個人資料
正文

金刻羽 西方嚴重誤解中國,對華政策或適得其反

(2023-09-29 23:19:06) 下一個

金刻羽:中國被西方嚴重誤解,拜登對華政策或適得其反

FARAH NAYERI  2023年9月27日
 
經濟學家金刻羽曾在美國接受教育,現為倫敦政治經濟學院副教授。她的父親金立群是總部位於北京的亞洲基礎設施銀行行長。
經濟學家金刻羽曾在美國接受教育,現為倫敦政治經濟學院副教授。她的父親金立群是總部位於北京的亞洲基礎設施銀行行長。 
 
本文係雅典民主論壇與《紐約時報》合作的特別報道。
 
作為交換學生來到紐約時,金刻羽還是一名14歲的北京女學生。她住進一個美國寄宿家庭,就讀於布朗克斯的私立高中霍勒斯曼。她被哈佛大學錄取,在那裏獲得了經濟學學位,包括博士學位,現在是倫敦政經學院的副教授。
 
40歲的金刻羽生活在倫敦和北京,浸淫於兩種文化,現在她把自己的雙重視角帶到了講座、演講和寫作裏。《中國策略》(The New China Playbook)一書於今年5月出版。
 “如今,我童年時落後的祖國已成為世界第二大經濟體,”她在序言中寫到。“然而,世界上很多地方仍在問同樣的問題,仍在將中國與那些前共產黨國家的專製和壓迫政權相比較。”
 
金刻羽的父親曾任中國財政部副部長,現任總部位於北京的亞洲基礎設施投資銀行行長。她本周將在雅典民主論壇上發表演講。在最近的一次電話采訪中,她談到了自己對中美關係現狀的看法。雖然在一些人看來,她的回答可能對中國政府比較寬容,但她表示,她提供了一個不同的視角。
 
“我願意在采訪中談論人們緘口不言之事,”她說。“我喜歡平衡一下對話,而不是人雲亦雲,來證明另一麵的存在。”
 
訪談經過編輯和壓縮。
 
你在書中寫道,中國基本上被西方誤解了。這是怎麽回事?
 
中國是一個幅員遼闊、非常複雜,而且處於不斷發展中的國家。中國創造了一種獨特的政治集權模式,同時伴隨一種很強的經濟分權形式,這一點被嚴重誤解了。
 
很長一段時間以來,西方一直把中國描繪成國家與私營部門的對立——對後者進行打壓。事實上,中國政府需要整個私營部門的繁榮。為什麽?因為它推動經濟增長,提供了大部分就業機會,也是實現科技實力的關鍵所在,這是領導層的主要戰略目標。
為什麽美中關係目前如此令人擔憂?
 
競爭加劇所致,同時也是文明的衝突:兩個國家擁有不同的價值體係和潛在的不同世界觀。由於缺乏有效的對話和溝通,大大加劇了緊張局勢。兩個國家傾向於各執一詞,或者是各說各話,而不是互相交流。更好的溝通和更狹義的競爭政策將帶來更好的結果。開展競爭性合作是最好的選擇。
 
拜登總統是如何加劇緊張局勢的?
 
