华盛顿时报 我们在中国自说自话

在国家利益继续分歧时，美国与中国越来越自说自话，国防部长盖茨最近的北京之旅正是一个例子。

　　盖茨试图提出中国支持伊朗的问题。北京不仅反对制裁伊朗核计划，而且还以常规武器武装伊朗，这些武器部分落入伊拉克、阿富汗和黎巴嫩叛军之手。但中国沉默以对，只是敦促以“和平手段”对付伊朗的野心。关于北京的反卫星试验，盖茨得到的回答甚至更少。

　　同时，中国的飞船正前往月球，中国的工厂在生产新的核导弹和军用机，而且中国的造船所比美国的更快地建造潜艇和驱逐舰。北京要推翻美国“霸权”的目标似乎相当透明。

　　华盛顿对北京的意图缺乏了解，这种情况不仅限于五角大楼。财政部也装聋作哑。11月14日，特使霍尔默（Alan Holmer）为下月的战略经济对话铺路。在清华大学，霍尔默宣称“美中经济互相依存性在加深”，指出在过去五年，美国对华出口慢慢从180亿美元增长到520亿美元，而美国从中国的进口从1020亿美元猛增到2870亿美元。美国的贸易赤字差不多乘三倍，从840亿美元到2350亿美元。

　　随着美国进一步深入中国债权人的洞，关系在“加深”。北京如今开始用它庞大的财政储备（估计有1.4万亿）支持国有企业和主权基金收购外国资源、技术和生产性资产以推进中国的能力。

　　中国用成功催生更多的成功，因此当美国官员试图说服中国官员为了他们自己的好处改变方向时，北京领导人一定觉得匪夷所思。霍尔默告诉中国官员“中国需要大胆的结构性政策改变中国增长，从重工业、高能耗、资本密集和依赖出口转向更依赖内需、服务产业以及让中国家庭获得更大份额的国民收入。”

　　别指望了。但我们现在所做的就是许愿和谈话（主要是跟自己谈）。

　　10月，中国的商品出口比去年同期增长22.3%，达1077亿美元，产生270亿美元的月盈余。即使中国满足其日益扩大的工业基地所需的石油和其他商品涨价，但中国继续出口更多商品，足以支付它所需要的。因此在贸易政策上，谁该给谁上课？

　　人民币低估就是北京用于支持国际扩张（同时保护国内经济）的众多重商主义政策之一。霍尔默指出“许多国家日益把人民币的汇率视为不公平竞争的源泉。越来越多的国家领导人和多国机构呼吁人民币升值。”

　　但在同一篇演讲中，他向中国人保证布什政府会继续反对国会向中国施压的提议。他试图说服北京，让市场力量设定人民币汇率比政府法令更符合中国的利益。只要北京可以继续成功地追逐它掠夺性的利益而不必担心华盛顿的反制，那些都没戏。

　　霍尔默徒劳地抱怨在中国经常帐盈余的庞大且日益增长的背景下，中国给美国出口和投资设置壁垒。在这方面，同样的挫折感会继续下去。

　　既然霍尔默和布什政府的其他人只是自说自话，他们应该听听自己的话。霍尔默有些话是正确的，他说：“中国在世界舞台重新崛起是近代最影响深远的地缘政治事件之一。因此，几乎没有哪个问题（从贸易，到国家安全，到气候变化）或哪个地方（从朝鲜到伊朗到苏丹）没有美国和中国利益的日益重叠（overlap）。”他应该说“冲突（conflict）”。

　　继续一种失衡的经济关系，给中国提供追求全球野心的手段，将让所有这些有争议的情况变得更糟（从美国的观点来看）。

　　中国不会自动改变其成功的贸易政策。美国需要改变自己不成功的贸易政策。谈论一个假想的合作世界并不是取代现实世界战略竞争中的行动的有效替代品。（作者 William Hawkins）

Talking to ourselves on China

William Hawkins

November 23, 2007

The recent visit to Beijing by Defense Secretary Robert Gates was an example of how the United States and China increasingly are talking past each other as their national interests continue to diverge.

