克裏斯托夫•金 (Christopher Jing)
20世紀80年代末赴美留學，從事金融投資與危機管理、高科技風險基金和跨國企業戰略。近期訪問中國和日本，旅途中博文斷續，敬請諒解。
美國，是一個生活在嚴重“危機意識”陰霾下的警醒民族，似乎每一天都在你死我活的刀尖口迎送著世界末日，以此凝聚舉國上下朝野各派的民心共識、激發眾誌成城勵精圖治的戰鬥氛圍。
中國人，“危機意識”相對淡薄，傳統上高調、張揚，喜歌功頌德，爭天下第一、崇太平盛世，隻有當外敵的入侵深入到刀架在脖子上，才會引起警覺。
中美、中印，是否開戰或再戰，是一個無法回避的悠關國家和民族“危機意識”的真實話題。
中美開戰?
21世紀的今天，世界各國，無論大小和強弱，正在經曆和見證一場仍在發酵、升溫、遠未消逝的結構性經濟危機，在經濟全球化的框架下，中國和美國兩個本職屬性完全不同的大國，破天荒地跨越社會主義和資本主義的森嚴壁壘走到一起，同舟共濟，共克時艱。
2009年4月4日，G20高峰會期間、美國《金融時報》和《華爾街日報》頭版熱點新聞上不約而同地刊登了一張十分有趣的照片。
照片中，美國總統奧巴馬、意大利總理貝盧斯科尼以及俄羅斯總統梅德韋傑夫三位首腦嬉笑逗樂地擁作一團，奧巴馬刻意地笑對鏡頭舉起大拇指，梅德韋傑夫也舉掌詼諧地致意，而前排正中的中國國家主席胡錦濤則麵露自信的微笑，顯得輕鬆愉快。
照片有趣，因為它釋出這樣一個明確的氣息，即中國的國際形象在世人心目中發生了根本性變化，其國際地位在金融風暴中驟然得到了空前的提升，中國以外匯儲備兩萬億美元雄居世界之最，以氣勢磅礴地推出4萬億人民幣刺激內需經濟計劃的大手筆，一躍成為G20高峰會眾星捧月的主角。
中美關係，隨之翩翩起舞，首次從經濟合作入手，結成從未有過的互相依賴的利益夥伴關係，曆史性地在G20高峰會上定格，合影留存這樣一張寓意深刻的“密月照”。
盡管中美兩國在整體實力上仍然具有相當的差距，如比較兩國2008年的國民生產總值(GDP)，美國14.33萬億美元，中國4.22萬億美元，美國是中國的3.3倍，但從動態的曆史發展來看，兩國之間原有的巨大差距正在不斷縮小是一個不爭的事實。
中美之間，拋開正在逐步減弱的意識形態方麵的較真，經濟上已經紮紮實實地捆綁在一起，相互需求超過任何其它國家，具體而言，美國是中國最大的消費國，中國是美國最大的債權國，中國不僅為美國生產物美價廉的中低檔產品，還提供其他任何國家和國際組織無法提供的美元貨幣。
從近30年來兩國領導人之間的友好互動和“肢體語言”來看，美國曆屆總統下台後均不約而同地變身為民間促進中美友好力量中最活躍的分子 —— 尼克鬆、裏根、福特、卡特、老布什、克林頓、小布什，可以切實感受到兩國人民之間的示好和尊重並不如境外某些異見媒體所一直渲染的那樣，充滿敵意和水火不容。
理論上，美國需要一個雖不是不堪一擊但決不是強大到武裝到牙齒的敵人來增強危機意識和軍備擴展，以美國人曆次戰爭的充分謀略和戰前準備來看，“絕對的勝算”是戰爭的最高目標，因此，美國軍隊從來不屑國際間“以石擊卵”的譏笑，勝者王敗者寇，毫不猶豫地“大炮打蚊子”，集中優勢兵力各個擊破，將傷亡減少到最小，確保戰爭的全勝。
實際上，追求中美兩國人民之間的互惠一直是朝野兩黨和民心的主流趨勢，美國是一個多元化民族的“大熔爐”，是崇尚技能集成人才的移民國家，如果沒有特別的理由，絕頂聰明的美國不會直接地在軍事上挑戰一個地緣上遠隔千山萬水的國家，特別是這個國家一直主動施以美國人友好和妥協的“笑臉”，史實上曾經與美國在韓戰和越戰上激烈廝殺而且不相上下，綜合實力使所有對手為之膽寒。
中美之間在今天的百年一遇的金融危機演變的經濟危機中，全方位合作都來不及，短期和中期兵戎相見的可能性幾乎為零。
當然，美國基於長期的國家戰略利益對於中國的遏製企圖和“敲打動作”決不會因此沉寂，馬放南山，仍然會推波助瀾，“坐山觀虎鬥”，根據在自身發展的某一個特定的危機階段從現實和長遠利益的層麵做戰略性調整。
問題是，這樣一個幾乎是常態規律性的調整，是否一定要透過慘烈的戰爭廝殺兩敗俱傷的方式來進行，還是通過非戰爭手段的零星摩擦針鋒相對的途徑來解決?
