创业家
Phablets score 21% of Q1 2015 smartphone sales in the US, Apple's iPhone 6 Plus leads the pack
报道：phonearena，资料：Kantar Worldpanel
Richard Haass on Tavis Smiley
【布鲁金斯学会】
Meeting China halfway: How to defuse the emerging U.S.-China rivalry
Introduction and moderator: Jonathan D. Pollack
Senior Fellow, Foreign Policy, John L. Thornton China Center, Center for East Asia Policy Studies
Keynote remarks: Lyle Goldstein
Associate Professor, China Maritime Studies Institute, U.S. Naval War College
【又一张南海图】
【每周工作40小时？正好贫困线】
大家都说一星期干40个小时，实际上个人工作时间不同，有人收入低，得多干才能养家糊口，有人要创业，每星期干上个六七十小时。那如果你只干40小时，能养家糊口吗？
这是彭博据经济合作与发展组织（Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development ，OECD，世界20经济强国）数据编成的图表：
（点击放大）
蓝条，每周工作40小时正好越过贫困线，就是说，没好日子，说不定有一顿没一顿。你也许大吃一惊，美国、德国和法国都在其内。
穷人，哪都一样。
【注】
The poverty line is defined as 50 percent of the median wage in any nation.
彭博原文。
【日本经济】
资料：【1】，【2】，【3】，【4】，【5】
【附录】马军（节目专家）说的西部”发展的冲动“，老例子
【路透社】2015.05.05
EU says seeking closer security cooperation with China
Ben Blanchard
Europe aims to improve security and defense cooperation with China, especially in the Middle East and in the fight against human trafficking, the European Union's foreign policy chief said on Tuesday following high-level talks in Beijing.
Federica Mogherini's two-day visit comes as Beijing launches a diplomatic offensive to move Sino-European relations beyond trade and raise China's international profile, buoyed by its success winning European participation in a new Asian bank.
Trade is still at the core of the relationship, worth 467 billion euros ($519 billion) last year, but China's bid to deepen cooperation on world affairs resonates with the EU as it seeks to forge a more unified foreign policy among its 28 member countries.
Mogherini told reporters during a joint appearance with China's top diplomat, State Councillor Yang Jiechi, that the two discussed "concrete possibilities" of strengthening security and defense ties, pointing to the example of successful anti-piracy cooperation in the Gulf of Aden.
"We also discussed the situation in Iraq and Syria and briefly in Libya, where the European Union and China share common interests and where our joint efforts could make a real difference," Mogherini said.
She said both sides had reiterated that the conflict in Ukraine can only be solved diplomatically with "full respect for Ukraine's sovereignty".
She praised too China's "precious" role in Iran nuclear talks and said China had an "important role" to play in countering human trafficking as it is a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council.
Mogherini's visit comes ahead of a China-EU summit in Brussels in June, where she said opportunities to work on infrastructure cooperation would also be discussed.
China appears set on reworking existing global governance mechanisms, laying down a challenge to the United States and the institutions that Washington has dominated since World War Two.
Those efforts enjoyed spectacular success recently when the nascent Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) won unexpected backing from European governments who chose, in an ill-coordinated scramble for advantage, to join despite Washington's misgivings.
Still, the EU remains wary of Beijing. It has had an arms embargo on China since the Chinese army bloodily put down pro-democracy protests around Beijing's Tiananmen Square in 1989.
Human rights rankles too, something Mogherini said she would raise during her visit, an issue China sees as irritating interference in its domestic affairs.
Many activists in Europe have called on her to publicly demand the release of government critics, anti-corruption activists, lawyers and journalists.
【华尔街日报】2015.05.08
Russia, China Forge Closer Ties With New Economic, Financing Accords
Moscow turns to Asian investors to reduce reliance on Europe and the U.S. amid standoff over Ukraine
Russian President Vladimir Putin (left) and Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping at a documents signing ceremony during their meeting at the Kremlin in Moscow on Friday
MOSCOW—Russia and China signed economic deals and a financing agreement for up to $25 billion for Russian companies from Chinese banks, as Moscow looks to seal closer ties with its southeastern neighbor given its standoff with the West.
President Vladimir Putin and his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping oversaw the signing of an agreement here allowing domestic companies to raise funding from Chinese banks against guarantees provided by Moscow, which is cut off from global capital markets by Western sanctions. The two countries also signed a preliminary deal for Russia to supply gas via a pipeline to China, although key details remain to be resolved, as well as agreements in aviation and farming.
“Today, China is our key strategic partner,” Mr. Putin said, seated alongside Mr. Xi as the deals were signed.
Mr. Xi is the highest-profile foreign leader in Moscow for Russia’s celebrations Saturday of the end of World War II. Western leaders aren’t attending the event after Russia’s annexation of Crimea and support for separatist militants in eastern Ukraine.
Facing Western economic sanctions, Moscow has touted a turn eastward, saying it would seek Asian investors to reduce reliance on Europe and the U.S. But results have been mixed. Russia was disappointed last year that Chinese and other Asian investors didn’t jump in to the void left by Western creditors. The financing deal, signed Friday by the Russian Direct Investment Fund, the Russia-China Investment Fund and China Construction Bank 601939 appears to represent a typical example of China’s hard bargaining, leaving Russia bearing all the risk.
The agreement will allow Russian companies, struggling to repay foreign debts, to raise up to $25 billion in the next two to three years at lower costs than on the domestic market, the spokeswoman for RDIF said.
The state-run RDIF will provide around $1.5 billion to the financial partnership, co-financing future deals and acting as a warrantor in case of possible defaults.
“We will focus on companies that are not under formal sanctions but are having difficulties attracting money. We plan to help companies that as a result of the current geopolitical situation are experiencing problems attracting liquidity,” RDIF chief Kirill Dmitriev said in televised remarks.
“We see excellent opportunities with many Russian companies seeking debt financing from overseas markets, and it is of mutual interest to leverage the strong capital of Chinese banks and financial institutions, which have active plans to invest internationally,” Hu Bing, president of the Russia-China Investment Fund said in a statement.
But there was no evidence of a breakthrough on energy deals, which the Kremlin has placed at the center of its hoped-for eastward turn. Russian state gas giant Gazprom OGZPY signed a preliminary agreement with China National Petroleum Corporation on supplying 30 billion cubic meters of natural gas to China via the so-called “western route,” which would allow it to divert gas from fields that currently serve Europe. But there was no indication of progress on the key issue of price. Gazprom Chief Executive Alexei Miller declined to provide any details on the timing of the project.
Russia wants to sell more gas to Asia as Gazprom is facing competition and regulatory pressure in Europe. But progress has been slow, and analysts question the economic viability of the “Strength of Siberia” pipeline, planned to take gas to eastern China in a deal signed in May 2014 worth $400 billion.
Speaking in the Kremlin after meeting with Mr. Xi, Mr. Putin touted China’s status as Russia’s largest trading partner, as well as the countries’ “common heroic past” in World War II.
As a part of plan to boost the trade in rubles and the yuan, Russia’s largest lender Sberbank agreed with the China Development Bank Corporation to set up a facility agreement worth 6 billion yuan ($970 million) for trade purposes.
Among other deals signed on Friday, Russia and China agreed to set up a $2 billion agriculture fund to invest in agricultural projects in both countries.
Moscow has also secured a deal to supply up to 100 Russian-made Sukhoi Superjet aircraft to both Chinese and Southeast Asian markets over the next three years, the RDIF said.
Russia and China also signed a framework cybersecurity deal. The two countries agreed not to conduct cyberattacks against each other, as well as to jointly counteract technology that could create political or social disturbances.
【美国外交政策杂志】2015.05.08
Russia’s Stumbling Pivot to Asia
Moscow and Beijing are trying to cement closer ties, but delays in high-profile energy deals highlight lingering tensions between the two American rivals
Keith Johnson
On May 21, 2014, after a marathon negotiating session in Shanghai, Russian President Vladimir Putin and his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, finally put pen to paper on a $400 billion natural-gas deal widely heralded as the kickstart to Russia’s own pivot to Asia. One year later, though, it’s far from clear that strategic shift is genuinely taking shape.
Despite plenty of smiles and a raft of bilateral economic pacts signed on the sidelines of Russia’s big World War II victory parade this weekend in Moscow, the two countries still seem far from cementing a full-blown rapprochement. Russia’s frosty relations with the West, prompted in large part by its invasion of Ukraine, helped spur Moscow’s lurch to the east. Yet those very woes in Europe are making it even harder for Russia to conclude new accords with China on anything like favorable terms because Beijing knows it can drive hard bargains with a Russia desperate for cash, credit, and new markets. With Moscow reluctant to accept those terms, little real progress has actually been made on expanding the landmark energy deals.
In other words, while analysts in Russia, China, and even the West talk of an ever-closer strategic relationship between Washington’s two bogeymen, in reality competing interests and clashing visions everywhere from Central Asia to China’s own backyard are keeping Moscow and Beijing from consummating their courtship.
“We should not forget there is still a whole lot of distrust between the two countries,” said Sijbren de Jong, an analyst at the Hague Centre for Strategic Studies. “’BFF’ in this case stands for ‘Best Frenemies Forever.’”
On Friday, the two presidents met ahead of a gala parade largely boycotted by Western leaders — President Barack Obama is skipping, and the U.S. is instead sending its ambassador to Russia — and took steps meant to reinforce at least the economic terms of their relationship. China and Russia signed billions of dollars worth of potential deals, including Chinese loans to credit-battered Russian firms and joint investment in agricultural and infrastructure projects. Chinese soldiers will take part in the military parade over the weekend, and the two countries will hold joint naval exercises in the Mediterranean next week.
“China today is our strategic key partner,” Putin said after the signing ceremony.
Yet just as revealing is what did not happen at the long-awaited summit. No real progress was made on the second natural-gas export deal to China that Russia spent the past year touting and which is widely seen as the keystone to a strategic energy relationship. The two sides apparently agreed on the outline of terms for Russia to ship gas from Western Siberia to China’s far-western provinces — the so-called Altai route — but could not resolve core differences such as how much China is actually willing to pay for the gas. Price differences in the past pushed back other bilateral energy deals a full decade.
Turning those big energy accords from aspirations into reality matters because energy is at the heart of Russia’s long-planned pivot to the east. For more than a decade, leaders in the Kremlin and inside Russia’s energy giants have been anxious to find hungry new markets for the natural-resource exports that account for half of Russia’s budget.
There are several reasons for the stumbles so far. Russia and its effectively state-run gas giant Gazprom always wanted to ship gas to China from existing gas fields in Western Siberia to Xinjiang; China long insisted that it needed energy in the populous coastal provinces of the east. Thanks to Putin’s direct intervention last May, the two sides finally agreed to build the $60 billion “Power of Siberia” pipeline from Russia’s east to provinces around Beijing.
But Gazprom never quit grumbling and kept eyeing the cheaper, potentially more lucrative western route. Those divisions between Gazprom and the Kremlin came close to torpedoing energy cooperation between the two countries altogether, especially after people close to Gazprom this spring publicly floated the idea of shoving Putin’s pet project to the back burner. “Power of Siberia” was salvaged in extremis last week when the Russian parliament finally rubber-stamped it.
“Frankly speaking, Gazprom is a liability for Putin’s pivot-to-Asia policy,” said Keun Wook Paik, an expert on Sino-Russian energy cooperation at the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies.
While Russia’s open conflict with Europe — including the West’s imposition of tough sanctions on energy firms such as Gazprom and a landmark antitrust investigation by authorities in Brussels — has accelerated Russia’s pivot east, it has also made it harder to carry off. The sanctions have hampered the ability of firms such as Gazprom and Rosneft to raise the billions of dollars they need to build the infrastructure required for the new projects, and the Chinese have slammed shut their wallets so far. Compounding all of Russia’s other financial woes is a sharp decline in the price of oil, and thus natural gas, over the past year, which has battered corporate earnings and national coffers.
“For the Western pipeline to succeed, Russia will need credit and the Chinese will need to provide this. But China is not crazy: It is willing to help, but only on its terms and strictly commercial terms at that,” said de Jong.
Russia’s efforts to reinvent itself in the European market, paradoxically enough, are also hampering its pivot to Asia. Putin’s latest European gambit is an undersea gas pipeline that would ship Russian gas to Turkey, thus bypassing Ukraine but keeping Gazprom’s grip on the huge European market. Russia and Turkey announced an agreement Thursday on the so-called Turkish Stream with ambitious hopes of opening the export route late next year — greased by a hefty discount in the price of natural gas for many private buyers in Turkey.
China, of course, has taken note of those Turkish discounts, as well as other shifts in the global energy landscape that for now have clearly made it a buyer’s market, to squeeze Russia for steep discounts on gas deals between the two countries. That not only delays the final accord but also limits the economic upside for Russia’s energy trade with Asia.
What all this means is that Russia’s full energy pivot to Asia will likely take longer to reach fruition than Moscow initially hoped. That will only entrench Russia and Gazprom’s reliance on the European market. And that could force Russia and Gazprom to reach some sort of deal with European Union authorities who have taken aim at the energy titan’s anticompetitive practices and who could slap the firm with multibillion dollar fines or dismantle its entire business model.
More broadly, the stumbles so far in Russia’s pivot belie the notion that the two countries are close to cementing a profound, ideological alliance that could bring together a has-been superpower with a rising superpower to create a durable anti-American bloc stretching across Eurasia.
“Putin claims Russia is pivoting to Asia, but progress is limited. China is simply cherry-picking from what Russia has to offer,” de Jong said.
【美国外交政策杂志】2015.04.24
The Middle East’s Pivot to Asia
Allies and adversaries alike are “strategically rebalancing” away from the United States and toward China
David Rothkopf
Remember the pivot to Asia? The big signature move of first-term Obama foreign policy? Some called it a “strategic rebalancing.” We were going to reset our priorities, put the conflicts of the Middle East behind us, and devote big efforts to creating and implementing a strategy to deal with the vital strategic moves America needed to make to account for the rise of the world’s fastest-growing region.
As it happened, and as anyone with eyes could see, after its champions like Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and National Security Advisor Tom Donilon left their jobs in Barack Obama’s administration, the initiative lost steam. Since 2013, there have been little more than assertions that the pivot was still pivoting — even though there was precious little concrete evidence to that effect. (See below for a brief note on one of the few significant Asia-Pacific efforts, the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal.) The region the administration had so hoped to pivot away from, the Middle East, was still sucking up every bit and bite of excess bandwidth, and top officials in the administration just weren’t able to muster up anything much more than symbolic gestures or relatively small initiatives to demonstrate America’s reprioritization of Asia at the top of its foreign-policy to-do list.
A funny thing happened though. While we went from pivot to pirouette in the Middle East — trying to spin away but being drawn right back around to where we started — the countries in the region, allies and adversaries alike, nonetheless saw an America that was trying to get out, lean back, or lead from behind. When Washington acted, it was in response to a crisis, and even then, mostly what it did was appear to try as hard as possible to do as little as possible. The administration’s one big Middle East initiative, the push for a nuclear deal with Iran, was seen by virtually all of our traditional allies in that neck of the woods as something even worse than the Asia rebalancing that they worried was a sign of American disengagement. To them, from Israel to the Gulf, it was seen as a pivot not out of the region but to an enemy within it.
Unsettled by the spinning, tottering superpower in their midst or perhaps motivated by its apparent dizziness, many of the most important countries of the Middle East decided to do what America apparently would not: They began to execute their own turn to Asia, or in some cases they just accelerated a trend that had already begun.
As one regional leader told me recently, “We need a dependable relationship with a major power. If the United States can’t be counted on, then we will have to turn elsewhere.”
As one regional leader told me recently, “We need a dependable relationship with a major power. If the United States can’t be counted on, then we will have to turn elsewhere.”
The result has been growing, strengthening Chinese (as well as, to a lesser extent, Indian, Japanese, and South Korean) relations with many of the countries of the greater Middle East. While the conflict in Yemen undid recent plans for Chinese President Xi Jinping to visit Saudi Arabia and Egypt, it was only a hiccup in a constant stream of visits of Middle Eastern leaders to China and vice versa. Over the past year, Chinese leaders have been flocking to the Middle East, along with nearby and strategically important neighbors like Pakistan. In fact, Xi’s visit to Islamabad this month is a perfect illustration of the impact of such exchanges. During the trip, the Chinese, who sometimes speak of the Pakistanis as their “iron brothers” and view them as a critical strategic pathway to the resources of the Middle East and a counterbalance to Indian rivals, promised $46 billion in investment in Pakistan — nearly triple the total foreign direct investment injected into Pakistan since 2008, according to the BBC. Projects included big commitments in energy, transportation, and telecommunications.
China’s special relationship with Israel
Pakistan is not an isolated example, even if it is a striking one. China’s commerce minister was an important player at the recent Sharm el-Sheikh summit focusing on investment in Egypt, and the two countries have also conducted multiple recent high-level meetings to promote ties. Last year, a touted “China week” in Israel featuring a visit of China’s deputy prime minister came with new promises of investment and cooperation, including a joint research project between Tel Aviv University and China’s Tsinghua University. Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s prime minister, who traveled to China the year before, has explicitly prioritized strengthening ties with Beijing, a decision one senior Israeli official told me was “clearly intended to send a message to the United States.” During the China week, Netanyahu celebrated what he called the “huge growth of cooperation and connections between Israel and China.” Earlier this month, the Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth ran an article asserting that the “crisis” in U.S.-Israel relations has pushed China and Israel closer.
The ties take other forms as well. One official from the Gulf noted just last week that when they have trouble getting defense technologies from the United States, one of the first places they turn is China. (The Chinese media this week celebrated the fact that it was Chinese-made PLZ-45 self-propelled missiles that Saudi forces used to attack Houthi militants in Yemen.)
Bit by bit, the deals, visits, and connections all add up to something greater. Today, China is, according to the CIA’s World Factbook, both Iran’s No. 1 trading partner (by far) and also the top partner of Iran’s sworn rivals in Saudi Arabia. It is the No. 2 trading partner of Israel and Pakistan (if you count Hong Kong). China’s oil imports from the region are up, with March imports from Iran 15 percent higher than they were a year ago. Beijing and Tehran have discussed ways to cooperate on civilian nuclear power, and ties between the governments are close and getting closer. China and India are seen as likely leading consumers of new Iranian oil that might come to market once sanctions against that country are lifted in a possible nuclear deal. Indeed, their appetite for oil is such that many analysts have rightly noted that if energy trade grows as expected, both countries would become aggressive opponents to the reimposition of sanctions against Tehran should it violate the nuclear deal. In other words, they might well be in a position to take the “snap” out of any “snap back” provisions the United States might seek to insert in the terms of a final arrangement to roll back and hit pause on Iran’s nuclear weapons program.
Beijing’s strategic clarity
While the countries of the Middle East have turned to China for economic benefits, arms trade, technology, and the strategic value the ties may bring, the Chinese have not just welcomed the arrangement — they have sought it out. As elsewhere — and unlike the United States just about everywhere — they have a very clear strategy to increase their influence. The Middle East has a central role to play in Beijing’s “One Belt, One Road” strategy to increase land and sea ties to vital economies in Central Asia, in the Middle East, and onward to Europe. Middle Eastern energy resources are absolutely central to this strategy. And the deftness of the Chinese at being able to maintain and strengthen relations with countries at odds with each other — e.g., Iran, Saudi Arabia, Israel — is a sign of the seriousness with which they approach the mission.
A recent milestone in this strategy is the triumphant announcement of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) — a financial institution created by the Chinese to help extend their influence and foster regional growth. The Obama administration fought the establishment of the AIIB (seeking to bully allies into staying out of it) so ineffectively and maladroitly that one Asian diplomat told me this week that the entire case ought to be studied in schools as an example of how not to conduct foreign policy. Washington appeared reactive, disorganized, and impotent. The Chinese used the institution’s rollout to send a message: Not only did America’s allies like Britain, France, and Germany sign up as founding members, but so did Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and the United Arab Emirates. And if that wasn’t enough of a slap in the face, the kicker was the announcement of Iranian membership on April 3 — just as the United States was trying to hold firm on applying economic pressure on Iran in order to secure the final steps in negotiations on the nuclear deal.
Although the Middle East’s pivot to Asia is being reciprocated by the Chinese, don’t think for a second that Beijing wants to assume the role once played by the United States or other major world powers that have sought to influence outcomes in the Middle East. That is because they are smart. They actually read history and think about the long arc of time. It is also because they do not work the same way as the intrusive, heavy-handed powers of the West. China’s leadership today insinuates itself into power; it does not covet the limelight; and it is not interested in the great games of empire or nation-building that have proved so costly and ill-fated for the United States, the British, and others.
Harvard University’s wise scholar Joseph Nye may have landed on a crucial insight in his definition of the utility of soft power. But he also did the world a bit of an unintentional disservice in coining and popularizing the term. Soft power is not something less than hard power — even if it sounds that way. It brings with it real influence and in many ways provides a better foundation for effective long-term relationships than does the use or threat of force.
Fortunately, Beijing has largely eschewed the application of hard power thus far in its current era of ascendancy. But it has carefully gained power of the softer variety through its cultivation of economic and political ties, used sparingly but effectively. It may not have seemed like a big deal to the world when China stopped buying Norwegian salmon after the Nobel Peace Prize was given by a Norwegian parliament-appointed committee to Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo. But it squeezed Oslo so hard it’s taken almost five years for the Norwegian government to undo the damage.
Stepping up to the plate
Should Washington welcome China’s new role in the Middle East?
Some in the let-the-rest-of-the-world-clean-up-its-own-messes-for-a-while camp might welcome this.
