習近平想要幹什麼？
托馬斯·弗里德曼 2015年04月17日
雖然美國和伊朗的關係正在吸引所有人的關注，而且對中東的未來至關重要，美國和中國關係則是與全世界都息息相關——而且還有許多我們看不到的暗流在涌動。「一國兩制」的概念是為了描述香港和中國內地的關係而創造出來的。然而實際上：美中兩國的經濟和未來在當下已經完全交織在一起，以至於它們成了真正需要關注的「一國兩制」。最近在中國海南島參加盛大的博鰲論壇，並聆聽了習近平主席的演講之後，給我留下最深印象的是，這段關係中的雙方似乎總是在問對方，「你是怎麼回事啊？」
兩國幾乎都以為它們這種緊密關係是理所當然的：每年6000億美元的雙邊貿易額；27.5萬中國人目前在美國留學，2.5萬美國人在中國留學；中國是美國最大的農產品市場，是持有美國債券最多的國家；去年，中國在美國的投資首次超過了美國在中國的投資。
- Josh Haner/The New York Times托馬斯·弗里德曼
不過，在這些表象之下你會發現，這兩種制度越來越對彼此感到困惑。中國官員仍然沒有從這樣的震驚中走出來：美國居然可以如此大意，觸發了2008年的全球次貸危機。而他們曾把美國看做經濟榜樣，許多人在那裡了解了資本主義制度。這讓一些中國人開始認為，美國是一個衰落中的超級大國。
讓中國官員困惑的還有奧巴馬團隊抵制中國設立亞洲基礎設施投資銀行的行動。美國的方法是遊說最大的經濟盟友——韓國、澳大利亞、法國、德國、意大利和英國——不要加入這家銀行。儘管財政部長雅克·盧(Jack Lew)不斷公開地以負責任的姿態強調，美國只關心這家銀行是否按照國際標準運作，奧巴馬政府的其他官員都大力勸說美國的盟友與這家銀行保持距離。除了日本，他們都沒有理會華盛頓的勸說，加入了中國領導的這家銀行。整個行動的結果只是讓北京的強硬派的腰桿更硬了，他們認為，美國只是想壓制中國，不會把中國當成一個利益攸關方予以接納。
不過，美國人也在問習近平：「你是怎麼回事啊？」習近平的反腐運動顯然旨在扼殺任何一黨制度的最大威脅：因為腐敗猖獗而失去執政合法性。不過，他似乎也在剷除潛在的政治對手。習近平對軍方、經濟和政治的權力槓桿的控制也超出了毛澤東以來的任何領導人。但這麼做的目的是什麼——改革還是原地踏步？
習近平「正在聚斂權力，以維持中共的最高權威」，《習近平時代的中國政治：復興，改革還是後退》(Chinese Politics in the Era of Xi Jinping: Renaissance, Reform or Retrogression?)的作者林和立(Willy Wo-Lap Lam)說。習近平「認為蘇聯解體的一個原因是黨失去了對軍隊和經濟的控制」。不過，習近平似乎更關注蘇聯是如何解體的，而不是美國是如何成功的，這可不好。他的打壓行動不光針對腐敗——許多官員因此不敢做大的決定，還針對哪怕是最溫和的異見。大學裡使用的外國教科書在被審查，中國主要網站的博客和搜索受到了前所未有的管控。使用谷歌或在線閱讀西方的報紙更是想都別想。
不過，與此同時，習近平開始大力推動「創新」，從而讓中國經濟從製造和組裝往更加偏向於知識密集型的工作上轉移，這樣一來，在一個沒有足夠社會保障網的國家裡，獨生子女這一代就能夠供養退休的雙親了。
唉，打壓可不會促進創業。
正如創造了「新興市場」一詞的投資家安托萬·范阿格塔米爾(Antoine van Agtmael)對我說的：中國正在讓在國內創新變得越發困難，而與此同時，中國不斷上升的勞動成本，和美國不斷增長的創新能力，正在促使越來越多的企業把下一個工廠建在美國，而不是中國。美國價格低廉的能源加上更靈活、開放的創新——大學與創業公司分享頭腦的力量，產生新的發現；製造商正在使用新一代的機械人和3D打印機，它們可以允許更多生產在本地進行；新產品結合了無線感應器和新材料，從而比以往更加智能和高效——正在讓美國成為范阿格塔米爾口中的「下一個巨大的新興市場。」
「這是模式的轉變，」他接著說。「過去25年，人們最關心的是誰能製造出最便宜的東西，未來25年，人們最關心的將是誰能製造出最智能的東西。」
習近平似乎在押注中國足夠龐大和聰明，對互聯網和政治言論的限制能夠在打壓異見的同時而不扼殺創新。這是當今世界上最大的賭。如果他錯了（我對此疑慮重重），我們都會有切身的感受。
OP-ED COLUMNIST
What’s Up With You?
