[加评论] 页面有问题?请点击打印板-》打印版                  [推荐此文给朋友]
[博讯主页]->[大众观点]
   

谢选骏先生“小国时代”的第三个回响/钟至
(博讯北京时间2009年4月26日 首发 - 支持此文作者/记者)
    谢选骏更多文章请看谢选骏专栏
    谢选骏先生“小国时代”的第三个回响
     (博讯 boxun.com)

    
    2007年1月开始,谢选骏先生主讲的《小国时代》电视片陆续摄制、播出,其中对话的文字稿,经过整理在《多维时报》、《多维月刊》双重连载,引起各方面的高度关注。
    
    过了十个多月,到2007年12月7日,英国《金融时报》专栏作家吉迪恩·拉赫曼〔Gideon Rachman〕的文章《全球将进入小国时代》,这可以说是“小国时代”的第一个回响。
    
    一年多以后,2008年3月,台湾联经出版了德国汉堡大学博士张亚中先生撰写的《小国崛起——转捩点上的关键选择》一书,幷置入“全球视野系列”。该书以威尼斯、尼德兰、瑞士、普鲁士、芬兰、爱尔兰等六个国家作为样板,细致讨论幷大力发挥了“小国崛起”的主题,和《小国时代》的电视对谈、文字记录可以说是相得益彰,为“小国崛起·大国解体”的思想作出了具体诠释,这可以说是“小国时代”的第二个回响。
    
    现在,美国《外交政策》杂志网站4月21日刊登了美国哈佛大学肯尼迪政府学院贝尔福科学与国际事务中心教授斯蒂芬·沃尔特(Stephen Walt)的文章《超常发挥与失常表现的国家》(Over-achievers and under-achievers)。所谓“Over-achievers”,是指那些在学校里学习成绩超过预料的学生;所谓“under-achievers”,是指那些在学校里学习成绩低于智商的学生。沃尔特评出的五大“超常发挥的国家”和五大“失常表现的国家”,就很符合“小国时代”精神。他指出:前者是国家实力虽小,但国际影响力却很大;而后者是表面上看国家实力强大,但国际影响力却相对很小。值得称赞的,当然是作为“超常发挥国”的小国,而不是作为“失常表现国”的大国。可见小国时代已经不是2007年12月7日吉迪恩·拉赫曼所说的“全球将进入”的状态,而是已在我们身边了。《超常发挥与失常表现的国家》可以说是“小国时代”的第三个回响。
    
    所谓五大“超常国”,就是1、瑞典;2. 朝鲜;3.加拿大;4.以色列;5.新加坡。其中,除了加拿大不太符合我们关于“小国”的通常观念之外,其余四个都是货真价实的“小国”,是小国时代的主角。而即使加拿大,在人口上确实也只能算是一个小国。
    
    “小国时代”的概念能在短短两年之内得到如此之大的反响,不是偶然的,说明“小国时代”这一概括,切中了当代世界的特点。
    
    最近,明镜出版社以《美国衰败,中国崛起?》(英文书名:Meiguo Shuaibai, Zhongguo Jueqi? ) 为名,结集出版了《小国时代》电视片中谢选骏先生与何频先生对话的文字稿,并且加了出版序言,指出:“在中国迅速资本主义化的同时,美国可能正在同样迅速地向社会主义的方向挺进。世界两个大国就以这种奇特的方式,裹挟着其他各国,走向全球化时代开始以后第一个灭顶之灾。”
    
    横扫一切的美国金融危机迅速演变为一场世界经济危机,其规模之大和性质严重,是1929年华尔街股市崩溃以来所未见的。许多人惊呼:美国已经衰败、中国即将崛起。这主要是考虑到,中国现在持有上万亿美元的美国债券,已是美国最大的债权人,这在以前是不可想象的。幷且中国总共拥有将近两万亿美元的外汇存底,这对于一百年前为了几百万美元的贷款,就要接受丧权辱国的条款的中国,真是一个醒目的对比。
    
    但是《美国衰败,中国崛起?》指出,美国之祸幷不一定就是中国之福。因为解体中的“大国”不仅指尚未解体的美国,而且指业已解体的苏联、大英帝国以及各个欧洲殖民帝国,这是近的、欧洲文化圈内部而言;远的就是指早已解体奥斯曼帝国、大清帝国、莫卧儿帝国等殖民主义时代之前的统一了各个不同文化圈的世界大国。“小国崛起·大国解体”是一个核武器所造就的历史规律,而不是政治咒语。
    
    既然如此,那么中国呢?中国是否能够逃脱这一核武器时代的历史规律呢?读者们是否有所好奇呢?
    
