中國:一個民主,六個國家
地緣政治板塊正在發生變化,中國共產主義帝國不可避免的拆除已經開始。
歷史告訴我們,即使在最好的情況下,一個主要共產主義大國的生命周期大約是七十年 - 也就是說,當獨裁統治通過零星的西方天真,膽怯和其他動機獲得每一個戰略優勢時。
這是蘇聯在勝利的第二次世界大戰後的經歷,將歐洲的一半交給了莫斯科的憐憫,並將共產主義統治半個世界再擴大和延長了40年。
現在,中華人民共和國(中華人民共和國)在天安門大屠殺前後被錯誤的西方政策延長四十年,終於到達終點 - 美國總統唐納德特朗普和香港都是它消亡的領頭羊。
作為候選人,當選總統和現任總統,特朗普已經明確表示,他正在拋棄舊的規則手冊,以一種全新的,非常傲慢的態度處理國內和國際問題。
當他轉向幾十年來困擾其前任的兩個挑戰時,這變得非常明顯:來自朝鮮的直接安全威脅以及來自中國的直接經濟威脅,以及它自身日益增長的侵略。
特朗普通過最大限度的制裁行動,可信的武力威脅和政權合法化,與朝鮮建立舞台後,與朝鮮領導人金正恩建立了個人關係。在中國國家主席習近平干預和加強平壤的態度之前,這種組合似乎提供了無核化突破的前景。現在,特朗普必須決定是否恢復到最大壓力 - 以及是否懲罰習近平中毒井。
在中國,美國總統強調了魅力因素,同時強行擴大貿易關稅,並宣稱美國在南中國海和台灣海峽的威懾力度。
儘管文化種族滅絕和對維吾爾人的身體迫害以及香港的危機提供了充足的機會,但他還沒有(現在)扮演反對中國共產黨政權的人權卡。
然而,僅貿易爭端對北京構成了生存威脅。特朗普不斷升級的戰術讓習近平處於兩難境地。如果他繼續無限期地發揮針鋒相對的作用,那麼在政府準備慶祝中華人民共和國成立70周年之際,中國經濟的成本將繼續上升。
如果美國總統決定恢復中興通訊和華為的禁令,這些費用可能會變得無法忍受,而這些禁令已被強制收回,然後作為個人支持向習近平撤回 - 但習近平並未就貿易,海上安全,人權或朝鮮做出回應。
另一方面,如果北京保留其最初改革其經濟實踐的承諾並且表現得像一個正常的全球貿易夥伴那樣,它將失去它幾十年來所享有的不公平優勢。
習近平無法維持其政權對大規模內部鎮壓或激進外部冒險的投資,並需要重新調整他的「中國夢」野心。
類似霍布森的選擇面對北京方面在香港長達數月的民眾抗議活動 - 中國共產黨(CCP)肆無忌憚地違背了對國際社會的承諾。
1984年中英聯合聲明,建立「一國兩制」,其結果註定要失敗,保障香港人民的公民,政治和人權只有50年。
然而,北京方面認為它甚至不能等待那麼長時間才能將香港吸收到其極權主義暴政中。
多年來,它一直在進行一場扼殺領土政治自治的逐步運動,首先是削弱普選和自治的承諾,然後通過引渡法破壞司法獨立,引發抗議活動。
很容易理解中國與香港的地位相關的尷尬,因為它與其他中國人口有著「一國兩制」的安排:台灣。
正如美國副總統邁克彭斯所說:「美國將永遠相信台灣對民主的擁抱為所有中國人民提供了更好的道路。」
中國顯然擔心香港/台灣民主模式會影響其他人口,特別是西藏和東土耳其斯坦(新疆)的各種征服地區。它實施了一場徹底的新聞封鎖,以防止中國人知道他們也可以選擇「更好的道路」。
到目前為止,為了避免破壞使西方企業,智庫和學術界某些部門受益的經濟安排 - 同時摧毀整個美國的工業和社區 - 華盛頓和其他政府都沒有發揮強大的信息卡來向北京施壓。
然而,維吾爾人和香港人的困境 - 以及強迫器官收穫等納粹式醫療程序對被壓迫的少數民族群體的暴露 - 不僅促進了對不道德行為的二次思考,也促進了持續沉默的戰略智慧。 。
來自特朗普經濟戰略的外部壓力和來自北京被壓抑人口的離心力量正在重合。在某些時候,習和/或他的同事,或他們的繼任者,需要面對整個中國共產黨制度的內部矛盾。
他們將不得不決定是否抨擊外部敵人和內部敵人是否會產生一場大火,這將摧毀他們過去30年來所取得的所有成就 - 以及中共本身 - 或者是否可以與外界安排通往軟著陸的滑行道路世界。
在這一點上,中國領導人可能會認為,一個具有共產主義特徵的恢復中國帝國最終是一個站不住腳的主張,而試圖將其融合在一起的負擔太大了。
那麼,一個制度 - 民主 - 可能會對中國核心國家以及台灣,香港,東突厥斯坦,蒙古和西藏的獨立和獨立實體更具吸引力和可行性。那些自由人民可以決定他們喜歡什麼重新融合或聯合關係。
這將是一個中國夢,北京統治下的14億人會歡迎。
(約瑟夫博斯科在美國國防部長辦公室擔任中國主任。他是台灣 - 美國研究所的研究員,也是全球台灣研究所諮詢委員會的成員。)
原文:China: One democracy, six countries
The geopolitical tectonic plates are moving, and the inevitable dismantlement of the Chinese communist empire has begun.
