我非常震驚地看到，2012年2月10日，就在中國國家副主席習近平即將訪美的前夜，《紐約時報》發表【特邀評論員社論】《十問中國的未來繼承人》，作者沈大偉（David Shambaugh）是美國喬治•華盛頓大學中國政策研究室的主任。
作為一個中國問題專家，沈大偉教授肯定懂得高層外交中的基本禮儀。但是現在不是與紐約時報編輯們糾纏這個問題的時候。中國有句古話：“來而不往非禮也。”我且模仿沈大偉的口氣，也向未來美國總統提出10個問題。如果這些問題在一些美國讀者看來挑釁味十足，那麽我事先道歉。
自二戰以來，美國媒體總是教導全世界，說美國總統的合法性來自於選舉，但世界各地的民眾都在深深懷疑美國領袖是否具備處理世界事務和地區和平的勇氣和智慧，盡管他們自封為世界警察與道德裁判。
這將是一個讓中國人民了解美國也讓美國人民了解中國的好機會。美國政策的朝三暮四在本國眾所周知，但是中國和其他亞洲國家並不清楚。
這裏是觀察美國的人們想要知道的十個問題，提給美國未來可能的領袖們，包括奧巴馬和他的挑戰者：
1. 美國領導人會讓美國重歸政治改革之路嗎？
自2008年金融危機，世界經濟深陷蕭條。正如國際貨幣基金組織前首席經濟學家、現麻省理工學院教授西蒙•約翰遜（Simon Johnson）所指出：危機之源在於金融寡頭綁架了美國政府。拯救美國經濟的唯一出路是拆分金融寡頭。美聯儲前主席、奧巴馬前經濟顧問保羅•沃爾克（Paul Volcker）也建議拆分金融寡頭。但是我們隻見到奧巴馬政府給金融巨頭們注資一萬多億美元，卻未見任何對危機製造者的懲罰措施。
美國領導人敢挺直腰板麵對阻礙金融與政治改革的強大利益集團嗎？他們包括金融寡頭、軍火工業集團、和跨國公司遊說集團。還是像小布什那樣，因為受過這些利益集團的好處而感激涕零？民主黨和共和黨的改革派們能在今年11月的黨內選舉中脫穎而出嗎？
2. 美國領導人能實現“糾正預算失衡”之類的豪言壯語嗎？
過去兩年裏，很多官方講話都在號召把赤字財政的重心從社會福利和軍事冒險開支向支持國內經濟結構轉型，以便為美國新的可持續經濟增長奠定基礎。但迄今為止，預算改革的現實和豪言壯語相去甚遠。
3. 美國領導人能否為美國的印第安土著安排一套更為人性化的政策嗎？
他們的人口從西方殖民者入侵北美之前的數千萬持續銳減，如今已從美國的政治舞台上銷聲匿跡。
美國政府確實有勇氣向二戰時被投入集中營的日裔美國人道歉。然而對於修建了三分之二橫貫北美大陸鐵路的華工——不同於修建了三分之一鐵路的愛爾蘭籍勞工， 1882年至1965年的種族主義排華法案還排斥華工向美國移民——美國政府遲遲沒有道歉。加拿大政府已經顯示除了政治勇氣，向華裔加拿大人道歉和賠償。美國政府是否也有勇氣麵對他們在曆史上欠下的人權債務？
4.美國領導人真能管住那些好戰勢力嗎？
他們正在中國周邊部署軍事力量，把美國的霸權推向戰爭邊緣。他們的意圖是統治世界，在國際上橫行霸道。
5. 美國領導人是否有足夠自信，來放鬆對世界互聯網基礎係統和國際現金流的控製？
須知美國情報機構正是利用它們來幹預任何國家、甚至他們的盟國的信息係統。
6. 美國人民能駕馭他們的領導人嗎？
這些領導人自冷戰時代起就顯示出令人擔憂的傾向：他們總是撇開聯合國和國際法，在全世界發動入侵。
7.美國領導人能否少推行一些言過其實的外交政策？
在需要華盛頓采取切實行動的地方，我們隻聽到老生常談的外交辭令。在這個危險的世界裏，美國的辭令已經越來越不可信。尚能給人一線希望的是，奧巴馬總統在2009年12月10日接受諾貝爾和平獎時做的演說。但問題是他對減少美國發動的戰爭和入侵，究竟做出了哪些曆史性貢獻？
8.美國領導人如何應對日益增長的來自非洲、中東、以及拉丁美洲國家的不滿？
須知這些不滿源於美國在能源、安全以及貿易上的帝國主義貪婪政策。
我們都知道美國以及其他西方強國人口隻占世界人口的10%，但是卻控製了世界上將近90%的資源，並且消耗世界上將近一半的能源。相比之下，中國人口比整個發達國家總和的兩倍還多，卻隻消耗世界10% 的石油。今天，既然美國很有錢又深陷債務危機，為什麽美國不按市場慣例出售資產償還債務？或者與債權國達成債轉股的協議？如此可以發展國際合作、處理金融危機，和平發展難道不比打貿易戰好嗎？
9.美國領導人能否在全球治理中扮演更積極而不是更消極、更難纏的角色？
美國的虛擬經濟是美國實體經濟的五十倍，是世界GDP的十倍，從美國流出的熱錢引發了拉美、東亞、俄國、南歐以及美國自身的金融危機。美國是否要繼續站在金融寡頭一邊，對抗20國首腦峰會上多數國家的要求？這些要求包括：全球變暖、國際金融監管以及製裁國際寡頭的反壟斷法。
美國的軍事開支幾乎占世界總軍事開支的一半，比僅次於美國的前20名強國軍事開支的總和還多。美國還是世界上第一個使用原子彈的國家。在中東、非洲、亞洲、和拉美的戰爭與軍備競賽中，美國扮演的角色究竟是矛盾化解者還是問題製造者？
10.美國領導人是否具有推進中美關係的戰略遠見？
當今世界，再沒有比這兩個國家的關係更重要的國際關係，然而當下的兩國關係中彌漫著戰略不信任。要改善兩國關係就需要中國領導人——以及美國領導人信守諾言，推動兩個大國間的戰略互信。
曆史上，中美兩國並無地緣政治衝突，唯一的問題是台灣。要消除中美之間的不信任，有一個簡單的方案：就是廢止《台灣關係法》，以此換取兩國在太平洋地區和其他世界事務上的合作。美國在內戰期間並沒有要求法國來做仲裁者。同理，台灣海峽兩岸的中國人也不需要美國來監管中國的和平統一。美國現行政策為中國的和平發展與統一製造的麻煩遠多於化解。
我相信多數美國商人和州長們都想抓住中國開放的市場機遇，並與中國人民成為朋友。隻有少數冷戰老兵還在猶豫著要不要睜開眼麵對急劇變化的世界。
這樣也無所謂。我們中國人一向有耐心。我們用100年的時間向西方列強抗爭獲得了國家的獨立，人民共和國用了21年時間重返聯合國，用15年的時間談判加入了WTO.靠著2200年的統一曆史，我們有自信等待美國的領導人意識到自從我們共同生活在這個地球上時，美國就需要中國，就像中國需要美國一樣。
