对华态度大相径庭，北约欧盟分歧凸显_风闻
钢铁沧澜-2020-06-29 10:35
对华态度大相径庭，北约欧盟分歧凸显
作者：兰顺正
首发自：CGTN
当地时间6月8日，北约秘书长斯托尔滕贝格（Jens Stoltenberg）在美国大西洋理事会和德国马歇尔基金会举办的论坛上发表讲话。在谈及对北约2030年展望时，斯托尔滕贝格对中国言辞不善，宣称中国的崛起“从根本上改变了全球力量平衡，加剧了经济和技术霸权的争夺，加大对开放社会和个人自由的威胁”等等。而在6月9日，在中欧第十轮高级别战略对话结束后，欧盟外交与安全政策高级代表博雷利则对媒体表示，他不认为中国给欧盟带来了军事或安全威胁，欧盟坚持以现实主义视角看待中欧关系，双方在很多问题上存在共同利益。明显的是，北约与欧盟在对华态度上的大相径庭将两者的分歧表露无余。
由于欧洲历来是北约的安全核心关切所在，而欧盟则是北约的战略合作伙伴。因此北约与欧盟在2001年正式建立制度化的合作伙伴关系后，二者的关系发展十分迅速，但是近年来随着国际形势的变化，北约与欧盟之间的裂痕也在加大，这其中特别以安全领域为最。
一方面，特朗普于 2016 年美国大选期间提出“北约过时”论，要求盟友“全额报销”美驻军费用，将盟友分担责任情况与美国履行北约承诺相挂钩，不断在责任分担问题上施压。但由于欧洲经济疲软且各国安全立场不尽相同，欧洲国家军费增幅难以满足美国的要求，特朗普在2018年布鲁塞尔峰会上予以激烈抨击。另一方面，美国将北约视为一种交易性质的联盟，而非维护美欧之间共同价值观的军事同盟，只愿意向那些被认定公平分担北约责任的盟友提供防务支持。因此北约在打造欧洲安全秩序时，更多的是依据自身的需要，却较少考虑其他欧洲国家的安全要求，甚至期望使它们都接受北约的设计，这种做法无疑会引起欧盟一些国家的反感。为此，近年来马克龙、默克尔等领导人质疑美国是否坚持欧洲的盟友地位，号召欧洲建立独立于北约的防务力量，以自强来确保欧洲的安全。
在对华问题上，北约与欧盟也有各自的打算。冷战结束后，北约在新的环境中依然通过树立新的战略对手来增强自身存在的合法性。除了俄罗斯之外，随着近年来中国影响力的增长，北约也将中国界定为重要的安全治理客体。北约认为中国国防预算排名世界第二并拥有全新的现代化军事能力，中国崛起已经改变了全球的力量平衡。在美国看来，中国未来将会对其霸权构成挑战，因此将中国定位为北约的假想敌并渲染中国威胁，既可以利用北约其他成员一齐遏制中国，也能够让美国继续坐稳“盟主”的宝座。正如此次斯托尔滕贝格声称：“他们（中国）已经拥有（全球）第二高的国防预算，正大力投资现代军事能力，包括可以打到所有北约盟国的导弹……”为此，要将北约“打造成更强大的政治联盟”，包括加强与澳大利亚、日本、韩国、新西兰等亚太地区“志同道合”伙伴的合作。
欧盟对于中国却有着不同看法。从中欧的经贸合作看，当前两者已经形成了良好的基础，合作广度不断扩展，合作深度日趋加深。如“一带一路”倡议为中欧拓展了合作平台，欧盟对于该倡议态度表现积极。欧盟在 2019 年 3 月份发布“欧盟—中国：战略展望”报告，认为在经济方面应加强与中方合作，落实欧亚互联互通战略。当前形势下，欧盟多重危机缠身迫切需要同中国开展多层次的合作，而将中国树立为战略对手无异于放弃中欧合作的重大发展机遇，因此并不完全认同北约敌视中国的态度。在2019 年末，美国国务卿蓬佩奥宣称北约正面临中国破坏北约安全的企图，因此北约必须继续发展并采取新的安全视角。同年北约峰会推出对华政策“内部报告”并提出“应对中国崛起带来的机遇和挑战”的计划。而德法两国并不认同美国与北约的表态，马克龙直言北约共同的敌人是恐怖主义，而非俄罗斯或中国。另外欧洲各国政府也在包括 5G移动通信网络建设在内的多项发展领域采取了不同于美国的政策。此次博雷利对媒体表示，他认为欧盟应坚持从现实主义出发看待中国，目前双方在很多议题上正进行着“公开而坦诚”的对话。同时，博雷利还指出中欧在不少事务上拥有共同利益，例如双方都希望继续支持伊核协议等。
可以看出，未来随着中国国力的增长以及为实现“人类命运共同体”而采取的越来越多的实际行动，基于切身利益和发展需求的欧盟将会在同北约、美国、中国的多重关系中寻求平衡，而不是盲目的听从他人的鼓动。
（以下为英文原版）
How EU and NATO see China is pivotal to their own development
Lan Shunzheng
***Editor’s note:*Lan Shunzheng is a research fellow at the Charhar Institute and a member of the Chinese Institute of Command and Control. The article reflects the author’s opinions, and not necessarily the views of CGTN.
