周波：“自由主义世界次序”？这不过是一种前史近视

发布时间：2025-05-08　点此：782次

编者按：近来，清华大学世界战略与安全研究中心研究员周波承受澳大利亚广播公司国家广播电台（ABC Radio International）《举世周游》节目主持人杰拉丁·杜格和哈米什·麦克唐纳的专访，论述了我国关于其时世界形势、台海问题及全球职责的观念。本文为北京对话与调查者网翻译发布，以飨读者。

【文/周波，翻译/王奕涵，核译/刘松瑀】

杰拉丁·杜格：咱们接下来要采访的人是周波——咱们之前采访过他，其时反应十分好。他是一位退役大校，最近出了一本新书——《世界应该惧怕我国吗？》。这是一本很少见的、从我国视角动身的作品。

哈米什·麦克唐纳：那咱们就从当下这个时间开端聊吧，说实话，我特别、特别想知道的是：我国怎样看现在这个世界的形势？全世界一片紊乱，而从我国的视角，这一切又是怎样的呢？

周波：这可真是个“价值十亿美元的问题”。其实我自己也一向在考虑，部分原因是我不太信任那个从前根深柢固的概念——所谓的“自在主义世界次序”。

简略来说，我以为现在的世界次序，其实和曩昔没有实质的不同：它始终是由不同国家、不同社会制度、不同国家认同、不同文明，最重要的是不同文明组成的一个集合体。打个比方吧，人们基本上直到16世纪“地理大发现”，即达·伽马发现印度，哥伦布发现美洲后才逐步明晰地了解世界的归纳，才开端对这个世界有了更完好的认知。

但假如你简略地把“世界次序”界说为一个所谓的“自在主义世界次序”，那其实是一种前史近视。由于假如你真这么看，那就有点像活在弗朗西斯·福山式的世界里了——那个“前史完结”的世界。

美国学者弗朗西斯·福山，著有《前史的完结》一书

杰拉丁·杜格：所以你的意思是，这其实是一种西方强加的世界观，是这样吗？

周波：是的，那种所谓的“自在主义世界次序”，顶多也便是在苏联崩溃、我国没有完全兴起的那段时间才看起来像那么回事。但假如你真信任那套次序，那就简略堕入自恋；一旦发现自己不再强壮了，就会开端寻觅“敌人”。这其实是十分风险的。但假如你信任这个世界次序本便是由各种文明构成的集合体，那你就会问自己：我该怎样与他人共存？

杰拉丁·杜格：从某种程度上讲，特朗普总统或许多少会赞同你的观念。他好像也在幻想一种权力与影响力的“同享”格式，而这在西方某些当地引起了极大轰动——由于他挑选与一些持有完全不同权力观的人协作。所以从这个含义上说，你所描绘的这种思路，是否某种程度上和特朗普的观念有些符合？

周波：不，我不这么以为。由于特朗普的标语是“让美国再次巨大”，而这种“再次巨大”基本上便是要康复美国的霸权位置，康复对世界的主导权。而我国则更乐意把自己看作是世界的一部分，仅此而已。

杰拉丁·杜格：莫非他不便是想把世界切割开来吗？咱们不是正逐步看清楚这一点吗？他好像在搞“势力范围”的区分？

哈米什·麦克唐纳：对啊，比方他乐意把欧洲“让”给俄罗斯，或许还会把亚洲“让”给我国，然后让美国专心于自身业务。

周波：你的说法或许是对的。但关键是，所谓“势力范围”其实是一个十分陈旧的概念，底子不适用于21世纪。我一向着重，我国首要是没有势力范围的；即便我国想具有，也不会有。

为什么这么说？许多人会把东南亚称为我国的“后院”，但你看看东南亚，有不少国家在南海问题上和我国存在疆域争端，还有几个国家是美国的盟友。再看东北亚，朝鲜也不一定会听我国的。

菲律宾拉洛机场，已于2023年对美军敞开

那么请问，我国的“势力范围”究竟在哪儿？所以结论是：假如我国底子没有势力范围，那就没必要去树立一个。咱们只需求走向世界，让自己变得更有影响力就行了。

要了解，“影响力”和“势力范围”是两回事。我国的影响力现已是全球性的，所以不需求去寻求所谓的势力范围。寻求势力范围，你就得结交一堆盟友，而结盟既贵重又难以维系，为什么要这么做呢？

杰拉丁·杜格：很有意思。你等于是提出了一个观念——我国在处理世界业务时，完全没有任何帝国主义颜色。并且你对我国的“国民性”也有一个很风趣的调查：你说我国现在仍然有某种程度的“受害者心态”，而这其实并不利于国家的开展。那么，你为什么以为这种心态对我国自身的开展没有协助呢？

周波：是的，不少我国人的确坚信这种“受害者心态”。从某种含义上讲，这种心态也并非没有道理，由于我国的确在1840年今后遭受过外来侵犯。但咱们常常说到的所谓“百年羞耻”，理论上、乃至从数学上讲，假如从1840年算起，到1949年就完毕了。

1949年中华公民共和国建立，毛泽东宣告“我国公民从此站起来了”。已然我国公民现已“站起来了”，那这段受辱的前史也应该翻篇了。这种受害者心态或许形成民族主义，由于你觉得自己从前被不公对待。但一旦你变强了，这种心情会让他人开端感到严重。