在經濟危機肆虐的現階段，中美之間的經濟利益決定了“避免大戰”的幾率。
為了鞏固和發展這一重要曆史時期的和平穩定，抓住機遇，中國完全有能力化百年一遇的危機為百年不遇的契機，以相對自由靈活的股權、資產和人才並購的方式逆向操作，登陸美國核心支柱性相關產業高灘陣地，囤積中國所需的稀缺性戰略資源，與美國形成與經濟利益掛鉤的不可分割的戰略夥伴關係。
當然，聰明的美國人不會眼看著“中國龍”勢如破竹地做大，他可以技巧地換一種方式在背後慫恿和操縱一個有能力有動機與中國抗衡的“核大國”，對中國實施直接和間接地挑釁和牽製。
比如說，打一場代理人的戰爭，讓“中國龍”後院起火，顧此失彼。
這個代理人或代理國，除了已經擁有12億人口、多核彈頭、並充分自傲在“自由民主、高端人才和技術資源”上更勝中國一籌的印度，別無它國。
印度人口2008年超過11.3億，此前，聯合國人口基金會在其公布的《2008世界人口狀況報告》中預測，到2050年時印度人口將達16.58億人，超過中國同年的14.08億人，成為世界人口第一大國。
更何況中印兩國邊境毗鄰相連，極易引發戰爭衝突的導火索。
毋庸置疑，中國通過印度的“宿敵”巴基斯坦接招，“打前站”，緩衝來自印方的直接威脅，一直是印度對中國無法再起戰火的根本原因。
巴基斯坦對印度的恩怨，不亞於印度對中國的仇恨，特別是印度1971年悍然出兵侵略東巴基斯坦並使之永久性地被肢解成一個再不附屬於巴基斯坦的國家。
印巴之間的衝突由來已久，一觸即發，隨時都有失控的危險。
盡管對巴基斯坦的強硬政策和戰爭恐嚇可瞬間掀起印度民族一致對外的戰爭狂熱，印度同時清晰地認識到，與巴基斯坦之戰即與中國一戰，中國才是巴基斯坦的堅強後盾。
中國，協助巴基斯坦發展核子武器，在曆次印巴戰爭中扮演的“大後方”角色，中巴之間的軍事交流非常態的密切，中巴領導人在國際舞台上從不否認相互之間的全力合作和親密無間。
中巴是公認的全天候“鐵哥兒們”，中國不會坐視巴基斯坦在自己的眼皮底下狼煙四起。
中印再戰?
中印之間，完全呈現一番波雲詭譎戰爭風雲時隱時現的態勢。
中國和印度是世代“冤家”，民間的友好是個別現象，不足以彌補兩國之間深深的鴻溝和恩怨。
印度與中國，地源上具有極易擦槍走火觸發大規模軍事衝突的有爭議的漫長邊境，曆史上因1962年邊境戰爭敗於中國在印度國民心中烙下的國家恩怨和深仇大恨，政治上因長期公開庇護和縱容達賴喇嘛不斷挑起的一波波全球性反華逆流愈演愈烈，經濟上與中國激烈角逐共爭“金磚領袖”實力相當互不相讓，軍事上更是核彈頭全方位對準中國決一雌雄……
印度，具有一切與中國一戰的動機和理由。
中印必有一戰，不是明天，便是後天，或是不遠的將來。
中印曆史上的一戰，中國雖勝，卻付出了沉重的代價，不僅永遠失去了西藏的精華 —— 藏南最肥沃的9萬平方公裏的祖國土地，還埋下了戰敗國印度世世與中國相克、較勁和衝突的“種子”。
中國的痛，中國人最清楚。
中印之間的角逐和爭鬥早已暗潮洶湧，印度高層不時放話強調不惜再戰的決心，而中國總是在克製和退讓中迂回展示自己的實力和意誌，然而，下麵就不同了，印方軍事領袖們屢屢惡語中傷中國的經濟發展和防衛能力，挑戰中國致力於改革開放和和平建設的底線。
為什麽?
這是勢均力敵的“中國龍”和“印度象”在同一個級別和同一條邊界上的決鬥，不可避免!
