驻美大使崔天凯：美国别幻想强加给中国另一个“广场协议”_风闻

编者按：8月30日上午，中美贸易智库系列对话之二“把脉当下中美关系的温度：当前状况与未来走向”研讨会由中国人民大学重阳金融研究院与美国战略与国际问题研究中心(CSIS)在华盛顿共同主办。中国驻美大使崔天凯出席午餐会并发表演讲。经授权，将演讲内容中英文独家刊发如下：

很荣幸再次来到美国战略与国际问题研究中心（CSIS），每次到访这里都让我得到启发，有所收获，特别是今天在座的还有我的一些老同事、老朋友和来自中国人民大学重阳金融研究院的学者。

在英语中，“Think Tank"一词的意思可望文生义、一目了然，但翻译成中文"智库”，则意思要更复杂些。“智库"实际上意味着"智慧的储备”，不仅要求思考，还要求明智地思考，今天这个讨论也准确反映了这一解释。因此，我在跟智库交流时始终心存敬畏，态度谦逊。我在这里并非想要提出什么智慧的见解，只希望能与你们分享一些常识。

坦率讲，当前我们面临一个很大的问题。一些人虽然身居高位，或需要在经济、战略问题上向国家领导人和政府部门建言献策，但他们却缺乏足够的常识。这些人相信，他们可以无视经济规律，破坏全球供应链，却不会对自身经济造成任何损害；他们可以永远垄断新技术，阻止他人创新并从技术进步中获益；他们可以通过指责别人来逃避肩负的重责，比如解决国内日益严重的经济社会分化问题等；他们可以通过四处树敌来让自己变得"伟大"。正是这种思维方式增加了当前国际关系的不确定性，给中美双边关系，特别是经贸关系带来困难。

今天午餐会的主题是"下一步"。中方对下一步该做什么是很清楚的。我奉劝那些认为可以将另一个"广场协议"强加给中国，认为中国会屈服于恐吓、威胁和无端指责的人放弃幻想。与此同时，中方始终致力于在相互尊重的基础上，采取能照顾双方关切的平衡方式，通过严肃、务实和实质性的谈判磋商来解决经贸问题，这个过程必须是能相互释放善意，体现彼此诚信的。通过这样的方式，经贸问题的解决当不至困难如斯。

当然，也有很多人关心中美关系何去何从，担心当前局势会对我们两国关系的未来产生影响。存在这样的担忧不是没有道理的。但我满怀信心，只要我们对当今世界的现实有清醒的认识，对两国共同的未来有明确的愿景，我们就可以战胜当前困难，并着眼未来建立一个更加强劲、稳定的中美关系。

人们常常谈到"修昔底德陷阱"。我本人也同撰写《必有一战：中美是否能逃脱修昔底德陷阱》一书的作者艾利森教授有过多次很好的交流。我认为很多人对他这本书要传递的主要信息存在误解或误读。在书中，他提到历史上有过16起所谓"新兴崛起大国"对"守成大国"构成挑战和威胁的案例，其中12次以战争和冲突告终，只有4次是以相对和平的方式实现了过渡。因此有人认为，历史上曾经发生过的事情，将在中美两国之间重演。

但我不认为这些在欧洲历史上发生过的事，会不可避免地在中美之间重演。对美国而言，如果相信欧洲历史会重演，那先驱者们为什么要开辟美洲新大陆？对中国来说，我们有悠久而独特的文明。上述16个历史案例所涉及的国家中，有哪个是运用综合调理以达阴阳平衡的中医来看病的？有哪个是协调手指使用筷子来吃饭的？有哪个是应用单字能独立表意、组合则衍生不同含义的方块字来表达的？

当然，我不是说中华文化一枝独秀，而是我们确实有不同的选择，可以找到更好的替代方式。中华文明一直强调和谐、协调、灵活、开放、宽容，如果我们能充分运用这些价值观，相信中美两国必能找到一条新的道路，建立新型大国关系。诚然，避免坠入"陷阱"的最好办法就是开辟一条新路，这是我们两国面临的共同任务，也是我们理应担当的国际和历史责任。

为了实现这些目标，需要有人来指明道路并绘制路线，这就是我们需要智库的原因。相信来自CSIS和人大重阳的专家学者们能发挥好这样的作用。期待从各位的讨论中受益。

谢谢！

附英文版

Remarks of AMB.Cui Tiankai at the

 Working Lunch of Roundtable Discussion Between CSIS and RDCY

（August 30, 2018）

It’s always been a great pleasure to come back to the Center for Strategic and International Studies(CSIS), especially with my old friends and colleagues today. I feel inspired every time I come here, particularly so as we have Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies, Renmin University of China(RDCY) with us today.