Some in the let-the-rest-of-the-world-clean-up-its-own-messes-for-a-while camp might welcome this. Good luck to the Chinese, they might say, given the costs and frustrations associated with the Middle East. But don’t be too quick to leap to such conclusions. Washington’s loss of influence to China in the still vitally important and volatile region could in the decades ahead prove decisive in a wide variety of potential great-power confrontations or regional crises — and not just to us but to our allies in Europe, India, or Japan.
As China is demonstrating, involvement in the Middle East does not always have to be costly or foolhardy. While Beijing may yet repeat the errors of those that came before in the last hundred years, it is certainly a force to be reckoned with (and not exactly new to the region: Mongol armies reached as far as Gaza in the late 13th century). But China’s growing clout relative to America’s in that part of the world will not be something that is lightly dismissed by anyone with any strategic sensibility at all — anyone who can look beyond today’s headlines and imagine the emerging strategic rivalries and successor conflicts of tomorrow.
As a footnote to the above, it should be noted that the progress the Obama administration has made in the past week toward gaining trade promotion authority, a crucial step toward the ultimate approval of the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal, is welcome. This deal does not an Asia pivot make. But it will help integrate the United States more into the region, speed the creation of vital U.S. export-related jobs, and help set standards for the Chinese as they seek to become even more of a global economic leader. The work done by U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman on this deal has been tireless and exemplary, and he, along with Commerce Secretary Penny Pritzker and Export-Import Bank Chairman and President Fred Hochberg, represent one of the Obama administration’s underappreciated secret weapons — a strong, active, talented, and capable international economic team.
Seymour Hersh on Killing of bin Laden
【Politico】
U.S. officials fuming over Hersh account of Osama bin Laden raid
Former top CIA official (Morell) on bin Laden raid account: 'It's all wrong'
Blogger accuses Seymour Hersh of ‘plagiarism’ for bin Laden raid story
【VOX】
The many problems with Seymour Hersh's Osama bin Laden conspiracy theory
【Slate】
Explosive, Controversial Report by Seymour Hersh Says Obama Administration Lied About Bin Laden Raid
“I Am Not Backing Off Anything I Said”
【London Review of Books】
The Killing of Osama bin Laden
It’s been four years since a group of US Navy Seals assassinated Osama bin Laden in a night raid on a high-walled compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. The killing was the high point of Obama’s first term, and a major factor in his re-election. The White House still maintains that the mission was an all-American affair, and that the senior generals of Pakistan’s army and Inter-Services Intelligence agency (ISI) were not told of the raid in advance. This is false, as are many other elements of the Obama administration’s account. The White House’s story might have been written by Lewis Carroll: would bin Laden, target of a massive international manhunt, really decide that a resort town forty miles from Islamabad would be the safest place to live and command al-Qaida’s operations? He was hiding in the open. So America said.
The most blatant lie was that Pakistan’s two most senior military leaders – General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, chief of the army staff, and General Ahmed Shuja Pasha, director general of the ISI – were never informed of the US mission. This remains the White House position despite an array of reports that have raised questions, including one by Carlotta Gall in the New York Times Magazine of 19 March 2014. Gall, who spent 12 years as the Times correspondent in Afghanistan, wrote that she’d been told by a ‘Pakistani official’ that Pasha had known before the raid that bin Laden was in Abbottabad. The story was denied by US and Pakistani officials, and went no further. In his book Pakistan: Before and after Osama (2012), Imtiaz Gul, executive director of the Centre for Research and Security Studies, a think tank in Islamabad, wrote that he’d spoken to four undercover intelligence officers who – reflecting a widely held local view – asserted that the Pakistani military must have had knowledge of the operation. The issue was raised again in February, when a retired general, Asad Durrani, who was head of the ISI in the early 1990s, told an al-Jazeera interviewer that it was ‘quite possible’ that the senior officers of the ISI did not know where bin Laden had been hiding, ‘but it was more probable that they did [know]. And the idea was that, at the right time, his location would be revealed. And the right time would have been when you can get the necessary quid pro quo – if you have someone like Osama bin Laden, you are not going to simply hand him over to the United States.’
This spring I contacted Durrani and told him in detail what I had learned about the bin Laden assault from American sources: that bin Laden had been a prisoner of the ISI at the Abbottabad compound since 2006; that Kayani and Pasha knew of the raid in advance and had made sure that the two helicopters delivering the Seals to Abbottabad could cross Pakistani airspace without triggering any alarms; that the CIA did not learn of bin Laden’s whereabouts by tracking his couriers, as the White House has claimed since May 2011, but from a former senior Pakistani intelligence officer who betrayed the secret in return for much of the $25 million reward offered by the US, and that, while Obama did order the raid and the Seal team did carry it out, many other aspects of the administration’s account were false.
‘When your version comes out – if you do it – people in Pakistan will be tremendously grateful,’ Durrani told me. ‘For a long time people have stopped trusting what comes out about bin Laden from the official mouths. There will be some negative political comment and some anger, but people like to be told the truth, and what you’ve told me is essentially what I have heard from former colleagues who have been on a fact-finding mission since this episode.’ As a former ISI head, he said, he had been told shortly after the raid by ‘people in the “strategic community” who would know’ that there had been an informant who had alerted the US to bin Laden’s presence in Abbottabad, and that after his killing the US’s betrayed promises left Kayani and Pasha exposed.
The major US source for the account that follows is a retired senior intelligence official who was knowledgeable about the initial intelligence about bin Laden’s presence in Abbottabad. He also was privy to many aspects of the Seals’ training for the raid, and to the various after-action reports. Two other US sources, who had access to corroborating information, have been longtime consultants to the Special Operations Command. I also received information from inside Pakistan about widespread dismay among the senior ISI and military leadership – echoed later by Durrani – over Obama’s decision to go public immediately with news of bin Laden’s death. The White House did not respond to requests for comment.
*
It began with a walk-in. In August 2010 a former senior Pakistani intelligence officer approached Jonathan Bank, then the CIA’s station chief at the US embassy in Islamabad. He offered to tell the CIA where to find bin Laden in return for the reward that Washington had offered in 2001. Walk-ins are assumed by the CIA to be unreliable, and the response from the agency’s headquarters was to fly in a polygraph team. The walk-in passed the test. ‘So now we’ve got a lead on bin Laden living in a compound in Abbottabad, but how do we really know who it is?’ was the CIA’s worry at the time, the retired senior US intelligence official told me.
The US initially kept what it knew from the Pakistanis. ‘The fear was that if the existence of the source was made known, the Pakistanis themselves would move bin Laden to another location. So only a very small number of people were read into the source and his story,’ the retired official said. ‘The CIA’s first goal was to check out the quality of the informant’s information.’ The compound was put under satellite surveillance. The CIA rented a house in Abbottabad to use as a forward observation base and staffed it with Pakistani employees and foreign nationals. Later on, the base would serve as a contact point with the ISI; it attracted little attention because Abbottabad is a holiday spot full of houses rented on short leases. A psychological profile of the informant was prepared. (The informant and his family were smuggled out of Pakistan and relocated in the Washington area. He is now a consultant for the CIA.)
‘By October the military and intelligence community were discussing the possible military options. Do we drop a bunker buster on the compound or take him out with a drone strike? Perhaps send someone to kill him, single assassin style? But then we’d have no proof of who he was,’ the retired official said. ‘We could see some guy is walking around at night, but we have no intercepts because there’s no commo coming from the compound.’
In October, Obama was briefed on the intelligence. His response was cautious, the retired official said. ‘It just made no sense that bin Laden was living in Abbottabad. It was just too crazy. The president’s position was emphatic: “Don’t talk to me about this any more unless you have proof that it really is bin Laden.”’ The immediate goal of the CIA leadership and the Joint Special Operations Command was to get Obama’s support. They believed they would get this if they got DNA evidence, and if they could assure him that a night assault of the compound would carry no risk. The only way to accomplish both things, the retired official said, ‘was to get the Pakistanis on board’.
During the late autumn of 2010, the US continued to keep quiet about the walk-in, and Kayani and Pasha continued to insist to their American counterparts that they had no information about bin Laden’s whereabouts. ‘The next step was to figure out how to ease Kayani and Pasha into it – to tell them that we’ve got intelligence showing that there is a high-value target in the compound, and to ask them what they know about the target,’ the retired official said. ‘The compound was not an armed enclave – no machine guns around, because it was under ISI control.’ The walk-in had told the US that bin Laden had lived undetected from 2001 to 2006 with some of his wives and children in the Hindu Kush mountains, and that ‘the ISI got to him by paying some of the local tribal people to betray him.’ (Reports after the raid placed him elsewhere in Pakistan during this period.) Bank was also told by the walk-in that bin Laden was very ill, and that early on in his confinement at Abbottabad, the ISI had ordered Amir Aziz, a doctor and a major in the Pakistani army, to move nearby to provide treatment. ‘The truth is that bin Laden was an invalid, but we cannot say that,’ the retired official said. ‘“You mean you guys shot a cripple? Who was about to grab his AK-47?”’
‘It didn’t take long to get the co-operation we needed, because the Pakistanis wanted to ensure the continued release of American military aid, a good percentage of which was anti-terrorism funding that finances personal security, such as bullet-proof limousines and security guards and housing for the ISI leadership,’ the retired official said. He added that there were also under-the-table personal ‘incentives’ that were financed by off-the-books Pentagon contingency funds. ‘The intelligence community knew what the Pakistanis needed to agree – there was the carrot. And they chose the carrot. It was a win-win. We also did a little blackmail. We told them we would leak the fact that you’ve got bin Laden in your backyard. We knew their friends and enemies’ – the Taliban and jihadist groups in Pakistan and Afghanistan – ‘would not like it.’
A worrying factor at this early point, according to the retired official, was Saudi Arabia, which had been financing bin Laden’s upkeep since his seizure by the Pakistanis. ‘The Saudis didn’t want bin Laden’s presence revealed to us because he was a Saudi, and so they told the Pakistanis to keep him out of the picture. The Saudis feared if we knew we would pressure the Pakistanis to let bin Laden start talking to us about what the Saudis had been doing with al-Qaida. And they were dropping money – lots of it. The Pakistanis, in turn, were concerned that the Saudis might spill the beans about their control of bin Laden. The fear was that if the US found out about bin Laden from Riyadh, all hell would break out. The Americans learning about bin Laden’s imprisonment from a walk-in was not the worst thing.’
Despite their constant public feuding, American and Pakistani military and intelligence services have worked together closely for decades on counterterrorism in South Asia. Both services often find it useful to engage in public feuds ‘to cover their asses’, as the retired official put it, but they continually share intelligence used for drone attacks, and co-operate on covert operations. At the same time, it’s understood in Washington that elements of the ISI believe that maintaining a relationship with the Taliban leadership inside Afghanistan is essential to national security. The ISI’s strategic aim is to balance Indian influence in Kabul; the Taliban is also seen in Pakistan as a source of jihadist shock troops who would back Pakistan against India in a confrontation over Kashmir.
Adding to the tension was the Pakistani nuclear arsenal, often depicted in the Western press as an ‘Islamic bomb’ that might be transferred by Pakistan to an embattled nation in the Middle East in the event of a crisis with Israel. The US looked the other way when Pakistan began building its weapons system in the 1970s and it’s widely believed it now has more than a hundred nuclear warheads. It’s understood in Washington that US security depends on the maintenance of strong military and intelligence ties to Pakistan. The belief is mirrored in Pakistan.
‘The Pakistani army sees itself as family,’ the retired official said. ‘Officers call soldiers their sons and all officers are “brothers”. The attitude is different in the American military. The senior Pakistani officers believe they are the elite and have got to look out for all of the people, as keepers of the flame against Muslim fundamentalism. The Pakistanis also know that their trump card against aggression from India is a strong relationship with the United States. They will never cut their person-to-person ties with us.’
Like all CIA station chiefs, Bank was working undercover, but that ended in early December 2010 when he was publicly accused of murder in a criminal complaint filed in Islamabad by Karim Khan, a Pakistani journalist whose son and brother, according to local news reports, had been killed by a US drone strike. Allowing Bank to be named was a violation of diplomatic protocol on the part of the Pakistani authorities, and it brought a wave of unwanted publicity. Bank was ordered to leave Pakistan by the CIA, whose officials subsequently told the Associated Press he was transferred because of concerns for his safety. The New York Times reported that there was ‘strong suspicion’ the ISI had played a role in leaking Bank’s name to Khan. There was speculation that he was outed as payback for the publication in a New York lawsuit a month earlier of the names of ISI chiefs in connection with the Mumbai terrorist attacks of 2008. But there was a collateral reason, the retired official said, for the CIA’s willingness to send Bank back to America. The Pakistanis needed cover in case their co-operation with the Americans in getting rid of bin Laden became known. The Pakistanis could say: “You’re talking about me? We just kicked out your station chief.”’
*
The bin Laden compound was less than two miles from the Pakistan Military Academy, and a Pakistani army combat battalion headquarters was another mile or so away. Abbottabad is less than 15 minutes by helicopter from Tarbela Ghazi, an important base for ISI covert operations and the facility where those who guard Pakistan’s nuclear weapons arsenal are trained. ‘Ghazi is why the ISI put bin Laden in Abbottabad in the first place,’ the retired official said, ‘to keep him under constant supervision.’
The risks for Obama were high at this early stage, especially because there was a troubling precedent: the failed 1980 attempt to rescue the American hostages in Tehran. That failure was a factor in Jimmy Carter’s loss to Ronald Reagan. Obama’s worries were realistic, the retired official said. ‘Was bin Laden ever there? Was the whole story a product of Pakistani deception? What about political blowback in case of failure?’ After all, as the retired official said, ‘If the mission fails, Obama’s just a black Jimmy Carter and it’s all over for re-election.’
Obama was anxious for reassurance that the US was going to get the right man. The proof was to come in the form of bin Laden’s DNA. The planners turned for help to Kayani and Pasha, who asked Aziz to obtain the specimens. Soon after the raid the press found out that Aziz had been living in a house near the bin Laden compound: local reporters discovered his name in Urdu on a plate on the door. Pakistani officials denied that Aziz had any connection to bin Laden, but the retired official told me that Aziz had been rewarded with a share of the $25 million reward the US had put up because the DNA sample had showed conclusively that it was bin Laden in Abbottabad. (In his subsequent testimony to a Pakistani commission investigating the bin Laden raid, Aziz said that he had witnessed the attack on Abbottabad, but had no knowledge of who was living in the compound and had been ordered by a superior officer to stay away from the scene.)
Bargaining continued over the way the mission would be executed. ‘Kayani eventually tells us yes, but he says you can’t have a big strike force. You have to come in lean and mean. And you have to kill him, or there is no deal,’ the retired official said. The agreement was struck by the end of January 2011, and Joint Special Operations Command prepared a list of questions to be answered by the Pakistanis: ‘How can we be assured of no outside intervention? What are the defences inside the compound and its exact dimensions? Where are bin Laden’s rooms and exactly how big are they? How many steps in the stairway? Where are the doors to his rooms, and are they reinforced with steel? How thick?’ The Pakistanis agreed to permit a four-man American cell – a Navy Seal, a CIA case officer and two communications specialists – to set up a liaison office at Tarbela Ghazi for the coming assault. By then, the military had constructed a mock-up of the compound in Abbottabad at a secret former nuclear test site in Nevada, and an elite Seal team had begun rehearsing for the attack.
The US had begun to cut back on aid to Pakistan – to ‘turn off the spigot’, in the retired official’s words. The provision of 18 new F-16 fighter aircraft was delayed, and under-the-table cash payments to the senior leaders were suspended. In April 2011 Pasha met the CIA director, Leon Panetta, at agency headquarters. ‘Pasha got a commitment that the United States would turn the money back on, and we got a guarantee that there would be no Pakistani opposition during the mission,’ the retired official said. ‘Pasha also insisted that Washington stop complaining about Pakistan’s lack of co-operation with the American war on terrorism.’ At one point that spring, Pasha offered the Americans a blunt explanation of the reason Pakistan kept bin Laden’s capture a secret, and why it was imperative for the ISI role to remain secret: ‘We needed a hostage to keep tabs on al-Qaida and the Taliban,’ Pasha said, according to the retired official. ‘The ISI was using bin Laden as leverage against Taliban and al-Qaida activities inside Afghanistan and Pakistan. They let the Taliban and al-Qaida leadership know that if they ran operations that clashed with the interests of the ISI, they would turn bin Laden over to us. So if it became known that the Pakistanis had worked with us to get bin Laden at Abbottabad, there would be hell to pay.’
At one of his meetings with Panetta, according to the retired official and a source within the CIA, Pasha was asked by a senior CIA official whether he saw himself as acting in essence as an agent for al-Qaida and the Taliban. ‘He answered no, but said the ISI needed to have some control.’ The message, as the CIA saw it, according to the retired official, was that Kayani and Pasha viewed bin Laden ‘as a resource, and they were more interested in their [own] survival than they were in the United States’.
A Pakistani with close ties to the senior leadership of the ISI told me that ‘there was a deal with your top guys. We were very reluctant, but it had to be done – not because of personal enrichment, but because all of the American aid programmes would be cut off. Your guys said we will starve you out if you don’t do it, and the okay was given while Pasha was in Washington. The deal was not only to keep the taps open, but Pasha was told there would be more goodies for us.’ The Pakistani said that Pasha’s visit also resulted in a commitment from the US to give Pakistan ‘a freer hand’ in Afghanistan as it began its military draw-down there. ‘And so our top dogs justified the deal by saying this is for our country.’
*
Pasha and Kayani were responsible for ensuring that Pakistan’s army and air defence command would not track or engage with the US helicopters used on the mission. The American cell at Tarbela Ghazi was charged with co-ordinating communications between the ISI, the senior US officers at their command post in Afghanistan, and the two Black Hawk helicopters; the goal was to ensure that no stray Pakistani fighter plane on border patrol spotted the intruders and took action to stop them. The initial plan said that news of the raid shouldn’t be announced straightaway. All units in the Joint Special Operations Command operate under stringent secrecy and the JSOC leadership believed, as did Kayani and Pasha, that the killing of bin Laden would not be made public for as long as seven days, maybe longer. Then a carefully constructed cover story would be issued: Obama would announce that DNA analysis confirmed that bin Laden had been killed in a drone raid in the Hindu Kush, on Afghanistan’s side of the border. The Americans who planned the mission assured Kayani and Pasha that their co-operation would never be made public. It was understood by all that if the Pakistani role became known, there would be violent protests – bin Laden was considered a hero by many Pakistanis – and Pasha and Kayani and their families would be in danger, and the Pakistani army publicly disgraced.
It was clear to all by this point, the retired official said, that bin Laden would not survive: ‘Pasha told us at a meeting in April that he could not risk leaving bin Laden in the compound now that we know he’s there. Too many people in the Pakistani chain of command know about the mission. He and Kayani had to tell the whole story to the directors of the air defence command and to a few local commanders.
‘Of course the guys knew the target was bin Laden and he was there under Pakistani control,’ the retired official said. ‘Otherwise, they would not have done the mission without air cover. It was clearly and absolutely a premeditated murder.’ A former Seal commander, who has led and participated in dozens of similar missions over the past decade, assured me that ‘we were not going to keep bin Laden alive – to allow the terrorist to live. By law, we know what we’re doing inside Pakistan is a homicide. We’ve come to grips with that. Each one of us, when we do these missions, say to ourselves, “Let’s face it. We’re going to commit a murder.”’ The White House’s initial account claimed that bin Laden had been brandishing a weapon; the story was aimed at deflecting those who questioned the legality of the US administration’s targeted assassination programme. The US has consistently maintained, despite widely reported remarks by people involved with the mission, that bin Laden would have been taken alive if he had immediately surrendered.
*
At the Abbottabad compound ISI guards were posted around the clock to keep watch over bin Laden and his wives and children. They were under orders to leave as soon as they heard the rotors of the US helicopters. The town was dark: the electricity supply had been cut off on the orders of the ISI hours before the raid began. One of the Black Hawks crashed inside the walls of the compound, injuring many on board. ‘The guys knew the TOT [time on target] had to be tight because they would wake up the whole town going in,’ the retired official said. The cockpit of the crashed Black Hawk, with its communication and navigational gear, had to be destroyed by concussion grenades, and this would create a series of explosions and a fire visible for miles. Two Chinook helicopters had flown from Afghanistan to a nearby Pakistani intelligence base to provide logistical support, and one of them was immediately dispatched to Abbottabad. But because the helicopter had been equipped with a bladder loaded with extra fuel for the two Black Hawks, it first had to be reconfigured as a troop carrier. The crash of the Black Hawk and the need to fly in a replacement were nerve-wracking and time-consuming setbacks, but the Seals continued with their mission. There was no firefight as they moved into the compound; the ISI guards had gone. ‘Everyone in Pakistan has a gun and high-profile, wealthy folks like those who live in Abbottabad have armed bodyguards, and yet there were no weapons in the compound,’ the retired official pointed out. Had there been any opposition, the team would have been highly vulnerable. Instead, the retired official said, an ISI liaison officer flying with the Seals guided them into the darkened house and up a staircase to bin Laden’s quarters. The Seals had been warned by the Pakistanis that heavy steel doors blocked the stairwell on the first and second-floor landings; bin Laden’s rooms were on the third floor. The Seal squad used explosives to blow the doors open, without injuring anyone. One of bin Laden’s wives was screaming hysterically and a bullet – perhaps a stray round – struck her knee. Aside from those that hit bin Laden, no other shots were fired. (The Obama administration’s account would hold otherwise.)