印度，是貨真價實的人口大國和核大國，是一個自信心極強的民族，格外“記仇”，視1962中印戰爭中的落敗為“國恥”和“國仇”，一直耿耿於懷，事實上，印度所有的核武器建造和部署都是為了遏製中國而不是防範其他國家和“天敵”巴基斯坦。
印度為達賴喇嘛在達蘭薩拉建國，其目的昭然若揭，最令中國耿耿於懷如鯁在喉的是印度至今都在為達賴喇嘛的西藏獨立搖旗呐喊，提供叛亂分子以中印邊界為橋梁、陰謀出逃和武裝潛入中國國境的“大後方”，旨在與中國勢不兩立，伺圖透過其宗教勢力的國際影響永遠地致衡中國。
回顧一下中印戰爭的始末: 中國與印度的邊界約2000公裏，分西、中、東三段。
到1951年前後，印軍侵占中國曆屆政府從未承認過的“麥克馬洪線”以南約9萬平方公裏的英國殖民者所占的領土，此外，在中段和西段，印度亦侵占部分中國領土，1959年，印軍越過雙方實際控製線建立了43個據點，中國政府提出談判解決邊境問題，未得印度方麵的接受。
所謂的“麥克馬洪線”是英國人自己定的，是英國殖民政府強加於西藏南部的分界線，任何時候的中國政府都沒承認過，是西方肢解中國的一部分，就像英國在巴基斯坦和印度之間的所作所為一樣，1947年印度立國後，認為他們有權利繼承英國殖民者占據的中國領土，宣稱藏南地區屬於印度。
1950年，趁中國忙於朝鮮戰爭，印度占領了“麥克馬洪線”以南地區，單方麵改變邊界現狀。
1954年，印度修改官方地圖，將“麥克馬洪線”作為中印之間的邊界線。
1962年，中印邊境戰爭在多年的局部衝突後正式爆發，從印度軍隊侵略挑釁開始，以中國軍隊自衛反擊大獲全勝結束。
美聯社報道，“中共軍隊在喜馬拉雅山南麓像快刀切奶油一樣橫掃印軍”，遺憾的是，中國總是見好就收，中國軍隊單方麵宣布停火，並主動撤退到1959年11月中印實際控製線後20公裏，希望以此推進談判，然而，直到1981年12月，中印兩國才重新恢複邊界談判。
目前，中印邊界長約2000公裏，從未正式劃定，雙方爭議地區約12.5萬平方公裏。
雖然贏了戰爭，但結果是慘痛的……
中國方麵：從“麥克馬洪線”上，再向北撤退20公裏。
印度方麵：印度官方將藏南和達旺納入版圖。
中印兩國曆史上的恩恩怨怨一直延續到今天，而且可能需要更長的時間才能從根本上化解，印度的海外企業家和學者幾乎一麵倒地難以掩飾其對中國崛起的曖昧和憎恨，真正敬佩和服氣中華文化、曆史和實力的印度人少之又少。
中國與印度，同樣在為擠入世界強國之列而奮鬥，都自信將在21世紀步入繁榮，不過，在中印崛起的過程中，兩國政府所扮演的角色截然不同。
中國將是在強勢政府的導向下逐步達到目標，印度則是在一個鬆散的民主製度下遲緩地期待繁榮，中國企業結構的基礎是國企民企和外資，印度主要與世界級大企業建立高效率的戰略夥伴關係。
當印度完成新一輪的改革之後，或象它所說在20年後超越中國，它將變成一個令中國敬畏的國家，這也許會成為中國在政治，經濟和軍事層麵不可忽視的、有可能一觸即發的危機。
文明古國的印度，實力不可低估，2004年至2008年經濟連續保持年均9%左右的高增長速度，外匯儲備位列世界第五，達2800億美元，經濟總量超過1萬億美元，與巴西、俄羅斯、中國成為“金磚四國”，同屬新興市場國家。
作為世界上陸地邊界最長、陸上鄰國最多、邊界問題最複雜的國家之一，中國用60年的時間，改變了幾千年來“有邊無界”的狀況，結束了幾百年來的邊界紛爭，目前，除印度和不丹(未與中國建立外交關係)外，中國已與12個鄰國確定了陸地邊界。
中國的邊界曾被西方稱為“ 動蕩之源”，如今它們不得不承認，中國邊界的穩定已成為亞洲安全與發展之本。
印度軍方近來向中國頻頻發出戰爭威脅，最近在西藏南部邊境地區對中國挑釁不斷，在靠近中印邊境的地區大規模修建軍事設施，並積極進行軍事演習，大叫甚至不惜和中國一戰。
中印之間既有曆史恩怨，又有領土爭議，更有現實爭端，印度至今仍然強占著中國藏南9萬方公裏的領土，對藏獨勢力明縱暗護，尤其是對六十年代的邊界戰爭失敗耿耿於懷，早就想報一箭之仇。
印度精英們一直都有南亞“霸主”之夢，不僅要“恢複”英國當年的“風光”(控製從伊朗南部到緬甸)，又妄圖進取中國新疆、西藏兩地區，但是印度的冒險每次都遭到中國的多方麵的有力回擊。
麵對印度赤裸裸的挑釁，中國高掛免戰牌，大打和平牌，外交部發言人稱感到“驚訝”，大談雙方夥伴關係“互不威脅”，實底下，則憂心忡忡。
印度軍方高層稱“中印十年間必有一戰”，是發自內心的實話實說，絕非空穴來風，必須認真對待，兩個人口居多的國家之間的戰爭似乎難以避免……
應該說，印度對1962邊境戰爭的落敗一直刻骨銘心，臥薪嚐膽，對中國發自內心的仇恨加上達賴喇嘛的從中作梗推波助瀾，以及兩國間經濟利益的激烈角逐和對抗，其軍備和核武器一直以中國為假想敵，使局部甚至全麵戰爭爆發的幾率不斷升高。
遲浩田上將曾寫到：“在戰國時代，一國的發展就意味著對另一國的威脅，這是世界曆史上的通則，也是西方外交的核心和基石。在國家利益這一殘忍的領域，容不得任何溫情，誰要是抱著一絲一毫的幻想，誰就會遭到大曆史殘酷的懲罰。”
中國在設法避免兩個毗鄰邊境人口密度世界數一數二的核大國之間任何戰爭的同時，情願也好，不情願也好，必須麵對!
