左膠的天真 拜登的政策使台灣變得更脆弱 謝蘭尼（Brahma Chellaney）＠自由 20231217

【雙魚之論】英文拷到 G / D 找中文翻譯
To maintain peace, it is imperative for the involved parties to provide assurances to their counterparts. Achieving this requires instilling genuine trust in the validity of promises.
Building on this premise, three specialists, including Bonnie Glaser, authored a lengthy essay for Foreign Affairs, emphasizing the importance for the U.S. to 'reassure, not just threaten, China.'
However, a potential challenge arises if counterparts deliberately choose not to believe the assurances they receive. Regardless of their sincerity, they may gain more concessions than warranted. The three scholars did not contemplate this possibility and assumed that counterparts are inherently trustworthy, which is precisely contrary to their assertion.

為了維持和平，參與方有必要向其對手提供保證。實現這一點需要灌輸對諾言有效性的真誠信任。
基於這一前提，包括葛萊儀在內的三位專家為《外交事務》撰寫了一篇冗長的文章，強調了美國「安撫而非威脅中國」的重要性。然而，如果對手刻意選擇不相信他們所接收到的保證，就可能面臨潛在的挑戰。無論真誠與否，他們可能獲得比應有的更多讓步。

這三位學者並未考慮到這種可能性，而是假定對手在根本上是值得信任的，這正好與他們的主張相反。

台灣與威懾的真正來源 - 為什麼美國必須安撫中國，而不僅僅是威脅中國（1/3） Bonnie S. Glaser, Jessica Chen Weiss, and Thomas J. Christensen＠Foreign Affairs/Taimocracy翻譯 20201130

 

拜登的政策使台灣變得更脆弱    謝蘭尼（Brahma Chellaney）＠自由 20231217

美國對中國不切實際的幻想，造就了美國有史以來最大的戰略競爭對手。四十五年來，從尼克森（Richard Nixon）到歐巴馬（Barack Obama），歷任美國總統都在政策上幫助中國經濟崛起。即使北京在貿易規則上欺騙造假、竊取技術，甚至大秀軍事肌肉，包括恫嚇台灣，美國也睜一隻眼閉一隻眼，天真地希望一個更加繁榮的中國，會在經濟和政治上實現自由化。

對中幻想 依然存在華府政壇

儘管美國的中國政策在前總統川普主政下，出現根本性的轉變，但在某種程度上，美國對中國的幻想依然存在，使得尋求一套清晰的戰略，以阻止中國國家主席習近平對台灣採取行動，變得更為複雜。

例如，相較於加強嚇阻，包括嚴肅評估中國封鎖台灣的可能性，拜登總統更在意的是如何安撫北京。美國迫切需要透過增加軍售和軍事訓練，來協助強化台灣的防禦能力。雖然烏克蘭對俄羅斯軍隊的反攻失敗了，拜登還是持續優先提供武器給烏克蘭，美國對台灣的軍備交運因而延宕數年之久。

今年，拜登安撫中國的積極令人側目—先是派遣一連串內閣官員訪問北京，接著在加州與習近平舉行峰會，甚至強調美國主導的國際行動旨在將對中關係「去風險化」（de-risk），而不是與中國「脫鉤」（decouple）。

拜登一方面關閉與俄羅斯的外交溝通管道，另一方面卻懇求中國設法穩定雙邊關係。拜登將美國這個比中國更強大的國家，塑造成比中國更熱中於改善兩國關係的樣態，可能會助長習近平的冒險行為。

在與中國打交道時，拜登手上的籌碼並不像他以為的這麼多。美國進一步介入烏克蘭和以色列戰爭，正在消耗美國的外交和軍事資源。這可能會誘使習近平對台灣採取行動，尤其是因為他知道美國將難以同時應付第三場戰爭。事實上，烏克蘭和加薩戰爭持續的時間愈長，北京對台灣發動侵略的可能性就愈大。

美陷烏戰 北京對台動武機率升

然而，在這種一廂情願驅使他向中國示好的同時，拜登不僅在他的烏克蘭戰略上加倍下注，還警告說若美國國會不批准向基輔提供六一○億美元的額外援助，「美國軍隊將與俄羅斯軍隊作戰」。美國陷入曠日持久的烏克蘭戰爭，將為北京對台動武創造更大的可能性。

儘管近年來美國的對中政策辯論反映出更多的現實主義色彩，拜登的作為仍是以不切實際的幻想為依歸。幻想之一是相信中國會在全球重大議題上與美國合作，拜登現在正是如此。另一個幻想則是，侵略台灣或溝通不良的風險，可以透過定期對話來緩解，包括軍事接觸在內。

這種思維忽略了一個事實，即中國的戰略向來以隱密、欺騙和出其不意為核心。從南中國海到喜馬拉雅山，這三個因素構成中國擴張主義的特徵。由於習近平不可預測，美國必須投注更多心力，在印度—太平洋地區加強嚇阻。

遺憾的是，一些美國學者也對中國抱有幻想。例如，三位中國問題專家在最近的一篇投書中指出，要避免中國侵略台灣，美國就必須「讓中國放心，而非僅止於威嚇」。他們的論點實際上是在呼籲，對中國脅迫台灣的逐漸常態化給予獎勵。

這不禁讓我們想起，當中國在南中國海興建人工島礁並將其軍事化時，美國是如何視而不見。事實上，在習近平的造島行動達到高峰時，在白宮的任期剩下最後一年的歐巴馬說：「比起一個成功的、崛起的中國，我們更害怕的是一個衰弱的、感受到威脅的中國。」這種綏靖政策協助中國在沒有付出任何國際代價的情況下，將其對南中國海的歷史性主權聲索變成現實。