‘They knew where the target was – third floor, second door on the right,’ the retired official said. ‘Go straight there. Osama was cowering and retreated into the bedroom. Two shooters followed him and opened up. Very simple, very straightforward, very professional hit.’ Some of the Seals were appalled later at the White House’s initial insistence that they had shot bin Laden in self-defence, the retired official said. ‘Six of the Seals’ finest, most experienced NCOs, faced with an unarmed elderly civilian, had to kill him in self-defence? The house was shabby and bin Laden was living in a cell with bars on the window and barbed wire on the roof. The rules of engagement were that if bin Laden put up any opposition they were authorised to take lethal action. But if they suspected he might have some means of opposition, like an explosive vest under his robe, they could also kill him. So here’s this guy in a mystery robe and they shot him. It’s not because he was reaching for a weapon. The rules gave them absolute authority to kill the guy.’ The later White House claim that only one or two bullets were fired into his head was ‘bullshit’, the retired official said. ‘The squad came through the door and obliterated him. As the Seals say, “We kicked his ass and took his gas.”’
After they killed bin Laden, ‘the Seals were just there, some with physical injuries from the crash, waiting for the relief chopper,’ the retired official said. ‘Twenty tense minutes. The Black Hawk is still burning. There are no city lights. No electricity. No police. No fire trucks. They have no prisoners.’ Bin Laden’s wives and children were left for the ISI to interrogate and relocate. ‘Despite all the talk,’ the retired official continued, there were ‘no garbage bags full of computers and storage devices. The guys just stuffed some books and papers they found in his room in their backpacks. The Seals weren’t there because they thought bin Laden was running a command centre for al-Qaida operations, as the White House would later tell the media. And they were not intelligence experts gathering information inside that house.’
On a normal assault mission, the retired official said, there would be no waiting around if a chopper went down. ‘The Seals would have finished the mission, thrown off their guns and gear, and jammed into the remaining Black Hawk and di-di-maued’ – Vietnamese slang for leaving in a rush – ‘out of there, with guys hanging out of the doors. They would not have blown the chopper – no commo gear is worth a dozen lives – unless they knew they were safe. Instead they stood around outside the compound, waiting for the bus to arrive.’ Pasha and Kayani had delivered on all their promises.
*
The backroom argument inside the White House began as soon as it was clear that the mission had succeeded. Bin Laden’s body was presumed to be on its way to Afghanistan. Should Obama stand by the agreement with Kayani and Pasha and pretend a week or so later that bin Laden had been killed in a drone attack in the mountains, or should he go public immediately? The downed helicopter made it easy for Obama’s political advisers to urge the latter plan. The explosion and fireball would be impossible to hide, and word of what had happened was bound to leak. Obama had to ‘get out in front of the story’ before someone in the Pentagon did: waiting would diminish the political impact.
Not everyone agreed. Robert Gates, the secretary of defence, was the most outspoken of those who insisted that the agreements with Pakistan had to be honoured. In his memoir, Duty, Gates did not mask his anger:
Before we broke up and the president headed upstairs to tell the American people what had just happened, I reminded everyone that the techniques, tactics and procedures the Seals had used in the bin Laden operation were used every night in Afghanistan … it was therefore essential that we agree not to release any operational details of the raid. That we killed him, I said, is all we needed to say. Everybody in that room agreed to keep mum on details. That commitment lasted about five hours. The initial leaks came from the White House and CIA. They just couldn’t wait to brag and to claim credit. The facts were often wrong … Nonetheless the information just kept pouring out. I was outraged and at one point, told [the national security adviser, Tom] Donilon, ‘Why doesn’t everybody just shut the fuck up?’ To no avail.
Obama’s speech was put together in a rush, the retired official said, and was viewed by his advisers as a political document, not a message that needed to be submitted for clearance to the national security bureaucracy. This series of self-serving and inaccurate statements would create chaos in the weeks following. Obama said that his administration had discovered that bin Laden was in Pakistan through ‘a possible lead’ the previous August; to many in the CIA the statement suggested a specific event, such as a walk-in. The remark led to a new cover story claiming that the CIA’s brilliant analysts had unmasked a courier network handling bin Laden’s continuing flow of operational orders to al-Qaida. Obama also praised ‘a small team of Americans’ for their care in avoiding civilian deaths and said: ‘After a firefight, they killed Osama bin Laden and took custody of his body.’ Two more details now had to be supplied for the cover story: a description of the firefight that never happened, and a story about what happened to the corpse. Obama went on to praise the Pakistanis: ‘It’s important to note that our counterterrorism co-operation with Pakistan helped lead us to bin Laden and the compound where he was hiding.’ That statement risked exposing Kayani and Pasha. The White House’s solution was to ignore what Obama had said and order anyone talking to the press to insist that the Pakistanis had played no role in killing bin Laden. Obama left the clear impression that he and his advisers hadn’t known for sure that bin Laden was in Abbottabad, but only had information ‘about the possibility’. This led first to the story that the Seals had determined they’d killed the right man by having a six-foot-tall Seal lie next to the corpse for comparison (bin Laden was known to be six foot four); and then to the claim that a DNA test had been performed on the corpse and demonstrated conclusively that the Seals had killed bin Laden. But, according to the retired official, it wasn’t clear from the Seals’ early reports whether all of bin Laden’s body, or any of it, made it back to Afghanistan.
Gates wasn’t the only official who was distressed by Obama’s decision to speak without clearing his remarks in advance, the retired official said, ‘but he was the only one protesting. Obama didn’t just double-cross Gates, he double-crossed everyone. This was not the fog of war. The fact that there was an agreement with the Pakistanis and no contingency analysis of what was to be disclosed if something went wrong – that wasn’t even discussed. And once it went wrong, they had to make up a new cover story on the fly.’ There was a legitimate reason for some deception: the role of the Pakistani walk-in had to be protected.
The White House press corps was told in a briefing shortly after Obama’s announcement that the death of bin Laden was ‘the culmination of years of careful and highly advanced intelligence work’ that focused on tracking a group of couriers, including one who was known to be close to bin Laden. Reporters were told that a team of specially assembled CIA and National Security Agency analysts had traced the courier to a highly secure million-dollar compound in Abbottabad. After months of observation, the American intelligence community had ‘high confidence’ that a high-value target was living in the compound, and it was ‘assessed that there was a strong probability that [it] was Osama bin Laden’. The US assault team ran into a firefight on entering the compound and three adult males – two of them believed to be the couriers – were slain, along with bin Laden. Asked if bin Laden had defended himself, one of the briefers said yes: ‘He did resist the assault force. And he was killed in a firefight.’
The next day John Brennan, then Obama’s senior adviser for counterterrorism, had the task of talking up Obama’s valour while trying to smooth over the misstatements in his speech. He provided a more detailed but equally misleading account of the raid and its planning. Speaking on the record, which he rarely does, Brennan said that the mission was carried out by a group of Navy Seals who had been instructed to take bin Laden alive, if possible. He said the US had no information suggesting that anyone in the Pakistani government or military knew bin Laden’s whereabouts: ‘We didn’t contact the Pakistanis until after all of our people, all of our aircraft were out of Pakistani airspace.’ He emphasised the courage of Obama’s decision to order the strike, and said that the White House had no information ‘that confirmed that bin Laden was at the compound’ before the raid began. Obama, he said, ‘made what I believe was one of the gutsiest calls of any president in recent memory’. Brennan increased the number killed by the Seals inside the compound to five: bin Laden, a courier, his brother, a bin Laden son, and one of the women said to be shielding bin Laden.
Asked whether bin Laden had fired on the Seals, as some reporters had been told, Brennan repeated what would become a White House mantra: ‘He was engaged in a firefight with those that entered the area of the house he was in. And whether or not he got off any rounds, I quite frankly don’t know … Here is bin Laden, who has been calling for these attacks … living in an area that is far removed from the front, hiding behind women who were put in front of him as a shield … [It] just speaks to I think the nature of the individual he was.’
Gates also objected to the idea, pushed by Brennan and Leon Panetta, that US intelligence had learned of bin Laden’s whereabouts from information acquired by waterboarding and other forms of torture. ‘All of this is going on as the Seals are flying home from their mission. The agency guys know the whole story,’ the retired official said. ‘It was a group of annuitants who did it.’ (Annuitants are retired CIA officers who remain active on contract.) ‘They had been called in by some of the mission planners in the agency to help with the cover story. So the old-timers come in and say why not admit that we got some of the information about bin Laden from enhanced interrogation?’ At the time, there was still talk in Washington about the possible prosecution of CIA agents who had conducted torture.
‘Gates told them this was not going to work,’ the retired official said. ‘He was never on the team. He knew at the eleventh hour of his career not to be a party to this nonsense. But State, the agency and the Pentagon had bought in on the cover story. None of the Seals thought that Obama was going to get on national TV and announce the raid. The Special Forces command was apoplectic. They prided themselves on keeping operational security.’ There was fear in Special Operations, the retired official said, that ‘if the true story of the missions leaked out, the White House bureaucracy was going to blame it on the Seals.’
The White House’s solution was to silence the Seals. On 5 May, every member of the Seal hit team – they had returned to their base in southern Virginia – and some members of the Joint Special Operations Command leadership were presented with a nondisclosure form drafted by the White House’s legal office; it promised civil penalties and a lawsuit for anyone who discussed the mission, in public or private. ‘The Seals were not happy,’ the retired official said. But most of them kept quiet, as did Admiral William McRaven, who was then in charge of JSOC. ‘McRaven was apoplectic. He knew he was fucked by the White House, but he’s a dyed-in-the-wool Seal, and not then a political operator, and he knew there’s no glory in blowing the whistle on the president. When Obama went public with bin Laden’s death, everyone had to scramble around for a new story that made sense, and the planners were stuck holding the bag.’
Within days, some of the early exaggerations and distortions had become obvious and the Pentagon issued a series of clarifying statements. No, bin Laden was not armed when he was shot and killed. And no, bin Laden did not use one of his wives as a shield. The press by and large accepted the explanation that the errors were the inevitable by-product of the White House’s desire to accommodate reporters frantic for details of the mission.
One lie that has endured is that the Seals had to fight their way to their target. Only two Seals have made any public statement: No Easy Day, a first-hand account of the raid by Matt Bissonnette, was published in September 2012; and two years later Rob O’Neill was interviewed by Fox News. Both men had resigned from the navy; both had fired at bin Laden. Their accounts contradicted each other on many details, but their stories generally supported the White House version, especially when it came to the need to kill or be killed as the Seals fought their way to bin Laden. O’Neill even told Fox News that he and his fellow Seals thought ‘We were going to die.’ ‘The more we trained on it, the more we realised … this is going to be a one-way mission.’
But the retired official told me that in their initial debriefings the Seals made no mention of a firefight, or indeed of any opposition. The drama and danger portrayed by Bissonnette and O’Neill met a deep-seated need, the retired official said: ‘Seals cannot live with the fact that they killed bin Laden totally unopposed, and so there has to be an account of their courage in the face of danger. The guys are going to sit around the bar and say it was an easy day? That’s not going to happen.’
There was another reason to claim there had been a firefight inside the compound, the retired official said: to avoid the inevitable question that would arise from an uncontested assault. Where were bin Laden’s guards? Surely, the most sought-after terrorist in the world would have around-the-clock protection. ‘And one of those killed had to be the courier, because he didn’t exist and we couldn’t produce him. The Pakistanis had no choice but to play along with it.’ (Two days after the raid, Reuters published photographs of three dead men that it said it had purchased from an ISI official. Two of the men were later identified by an ISI spokesman as being the alleged courier and his brother.)
*
Five days after the raid the Pentagon press corps was provided with a series of videotapes that were said by US officials to have been taken from a large collection the Seals had removed from the compound, along with as many as 15 computers. Snippets from one of the videos showed a solitary bin Laden looking wan and wrapped in a blanket, watching what appeared to be a video of himself on television. An unnamed official told reporters that the raid produced a ‘treasure trove … the single largest collection of senior terrorist materials ever’, which would provide vital insights into al-Qaida’s plans. The official said the material showed that bin Laden ‘remained an active leader in al-Qaida, providing strategic, operational and tactical instructions to the group … He was far from a figurehead [and] continued to direct even tactical details of the group’s management and to encourage plotting’ from what was described as a command-and-control centre in Abbottabad. ‘He was an active player, making the recent operation even more essential for our nation’s security,’ the official said. The information was so vital, he added, that the administration was setting up an inter-agency task force to process it: ‘He was not simply someone who was penning al-Qaida strategy. He was throwing operational ideas out there and he was also specifically directing other al-Qaida members.’
These claims were fabrications: there wasn’t much activity for bin Laden to exercise command and control over. The retired intelligence official said that the CIA’s internal reporting shows that since bin Laden moved to Abbottabad in 2006 only a handful of terrorist attacks could be linked to the remnants of bin Laden’s al-Qaida. ‘We were told at first,’ the retired official said, ‘that the Seals produced garbage bags of stuff and that the community is generating daily intelligence reports out of this stuff. And then we were told that the community is gathering everything together and needs to translate it. But nothing has come of it. Every single thing they have created turns out not to be true. It’s a great hoax – like the Piltdown man.’ The retired official said that most of the materials from Abbottabad were turned over to the US by the Pakistanis, who later razed the building. The ISI took responsibility for the wives and children of bin Laden, none of whom was made available to the US for questioning.
‘Why create the treasure trove story?’ the retired official said. ‘The White House had to give the impression that bin Laden was still operationally important. Otherwise, why kill him? A cover story was created – that there was a network of couriers coming and going with memory sticks and instructions. All to show that bin Laden remained important.’
In July 2011, the Washington Post published what purported to be a summary of some of these materials. The story’s contradictions were glaring. It said the documents had resulted in more than four hundred intelligence reports within six weeks; it warned of unspecified al-Qaida plots; and it mentioned arrests of suspects ‘who are named or described in emails that bin Laden received’. The Post didn’t identify the suspects or reconcile that detail with the administration’s previous assertions that the Abbottabad compound had no internet connection. Despite their claims that the documents had produced hundreds of reports, the Post also quoted officials saying that their main value wasn’t the actionable intelligence they contained, but that they enabled ‘analysts to construct a more comprehensive portrait of al-Qaida’.
In May 2012, the Combating Terrrorism Centre at West Point, a private research group, released translations it had made under a federal government contract of 175 pages of bin Laden documents. Reporters found none of the drama that had been touted in the days after the raid. Patrick Cockburn wrote about the contrast between the administration’s initial claims that bin Laden was the ‘spider at the centre of a conspiratorial web’ and what the translations actually showed: that bin Laden was ‘delusional’ and had ‘limited contact with the outside world outside his compound’.
The retired official disputed the authencity of the West Point materials: ‘There is no linkage between these documents and the counterterrorism centre at the agency. No intelligence community analysis. When was the last time the CIA: 1) announced it had a significant intelligence find; 2) revealed the source; 3) described the method for processing the materials; 4) revealed the time-line for production; 5) described by whom and where the analysis was taking place, and 6) published the sensitive results before the information had been acted on? No agency professional would support this fairy tale.’
*
In June 2011, it was reported in the New York Times, the Washington Post and all over the Pakistani press that Amir Aziz had been held for questioning in Pakistan; he was, it was said, a CIA informant who had been spying on the comings and goings at the bin Laden compound. Aziz was released, but the retired official said that US intelligence was unable to learn who leaked the highly classified information about his involvement with the mission. Officials in Washington decided they ‘could not take a chance that Aziz’s role in obtaining bin Laden’s DNA also would become known’. A sacrificial lamb was needed, and the one chosen was Shakil Afridi, a 48-year-old Pakistani doctor and sometime CIA asset, who had been arrested by the Pakistanis in late May and accused of assisting the agency. ‘We went to the Pakistanis and said go after Afridi,’ the retired official said. ‘We had to cover the whole issue of how we got the DNA.’ It was soon reported that the CIA had organised a fake vaccination programme in Abbottabad with Afridi’s help in a failed attempt to obtain bin Laden’s DNA. Afridi’s legitimate medical operation was run independently of local health authorities, was well financed and offered free vaccinations against hepatitis B. Posters advertising the programme were displayed throughout the area. Afridi was later accused of treason and sentenced to 33 years in prison because of his ties to an extremist. News of the CIA-sponsored programme created widespread anger in Pakistan, and led to the cancellation of other international vaccination programmes that were now seen as cover for American spying.
The retired official said that Afridi had been recruited long before the bin Laden mission as part of a separate intelligence effort to get information about suspected terrorists in Abbottabad and the surrounding area. ‘The plan was to use vaccinations as a way to get the blood of terrorism suspects in the villages.’ Afridi made no attempt to obtain DNA from the residents of the bin Laden compound. The report that he did so was a hurriedly put together ‘CIA cover story creating “facts”’ in a clumsy attempt to protect Aziz and his real mission. ‘Now we have the consequences,’ the retired official said. ‘A great humanitarian project to do something meaningful for the peasants has been compromised as a cynical hoax.’ Afridi’s conviction was overturned, but he remains in prison on a murder charge.
*
In his address announcing the raid, Obama said that after killing bin Laden the Seals ‘took custody of his body’. The statement created a problem. In the initial plan it was to be announced a week or so after the fact that bin Laden was killed in a drone strike somewhere in the mountains on the Pakistan/Afghanistan border and that his remains had been identified by DNA testing. But with Obama’s announcement of his killing by the Seals everyone now expected a body to be produced. Instead, reporters were told that bin Laden’s body had been flown by the Seals to an American military airfield in Jalalabad, Afghanistan, and then straight to the USS Carl Vinson, a supercarrier on routine patrol in the North Arabian Sea. Bin Laden had then been buried at sea, just hours after his death. The press corps’s only sceptical moments at John Brennan’s briefing on 2 May were to do with the burial. The questions were short, to the point, and rarely answered. ‘When was the decision made that he would be buried at sea if killed?’ ‘Was this part of the plan all along?’ ‘Can you just tell us why that was a good idea?’ ‘John, did you consult a Muslim expert on that?’ ‘Is there a visual recording of this burial?’ When this last question was asked, Jay Carney, Obama’s press secretary, came to Brennan’s rescue: ‘We’ve got to give other people a chance here.’
‘We thought the best way to ensure that his body was given an appropriate Islamic burial,’ Brennan said, ‘was to take those actions that would allow us to do that burial at sea.’ He said ‘appropriate specialists and experts’ were consulted, and that the US military was fully capable of carrying out the burial ‘consistent with Islamic law’. Brennan didn’t mention that Muslim law calls for the burial service to be conducted in the presence of an imam, and there was no suggestion that one happened to be on board the Carl Vinson.
In a reconstruction of the bin Laden operation for Vanity Fair, Mark Bowden, who spoke to many senior administration officials, wrote that bin Laden’s body was cleaned and photographed at Jalalabad. Further procedures necessary for a Muslim burial were performed on the carrier, he wrote, ‘with bin Laden’s body being washed again and wrapped in a white shroud. A navy photographer recorded the burial in full sunlight, Monday morning, May 2.’ Bowden described the photos:
One frame shows the body wrapped in a weighted shroud. The next shows it lying diagonally on a chute, feet overboard. In the next frame the body is hitting the water. In the next it is visible just below the surface, ripples spreading outward. In the last frame there are only circular ripples on the surface. The mortal remains of Osama bin Laden were gone for good.
Bowden was careful not to claim that he had actually seen the photographs he described, and he recently told me he hadn’t seen them: ‘I’m always disappointed when I can’t look at something myself, but I spoke with someone I trusted who said he had seen them himself and described them in detail.’ Bowden’s statement adds to the questions about the alleged burial at sea, which has provoked a flood of Freedom of Information Act requests, most of which produced no information. One of them sought access to the photographs. The Pentagon responded that a search of all available records had found no evidence that any photographs had been taken of the burial. Requests on other issues related to the raid were equally unproductive. The reason for the lack of response became clear after the Pentagon held an inquiry into allegations that the Obama administration had provided access to classified materials to the makers of the film Zero Dark Thirty. The Pentagon report, which was put online in June 2013, noted that Admiral McRaven had ordered the files on the raid to be deleted from all military computers and moved to the CIA, where they would be shielded from FOIA requests by the agency’s ‘operational exemption’.
McRaven’s action meant that outsiders could not get access to the Carl Vinson’s unclassified logs. Logs are sacrosanct in the navy, and separate ones are kept for air operations, the deck, the engineering department, the medical office, and for command information and control. They show the sequence of events day by day aboard the ship; if there has been a burial at sea aboard the Carl Vinson, it would have been recorded.
There wasn’t any gossip about a burial among the Carl Vinson’s sailors. The carrier concluded its six-month deployment in June 2011. When the ship docked at its home base in Coronado, California, Rear Admiral Samuel Perez, commander of the Carl Vinson carrier strike group, told reporters that the crew had been ordered not to talk about the burial. Captain Bruce Lindsey, skipper of the Carl Vinson, told reporters he was unable to discuss it. Cameron Short, one of the crew of the Carl Vinson, told the Commercial-News of Danville, Illinois, that the crew had not been told anything about the burial. ‘All he knows is what he’s seen on the news,’ the newspaper reported.
The Pentagon did release a series of emails to the Associated Press. In one of them, Rear Admiral Charles Gaouette reported that the service followed ‘traditional procedures for Islamic burial’, and said none of the sailors on board had been permitted to observe the proceedings. But there was no indication of who washed and wrapped the body, or of which Arabic speaker conducted the service.
