支持台灣獨立建國的白樂崎大使也注意到了芝加哥大學國際關係學泰斗Prof. John Mearsheimer最近的言論 (下)
續 二
這事情看在親台的美國愛國者白樂崎大使的眼裡，當然要挺身站出來，為台灣人仗義執言，白大使現在「英文台北時報」發表了一篇英文文章，按照慣例，該文將會被譯成漢文，然後刊登在「自由時報」上。
“Say goodbye to Taiwan, say goodbye to peace”
By Nat Bellocchi 白樂崎 /
Taipei Times
Sun, Mar 09, 2014 - Page 8
An article by University of Chicago professor John Mearsheimer titled “Say Goodbye to Taiwan” in the March-April issue of the National Interest is thought-provoking. In his essay, first published online on Feb. 25, Mearsheimer predicts that in the face of China’s continued rise, Taiwan will have to give up even its present de facto independent status and seek a Hong Kong-style accommodation with Beijing.
Mearsheimer, who is a political scientist from the “offensive realism” school of international relations, did do his homework for the essay and studied local political attitudes carefully. For instance, he presents recent statistics showing that — assuming that China will not attack Taiwan — the overwhelming majority of Taiwanese, 80.2 percent, would opt for independence.
He also writes that: “… most Taiwanese would like their country to gain de jure independence and become a legitimate sovereign state in the international system. This outcome is especially attractive because a strong Taiwanese identity — separate from a Chinese identity — has blossomed in Taiwan over the past 65 years.”
However, he concludes that, in spite of locals’ strong desire that Taiwan be accepted as a legitimate sovereign state in the international system, China’s continued rise will make it increasingly difficult to resist Beijing’s pressure toward unification. [雖然Prof. Mearsheimer了解多數台灣人要建立獨立主權國家的願望，但他做出一個結論或與預測: 中國持續的竄起將會讓台灣人對北京統一台灣的壓力的抵抗的困難逐漸增加。]
The main flaw in Mearsheimer’s reasoning is that he believes in the inevitability of an unfettered continuation of China’s rise. In his attempt to apply his theoretical construct to the real world, Mearsheimer neglects a number of important aspects, such as the push-back from Taiwanese, from the US and from other nations in the region against a rising and increasingly aggressive China.
In addition, China’s continued rise is by no means certain because its economic and political fundamentals are weak at best: The economy has been liberalized, but the Chinese Communist Party’s political control is as tight as ever and there are manifold bubbles — like housing and banking — waiting to burst. This fuels internal tensions which could derail China’s aspirations.
Yet Mearsheimer’s essay is an important wake-up call to global policymakers: If the present “status quo” and “one China” policies are maintained, there is an increasing likelihood that democratic Taiwan will be absorbed by its neighbor.
This would not only be highly undesirable for Taiwanese, but it would also fundamentally upset the regional balance of power.
Mearsheimer describes how control over Taiwan could greatly enhance Beijing’s ability to project military power. This would certainly cause deep anxiety in neighboring countries like South Korea, Japan and the Philippines. Mearsheimer concludes that China will try to dominate Asia in the way that the US dominates the western hemisphere.
Mearsheimer reveals the perception that Washington and Taipei’s current policies have brought about a reduction in cross-strait tensions is only a short-term fata morgana. These policies simply do not form a solid basis for longer-term stability. At some point, the democratic aspirations of Taiwanese will collide with the designs of Beijing, leading to sharply higher tensions.
To ensure that Taiwan remains among free, democratic nations and to maintain a stable and free Western Pacific, it is essential that the US, Asian democracies and Western Europe significantly improve economic and political ties with Taiwan. Perhaps it is time to promote a “Community of Democracies in East Asia.” [為了讓台灣繼續留在自由民主陣營，美國、亞洲的民主國家以及西歐應該大幅地增進與台灣的政經聯繫，或許促進「東亞民主共同體」現在正是時候。]
(Nat Bellocchi served as chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan from 1990 to 1995. The views expressed in this article are his own.)
三
白大使提起「東亞民主共同體」這個概念，這讓我們想起安倍晉三在二度出任日本首相之前提出的「亞洲民主安全鑽石聯盟」，---Read More--- 建州派以前為文介紹過，我們現在再貼出來，讓大家溫故知新。
Shinzo Abe: “Asia’s Democratic Security Diamond”
12/27/2012
http://project-syndicate.org/
TOKYO – In the summer of 2007, addressing the Central Hall of the Indian Parliament as Japan’s prime minister, I spoke of the “Confluence of the Two Seas” – a phrase that I drew from the title of a book written by the Mughal prince Dara Shikoh in 1655 – to the applause and stomping approval of the assembled lawmakers. In the five years since then, I have become even more strongly convinced that what I said was correct.