假如咱们把我国的经济总量除以人口规划，我国当然是一个开展我国家。但与此一同，我国也的确有或许成为世界上最大的经济体。那么问题来了：一个全球最大经济体，还能被称为开展我国家吗？假如答案是“能够”，那“发达国家”与“开展我国家”的区分又还有什么含义？假如我国成为了全球最强壮的国家之一，还有必要持续维系“受害者”心态吗？你还会持续称自己为“受害者”吗？

哈米什·麦克唐纳：好吧，但这不正是美国对我国不满的一个核心问题吗？美国以为我国利用了“开展我国家”的位置来为自己获取利益。比方在气候转型的世界职责分管中，这一点就成了争议焦点——由于我国被归为开展我国家，所以在应对气候变化时不需求承当像西方发达国家那样的职责和责任。而这在西方看来是不公平的，究竟，正如你自己也说到的，我国或许很快就会成为世界上最大的经济体。

周波：问题在于，我国被戴了“太多顶高帽子”——而每一顶帽子又都是实在的，这让许多人包含我国人感到困惑。在我国人自己看来：咱们按GDP算是全球第二大经济体，但按购买力平价来算，咱们是世界榜首大经济体；咱们是世界榜首大交易国，榜首大出口国，也是全球最大工业国。但与此一同，不久之前咱们仍是世界人口榜首大国。

哈米什·麦克唐纳：那么问题来了：为什么我国好像惧怕供认自己的强壮与影响力？

周波：我觉得是由于我国戴了太多顶高帽子，所以我国的每一个方面都是实在的。这取决于你在跟谁说话，也取决于你站在什么情绪、用什么视角来看我国。

哈米什·麦克唐纳：的确，周先生，我在听你解说的时分也的确有点这种“戴太多顶高帽子”的感觉。你说我国其实不需求也不想要盟友，但一同又和俄罗斯“友谊无上限”。这两个说法怎样能放在一同呢？

周波：我很快乐你问了这个问题——让我尽量用最简略的方法来压服你吧。比方我说，哈米什，我想和你做朋友。然后又说，等一下哈米什，咱们的友谊有必要有极限。你觉得这说得通吗？所以所谓“友谊无上限”，基本上便是表达一种美好愿望，期望这段友谊能够持久地持续下去。

哈米什·麦克唐纳：但我国并不是对一切朋友都这么说啊。它的确会说友谊是有底线的。它对咱们澳大利亚便是这么说的。咱们从前经历过友谊不断升温的时期，但也有一些时分，我国会说：“不，这儿有问题。”

周波：或许我能够换个方法来压服你。虽然这段友谊在同一份文件中被描绘为“无上限”，但就在这句话之后一两句，咱们清晰表明这不是一种军事同盟。所以，这表现了即便在这种友谊中，我国也是有底线的。我国对立任何方法的核武器运用，我国也没有向俄罗斯供给任何导弹或军事配备。

在两会记者会上，王毅部长表明，中俄已探究出一条“不结盟、不对立、不针对第三方”的共处之道。外交部

哈米什·麦克唐纳：是啊，这便是我不太了解的当地。我国期望成为一个全球的首要力气，那为什么不在与俄罗斯的联系中发挥影响力，去促进乌克兰战役的完毕呢？

周波：那是由于你是用欧洲人的视角来看这个问题。而我国在审视这段联系时，首要有必要从两头的的视点来看待。

哈米什·麦克唐纳：但我国也说过，比方说经济增加需求依托平和，全球的安稳是完成持续昌盛的条件。

周波：哦，当然了。关于“安稳”，那问题是什么导致了不安稳？由于俄罗斯以为北约的扩张正是不安稳的本源。这说法也不无道理，由于普京和上一任领导人最大的不同在于，他是那个说“够了，到此为止”的人。从苏联时期开端，不管是戈尔巴乔夫、叶利钦仍是普京，他们对北约的情绪基本是共同的——北约不该该持续扩张。但不同的是，普京决议采纳举动，这便是他和上一任领导人之间的差异。

杰拉丁·杜格：我觉得咱们或许无法在这期播客中处理这个观念不合，但我想转向另一个问题。你在书中说到一个清楚明晰的要点：咱们一切人面对的最大问题是，怎样防止我国与其他国家——不管“其他国家”是谁——之间迸发战役。而你的答复十分直接，也的确点出了台海形势中的一个应战。你能不能归纳一下你的观念，让咱们听听你是怎样看的？

周波：首要，我以为我国和美国之间产生战役也并不是不可防止的。咱们或许迸发抵触的当地只需两个：一个是南海，一个是台海。我把南海放在台海前面，这和许多人想的不相同，这是由于美国一向在往南海差遣飞机和军舰，咱们有时分也会进行阻拦。这就形成了一种十分风险的近距离触摸。

哈米什·麦克唐纳：美国往南海差遣船舶和飞机去保护飞行自在，这有什么问题呢？

周波：这恰恰是问题所在。这些岛礁是我国的疆域，但美国不供认。问题是，美国自己并没有同意《联合国海洋法公约》，却一向以“守护者”的身份自居。那我想问，假如这部法令真那么好，为什么你们不同意？假如它欠好，你又为什么用它来应战他人？