Within weeks of the raid, I had been told by two longtime consultants to Special Operations Command, who have access to current intelligence, that the funeral aboard the Carl Vinson didn’t take place. One consultant told me that bin Laden’s remains were photographed and identified after being flown back to Afghanistan. The consultant added: ‘At that point, the CIA took control of the body. The cover story was that it had been flown to the Carl Vinson.’ The second consultant agreed that there had been ‘no burial at sea’. He added that ‘the killing of bin Laden was political theatre designed to burnish Obama’s military credentials … The Seals should have expected the political grandstanding. It’s irresistible to a politician. Bin Laden became a working asset.’ Early this year, speaking again to the second consultant, I returned to the burial at sea. The consultant laughed and said: ‘You mean, he didn’t make it to the water?’
The retired official said there had been another complication: some members of the Seal team had bragged to colleagues and others that they had torn bin Laden’s body to pieces with rifle fire. The remains, including his head, which had only a few bullet holes in it, were thrown into a body bag and, during the helicopter flight back to Jalalabad, some body parts were tossed out over the Hindu Kush mountains – or so the Seals claimed. At the time, the retired official said, the Seals did not think their mission would be made public by Obama within a few hours: ‘If the president had gone ahead with the cover story, there would have been no need to have a funeral within hours of the killing. Once the cover story was blown, and the death was made public, the White House had a serious “Where’s the body?” problem. The world knew US forces had killed bin Laden in Abbottabad. Panic city. What to do? We need a “functional body” because we have to be able to say we identified bin Laden via a DNA analysis. It would be navy officers who came up with the “burial at sea” idea. Perfect. No body. Honourable burial following sharia law. Burial is made public in great detail, but Freedom of Information documents confirming the burial are denied for reasons of “national security”. It’s the classic unravelling of a poorly constructed cover story – it solves an immediate problem but, given the slighest inspection, there is no back-up support. There never was a plan, initially, to take the body to sea, and no burial of bin Laden at sea took place.’ The retired official said that if the Seals’ first accounts are to be believed, there wouldn’t have been much left of bin Laden to put into the sea in any case.
*
It was inevitable that the Obama administration’s lies, misstatements and betrayals would create a backlash. ‘We’ve had a four-year lapse in co-operation,’ the retired official said. ‘It’s taken that long for the Pakistanis to trust us again in the military-to-military counterterrorism relationship – while terrorism was rising all over the world … They felt Obama sold them down the river. They’re just now coming back because the threat from Isis, which is now showing up there, is a lot greater and the bin Laden event is far enough away to enable someone like General Durrani to come out and talk about it.’ Generals Pasha and Kayani have retired and both are reported to be under investigation for corruption during their time in office.
The Senate Intelligence Committee’s long-delayed report on CIA torture, released last December, documented repeated instances of official lying, and suggested that the CIA’s knowledge of bin Laden’s courier was sketchy at best and predated its use of waterboarding and other forms of torture. The report led to international headlines about brutality and waterboarding, along with gruesome details about rectal feeding tubes, ice baths and threats to rape or murder family members of detainees who were believed to be withholding information. Despite the bad publicity, the report was a victory for the CIA. Its major finding – that the use of torture didn’t lead to discovering the truth – had already been the subject of public debate for more than a decade. Another key finding – that the torture conducted was more brutal than Congress had been told – was risible, given the extent of public reporting and published exposés by former interrogators and retired CIA officers. The report depicted tortures that were obviously contrary to international law as violations of rules or ‘inappropriate activities’ or, in some cases, ‘management failures’. Whether the actions described constitute war crimes was not discussed, and the report did not suggest that any of the CIA interrogators or their superiors should be investigated for criminal activity. The agency faced no meaningful consequences as a result of the report.
The retired official told me that the CIA leadership had become experts in derailing serious threats from Congress: ‘They create something that is horrible but not that bad. Give them something that sounds terrible. “Oh my God, we were shoving food up a prisoner’s ass!” Meanwhile, they’re not telling the committee about murders, other war crimes, and secret prisons like we still have in Diego Garcia. The goal also was to stall it as long as possible, which they did.’
The main theme of the committee’s 499-page executive summary is that the CIA lied systematically about the effectiveness of its torture programme in gaining intelligence that would stop future terrorist attacks in the US. The lies included some vital details about the uncovering of an al-Qaida operative called Abu Ahmed al-Kuwaiti, who was said to be the key al-Qaida courier, and the subsequent tracking of him to Abbottabad in early 2011. The agency’s alleged intelligence, patience and skill in finding al-Kuwaiti became legend after it was dramatised in Zero Dark Thirty.
The Senate report repeatedly raised questions about the quality and reliability of the CIA’s intelligence about al-Kuwaiti. In 2005 an internal CIA report on the hunt for bin Laden noted that ‘detainees provide few actionable leads, and we have to consider the possibility that they are creating fictitious characters to distract us or to absolve themselves of direct knowledge about bin Ladin [sic].’ A CIA cable a year later stated that ‘we have had no success in eliciting actionable intelligence on bin Laden’s location from any detainees.’ The report also highlighted several instances of CIA officers, including Panetta, making false statements to Congress and the public about the value of ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’ in the search for bin Laden’s couriers.
Obama today is not facing re-election as he was in the spring of 2011. His principled stand on behalf of the proposed nuclear agreement with Iran says much, as does his decision to operate without the support of the conservative Republicans in Congress. High-level lying nevertheless remains the modus operandi of US policy, along with secret prisons, drone attacks, Special Forces night raids, bypassing the chain of command, and cutting out those who might say no.
【纽约时报点评美国防部中国军情报告】
中国军队到底有多强？
傅才德 2015年05月12日
每年，美国国防部都必须就“涉华军事与安全发展”向国会提交一份报告——分保密和非保密两个版本。今年的非保密报告已于上周发布，篇幅为89页。报告分析了中国不断演变的军事目标和战略，及其海上、空中和地面能力的新发展。报告通常会遭到中国官方的指责，今年也不例外。外交部发言人华春莹在周日表示，美国应该“摒弃冷战思维，摘下有色眼镜，客观、理性看待中国的军事发展”。
在接受采访时，美国海军战争学院(United States Naval War College)副教授、哈佛大学费正清中国研究中心(Harvard University’s John King Fairbank Center for Chinese Studies)学者艾立信(Andrew S. Erickson)对这份报告、北京的野心以及中国拉近与美军力差距的可能性进行了讨论。
问：报告似乎非常谨慎、折衷，完全谈不上危言耸听。在你看来，有什么特别突出的吗，尤其是和过去的报告相比？
答：我完全同意。用中文的说法，报告的确代表了一次“实事求是”的努力。这是一年一度的政治仪式。中国官方喉舌对报告表示谴责，但几乎完全未提及报告的实际内容，更别说反驳任何细节了。
和以前的老生常谈相比，一个特别的演变是，国防部强调了中国人民解放军开始在东亚以外地区的行动规模。报告显示，在2013至2014年之间，中国首次向印度洋派出潜水艇，表面上是为了协助亚丁湾打击海盗的行动，但更重要的是为了获得无可替代的行动经验。报告大胆预测，10年之内，北京将在印度洋“建立多个入口”，以支持加油补给、低级维护和人员休整。目前已有媒体报道引吉布提总统的话说，他领导的国家正在与中国就建立这些入口举行商讨。尽管如此，北京在军事上的重点仍然是在本土。
问：报告用了相当大的篇幅来分析中国在南海和东海的举动。过去一年里，我们看到南海的填海造陆活动升级。中国目的何在？这一点对该地区战略形势有何影响?
答：这正是中国军力发展最有力的地方，也是外国担忧的焦点。这种担忧是合理的。4月9日，外交部发言人华春莹声称斯普拉特利群岛（Spratly Island，中国称南沙群岛——译注）的工程是为了“满足必要的军事防卫需求”。5月8日，华春莹又表示，“中方建设活动的规模与大国的责任和义务相称”。北京方面似乎正在为驻扎在人造岛屿上的人员修建更好的设施，以及供后勤、准军事和军事船只使用的港口、民用和军用飞机跑道、能对南海大部分区域进行监控的雷达系统。
中国的海警船比所有邻国加起来的还多。同时，中国还是世界上少数拥有海上民兵的国家之一。这正在迅速地让中国在军事影响和实力方面，与南海邻国处于完全不同的级别。北京不希望打仗，但它的确想利用占优势的实力，按照自己的意愿去和比它小的邻国解决双边争端。更广泛地说，看起来中国正梦想着恢复在东亚地区的主导地位。在这一点上，中国领导人似乎认为，国际规范应该服从中国的“核心”利益。
问：美国海军的船只经常在南海穿行。你认为这一做法会有遭到中国海军挑战的一天吗？届时会是怎样的局面？
答：北京方面声称自己在国际海域和空域的活动不会构成这种威胁，但它的行动和努力却呈现出令人担忧的不一致和不确定性。中国多次试图对自己反对的行为进行反击，导致与美国政府和军方的船只及飞机发生多次危险的对峙，很多都发生在南海。北京以一种笼统的方式声称拥有南海绝大部分地区的主权。多年来，中国宣称有权限制其专属经济区内的侦察、测量等其他所谓的“军事”活动——这一举措明显不符合大多数国家所接受的国际法和惯例。2013年11月，中国宣布在东海设立防空识别区。中国威胁称，如果外国飞机不听从中国的命令——防空识别区并不会使中国获得发布或实施这些命令的许可，中国就会采取“防御性紧急处置措施”，但没有详细说明这些措施。这说明中国在一些重要方面保留了将12海里以外的国际空域当做自己“领空”的“权利”——这是一种与经济专属区类似的扩张主义说辞。
根据国防部报告的记录，去年8月，中国海军歼-11战机在国际空域逼近一架缓慢飞行执行常规任务的[美国海军]“P-8 海神”(P-8 Poseidon)巡逻机，两者距离不到30英尺。如果中国利用南沙群岛的飞机跑道维护南海的防空识别区，我担心此类危险事件只会增加。美国和其他很多国家认为，维护航行自由对于全球系统有效发挥作用至关重要。
问：报告论述了中国弹道导弹核潜艇(SSBN)舰队日益加强的能力，以及远程巡逻的开始。美国对此有多担心？
答：国防部早就预料到这一点，第一次巡逻似乎很快就会开始。但SSBN行动的要求是极高的，中国似乎没有掌握核动力推进技术，以及使其行动难以探测的相关消声技术。这是一个长期项目。相比之下，陆基的中国第二炮兵部队已经拥有强大的洲际弹道导弹力量，以及世界一流的次战略弹道导弹力量。该部队的最新核系统及常规系统都是机动的，其中一些还具有尖端的反制能力。此外，中国在陆地、潜艇、船舰及飞机上部署了大量先进的巡航导弹。因此，中国在拥有SSNB之前就掌握了强大的核及常规威慑能力，SSBN能够有效地隐藏在偏远海域，对世界任何地方的目标展开攻击——这是最坏的情况，我们都希望它不要发生。