拜登提出了對半導體的出口管製,因此美國公司不能向中國出口某些類型的芯片。有大量證據表明,這可能會適得其反。首先,這促使中國為大型科技公司的利益調動國家資源。阿裏巴巴、騰訊和華為正聯手克服美國對中國提出的技術挑戰。它們以前不太可能成為合作夥伴——中國的競爭非常激烈。所以整個國家團結起來支持一個戰略目標。我不確定這是不是美國的預期目標。
對於圍繞台灣的地緣政治緊張和中國的好戰姿態,你怎麽看?
挑釁是雙向的。說中國平白無故就好戰起來是不對的。有大量證據表明,這種立場很大程度上也是對美國在該地區挑釁的回應。我認為兩國需要緩和姿態,繼續對話。
不要低估中國人民有多看重和平。他們經曆過動蕩時代,老一輩人對此的記憶是很清晰的。新一代人則是獨生子女的一代。想象一下獨生兒子的父母吧。他們是否願意支持軍事行動也是個問題。
西方社會以自由民主和法治為基礎。在美國,前總統特朗普都得多次出庭接受起訴。這在中國是難以想像的。
中國人與權威的關係並沒有得到很好地理解。這不僅是人民與國家之間的事,也是父母與子女、老師與學生之間的關係。在某種程度上,任何中國人都得在個人主義和服從權威之間找到平衡。這不是非黑即白的,而是一種灰色地帶。
思想的活力不僅存在於自由民主國家。盡管一些政治敏感議題受到審查,但中國境內的信息流動其實非常自由。各個互聯網平台上存在大量活躍的民間討論。
但異見人士和活動人士在中國遭到監禁和虐待,維吾爾少數民族也受到迫害。你不覺得你對中國所作所為的評價有點過於溫和嗎?
我願意在采訪中談論人們緘口不言之事。我喜歡平衡一下對話,而不是人雲亦雲,來證明另一麵的存在。中國是個複雜的國家。有好的地方也有壞的地方,還有我們都必須了解的未來。我想呈現的是一幅現實圖景。中國存在很多問題,任何社會都一樣。
但世界其他社會並沒有迫害維吾爾人那樣的少數民族。
我認為這樣的情況是不幸的,我不是這方麵問題的專家。但據我所知,新疆的再教育營已經關閉。遊客可以自行去看看。
我不是在為這樣的事找借口。我隻是從經濟學家的角度看到了無數人的福祉和不斷變化的環境。在某些領域有所改善,而在另外一些領域則有所倒退。
鑒於你的背景,你是否認為你的身份有助於彌合這兩個世界超級大國之間的裂痕?
如今站中間立場可不是件易事,因為你會被兩麵夾攻。我個人更願意拋開主觀感情,關注事實、真相和數據,並希望在我認為存在盲點或誤解的地方做出貢獻。兩國都太過意氣用事,這無助於讓世界變得更好。
中美之間的衝突會發展到什麽程度?
我認為目前的狀態是一種拉鋸而非關係破裂。這更像是一場口水戰,以及經濟交往的整體緩慢下降,無論是在貿易還是相互投資方麵。
我不知道這種狀態是否會永久持續下去,因為中國是世界第二大經濟體。如果中國的經濟增長率每年超過美國1.5個百分點,雖然不多,但它也會將在10年左右的時間裏成為世界第一經濟體。美國企業將不得不捫心自問,是否真願意放棄這個世界上最大的市場。而中國企業也必須問自己同樣的問題。
 
One View: Behind China-U.S. Tensions Are Misunderstandings, Author Says

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/26/world/asia/china-us-tensions-keyu-jin-interview.html?_ga=2.184205411.452759687

In an interview, the economist Keyu Jin says much of the world is asking the wrong questions — and so is drawing outdated conclusions.

 

Keyu Jin stands before a dark gray background in a red dress.

The economist Keyu Jin was educated in the United States and is now an associate professor at the London School of Economics. Her father, Jin Liqun, heads the Beijing-based Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank.Credit...Edwin Koo for The New York Times

This article is from a special report on the Athens Democracy Forum in association with The New York Times.


Keyu Jin was a 14-year-old schoolgirl in Beijing when she transferred as an exchange student to New York. She moved in with an American host family, and attended Horace Mann, a private high school in the Bronx.

She was accepted to Harvard University, where she picked up economics degrees, including a Ph.D., and is now an associate professor at the London School of Economics.

Steeped in the two cultures — she divides her time between London and Beijing — Ms. Jin, 40, now brings her dual perspective to lectures, talks and in writing. A book, “The New China Playbook,” was published in May.

“Today the backward homeland of my childhood has become the world’s second-largest economy,” she writes in the introduction. “Yet so much of the world is still asking the same questions and still comparing China to former Communist countries with their autocratic and repressive regimes.”

 

Ms. Jin — whose father, a former Chinese vice finance minister, now heads the Beijing-based Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank — is a speaker at the Athens Democracy Forum this week. In a recent phone conversation, she discussed her views on the state of play between China and the United States.

While her answers might sound lenient to some toward China’s government, she said she was offering a different perspective.

“In interviews, I like to talk about what has not been said,” she said. “I like to balance out the conversation a little bit, rather than join the chorus — show that there’s also another side.”

The conversation has been edited and condensed.

You write in your book that China is basically misunderstood by the West. How so?

China is a very large and complex nation that is constantly evolving. What is very much misunderstood is that China has created a unique model of political centralization, coupled with a strong form of economic decentralization.

 

For a long time, the West has depicted China as the state versus the private sector — a suppression of the private. In fact, the Chinese government needs every bit of the private sector to be thriving. Why? Privately owned companies drive economic growth, they provide the lion’s share of employment, and they are the ones that will carry out the key strategic objective of achieving technological prowess, which is the leadership’s main goal.