杰拉丁·杜格：但我仍是想把论题拉回来。我看你在引言中写到：“怎样防止台海战役？我的答复很简略——让我国信任平和一致仍然或许。”这句话十分特别。我还想弥补一点：你没有说到台湾公民。他们想要什么？咱们要怎样达到一种一致，能让每个人的权力都能被尊重？

周波：我之所以这么说，是由于这是我对一个“十亿美元等级问题”的最简略答复。依据我国的法令，我国运用非平和手法的一个条件是：我国以为平和一致的远景现已完全损失。因而，咱们有必要信任：“平和一致的远景还没有完全幻灭，咱们还有耐性。”而现在我国正处于快速开展之中，这也引出了一个问题：我国会因而更有决心寻求平和一致，仍是会变得更没有耐性，然后诉诸武力？

我以为让我国政府信任平和仍然是或许的，这就意味着美国要有所抑制，台湾当局也要有所抑制。假如这些都能做到，我信任平和是有或许的。假如我国政府以为平和一致的途径现已走不通了，那就会是一个完全不同的形势了。

2024年5月8日，美军导弹驱逐舰穿越台湾海峡

哈米什·麦克唐纳：但完成一致的方法有许多种，许多人会拿香港举例。所以台湾也完全或许在相似的情境下被“回收”，对吧？

周波：这种类比其实并不完全恰当。让我换个比方说吧。疫情前，大约有150万台湾人住在我国大陆，所以你不能幻想两岸是完全阻隔的。

150万台湾人生活在我国大陆，这意味着大约有6%的台湾人现已在大陆居住了。人们总是说到大陆会用“大棒”，但咱们往往忘了，大陆其实也给出了许多、许多“胡萝卜”。比方说，台湾人的孩子能够在福建省上幼儿园，就像咱们自己的孩子相同。他们还会有身份证，几乎是相同的身份证。

所以这150万人阐明晰许多问题。这些人并不在乎生活在一个完全不同的社会和完全不同的政治体制中——只需这个社会能为他们供给更好的时机。而这些人都是中产阶级以上的，所以我信任，跟着全球化的开展和人工智能的加快，就像世界上其他当地相同，两岸之间的交融也在加快。这也意味着，或许有一天，台湾人会觉得，成为这个地球上最强壮国家的一部分，其实也不错。

哈米什·麦克唐纳：我对你怎样看待我国未来作为全球大国的人物很感兴趣。在我国对外传递的信息中，咱们常常听到说到“依据规矩的世界次序”。而与此一同，美国好像正在抛弃软实力，好像在把盟友当成敌人。假如美国不再扮演传统的人物，那我国会怎样定位自己？是要取而代之，仍是还有主意？

周波：我国其完成已介入了。由于当世界其他当地看起来越来越紊乱的时分，人们自然会把目光投向我国，提出和你相同的问题。但我国会扮演怎样的人物呢？我以为，我国更像是这个动乱世界中的“锚”或“安稳器”。

哈米什·麦克唐纳：但假如我国想成为“安稳器”，那岂不是意味着要在中东抵触、欧洲抵触中扮演调解者的人物？那就得做一些现在我国在世界舞台上其实并不常做的事吧？

周波：我以为我国的确能够在中东和乌克兰战役中发挥效果。现在俄罗斯和美国虽有沟通，但你跟我相同看新闻，都知道普京提出的停火其实是有条件的，对吧？所以将来或许会有那么一个时间，一切首要大国，包含我国，都需求供给某种方法的团体安全保证。

哈米什·麦克唐纳：你觉得我国真的会这么做吗？比方在乌克兰或许中东？

周波：是的，我以为有或许，这要看形势怎样开展。假如终究的结局是一种“休战”，那必定需求安全保证。

哈米什·麦克唐纳：那你觉得，拿乌克兰为例，什么样的安全保证是或许的？

普京签署关于乌东四地参加俄联邦的公约

周波：比方说，俄罗斯现已宣告将那四个州并入俄罗斯疆域，但俄罗斯其实很难真实完全操控那四个州，由于乌克兰至少还有欧洲的全力支撑，乃至或许还有美国的支撑。所以未来这四个州很或许会变成相似阿富汗的形势——乌克兰人会像圣战者那样进行无休止的游击战。这就意味着俄罗斯永久无法真实操控那四个区域。所以这也就意味着，所谓的“休战协议”是有或许的。现在许多人都在谈停火、休战、或其他情境，而“休战”是被评论最多的一个选项。

哈米什·麦克唐纳：所以，首要想请问，我国的安全保证究竟是供给给俄罗斯，仍是乌克兰？

周波：应该是对两头都供给团体安全保证，由于两头都不或许完全打败对方，但两头其实都很惧怕。咱们都忧虑一旦达到的停火被打破，会呈现各种状况。这不仅是乌克兰惧怕，俄罗斯也惧怕，惧怕自己显得孤立。所以俄罗斯才期望全球南边国家，比方我国、印度和巴西能参加进来。

我国第4批赴南苏丹（朱巴）维和步兵营组织应急演练

杰拉丁·杜格：你在书中也说到，我国其实在全球维和举动中发挥了很重要的效果，这点我从前并不太了解。假如有乌克兰休战的组织，我国乐意差遣维和部队去监督吗？

周波：我以为，假如抵触两头提出恳求——这是进行维和的首要条件——那我国是能够这么做的。由于我国是五个安理会常任理事国中出动戎行最多的国家，并且在全球维和方面的诺言毋庸置疑。所以我以为，我国能够和印度、还有其他全球南边国家一同承当这个人物，再加上一些非北约的欧洲国家。究竟这场战役产生在欧洲的心脏地带，欧洲国家仍是应该参加的，但不能是北约成员国。由于我想对俄罗斯来说，这些国家只会被视为“披着羊皮的狼”。