April 17, 2015
While U.S.-Iran relations are taking up all the oxygen in the room these days, and they’re vitally important for the future of the Middle East, U.S.-China relations are vitally important for the world — and there’s more going on there than meets the eye. The concept of “one country, two systems” was invented to describe the relationship between Hong Kong and mainland China. But here’s the truth: the American and Chinese economies and futures today are now totally intertwined, so much so that theyare the real “one country-two systems” to watch. And after recently being in China to attend the big Boao Forum on Hainan Island, and hearing President Xi Jinping speak, what is striking is how much each side in this relationship currently seems to be asking the other, “What’s up with you?”
Both countries almost take for granted the ties that bind them today: the $600 billion in annual bilateral trade; the 275,000 Chinese studying in America, and the 25,000 Americans studying in China; the fact that China is now America’s largest agricultural market and the largest foreign holder of U.S. debt; and the fact that last year Chinese investment in the United States for the first time exceeded American investment in China.
But dig underneath and you find these two systems increasingly baffled by the other. Chinese officials still have not gotten over their profound shock at how the United States — a country they took as an economic model and the place where many of them learned capitalism — could have become so reckless as to trigger the 2008 global subprime mortgage meltdown, which started the trope in China that America is a superpower in decline.
Chinese officials were also baffled by an effort by President Obama’s team to resist China’s establishment of an Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, by lobbying our biggest economic allies — South Korea, Australia, France, Germany, Italy and Britain — not to join. While the Treasury secretary, Jack Lew, kept stressing publicly, and responsibly, that the only American concern was that the bank operate by international standards, other Obama officials actively pressed U.S. allies to stay out. Except for Japan, they all snubbed Washington and joined the Chinese-led bank. The whole episode only empowered Beijing hard-liners who argue that the United States just wants to keep China down and can’t really accommodate it as a stakeholder.
Americans, though, are asking of President Xi: “What’s up with you?” Xi’s anti-corruption campaign is clearly aimed at stifling the biggest threat to any one-party system: losing its legitimacy because of rampant corruption. But he also seems to be taking out potential political rivals as well. Xi has assumed more control over the military, economic and political levers of power in China than any leader since Mao. But to what end — to reform or to stay the same?
Xi is “amassing power to maintain the Communist Party’s supremacy,” argued Willy Wo-Lap Lam, author of “Chinese Politics in the Era of Xi Jinping: Renaissance, Reform or Retrogression?” Xi “believes one reason behind the Soviet Union’s collapse is that the party lost control of the army and the economy.” But Xi seems to be more focused on how the Soviet Union collapsed than how America succeeded, and that is not good. His crackdown has not only been on corruption, which is freezing a lot of officials from making any big decisions, but on even the mildest forms of dissent. Foreign textbooks used by universities are being censored, and blogging and searching on China’s main Internet sites have never been more controlled. Don’t even think about using Google there or reading Western newspapers online.
But, at the same time, Xi has begun a huge push for “innovation,” for transforming China’s economy from manufacturing and assembly to more knowledge-intensive work, so this one-child generation will be able to afford to take care of two retiring parents in a country with an inadequate social-safety net.
Alas, crackdowns don’t tend to produce start-ups.
As Antoine van Agtmael, the investor who coined the term “emerging markets,” said to me: China is making it harder to innovate in China precisely when rising labor costs in China and rising innovation in America are spurring more companies to build their next plant in the United States, not China. The combination of cheap energy in America and more flexible, open innovation — where universities and start-ups share brainpower with companies to spin off discoveries; where manufacturers use a new generation of robots and 3-D printers that allow more production to go local; and where new products integrate wirelessly connected sensors with new materials to become smarter, faster than ever — is making America, says van Agtmael, “the next great emerging market.”
“It’s a paradigm shift,” he added. “The last 25 years was all about who could make things cheapest, and the next 25 years will be about who can make things smartest.”
President Xi seems to be betting that China is big enough and smart enough to curb the Internet and political speech just enough to prevent dissent but not enough to choke off innovation. This is the biggest bet in the world today. And if he’s wrong (and color me dubious) we’re all going to feel it.
沒有留言:
張貼留言