The term “think tank” is very clear and easy to understand in English. But its Chinese equivalent 智库（“Zhiku”）is more sophisticated. It literally means a reservoir with wisdom. It not only requires people to think, but also to think wisely. I am sure this is how we should describe the discussions today, which makes me a little bit humbled and scared whenever I am invited to speak to think tanks. I do not intend to offer you anything of wisdom, but rather something that carries common sense.

Honestly speaking, we are facing a big problem. Some people who are in high places or are advising the government and leaders on economic and strategic issues don’t have sufficient common sense. For instance, they believe that they could disrupt the global supply chain in defiance of all the economic imperatives without any damage to their own economy. They believe that they might keep monopoly of innovation forever and prevent others from making innovations and benefiting from technological progress. They believe that they could point finger at others and escape the heavy responsibility of addressing the increasing economic and social divides at home. They believe that they could make themselves great by making everyone else their enemies. I think it is such a mindset that could go a long way to account for the current uncertainties in international relations and difficulties in our bilateral relations, especially on trade and economic issues.

The topic for lunch is “Next Steps”. On what to do next, for China it is very clear. I wish to advise people to give up the illusion that another Plaza Accord could be imposed on China. They should give up the illusion that China will ever give in to intimidation, coercion or groundless accusation. But at the same time, China is always ready to engage in serious, substantive and pragmatic negotiations and consultations to address the economic and trade issues on the basis of mutual respect and a balanced approach to resolve the concerns of both sides. This has to be a process of goodwill for goodwill and good faith for good faith. If we can reach an agreement through this approach, I don’t think the current economic and trade issues would be that difficult.

And of course many people are worried about the impact the current situation would have on the future of our relations and where the China-U.S. relationship is going.

I think they have very good reasons to be worried.But I’m still confident that our two countries would be able to overcome the difficulties and build a strong and steady relationship for the future, as long as we have a clear understanding of today’s world, as long as we have a clear vision of our common future.

People now talk a lot about the so-called “Thucydides Trap”. I have had several very long conversations with Prof. Graham Allison, the author of  Destined for War: Can America and China Escape Thucydides’s Trap? I think the key message in this book has been misread and misinterpreted by so many people.In the book, he mentioned 16 cases in history of the relations between the so-called“rising power” and the “existing power”. Out of the 16 cases, 12 ended up in wars and conflicts. Only 4 of them experienced relatively peaceful transitions.So some people believe that what happened in the past would recur between our two countries.

But I don’t think what happened in the past in Europe is inevitable for our two countries. For America, if you believe so, then why did the American founding fathers come to the New Continent in the first place? For China, it has its own long history of civilization. Out of all the countries in these 16 historical cases, how many of them practice a type of medicine that takes the body as an integral whole with achieving balance as the key? How many of them use chopsticks that emphasize the coordination of fingers?How many of them use characters in their languages and each character standing on its own would need a good structure, but together they could make numerous combinations in a very flexible way and mean a lot of different things.

I am not suggesting that the Chinese culture is exceptional; what I am saying is that we do have a different choice; we do have a good alternative. The Chinese civilization and culture has all along stressed the values of harmony, cohesion, flexibility, openness and tolerance.If we give full play to all these values, I am sure our two countries can find a new path and build a new type of relations between major countries. And indeed, the best way of avoiding a trap is to open a new path. And this is I believe a common task for our two countries and our shared responsibility to the world and to history. Of course, in order to achieve these goals, we need people to show us the way forward, we need people to draw up the roadmaps.That’s why we need people in think tanks, people in CSIS and in RDCY to help us and guide us. I look forward to benefiting from your discussions here today.

 Thank you!