看看國內們的記者報道即知:用字錯誤,介紹新聞時不知介紹什麽東西,數字單位常常錯...又誇大不實;
一次,說某地的降雨量是[0.2到5.1毫米],明明是厘米都不知道,我特一打越洋電話,跟他們的編輯吵了一通,他當時還不太懂...
自己的語言都弄不通,而現在拚命學英語...大腦有問題!
這位哈佛大學經濟史教授是尼爾·弗格森(?Neal Fergusen?/spelling?)
好像全國人都在學,大多數人根本用不著,威嚇浪費時間精力去做這事?完全不合市場學原則!
而對鄰國的語言不重視,真實豈有此理!(與鄰國用英語談話真是太糟糕了!)
奧運會時,胡錦濤對一位韓國運動員講了句韓國話,使得他們高興了很久;
用他們的語言,才能建立國民外交,建立友好關係;
如今中國與鄰國用第三者語言/英語交談,這是天大的笑話!
看起來,中國現在急需西班牙和葡萄牙語人才...
謝謝。你也是。
晚安
Clinton, you got me back to the blog. You are the man.
You seems to believe in China-Russia conflict. Keep digging...
Another scenario of thinking could be:
China and India are neighboring so closely and therefore so easily for 擦槍走火 to induce the war。
------------------------------------------------------
小小邊界摩擦也許有，但不會演變為全麵衝突。特別是印度沒這個膽量。
中印隔著喜馬拉雅山，山的兩側，一個荒蕪人煙，兔子不拉屎；一個人滿為患，過兩年擠得人都隻能單腳站立，沒有太大的價值。除非哪天在珠峰鑽探出了油什麽的。
中俄就不一樣了，西伯利亞有著中國生存和發展不可或缺的資源，何況本來就是中國的，理應回歸中國。可這老毛子是個不講理的蠻子，不來點真刀真槍，土地是回不來的。日本北方四島就是一個例子。日本人唧唧歪歪的和俄國人要了幾十年，磕頭下跪，威逼利誘招術全用遍，俄國人就是把島荒著，也不還給他。
所以結論是，中俄20年內必有一戰。海外父老兄弟姐妹們，有錢的出錢，有力的出力，到時候您就往外掏吧。
Enjoyable night. Keep in touch. Good night.
I did the follow for the book.
高端人才資源麵臨嚴峻挑戰
國際著名谘詢公司麥肯錫(McKinsey)2006年公布的一份報告顯示，由於中國經過良好職業訓練的大學畢業生十分短缺，其經濟增長可能因此受阻，工業領域的更新換代也可能停滯不前，中國大學畢業生缺乏實際應用技巧以及糟糕的非實用英語水平，使其在發展諸如外包等以服務為基礎的信息科技方麵，遠遠落後於印度。
由於缺少合格的人力資源，那些已進入中國的跨國企業在招聘高標準的雇員方麵，也將會遭遇到更多的不順，中國僅有10%的大學畢業生具有在某一家外國公司工作的技能，麥肯錫強調指出，許多中國大學生所接受的教育類型，都無法給他們提供實用的和團隊工作的技巧，而這種技巧正是全球化公司不可缺少的。
傳統的大學教育隻注重理論教育、書本教育、基於事實教育和教與學的方法，英語教學也是紙上談兵，不適當地強調對話訓練，盡管中國每年“誕生”60萬名新工程師，比美國多出9倍，但僅有1.6萬擁有在外國公司工作的實用能力和語言能力。
麥肯錫發出的警訊，將不斷地對中國未來幾十年的可持續發展敲響警鍾，伴隨中國政府大力推動海內外優秀人才回國效力的陽光政策和激勵措施，實施國際化高端人才戰略的行動在全球危機中舉足輕重，迫在眉睫。
===
有再考慮的餘地.
另有看法.
Precisely right.
不過說到底，多數流行作家掙地還是小錢。比比那些禦用經濟學家算什麽?聽說很多這樣的人在公司董事會中任職，光是股票期權，錢就多得數不過來，吃稿費的人是無法比的。
When America is declining, China do the same, even worse. By the way, I am very pro-China, unequivocally, but never hold from being critical of their challenges, nevertheless.
Education is one of the worst nightmares in China. I have been teaching in China's top universities, so I can tell that the quality is well beyond deterioration. To get into Beida and Qinghua, as long as you have money, you can by giving a unique way. Very popular there. Professors are busy making money that not many focus on teaching and researching.
To catch up with the high-end on the global value chain, you need the quality massively.
Another scenario of thinking could be:
China and India are neighboring so closely and therefore so easily for 擦槍走火 to induce the war.
The danger is that, both nuclear powers are not as well-prepared for the war as US usually goes. In a sense, US could prepare for years to start a "Shock and owe" before a full assault, while China and India might just do it on the spur of inspiration, by simply pushing a button.
We know the history, that Chairman Mao gave the order to cross the 鴨怒江 and assist the Korean War, everything just follow through, even airplanes with no experienced pilots, say 100 hours flight training.
That is the most dangerous part to mull over.
American is in control of the essence to design (IP) and marketing at high-end, while Chinese is in manufacturing and processing at low-end. This paradigm is very hard to change, unless China has reached to the level where it can pave the way for its design and manufacturing to prevail as a while line without orders from US. You can image how hard it is.