History teaches that the lifespan of a major communist power is about seven decades, even under the best of circumstances — that is, when the dictatorship is given every strategic advantage through sporadic Western naivete, timidity and other motivations.
That was the experience of the Soviet Union after the victorious World War II Allies handed over half of Europe to Moscow』s tender mercies and expanded and prolonged communism』s rule of half the world for another 40 years.
Now, the People』s Republic of China (PRC), itself having been given a four-decade extension by misguided Western policies before and after the Tiananmen Square massacre, is finally reaching the end of the line — and US President Donald Trump and Hong Kong are the bellwethers of its demise.
As a candidate, president-elect and now as president, Trump has made clear that he is throwing out the old rulebook and approaching both domestic and international issues with a fresh, and very brash, attitude.
That became dramatically evident when he turned to the two challenges that bedeviled his predecessors for decades: the immediate security threat from North Korea and the immediate economic threat from China, along with its own growing aggression.
After setting the stage with North Korea through a maximum-pressure campaign of sanctions, credible threats of force and regime delegitimization, Trump cultivated a personal relationship with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un. The combination seemed to offer the prospect of a denuclearization breakthrough until Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) intervened and hardened Pyongyang』s posture. Now, Trump must decide whether to return to maximum pressure — and whether to punish Xi for poisoning the well.
With China, the US president has emphasized the charm component while imposing expanding trade tariffs and asserting the US』 deterrent resolve in the South China Sea and the Taiwan Strait.
He has not (yet) played the human rights card against the Chinese communist regime, despite abundant opportunities presented by its cultural genocide and physical persecution of Uighurs and the crisis in Hong Kong.
However, the trade dispute alone poses an existential threat to Beijing. Trump』s escalating tactics present Xi with a dilemma. If he continues to play tit-for-tat indefinitely, the costs to the Chinese economy will keep rising at a time when the government is preparing to celebrate the 70th anniversary of the PRC.
The costs could become unbearable if the US president decides to reinstate the ZTE and Huawei bans, which he imposed and then retracted as a personal favor to Xi — but for which Xi has not reciprocated on trade, maritime security, human rights or North Korea.
If, on the other hand, Beijing keeps the promises it originally made to reform its economic practices and behave like a normal global trading partner, it would lose the unfair advantages it has enjoyed for decades.
Then Xi would be unable to sustain his regime』s investment in either massive internal repression or aggressive external adventures, and would need to recalibrate his 「China Dream」 ambitions.
A similar Hobson』s choice confronts Beijing regarding the burgeoning, months-long civil protests in Hong Kong — again precipitated by the Chinese Communist Party』s (CCP) brazen reneging on promises made to the world community.
The 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration on Hong Kong, establishing 「one country, two systems,」 was seeded with a doomed outcome, guaranteeing the civil, political and human rights of the people of Hong Kong for a period of only 50 years.
However, Beijing decided it could not even wait that long to absorb Hong Kong into its totalitarian tyranny.
Over the years, it has undertaken a gradual campaign of strangling the territory』s political autonomy, first by eroding the promise of universal suffrage and self-government, and then by undermining judicial independence through an extradition law, triggering the protests.
It is easy to understand China』s discomfiture with Hong Kong』s status when it is coupled with the other Chinese population for which the 「one country, two systems」 arrangement was intended: Taiwan.
As US Vice President Mike Pence has said: 「America will always believe that Taiwan』s embrace of democracy shows a better path for all the Chinese people.」
China obviously fears that the Hong Kong/Taiwan democratic model would infect the rest of its population, especially the diverse subjugated regions of Tibet and East Turkestan (Xinjiang). It imposes a sweeping news blackout to keep Chinese from knowing that a 「better path」 is possible for them, too.
So far, to avoid upsetting the economic arrangements that have profited some sectors of Western business, think tanks and academia — while devastating entire US industries and communities — Washington and other governments have not played the powerful information card to pressure Beijing to reform.
However, the plight of the Uighurs and Hong Kongers — and the exposure of Nazi-like medical procedures, such as forced organ harvesting, against oppressed minority groups — is fostering second thoughts on not only the immorality, but also the strategic wisdom of continued silence.
The external pressure from the Trump economic strategy and the centrifugal forces emanating from Beijing』s repressed populations are coinciding. At some point, Xi and/or his colleagues, or their successors, would need to confront the internal contradictions of the entire Chinese communist system.
They will have to decide whether lashing out at external enemies and those within could produce a conflagration that will destroy all their achievements of the past 30 years — and the CCP itself — or whether a glide path to a soft landing can be arranged with the outside world.
At that point, China』s leaders might decide that a restored Chinese empire with communist characteristics is ultimately an untenable proposition and that the burden of trying to hold it together is too much.
Then, one system — democracy — would likely prove to be more attractive and feasible for the core Chinese nation, and for the separate and independent entities of Taiwan, Hong Kong, East Turkestan, Mongolia and Tibet. Those free peoples then could decide what remerging or federated relationships they prefer.
That would be a China Dream that the 1.4 billion people under Beijing』s rule would welcome.
Joseph Bosco served as China country director in the office of the US secretary of defense. He is a fellow at the Institute for Taiwan-American Studies and a member of the advisory committee of the Global Taiwan Institute.
=================
反論:看看海外中國人的德行,對比拓荒期的美國移民,毫無獨立意識和精神長進,就知道中國的問題是人的差距是文明的優劣不是制度的改變。