[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]
   

美国向中国大献殷勤却冷落印度
(博讯北京时间2009年7月04日 转载)
    
    印度在奥巴马政府的政策地位低于布什时期,关键原因是美国的亚洲政策不再以大地缘政治框架为指导。事实上,上任五个月的奥巴马,其处理亚洲的办法缺乏明显的战略印记,因此看上去支离破碎。奥巴马政府可能对每一个亚洲大国都有一种政策,但关于如何在亚洲打造持久的势力平衡,它仍然缺乏战略。
     (博讯 boxun.com)

    结果呢,华盛顿再一次主要透过巴基斯坦的棱镜看印度。这转化成美国对印巴接触的聚焦,对克什米尔问题以及阿富汗巴基斯坦地区反叛乱问题的重新关注,包括关注其对美国国土安全的影响。例如,奥巴马不满足于让伊斯兰堡成为美国援助的最大受益人,他还希望受害者印度帮助输出恐怖行动的巴基斯坦,包括提出新的“和谈”,重新部署部队,哪怕这意味着更严重的恐怖主义渗透。
    
    美国副国务卿斯坦伯格(James Steinberg)最近在东京进行亚洲政策演讲的时候,甚至没有顺带提起印度。无论赞不赞同布什的外交政策,其亚洲政策背后至少有更大的地缘政治蓝图。相比之下,奥巴马的亚洲政策充其量只能说是寻求培养与中国的关键双边关系,并在可能的情况下建立三边关系。
    
    其结果是,奥巴马团队刚刚推出一个新的亚洲三角安全框架,其中涉及美国、中国和日本。华盛顿在宣布这个倡议的时候,却没有承认美国、印度、日本三角。看来,这个三角已经不受美国新政府宠爱了,正如陆克文当选澳大利亚总理之后,美国、澳大利亚、印度、日本以民主和平概念为基础的“四方倡议”就搁浅了。
    
    亚洲正处于转型期,权力失衡的幽灵逼近,投入体制建设以巩固长期稳定已经成为必须。毕竟,亚洲不仅成为全球地缘政治变化的枢纽,而且亚洲挑战正影响着国际战略挑战。但奥巴马政府的目光却锁定在那个快速聚集实力并炫耀肌肉威胁亚洲稳定的那个国家身上。
    
    这不是谴责美国加深与中国的接触,毕竟,美国国债对北京的依赖性有增无减。美国和中国自冷战后半段以来就成为便利的盟友,如今已经形成相互依存的伙伴关系,经济历史学家弗格森(Niall Ferguson)和苏拉里克(Moritz Schularick)为这种关系创造了一个新词“中美国(Chimerica)”。中国《?望》杂志把这种关系描述为“复杂的相互依存”关系,美国和中国相互竞争又相互协商。
    
    但中国日益扩大的海军及海上主张可能与美国利益相冲突,包括与华盛顿传统上强调的海上自由冲突。美中经济关系也可能不稳定:美国存款太少,从中国借钱太多,而中国卖给美国的东西太多,买入的东西太少。在人权及其他问题上,美国对中国的态度较对俄罗斯的态度宽容,哪怕中国可能对美国的全球优越地位构成可信的挑战。
    
    新的美中日三角重新强调华盛顿对中国的关注,视之为处理亚洲问题的关键伙伴。新的三角已经被宣传为奥巴马亚洲政策的核心,号称为讨论朝鲜问题提供一个新框架,作为目前日益衰退的六方会谈机制的补充。
    
    然而,奥巴马团队提出以中国为中心的亚洲政策,甚至探索美中韩三角,却没想到美中印三角。这是因为华盛顿如今不是透过亚洲地缘政治的棱镜看印度,而是透过地区透镜(或者阿富汗巴基斯坦透镜)看印度,国务卿希拉里到北京鞠躬,六个月后才访问新德里。
    
    但关键是,印度在亚洲的角色不会仅仅因为奥巴马政府忽视其战略意义而有所削弱。
    
     The key reason why India ranks lower in the policy profile of the Barack Obama administration than it did under President George W Bush is that
    
    America's Asia policy is no longer guided by an overarching geopolitical framework. In fact, after five months in office, Obama's approach on Asia lacks a distinct strategic imprint and thus appears fragmented. His administration may have a policy approach towards each major Asian country and issue, but still lacks a strategy on how to build an enduring power equilibrium in Asia.
    
    The result is that Washington is again looking at India primarily through the Pakistan prism. That translates into a US focus on India-Pakistan engagement, revived attention on the Kashmir issue and counter insurgency in the Af-Pak region, including implications for US homeland security. For instance, not content with making Islamabad the largest recipient of US aid in the world, Obama wants victim India to come to the aid of terror-exporting Pakistan, including by offering new "peace" talks and redeploying troops, even if it means more terrorist infiltration.
    
    In a recent Asia-policy speech in Tokyo to a small group, of which this writer was a member, US deputy secretary of state James Steinberg did not mention India even in passing. Whether one agreed or differed with Bush's foreign policy, at least its Asia component was driven by a larger geopolitical blueprint. By contrast, the best that can be said about Obama's Asia policy is that it seeks to nurture key bilateral relationships with China at the core of Washington's present courtship and establish, where possible, trilateral relationships.
    