--------------------------------------------------------
我不這麽認為。現在雖然中國產品多數處於低端，但很快就會變了。看看中國沒年6百萬的大學畢業生，而美國隻有不到4百萬(還包括了很多學理工的外國學生),美國的衰落隻是時間問題。十年也許就能看到。
Sorry, a mistake, should be "I am doing the book not for the money!"
是真實戰爭，不是冷戰!
I love this sharp expression in contrast.
Thanks. I was told that only the hottest book is profitable, namely, 98% books is losing money. However, after-book effect works. For example, invited speeches, media interviews, etc. indeed make very handsome money.
I am doing book for the money, believe or not. I am interested in driving my ideas to the public then impact the world. Not young, but still ambitious.
I am talking about how to taking advantage of market crisis to bottom-fish the Wall Street, for instance, to bottom fish Goldman Sachs when it drops from 248 to 47 less than a year. I did this ideas as recorded, rather than 馬後炮 or "cannon after horse".So the book is about real action, about the only way for China to be streamlined with US to eventually avoid the conflict.
The sense is that, when you tie together in the best interests to each sides, it is hard to break.
我相信,隻要有決心,天下無難事.
若是,自己就認了,那就沒救了.
1830???年美國門羅(MONROE)總統就是用閉關自守的政策,把美國立下基業的.
很多人在懷疑,到底鄧小平的"無計劃"大開放,是利是害?
With the collapse of the Soviet empire, the US has shifted its sight on its next target, China. The ultimate goal of the US towards China is no different than the one towards the Soviets, which is to destroy China so as to maintain its eternal supremacy and dominance in the world. On the other hand, there is absolutely no basis for making a similar argument in the India-China scenario. India, like Japan, is nothing more than a pawn or a proxy at the disposal of the USA to be used against China.
------------------------------------------------------
你所說的這一切，僅見於某些學者的論述，是一種理論而已。不知是否有美國官方的文件證明?美國總統僅是一個在位為期四年的政客，懷疑他們是否能認真的考慮任何超過四年的長遠計劃。而且我們討論的是真實戰爭，不是冷戰。現在西方可能也明白，用不流血的辦法是無法搞垮中國的。熱戰的成本，美國也無法承擔。伊拉克這麽弱的國家都搞不定，其它也就可想而知。
Chinese are always doing this kind of foolish things, inconsistent inside and outside. Win is win, why retreat after win? You think you did a right thing to show to the world how generous and mighty, but no one go with it.
The question is that, if no more readers, who will know you? where the impact to come from.
Honestly, I am advised to open a blog online that I did just a few weeks ago in order to coop with book selling. Everything is pertinent to market to sell. If you don't do it, no matter how good you are, you are deem to lose money. When that happens, it is a losing game.
全球化產業鏈的分工一旦定型，幾乎很難改變．
American is in control of the essence to design (IP) and marketing at high-end, while Chinese is in manufacturing and processing at low-end. This paradigm is very hard to change, unless China has reached to the level where it can pave the way for its design and manufacturing to prevail as a while line without orders from US. You can image how hard it is.
There is one thing China can do better than anyone else, as it starts right now to meet the domestic demand by investing 4 trillion RMB inside China.It can design, assemble, market, distribute, whatever it wants. Beyond that, it is different story.
[中美對全球化的看法決然不同,更有甚者,它對兩個社會所產生的影響有天大的差別!]
The fundamental thinking of the Western nations will not change over night. There is a basic belief that separate the Chinese and the Western ideologies. In short, the Chinese(India also can) can co-exist with different cultures, yet the Westerns are very self-righteous.
[東西的基本想法根本不同,中國的文化是包容的,西方是非常排斥異己的.不能說蘇聯被鬥倒了/新世紀來了,西方的思想一下子就改過來了,這是不可能的!]
2) per:"...Globalization has surfaced to the level where US and China have gradually become inseparable commercial partnership, where Americans is happily to design and consume while China is equally excited to manufacture and deliver. "
===
The Chinese and the Americans see Globalization different!
Please try to define it precisely for both!
This is the concept from a Harvard professor's Chiamerica idea. Do you think it will be a fair thing for China keeps on providing the low cost products to the Americans to spend? It will not last long in this way. Not only because it is not equal, but also China just can not afford doing this way for a long time!
[近來哈佛教授說出中美國觀念,就是:中國一直供應廉價物品給美國人消費,這平等嗎? 中國都快成大垃圾桶了!中國能夠一直這樣繼續下去嗎? 明顯的不可能!
很多教授學者實在缺少實際生活經驗,說些不著邊際的話,大問題是中國不少的領導人,還會聽這些人的話.莫名其妙呀!]
回複克裏斯托夫的評論:
好主意，大家經常的討論辯論也能為諸位在美國枯燥的生活增加點活力和色彩。
謝謝你推薦的年輕作家郭敬明，是個天才。一定要找找他的作品看看。
學術作品讀者少，照樣能家喻戶曉。愛因斯坦曾經寫信給友人抱怨說，全世界隻有不到一打的人理解相對論。陽春白雪，魅力更長久。
我期待閱讀你的，到時我定以一個普通讀者的眼光發表評論。
也謝謝你的EMAIL地址和網頁連接，有時間聯係。
Respectively, I am focusing on Sino-US relations from non expert view of point, as to the war potential between two powers.
you might neglect the fact the world has been changed since the cold war. Back to the old days, no one was capable then of predicting what took to be reshaped to what would be today. Particularly in the recent days, the whole landscape has been redrawn to the very different one and so the intellectuals' brains need to be rewashed in order to adapt to the new challenging environment.
