Friday, April 18, 2014
Exit from comment view mode. Click to hide this space
5

中国的阿富汗博弈

马德里—在其新著《论中国》(On China)中,亨利·基辛格用中国和西方的传统博弈游戏——围棋和象棋——来说明双方在国际权力政治方面的不同态度。象棋的目标是完全胜利,争夺的是克劳塞维茨所谓的“重心”,旨在最终完全消灭敌人,而围棋追求的是通过避免直接冲突的包围战略获得相对优势。

这一文化反差可以作为观察中国如何管理当前与西方之争的指南。中国的阿富汗政策便是竞争中的一项,且颇为符合围棋之道。在美国准备从阿富汗撤军的同时,中国必须处理好不确定性很大的战后状况。

阿富汗对中国具有关键性的战略利益,但中国领导人从未想过要通过战争维护这一利益。阿富汗是中国西陲的关键安全区域、中国确保其在巴基斯坦(中印之争中中方的传统盟友)利益的重要走廊,也是中国获得该地区关键性自然资源的通道。此外,在与阿富汗接壤的新疆自治区,穆斯林占据着人数优势,局势很不稳定,很容易受到塔利班和中国分裂分子的渗透。

阿富汗战争是美国打得最久的战争,花费(到目前为止)超过了5550亿美元,更有上千万阿富汗人民和近3100名美国士兵丧命。但中国在阿富汗的战略大体上集中于商业开发,以满足其对能源和矿产的需求为目标。据美国国防部估计,阿富汗待开发矿产存量大约价值1万亿美元。而如今欲在阿富汗攫取其中大部分资源的正是中国。

事实上,中国的艾娜克(Aynak)铜矿开发项目阿富汗历史上最大的单一外国直接投资项目。中国还参与了5亿美元的电厂项目和塔吉克斯坦-巴基斯坦铁路项目。去年12月,中石油与阿富汗当局签署了一项协议,成为首家开采阿富汗原油和天然气储备的外国公司。

一旦中国在阿富汗巨大的经济和安全利益没有了美国军力的约束,中国肯定会在阿富汗扮演更重要的角色,一种阿富汗人希望达到“战略水平”的角色。中国将用中国的方式完成这一步——即通过展示软实力,也可能通过“非传统安全区”来达到这一目的——这也是中国政府在阿富汗总统卡尔扎伊6月初正式访问北京时的说法。

以中国在世界其他地区的行为来判断,军事合作可能会非常温和和小心翼翼。中国已经明确表态不会在维持阿富汗国防军的41亿美元多国资金中出力。

两国最新签署的双边合作协议将通过社会和经济发展“捍卫阿富汗国家稳定”。中国特别热心于打击毒品运输,因为与新疆接壤的阿富汗巴达赫尚省已成为阿富汗鸦片的主要运输路线。防止塔利班宗教极端主义向新疆的渗透也依然是最重要的任务之一。

在最近的上合组织(成员包括中国、俄罗斯和主要中亚国家)北京峰会中,中国竭尽全力营造地区利益相关者的利益均衡局面。此外,上合组织还寻求在防止该地区遭受“区域外动荡冲击”(胡锦涛主席语)方面达成共识。

但是,不管中国如何集中精力于在阿富汗战事软实力,都可能发现难以在这个极端复杂且充满着历史冲突的地区充当警察角色。此外,中国的地区动作会与该地区的其他大国(比如俄罗斯和印度)发生冲突。其自身盟友巴基斯坦也并不急于清除威胁邻国(中国也是其中之一)安全的恐怖主义集团。

巴基斯坦或许会发现,协调其中国盟友的安全与其与印度的事实上的代理战争是十分困难的。因此,中国或许被迫增强其在巴基斯坦以及阿富汗边境部落区域的军力部署,以对付恐怖主义集团,比如巴基斯坦的东突厥斯坦伊斯兰运动组织(中国认为它是新疆暴乱的罪魁)。

中国喜欢的方式是合作与对话。事实上,中国外交官最近忙于和巴基斯坦和阿富汗开战旨在与塔利班和解的三边对话。中国也无意搅合其盟友巴基斯坦和其对手印度之间的冲突。相反,多年来中国一直指出影响阿富汗稳定的主要问题是印度-巴基斯坦代理战争,因此克什米尔和平才是阿富汗和平的关键。

如何在美国撤军后捍卫其在阿富汗的利益才是中国外交所面临的真正重大挑战。但是,没有迹象表明中国会像美国那样部署大规模军事干预(而在近几年中,世界逐渐习惯了美国的做法)。对中国来说,阿富汗的考验很有可能兼具了象棋和围棋的特点。

Exit from comment view mode. Click to hide this space
Hide Comments Hide Comments Read Comments (5)

Please login or register to post a comment

  1. CommentedTim Teng

    Given the size of China and its recent progress, especially in contrast to the stagnant west, the latter, out its habit/history, might frame China into a dichotomistic relationship vis-a-vis west with such connotations as 'game', 'winner/loser'..etc. But the thing is..as Chinese we don't think in such terms. Our philosophy in terms of person-2-person and nation-2-nation dealings are one of the same: respect begets respect, trade begets win-win, and the relationships (either p2p, or nation2nation) are not contests, but of familial domain: how to get along.

    1. CommentedMinos Hydargos

      How do the general relationship with Japan, Taiwan, the US, and the recent spats with the Philippines, Singapore and Vietnam qualify as a philosophy of "how to get along" ?

      It is its repeatedly failed attempts at playing hardball with neighbours that may slowly lead the current leadership into considering softball and contemplate win-win relationships in general.

      But there is a long road ahead, and nobody knows if the current leadership even knows how to go down that road.

  2. CommentedCaesar Vipi

    I don't think we will be seeing the military build ups at the level we have seen in afghanistan and iraq. perhaps we should just invade saudi arabia to combat the hyperdiastolic prezygomatic posttracheal goatherding radicals there.

    1. CommentedKevin Lim

      The author forgets a few things:-

      1. Much of the animus that locals feel against a US presence is from US's fraught relations with Islam in general. In their eyes, America is still very much the Great Satan. China does not have that historical baggage (the Uighur thing being small potatoes compared to the Israeli-Palestinian thing)

      2. Part and parcel of the US presence is the desire to impose/create a functioning democracy in a country with no real history of democracy, or the institutions that such a democracy reuires. Also, there is the question of imposing values that however laudable, are alien (e.g. equality to women, respect for minorities, Rule of Law). China has no such qualms. Its there to do business, and it has a rigid non-interference policy. If the Karzai regime is in the seat of power, it will work with Karzai. If the Taliban recaptures Kabul, it will do business with the Taliban. China does not seek to make Afghanistan a better place, and for that reason has the advantage of not challenging the existing power structures

      3. China has a lot more money to splash around, and is not gonna be spending it on an expensive military presence. It can BUY itself peace around its areas of economic interests.

Featured