杰拉丁·杜格：或许咱们该回到你这本书的标题：《世界应该惧怕我国吗？》你的答案显着是“不该该”。那你能不能再打开说说这个观念，尤其是在其时这种形势十分不确定、谁都不知道接下来会产生什么的时分。请你谈谈为什么你以为我国其实能够在新的世界次序中扮演一个建设性的人物？

周波：咱们先看看我国曩昔40年的前史。我国的兴起现已是人类前史上的一个奇观了，这自身就现已阐明晰许多。我以为我国接下来要证明的是，我国即便强壮了，也不需求以霸权的方法行事。这是我国面对的下一个应战。我以为榜首个问题咱们现已处理了。现在要看我国能不能作为世界上最强壮的国家之一，却不走霸权之路。

这的确具有应战性，但咱们有时间去调查。假如我国曩昔40多年都能坚持平和，那为什么我国不能让这个世界更安全呢？世界并不是西方看世界的那种单一视角。假如你从全球南边的视点看世界，我以为人们对我国的观念整体上是正面的。在非洲，绝大多数国家对我国都有正面形象。而在印太区域，状况比较杂乱，但即便是上一年，依据一份民调，在东南亚，人们对我国的好评其实是超过了对美国的点评。

杰拉丁·杜格：那印度呢？我能插一句吗？中印之间好像就更杂乱一些。

周波：是的，的确如此。由于中印联系本来是不错的，直到2020年在边境产生了那场丧命的抵触。但即便在那次工作中，我仍然看到了一点活跃的东西——那便是两头都没有挑选开枪。你不觉得很古怪吗？两个世界上的现代化戎行，却用石器时代的方法在打架。这就阐明，两头的战士在潜意识里都知道：不能开枪。

哈米什·麦克唐纳：咱们或许有点疏忽了非洲部分国家和太平洋区域一些国家的感触——尤其是它们现在由于我国的借款而担负的债款和还账的责任。我想知道，在这样的布景下，咱们澳大利亚该怎样看待这种联系？我国是想和咱们做朋友，仍是工作其实更奇妙一些？

周波：这么跟你说吧，我榜首次出国拜访的国家，其实便是澳大利亚，那是在1990年。其时我是来担任口译员的，伴随我国飞行员在安塞特航空公司的模拟器上协助我国飞行员训练。安塞特现在好像现已不存在了。但我在1999年又去了一次，其时我是澳大利亚皇家军事学院的榜首位我国拜访研究员，我在那儿待了三个月。所以我觉得，整体来说，我国人对澳大利亚的爱情仍是挺正面的。由于你们离咱们很远，是浩瀚中的一个大岛。理论上来说，咱们之间不该该是敌人，但前史上你们总是参加他人的战役。

哈米什·麦克唐纳：是的，咱们的确离得很远。那为什么我国水兵舰艇要绕行澳大利亚？这样做的意图是什么？咱们又该怎样解读这种行为呢？

周波：那我或许应该提示你们，为什么你们的军舰会开到离我国海岸线那么近的当地？还有你们的军机为什么会侵略西沙群岛的空域？那是我国的领空。并且这种事你们不是做过一次两次，是屡次。

澳大利亚P-8巡逻机，曾未经答应侵闯我国西沙群岛领空

哈米什·麦克唐纳：不过咱们的官方情绪是，咱们是在保证世界交易航道的飞行自在。这两者之间仍是有差异的。

周波：那我是不是也能够借用你的话说，咱们绕行澳大利亚也是为了相同的理由，做相同的事？

哈米什·麦克唐纳：你是说你们绕行澳大利亚是为了运送交易物资？是这个意思吗？

周波：我的意思是，咱们的舰艇也在澳大利亚周边进行“飞行自在”举动。

哈米什·麦克唐纳：那意图是什么呢？

周波：首要，那是公海，咱们有权飞行。没有任何世界法规制止咱们那么做。其实问题应该是问你们：你们为什么要穿越台湾海峡？你们经过那里是为了什么？你们经过那儿其实没有多少实质性的交易，对吧？你们三分之一的交易是和我国大陆进行的，军舰并不需求穿越台湾海峡来运送这些货品。

哈米什·麦克唐纳：所以你的意思是，咱们应该从中得到的解读便是：“你们别对咱们这么做”？

周波：我不以为我国政府从前以这种方法表达过意见，但是世界法的确答应咱们这么做。但假如你们能抚躬自问一下，我觉得那对你们也是功德。

哈米什·麦克唐纳：(大笑)那咱们就到这儿完毕吧？

杰拉丁·杜格：哦，等等，我还特别想问你一个问题，便是关于“硬实力”和“软实力”的。约瑟夫·奈（Joseph Nye）从前说过，从长远来看，软实力往往胜过硬实力。比方说我国公民解放军现在的配备十分先进，你们的水兵也让全世界都仰慕。但我想说，我国的软实力其实并不强。虽然在“全球南边”你们的形象有所提高，但整体来看，我国的软实力仍是处于下风位置。你怎样看，这是我国的短板吗？