问：从作战方面来看，如何比较在太平洋地区执行任务的现代中国海军与美国太平洋舰队？中国海军在某些能力的提升上速度怎样？
答：这充其量就像是对比苹果和柑橘。美国海军和中国海军负责执行不同的任务。最根本的是，美国海军的任务是确保核威慑、保障全球共同利益，协助兄弟军种的地面力量投射。中国海军依旧主要负责在“近海”（黄海、东海和南海）——北京方面尚未解决的岛屿和领海争端所在区域——的常规战争和当前问题的处理。中国海军在这些行动中会获得“反海军”的陆基导弹和飞机的支持。中国人民解放军在协调行动及力量投射方面仍然受到巨大限制，但在这个重点区域，该部队拥有很多可以发挥的能力，也有很多发挥能力的方式。
中国确实将向印度洋及之外的海域派遣海军，并大力提升和平时期在该区域执行任务的能力。但仍不足以转化成对抗其他主要军队的作战能力。能作战的海军在外观和功能上需要像美国海军一样。中国将需要投入大量资源、精力及时间实现这种转变，即便是部分转变。北京方面在中国近海巧妙利用的捷径和协同效应，很难适用于遥远的地方。
问：你认为报告中还有其他值得关注的地方吗？
答：鉴于欧洲一体化陷入经济和政治上的困境，俄罗斯的一系列国防发展项目又缺乏稳固的财政基础，中国的军事实力正在向整体上仅次于美国的地位挺进。一些较小国家的军事实力在某些细分领域的单一装备上仍然遥遥领先，但在未来数年中，北京付出高昂成本完成的质与量的结合将无可匹敌，使其成为真正的军事大国。
国防部的报告中记录了帮助中国人民解放军崛起的一些数字之最。中国的海军舰只数量居亚洲之首，远洋海警船数量居世界首位，其空军规模是亚洲最庞大的，全世界位列第三。中国空军的高级远程地对空导弹力量居世界前列。到2030年，北京的航空母舰数量可能接近全球第二。其数量一直优于质量，但北京在质量上也在急赶直追。
“中国在所有国防工业生产领域都出现了显著提升，”报告称，“在一些领域甚至可以和俄罗斯及欧盟国家等主要武器系统制造国相媲美。”在无人机等目前还不太成熟的系统方面，中国可能正在以尤其惊人的速度接近领先水平。例如，报告称：“一些估计数值显示，2014年到2023年，中国打算生产超过41800个陆基和海基无人武器系统，价值约为105亿美元。”
不过，中国不太可能彻底消除与美国的整体军事力量的差距。两国全球军事影响力的差距可能会更大。国内稳定仍然是中国共产党最关注的问题，他们把大量资源用在了建设国内的安全力量上。近海海域的“核心”利益仍然没有以北京满意的方式解决，邻国对来自中国的压力的不满越发强烈。
与此同时，曾经帮助为军事现代化提供资金的30年的经济高速发展正在降温，至少经济增速会放缓。这些因素都粉碎了中国军事实力追上美国的任何可能性，哪怕是接近美国式的全球力量态势也不太可能。它还显示出，在剑拔弩张的中国近海海域之外，美国和中国还有许多共同和相辅相成的利益，两国可以在此基础上展开进一步的合作。
FAS：Pentagon Report: China Deploys MIRV Missile
【C191】
《国家重大技术装备网》
2014.10.30
C919飞起来
2015.02.26
C919大型客机年内望首飞 大飞机产业链借机展翅
我国航空级铝合金板材张力拉伸机装备取得重大创新成果
（科普）军事工业用新材料大盘点
路透社2015.05.13
Exclusive: China set to delay maiden flight of C919 commercial jet - sources
（新浪）
截止于 2015 年，中国有哪些技术是落后于国外的？
《多维》中国空军更新计划
目前：946架新型战机
2020：1562
J20：24
S35：24
S27：从70减至28
J11A/B:230增至390
J16：增100
J10：220增至400
Through Beijing's Eyes: How China Sees the U.S.-Japan Alliance
Toward a Free and Democratic China
Searching for the Next Jack Ma
Why China Is Ready to Let Wall Street Firms Invade Its Markets
【妙史】联想买下摩托罗拉，最难的是专利谈判
《财新网》【“赵衙内”的房产帝国】
之一
南京：父荫下的原始积累
2015年05月11日
21年前，中国的房地产业开始发轫，时年21岁的赵晋赖祖德父荫，以空手套白狼之势在南京完成原始积累，进而北上津、鲁、冀，南下浙江，攻城略地，至少创办六十余公司，打造了一个庞大的房产帝国。其开发楼盘时增加面积之肆无忌惮，围猎权力之无所其及，皆令人瞠目。赵晋几乎每建一楼皆民怨沸腾，业主维权每每走投无路。值中央铁腕反腐，“猛虎翦翼，方入柙中”
【财新网】（记者 谢海涛）
2014年的最后一天，昏黄的夕阳泻在南京丹凤街上，恒基中心公寓B座四楼的屋顶花园里，一片落寞。下午四点刚过，一个看房人走出402房间，锁上门，推着自行车慢慢而去。
B座402临街的门面处落满树叶，南京瀚海房地产开发有限公司（以下简称南京瀚海地产）的名字还在，金色的电梯门似乎还能看出主人往日的辉煌。
由此北向六百余公里处，山东济南的文化东路上，金碧辉煌的万豪国际公寓楼盘内，一栋五层小楼大门紧闭，门墙上写着山东诚基房地产开发有限公司字样，左右一对白色石麒麟作咆哮状，门前一尊三面观音低眉作慈悲相，观音像下的水池里，塑料荷花已冻结在冰里。
由此再北向三百余公里，天津南京路上，诚基经贸中心3号楼的四楼南端，黑如隧道，人去尘积。冰封的海河边上，水岸银座的销售中心大门紧闭，开发商天津高盛房地产开发有限公司的奖牌依然琳琅满目。
上述楼盘的主人，在2014年7月之前，并不为公众所知。当月，天津银监局发出的一份金融监管提示书称，天津高盛房地产开发有限公司和天津汇景房地产开发有限公司的高管被有关部门控制，两家公司实际控制人为赵晋。
这个神龙现首不现尾的地产商至此浮出水面，而牵其一线，震动数省市政坛。
在天津，2014年7月20日，天津市政协副主席、公安局长武长顺涉嫌严重违纪违法，接受组织调查。
在江苏，2014年9月13日，南京市委常委、建邺区委书记冯亚军落马。三天后，连云港市委书记李强落马。
在北京，2014年10月11日，已退休8年的江苏省委原常委、秘书长赵少麟，国家行政学院常务副院长何家成，在同一天落马。
在山东，2014年12月，山东省委常委、济南市委书记王敏被查……
在诸多政要出事的背后，隐隐然有赵晋的影子。赵晋是谁？何以有如此大能量？
遥想1990年代初，中国的房地产业开始发轫，此后成为中国经济发展的支柱产业，也成为平民谋生的悲凉地，开发商登顶富豪榜的加冕场，以及政府官员腐败落马的泥潭。21岁的赵晋于彼时乘势而起，赖祖德父荫，以空手套白狼的姿态，在南京完成原始积累，进而北上津、鲁、冀，南下浙江，攻城略地，至少创办六十余公司，布点京、沪、深、港等地，打造了一个庞大的房产帝国。
其人貌似低调，从不在公开场所露面，而开发楼盘时，谋划手段之精妙，之肆无忌惮，皆令人震惊。其智商之高，能力之强，谈笑间，玩弄法律、政策于鼓掌之间。几乎每建一楼，皆民怨沸腾，业主维权成燎楼之势；而其挟权力以“维稳”，令业主苦不堪言。值中央铁腕反腐，“猛虎翦翼，方入柙中”。
赵晋不仅“为富不仁”，其人早年给人送礼，暗中录音录像，后在京城建有高级会所，有如赖昌星之红楼，招待王敏等各路领导，勾连上层关系，并录像以要挟。值其于会所中翻船之际，录像中出现的人物次第显形，一个纵横数省市的官商网络慢慢浮出水面，而水依旧很深。如律师胡春雨感慨：该案件亦吾国反腐洪流中一波澜尔。濯足濯缨，深未可见。
20年苦心经营，20年风流富贵，一朝大厦倾，树倒猢狲散，如一场金陵春梦。其梦破时分，给人们留下N多疑问：赵晋何以成为赵晋？其成长之土壤何在？
于此，盘点其成长史，非为痛打落水虎落水蝇，非为政府反腐歌功颂德，而旨在以审视中国房地产业20年之烟云黑幕，中国实行市场经济以来，某些领域政商共生之畸形生态，以及种种世相人生，以为世鉴。
“赵衙内”的房产帝国之一
南京：父荫下的原始积累
南京，虎踞龙盘之地，温柔富贵之乡，赵晋的起家之地。
房地产业，近20年来影响中国经济、社会乃至官场至巨至深的行业，亦是赵晋发迹直至最后打翻一船人之所在。
和一般白手起家的房产大亨不同，赵晋如《红楼梦》里贵公子衔玉而诞。年既长，赖祖德父荫，以衙内姿态，行原始积累之能事。一个弱冠青年，如何快速成长为一个既飞扬跋扈又神秘低调的隐形富豪？其长袖善舞，勾连官场的手段如何养成，经营房产谋取暴利的技术如何问世？
显赫家世
1994年6月，当赵晋创建南京世昌房地产开发公司（以下简称南京世昌地产）时，只有21岁。这是一家由共青团中央办公厅批复成立的公司。
1994年，正值邓小平南巡讲话之后，中国经济开始了新一轮腾飞，全民大经商由此开始。彼时，全国政府机关、公检法系统，甚至军队，纷纷涉足商海。南京世昌地产为适应团中央办公厅发展第三产业的需要而建，经江苏省建委批准，在江苏省工商局核准登记注册。
根据团中央办公厅相关批文，该公司为全民所有制企业，实行独立核算、自负盈亏，注册资金1000万元，地点设在南京市工人新村108号，主营房地产开发及中介服务，兼营建筑材料、建筑装潢、建筑五金的销售协作。
这年6月7日，赵晋被团中央办公厅任命为公司法人、总经理。年轻的赵晋，并不具备共青团背景。知情人称，这和其家世背景有关。
根正苗红的赵晋，出生在南京军区部队大院。其祖父是老资格的开国军人，其父赵少麟，1946年10月生人，祖籍山西原平。这是中共革命老区，抗战时著名的火烧阳明堡机场即发生于此。这片红色的土地上，陆续走出20余位将军，两千多名烈士曾为国捐躯。
知情者称，赵少麟出身于南京空军大院，最早是在南京市小营小学接受教育，这是一所由华东军区空军干部管理部1952年创办的学校，时为空军子弟小学。
1965年8月，赵少麟进入解放军军事工程学院原子工程系学习。这所筹建于1952年的著名军事院校，因校址在哈尔滨，又简称哈军工，约300位将军、40多位两院院士以及诸多中央级政要曾在此就读、执教。哈军工的读书经历，为赵少麟仕途打下了坚实的基础。
1970年，哈军工毕业的赵少麟进入南京大桥机器厂工作。这是一所建于1958年，为信息产业部门和部队定点研制气象雷达等产品的军工企业。他在这里历任工人、技术员。1980年6月，升任厂党委副书记。
1982年8月，赵少麟出任共青团南京市委书记，由此开启仕途。1984年3月，赵少麟任南京市鼓楼区委书记；1986年4月，任南京市委常委、市委秘书长；1989年8月，任南京市委副书记。
1973年7月，赵晋就出生于这样一个红色家庭，在南京军区的大院长大，在南京著名的金陵中学、南京第十三中读书。接近赵家的人士称，赵晋读书时成绩不是太好，但人非常聪明。
1990年9月，赵晋进入设在南京的解放军国际关系学院读专科。这是一所隶属于解放军总参谋部的院校。1993年毕业之后，赵晋并没有进入部队或机关工作，而是进入上海一家公司的南京分公司。
在赵晋创业的1994年，后来与其关系密切的部分人士各有前程。
他的父亲赵少麟在这一年从淮阴市市长升任市委书记。1992-1997年，赵少麟从省城调至苏北地级市淮阴（今称淮安市），历任淮阴市政府和市委的最高领导职务。一位江苏省的退休老干部后来接受媒体采访时称，淮阴是江苏省比较穷的一个地区，在赵少麟任上，淮阴并无太多变化，但这并没有妨碍其此后继续擢升。
在天津，平民子弟武长顺，经过24年打拼，已从一名普通交警，擢升为天津市公安局副局长兼公安交管局局长。
在济南，山东师大78级大学生王敏，进入山东省委工作已12年，担任省委办公厅副厅级秘书兼秘书二室主任。
在南京，同样出身南京军区的李强，1991年调入江苏省委办公厅，时为南京市政府办公厅副主任。
在北京，学界精英何家成则结束在江苏的挂职，返回北京担任国内贸易部政策体制法规司司长。
何家成1956年5月生于南京，1978年考入南京大学经济系，1981年至1986年间，在中国社科院攻读经济学硕士和在职经济学博士，先后师从经济学家戴园晨和刘国光。期间他和华生等人合作的《微观经济基础的重新构造》获得1986年中国经济学最高奖——孙冶方经济科学奖。1984年6月，硕士尚未毕业的何家成，参加了在中国经济发展史上具有重要意义的莫干山会议，并和华生等人提出放调结合的双轨制；同年9月，何家成又参加了同样重要的巴山轮会议，由此开启了其高层智囊之路。
1986-1987年，何家成在中共中央办公厅调研室工作一年后，被调到曾经赫赫有名的“政改办”（即中央政治体制改革研讨小组办公室），1987年十三大后在政改办基础上成立中央政治体制改革研究室，何家成担任综合局副局长。
1989年6月之后，中央政治体制改革研究室与中共中央农村政策研究室合并为中央政策研究室，何家成的履历出现了短暂的空白，但仕途反而得以提升。1990年，他调任原国家物资部办公厅副主任、部长办主任，之后还兼任正司局级的中国物资经济研究所所长。简历显示，1992-1993年，何家成被派往江苏无锡市短暂挂职副市长。1993-1995年，他担任国内贸易部政策体制法规司司长。2000年，44岁的何家成成为国务院任命的首批36名副部级国有重点大型企业监事会主席之一；2009年9月，他出任国家行政学院副院长，2013年3月，升任常务副院长，主持学院常务工作，被明确为正部级干部。在此期间，经济学理论功底扎实的何家成一直充当着中央高层幕僚的角色，经常出入中南海。
多位消息人士向财新记者证实，何家成与赵家是通家之好，赵晋称呼其为“干爹”。关于何家成与赵家的交好。一说出身草根的何家成，在某次回南京时，结识了有靠山的赵少麟；一说在何家成1992年至1993年挂职无锡副市长时，结识了时任淮阴市长的赵少麟。更有人士称，何家成的公开简历有误，他当年就是在淮阴挂职，而不是无锡。
这些只是赵家关系的冰山之一角。
父子同唱房产戏
在赵晋创业的1994年，中国的房地产市场方兴未艾。
1990年，国务院颁布《城镇土地使用权出让和转让暂行条例》，标志着中国房地产业的肇始，但很快，房地产泡沫在海南等地出现，政府开始第一轮紧缩性宏观调控，造成了大量烂尾楼和银行呆坏账。
南京的房地产市场也是自1990年代起步。据《南京市志》介绍，1992年，南京实施公有住房制度改革；1995年，稳步出售公房；1997年，停止福利分房。但在1994年以前，南京的商品房年上市量只有约100万平米。
一座城市的变迁与发展，离不开房地产业的推动。房地产对于城市发展的重要性，赵少麟早有认识。
1993年，身为淮阴市市长的赵少麟，在接受《瞭望周刊》访谈时曾表示，淮阴交通条件不好，改善也非一时之功，因此投资者少。怎么办？能不能反过来搞，把旧房子拿出来卖，拿了钱去盖新房子招商。
赵少麟举了淮阴淮海大厦的例子，称淮海大厦经营五六年，年年亏本。后来整个包给了外商，每年按一定的递增率收钱。但也有人不理解，说这么好的地段怎么包给别人经营呢？但就是不去想，这么好的地段，自己越办越亏，为什么不能让他投入市场经营，成为生财聚财的源泉呢？现在大家想通了，市里的房地产都可以卖，有的政府机关占了商业黄金地段都要卖。转起来才能生钱，有了钱，淮阴的戏才好唱。
在赵少麟围绕着经济发展“唱戏”之际，赵晋的创业也开始了。
新成立的南京世昌地产，编制25人，或来自房产公司，或来自供电局、自来水公司等市政部门，也有来自赵少麟掌控过的南京大桥机器厂，其中不乏干部子弟。
1994年8月14日，成立两个月后，南京世昌地产和一家集体企业南京恒盛物资经营公司，在苏州合资成立苏州市泰和房地产开发有限责任公司（以下简称苏州泰和地产）。1996年3月5日，苏州泰和地产又和江苏泰丰商贸发展有限公司合资，成立江苏鸿业房地产开发有限公司（以下简称江苏鸿业地产）。
赵晋以上述三大公司为母公司，开始了在宁、苏两地发展的双城记。
南京首秀
赵晋开发的第一个楼盘，是南京宁夏路住宅。
宁夏路属于颐和路公馆区，在南京人印象中，颐和路公馆区于南京，如同外滩之于上海，八大关之于青岛，凝结着20世纪初中国的历史记忆。此地全称为颐和路历史文化街区，北到江苏路，东至宁海路，南抵北京西路，西至西康路，总面积约35.19公顷，是全国规模最大、保存最完整的民国别墅建筑群，被誉为“民国官府区”。
民国时，旧官僚、新权贵、外国公使云集于此，兴建官邸，道路以中国各地名胜命名，主干道叫颐和，两侧有珞珈、牯岭、宁夏诸路。马歇尔、孙科、宋子文等人于此留下印记。新中国之后，这里的小楼小院内住着南京军区的将军、江苏省的老干部。宁夏路一带地块，非一般人所能拿到。
1994年，成立之初的南京世昌地产，申请对宁夏路3、7片进行开发建设，向南京市建委提交《关于申请建设多层住宅的立项报告》。当年7月，南京市建委做出立项批复，称为加快旧城区的改造建设，经研究同意世昌公司对鼓楼区宁夏路3、7片进行开发建设。
这是一块面积不大的地块，南京世昌地产在这里建了三幢楼房，两幢五层，一幢四层，总建筑面积4342平米。
1995年8月，南京世昌地产以宁夏路住宅楼的名义对外售房。耐人寻味的是，南京市房管局在颁发的销售许可证中称，该项目不得广告宣传。
1996年，成立两年后的南京世昌地产进行改制。
这时中国的房产市场并不景气，紧缩性的宏观调控政策落实后，经济过热势头放缓。据《南京市志》介绍，1995年后，南京商品房市场投入量涌增，而需求量减少。1995年，商品房上市量达644.7万平方米，销售量只有117万平方米；1996年，商品房上市量586万平方米，比上年下降9.1%，销售178万平方米，比上年增加52.1%，但因上市量远大于销售量，年末商品房空置量仍高达408万平方米。
1996年12月25日，团中央办公厅向江苏省工商局出示情况说明称：“我单位曾于1994年向你局申请注册成立南京世昌房地产开发公司，当时由于我单位资金紧张，所以该公司注册资本金未到位，对此我单位深表歉意。鉴于至今我单位仍无力筹措该公司的注册资金，且未投入任何资金，致使该公司无法正常经营，所以我单位决定不再作为该公司的出资者及主管部门，并同意该公司改制。”
而在南京世昌地产成立时，其企业注册资金来源情况说明称，注册资金1000万元，系团中央办公厅拨款。
1996年12月28日，南京世昌地产进行公司重组，注册资金仍为1000万元，赵晋任董事长兼总经理，公司名字变更为江苏世昌实业有限公司（以下简称江苏世昌实业）。赵晋个人的房产江湖由此开启。
1998年左右，江苏世昌实业转战石婆婆巷。
这一年，中国的房地产市场迎来了新发展。1998年5月，中国人民银行出台《个人住房贷款管理办法》，倡导贷款买房。7月，国务院正式宣布停止住房收入分配，逐步实行住房分配货币化。海南房地产泡沫破裂后延续5年的颓势，在这一年得以扭转：当年全国完成房地产开发投资3623亿元，同比增加13.79%。
亚洲金融危机爆发后通货紧缩的经济局势，使得政府决定催热房地产拉动内需，这一影响深远的决策影响持续至今，房地产成为中国经济的支柱产业之一，不仅造就了大批中国富豪，也成为政府官员落马的主要泥潭。
在南京，1998年12月31日，南京停止住房实物分配。1999年5月，允许已购公有住房上市出售，促使房地产市场进一步活跃。赵晋也得以乘势而起。
南京石婆婆巷也不是一条平常小巷，西连被张恨水写进小说的丹凤街，东接东南大学。民国时，徐悲鸿和蒋碧微在这里漫步 张爱玲和胡兰成在这里缠绵。
在石婆婆巷与丹凤街交界处，江苏世昌实业拆迁居民的平房，开发了三幢七层的商住楼，为石婆婆巷12号、14号、16号，建筑面积2万余平米。1998年8月14日，由南京房产局颁发房权证。
石婆婆巷一度成了赵晋的大本营。江苏世昌实业以此为基地，相继成立了南京分公司、南京第二分公司、上海分公司。
苏州泰和地产也于1998年9月1日，从征战四年的苏州迁至石婆婆巷14-2号，其后更名为江苏泰和房地产实业有限公司（以下简称江苏泰和地产）。
在石婆婆巷14-1号，赵晋于1996年12月成立了江苏恒基商贸有限公司，2000年5月成立了南京而仁贸易有限公司。
在石婆婆巷12号楼下，赵晋于2000年成立了南京恒基通讯器材市场，后来此地成为南京有名的二手手机市场。
此后，赵晋还成立了江苏嘉辉广告文化传播有限公司、南京德辉广告文化传播有限公司、南京顺熹隆广告文化传播有限责任公司以及上海康定投资管理有限公司等。
石婆婆巷的居民，见证了赵晋早期发展的威势。在一位居民印象中，那时赵晋天天在这里上班，长得高高胖胖的，公司里养了一帮保安，身上雕龙画凤。恒基通讯市场开业时，居民们看到时任玄武区公安分局局长着便装前来剪彩。
石婆婆巷的回迁户，对赵晋更是深有感受。沈真文（音）是其中的一户。据当地《江南时报》报道，1999年，沈家拆迁后按协议回迁到石婆婆巷14号楼内居住。按照当初开发商的承诺，沈家拿到一小套住房，以及16号楼下一间10平米的“门面房”，然而，此房有名无实，并不在街上，而是在小巷的里面，三米外即是围墙。沈家对此颇为不满，多次找到开发商交涉。
2002年5月10日晚上，沈真文再次找到开发商负责人，双方发生争执，后经派出所协调予以平息。第二天晚11时许，沈家夫妇准备休息时，几名陌生人来敲门，并称有人在楼下等，找他们去调换房子。为慎重起见，沈真文拨打了110报警。丹凤街派出所值班警察接到电话后，让他在楼下等。然而，沈真文和妻子下楼后不久，即有一伙人从暗中冲出，对其一顿暴打。
多年后，附近居民对财新记者称，那天下着雨，在石婆婆巷的松树前，十几个人像练拳一样打沈真文，他被打趴在一个水坑里，妻子大喊救命。