Peace, stability, and freedom of navigation in the Pacific Ocean are inseparable from peace, stability, and freedom of navigation in the Indian Ocean. Developments affecting each are more closely connected than ever. Japan, as one of the oldest sea-faring democracies in Asia, should play a greater role in preserving the common good in both regions. [安倍採納了「印太戰區」的概念，把印度洋與太平洋的安全與航行自由連結起來。]
Yet, increasingly, the South China Sea seems set to become a “Lake Beijing,” which analysts say will be to China what the Sea of Okhotsk was to Soviet Russia: a sea deep enough for the People’s Liberation Army’s navy to base their nuclear-powered attack submarines, capable of launching missiles with nuclear warheads. Soon, the PLA Navy’s newly built aircraft carrier will be a common sight – more than sufficient to scare China’s neighbors. [安倍採納了美國戰略家的認知與判斷，他們認為，中國把南海視為「北京湖」，猶如當年的蘇聯把鄂霍次克海視為內海一樣。關於這個，我們以後會加以說明。]
That is why Japan must not yield to the Chinese government’s daily exercises in coercion around the Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea. True, only Chinese law-enforcement vessels with light weaponry, not PLA Navy ships, have entered Japan’s contiguous and territorial waters. But this “gentler” touch should fool no one. By making these boats’ presence appear ordinary, China seeks to establish its jurisdiction in the waters surrounding the islands as a fait accompli.
If Japan were to yield, the South China Sea would become even more fortified. Freedom of navigation, vital for trading countries such as Japan and South Korea, would be seriously hindered. The naval assets of the United States, in addition to those of Japan, would find it difficult to enter the entire area, though the majority of the two China seas is international water.
Anxious that such a development could arise, I spoke in India of the need for the Indian and Japanese governments to join together to shoulder more responsibility as guardians of navigational freedom across the Pacific and Indian oceans. I must confess that I failed to anticipate that China’s naval and territorial expansion would advance at the pace that it has since 2007.
The ongoing disputes in the East China Sea and the South China Sea mean that Japan’s top foreign-policy priority must be to expand the country’s strategic horizons. Japan is a mature maritime democracy, and its choice of close partners should reflect that fact. I envisage a strategy whereby Australia, India, Japan, and the US state of Hawaii form a diamond [「民主安全鑽石聯盟」的成員包括澳大利亞、印度、日本與美國的夏威夷州]to safeguard the maritime commons stretching from the Indian Ocean region to the western Pacific. I am prepared to invest, to the greatest possible extent, Japan’s capabilities in this security diamond.
My opponents in the Democratic Party of Japan deserve credit for continuing along the path that I laid out in 2007; that is to say, they have sought to strengthen ties with Australia and India.
Of the two countries, India – a resident power in East Asia, with the Andaman and Nicobar Islands sitting at the western end of the Strait of Malacca (through which some 40% of world trade passes) – deserves greater emphasis. Japan is now engaged in regular bilateral service-to-service military dialogues with India, and has embarked on official trilateral talks that include the US. And India’s government has shown its political savvy by forging an agreement to provide Japan with rare earth minerals – a vital component in many manufacturing processes – after China chose to use its supplies of rare earths as a diplomatic stick.
I would also invite Britain and France to stage a comeback in terms of participating in strengthening Asia’s security. The sea-faring democracies in Japan’s part of the world would be much better off with their renewed presence. The United Kingdom still finds value in the Five Power Defense Arrangements with Malaysia, Singapore, Australia, and New Zealand. I want Japan to join this group, gather annually for talks with its members, and participate with them in small-sized military drills. Meanwhile, France’s Pacific Fleet in Tahiti operates on a minimal budget but could well punch above its weight. [英國與法國也應被邀請加入，特別是英國，因為它與澳大利亞、紐西蘭、馬來西亞及新加坡有安全與軍事聯繫。]
That said, nothing is more important for Japan than to reinvest in its alliance with the US. In a period of American strategic rebalancing toward the Asia-Pacific region, the US needs Japan as much as Japan needs the US. Immediately after Japan’s earthquake, tsunami, and nuclear disaster in 2011, the US military provided for Japan the largest peacetime humanitarian relief operation ever mounted – powerful evidence that the 60-year bond that the treaty allies have nurtured is real. Deprived of its time-honored ties with America, Japan could play only a reduced regional and global role.
I, for one, admit that Japan’s relationship with its biggest neighbor, China, is vital to the well-being of many Japanese. Yet, to improve Sino-Japanese relations, Japan must first anchor its ties on the other side of the Pacific; for, at the end of the day, Japan’s diplomacy must always be rooted in democracy, the rule of law, and respect for human rights. These universal values have guided Japan’s postwar development. I firmly believe that, in 2013 and beyond, the Asia-Pacific region’s future prosperity should rest on them as well.