    2009年4月26日
    
    ____________________________________
    
    超常发挥与失常表现的国家
    
    据美国《外交政策》杂志网站4月21日刊登美国哈佛大学肯尼迪政府学院贝尔福科学与国际事务中心教授斯蒂芬·沃尔特(Stephen Walt)的文章Over-achievers and under-achievers(超常发挥与失常表现的国家)。
    
    一般来说,在我们的日常观念中,国家实力的强弱应该能够决定其在国际上的影响力。但世界上就有这么五大“超常国”和五大“失常国”,前者是国家实力虽小,但国际影响力却很大;而后者是表面上看国家实力强大,但国际影响力却相对很小。文章摘要如下(英语原文附后):
    
      五大“超常国”(排名不分先后)
    
      1、瑞典
    
      尽管瑞典只有900万人口,国土面积也只有45万平方公里,但瑞典却在国际社会上扮演着重要角色。瑞典的工业经济非常发达,其福利措施和社会政策受到广泛借鉴,甚至成为许多国家模仿的典范。在外交领域,达格哈马舍尔德(联合国第二任秘书长)、福尔克-贝尔纳多特(瑞典红十字会会长,曾从纳粹手里拯救过成千上万的斯堪地那维亚人)以及奥洛夫帕尔梅(前瑞典首相)等人,都具有很大的国际影响力。瑞典对外援助所占的国民生产总值比例比任何国家都多,其关注军控和裁军的斯德哥尔摩国际和平研究机构的影响力在不断扩大。此外,世人瞩目的诺贝尔奖也在瑞典颁发。
    
      2. 朝鲜
    
      尽管朝鲜只有2200万人口,国家面积更是只有12万平方公里,但任何国家都不能因此忽略朝鲜的存在。尽管与韩国相比,朝鲜只能算“后进生”,但朝鲜却始终吸引着国际社会的注意力,总是能惊动世界。
    
      3.加拿大
    
      加拿大的国土面积仅次于俄罗斯,是世界面积第二大国,但人口只有3200万,军事实力一般。加拿大是多边机制的坚定支持者,对外援助占世界第九位,热心于国际维和任务。在阿富汗战争中,已经有117名士兵阵亡,是驻阿富汗“国际安全援助部队”伤亡比例最高的国家。
    
      4.以色列
    
      以色列国的主权范围,若去除所有以色列在1967年攻克的领土,总计为20777平方公里。这个总人口还没有纽约人口多的国家,却时时吸引着国际注意力。确实,这可以反映出以色列的经济成功,包括其在先进高科技产业和重要军需工业方面,这还不包括其在核技术以及军事方面的实力。多年来,以色列一直没有停止过与阿拉伯国家的争斗,其影响力也在日益增加。
    
      5.新加坡
    
      新加坡是一个城市国家,原意为“狮城”,人口只有440万,直到1965年才完全获得独立。新加坡最引人瞩目的就是其独立后取得的经济成就,其经济几乎步入发达国家之列,民众人均收入非常高。此外,新加坡还是南亚地区合作的主力,积极促进东南亚国家联盟的成立。新加坡已经开始就国际重大问题发表自己的看法。
    
    
      五大“失常国”
    
      1.日本
    
      尽管日本是世界第二大经济体,其经济高度发达,是全球最富裕、经济最发达和生活水平最高的国家之一,日本国防预算位居世界第六,但日本的国际影响力却与其国家实力不相符。美国麻省理工学院的理查德-塞缪尔斯最近指出,日本在中国宣布派遣军舰帮助打击海盗后,才追随中国的脚步派出军舰;日本仅派了38名士兵参加联合国维和任务。塞缪尔斯认为,日本在国内外的领导力似乎都陷入瘫痪之中。此外,老龄化人口日益增多,日本未来的影响力甚至比现在都不如。
    
      2. 印度
    
      印度被称为世界上最大的民主国家,是南亚次大陆当之无愧的巨无霸,被看做全球离散犹太人的第二家乡,并且拥有核武。印度领导人圣雄甘地、尼赫鲁、英迪拉甘地等,都是国际瞩目的人物。然而,印度现在依然在练习其全球领导角色,甚至对其邻国都未能发挥出建设性影响力。此外,《印度教徒报》对印度国际研究的恶化状态表示悲痛。
    
      3.德国
    
      东西德国已经统一,作为世界上第十四人口大国和第三大经济体和出口国,却在世界领导舞台上缺席,其影响力与其潜能完全不相符。即使德国在很多问题上更加积极活跃,他们的行动在高限制性规则下,其效果也被大大削弱。与前德国铁血首相俾斯麦、前西德总理康拉德阿登纳以及维利勃兰特等人执政时期相比,德国已经远远不及。
    