周波：我不这么以为，这其实取决于你怎样界说软实力。就拿你刚刚说到的解放军来说，现在为止，我国戎行在海外的举动全都是人道主义性质的，不管是冲击海盗、维和，仍是灾祸救援。咱们的医疗船“平和方舟”现已环游世界，为人们免费供给药品和医疗服务，从不收费。这些都是我国展现其好心的尽力。

我国医疗船“平和方舟”

作为一名解放军老兵，我的期望是：即便我国具有世界上最多的军舰，解放军未来仍然只做人道主义使命。由于杀人总能找到各种托言，但是谁能记住那些托言呢，对吧？但假如你仅仅去协助世界各地需求协助的人们，他们会感谢你。而维和、冲击海盗、救灾，这些工作的重要性，谁能否定呢？而这正是解放军一向在做的事。在曩昔40年里，你找不出一个比方阐明解放军在海外杀过一个人——这莫非不值得称誉吗？

哈米什·麦克唐纳：周先生，咱们来自两个常常互相误解、也不常直接沟通的国家。所以我个人十分感谢你今日来跟咱们沟通。我也诚心期望今后还能约请你回来，持续这场对话。我以为这比以往任何时分都更重要。

周波：谢谢你，哈米什，谢谢你，杰拉尔丁。这是一场风趣的、友爱的争辩。

杰拉丁·杜格：咱们或许还需求更多这样的“友爱争辩”。

以下为英文提要和采访原文：

Geraldine Doogue ：The man we're going to meet, Zhou Bo, who we spoke to and we got good feedback on him. He's a retired Senior Colonel. He has recently brought out a new book -- Should the world fear China? Now that's an unusual book to emerge from China.

Hamish Macdonald：Zhou Bo, welcome to Global Roaming now. Can we start with the current moment? To be honest, the thing I really, really want to know is the way China is viewing this moment. There's such chaos in the world, but how is that viewed from China?

Zhou Bo：Well, this is really a billion-dollar question. Actually, I myself have been struggling with this issue in part because I kind of dismiss the concept has been deep, deeply rooted, that is the so called “liberal international order”. To put a long story short, basically, I believe the international order now as in the past, is the same thing. It is a combination of different countries, different social system, different national identities, different cultures, and, above all, different civilizations. So just give you an example, people basically know more or less how the world look like after 16th century with this so called geographical discovery -- De Gamma discovered india and Columbus discovered America. So people then developed that general idea about how the world looks like. But if you just say the world order is kind of liberal international order, that was basically a kind of historic myopia. Because if that is true, that is very much Francis Fukuyama’s world—the end of history.

Geraldine Doogue：So you are saying that this is sort of Western imposition, aren’t you?

Zhou Bo：Yes, the time after the dissolution of Soviet Union and before the full rise of China, that looks at best like the liberal international order. But if you believe in that, then you become narcissistic. And if you find that you are not strong enough, then you start to look for enemies. So that is something very bad. But if you believe this world order is a composition, is a hybrid of a different civilizations, then you would tell yourself, how can I coexist with other people.

Geraldine Doogue ：In a way, President Trump almost might agree with you. He seems to be imagining some sort of shared power and influence which has caused a great deal of shock in, you know, in parts of the West, as he decides he's going to twin with people who certainly have had a very different view about the way powers are used. So, in a way, what you're describing, wouldn't you say slightly accords with his apparent view?

Zhou Bo：No, I don't think so. Because Trump's idea is to Make America Great Again. And this kind of Make America Great Again is basically to resume American hegemony, or dominance in the world, while China would consider itself a part of the world, no more than a pole.

Geraldine Doogue：Doesn't he want to divide up the world? Isn't that one of the things we're learning that he has these spheres of interest?

Hamish Macdonald：He's willing to give Europe to Russia. He's willing to give maybe the Asia region to China, and allow America to concentrate on its own.

Zhou Bo：Your description is probably right. But the point is, first of all, sphere of influence is really an old concept, a very old concept, which should not be fitting for the 21st century. I’m always arguing that China, first of all, doesn't have any spheres of influence. Even if China wants, China won't have sphere of influence. Why is that? Most people would describe Southeast Asia as China's backyard. But look at Southeast Asia, where we have quite a few countries that have territorial disputes with China in the South China Sea, where there are quite a few countries that are American allies. In Northeast Asia, the DPRK won't necessarily listen to China. So where is your sphere of influence? So the conclusion is, if China doesn't have sphere of influence, then you don't need to establish it. You just go to the rest of the world to make yourself more influential. Influence and sphere influence are two different things. Because China's influence is already global, china doesn't need to seek sphere influence. If you seek sphere of influence, you have to have allies, which itself is costly and difficult to maintain. Why would you try to do that?

Geraldine Doogue：Very interesting. So you're putting the idea that there's absolutely nothing imperialistic at all about the way China is approaching international affairs, and that you have this very interesting diagnosis of China's temperament. At the moment, you say that it is still full of victimhood, which doesn't help China's growth. Now, why do you say it's not helpful to your own country's growth?