I probably would go with you if it were right after the breakdown of the Soviet Union to 15 republics. At that time, the entire world was stilled over clouded by the misguidance of concept of the "cold war forever", so overwhelm and so real.
There is no doubt that the US was then desperately seeking to replace enemy target in efforts to strengthen and legitimize its military muscle and weaponry expansion. China was ideal drawn to the map considering its then-ambitious different communist ideology and strong regime, history conflicts (the presumed winner to both Korean War and Vietnam War against US and its allies), as well as its overcapacity of military resources and emerging power in Asia.
Worth a note, I am not a guru of military science and international relations, but simply a consulting business professor and venture capitalist in Silicon Valley.
To a surprise not only to the world, but to the US and China as well, the table is starting to turn 180 degrees when it entered to the new century that the old thinking of perfect confrontation target between US (active to take) and China (passive to accept) is hard to maintain and therefore no longer workable. Globalization has surfaced to the level where US and China have gradually become inseparable commercial partnership, where Americans is happily to design and consume while China is equally excited to manufacture and deliver. Further,real economy has stepped into virtual financial economy where China also become a creditor to the currency demand of American.
When you trace back to the old days, there is neither such thing as globalization, nor as the transformation of easy-to-break then to hard-to-bend now in terms of relationship. The politics is plain talk and empty-handed and so is the military if without solid economic support as cornerstone.
A No.1 (1 trillion $) debtor of US owning to China, I could not image how US comes up with any excuse to wage a war by excusing and off-setting the entire debt with China. For any bloody war with China, you need the strongest "why" to mobilize the people, simply because it is the people who are going to wound and die for you. Where is that? I can't see it at all.
There is great deal of challenges facing two super powers. The American's ability to resolve these challenges won't choose an only to wage a war, but rather, to be deeply affected by the policies pursued by China too, which is a home to one of fourth of the earth's population. Beyond Asia, the role China chooses to play in preventing or abetting the spread of weapons of mass destruction, combating or ignoring international crime, protecting or degrading the environment, tearing the or building up trade barriers, managing the financial institutions or green-lighting the unlimited application of derivatives levers, or abusing human rights will help shape the new relationship between US and China in the next century.
Old thinking for unstoppable war lies in the fact that some Americans believe China's interests and US's inexorably are in conflict that they should work to contain China before it becomes stronger. But in isolating China, they would only encourage China to turn inward and to act in opposition to US's interest and values.
That is how the tide was changing with the passage for time accompanied by globalization.Americans are smart enough not to challenge a already grow-up of power and instead, to choose a pragmatic and principled course: expanding areas to cooperation with China while dealing directly with their difference. It works. It works well.
A quick summary, I would not agree with you equally that the US is permanently targeting China as an enemy, and if any, that is only to the extreme thinking with eyes blinded.
Thanks for your views.
I appreciate your response. However, I do not share your perspective at all.
I think we can all agree that rivalry between great powers is a given, but it does not mean it will play out in all-out wars, which was amply demonstrated by the US and the Soviet Union during the 40 plus years of Cold War until 1989. But the Cold War ended with the demise of the Soviet Union. How? The answer is obvious. The US destroyed the Soviet Union without starting a hot war. The US will now try to do the same to the Chinese.
With the collapse of the Soviet empire, the US has shifted its sight on its next target, China. The ultimate goal of the US towards China is no different than the one towards the Soviets, which is to destroy China so as to maintain its eternal supremacy and dominance in the world. On the other hand, there is absolutely no basis for making a similar argument in the India-China scenario. India, like Japan, is nothing more than a pawn or a proxy at the disposal of the USA to be used against China.
This is where I think you are very misguided.
Thanks for your response.
I have a more detailed blog in China.
http://blog.ifeng.com/index.php?action=home&uid=2050792
挺好的, 英中交替也是海外學人的風格。咱們可逐步形成一個自由的討論時政, 經濟, 軍事, 社會和其他社會熱點的論壇, 茶餘飯後閑談或深究, 激烈辯論,會非常有趣。我的博客中有我的簡曆。
我的郵箱: chris_jing@yahoo.com
喜歡你的寫作風格--嚴肅，認真，辯論能夠扣住要點。
不同的作家寫作風格不一樣。俺喜歡一句格言"上帝喜歡簡單."(忘了是不是牛頓說的)。所以發帖時也力求簡單。
希望今後能夠和你多多辯論探討，越激烈越好。不過我用中文，你用英文，好象對你有點不公平啊。
Can't agree with you more than I have... rational thought and exploration always assemble great friends together and allow for upgrading and improving. You may find my writing different from others, since I intentionally tailor myself to insulate from academic style, instead, to write poetic and cultural, and to turn under-to-understand to easy-to-read, even for very serious politics and wars. You will see next couple of months.
I "arrogantly" classify it as "Wall Street Literature".