行凶者欲乘车逃离现场时，警察赶到，在群众的协助下，抓住一名身着黄色西装的行凶男子，但此人第二天就放走了。沈真文被送进医院抢救，其鼻骨与一根肋骨被打折，面部及脑部有挫伤，脾脏也被打坏。
《江南时报》记者当时采访到开发商一位赵姓副总，对方称，整个事件与该公司无关。此事后来不了了之。
“我们晓得他老头子是江苏省委秘书长，没人敢动他。”知情居民说。
原始积累的秘密
赵少麟是在1997年11月，从淮阴市委书记调任江苏省委副秘书长、办公厅主任，开始接近江苏省权力核心圈的。1998年6月，他升任省委秘书长兼办公厅主任。接下来的8年中，陈焕友、回良玉和李源潮先后出任江苏省最高领导，但赵少麟的工作分工一直没有变，并在2000年进入江苏省委常委班子——这也是他担任的最高职务。
知情者称，赵少麟在南京官场上并不张扬，但民间口碑不好。2000年左右，曾有开发商跟他谈及赵少麟时说，这哪里像共产党的干部。
赵晋的原始积累中，赵少麟提携甚力。在南京多位房产界人士印象中，赵晋势利、霸道，他的原始积累是一种空手套白狼的方式，“只要他看中了哪块地，赵少麟会直接出面打招呼”。
“每个项目都有他老子在里面，他会把地从人家手里转过来。”知情者举例说，2000年前后，南京汉中门外二道埂的一块地，有家房产公司来买，只给600万元。那块地只有五六亩，但位置非常好，在莫愁湖边上，600万元比市场价便宜一半。土地的产权方不同意卖，后来上级领导硬压下来，一定要把地卖给该公司。
“当时听说是赵少麟的儿子来买地，但赵没有直接出面，是淮阴驻南京办事处的人来的。”该知情者说。
在父亲的荫护下，至2000年，赵晋的资产已初见规模，其旗下房产开发的三驾马车江苏泰和地产、江苏世昌实业、江苏鸿业投资，在这一年各有斩获：
江苏世昌实业，已建成靠近南京大学鼓楼校区的汉口路48-2号住宅；
江苏泰和地产有五处工地在建。至2001年，公司所开发的12幢商品房有7幢竣工；
江苏鸿业投资有限公司，在进行大行宫雍园项目前期开发准备工作，该项目占地2.1公顷，拟建住宅4万多平米。
更多的时候，江苏鸿业投资承担着资本运作、对外投资的作用，先后投资江苏世昌实业有限公司、南京顺熹隆广告文化传播有限公司、南京永亨房地产开发有限公司、南京百润德置业咨询有限公司。
赵晋的项目还涉及军队政策性住房。多年后，赵晋在其公司介绍中声称，他旗下的房产公司，始终承担着“央企”的历史使命与责任，为我国房地产行业的发展及地方、军队政策性住房的建设做出了巨大贡献。
知情者称，“智商极高”的赵晋，除了依靠父荫，也善用各种人脉资源，长袖善舞。其早期的合作者中，不乏出身南京公教一村的子弟，这是南京市委市政府领导所住小区。
数年间，赵晋于南京建立20多个公司。这些公司或租在办公楼内，或蜗居民居内，从一开始就蒙上了神秘面纱，数年后一些公司又悄然注销，了无痕迹。
这些公司的法人大多不是赵晋，或是其公司高管，或是普通员工、秘书，或是一些身份不明人士，且法人经常变动，让人神秘莫测。
1999年7月，江苏鸿业投资的法人变更为一位姬先生。两个月后，南京世昌实业的法人也由此人出任。
姬先生，时年65岁，北京崇文区人，1950年代曾就读于哈尔滨外国语学院，也曾赴苏留学，此后供职于燃料工业部、中国国际旅行社，还担任过北京某实业公司总经理。
2000年2月12日，江苏泰和地产的法人变更为一位孙先生。孙先生，北京宣武区人，1957年生，北京某师范学院毕业，曾在北京市一所中学和深圳某发展有限公司工作。
姬、孙两人其后出任赵晋多家公司的法人。两人都曾在北京对外友好交流促进会任过职，姬先生还担任过副会长，该促进会设在北京一座部队大院内。有消息称，赵晋也跟该促进会有关联。
2004年9月15日，在南京世昌实业的股东会上，一个叫苏韵的南京人出任董事。同一天，她又当选为江苏泰和房产董事。苏韵生于1977年，是赵晋的中学校友，大学毕业后，曾在保险公司工作。2001年6月，进了润信国际集团有限公司，后成为赵晋的财务总监。苏韵和弟弟苏冠睿多次出任赵晋公司的法人。
在赵晋所控制的公司中，出任法人最多的则是一个叫杭宁的女性。杭宁出生于1953年，曾供职南京某无线电厂，长期担任会计工作。
从表面看，这个叫杭宁的神秘人物，创立了一个庞大的房产帝国，转战京津鲁等地，吞吐风云，询之于业内，几乎无人识其面目。
实际上，杭宁诸人不过是马甲，赵晋在这些马甲的后面运筹帷幄，攻城略地。
恒基中心的隐患
在赵晋后来的房产江湖中，香港是一座幕后之城。
知情者称，还在南京的时候，赵晋就经常去香港，后来几乎每年都去，或是考察市场，或是其他目的，甚至有人怀疑他去洗钱。
香港成为他此后多家离岸公司的法定地址，这些公司多是注册在英属维尔京群岛，他从这里出发，以外商的身份反身进入内地，或直接成立公司，或参与股份，成立合资企业。
香港更成为赵晋此后房产帝国的“延安”，他从这里借鉴了先进的房产思路，吸取了新的想法，加以改造，以打造自己的基业。
一位知情的员工对财新记者透露：“老板（赵晋）从南京时代，就开始模仿香港。楼盘起的名字跟香港公司很像，很多人以为这是香港公司。他就是要故意造成这种印象。最初，公司的人也会对外宣称，我们是香港公司，李嘉诚入股之类。”
2003年8月，建设部公布了国务院18号文件，明确了房地产支柱产业的地位，中国的城市房地产业走上了打造富豪的征程。也就从这一时期开始，赵晋开发的楼盘开始高端大气上档次，开始香港化。
2003年8月28日，南京丹凤街上，由石婆婆巷路口向南数百米处，一家名叫恒基中心的公寓开盘，这是赵晋试水高档楼盘的处女作。
由江苏泰和地产开发的该楼盘，分A、B两座大楼，高19-20层，1到4楼是商铺，其上为住宅。在开发商的广告中，楼盘地处黄金地段，配套设施优越，为优良社区和学区，建有五星级酒店标准的大堂，配备会所、屋顶花园等，均价每平方米6500元。楼盘开盘后，连续多日创造南京楼盘销售量新高。
2004年，恒基中心两座高楼拔地而起，雄视周边低矮民居。B座侧面二楼处，4根巨大的廊柱间，两个大圆盘上的“恒基”金色大字，让人想起香港的恒基兆业地产集团；圆盘中间是一个由权杖、令旗组成的徽标，同样让人浮想连绵。
恒基中心成了赵晋公司的新基地，其B座402室是他旗下多家公司的所在地。赵晋后来纵横津门诸地，谋取高额利润的系列技术，也正是通过该楼盘开始操练。
知情人称，赵少麟在位时，利用职权、关系，从别人那里转让多起土地，让儿子操作。丹凤街的这块土地也不例外，原是玄武区开发公司的地块，赵少麟利用职权强行拿到手，后来补签了合同。
在赵晋后来的房地产牟利过程中，更改容积率是其重要手段。恒基中心本来容积率是2.2，赵晋把大楼盖到了7.1。如果按照容积率，需要补交数以亿计的资金。但赵少麟利用职权，把此事抹掉。
恒基中心的两座楼之间，政府开了一条薛家巷，等于增加了很多商铺，容积率也增加了很多，对于开发商是有利的，但南京市政府反而补偿了赵晋不少钱。
在赵晋更改容积率的征途中，时常需要变更设计。恒基中心于此也已牛刀小试，其隐患则在多年后陆续出现。
据南京龙虎网当时报道，市民陈汝（化名）花了近110万元购置恒基中心一套六楼住房。2004年入住后，问题接踵而至。一遇雨天，房屋就出现大面积渗水，而且地面有很多小裂缝，前后折腾三年，一直没彻底解决。2006年2月，开发商在陈汝家房屋内墙体与窗户连体处，打开一条4米长的排水沟，还发现墙内有大量积水。
陈汝曾去南京市规划局档案馆，调出房子的原始建筑设计图，让她吃惊的是，开发商将原本与外墙平行的东北角的弧形窗户向外延伸，房屋多出一个大理石空体平台。
建筑专家验房发现，该公寓以陈汝家所在楼层为界，上下楼层均在一个平面内，唯独六楼向外突出了一个平台，如一道花边雕塑把六层包起来，外围看起来非常美观，但里面全是空的。由于该公寓的外围墙体上没有排水管，一到雨天，整栋楼外墙面的雨水，就顺着陈家的外墙体倒灌入室内。
另一个困扰业主的问题，是恒基中心公寓外墙大理石的掉落。从2008年上半年开始，公寓B座外立面大理石就开始脱落。公寓裙楼上有500多户居民，裙楼下是多家商业网点，每天客流量达10万人次，大理石砖的掉落，使这一闹市区的安全被蒙上阴影，先后多辆车子被砸坏。
大理石坠落事件，一直持续到2012年。据《南京晨报》报道，大年初一下午，恒基中心公寓B座南面五楼，又有三块十几公斤重的大理石条坠下，砸在四楼平台上。幸好当天楼下客流量小，否则后果不堪设想。
对于坠石事件，物业公司和业委会向南京市住建委递交报告称，开发商在建设公寓时，未按照施工图施工，致使20层以下的外立面大理石脱落……
“激流勇退”
赵晋在其房产江湖中，以桀骜不驯著称。知情者称，这种习性赵晋在南京时代就已养成。江苏泰和地产在其早期发展中，时有对抗政府之举。
2004年， SARS过后，中国房价反弹，土地拍卖和加息伴随着新一轮房价的大涨，房地产发展的热潮已从京沪转向内陆城市。炒房之风随之盛行，常用手法之一，是“假退房真转让”：
楼盘开盘初期，“房虫”与开发商串通一气，先大口吃下房源，造成该楼盘“热销”假象，然后再在二手房市场上加价挂牌出让，找到下家后对房管部门谎称退房，解除合同，让下家和开发商重新签署购房合同，以此牟利。
为对付上述炒房，2004年4月1日，南京出台《加强商品房预售管理实施细则》，规定对所退房源的坐落、套型、面积、房价等内容进行公示，开发商必须将退出的房源统一交由房管部门，按照规定程序公开抽签摇号销售。
据《金陵晚报》当时报道，南京炒房禁令下达后，当月共有三个开发商将自己退回的14套期房房源交给南京房管部门公示，定于4月28日公开抽签摇号。然而这一首次公开抽签摇号却被取消了，原因是有人举报，14套期房退房的房源有问题，房管局调查发现，确有开发商将不符合条件的房源交来摇号，将其狠狠“涮”了一把。房管局一位人士透露，这个胆大的开发商就是江苏泰和地产。房管部门为此非常恼火。
2005年4月，南京市物价检查人员检查江苏泰和地产的收费情况时，发现该公司擅自向部分拆迁安置户收取大堂装修费、屋顶花园装修费。
尽管如此，似乎并不影响江苏泰和地产的销售情况。2005年，南京市评出了2004年度房地产十强企业，该公司榜上有名。
蹊跷的是，2006年11月16日，这家公司从省会城市南京迁至偏远的淮安市，即赵少麟主政5年的淮阴市。2006年度，公司没有参加年检。
这一年，中国的房产市场并未出现波动。恰恰相反，虽然“国六条”、“十五条”等调控政策频出，但房价一路坚挺。在此背景下，江苏泰和地产的举动格外让人费解。不仅如此，2007年5月21日，该公司股东书面决定称，因公司长期没有业务，无力继续经营，决定停止经营活动，进行清算。
2007年5月24日，公司成立清算组，向淮安市工商局称，公司在迁入淮安后，多次对淮安市场进行调研考察，始终没有找到合适的开发项目，故没有开展经营业务。鉴于这种情况，公司没有在淮安市税务局申领税务登记证，但已在南京鼓楼区税务局批准注销税务登记证。
5月26日，该公司在《淮安日报》刊登注销公告。12月2日，该公司向淮安工商局递交公司注销登记申请。
房价疯涨之际，赵晋在南京注销的并非一家公司。2007年5月28日，江苏世昌实业举行股东会，也称因公司长期没有业务，无力继续经营，决定停止经营活动，进行清算。9天后，江苏鸿业投资以同样原因决定停止经营，进行清算。两家公司在2007年下半年申请注销。
至此，为赵晋早期原始积累立下汗马功劳的三大公司相继消失，事如春梦了无痕。
比它们稍早一些退出江苏官场的，是赵晋之父赵少麟。2006年12月，年满60岁的赵少麟卸去江苏省委常委、秘书长职务，名字出现在中国老龄事业发展基金会副理事长的职位上。
知情者称，按照惯例，赵少麟退休后，本来可以在江苏省政协任职，但他走了门路，选择了北上。
退休之前，赵少麟住在南京市傅厚岗。这是一条位于鼓楼区东北侧，东西长约400米的街巷，周边分布着民国政府外交部、李宗仁公馆等民国建筑，徐悲鸿、傅抱石等人曾在此居住。
傅厚岗28号，有三处独门小院，院内各有二层小楼，赵少麟住在中间的院子。自2006年后，这所小院常年铁门紧闭。
赵少麟退休后在江苏政坛为数不多的亮相，是2007年1月27日江苏省第十届人代会第五次会议开幕，他以中国老龄事业发展基金会副理事长的身份出席。
万豪中心与卓越
很多年后，南京人才明白，赵晋在2007年注销公司，并不仅仅是因为父亲淡出江苏官场而急流勇退，他还实现了自己的战略转移。
2003年之后，赵晋就开始布局北上，此后数年，发展重心逐步北移，南京只有一些项目处于收尾阶段。万豪中心和卓越SOHO（后更名为卓越名座）是其中的两个楼盘。
位于鼓楼区中山北路的万豪中心项目，是一个联建项目。早在2002年12月，江苏泰和地产与南京中商房产开发有限公司（以下简称南京中商房产）、南京三乐电气总公司签订协议，联建该项目，并于2006年7月签订《补充协议》，约定江苏泰和地产承担建设用地的拆迁安置补偿费用、土地出让金、设计费、城市建设规费等，南京中商房产承担全部建设费用。
2006年9月，江苏泰和地产将其在联建项目中的权利，转让给赵晋控制的江苏乾康房地产实业有限公司（以下简称江苏乾康地产）。
万豪项目于2007年9月预售，2008年10月26日，其工程主体结构封顶，总建筑面积124650平米，地上54层，建筑总高度为200米，有江苏第一高住宅工程之称。
但在未交房之前，万豪中心就遭受质疑。据《东方卫报》报道，2008年11月，就有业主反映，该项目中大多数精装修房源没有管道燃气。
该报记者发现，该项目1-9层为商用房，10层以上为住宅。住宅项目中，每层39套房子中，只有4套明厨明卫的房子安装了管道燃气，暗厨暗卫的房子则没有。南京市燃管处负责人称，从安全上考虑，暗厨暗卫达不到通风消防条件，不能安装管道燃气。
南京著名验房师丁渤称，开发商此举是在打擦边球，目的是增加建筑面积多赢利，因为如果严格按照设计规范，住宅部分就不应该出现暗厨暗卫。
此外，也有业主质疑开发商的其他问题：该地块1999年购买，2006年建造，并将在2010年完工，按此计算已囤积10年，故导致房屋产权比国家规定少了10年；开发商的临时购房订购协议规定，如延迟交房，开发商将按每天总房价的0.3/10000赔付。但根据南京市的售房标准，每天应按总房价的5/10000赔付等。
赵晋系的另一项目卓越SOHO引发公众注意，是在2009年7月底。
这一年，在经过2008年房产降温后，随着救市政策的作用显现，中国的房产市场从年初的低价、平价全面转向涨价，南京的房产市场也在升温。7月中旬，仁恒江湾城发生了“深夜抢楼”事件，一周后，类似情景又在南京市中心重演。
2009年7月23日，南京丹凤街恒基中心，早上8点多就有人冒雨在售楼处外排队，至次日晚上已达200多人。现场维持秩序的辅警称，排队者在街头睡了一夜。他们等待的楼盘，要到7月25日晚上才能开盘。
这家楼盘就是卓越SOHO，位于珠江路劳动村地块。2007年，由赵晋控制的山东诚基房地产开发有限公司以1亿元拿下地块，用地总面积4735.5平米，南京泰亨房地产开发有限公司（以下简称南京泰亨地产）负责开发。
在广告宣传中，该楼盘为商业、金融业、公寓综合楼，建筑高度80米，地处城市中心，在楼上可东眺紫金山，北望玄武湖，周边超市、医院、学校一应俱全，配套成熟，交通便利，层高5.2米，可买一用二。
市民彻夜排队引起了《扬子晚报》的注意。该报记者在有关部门查到，该楼盘可上市销售1123套，实际土地使用年限只有40年，从2007年7月至2047年7月。
一个土地使用年限仅剩38年的项目，为何还有人连夜排队抢购？南京市房管局一位人士对该报记者表示，楼市迅速升温，不排除一些开发商刻意“炒作”，人为制造排队抢购的现象，借此抬高价格。
此前，南京搜房网也曾质疑过，卓越SOHO的产权是商业产权，开发商却宣称水电是民用标准。这座大厦的房型也与其他楼盘不同。其1-4层是商铺，5-15层是住宅，每层有49户，商铺与住宅都是一种小户型。当时有购房者提出疑问，他们买的房子为什么是鸽子笼式的小户型？为什么没有煤气？他们不知道，赵晋正在把在北方演练成熟的房产发展模式，推广回了自己的故乡。
南京再布局
在南京，似乎再也没有一个板块的城市化进程可比河西新城：十年架构，从一片荒芜河滩变身高楼林立。在经历了“十运会”“中国首届绿博会”“第四届世界城市论坛”后，河西新城发展大大提速，举办青奥会的契机更使其一日千里。
河西新城是南京的地王频出之地，和记黄埔、招商地产、北京金隅先后在此刷新南京地价纪录。这里也是腐败滋生之地，曾任河西新城开发建设指挥部常务副指挥长的南京市政府原副秘书长汪扬，担任过副指挥长的南京市委常委、建邺区委书记冯亚军，担任过指挥长的连云港书记李强，于2013-2014年先后落马。
尽管如此，这里的黄金土地，仍引得房产商竞相折腰。
2010年10月29日在南京的一次土地拍卖会上，一家名不见经传的江苏盛康商贸有限公司（以下简称江苏盛康商贸），以8.1亿元拿下河西大街（中部33-2）地块。
从表面看，这家成立于2007年的公司注册资金仅500万元，却能在如此黄金地带拿地，似乎有点不可思议。细究其背景，其法人杭宁，其股东江苏乾康地产和江苏恒基商贸有限公司，均暴露出这家公司的真正主人。
在淡出南京的房产市场数年之后，赵晋又回来了。
这一年，中国的楼市可用火爆形容。在2009年政策全面放开救市之后，楼市疯狂最终引发中央出重手调控，此后四年，楼市进入了“最严厉宏观调控时代”，但各地房价除了2011年短暂低谷外，仍然坚挺。
赵晋的归来似乎正是时候。此时他早非吴下阿蒙，江苏盛康商贸成为他后期在南京发展的起点。
2010年11月，江苏盛康商贸出资2000万元，成立南京瀚海地产，以开发河西新城地块。在其规划中，该地块拟投资23亿元，从西北到东南依次建设三栋主体建筑，地上36层，建筑高度199米，地下4层，总建筑面积202315平米。
知情人称，这块工地后来曾经两次改图纸，一次是改内部结构，一次是将建筑高度从200米改到300米——这并不容易，但赵晋做到了。
其时，冯亚军于2013年1月出任南京市河西新城区开发建设指挥部常务副指挥长、建邺区区委书记。消息人士告诉财新记者，赵晋曾送其张大千的画，并录像记录下来。
2011年1月，江苏盛康商贸再以3.16亿元，竞得原下关黄家圩商业金融用地。该地块项目用地面积19644.4平米，总建筑面积约10万平米。当年3月，江苏盛康商贸出资1000万元，成立南京德胜房地产开发有限公司（以下简称南京德胜地产），以开发该地块。
南京瀚海地产和南京德胜地产是赵晋后期发展的主要推动力。根据财新记者的不完全统计，2012年7月-2013年10月，短短一年出头时间，南京瀚海地产和南京德胜地产出资15.75亿元，连续拍得江宁区、下关区、栖霞区的五个出让面积基本都过万平方米的地块，引起各方侧目。
赵晋在下着一盘很大的棋。他的眼光越过了南京市中心，开始布局栖霞区、江宁区等。南京之外，则是天津、济南、杭州、唐山……
《财新网》【“赵衙内”的房产帝国】
之二
天津：海河之畔的房产大佬
2015年05月18日
天津十年，赵晋把香港的房产思路、南京的历练，试验于此黄金宝地，逐渐发展出一套独具风格的谋利模式：高价拿地，全力开发超高密度小户型，挖空心思偷面积，低价快速出售。赵晋打造房产帝国的征途如坦克滚滚向前，凡阻碍者必碾于车下
2014年10月12日，天津市河西区的名门广场销售中心墙上贴着“广场复工”、“还我血汗钱”等口号
【财新网】（记者 谢海涛）
南京只是赵晋的起家之地，深入京畿重地，则是其成就霸业之始。2003年之后，赵氏父子相继北上，似非偶然。
京师有退休的老爷子坐镇，赵晋于此设高级会所，勾连权贵，官商同乐；更于津门开疆辟土，旁及冀地，以为旗舰，号令诸地。
天津十年，赵晋把香港的房产思路、南京的历练，试验于此黄金宝地，逐渐发展出一套独具风格的谋利模式：高价拿地，全力开发小户型，挖空心思偷面积，低价快速出售……再把其先进经验，推广至宁济等地，一时烈火烹油，鲜花着锦。
虽每建一楼，皆如引发一座火山，民怨沸腾，但其根深叶茂，挟权势以令业主，高压维稳，强势止沸，业主徒呼奈何，遂有最牛开发商之名。
1、天津标王
2003年，赵晋是以外商的身份空降天津的，由此开启了其隐形帝国在北方的基业。
这一年，在公众心目中，SARS的阴霾笼罩着全国。自1998年终止福利分房后，中国逐渐建立起住房分配货币化、住房供给商品化的住房新体制，房地产刚刚迎来发展的春天，在SARS疫情中瞬间坠入寒冬。当年6月，央行出台“121号文”严控房地产贷款，又给了开发商当头一棒。这是中国第一轮房地产牛市之后，中央政府第一次采取措施抑制房地产过热。但两个月后，国务院出台“18号文”，却又明确房地产业作为国民经济的支柱产业。
就在这种既警惕又依赖的矛盾中，调控新政不断涌现，房地产业作为支柱产业发展的黄金十年开始了。
当时，与其他城市一样，固定资产投资和城市基础建设被天津主政者设定为天津经济发展的主要驱动力。天津有一个数额巨大的固定资产投资计划——5年总投资将超过7000亿元。与其他城市有所不同，“银政合作”在天津更加得天独厚，除了中国银行，农工建及开行等各大银行纷纷与天津市签订金融合作协议，为其城市建设提供巨额信贷。
天津“一夕之间”变成了超级大工地，放眼望去，到处在拆迁，到处在盖楼。从1990年代中期启动旧城改造到2002年，天津拆迁危陋建筑近1000万平方米，而2003年一年就创下历史记录——拆迁400万平方米旧房。
海量的拆迁工程在天津房地产市场形成了强有力的刚性需求。2003年，天津商品房销售10020万平米，较上年增长近50%。一直温温吞吞的天津地产沸腾了，房价上涨速度如坐飞机，很多优质项目已到了“抢房子”的地步。
这一年的3月4日，一家注册地在英属维尔京群岛的离岸公司——百瑞德置业有限公司（BEST RATE PROPERTIES LIMITED），出资200万美元，在天津和平区南京路129号的世贸广场注册成立了天津泰瑞房地产开发有限公司（以下简称天津泰瑞地产）。