Zhou Bo：Yes. A lot of Chinese believe in this kind of victimhood. That is right, because China certainly was invaded after 1840. But if we talk about 100 years of humiliation, that even in theory, mathematically speaking, should finish by 1940 and People's Republic of China was established in 1949 when Mao Zedong declared that the Chinese people have stood up. Then Chinese people have stood up. Then the century should have finished, right? This kind of victimhood actually wouldn’t help China, because it might lead to nationalism， because you feel that you are wrongly treated by other people. So if you become strong, then you may just make other people nervous. China is certainly a developing country, if its population is divided, if its economy strength is divided by its population. But then there is really a possibility that China could still become the largest economy in the world. So can the largest economy in the world be also a developing country? If yes, so, what is the point of dividing countries into developing country and developed country? If China becomes the strongest nation on this, how can you still have victimhood? Do you still describe yourself as victim?

Hamish Macdonald：Okay. But this is part of what America's complaint about China is, right? That you have leveraged the position of developing nation status to your own advantage. This is part of the whole argument against Western developed nations throwing money into the climate transition, because countries like China are classified as developing and therefore don't have the same impost in terms of responding. That scene is unfair, because, as you point out, you might become the biggest economy in the world.

Zhou Bo：The irony is that, because Chinese are wearing too many hats, all of them are true. So that confuses everybody including Chinese. We are the second largest economy by GDP, but we are the largest by PPP. Then China is certainly the largest trade nation on earth. China is the largest exporter. China is the largest industrial nation, but China, not a long time ago, is also the most populous country on earth.

Hamish Macdonald：So why is China afraid to admit its power and its might?

Zhou Bo：I think because there is a truth, a grain of truth in every aspect. China is wearing too many hats. So it depends on really who you are talking to, right? And it also depends on where you are standing if you look at China.

Hamish Macdonald：Respectfully, Zhou, I'm feeling a bit of that too many hats in listening to your explanations. Like you talk about China not really wanting or needing allies, but there is this no-limits partnership with Russia. How does that all fit together?

Zhou Bo：I'm glad you brought up this question, because -- let me just try to persuade you in the most simple way. If I say, for example, Hamish, I say I want to develop my friendship with you. And then let's hang on for a moment, Hamish, our friendship has to be limited. What do you think? So this kind of unlimited friendship is basically an expression of good wishes for this kind of friendship to go on.

Hamish Macdonald：But China is not saying that to all its friends. I mean, it does say friendships have limits. I mean, it said that to us here in Australia. We've gone through times of really building the friendship, and then there's been moments where China said, “No. You know, there are issues here.”

Zhou Bo：Maybe I can try to convince you another way. Although this friendship is described as unlimited in the same document where this very word was mentioned just one or two sentences after this, we have maintained that is not one of military alliance. So this war has demonstrate exactly how China, in spite of this friendship, has bottom lines. China has discouraged any use of nuclear weapons. China has not provided any missiles or military aid to Russia.

Hamish Macdonald：Yeah, this is, you know, something that I just don't understand, right? China does aspire to be a major global power. Why not exercise its influence in this relationship with Russia to bring about an end to a major conflict in Ukraine?

Zhou Bo：Well, that is because you are looking at this issue through the prism of a European. When China examines this relationship, first of all, China has to look at this relationship from bilateral basis. So the war…

Hamish Macdonald：But I'm also listening to what China is saying about the need for economic growth to rely upon peace, the need for stability on our planet to ensure ongoing prosperity.

Zhou Bo：Oh, of course. On stability, the question is, what cause instability? Because Russia would consider NATO’s expansion the very source of instability. And there is some truth in it, because – Putin, what makes him different from his predecessors? He's a man who said “enough is enough.” Because from the Soviet time, that is from Mikhail Gorbachev to Boris Yeltsin to President Putin, they all think in the same light, that is NATO should not expand. But Putin is a man who said “enough is enough”, and he decided to do something that is different between him and his predecessors.

Geraldine Doogue：I don't know that we're going to solve this difference of opinions on this podcast, but I would like to move to another, question you make the obvious point in your book. The biggest question facing us all is how war can be avoided between China and others, whoever those others may be. Well, your answer is pretty blunt, and it's a real challenge about China and Taiwan. Now, could you outline that please, so we can hear how somebody like yourself sees it?

Zhou Bo：Yeah. First of all, the chance of China having a war, even with the United States, is not inevitable. There are only two places where we might have the wars or conflicts: the first is South China Sea, the second is Taiwan Strait. I put South China Sea in front of the Taiwan Strait, contrary to what most people think, just because Americans keep on sending aircraft and ships to come to South China Sea, where we sometimes would do interceptions. Because this would create kind of a very dangerous close-distance encounters.

Hamish Macdonald：What's the problem with America sending ships and an aircraft to monitor freedom of navigation in the South China Sea? It's not Chinese territory.

Zhou Bo：Well, that's exactly the point. Chinese believe these islands and rocks are Chinese territories, while the United States would not, you know, agree to that. That is fine. But then the point is, the United States is not a country that has actually ratified the UN Convention Law of Sea, but it is behaving as if it is guardian of the Law of the Sea. Then my question is, if the law is so good, why don't you ratify it? If they're not good, why would you challenge other people in the name of it?

Geraldine Doogue：But look, I want to bring you back. I read in your introduction, “how can war be avoided in the Taiwan Straits? My answer is simple: let China believe that peaceful reunification is still possible”. It's an extraordinary sentence from you. I might add, there was no mention of the Taiwanese people in that. What the Taiwanese people might like? How do we come to some sort of understanding about a move forward where everybody's rights are respected?