      4. 俄罗斯
    
      尽管俄罗斯幅员辽阔,石油和天然气资源丰富,工人阶级受教育程度高,联合国常任理事国成员,并且拥有大量核武,但俄罗斯今天在世界舞台上的影响力,却与其国家实力不相符。俄罗斯的政治体系没有形成模式,它的文化没有吸引力,其领导人不能或者不愿意为解决世界挑战承担起主要责任。相反,俄罗斯总是充当破坏者的角色,这个超级大国已经难当其领导人使命。
    
      5.巴西
    
      作为“金砖四国(主要的新兴市场,巴西、俄罗斯、印度和中国)”之一,巴西将在21世纪全球均势中起到关键作用。但作为世界上第五人口大国和第十大经济体,巴西却依然没有担当起与其实力相符的国际角色。巴西正在谋求更高的国际地位,比如进入联合国安理会,扩大外交范围,积极加入现存国际组织等。总统卢拉的支持率非常高。但到目前为止,这些雄心和能力还没有转化成直接影响力。
    
    
    
    Over-achievers and under-achievers
    
    Stephen Walt
    
    evers and under-achi
    
    Here's an IR theory puzzle: Why do some seemingly powerful states exert relatively little influence on world politics, while other states with more modest capabilities cast a bigger shadow than one would expect? Although there is no consensus on how national power should be defined or measured, most IR scholars would probably agree that there is a substantial but not perfect correlation between national power and international influence. Indeed, one could imagine a simple regression, with "power" on the X-axis and "influence" on the Y-axis, and a diagonal line bisecting that space. I'd expect most states to array themselves pretty close to that line: as their power increased (measured in terms of GDP, population, military capability, resource endowments, etc.) one would expect to see a corresponding increase in their global influence.
    But what about the outliers -- either the "overachievers" who swing a bigger bat than one would expect or the "underachievers" who wield less influence than their overall capabilities might provide? Here's my personal, decidedly un-scientific top five list in each category, followed by some thoughts on what might explain why some states punch above their weight and some potentially major powers cast a comparatively small shadow.
    
    "OVER-ACHIEVERS" (in no particular order)
    
    1. Sweden.
    
    With a population of only 9 million, one wouldn’t expect Sweden to cast much of a shadow, despite its advanced industrial economy. Yet for its size and population, Sweden has been a significant international player. Its welfare state and other social policies have been widely-studied and a model for others, and diplomats such as Dag Hammarskjold, Folke Bernadotte, and Olof Palme were all important international voices. Sweden still devotes a higher percentage of its GDP to foreign aid than any other country, and institutions such as the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute have amplified Sweden's visibility on major issues of arms control and disarmament. Awarding the Nobel Prizes probably doesn't hurt either.
    
    2. North Korea.
    
    With a small population (22 million), an obsolete military machine, a bankrupt ideology, and an economy that exposes its citizens to periodic famine, one wouldn’t expect North Korea to get much attention at all. Indeed, on most measures North Korea is an under-achiever (especially when compared with its neighbor to the south). But Pyongyang's leaders are past masters at commanding international attention, usually by threatening to do something undesirable (and then sometimes going ahead and doing it). North Korea is hardly an inspiring model for anyone, but it shows how sheer cussedness can enable a country to punch well above their weight.
    
    3. Canada.
    
    America’s northern neighbor has the world's second largest land mass but a relatively small population (only 32 million) and only modest military assets. Yet Canada has been a consistent proponent of multilateralism, ranks ninth in the world as a provider of foreign aid, and has been an enthusiastic participant in international peacekeeping missions. Indeed, Canada has lost 117 soldiers fighting in Afghanistan, the highest per capita figure of any ISAF participant.
    
    4. Israel.
    
    For a country whose total population is less than that of New York City, Israel generates a lot more attention than one would expect. To be sure, some of this reflects Israel’s economic success (which includes advanced hi-tech sector and a significant arms industry) not to mention its nuclear arsenal and overall military power. And then there's the occupation and the violence that it has produced over the years. Regardless of one's views on that thorny subject, it's hard to argue that Israel doesn't exert a lot of influence on the global agenda, especially given its very modest size.
    
    5. Singapore.
    
    For a city-state with a population of only 4.4 million, which gained independence only in 1965, Singapore's international prominence marks it as an obvious outlier, even when one allows for its advanced economy and high per capita income. In addition to its economic achievements, Singapore has been a major force behind regional cooperation in Southeast Asia, an energetic promoter of institutions such as ASEAN, and its leaders have rarely been bashful about offering their views on major international issues.
    