百瑞德置业有限公司成立于2000年8月22日，赵晋作为百瑞德置业的代表，担任天津泰瑞地产总经理和法定代表人。
多年之后，天津泰瑞地产的高管还不无炫耀地对业主说，当年进天津，是市领导招商引资进来的。
赵晋时年刚满30岁，风头正劲。知情者称，赵晋初赴津门时，租住在某高档小区。他抽烟很凶，把房东家的沙发、地板之类都弄坏了。后来他对房东说，你到诚基买一套房子吧，便宜点。这是赵晋即将在天津开发的楼盘。
2003年10月16日，天津市举行第一次土地拍卖活动。中国实行土地招拍挂制度始于2002年。当年7月1日，国土资源部制定的《招标拍卖挂牌出让国有土地使用权规定》开始施行。
在这次拍卖会上，天津泰瑞地产重拳出击，以当时的天价拍得南京路上的黄家花园地块，一举成为“标王”。
黄家花园位于天津和平区中部偏东南，泛指山西路与西安道交会处一带，1860年后此地沦为英租界，1930年成为商业区，其南为天津历史文化街区五大道区域，分布着2000多座英、法、意、德等国建筑风格的花园洋房，有万国建筑博览会之称。
进入21世纪后，黄家花园地块周边成为天津南京路CBD商务核心区，汇集了地铁1、2号线和20多条公交线路，且串联着南京路、滨江道和小白楼三大商圈，延续着五大道的历史文脉，可谓绝版地块，如钻石般珍贵。
2、抢房也疯狂
2005年5月，在黄家花园地块出现了一个巨大的售楼广告：“稀缺黄金地段、名牌中小学校生源地、超豪华的设计和建筑、酒店式公寓管理、只需8万元首付就可在诚基中心实现。”广告中的每一句都透射着巨大的诱惑力。
这一年，房地产业已走到中国经济的舞台中央，大戏开唱，全民癫狂。政府的宏观调控集中火力，数十条严控政策横空出世，却陷入越调越涨的怪圈，房价一路坚挺。
6月，一个名为诚基经贸中心（以下简称诚基中心）的楼盘在南京路动工了，总建筑面积近30万平米。其时，南京路附近有四大公建项目破土，皆志在成为地标性建筑。诚基中心西邻，和记黄浦将开建20多万平米的大型商场、高级公寓和酒店；再往西，现代城·庄吉商业中心，将以10万平米规模刷新滨江道单体购物中心的纪录……与豪强比邻，诚基中心的显赫位置可见一斑。
这一年7月16日，诚基中心B区精致户型首次预约，现场火爆。9月24-25日，精致户型一期开盘，两日销售1288套，创地产销售神话。当月，该楼盘获《每日新报》所评的最佳市场人气奖；10月，再获销售冠军奖。
12月9-16日，诚基中心A区挑高户型样板间开放，市民连夜排队，参观者超过2000人次；12月17-18日，挑高户型一期开盘，两日销售658套；该楼盘获12月份销售冠军、2005年度销售冠军奖。
业主郭莉回忆称，当时在售楼处，市民连续排队一星期，晚上穿着军大衣，困了睡在躺椅上，还有民工排队卖号，一个号炒到200元。
“选房时，10个人往里面一放。售楼中心墙上挂着楼图，售楼小姐往上面啪啪地插红旗，插上红旗的房子就是卖掉了。啪，这个房子没有了。啪，那个房子没有了。气氛非常紧张，看得眼睛都花了。插完红旗，就到另一边去签合同。”
诚基中心的底楼是商铺，同样销售火爆。开盘时，已到次年夏天，大楼已封顶。在一位商铺业主印象中，当时为买到好商铺，有人千方百计托关系，去找赵晋。有人一买就是七八套商铺。他是排了一夜队，才买到了商铺。
选房那一天，工地南边的西安道，“天津不夜城”的巨幅喷绘广告下，整条路都“戒严”了，警察忙着管制交通，路上排满了人，死乞白赖地抢位置，有人甚至打起来。
这位业主回忆称，买底商也是提前排号。排到你，拿着号，就往里走。墙上挂着楼图，你进去了，根本没有坐下来选铺面那一说。你要提前选好房，到了那里，就赶紧插红旗，慢一步，别人的红旗就插上去了。插上红旗，就去签合同。三分钟不到，就完事，根本不给你考虑的时间。一夜之间，七八成商铺都抢没了。
这个诚基中心，即为赵晋献给天津人的见面礼，由他旗下天津泰瑞地产开发。
3、如此“小户型”
让天津人趋之若鹜的，是诚基中心推出的一种小户型，一种单价7000多元/平方米，主力户型为58平方米的房子。
按常规思路，对市中心黄金地段，开发商更愿意做成豪宅。但赵晋的泰瑞地产却另辟奚径，在城市中心全力开发小户型。诚基中心只有三幢高层，却拥有五千户单元。如此繁华地段，如此高密度项目，给天津的楼市带来了震撼，也让业界疑虑重重。
天津泰瑞地产相关负责人在当时接受媒体采访称，本来他们是考虑做150平米左右的大户型，但经过调研发现，在CBD中心区、商务中心区，小户型产品非常稀缺，而市场需求量极为庞大。定位小户型是基于附近有大量的机关、外资企业、金融单位等，房屋无论是销售还是出租都被市场看好。
小户型还被赵晋的天津泰瑞地产赋予了形而上的意义。该公司负责人称，开发小户型，是天津城市发展需要，是市场细分的需要，也是老百姓投资获利的根本需要，“这种项目，自用、投资两相宜，既可满足业主基本居住需求，兼具保值、增值的能力，宜出租、宜投资变现，真正为业主提供了投资理财的最佳选择”。
诚基中心的小户型，另一特点是低价位。此前，在黄家花园地段花40万元买一套高品质新房，会被笑为痴人说梦。当2005年7月诚基中心以总价38万元推出58平米的小户型时，天津人又惊又喜。当时旁边稍晚销售的楼盘，房价已过万元。
诚基中心的好处不仅如此。在广告宣传中，开发商还声称，诚基中心虽是住宅楼，但将聘请优质物业管理公司进行酒店式服务。大堂挑高9米，装修豪华，采用五星级酒店标准。5000平米法式洛可可屋顶花园，5000平米全方位超大会所，让业主尽享尊贵生活……
业主李明（化名）在2006年以40万买下一套房子。多年后，他仍对诚基中心的诱惑印象深刻：“我第一眼看到广告，首付7万块钱，入住南京路，又是70年产权，都不大相信。售楼员说，首付7万，一个月只还贷一千多，房子以后会升值几倍，地段就不用说了，房子地基已出地面，马上就是现房了。四五十层的高楼，这不就跟国外的高级公寓一样吗？有人一买就是四五套。”
在诚基中心开盘之初，也有业内人士对其质疑：通道式设计使一半户型处于阴面，两楼之间楼间距太近，楼体又高又宽，楼体间遮挡现象严重，近70%住户将处在采光极差的环境中；总户数约5000户，投资者若按30%计算，将有1500套房子用于投资，将导致居住者的流动性增强，安全隐患较大；单层户数太多，楼内垂直交通的压力增大，电梯频繁使用将加速老化，高层业主在高峰时上下楼将较困难。但是，这些质疑之声很快就被火热的销售追捧淹没了。
多年后，一位深受诚基之害的业主剖析了赵晋的发展路数：“他是模仿香港楼盘那种高密度的方式，把香港的小户型移植到了天津。好地段、小户型、低价位，让大多数人都买得起，他抓住了这个市场，快速销售，快速变现。”
4、维权中的惊人发现
买房之后，留给业主的是幸福的等待。在房价飞涨中，在诚基中心不断创造的销售神话中，业主们或在亲友的羡慕中规划着新家的未来，或享受着投资获利的窃喜。
诚基中心的楼在一天天长高，住在附近的业主几乎天天去看，天天去数楼层，计算着什么时候封顶。在规划中，诚基中心的3号楼是47层。2007年的一天，业主终于数到了47层，却惊异地发现，大楼并没有停下来，而是继续往上长。
业主们很快有了更多的发现。这个号称五星级酒店的家，已失火3次，存在着巨大的安全、消防隐患，其背后则是开发商篡改设计、欺诈销售：
在购房合同中，1、2号楼住宅自然层是29层，现在开发商将前期承诺的29层以上的俱乐部、会所等改为住宅，使得住宅自然层变为33层。
3号楼原本为47层，已被增高至52层。开发商前期承诺8层以下为酒店，后来酒店改为5层以下，6-8层改为住宅，2-5层以产权式商务酒店名义出售，但购房合同却以用地性质为住宅、70年土地使用权签署。
业主们担心，开发商在三幢楼原结构基础上，多加了数层楼房，楼房是否能负担其重量？抗震能力是否下降？容积率是否上升？公摊面积是否改变？住户巨增，电梯是否够用？
2007年8月，业主们举行维权大会，数次派代表与开发商交涉，但开发商以手续齐全为由置之不理，并以退房相威胁。12月18日，是3号楼交房的日子，业主们一度拒收房子。针对开发商更改规划问题，他们先后找了规划部门和房管部门。“都支支吾吾，说不出来改的理由，就说是合法的。”李明回忆称。
直到有一天，李明在天津市建委网站上，查到了一则由天津市土地交易中心发布的公示。公示称，天津泰瑞地产通过公开挂牌取得津和南（挂）2003-159号地块使用权，该地块出让面积为19692.1平米，总建筑面积291434平米。经有关部门批准，总建筑面积调整为340462.6平米。
这个变更此前没有业主知道。在土地招投标时，容积率是固定的，要想加盖楼层，更改容积率，根据《天津市国有土地有偿使用办法》规定，需要重新招拍挂，必须重新公示。公示期内如无单位竞拍，才能为原来拍下土地的公司办理手续，并相应调整土地出让金。
知情者称，更改容积率是赵晋在低房价下保证赢利的惯用方式。李明说：“我们原来认为最不可能改的是容积率，但他就有这个本事，单价不改，改面积。”
有业主称，业委会后来一直在告诚基加层的问题，市里曾来人，把当时市政府的会议纪要拿出来了，称加层不是某一个领导批的，是经过多少会议，为了满足回迁房需要，才同意开发商加层。
容积率的更改让业主们惊讶，他们随后在网上查到赵晋在南京的信息，才知道此人背景很深，能量很大。
有一阵子，业主们的维权不再死追烂打楼层加盖了，而是转向了产权问题。业主在购房时，开发商承诺房子是70年产权，合同上写的是住宅，但收房之前，他们听说房子性质是公寓，产权是50年。
业主们为此多次去找市房管局，一位信访处长接待称，住宅是有严格要求的，包括朝向、容积率、配套、采光率，国家都有明确规定，你们的房子怎么能符合住宅的规定呢？
业主们又反复去找规划局。一次，百十口子业主堵在市规划局的大厅里，新调来的规划局长把赵晋叫来。“赵晋坐着奔驰来了，业主们候在大厅里。过了一阵子，有人出来说，你们回去听信吧。”李明说，“结果还真不错，不知道是怎么协调的，把我们的房子变成了住宅，拿了70年的产权。”
产权问题，进一步让业主知道，赵晋确实有实力。他做的事情不是一般人所能想象，规划局、房管局、市政府，遇到他的事，都是一路绿灯。
在诚基中心，同样维权的还有商铺业主。
在一位业主印象中，当初买商铺时，开发商说得天花乱坠，什么不夜城，24小时金碧辉煌之类。2008年秋天一进驻商场，业主就发现根本不是那么回事。
首先是硬件违约，商铺里的各种硬件设施达不到商业配套标准，暖气及制冷无法正常运行。合同中规定的商业管理用房，被开发商变成产权房卖了。合同中还承诺免费进行两年统一商业管理，但开发商未按约定进驻商管。没有商业管理，意味着商场是无政府状态。有半年时间，这个取名第五大道商业街的商场里漆黑一片，除了几家自营商铺，没几家开着。
业主们开始维权，一遍遍地找开发商，找政府。一开始，政府很重视，专门成立班子接待。后来，业主就找不到接待方了。开发商明目张胆告诉他们，“你们找区政府没有用。”
业主们无奈去信访，申请游行。闹了四个月，最后在区政府协调下，开发商拿出100万元作为商场的广告费用。业主们利用这笔钱，在报纸上登广告，招聘招商公司。招商招了三个月，成功组织了一次韩国商品展销会，商场的生意好起来了，但两年后，由于商场依然没有后期管理，还是处于无政府状态。
5、君临天下的新战术
当诚基中心的业主还在维权时，赵晋又有了大手笔。
2006年元月18日，在天津市新年第一次土地拍卖会上，他的天津泰瑞地产重拳出击，以1.639亿拿下“海河-电信大厦”地块，土地面积10340平米，建筑面积85000平米，使用年限50年。
这同样是一块黄金宝地，面朝波光潋滟的海河，背靠历史文化街区意式风情区，这曾是意大利在境外唯一的租界区，精致的广场与联排别墅，构成了意大利境外最大的意式风格建筑群，高低错落的别墅房顶角亭下，散布着梁启超、曹禺等名人故居。
2007年初，天津泰瑞地产出资2000万元，成立天津星际房地产开发有限公司（以下简称天津星际地产），以开发海河地块。2月26日，工程破土动工，天津星际地产投资4.5亿元，以打造一幢高230米、名为“君临天下”的高楼。
2007年11月，该楼盘开盘。同样是夜里排队，同样是桌上摆着沙盘，墙上挂着房图，同样是插红旗，乱哄哄地抢房子。与诚基中心相比，君临天下的抢房则更为疯狂。在塘沽工作的几个浙江人，买下四五十套房子。另一个大客户康总，则斥资一亿多元，拿下100多套房子。
但开盘之初，就有业主在网上反映，君临天下的复式单元，号称买一层送一层，他花127万元买的房子，按两层算面积有120平方米，房本上却只有60平方米，后又变为40多平方米，有10多平方米变成了赠送的装饰性阳台。亦有业主表示，该楼盘广告宣传的建筑面积和实际签署面积有20%的差距，售楼员称这是对双方有利的擦边球。
从君临天下开始，赵晋的房产模式有了创新：除了以“好地段、低价格”诱使市民购买小户型实现快速开发、快速销售，他还越来越热衷于压缩房产证上的面积，使之低于实际面积，证外面积则以“景观阳台”方式赠送。
这种房产证面积被浓缩的做法，坑了谁？又肥了谁？有业界人士认为，被坑的是国家和购房者。首先，国家应收缴的税款被偷逃。上述例子中，开发商将购房者实际购买的面积浓缩成1/3，逃脱了应纳的国家税收。另外，国有土地出让金是按照建筑容积率递增收取的，开发商将2/3的建筑面积隐瞒不报，其目的就是为降低容积率，逃避巨额土地出让金的追缴。
其次，购房者本应享受的合法权益被损害。从法律上讲，只有进行登记的房产面积，才受法律保护。开发商以景观阳台的形式赠送面积，这种赠送并无法律效力，这类房屋在二次买卖中风险重重，遇到房屋征收时，业主权益势必严重受损。
此举获利的当然是开发商，假如同样规划建筑面积10万平米，正常开发商按每平米2万元，可销售20亿元；赵晋通过上述方式，变相提高容积率，能把房子建到20万平米或更多，即使以每平米1.3万元算，可销售26亿元，实为暴利。
当然，开发商不可能独享暴利，要实现其浓缩房产证面积、掩盖超容积率的目的，必须过规划、房管及国土部门三道关。在商品房交付前必须进行规划验收，如果没有规划局的配合，开发商的上述房子不可能通过规划验收。此外，房管和国土部门，如果稍微把关严一点，对套内面积严重背离常理的商品房，不进行合同备案和办证，开发商的路子也会被切断。
君临天下是2010年8月底交房的，从外面看，该大厦裙楼高四层，立面为敞开式的全透明玻璃幕墙，造型为扬帆起航之舟；主楼高230米，以天津第一高度、新地标之势，矗立于海河北岸，颇有君临天下、舍我其谁的气概。
“买了这房子，你就不是人，是神了”。业主张亮（化名）和邻居们是在欢天喜地中开始收房的，其耳边似乎还回响着当初售楼小姐的恭维声。但入住之后，张亮逐渐意识到，他不是变成了神仙的神，“而是神经病的神”。
业主们很快发现问题多多。先是大厦盖了夹层：9楼之上有9B，25楼之上有25B，33楼之上有33B……规划中的40层楼建成了51层；规划的482个停车位，实际只有280个，负一层的120个车位被改成商铺出售了。规划中的4个出入口，两个被改成商铺出租出售，一个改为君悦酒店的大堂。高层建筑都设有避难层，君临大厦的9B、25B是避难层，但开发商在避难层的四个角也盖房子出售。
与黄家花园地块一样，该地块的规划同样经过了变更。天津土地交易中心2011年3月24日发布补充公告称，天津星际地产2006年取得该地块使用权，土地出让面积为10340平米，地上总建筑面积85000平米；经有关部门批准，其地上建筑面积调整为90032.07平米，地下商业建筑面积为2915.41平米。这一“调整”，建筑面积整整多出近8000平米。
开发商违约的，还有主楼外面的裙楼建设。在君临大厦的销售中，海河景观是重要卖点。业主黄浩（化名）在2009年10月看中了一套朝南的房子。买房时，售楼员说能看见海河，黄浩实地观察后，发现确实能看见海河，又问售楼员交房时是否如此。售楼员说市政府要求，为了海河景观，在楼的前方有几颗罗马柱子，但不影响看海河。
但2010年8月28日验房时，黄浩却发现，所买房子的外面又盖了三层裙楼，裙楼的上面才是罗马柱子，原本能看到的海河已被完全挡住。
黄浩的遭遇并非孤例，二三四楼相关业主，为此多次去找开发商，并在售楼处和大厦四周挂起标语抗议。2011年12月，一些业主委托律师状告开发商擅自变更房屋设计及环境布局，在业主窗外竖起巨型围墙和柱子，严重影响观瞻窗外海河和周边景观，致使该房屋价值减损。
修改规划之外，业主们房产证被浓缩的隐患也渐渐显现出来。业主张亮在入住一年之后，2011年拿到了房产证，发现上面的面积只有41.17平方米。当初他买房子时，开发商是按户型卖的，售楼员承诺他的房子有90多平方米。
另一位业主告诉财新记者，他家两层房子的实际面积是137平方米，合同上是46平方米，房产证上是50平方米。而15楼有一家，房产证上只有5平方米。
上述情况直接导致业主们的交费乱套了。交物业费时，有按证上面积交的，有按采暖实际面积交的。证上面积80平米的平房，交费时就比实际面积137平米的复式房子还要多。
业主们还发现，这个大楼里只有500多户大户型通了煤气，1700多户没有煤气。有的房子，合同上说是有煤气，交房时却没有。
6、天津高盛地产的魄力
在赵晋登陆天津的早期，天津泰瑞地产和天津星际地产为其急先锋，四面出击，立下汗马功劳。
2006年12月底，天津泰瑞地产在山东济南发力，以2.77亿元拿下文化东路以南艺术学院地块；2007年8月，天津泰瑞地产成立上海第一分公司，进军上海滩；2008年11月，天津星际地产出资2.496亿元，拿下天津河西区广东路与绍兴道交口的津西广（挂）2008-209地块，出让面积17195平米，建筑面积41200平米；2009年12月，天津星际地产出资4.92亿元，拿下河北区中山路与昆纬路交口的津北中（挂）2009-176地块，出让面积19305.5平米，建筑面积98000平米。
天津星际地产还远征河北。2011年5月，该公司出资15463万元拿下唐山市北新西道南侧、学院路西侧一块地，总面积14278平米，规划建筑面积29.98万平方米，拟建造260米高的商业地产和公寓项目。同年9月，又出资10152万元拿下凤凰新城友谊路西侧、朝阳道南侧的地块，拟建300米高的商业、公寓。
此后，泰瑞、星际两大公司逐渐淡出江湖，天津高盛房地产开发有限公司（以下简称天津高盛地产）浮出水面，成为赵晋在天津的母公司。
早在2006年6月，一家注册于英属维尔京群岛、香港籍张剀为法人代表的万豪房地产销售·策划代理有限公司，出资275万美元，在天津港保税区成立天津世昌房地产开发有限公司，赵晋为法人。8月24日，公司名字变更为天津高盛地产。
成立之初，天津高盛地产并未直接开发楼盘，而是在幕后进行土地运作。2006年8月29日，该公司取得天津河东区七纬路东侧的津东七（挂）2006-033号地块，土地出让面积为12854平米，地上建筑面积63512平米；2009年8月14日，该公司出资36940万元，拿下河东区十二经路与海河东路交口的津东海（挂）2009-086地块，出让面积18653.1平米，为商业金融业用地，使用年限40年，建筑面积68800平米；2011年10月13日，该公司出资20300万元，拿下河东区新开路与华昌道交口的津东新（挂）2011-205号地块，面积4151.6平米。
在拿地的同时，赵晋以天津高盛地产等公司为母公司，组建天津泰基房地产开发有限公司（下称天津泰基地产）、天津汇景房地产开发有限公司（以下简称天津汇景地产）、天津盛昌房地产开发有限公司、天津荣宝房地产开发有限公司、天津润津置业有限公司等，以分别开发上述地块。
在房产领域，开发商为开发不同地块成立不同的公司，似是常态。赵晋把这种惯例发展到了极致。多年后，业主们反思赵晋的此类战术：当天津泰瑞地产开发的诚基中心臭了之后，他以天津星际地产开发君临天下；当君临天下麻烦一堆之后，他又启用天津高盛地产开发新楼盘。他以不同面目出现在天津，打一枪换一个公司，他的楼盘开盘时，如果在介绍有利的一面时，售楼员就会说和其他楼盘是一家；如果出现负面消息，也很容易和问题楼盘切割；一旦楼盘交房，赵晋一般会快速注销公司，即使该公司在诉讼期间，他也能从容注销，让业主有问题找不着主儿，而把一堆麻烦留给业主和地方政府。
此外，赵晋还先后成立天津永亨建筑设计有限公司、天津盛康投资咨询有限公司、天津康定建筑安装工程有限公司、天津丽晶酒店管理有限公司、天津永嘉百货市场管理有限公司、天津永泰君悦管理有限公司、天津卓越文华酒店管理有限公司等，作为楼盘开发的配套公司。
赵晋在津门悄然打造着他的房产帝国。
7?“装饰性阳台”奥秘
天津高盛地产是在2009年才开始直接开发楼盘的。
这是一块2006年8月就拿到的土地，位于河东区十经路与七纬路交口，出让面积为12854平米，为住宅及商业金融用地，建筑面积63512平米。
该地块同样存在着补充公告。2010年5月4日，在地块开工期间，天津土地交易中心公告称，经有关部门批准，增加该地块地下商业建筑面积12700平米，土地出让期为40年。
2010年，大楼尚未封顶，这个叫卓越浅水湾的楼盘就开盘了。彼时中国的房产市场已经走出了2008年的短暂低迷，房价屡攀新高。尽管诚基中心和君临天下在天津坊间已多遭非议，有业主在网上发帖，“诚基中心基不诚，君临天下临危机。业主联手齐维权，泰瑞坑人难上难”，但卓越浅水湾优越的地理位置，每平米1.3万多元的超低均价，还是让一些市民趋之若鹜。
从卓越浅水湾开始，赵晋在更改容积率上的路上越走越远。
2010年12月，多名卓越浅水湾业主向媒体反映，该楼所有户型的房本面积都远低于实际面积。如A户型的三室两厅建筑面积是118平方米，但除了客厅和卫生间在房本上有体现外，其他三个卧室均称为“装饰性阳台”，房本上的面积不到27平方米。
中国质检网记者在售楼处暗访时，曾见识过该楼盘的操作方式。售楼员拿来了三种户型的房型图，简单介绍后便用笔将房本上没有体现出的面积划掉，所有的卧室都被划掉了，并称这些卧室都上报成“装饰性阳台”，所以不能在房本上体现。售楼员还称该项目是天津市景观项目，允许这么做。