(Abe is Prime Minister of Japan and President of the Liberal Democratic Party. He wrote this article in mid November, before Japan’s elections.)
台灣建州運動發起人周威霖
David C. Chou
Founder, Formosa Statehood Movement
(an organization devoted in current stage to making Taiwan a territorial commonwealth of the United States)
“Say goodbye to Taiwan, say goodbye to peace”
By Nat Bellocchi 白樂崎 /
Taipei Times
Sun, Mar 09, 2014 - Page 8
An article by University of Chicago professor John Mearsheimer titled “Say Goodbye to Taiwan” in the March-April issue of the National Interest is thought-provoking. In his essay, first published online on Feb. 25, Mearsheimer predicts that in the face of China’s continued rise, Taiwan will have to give up even its present de facto independent status and seek a Hong Kong-style accommodation with Beijing.
Mearsheimer, who is a political scientist from the “offensive realism” school of international relations, did do his homework for the essay and studied local political attitudes carefully. For instance, he presents recent statistics showing that — assuming that China will not attack Taiwan — the overwhelming majority of Taiwanese, 80.2 percent, would opt for independence.
He also writes that: “… most Taiwanese would like their country to gain de jure independence and become a legitimate sovereign state in the international system. This outcome is especially attractive because a strong Taiwanese identity — separate from a Chinese identity — has blossomed in Taiwan over the past 65 years.”
However, he concludes that, in spite of locals’ strong desire that Taiwan be accepted as a legitimate sovereign state in the international system, China’s continued rise will make it increasingly difficult to resist Beijing’s pressure toward unification. [雖然Prof. Mearsheimer了解多數台灣人要建立獨立主權國家的願望，但他做出一個結論或與預測: 中國持續的竄起將會讓台灣人對北京統一台灣的壓力的抵抗的困難逐漸增加。]
The main flaw in Mearsheimer’s reasoning is that he believes in the inevitability of an unfettered continuation of China’s rise. In his attempt to apply his theoretical construct to the real world, Mearsheimer neglects a number of important aspects, such as the push-back from Taiwanese, from the US and from other nations in the region against a rising and increasingly aggressive China.
In addition, China’s continued rise is by no means certain because its economic and political fundamentals are weak at best: The economy has been liberalized, but the Chinese Communist Party’s political control is as tight as ever and there are manifold bubbles — like housing and banking — waiting to burst. This fuels internal tensions which could derail China’s aspirations.
Yet Mearsheimer’s essay is an important wake-up call to global policymakers: If the present “status quo” and “one China” policies are maintained, there is an increasing likelihood that democratic Taiwan will be absorbed by its neighbor.
This would not only be highly undesirable for Taiwanese, but it would also fundamentally upset the regional balance of power.
Mearsheimer describes how control over Taiwan could greatly enhance Beijing’s ability to project military power. This would certainly cause deep anxiety in neighboring countries like South Korea, Japan and the Philippines. Mearsheimer concludes that China will try to dominate Asia in the way that the US dominates the western hemisphere.
Mearsheimer reveals the perception that Washington and Taipei’s current policies have brought about a reduction in cross-strait tensions is only a short-term fata morgana. These policies simply do not form a solid basis for longer-term stability. At some point, the democratic aspirations of Taiwanese will collide with the designs of Beijing, leading to sharply higher tensions.
To ensure that Taiwan remains among free, democratic nations and to maintain a stable and free Western Pacific, it is essential that the US, Asian democracies and Western Europe significantly improve economic and political ties with Taiwan. Perhaps it is time to promote a “Community of Democracies in East Asia.” [為了讓台灣繼續留在自由民主陣營，美國、亞洲的民主國家以及西歐應該大幅地增進與台灣的政經聯繫，或許促進「東亞民主共同體」現在正是時候。]
(Nat Bellocchi served as chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan from 1990 to 1995. The views expressed in this article are his own.)
三
白大使提起「東亞民主共同體」這個概念，這讓我們想起安倍晉三在二度出任日本首相之前提出的「亞洲民主安全鑽石聯盟」，
Shinzo Abe: “Asia’s Democratic Security Diamond”
12/27/2012
http://project-syndicate.org/
TOKYO – In the summer of 2007, addressing the Central Hall of the Indian Parliament as Japan’s prime minister, I spoke of the “Confluence of the Two Seas” – a phrase that I drew from the title of a book written by the Mughal prince Dara Shikoh in 1655 – to the applause and stomping approval of the assembled lawmakers. In the five years since then, I have become even more strongly convinced that what I said was correct.