I found one phenomena amazing when it comes to writing. In China, the popularity of a lot of young writers, most of them around 20-30s, is much influential than older generation writers. For example, 郭敬明, just 24, writing mostly fiction or novels, is a quick writer and sell his book for averaging 500K to 5M copies. You guess, how many copies for those academic and technical, 2000, 5000, 10K is a given.
Why? You have to turn complex to simple if you wish to more readers to be attracted to your landscape.
嗬嗬，很喜歡和你理性探討，這對雙方深入的參考都有益。
祝你中國旅途愉快。
Hi Wiserman, don't read you for a while. I have time now to put something in ink before dispatching for China on 5/19 through July. Means will be slow coming out with something valuable during that period. Look forward to your insightful views always.
Thanks for your argument. Through heated debates, cloudy sky can be cleared to certain degrees. I enjoy being pushed back and forth in order to improve myself for issues critical to China, US and the world as well. You are great!
Bill Gate once said, which I remember, Microsoft is living on the crisis everyday. It means one day delay of the products delivery, its market share could be taken away from peers. Just give a thinking.
---------------------------------------------------------
做為一個企業家，提醒自己的下屬保持危機意識是一種企業管理手法。就好象幼兒園的阿姨嚇唬小朋友，如果不聽話，大灰狼就要把你抓走一樣。
從微軟官司的實際所為來看，他的驕傲自大是有目共睹的。Vista,window me這麽爛的產品都敢推出到市場，如果不是他所處的壟斷地位和消費者的容忍，早就該完蛋了。
----------------------------------------------------
As for Russian's occupation of China's large territories, I am curious about why Chinese government is not as showing strongly to Russians as to Indians. There should be something behind. You go figure out.
-------------------------------------------------------
中國領導現在是不提俄國對中國的侵略，那是因為現在中國沒實力，說了白說，還給自己惹麻煩。請相信，如果中國有一天大聲地說出來了，那就是收複失地的日子。
Russia and China still belongs to the brotherhood circle. Ideologically, they still believe, by large measurement, in the same of socialist ideas and essences. Russia's challenger is not Chinese but US, and most importantly, Russians are hateful and very reminiscent of US's betrayal after Gorbachev's overnight "Sky Change". They hate US more than anyone else.
---------------------------------------------------------
世界上沒有永遠的朋友，也沒有永遠的敵人。在國家關係上更是如此。當年中越兩國是同誌加兄弟，共同對付美國可以說是唇齒相依的戰友。美國撤出越南後不到十年，戰友變仇敵，大打出手。而這一切的發生之前，誰能想得到呢?其實這一切也並非沒有前兆。越南的刊物早就宣揚他們的祖先如何抗擊漢朝的入侵，隻是專家學者和領導階層不願意看到這些。
中俄兩國的利益衝突早晚要爆發，現在的友好並無深厚的曆史基礎。至於說中國人喜歡俄國的歌曲舞蹈等，那也是50，60年代的事了，而70年代中蘇衝突時，這個因素也沒起到正麵的減緩作用。
更別提現在的中國青年喜歡的是歐美文化。
中印見存在達賴和其它一些觀念的衝突，但自從十字軍遠征之後，世界上重大的衝突沒有一次是因為意識形態不同所引起的，而全部是國家利益衝突引起的。
2) 印度和美國在比他人強大時,不如意,都必然會先動手修理別人.這是英國格式.他們都撿弱小的打...
3) 印度人好像沒有那麽"恨"中國人.中印說不準還可以加強合作.不見得是可靠的夥伴.
中國如何能與印度巴基斯坦同時做友好?
Being a veteran Silicon based venture capitalist, I understand how crisis works its way through an enterprise's development process from startup, funding, marketing, IPO, continuing... Crisis is embedded in every phase of its process. If you miss one quarter, you will perhaps miss the whole and you will thereby get punished perhaps the whole year or longer. Repercussion could be substantial. That is how crisis given in technology field.
Bill Gate once said, which I remember, Microsoft is living on the crisis everyday. It means one day delay of the products delivery, its market share could be taken away from peers. Just give a thinking.
As for Russian's occupation of China's large territories, I am curious about why Chinese government is not as showing strongly to Russians as to Indians. There should be something behind. You go figure out.
Russia and China still belongs to the brotherhood circle. Ideologically, they still believe, by large measurement, in the same of socialist ideas and essences. Russia's challenger is not Chinese but US, and most importantly, Russians are hateful and very reminiscent of US's betrayal after Gorbachev's overnight "Sky Change". They hate US more than anyone else.
Historically and culturally, Russian and Chinese are fond of each other, started from Red Army era, through National Party and Communist Party phases. You can easily see, how many Chinese seniors leaders and young people are trained and culitivated in Russia, the former Soviet Union, the past, now and years to come.
Yes, Russia and China engaged a lot of small-scale sporadic bordering conflicts, absolutely "No"wars, but only at certain special and sensitive points of time, when both countries went crazy against each other. However, when the wind blown out, quickly, it was recovery right after.
Not to say, there is no huge obstacle in front of both countries, such issues as Tibet.
Seems to me, India will never give up Dala and his independent-minded followers.
I went to Moscow University as consulting professor twice and I know Russians are basically highly appreciative and admiring of Chinese history and culture, particularly, the modernization of today's China.
