PRC and USA: Taiwan's Strategic Options Disappearing

PRC and USA: Taiwan's Strategic Options Disappearing
Want Daily/China Times Group Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
March 11, 2015

Executive Summary: PRC-USA relations pose a challenge for Taiwan, which must change its strategy. It must not become a troublemaker in PRC-USA relations. Balancing the trilateral relationship between Taipei, Washington, and Beijing is in Taiwan's best interests.

Full Text Below: 

US President Barack Obama sternly criticized Mainland China's recently drafted anti-terrorism law. The law forces foreign companies, such as Microsoft or Apple, to allow the Mainland government to access to their databases. This enables it to monitor the company's customers. Mainland China however, points out that US intelligence agencies have hacked into mobile phone SIM cards the world over. Mainland China says its move is consistent with international circumstances and domestic counter-terrorism requirements. The PRC and the USA clash constantly. Meanwhile, counter-terrorism measures proliferate day by day.

Sino-US relations are simultaneously competitive and cooperative. It is not a simple matter of friend or foe. The confrontation and conflict is even more complex than the "Thucydides Trap" from Western history. Mainland China and the US clash over geopolitical, economic, and strategic interests. They also clash over ideology and political values, making the problem doubly difficult.

Late last January, Mainland President Xi Jinping told US reporters that Mainland China's rise would inevitably lead to opposition from the United States, Japan and other countries. Fears of another conflict are increasing. But Mainland China will do its best not to fall into the Thucydides Trap. The pursuit of hegemonic power is inconsistent with Mainland China's circumstances. The Chinese people lack the genetic disposition for hegemony and domination. Xi Jinping noted the United States' dualistic worldview. He affirmed the desire to avoid conflict with the United States, since it would result in a lose-lose outcome. He said the realization of the "China Dream" requires international peace and prosperity.

The Thucydides Trap is a theory elaborated by the ancient Greek thinker Thucydides. It refers to the 30-year war between Athens and Sparta in 5th century BC,
which led to a lose-lose outcome. The theory has been applied to current Sino-US relations. Mainland China's rise obviously challenges US hegemony. The result of differences and conflicts might well be war. Paraphrasing Thucydides: Sino-US war may be difficult to avoid because the US fears China's rise to power.

Consider actual cases from the 16th century. The rise of new powers usually led to war. Obvious examples include the Franco-Prussian war of 1871, when Germany replaced Britain as Europe's largest economy. This led to two European wars, one in 1914, and one in 1939. The rise of Japan after World War I challenged the traditional powers. Japan established an Asian order, then launched a war of aggression against China and East Asia.

The international environment in the 21st century is different. Emerging powers have neither the ability nor desire to clash with traditional hegemons. In mid January, at the "China-US Business Forum", Mainland Premier Wang Yangyuan advanced his "America leads the world" theory. He said the United States has been the leader of global systems and standards. Mainland China has no desire or ability to challenge the US. It is willing to join the system and play a constructive role. In Switzerland, at the "World Economic Forum", Li Keqiang pledged that Mainland China would strive to maintain peaceful relations with the international community. He stressed that Mainland China's reforms and development will bring more opportunities to the world. He guaranteed that Mainland China will not shy away from its international responsibilities.

Beijing is attempting to gradually integrate itself into the existing US-dominated global system. It is keeping a low profile to avoid threatening continued US hegemony. It has adopted a global strategy of mutually beneficial relations between nations to avoid falling into the Thucydides Trap.

Meanwhile, the United States has no intention of widening Sino-US differences. Early this year, President Obama delivered a "State of the Union" address, and a "National Security Strategy" report before Congress. He said the US "welcomes the rise of a stable, peaceful and prosperous China", and seeks a constructive relationship with China that promotes security in Asia and the world. He stressed that although the United States and Mainland China are in competition, conflict is not inevitable. This is a new national security strategy for Washington, one that does not emphasize a “China threat”. It reflects the United States' strategic restraint and desire to avoid provoking Mainland China.

Mainland China is guarding against the United States' Asia-Pacific rebalancing strategy. But it has not been stampeded into a Thucydides Trap. The US is worried about rapidly increasing Chinese influence in the Asia-Pacific region. But it is also actively promoting Sino-US Strategic and Economic Dialogue, high-level consultations, and military exchanges and cooperation. Mainland China and the US maintain a state of jostling with each other without breaking with each other. They are clearly aware of the rise of Athens in the 5th century BC Athens and the rise of Germany in the 19th century. They know that the Thucydides trap would result in an Asian and global tragedy.

Mainland China and the US have different perceptions regarding rising great powers. Mainland China emphasizes mutual respect, mutual trust, restraint over differences, cooperation, and win-win as a foundation for the future. The United States emphasizes utility, the solution of specific problems, pragmatic cooperation, and constructive management of differences, leading to a win-win situation. Sino-US relations will require improved dialogue and cooperation. The Thucydides Trap is merely the product of certain people's imaginations.

