The 'peaceful rise' is shown to be the biggest lie since Adolf Hitler told his lies.

中国鼓吹的“新型大国关系””实际上是“老掉牙的大国关系”。为什么？我来告诉你:
中国："我现在强大了，要些东西”
世界：“我们投了资，你还要什么？”
中国：“向小国要点地，再完全掌控这些小国。”
世界：“？？？“
”和平崛起“是继希特勒之后的最大谎言。

The Hard Man • 2 days ago
Good article. In only two years of bullying, incursions, and island building Mr. Xi has destroyed once and for all the myth of China's peaceful rise.

Xi was smart, until now. He doesn't know when to pull back, like Deng did. Xi understood that as China's economy slows, he could use an aggressive foreign policy to bolster the Party's credentials with the people. So when China started making moves in the South and East China seas in 2012, and pumping up their hacking and espionage against the west, he found that powerful morons were counseling western leaders to show restraint, to negotiate, to accommodate. Now the west has woken up and found that this policy has actually encouraged China rather than tempered the CCP's appetite for more.

Who are the morons? Let's name a few of China's useful idiots: Charlene Barshefsky, Jonathan Greenert, Evan Medeiros, Joseph Nye, Kevin Rudd, John Kerry, and many more.

好文。只用两年时间欺凌、入侵小国和进行岛建设，习近平就一劳永逸地摧毁了中国”和平崛起“的神话。

在此之前习近平还算聪明。邓小平懂得见好就收，习却不知道什么时候该收手。习近平认为：中国经济发展速度放慢了，他能够利用激进的外交政策树立党在人民中的威信。所以当中国在2012年在中国南部和东部海域采取行动、并加大他们对西方的的黑客攻击和间谍活动时，他发现：有权势的白痴在劝告西方领导人要保持克制、谈判、调解。现在西方醒悟过来，发现这一政策实际上并没有让共产党的胃口变得小点，反而倒是鼓励了中国（让它胃口越来越大）。

哪些人是白痴?让我们列举一些对中国有用的白痴：（美国海军作战部长）乔纳森·•Greenert，美国前贸易代表巴尔舍夫斯基、麦埃文Medeiros（中国军事问题专家）、约瑟夫•奈（“软实力”、“巧实力”概念的提出者）、陆克文(Kevin Rudd）（曾任澳大利亚总理)、约翰•克里（美国国务卿）等许多政客。