 

Why are U.S.-China relations so fraught at the moment?

Rising competition and, at the same time, a clash of civilizations: two countries with different value systems and potentially different world views. The tension has been greatly exacerbated by a lack of effective dialogue and communication. The two countries tend to talk past each other, or talk at each other, not with each other. Better communication and more narrowly defined competitive policies would lead to a much better outcome. Competitive collaboration would be best.

How has President Joseph R. Biden contributed to the tension?

Biden came out with export controls on semiconductors, so U.S. companies can’t export certain kinds of chips to China. There’s plenty of evidence suggesting that this could possibly backfire. First of all, this is pushing China to mobilize national resources for the benefit of the big Chinese tech companies. Alibaba, Tencent and Huawei are all coming together to overcome the technological challenges that the U.S. has placed on China. They were unlikely partners before — China is hugely competitive. So you get a whole nation coming together to back a strategic objective. I’m not sure that was the U.S.’s intended goal.

What about the geopolitical tensions around Taiwan and China’s bellicose stance?

The provocations go both ways. It’s incorrect to say that China is being bellicose on its own. There’s plenty of evidence that much of it is also a response to U.S. provocations in the area. I think they need to take the temperature down and to continue the dialogue.

 

I wouldn’t underestimate how much peace matters to the Chinese people. They have gone through turbulent times, and it’s fresh in the memory of the older generation. The new generation is a one-child-only generation. Imagine the parents of only sons. Whether they are willing to support military action is also in question.

Western societies are predicated on liberal democracy and the rule of law. In the U.S., we’re seeing former President Donald Trump appear multiple times in court to be indicted. This would be unimaginable in China.

Our relationship with authority is something that is not well understood. This is not just between the people and the state: It’s also between parents and children, students and teachers. A Chinese person always has to make that balance between individualism and deference to authority, to a certain degree. It’s not black and white, it’s gray.

Dynamism in ideas doesn’t only exist in liberal democracies. Information within China, despite censorship of some politically sensitive issues, is actually very free-flowing. There is a huge and dynamic civil debate on internet platforms.

But dissidents and activists are being imprisoned and mistreated in China, and the Uyghur minority is being persecuted. Don’t you think you’re a little soft on China?

 

In interviews, I like to talk about what has not been said. I like to balance out the conversation a little bit, rather than join the chorus — show that there’s also another side. China is a complex country. There’s the good, the bad, and the future that we all have to learn about. I want to show a realistic picture. There are lots of problems with China, as with any society.

But other societies around the world don’t have a minority such as the Uyghurs that they’re persecuting.

I think these are all unfortunate circumstances, and I’m not an expert on these issues. But from what I’ve learned, the Xinjiang camps are closed. Visitors can go there to examine them.

I’m not trying to make any excuses for any of these things. I just see, from an economist’s point of view, the welfare of hundreds of millions of people, and the changing circumstances. There are improvements in certain areas and regressions in certain other areas.

Given your background, do you see it as your role to bridge the gap between the two world superpowers?

 

It’s very difficult at the moment to take up that position in the middle, because you’re attacked from both sides. I personally prefer to rise above the emotions and look at the facts, the truths, the data, and hopefully contribute where I think there are blind spots or gaps in understanding. Being too submerged in emotional attitudes, which is true of both countries, is not going to help make this world a better place.

How far is the conflict between China and the U.S. going to go?

I think it’s a tussle but not a break. It’s more a war of words, and a slow structural decline in economic engagement, whether in terms of trade or mutual investment.

I don’t know if this is going to be permanent, because China is the second-largest economy in the world. And if China outpaces the U.S. in growth rates by 1.5 percentage points a year, which is not a lot, it will become the largest economy in the world in a little over 10 years. American businesses will have to ask themselves whether they want to forsake the largest market in the world. And Chinese enterprises will have to ask themselves the same question.

A correction was made on 
Sept. 26, 2023

A caption in an earlier version of this article incorrectly identified the economist Keyu Jin as head of the Beijing-based Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. The investment bank is headed by Ms. Jin’s father, Jin Liqun, not by Ms. Jin.

How we handle corrections

Farah Nayeri writes on art and culture in Europe. She is the author of “Takedown: Art and Power in the Digital Age.” More about Farah Nayeri

[ 打印 ]
閱讀 ()評論 (0)
評論
目前還沒有任何評論
登錄後才可評論.