Zhou Bo：Well, I talked about that because that is my most simple answer to a billion-dollar question. Because, according to China's law, one of the conditions for China to use non-peaceful means is that Beijing felt that the prospect for peaceful reunification is exhausted forever. Therefore we have to believe that, “okay, this kind of prospect for peaceful reunification is not exhausted, so we would have patience,” right? So China is growing with strength, and that invites a question: whether China would be more confident to have peaceful reunification, or China would become more impatient to use force?

My view is that we have to let Chinese government to believe that peace is still possible, and that would mean restraint from the United States. That means restraint from the Taiwanese authorities. So with all these, I believe peace is still possible. If the Chinese Government believe peaceful reunification is not possible, then, it’s a totally different story.

Hamish Macdonald：There are also many different ways that this could happen, right? So many people point to the Hong Kong example. There's many scenarios in which Taiwan could be taken back, isn't it?

Zhou Bo：Well, this kind of analogy is not absolutely all right. Let me give you another example. Before COVID, there was about 1.5 million Taiwanese people living in mainland. So you just cannot imagine as if the two sides are all separated. No.

Hamish Macdonald：I'm interested in what you think China's role as a global power is moving forward. There's a lot of talk in China when you hear the communication of the outside world that refers to the international rules-based order. And we have an America that seems to be giving up on soft power, seems to be turning allies into enemies. What role does China play then, if America is not going to play that traditional role？Does China want to step in and be that player, or is it something else?

Zhou Bo：Let me tell you, if there are 1.5 million Taiwanese people living in mainland China. That means 6% Taiwanese people were already living in mainland China. And people always mentioned how China would use sticks, but people forgot, China also has offered a lot, a lot of carrots. For example, the children of Taiwanese could actually go to kindergartens in Fujian province, like our children would do. They would have ID cards, almost same ID card. So those people, 1.5 million people, tell a lot. These people do not care to live in a totally different society with a totally different political system, so long as this society can provide them better opportunities. And these people, are middle-class people and above, right? So I believe with globalization, with the acceleration of AI, the integration between mainland China and Taiwan is also accelerating, like in any parts of the world. So that means maybe one day Taiwanese people would consider it's not that bad to be part of the strongest nation on earth.

Zhou Bo：China has already stepped in. Yeah, because when the rest of the world looks more chaotic, people definitely will look up to China to ask the same questions as you did. But then how would China look like? I think China would look more like a kind of anchor or stabilizer in this volatile world.

Hamish Macdonald：But wouldn't that involve playing the role of dealmaker when it comes to conflict in the Middle East or conflict in Europe? Wouldn't it actually involve doing something quite different to what China does on the global stage?

Zhou Bo：I believe China does have a role, both in the Middle East and in the war in Ukraine. Because right now Russia and the United States are talking but you read newspapers like I do, so actually, President Putin's offer of ceasefire is just conditional, right? So maybe there could be a time when all the major powers, including China, would have to provide a kind of collective security guarantee.

Hamish Macdonald：Can you see China doing that, for example, in Ukraine or in the Middle East?

Zhou Bo：Yeah, I think so, because it depends on how the situation develop. If the end game is a kind of armistice, then it needs security guarantee.

Hamish Macdonald：What would be the security guarantee that you could imagine? Let's just take Ukraine as the example.

Zhou Bo：For example, Russia has claimed the four oblasts as Russian territories, but Russia can hardly really have full control of the four oblasts, because Ukraine is wholly supported by Europe, at least, If not by America. So that means these four oblasts in the future could very much become like Afghanistan, where Ukrainians would behave like Mujahideens to have endless guerrilla warfare. That means Russia can never have full control of the four regions. So that means there could be a possibility of so-called armistice. Because many people talk about the ceasefire, armistice and another scenario, but armistice is the one that is talked the most.

Hamish Macdonald：So starting on who's China offering the security guarantee, to the Russians or the Ukrainians?

Zhou Bo：Well, it has to be a collective security to both sides, because they could not win over others. But both sides are afraid. What about the ceasefire is broken, for different reasons? It's not only that Ukraine is afraid. Russia is also afraid, at least of looking lonely. So that is why Russia would want, you know, countries from Global South that is China, India and Brazil, to be involved.

Geraldine Doogue：And you make the point in your book about how many peacekeepers that China actually plays a big role in peacekeeping operations around the world, which I must say, I wasn't quite aware of. Would China be happy to send peacekeepers to monitor the Ukraine armistice?

Zhou Bo：I think if there is a request from the warring parties, which is the first condition for peacekeeping, then I think China can do that because China is the largest troop contributing country out of P5 and in terms of China's credibility in peacekeeping, it is never doubted. So China, along with India, with some other Global South countries, would be most, most suitable for this role, plus some non-NATO countries from Europe. Because this anyway, is a war in the heartland of Europe. So European countries can still be involved, but they should not be any NATO countries, because for Russia, these countries will simply be wolves in sheep’’ clothing, I believe.

Geraldine Doogue：Maybe we should go back to the title of your book, Should the world fear China? Now, you're clearly saying, “No, it should not.” Develop that idea, particularly at the moment when everything is so fluid and no one quite knows how it's going to unfold in the next little while. Tell us why you think China, in fact, could play a constructive role in this new world order.