PRC-USA relations pose a challenge for Taiwan, which must change its strategy. It must not become a troublemaker in PRC-USA relations. Balancing the trilateral relationship between Taipei, Washington, and Beijing is in Taiwan's best interests.

社評－中美大局下 台灣戰略選擇漸失
2015年03月11日 04:10
本報訊

美國總統歐巴馬最近嚴詞批評中國草擬的第一部《反恐法》，認為強迫外國企業（例如微軟或蘋果科技公司）同意中方進入其數據庫，是北京用來監控客戶的手段；中國則根據美方情報機構曾入侵全球手機SIM卡，指出此舉乃符合當前國際反恐情勢與國內反恐工作需要。中美分歧原本不斷，於今為反恐措施增添新例。

中美關係既競爭又合作，難以簡化為「非敵即友」，雙方對立與衝突的程度，似乎較西方歷史上的「修昔底德陷阱」（Thucydides's trap）更為複雜。地緣政治、經貿與戰略利益衝突之外，中美意識形態與政治價值觀的分歧，尤其難以解決。

去年元月下旬，大陸國家主席習近平接受美國媒體專訪時提到，中國崛起必然會引起美、日等國的防範，擔憂彼此爆發衝突的機率增加，但中國會努力避免陷入「修昔底德陷阱」，因為強權追求霸權的作法並不適合中國國情，中國也不具備爭霸與稱霸的基因。習近平此語不僅點出美國的二元對立觀，期望避免與美國衝突及對抗而造成兩敗俱傷，同時也暗喻「中國夢」的實現需要與外部建立和平共榮之路徑。

歐洲歷史上的「修昔底德陷阱」源於古希臘思想家修昔底德的理論，闡述公元前5世紀雅典和斯巴達間長達30年的戰爭，最終形成雙輸的結果。以此詮釋當下的中美關係，中國崛起顯然會挑戰美國的傳統霸權，分歧與衝突的結果可能是戰爭。若套用修昔底德的名言：中美戰爭難以避免或因中國強大引發美國的恐懼。

就16世紀迄今的實際案例來看，崛起強權多半會造成戰爭。明顯的例子是：1871年普法戰爭後的德國取代英國成為歐洲最大經濟體，隨後引爆1914年及1939年兩次歐戰；一次大戰後崛起的日本，同樣因挑戰傳統強權、建立以其為核心的亞洲秩序，而對中國和東亞發動侵略戰爭。

21世紀的國際環境不同於過去。新興強權與傳統霸權皆無衝突的本錢和意願。大陸副總理汪洋元月中旬在「中美商業論壇」會議上提出的「美國引領世界」論，聲稱美國業已主導全球體系和規範，中國無力也無意挑戰美國，願意加入體系並扮演建設性角色。緊接著，李克強在瑞士「世界經濟論壇」會議上也承諾，中國將致力於與國際社會維持和平關係，強調中國的改革和發展將為世界帶來更多機會，保證中國不會迴避自己應承擔的國際責任。

北京當下的全球布局是採取逐步融入美國主導的現存全球體系、持續韜光養晦避免與美國爭霸、另闢途徑與全球各國互利互惠關係等3項策略，無非是為了避開陷入修昔底德的宿命。

反觀美國亦無意深化中美分歧。歐巴馬總統年初的《國情咨文》與提交國會的《國家安全戰略》報告，都重申「歡迎穩定、和平與繁榮的崛起中國」，尋求與中國發展建設性關係，促進亞洲及世界的安全，強調美中雖有競爭，但衝突並非不可避免。華府的此一國安新戰略，並未強調中國威脅，反映了美國秉持的是「戰略克制」原則，避免挑釁中國。

中國雖嚴防美國的亞太再平衡戰略，但不致於陷入「修昔底德陷阱」的恐慌。美國憂慮中國迅速增強亞太地區的影響力，卻仍積極推動中美戰略暨經濟對話、高層磋商與軍事交流合作。中美維持「鬥而不破」的格局，顯然意識到雙邊若落入公元前5世紀雅典或19世紀末德國崛起後的「修昔底德陷阱」，將會造成亞洲與全球的悲劇。

中美對新型大國關係的概念與內涵有分歧，中方講求原則，強調相互尊重為增進互信、管控分歧、開展合作、共創雙贏、引領未來的基礎。美方則重視功能，要求先解決具體問題，務實合作與建設性處理分歧，就會形成雙贏。加強對話與尋求合作，會是未來中美關係的發展趨勢，「修昔底德陷阱」不過是某些人士的想像。

台灣面對中美關係的丕變，需要適時調整戰略，切勿成為中美關係的「麻煩製造者」。均衡的台、美、中三邊關係，才能最符合台灣的利益。