    "UNDERACHIEVERS" (also in no particular order)
    
    1. Japan.
    
    Despite having the world's 2nd largest economy and the world's sixth largest defense budget, Japan performs a remarkably modest international role. As Richard Samuels of MIT recently pointed out in Newsweek, Japan sent warships to help defend against tSomali pirates only after China announced it was going to do so, and it has only 38 soldiers participating in UN peacekeeping missions. Increasingly, its leadership both at home and abroad seems paralyzed. Moreover, with a declining and rapidly aging population, Japan seems likely to become even less influential over time, despite its economic size and considerable national wealth.
    
    2. India.
    
    It is the world's most populous democracy, the dominant state in south Asia, the home country of a sizeable and successful global diaspora, and a nuclear power. Past Indian leaders such as Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru, and Indira Gandhi were major international figures. While far from being inconsequential, India has yet to exercise a global leadership role, or even to exert far-sighted and constructive influence over its immediate neighborhood. Moreover, a recent article in The Hindu deplores the deteriorating state of international studies in India, at precisely the same period when a rising China is taking the study of international relations very seriously.
    
    
    3. Germany.
    
    Now reunified, with the world's 14th largest population and either the 3rd or fifth largest economy (depending on whether one uses straight GDP figures or purchasing power parity estimates). Germany is also the world's third largest exporter. While not entirely absent on the world stage, it is hardly exercising an influence commensurate with its latent capabilities. Even when Germany does get more actively involved (as they have in Afghanistan), they operate under highly restrictive rules of engagement that substantially undercut their effectiveness. A far cry from the Germany of Otto von Bismarck, or even the creative leadership of Konrad Adenauer and Willy Brandt.
    
    4. Russia.
    
    At first, I thought about putting Russia in the other category -- a large but relatively weak state that managed to exert more influence than its overall capabilities might suggest. But on reflection, I think Russia belongs here. Despite its geographic size, oil and gas resources, and relatively well-educated work force, as well as the inherited assets of permanent Security Council membership and a large nuclear arsenal, Russia today exerts less influence on the agenda of world politics than its overall capabilities might provide. Its political system is not a model for anyone; its culture is not a magnet, and its leaders are either unable or unwilling to play a constructive role in addressing the major problems that confront the world today. Instead, Moscow mostly plays a spoiler role, which is what former great power do when they cannot find a way to lead.
    
    5. Brazil.
    
    Yes, I've read about the BRICS, and how countries like Brazil are going to reshape the global balance of power in the 21st century. But the world's tenth largest economy (and fifth largest population) has yet to achieve an international role of similar stature. Brazil clearly wants a more prominent international position, as exemplified by its current efforts to win a permanent seat on the UN Security Council, its extensive diplomatic presence and active participation in existing international organizations. President Lula da Silva has very high approval ratings (including the highest ratings in all of Latin America). But so far, these ambitions and capabilities have not been translated into as much direct influence as I'd expect.
    
    So what explains why some states punch above their weight and others punch below it? This would be a great topic for a dissertation, but here are a few tentative thoughts. First, individual leadership matters. A leader like Charles De Gaulle, Lester Pearson, or Lee Kwan Yew can elevate a country's profile above its "natural" place, and a series of weak leaders can keep a country from reaching its true potential. Second, history can have a long-term impact on a country's overall influence: Britain and France occupy somewhat enhanced roles today because they were once great powers with extensive global empires and Sweden's tradition of international activism may even be a legacy of its former role as a great power several centuries ago. Third, the examples of Germany and Japan suggest that extreme misconduct in the past can suppress a state's willingness or ability to play a large international role for a very long time. And in these two cases, the legacy of World War II has been reinforced by decades of Cold War free-riding. Fourth, small states can leverage a relationship with a major power like the United States (as both Israel and Singapore have done) in order to maintain positions that would be harder to sustain on their own. Lastly, relatively weak states may enhance their overall influence by occupying a specialized "niche" in the international environment, as neutral powers like Sweden or Switzerland have done.
    
    I'm sure I missed some other good examples and possible explanations, so I hope readers will contribute suggestions or critiques of their own. [博讯首发,转载请注明出处]- 支持此文作者/记者(博讯 boxun.com)
(本文只代表作者或者发稿团体的观点、立场)

博讯相关报道(最近20条,更多请利用搜索功能):
  • 钟至:谢选骏的“小国时代”很有预见性
  • 谢选骏先生提出的“小国时代”很有预见性/钟至


    点击这里对此新闻发表看法
  •    
    联系我们


    All rights reserved
    博讯是畅所欲言的场所、所有文章均不一定代表博讯立场
    声明:博讯由编辑、义务留学生、学者维护,如有版权问题,请联系我们。另外,欢迎其他媒体 转载博讯文章,为尊重作者的辛勤劳动以及所承担风险,尊重博讯广大义务人士的奉献,请转载时注明来源和作者。