Zhou Bo：Well, let's look at China's history in the last 40 years. China's rise is already a miracle in human history. So this is already proved it. I think the next thing China needs to prove is that even if China is strong, it doesn't have to behave like a hegemon. That is the next challenge. I think China has already solved the first problem. We have to wait and see whether China can actually behave like the strongest nation on earth, but not a hegemon. That is challenging, but we have time to wait and see. But if China can achieve, you know, peace in the last 40 years and plus, why just can’t China make the world safer? The world is not how the West look at it. If you look at this world, in Global South, I think people's perception about China is more or less positive. In Africa, certainly, most of the countries would have positive views of China. Then in the Indo-Pacific, this picture is a little bit patchy, but even last year, China's impression in the Southeastern Asia actually prevails over people's impression of the United States according to a poll.

Geraldine Doogue：With India, can I just pop that in with India? It has been quite a lot more complicated.

Zhou Bo：Yes, that is true, because, India’s relationship with China was good, but until we had the deadly brawl in the border in 2020. But even in that incident, I still see something positive, that is neither side decides to shoot at each other. Isn't it strange that the two modern armies in the world were fighting in a Stone Age manner, so that means the soldiers on both sides know subconsciously that they should not shoot at each other.

Hamish Macdonald：We might be somewhat skimming over the feelings in parts of Africa and parts of the Pacific about the debt levels and the obligations that those countries have now to China because of the loans that were granted to them. I wonder, then, where that leaves us here in Australia, does China want to be our friend, or is it something a little more nuanced?

Zhou Bo：Let me tell you the first country that I visited was actually Australia in 1990. That was my first trip to Australia, working as an interpreter for Chinese pilot training on simulator of Ansett Australia, which does seem to exist anymore. But I was back in 1999 when I was the first visiting fellow of the Royal Military College in Duntroon, where I stay for three months. So I believe, generally speaking, Chinese People's feelings toward Australia is quite positive, because you are far away from us. You are a big island in the ocean. Theoretically you should not be enemy, but historically, you always fought other people's war.

Hamish Macdonald：Yes, we are far away. Why are Chinese naval ships circumnavigating Australia? What's the purpose of all of that? How do you want us to interpret that?

Zhou Bo：Well, maybe I should remind you why your ships would sail so close to Chinese shore? And why would your aircraft penetrate into the airspace of Paracel Islands, which, according to Chinese, is China's airspace? And you did it more than once for all these kinds of things, and the Chinese ships sailing…

Hamish Macdonald：I think our position, though, our formal position, is that we're ensuring that there's free passage through international trade routes. So there is a bit different.

Zhou Bo：Can I just borrow your words to say, we are doing exactly the same thing around Australia, for the same reason?

Hamish Macdonald：You want to send trade around the bottoms of Australia. Do you?

Zhou Bo：No. I mean, our ships are also doing kind of freedom navigation around Australia.

Hamish Macdonald：For what purpose?

Zhou Bo：Right. First of all, that is high seas we can sail. There's no international rule, you know, restricting that. And actually, the question is for you. Why would you sail through Taiwan strait? What is the purpose of you sailing through Taiwan strait? There is not much business for you to go through there, right? One third of your trade is done with China. The warships don't have to carry all these goods through Taiwan strait.

Hamish Macdonald：So the interpretation that you think we should take from this is, “don't do it to us.”

Zhou Bo：Well, I don't think the Chinese government has ever talked about like that, but the international law would allow us to do that. But if you ask yourself, do some soul-searching, I think it is good for you.

Hamish Macdonald：(laughter) Should we leave it there?

Geraldine Doogue：Oh, well, I just really wanted to ask you about hard and soft power. Joseph Nye talks about the fact that long-term soft power often wins over hard power. You know, there's the PLA equipped in an extraordinary way. You've got a navy that is the envy now of the world. But your soft power, I would argue, to you, is really not great. You're on the back foot despite those changes in the Global South, do you see this as a deficit for China?

Zhou Bo：I don't think so, because it really depends on how you define soft power. Let me just raise the PLA you have mentioned. So far PLA’s operation overseas are all communitarian in nature, be it counterpiracy, peacekeeping or disaster relief. And our hospital ship, Peace Ark, has been sailing around the world to give free medicine and free medical treatment to people without charging anything. And this is the Chinese efforts to show that its intentions are benign. My hope as a PLA veteran is that I hope PLA will always do humanitarian operation in the future, even if China has the largest number of ships. Because you don't have to kill people with all kinds of excuses whatsoever. Who can remember all these excuses? But if you just do humanitarian aid to people of the rest of the world, people would be grateful to you. And who can disagree the importance of peacekeeping, counterpiracy and disaster relief？And this is exactly what PLA has been doing. You cannot give me a single example that the PLA has killed anyone overseas in the last 40 years. Isn't that impressive?

Hamish Macdonald：Zhou, we come from two countries that often don't understand each other very well, and often don't talk directly to each other very much. So personally, I want to say thank you for coming on and discussing with us. And I actually hope that we can have you back and continue this conversation. I think it's as important as ever.

Zhou Bo：Thank you, Hamish and Geraldine. This is an interesting friendly quarrel.

Geraldine Doogue：[Chuckles] Friendly quarrel, we may need more friendly quarrels.

本文系调查者网独家稿件，文章内容纯属作者个人观念，不代表渠道观念，未经授权，不得转载，否则将追查法令职责。重视调查者网微信guanchacn，每日阅览兴趣文章。

告发/反应