Peace, stability, and freedom of navigation in the Pacific Ocean are inseparable from peace, stability, and freedom of navigation in the Indian Ocean. Developments affecting each are more closely connected than ever. Japan, as one of the oldest sea-faring democracies in Asia, should play a greater role in preserving the common good in both regions. [安倍採納了「印太戰區」的概念，把印度洋與太平洋的安全與航行自由連結起來。]
Yet, increasingly, the South China Sea seems set to become a “Lake Beijing,” which analysts say will be to China what the Sea of Okhotsk was to Soviet Russia: a sea deep enough for the People’s Liberation Army’s navy to base their nuclear-powered attack submarines, capable of launching missiles with nuclear warheads. Soon, the PLA Navy’s newly built aircraft carrier will be a common sight – more than sufficient to scare China’s neighbors. [安倍採納了美國戰略家的認知與判斷，他們認為，中國把南海視為「北京湖」，猶如當年的蘇聯把鄂霍次克海視為內海一樣。關於這個，我們以後會加以說明。]
That is why Japan must not yield to the Chinese government’s daily exercises in coercion around the Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea. True, only Chinese law-enforcement vessels with light weaponry, not PLA Navy ships, have entered Japan’s contiguous and territorial waters. But this “gentler” touch should fool no one. By making these boats’ presence appear ordinary, China seeks to establish its jurisdiction in the waters surrounding the islands as a fait accompli.
If Japan were to yield, the South China Sea would become even more fortified. Freedom of navigation, vital for trading countries such as Japan and South Korea, would be seriously hindered. The naval assets of the United States, in addition to those of Japan, would find it difficult to enter the entire area, though the majority of the two China seas is international water.
Anxious that such a development could arise, I spoke in India of the need for the Indian and Japanese governments to join together to shoulder more responsibility as guardians of navigational freedom across the Pacific and Indian oceans. I must confess that I failed to anticipate that China’s naval and territorial expansion would advance at the pace that it has since 2007.
The ongoing disputes in the East China Sea and the South China Sea mean that Japan’s top foreign-policy priority must be to expand the country’s strategic horizons. Japan is a mature maritime democracy, and its choice of close partners should reflect that fact. I envisage a strategy whereby Australia, India, Japan, and the US state of Hawaii form a diamond [「民主安全鑽石聯盟」的成員包括澳大利亞、印度、日本與美國的夏威夷州]to safeguard the maritime commons stretching from the Indian Ocean region to the western Pacific. I am prepared to invest, to the greatest possible extent, Japan’s capabilities in this security diamond.
My opponents in the Democratic Party of Japan deserve credit for continuing along the path that I laid out in 2007; that is to say, they have sought to strengthen ties with Australia and India.
Of the two countries, India – a resident power in East Asia, with the Andaman and Nicobar Islands sitting at the western end of the Strait of Malacca (through which some 40% of world trade passes) – deserves greater emphasis. Japan is now engaged in regular bilateral service-to-service military dialogues with India, and has embarked on official trilateral talks that include the US. And India’s government has shown its political savvy by forging an agreement to provide Japan with rare earth minerals – a vital component in many manufacturing processes – after China chose to use its supplies of rare earths as a diplomatic stick.
I would also invite Britain and France to stage a comeback in terms of participating in strengthening Asia’s security. The sea-faring democracies in Japan’s part of the world would be much better off with their renewed presence. The United Kingdom still finds value in the Five Power Defense Arrangements with Malaysia, Singapore, Australia, and New Zealand. I want Japan to join this group, gather annually for talks with its members, and participate with them in small-sized military drills. Meanwhile, France’s Pacific Fleet in Tahiti operates on a minimal budget but could well punch above its weight. [英國與法國也應被邀請加入，特別是英國，因為它與澳大利亞、紐西蘭、馬來西亞及新加坡有安全與軍事聯繫。]
That said, nothing is more important for Japan than to reinvest in its alliance with the US. In a period of American strategic rebalancing toward the Asia-Pacific region, the US needs Japan as much as Japan needs the US. Immediately after Japan’s earthquake, tsunami, and nuclear disaster in 2011, the US military provided for Japan the largest peacetime humanitarian relief operation ever mounted – powerful evidence that the 60-year bond that the treaty allies have nurtured is real. Deprived of its time-honored ties with America, Japan could play only a reduced regional and global role.
I, for one, admit that Japan’s relationship with its biggest neighbor, China, is vital to the well-being of many Japanese. Yet, to improve Sino-Japanese relations, Japan must first anchor its ties on the other side of the Pacific; for, at the end of the day, Japan’s diplomacy must always be rooted in democracy, the rule of law, and respect for human rights. These universal values have guided Japan’s postwar development. I firmly believe that, in 2013 and beyond, the Asia-Pacific region’s future prosperity should rest on them as well.
(Abe is Prime Minister of Japan and President of the Liberal Democratic Party. He wrote this article in mid November, before Japan’s elections.)
台灣建州運動發起人周威霖
David C. Chou
Founder, Formosa Statehood Movement
(an organization devoted in current stage to making Taiwan a territorial commonwealth of the United States)
沒有留言:
張貼留言