風蕭蕭_Frank
以文會友
美國學者：美國才是給世界製造風險的“房間裏的大象”
2023-07-28 16:33 來源：國際在線
國際在線報道（記者 任麗君）：近來，美西方政客頻頻將所謂“去風險”掛在嘴邊，鼓動對華“脫鉤斷鏈”。美國政治學學者、中國問題專家約瑟夫·格雷戈裏·馬奧尼（Josef Gregory Mahoney）在接受國際在線專訪時指出，“去風險”是美方為實現“脫鉤”目的玩弄的文字遊戲，美國才是給世界製造風險的“房間裏的大象”。
馬奧尼分析稱，“去風險”一詞從表麵上看似乎是中性的，然而其背後意圖有待深究。G7峰會公報強調對華“去風險”，而不“脫鉤 ”。G7為何會作這種改變，馬奧尼認為， “脫鉤 ”一詞意味著一場新的冷戰，增加了國際體係徹底崩潰的可能性，將對各領域國際合作產生不利影響，大多數人覺得這是一條不可接受的危險道路。相比之下，“去風險”似乎降低了“脫鉤”的危險性，所以G7選擇了“去風險”這個說詞。
馬奧尼指出，雖然美西方聲稱不“脫鉤”，但在關鍵領域，他們仍然截斷了與中國的聯係。例如，一些國家針對華為等中國高科技企業，以這些公司可能存在“與間諜活動相關的不可接受的風險”為借口，將使用中國公司產品定為非法，從而實現所謂“去風險”的目的。馬奧尼提到，被視為“去風險”舉措的美國《芯片和科學法案》，本質旨在加速美國關鍵技術的開發與商業化，同時遏製中國的芯片技術發展。
馬奧尼稱，有理由擔心“去風險”實際上是更徹底的“脫鉤”前奏。他認為，“去風險”更像是一個文字遊戲，一種修辭策略，通過該策略可以實現逐步“脫鉤”，卻能避免對此承擔責任。一方麵，它明確否認“脫鉤”，另一方麵，它還險惡地暗示了中國是“增加風險的來源”。
馬奧尼引用“房間裏的大象”這一表述指出，許多國家忽視了一個事實，即美國輸送給世界的風險要比中國大得多。G7峰會指責中國實施“經濟脅迫”但提供不了相關依據，相反，幾十年來美國常常使用經濟脅迫手段阻撓中國與其他國家的能源合作；2022年美國通過《芯片和科學法案》實施經濟脅迫，迫使一些國家停止與中國開展技術合作。形成鮮明對比的是，中國隻在某些國家企圖幹涉中國內政、威脅中國國家安全時，才會采取反製措施。他強調，美國的主動脅迫與中國麵對威脅作出合理反應這兩者之間是有本質區別的。
馬奧尼表示，美國脅迫其他國家中止與中國的技術合作，毫無根據地汙蔑和打壓中國科技公司，美方對中國企業的指控內容卻已被證實正是美國科技公司過往的行徑。這相當於用一個未經論證的風險來隱藏一個真正的風險，同時又創造了新的風險：對許多國家而言，假如不服從美國指令對華“去風險”，那麽他們就得麵臨美國施加的風險。因此，部分國家不得不為了規避來自美國的巨大風險而對華“去風險”。這種妥協則指向了一條使霸權主義和帝國主義更加囂張的黑暗道路。與此同時，至關重要的一點被忽略了，那就是：中國比世界上任何其他國家都更關心發展中國家的未來，也比任何其他國家都更加致力於促進世界和平、安全與發展。
Beijing must take ensure it avoids repeating past missteps as it advances new monetary and fiscal policies to stimulate growth and recovery. Otherwise, it risks creating a tech bubble that could hamstring its long-term ability to compete globally.
videocam
OpinionWhy science, not ideology, is guiding China’s Covid-19 policy
Beijing is risking popular displeasure because many citizens still remain vulnerable and unvaccinated. While the US could see up to 100 million new cases this year, China is focused on keeping the Omicron surge at bay while building testing capacity ahead of the next wave.
The risks facing the US now are not dissimilar from those the Soviets faced. Yet it’s not clear Washington has learned the deeper lessons of history, including why Beijing has avoided the Soviet Union’s fate.
Experts, and US policymakers, subscribing to a zero-sum view of international relations normalise and even goad conflict. The only solution is to break this cycle of violence and normalise peace and cooperation instead.
A distinct strain of pandemic capitalism is present in the United States as stock prices soar and the government and markets prioritise profits over people. Women, the working poor and minorities have experienced the brunt of the suffering while drug companies, tech firms and friends of the government have lined their pockets.
The White House has sent mixed signals on China, agreeing to hold talks while announcing a ban on Chinese apps. But the hope that these are just Washington’s negotiation tactics is fading, amid worries of a potential armed conflict.
US President Donald Trump’s provocative rhetoric raises questions about how far he is willing to go in his confrontation with China. While countries and businesses are reluctant to pick sides, the spectre of a US-China military conflict might force them to.
For a coronavirus with a lower fatality rate than peak flu season in the US, millions are quarantined, borders are closed, flights are cut, and economic and political costs are mounting. With human rights swept aside and public health politicised, are we creating more problems than we hope to solve?
The US’ targeting of Huawei is rooted in long-standing fears that China might challenge the idea of civilisational superiority on which the West constructs itself. Focusing on Chinese surveillance effaces the threat posed by Western tech giants.
The leaders of China’s Communist Party learned from both Tiananmen and the fall of the Soviet Union not to give in. The mainland Chinese public also appears to have little sympathy for Hongkongers, which will free Beijing’s hand to act decisively.
China’s young people, once at the forefront of politics, are increasingly disenfranchised, and part of a worrying generational gap as a result of the nation’s unprecedented cultural and economic development.
With the unveiling of the Indo-Pacific Economic Vision, the apparent resolution of the trade dispute with the EU and the cosying up with Russia, it is now clear that the US president has been working towards a strategy of turning other countries against Beijing.
Xi Jinping is pitting himself against Deng Xiaoping’s legacy, particularly his vision of collective leadership.
Behind Poland’s controversial new law lurk some disturbing suspicions regarding the country’s Jewish community – but also anti-EU and anti-German sentiment, not to mention nationalist and economic concerns over potential Holocaust reparations.