When talking about the 2030 outlook for NATO at a forum hosted by the Atlantic Council and the German Marshall Fund of the United States on June 8, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said the rise of China “fundamentally changed the balance of power in the world, contributed to the economic and technological competition for hegemony, to open the threat of social and individual freedom” and so on.
On June 9, in the end of the 10th round of China-European Union (EU) High-level Strategic Dialogue, the EU’s Foreign and Security Policy High Representative Josep Borrell told reporters he did not think China brought a military or security threat to the EU, for the EU to have a realistic perspective on China-EU relations, and that the two sides in many issues of common interest. It is clear that the very different attitudes of NATO and the EU towards China have exposed their differences.
Since Europe has always been NATO’s core security concern, the EU is NATO’s strategic partner. Thus, since the establishment of the formal institutionalized partnership between NATO and the EU in 2001, the relationship between the two has developed rapidly.
But in recent years, with the change of the international situation, the rift between NATO and the EU is also widening, especially in the security field.
On the one hand, Trump put forward the “outdated NATO” theory during the 2016 U.S. election, requiring allies to “fully reimburse” the U.S. military forces, and linking the burden shared between Allies and the U.S.’ fulfillment of NATO commitments.
However, due to the weak economy and different security positions of European countries, it is difficult for European countries to meet the demand of the U.S. to increase their military expenditure, which was severely criticized by Trump at the 2018 Brussels summit.
The U.S., on the other hand, sees NATO as a transactional alliance rather than a military alliance that upholds shared values between the U.S. and Europe, and is willing to provide defense support only to Allies deemed to share NATO’s responsibilities fairly.
Therefore, when NATO is building the European security order, it is more based on its own needs, but gives little consideration to the security requirements of other European countries, and even expects them to accept the design of NATO, which will undoubtedly arouse the aversion of some EU countries. For this reason, in recent years, Macron, Merkel and other leaders have questioned whether the United States maintains its position as an ally in Europe and called on Europe to build a defense force independent of NATO to strengthen its security.
On the issue of China, NATO and the EU also have their own plans. After the end of the Cold War, NATO still needs to build new strategic rivals to enhance the legitimacy of its existence in the new environment.
In addition to Russia, NATO defines China as an important object of security governance. NATO argues that China’s rise, with what Stoltenberg alleged as the world’s second-largest defense budget and a new modern military capability, has changed the global balance of power. Therefore, positioning China as the imaginary enemy of NATO and playing up the Threat of China can not only use other NATO members to contain China, but also keep the U.S. as the “leader”.
As Stoltenberg said this time: “They (China) already have the second largest defense budget [in the world] and are investing heavily in modern military capabilities, including missiles that can reach all NATO allies…” To this end, NATO should be “built into a stronger political union”, including enhanced cooperation with “like-minded” partners in the Asia-Pacific region such as Australia, Japan, South Korea and New Zealand.
However, the EU has a different attitude towards China. In regard of economic and trade cooperation, the two sides have set up a deep foundation. For example, the Belt and Road Initiative has expanded the platform for cooperation between China and the EU, and the EU has taken a positive attitude towards the Initiative.
The EU has released the “EU-China Strategic Outlook” report in March 2019, calling for a closer bilateral economic cooperation and the implementation of the Eurasian connectivity strategy.
Therefore, the EU, beset by multiple crises, urgently needs to carry out multi-level cooperation with China, and establishing China as a strategic rival is tantamount to giving up major development opportunities for China-Eu cooperation.
Besides, the hostile attitude of NATO towards China is not fully recognized. In late 2019, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo declared that NATO was facing an attempt by China to undermine its security, so the alliance must continue to evolve and adopt a new security perspective.
In the same year, the NATO Summit launched an “internal report” on China policy and a plan to “address the opportunities and challenges posed by China’s rise”. Germany and France disagreed with the U.S. and NATO, with Macron bluntly saying the alliance’s common enemy is terrorism, not Russia or China.
It can be seen that in the future, the EU based on its vital interests and development needs will seek balance in its multiple relations with NATO, the United States and China, instead of blindly following the instigation of others.