Vice versa, Chinese enjoy Russia's culture, music, dance,too.
That is also never the case of C with I.
Really respect your views toward who would be the most right rivals to China and appreciate for your time given to the argument. Here is my quick feedback as to why I pull my trigger to shot China-India issue instead of US-China.
Briefly, a potential war between US and China, as derived from historical record, say Wars in Korean Peninsula War and Viet Nam with Chinese "heavy involvement" against US, seems inevitable in open arguments for decades. That is a out-of-date thinking.
As history turns to the new page in 21th century, there are only two superpowers still alive on the planet, one is truly paramount superpower, US, while the other an emerging disputable superpower, China. Leaders of both powers come together with new thinking encroaching new actions. Survival is the first to consider, in as sense economic ties are rightly positioned and predominant over anything else, so that basically, China sell and US buy to keep going of the world by large. As economy draws them together, and consequently, either side can't afford to breaking out without serious price paying. Equally and more or less, both powers maintains the nuclear arsenals enough to destroy either sides along with the world, without a doubt. When such close ties and serious threats is weighed in balance, neither US nor China is willing to let go ever-growing goodwill and kill the best for worst, in efforts to engage in something beyond their best interest.
I believe in the geographically factor, simply because most major wars, whatever happened in history, were stemmed from bordering conflicts. Neighboring countries, regions and tribes are prone and have countless reasons to fight for the sake of religion beliefs, territories, immigrant flows, dissident protection, etc.
All wars were so started as of bordering conflicts, Koren War, India-China War, Iraq-Iran War, Iraq War (actually of Iraq's invasion into bordering Kuwait), China-Viet Nam War, are all such, not to mention of as far the early 20th century as the first and the second World Wars broke out. Almost all major wars were initiated from bordering conflicts.
China and India are bordered for too long to reconcile, and both countries has virtually no close economic ties strong enough to support each's growth and stability. Rather than, there existed too many uncertain factors to wage a war, big or small, say, religion, Tibet issue, nuclear pile-up, Pakistan touching point, population overflow...
Indians are not compatible with Chinese culturally, if not to hate, while not really true the other side, Chinese toward Indians. China has no strong reason to be provocative against India when it focuses entirely on sustaining its high economic growth. China is already surrounded by so many challenging countries, for example, Japan, even Russia, Viet Nam, Philippine, Indonesia, etc.
However, that is not the case of China with India. India's only enemy is China. In their mind, Pakistan is part of China so that anything with P is with C.
危機本身是危機意識的展示? 這句話含義模糊，what is your point?
從曆史上看，俄國侵占了我大片疆土，中俄衝突不可調和，20年之內必有一戰。
India is not a true threat to China, simply because it is not a power to be reckoned with in the new century. The United States, on the other hand, is the source of all China's international problems, such as with the Indians and the Japanese, not to mention small frictions with countries around the South China Sea, such as Vietnam, Malaysia and the Philippines.
The real rival for and threat to China, both geo-politically and strategically in the 21st century, is none other than the USA, not India. I don't think the author of the article got it right.
Don't you think the crisis itself is a demonstration of crisis consciousness?
---------------------------------------------------------
別逗了。如果是警醒民族，怎麽會發生金融危機?如果舉國上下朝野各派民心共識，怎麽伊拉克問題上搖擺不定?
If you go human history deeper, war seems easily being triggered if several irrational powers hand in together and become loose canon in face of the unavoidable crisis, while the same can be avoided when the otherwise. India likes to go tough with Pakistan decisively but it can't, unfortunately, China is the key behind. I am here talking about the possibility, the sense and the warning. Thanks.
更別說都是有核國家，印度現在連巴基斯坦都不敢動，何談與中國施以顏色？!
中印不會打起來---印度沒那膽量和實力，除非中國先動手。
中國對美國要鬥智。美國是遏製中國的總後台。但美中的直接大衝突不符合雙方利益。美國挑撥煽動的行為不會停止。中國真正的趕超美國，不僅是經濟總量的趕超，更應該在製度上進行趕超。要在糾錯能力上強於美國。沒有完美的製度，但有不斷完善的方式。
首要一點就是需要作出國防戰略調整。變武力收台為武力製獨，真正著眼於和平統
一，逐步減少對台軍事部署。一批中短程導彈可以考慮調防西南部和青藏新疆地區。
讓印軍的一線陸空軍設施置於我軍的遠程大炮和導彈的火力控製之下。
加緊在西南西北部署更多武裝直升機部隊和先進空軍部隊。加強對印空降軍部隊部
署。加緊山地戰演練。開發適合山地戰的新型輕型坦克。
對印度可能的核攻擊應該有所警惕。
加強與巴基斯坦的軍事聯盟。特別是讓巴擁有比較先進的坦克部隊，維持對印度的
軍事壓力。
盡快建立印度洋艦隊。把中國海軍的核潛艇，航空母艦的主力戰艦早日開進印度洋，
確保中國海上運輸的生命線安全，同時在中印可能的戰爭時期威攝印度的西海岸線，
讓它首尾不能相顧。
如果印度敢於挑起二次中印戰爭，中國應該把握機遇，消滅印軍有生力量，借機收
複藏南國土，鏟除西藏藏獨在印基地。