這也沒什麽了不起，中國人有的是耐心。我們打了一百年仗才從西方強權手中贏回國家獨立。人民共和國等了21年，才重回聯合國的合法席位；加入WTO又經過了15年的談判。已有2200年統一曆史的中國，有足夠的信心等待美國領袖最終接受一個簡單的現實：即美國需要中國，就和中國需要美國一樣，誰讓我們同住在一個小小的地球村！
習的訪問不可能為這十個問題給出所有答案，而時間也會證明美國是能最終擁有一個在其內政外交上都讚成並推動積極變化的“改革型”領導人，還是不過又選出一個在政策上碌碌無為的政治秀客。
陳平博士，春秋綜合研究院研究員，北京大學國家發展研究院教授，上海複旦大學新政治經濟學研究中心高級研究員。德克薩斯大學奧斯汀校區物理學博士，研究經濟周期和經濟混沌。 導師普裏戈金 (Ilya Prigogine) 教授是1977年諾貝爾化學獎獲得者，非平衡態統計物理與耗散結構理論奠基人。
【英文】
Ten Questions for America’s Leader Presumptive
By Ping Chen
I am surprised by the New York Time Op-Ed “Ten Questions for China’s Heir Presumptive” by David Shambaugh, published on Feb.10, 2012, on the eve of China’s Vice President Xi Jinping’s visit to the United States.
As a China expert, Prof. Shambaugh at Georgetown University certainly knows the minimum international curtsey for high level exchanges. But it is not this time for me or even the New York Time editors to dwell on this issue. As a Chinese saying goes“It is impolite not to reciprocate （來而不往非禮也）,” I would like to raise ten questions here in the similar tune of David Shambaugh. I would apologize in advance if my questions are somewhat provocative to some American readers. American media always lecture the world since the end of WWII that the US President is legitimate through election, but people around the world are deeply skeptical about the courage and wisdom of American leaders in dealing with world affairs and regional peace about their self-appointed role as world judges and police. This will be a good opportunity for Chinese people to familiarize with America and vice versa. As American policy inconsistency is well known in the United States, but not quite clear in China and other Asian countries.
Here are 10 questions America observers would like to know about the leaders of the United States, including the President Obama and his Republic challengers:
•1. Will American leaders return to a politically reformist path for the American political system?
Since 2008 financial crisis, the world economy had been dragged into a recession. As Simon Johnson, the former IMF Chief Economist and now a MIT professor, pointed out: the root cause was financial oligarchs who captured the American government. The only way to save American economy is to break-up financial oligarchs. Paul Volcker, the Former Chair of Federal Reserve and former economic advisor to President Obama, also suggested the breaking-up of financial oligarchs. However, we only see the Obama administration injecting 1 trillion dollars into financial giants, but without doing anything to discipline crisis creators.