    The upshot is that the Obama team has just unveiled a new trilateral security framework in Asia involving the US, China and Japan. While announcing this initiative, Washington failed to acknowledge another trilateral the one involving the US, India and Japan. It is as if that trilateral has fallen out of favour with the new US administration, just as the broader US-Australia-India-Japan "Quadrilateral Initiative" founded on the concept of democratic peace ran aground after the late-2007 election of Kevin Rudd as the Australian prime minister.
    
    At a time when Asia is in transition, with the spectre of power disequilibrium looming large, it has become imperative to invest in institution-building to help underpin long-term stability. After all, Asia is not only becoming the pivot of global geopolitical change, but also Asian challenges are playing into international strategic challenges. But the Obama administration is fixated on the very country whose rapidly accumulating power and muscle-flexing threaten Asian stability.
    
    This is not to decry deeper US engagement with China when dependence on Beijing to bankroll American debt has only grown. From being allies of convenience in the second half of the Cold War, the US and China now have emerged as partners tied by such close interdependence that economic historians Niall Ferguson and Moritz Schularick have coined the term, 'Chimerica' a fusion like the less-convincing 'Chindia'. An article in China's Liaowang magazine describes the relationship as one of "complex interdependence" in which America and China "compete and consult" with each other.
    
    But China's expanding naval role and maritime claims threaten to collide with US interests, including Washington's traditional emphasis on the freedom of the seas. US-China economic ties also would stay uneasy: America saves too little and borrows too much from China, while China sells too much to the US and buys too little. Yet, such is its indulgence towards China that Washington holds Moscow to higher standards than Beijing on human rights and other issues, even though it is China that is likely to mount a credible challenge to America's global pre-eminence.
    
    The new US-China-Japan trilateral re-emphasises Washington's focus on China as the key player to engage on Asian issues. Slated to begin modestly with dialogue on non-traditional security issues before moving on to hard security matters, the latest trilateral already is being billed as the centrepiece of Obama's Asia policy. Such is its wider significance that it is touted as offering a new framework for deliberations on North Korea to compensate for the eroding utility of the present six-party mechanism.
    
    Despite its China-centric Asia policy, the Obama team, however, has not thought of a US-China-India trilateral, even as it currently explores a US-China-South Korea trilateral. That is because Washington now is looking at India not through the Asian geopolitical prism but the regional, or Af-Pak, lens a reality unlikely to be changed by secretary of state Hillary Clinton's stop in New Delhi six months after she paid obeisance in Beijing. While re-hyphenating India with Pakistan and outsourcing its North Korea and Burma policies to Beijing, the US wants China to expand its geopolitical role through greater involvement even in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
    
    The point is that India's role will not diminish in Asia just because the Obama administration fails to appreciate its larger strategic importance.
     来源:印度时报 _(网文转载) (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):
  • 印度:中国玩的游戏令人担忧(图)
  • 印度有印度问题/崔继新
  • 印度野心越来越大 竟明目张胆的插手中国南沙了
  • 印度欲重拾殖民主义尾巴:麦克马洪线
  • 最近一段时间,印度在中印边境动作不断,中国真的生气了
  • 印度嫉恨中国的真正原因:与中国无法忘怀日本相似?
  • 曹长青:中国比印度落后在哪里
  • 印度今次增兵藏南,相信是「内部消费」的决定
  • 从印度选举看中国的政治未来
  • 从印度选举看我国的政治未来/郑酋午
  • 印度的环境主义/张淑兰
  • 从印度大选看“民主” /丁学良
  • 中国VS印度=效率VS民主?/吴稼祥
  • 留欧生活琐记:我的印度朋友亚玛尔
  • 郑酋午:从印度选举看我国的政治未来
  • 解析印度对中国的五大优势
  • 印度记者眼中的西藏:真是一个神奇的地方
  • 唐荆陵: 印度的自由之路--------公民不合作运动
  • 由印度电影谈起/大宗师
  • 印度称在中国境内找到失事军机残骸 13人恐丧生
  • 曾向外国记者哭诉中共罪行的拉卜楞寺僧人流亡印度
  • 达赖即将加入印度国籍,是真是假引各界关注(图)
  • 达赖“很高兴即将接受印度国籍”,中央政府该怎么办?(图)
  • 新华社造谣:达赖喇嘛入籍印度(图)
  • 印度退休学者:Chindia,是中印关系发展必由之路
  • 印度高官称中印正尝试解决边境分歧
  • 学功夫有中国女友 印度留学生成“大理人”
  • 中国富豪人数 首度压倒印度
  • 印度政府发表通告解除进口中国玩具禁令
  • 印度媒体称藏人对中共的不满情绪正在激增
  • 印度10元笔记本曝光(图)
  • 印度海军否认潜艇被中国军舰逼出水面(图)
  • 印度宣布今后半年禁止进口中国玩具
  • 印度对中国军舰远征护航反应最不友好(图)
  • 達賴喇嘛與印度前總統阿卜杜勒.卡拉姆博士會晤 (图)
  • 中国将在雅鲁藏布江上游建水坝 印度不安
  • 中国强硬,印度被迫取消划界谈判
  • 声援西藏组织聚会印度新德里(图)
  • 这个印度人让国人汗颜--从如厕事件见冷漠人心


    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。