在南中國海的成功擴張，讓習近平妄想在他任內併吞台灣的決心更為堅定，尤其是美國在印太地區的軍事優勢正逐漸遭到中國侵蝕。更糟糕的是，美國捲入烏克蘭戰爭，使台灣更難以抵擋中國的侵略。烏克蘭已經取得原本可能要運往台灣的關鍵戰爭物資。

如何保台 美仍缺乏戰略明確性

可是，部分美國人仍然認為，美國須先在烏克蘭擊敗俄羅斯，才能轉向遏制中國。好像習近平會等到美國在戰場上痛宰俄羅斯，然後集中心力對付中國，才會對台灣採取行動似的！

台灣維持自治狀態，對美國維護其全球優勢地位至關重要。然而，在超過三分之二的美國選民擔心八十一歲的拜登的身心健康之際，令人震驚的是，對於如何遏阻或應付中國對台灣發動攻擊，美國仍然缺乏戰略明確性。

如果習近平認為，中國在拜登擔任總統期間有機可乘，他可能就會對台灣下手。一旦發生這種情況，中國就可能成為美國自身的迫切軍事威脅。

Brahma Chellaney On Taiwan: Biden’s policies make Taiwan more vulnerable

American fantasies about China helped create the biggest strategic adversary the US has ever faced. For over 45 years, from Richard Nixon to Barack Obama, successive American presidents aided China’s economic rise as a matter of policy. Even as Beijing cheated on trade rules, stole technology, and flexed its military muscle, including against Taiwan, the US looked the other way, in the naive hope that a more prosperous China would liberalize economically and politically.

Despite the fundamental shift in America’s China policy introduced by then-US president Donald Trump’s administration, US fantasies, to some extent, still persist, complicating the pursuit of a cleareyed strategy to deter Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) from moving against Taiwan.

Consider, for example, President Joe Biden’s greater emphasis on placating Beijing than on strengthening deterrence, including by taking the possibility of a Chinese blockade of Taiwan seriously. The US needs to urgently help bolster Taiwan’s defenses by stepping up arms sales and military training. But with Biden continuing to prioritize weapons deliveries to Ukraine despite its failed counteroffensive against Russian forces, US arms transfers to Taipei are lagging years behind orders.

This year has stood out for Biden’s conciliatory moves toward China — from sending a string of cabinet officials to Beijing and holding a summit meeting with Xi in California to emphasizing that the US-led effort is to “de-risk” the relationship with China but not to “decouple” from it.

While keeping the door to diplomacy with Russia shut, Biden has beseeched China to stabilize bilateral ties. By presenting the US, the stronger power, as more zealous than China to improve relations, Biden could embolden Xi’s risk-taking.

In dealing with China, Biden has a weaker hand that he would like. The deepening US involvement in the Ukraine and Israel wars is sapping America’s diplomatic and military resources. This could tempt Xi to move on Taiwan, especially because he knows the US would struggle to deal with a third war simultaneously. In fact, the longer the Ukraine and Gaza wars rage, the greater would be the likelihood of Beijing launching aggression against Taiwan.

Yet, while letting hope drive his overtures to China, Biden has not only doubled down on his Ukraine strategy but also is raising the specter of “American troops fighting Russian troops” if the US Congress does not approve US$61 billion in additional assistance for Kyiv. A US mired in a protracted Ukraine war would open greater opportunity for Beijing to move on Taiwan.

Despite the China-policy debate in the US reflecting more realism in recent years, illusions continue to guide Biden’s approach. One illusion is to believe, as Biden apparently does, that China would cooperate with the US on major global issues. Another illusion is that risks of aggression against Taiwan or miscommunication can be mitigated through regular dialogue, including military-to-military contact.

Such thinking misses the fact that China’s strategy centers on stealth, deception and surprise. These three elements have characterized China’s expansionism from the South China Sea to the Himalayas. Xi’s unpredictability demands greater US attention to shoring up deterrence in the Indo-Pacific region.

Unfortunately, the China fantasies extend to some American scholars. For example, three China specialists argued in a recent essay that averting Chinese aggression against Taiwan demands that the US “reassure, not just threaten, China.” Their thesis effectively calls for rewarding China for steadily regularizing its coercion of Taiwan.

This is redolent of how the US looked the other way as China created and militarized artificial islands in the South China Sea. Indeed, at the height of Xi’s island-building drive, Obama argued in his final year in the White House that “we have more to fear from a weakened, threatened China than a successful, rising China.” Such appeasement helped turn China’s contrived historical claims to the South China Sea into reality without Beijing incurring any international costs.

Success in the South China Sea has made Xi more determined to annex Taiwan on his watch, especially as China erodes America’s military’s edge in the Indo-Pacific. Worse still, America’s entanglement in the Ukraine war has made Taiwan more vulnerable to Chinese aggression. Ukraine has secured key war materiel that could have gone to Taipei.

Yet, some Americans still argue that the US must first defeat Russia in Ukraine before pivoting to deter China. It is as if Xi would wait on Taiwan until the US has humiliated Russia on the battlefield and turned its attention to containing China!

Taiwan’s continued autonomous status is central to America’s safeguarding of its global preeminence. Yet, at a time when more than two-thirds of American voters worry about the 81-year-old Biden’s mental and physical health, the lack of US strategic clarity on how to deter or respond to a Chinese attack on Taiwan is striking.

If Xi perceives that China has a window of opportunity to act during the Biden presidency, he will likely move on Taiwan. If that were to happen, China would likely emerge as a pressing military threat to the US itself.

Brahma Chellaney, a professor of strategic studies at the New Delhi-based Center for Policy Research, is the author of nine books, including the award-winning Water: Asia’s New Battleground (Georgetown University Press).