Mr. Gates tried to raise the issue of Chinese support for Iran. It is not just Beijing's opposition to sanctions against Tehran's nuclear program. China is arming Iran with conventional weapons, some of which end up in the hands of insurgents and militias in Iraq, Afghanistan and Lebanon. But his hosts were silent except to urge only "peaceful means" be used to counter Iran's ambitions. Mr. Gates got even less of an answer about Beijing's anti-satellite test.

Meanwhile, during the Gates visit a Chinese spacecraft was headed to the moon, Chinese factories were turning out new nuclear missiles and warplanes, and Chinese shipyards were building submarines and destroyers faster than American yards. Bejing's aim of overthrowing American "hegemony" seems quite transparent.

The supposed lack of understanding in Washington about Beijing's intentions is not limited to the Pentagon. The Treasury is also playing dumb. On Nov. 14, Special Envoy Alan Holmer was in China to lay the ground work for the Strategic Economic Dialogue next month. At Qinghua University, Mr. Holmer proclaimed "U.S.-China economic interdependence is deepening," noting that over the last five years U.S. exports to China have grown slowly from $18 to $52 billion, while U.S. imports from China have jumped from $102 to $287 billion. That's nearly tripled the American trade deficit, from $84 billion to $235 billion.

The relationship is "deepening" as America goes further into the hole to Chinese creditors. Beijing is now starting to use its massive financial reserves — estimated at $1.4 trillion — to bankroll state enterprises and sovereign wealth funds in their quest to buy up foreign resources, technology and productive assets to further Chinese capabilities.

China is using success to generate more success, so it must seem strange to Beijing's leaders when American officials try to persuade them to change course for their own good. Mr. Holmer told his hosts that "Bold structural policies are needed to shift China's growth away from heavy industry, high energy use, capital intensiveness, and dependence on exports — towards greater reliance on domestic demand, production of services, and a greater share of China's national income accruing to China's households."

Don't we wish. But wishing and talking (mainly to ourselves) is all that is being done.

Merchandise exports from China in October rose 22.3 percent from the same month last year, to $107.7 billion, generating a surplus for the month of $27 billion. Even with rising world prices for the oil and other commodities China imports to feed its expanding industrial base, the country continues to export more than enough to pay for what it needs. So who should be giving lessons in trade policy to whom?

Among the many mercantilist policies Beijing uses to support international expansion, while protecting its domestic economy, is its undervalued currency, the RMB (renminbi). Mr. Holmer noted that "the RMB's exchange rate is increasingly being viewed by many countries as a source of unfair competition. A growing number of national leaders and multilateral institutions are calling for currency appreciation."

But in the same speech, he assured the Chinese that "the Bush administration continues to oppose congressional proposals" to pressure China to change its policy (not that Congress has done anything to advance these proposals). Instead, he tried to persuade Beijing it would be in its own interest to set the RMB by market forces rather than government fiat. Fat chance, as long as Beijing can continue to successfully pursue its predatory interests without fear of counteraction by Washington.

The same frustration will continue in regard to "Chinese barriers to U.S. exports and investment, in the context of a large and rising Chinese current account surplus," about which Mr. Holmer also complained in vain.

Since Mr. Holmer and the rest of the Bush administration are only talking to themselves, they should listen to their own words. Mr. Holmer was right in saying: "China's re-emergence on the global stage is one of the most consequential geopolitical events of recent times. There is hardly an issue (from trade, to national security, to climate change) or a place (from North Korea to Iran to Sudan) where American and Chinese interests do not increasingly overlap." He should have said "conflict."

Providing China with the means to pursue its global ambitions by continuing a lopsided economic relationship will make all of these contentious situations worse from the American perspective.

China won't voluntarily change its successful trade policy. America needs to change its unsuccessful one. Talking about an imaginary world of cooperation is not an effective substitute for acting in the real world of strategic rivalry.

William Hawkins is senior fellow for national security studies at the U.S. Business and Industry Council in Washington, D.C.