Can American leader stand up to the powerful interest groups that have blocked financial and political reforms — the financial oligarchs, the military-industry complex, the lobby groups for large multi-national enterprises — or will he be beholden to them, as George W. Bush has been? Will any reformers in both Democrat and Republican be elected to top leader positions at the coming election in November?
• 2. Can the American leaders turn the rhetoric of budget “rebalancing” into reality?
Many official speeches have been made over the past two years calling for a reorientation of the deficit budget away from the entitlement and the military adventure to domestic restructuring as the basis for a new and more sustainable growth model for the United States. To date the reality of budget reform has not matched the rhetoric. •3. Will American leader be able to devise a more humane policy toward Native American Indians, when their population had steadily dropped from tens of millions before Western colonists invaded the North America and now has disappeared from America’s political stage?
American government did have some courage to apologize to Japanese American citizens who were put in concentration camp during the world war two. However, American government owes an apology to Chinese Americans who built two thirds of transcontinental railway, but unlike Irish workers, Chinese immigrants were barred by the racist Chinese Exclusion Act from 1882 to 1965. As the Canadian government has political courage to offer an apology and some compensation, will American leaders have the similar courage to face their historical debt in human rights?
•4. Can American leaders reign in the hegemonies that are pushing the American power to the edge of war on China’s neighbors, to “dominating” the world and behaving aggressively internationally?
• 5. Will American leaders be sufficiently confident to all the relaxation of tightened controls on world internet infrastructure and international financial flow so that American intelligence apparatus could manipulate any country’s information system at any time including their allies?
•6. Can the American people reign in their leaders, which have demonstrated a worrisome tendency since the cold war to undertake invasions around the world, act independently of United Nations and international laws?
7. Will American leaders conduct a foreign policy that is more about substance than rhetoric?
America’s diplomatic platitudes have become increasingly incredulous in a dangerous world where real action is needed from Washington. One hopeful indicator in this regard is a speech President Obama gave at the Nobel Peace Prize Forum on Dec.10, 2009. Did he make any historical contribution to make less America-led wars and invasions?
•8. How American leaders handle the growing discontent across Africa, the Middle East, and Latin America over America’s rapacious and imperialist energy, security and trade policies?
We know American and other western powers have only 10 percent of the world population, but control near 90 percent of resources, and consume near half of produced energy. Now, the US is rich but deep in the debt. Why could the US simply follow the market convention to sell your assets to pay the debt or reach agreement for a debt-equity swap and international cooperation in financial crisis and peaceful development?
•9. Will the American leaders begin to take more active and less passive, more supportive and less obstructionist, roles in global governance?
American virtual economy is ten times the world GDP and near fifty times of the US real economy. The US originated hot money ignited financial crisis in Latin America, East Asia, Russia, Southern Europe and the US itself. Will US continue to stand with financial oligarchs in the G20 meeting against the majority of other nations on issues like global warming, international financial regulation, and anti-trust law against international oligarchs? American’s military budget is near half of the world and more than the next top 20 nations combined. The United State was also the first nation to use the atomic bomb. Will US become part of solution instead of part of the problem in the Middle East, Africa, Asia, and Latin America in preventing war and arm race?
•10. Will American leaders have the strategic foresight to invest in advancing the relationship with China?
There is no more important relationship for either country in the world today, yet strategic mistrust permeates the current relationship. Advancing the relationship requires the active engagement of China’s leaders — and the American leaders — to build strategic trust between the two great nations.
Historically, China and the US have no geopolitical conflicts except the Taiwan issue. To remove the mistrust between China and United States, there is a simple solution: to abolish the Taiwan Relation Act in exchange for economic cooperation in Pacific and world affairs. The United States did not ask France to be a broker during American Civil War. By the same token, Chinese people on the both sides of Taiwan Straits do not need American supervision for China’s peaceful unification. The US policy is more a problem than a solution in China’s peaceful development and unification.
I believe that most of American businessmen and state governors would love to participate in the open Chinese market and make friends with Chinese people. Only a few cold war veterans are reluctant to open their mind to a changing world.
That is o.k. We Chinese people have patience. We fought a hundred year war to regain China’s independence from West Powers. People’s Republic waited 21 years to return to the United Nations, and joined WTO through 15 year negotiation. Based on the 2200 year history of a united China, we have confidence to wait until American leaders finally realize that the United States needs China as much as China needs the United States, since we all live in the same small village of the earth.
As Xi’s visit is not likely to get all the answers to these 10 questions, time will tell if the United States finally has a “transformational” leader who embraces and shapes positive changes for America at home and abroad, or whether America just elect another risk-averse showman in American politics.
Dr.Ping Chen, is the Professor at National School of Development, Peking University in Beijing and Senior Fellow at Center for New Political Economy at Fudan University in Shanghai, China. He got Ph.D. in physics at University of Texas at Austin by study of business cycles and economic chaos.