中国质检网援引房地产打假人士的意见称，国家规定高层住宅容积率不应超过5，若按实际面积计算，该楼盘容积率将超过10。开发商就把所有住宅全按小面积申报，其余面积变成“装饰性阳台”，不计入建筑面积。这样做不仅降低了容积率，同时还降低了总可售面积数值，提高了销售成本，减少了应交税额以及配套费用。
关于装饰性阳台，2009年，天津市曾出台《天津市建筑飘窗、设备平台及阳台建筑面积规划计算规则》，称装饰性阳台是指设置在建筑外墙外，为美化建筑造型而与建筑内部空间及阳台不相连通，采用阳台形式的装饰性构件。自外墙墙体外边线至装饰性阳台外边线距离应小于或者等于0.6米。装饰性阳台符合以上条件的，不计算建筑面积；否则，按水平投影面积的1/2计算建筑面积并计入容积率指标。
赵晋从2007年君临天下时，就已试用了“装饰性阳台”。在他的观念里，装饰台阳台是另外一种概念。知情者称，赵晋智商极高，想法匪夷所思，“什么是阳台？在一般设计理念里，阳台最大也就一米五宽，一米八就算大的，这是固定思维，可在赵晋眼里就不是这样，既然没有规定阳台有多大，我就可以无限扩大。一个房间纵深是5米，那我做成一米是卧室，4米都是阳台，你不能说不合法，这叫装饰性阳台。到后来，他直接就在地上划个线，一边是卧室，另一边就是装饰性阳台”。
2012年6月1日，业主田鹿在人民网地方领导留言板上，控诉卓越浅水湾以上述方式欺诈售房。7月27日，天津市规划局回复称，经河东区规划分局复核，卓越大厦地上建设规模容积率符合土地出让合同约定。关于装饰性阳台，《天津市建筑飘窗、设备平台及阳台建筑面积规划计算规则》于2009年9月11日施行，该项目建筑设计方案在此规则施行前已审定，审批符合当时的有关规定。但此后，装饰性阳台并未淡出赵晋的新楼盘。
赵晋中后期开发的楼盘中，多为城市综合体项目，商住两住，甚至融商业、酒店、公寓、豪宅为一体，卓越浅水湾的酒店式公寓是其中一种。
赵晋出售酒店式公寓，与众不同，其房价比普通住宅高40%，房子售出后，由其控制的酒店管理公司租赁，在大楼内开酒店，向业主返租6年，每年按照房价的8%返利。这种新颖的售楼方式，吸引了不少市民。
2011年，业主青青（化名）在卓越浅水湾买了一套酒店式公寓。选房时，售楼员说，大楼里25层以下是酒店式公寓，40年产权；25层以上是住宅，70年产权。售楼员带她看了同一楼层相邻的两间，说这两间都可以买，你先选了哪间，它就是酒店式公寓，另一间就是住宅。这让青青很是奇怪：他们房子的产权，似乎随时在更改中，想给谁几十年产权就是几十年。
2013年5月，卓越浅水湾交房，业主们才发现，大楼里从3层到25层的368户房子中，混杂着132户酒店式公寓。“同样的房型，我家是156万元，40年产权，是酒店式公寓；对门就是105万元，70年产权，是住宅。”一位业主称。
青青买的酒店式公寓，实际面积是120多平米，后来发现房本上只有30多平米，土地用途上写着餐饮、住宿用地。
不仅如此，业主们还发现，合同上所说的49层大楼，实际盖到了52层。
8?水岸与名门再出新招
他怎么还不出事呢？天津一位房产界人士数年来一直关注赵晋的发展，看他起高楼，看他热销楼盘，看他民怨沸腾。但赵晋的事业仍如日中天。报纸上，卓越浅水湾的广告像风刮过之后，水岸银座和名门广场的广告又是满天飞。
“赵晋的房产广告别具一格。不像别的房产广告，把画面搞得美轮美奂，他是直接印上房子户型，标明价格从多少万降到多少万，散发着赤裸裸的诱惑力。”这位人士称。
坐落于河东区十二经路与海河东路交口的水岸银座，于2011年12月开盘。该地块是在2009年8月由天津高盛地产出资36940万元拿下的，出让面积18653.1平米，为商业金融用地，使用年限40年，地上建筑总面积为68800平米。2010年6月12日，天津土地交易中心公告称，经有关部门批准，增加该地块地下商业建筑面积10126.84平米。
与诚基中心一样，该地块位置同样金贵，地处海河之边大光明桥畔，与天津CBD核心的小白楼商业区隔河相望，距万达商业区、意式风情街等天津地标式区域均在咫尺之间。
按照规划，赵晋的天津高盛地产将在这里建三栋高级公寓，一、二栋为31层，高100米，三栋为35层，高169米，将成为天津CBD核心的新标志建筑。
开盘之初，水岸银座的户型图在网上流传出来，一层居然有70户——这是比诚基中心的房子还要密集的户型。
长期关注天津地产市场的专业人士王博士看到户型图后，第一感觉是不对劲：“一层有这么多户，必然有不少房间是暗房，必然带来管理混乱，今后会不会在海河边上造成一道暗伤呢？”
专业人士的担忧，其他业主前车之鉴的警告，并未影响水岸银座的热销。海河边上，水岸银座在一天天长高，远远望去，一排排窗口，密密麻麻，像蜂窝一样。规划局审批的是160多米，水岸银座长到了180多米，还在长……
一年后，2012年11月，赵晋旗下的另一楼盘名门广场开盘。名门广场位于河西区广东路与绍兴道交口。2008年11月，由天津星际地产出资24960万元拿下地块，出让面积17195平米，规划建筑面积41200平米，为居住型公寓，使用年限70年，由天津汇景地产负责开发。
这同样是块黄金宝地，南临人民公园，可坐享公园自然景观；距小白楼、海信商圈不远，具备商业价值；毗邻五大道历史风情区，周边大中小学校环绕，又属文化中心板块，升值潜力巨大。
在“70年大产权，落户河西”的口号中，在周边房子每平米卖到2万元以上，名门广场打出“精致豪宅”的旗号，均价只要1.3万元，“一居室25万元起；二居室78万元起；三居室99万元起”。楼盘一经推出，市民趋之若鹜。
在水岸和名门时代，赵晋开发中小户型的战略，已步入新境界。
2013年前后，国内各地对于房地产的调控进一步强化，“新国五条”细则密集出台，各大城市将新建商品房价格涨幅与人均可支配收入增度相挂钩。在天津，还提出了“继续加大保障性住房建设比重，增加中小户型、中低价位普通商品住房供应”，作为2013年新建商品住房价格控制的目标。
天津高盛地产主推中小户型，在一定程度上是顺应时代潮流。2013年1月，由北方网和星际传媒举办的2012天津领袖地产网络颁奖典礼上，赵晋的两个新楼盘都有斩获，水岸银座获最具升值回报楼盘奖，名门广场获最具收益价值楼盘奖。进入2013年，在天津楼盘成交套数排行榜上，赵晋的这两座楼盘继续领跑。赵晋的小户型牢牢抓住了普通市民的刚需——那是一个收入有限又想住房的群体，只要有房住，就不嫌小。
其时，赵晋在更改房本面积上的手法更加炉火纯青，也更加肆无忌惮。2013年3月12日，《中国产经新闻》记者暗访名门广场售楼部，问到房产证上的面积怎么写？售楼员说，房产证写1/3，其余2/3算赠送，赠送的是观景阳台不计入建筑面积；并称卖出的实际面积在图纸上用红线圈好，同时盖上开发商、房管局和规划局的公章，保证能住、能租，还能过户，享受蓝印户口和上学的政策。
对于开发商承诺的上述好处，曾有业主咨询了规划部门，对方称，名门广场用地是公建用地，可建宾馆、商用等公共设施建设，他们批的是居住式公寓，不是住宅。房管部门则称，该楼盘不能办蓝印户口，也不是学区房，遇拆迁则会损失巨大，买卖也会有问题。
水岸银座的业主同样是如此遭遇，一位业主这样描述其买房经历：当初买房时，对于购买面积几十平方米，产权证只写十几平方米的差异很不理解。售楼员“义正辞严”地讲，这是新生事物，天津刚开始实施，全国各地都有，这是向香港学习的，也是以后发展的趋势。一位业主说：“当我们看到开发商五证俱全时，才放心了。因为我们相信五证必须要经过政府职能机构认证审批层层把关的，为此我们的疑虑打消了，殊不知这是上当受骗的开始。”
9?赵晋的开发模式
多年后，一位深受赵晋之苦的业主还在感慨，赵晋很了不起，他从30岁来到天津，十年里资产高速增长，创造了地产史上一个奇迹。
在天津高盛地产的官网上，该公司自称在业界以商务开发闻名，在打造商业、酒店、国际公寓、豪宅、写字楼为一体的城市综合体项目方面术业有专攻，具有自身独到的眼光与优势，具备业内首屈一指的专业技术、项目运营的成功经验及最优化的管理模式及精英团队。
在上述介绍中，赵晋的开发区域，多在城市核心区域及卫星城区中心位置。事实确实如此。赵晋在天津拿地，从南京路到海河边，无一不是黄金地带。
一位长期关注赵晋房产的人士称，赵晋想拿地的时候，谁也拿不过他。除了关系深厚之外，赵晋拿地时，其气魄宏大，时有惊世骇俗之举，也让他人望而生畏。
赵晋旗下一位员工向财新记者透露，有一次，赵晋想拿一块地，起拍价是4000万，每轮加价也就是一两百万元，一般估计这块地一个亿也就差不多了。赵晋一直坐着不动，差不多的时候，他啪一下举牌，“1.5亿元”，其他人全都傻眼了。
多年观察赵晋的李明分析，开发商高价拿地，政府尤其喜欢，因为地方政府长期依赖土地财政，靠卖地赚钱，一个地段出现了高价，会带动其他地段。开发商如果能托这个价，地方政府何乐而不为呢？
拿到地后，赵晋就开始在容积率上做文章。每个做房产的人都知道，建筑和配套成本，在房价中是固定的。要赚钱，容积率是第一位。而更改容积率是很难的。招拍挂非常严格，从买地开始，容积率是固定的。赵晋的本事就在于，其他人做不到的更改容积率，他能做到。
在诚基中心，赵晋采取了加层等方式；在君临天下，他设计出了夹层，把40层的楼实际盖成了51层，并让房本上的面积低于实际面积，以掩盖其容积率严重超标现象。而随着楼盘的开发，他更改容积率的手法，不断与时俱进。在卓越浅水湾项目上，赵晋借“装饰性阳台”隐瞒房间实际套内面积，已经到了令人瞠目的地步。
在开发小户型上，赵晋的团队也有专攻。他有自己的设计公司，挂靠在天津的大设计单位，亲自设计出了诚基中心的小户型。从大楼构造上看，那种细长条的，几十户共用一个过道，像酒店一样的构造，能保证出房率高，利润最大化。
这种小户型在面积上也很讲究，诚基中心三号楼的房子多为58平米，一、二号楼多为89平米。根据中国的房产政策，单套建筑面积在60平米左右的，为经济适用房；90平米，为限价房的标准，国家在税收、配套等方面有政策扶持。2006年6月，建设部等多部门出台“90/70”调控政策，规定凡新开工的商品房建设，90平米以下住房面积所占比重，必须达到建设总面积的70%以上。
“感觉赵晋总是在打擦边球。”业主郭莉有时感慨，“我觉得他有一个专业法律团队，把中国的法律、法规、政策都吃透了。”
上述运作，可确保赵晋获取高额利润，即使高价拿地，他的楼盘也能卖出低价，房子一开盘，全部卖空，周转特别快，周边楼盘根本无法与之抗衡。
李明分析称，赵晋从上述开发模式中看到了甜头，吃准了相关部门的心理：他先是高价拿地，让政府高兴；让老百姓用低价，在黄金地段买到了房子；他则靠更改容积率，赚取“空钱”。这似乎是一个皆大欢喜的多赢局面。
但皆大欢喜是一时的。“这种高容积率的房子，必将带来物业管理难度、消防隐患等，最终导致房子贬值。”一位业内人士认为，赵晋和一般开发商的区别，就在于他脚踏市场行情，一只手伸向政府，在政府的法律和规则之下，大打擦边球，甚至直接违背，其目标是为了利润；他另外一只手伸向了老百姓，利用老百姓对文本合同的不了解，大力地公示政府的五证、两表、一书，利用老百姓对政府的信任，卖出严重违规的房子，实际上是让政府和百姓共同为他的违规买单。
其通过改变规划、扩大容积率、擅自加高楼层和加盖夹层、隐瞒实际房屋面积等方式，偷逃巨额土地出让金、市政配套费、土地增值税等税费，具体数字可能远超想象。尽管醒悟后的业主一再向天津市建委、房管、规划等部门举报，相关问题始终没有得到重视和纠正。
可怕的是，赵晋在天津不断复制上述模式，像瘟疫一样，从一个地方蔓延到另一个地方。
10?赵晋的“小伙伴们”
在天津的日子，赵晋不是一个人在战斗。他把南京的小伙伴们带来了。在外人看来，这是一个有些神秘的团队。
很少有人见过赵晋，他基本不在公开场所露面。天津的房产圈子，也只是闻其名不见其人，只有他的楼盘在江湖上流传。
诚基中心一位业主有幸见过赵晋本尊，印象中，他不高不矮，挺胖，大眼，有点卷发，很有派头，有点领导人的风范，从不跟业主直接发生冲突。君临天下的一位业主曾见过他接待大客户：中等个头，外表白净，说话通情达理，“不是那种野蛮人”。
赵晋之外，天津高盛地产也是一个神秘的公司。即使在其攻城略地，所建楼盘名震津门时，公众仍对其所知甚少，不知其所在何处。
如大隐隐于市，该公司的工程及对外部门，设在诚基中心的丽晶酒店4楼，财务部门等设在几十米外世贸广场B座17楼。在员工的印象中，这是一个奇怪的公司，“一年365天，天天上班9点，下班没点，节假日均不放假，请假一概不准，只许倒休。公司高管习惯于晚上上班，有如老一代领导的遗风”。
在天津高盛地产的自我期许中，这是一家默默耕耘的低调企业，拥有一支年轻的专业化团队，员工上千人，同时还拥有设计院，设计师近百名，建筑、结构、水电暖等各类专业工程师近200名。而据知情者称，赵晋在天津也就四百多人，所谓千人，包括赵晋在济南、南京等地其他公司的员工。
赵晋之所以能在天津呼风唤雨，依凭的依然是一个以父荫开道的政商关系网。知情者称，赵晋津门创业，赵少麟也不时从南京或者北京过来“指导工作”。
知情者称，赵晋在天津的关系，根深叶茂，背景深厚，连天津市政协副主席、公安局长武长顺都要着意结纳他。
武长顺1970年从警，22年后成为天津市公安局副局长兼公安交通管理局局长，2003-2014年担任天津市公安局长，2011年当选天津市政协副主席。44年经营，武氏在天津政法系统根深蒂固，其商业帝国覆盖公安交管、地产、高速公路、石化等领域。
在赵系楼盘发生业主维权，或与其他公司诉讼时，隐约可见武长顺的影子。武长顺后来涉嫌严重违纪违法被双开时，中纪委披露的罪名中，包括利用职务上的便利，在干部选拔任用、企业经营等方面为他人谋取利益，收受巨额贿赂，向他人行贿等。
在中层官员层面，知情者称，赵晋与天津市委委员、天津市城乡规划建设交通工委原书记沈东海关系密切。1951年出生的沈东海，1984年进入天津市委城乡建设工作部工作，1999-2014年担任了长达15年的天津市委城建工委（先后更名为天津市委规划建设工委和天津市委城乡规划建设交通工委）书记。赵晋在天津从拿地到更改容积率皆一帆风顺，与之不无关系。2014年10月，中纪委网站曾通报称，天津市城市建设领域腐败问题突出。2014年12月，沈东海因涉嫌严重违纪，接受组织调查。
知情者称，父荫之外，赵晋搞关系也非常有水平。他在天津的公司里，养着各路人才，如孟尝君之养士。所养之人，有的可勾连上层路线；有的打通地方政府关窍；也不乏鸡鸣狗盗的非常之才。
赵晋对有用的人，舍得花成本。天津河北区建委一位前副主任，就被赵晋罗致，担任天津高盛地产副董事长。
在丽晶酒店4楼，业主们有时能看到，赵晋的人马进进出出，其中有些是老同志，五六十岁左右，那是天津高盛地产法务部的员工，多是从政府退休后，被高薪聘请而来。法务部部长姓柳，退休前在天津市信访局工作。在知情者印象中，老太太工作经验特别丰富，能力超强，赵晋楼盘的所有纠纷，都由她牵头处理。
“赵晋厉害在哪里呢？他找的人，都是干了一辈子政府工作，一辈子跟人民群众玩心眼子的人，跟他们打交道，一不留神就掉他沟里去了。赵晋还专爱告别人，他有法务部，一般人都弄不了他。”知情者说。
法务部之外，天津高盛地产还设有秩维部，取秩序维护之意，网罗的多为特殊人才，那是一些脖戴金链子、胳膊画龙的人。
这只是赵晋关系网的冰山之一角。天津拱卫京师，京城既有老爷子坐镇，赵晋也时常坐着京牌豪车，往来两地，勾连官场。知情者称，赵晋在北京建有高级会所，如赖昌星之红楼，招待各路显达，并录像作为要挟证据。
天津诚基中心业主郭莉，在维权之时，时常听天津高盛地产的总经理温峰提到老板赵晋认识很多大人物，总有些将信将疑，直到有一次郭莉去找赵晋论理时，看到天津市某局长赶过来送古画，不禁大吃一惊：市政府的人怎么还要给他上贡？
11、逆我者获刑
郭莉的惊讶并不止于此。赵晋依凭权势给她和业主们，以及这个城市带来的影响，更让人匪夷所思。
北大法律系毕业的郭莉，自2008年3月入住诚基中心后，先是参与了雨水管问题的赔偿解决，后来为了丽晶酒店门前存车场的占地问题与开发商抗争，老公的眼睛被保安打伤，诉至法院只获赔3000元。她11岁的儿子，在一天早晨坐电梯去上学时，却随电梯坠入负几层，直到下午才被发现。郭莉怀疑是开发商在报复。
此后，郭莉参与起诉开发商私盖加层侵权，并发起并参与业主委员会的筹建，业委会正式成立时，她成为35个海选成员之一。
2010年3月，加层维权案在和平区法院立案。但此后，郭莉发现和平区检察院到她工作的中国银行，去调查其工资收入。她听说，开发商到检察院检举她有多套房子，资金来历不明。
一波未平，又起一波。2010年6月一天早晨，郭莉的丈夫在外遛导盲犬时，被数名警察拦住。警察称养犬证上的狗种与实际不符，用铁套管套住狗脖，要强行带走。看到狗被勒得眼睛都突出了，郭莉与警察争抢绳索，情急中咬了他的手。
其后，郭莉被带至派出所。派出所从中调解，让郭莉出两万元，给受伤警察赔礼道歉。下午4点，还在调解时，郭莉看见一名便装女子带人进了派出所，把装狗的皮卡开走了。后来，她才知道，来人是和平区治安科科长、天津市公安局长武长顺的外甥女。
郭莉随即打电话，向天津市公安局督察反映情况。督察把电话打到派出所，郭莉听到派出所所长对督察说：你不要说了，这个事情是武局定的。当晚，郭莉被刑拘，罪名为“涉嫌妨害公务罪”，之后两次取保候审。
其间，郭莉在和平区房管局物业办的压力下，放弃了业委会委员的资格，但仍以业主的身份继续维权。加层维权案在2010年9月13日开庭后，再无动静。一年后，参与诉讼的业主在拿到少许安抚费后，大多撤诉。只有郭莉还在坚持。
2011年9月，和平区法院的法官把尚在取保候审的郭莉叫去，说加层维权的案子要驳回，诉讼主体不成立了，开发商的公司注销了。郭莉说怎么会注销，我们天天在楼里进进出出，看见那些人都还在。
法官递过来一份报纸。郭莉看了才明白。2011年5月3日，天津泰瑞地产申请注销，称公司的项目诚基中心于2007年交付，无任何产权纠纷及遗留问题。公司没有新开发项目，无债权债务事宜，现经股东同意进入清算程序。5月11日，天津泰瑞地产在《天津日报》刊登注销公告。6月24日，向天津市工商局提出注销申请。
而郭莉是在2010年3月起诉开发商的。一个公司要注销时，不能有债权债务，不能有纠纷。它是怎么注销的呢？郭莉想不明白。这时，诚基中心的商铺业主也准备起诉天津泰瑞地产，但法院已不给立案。
给外资企业注销，有很严格的手续。郭莉到处去查资料，去找和平区商委，有人告诉她，有一个领导签字，才给天津泰瑞地产注销的。
郭莉又查到，2011年5月12日，天津泰瑞地产与天津盛康投资咨询有限公司（以下简称天津盛康投资）签署托管协议，鉴于泰瑞公司将要进行注销，尚有债权、债务未处理完，对未清理完的款项委托天津盛康投资代为接管，有关人事、劳资、行政、工程档案全部交由盛康公司代管。
既然天津泰瑞地产把债权债务转移到天津盛康投资，那它应承担赔偿责任。郭莉追加起诉了天津盛康投资。此后，法院称联系不上该公司。郭莉又去市工商局调取其工商资料，提供给法院。法院说查无此公司。
在郭莉对天津泰瑞地产穷追不舍之时，她涉及的刑事案件，已由天津一中院指定红桥区法院审理。2011年9月27日开庭时，郭莉发现讯问笔录中，好多话自己没说过，签名也不是自己的。在一份笔录中，办案警察居然于同一时间，在两个地方分别讯问郭莉夫妇。
在郭莉的要求下，法院委托鉴定机构对相关字迹进行鉴定，结果证明并非郭莉的字迹。鉴定报告出来后，法官把郭莉叫到小屋里做工作。在郭莉记忆中，法官当时急得要命，一再求她，让她认妨碍公务罪，判个缓刑。郭莉没有答应。
与此同时，郭莉在诚基中心的家也遭袭击。从2011年10月9日起，一连四五夜，从晚上11点起，她家就有人用刀砸门，用脚踹门，用粪便泼门，用铁丝加502胶堵死大门钥匙孔。郭莉从门禁里认出了是开发商的人，当即报警，并提供了作案人的照片和住址，但警方并未处理。
10月底，郭莉看见赵晋的奔驰停在诚基中心楼下，就跑去找其论理。这是郭莉唯一一次见到赵晋。赵晋穿着蓝色T恤，大肚子鼓鼓的，说话时两手一甩一甩。对于砸门问题，他先是否认，在郭莉拿出照片之后，他把公司的总经理温峰叫了过来说：温峰，咱不许有这种事情。温峰红着脸没说话。
赵晋提出，给郭莉一万元赔偿，让她撤诉。郭莉没有同意，她的诉讼标的是五万元。“赵晋走后，温峰对我说，‘你想要钱？我宁可花十倍的钱办你，也不给你一分钱。’”郭莉回忆道。温峰还扬言，“你不服，就让武局办你”。
2011年12月19日，郭莉在上班时，被法官的电话叫到了红桥区法院。下午3点，她被送进看守所。22日，她收到法院两天前下达的刑事判决书，因妨害公务罪判刑一年。后来，郭莉听说，武长顺以天津市政法委副书记的名义批示，称郭莉袭警，应严肃处理，判实刑。
同一天，和平区法院驳回了郭莉对天津泰瑞地产的起诉。法院民事裁定书称，诉争房屋系天津泰瑞地产开发，该公司已于2011年6月27日注销，在工商注销登记中声明：将未清理完毕的款项委托天津盛康投资代为接管，该行为未得到该公司的承诺和确认，天津盛康投资查无下落，原告所诉的被告主体不适格。
12、南京路上的“炮楼”
当郭莉单枪匹马维权时，诚基的业主们，已经觉得维权不重要了，他们遇到了新的麻烦，“没法活了”。
在天津人心目中，南京路、滨江道，相当于北京的王府井。坐落于此的诚基中心，银灰色的建筑拔地而起，巍峨大气，尽显高贵。
2008年，业主入住后，在对开发商私盖加层进行维权之余，也认同诚基中心的硬件：先进的门禁，铝包铜的暖气片，大理石铺地的走廊，漂亮极了的大堂。毕竟这是赵晋在天津的首个楼盘。
仅仅过了数年，这个黄金地带的楼，就成了臭名昭著之地。诚基中心一、二号楼32层，每层8梯38户；三号楼52层，每层16梯62户。三幢高层分布着5000多户人家。这些“鸽子笼”式的小户型，由于交通便利、租金便宜、管理松散，很快成了外来人员租房的首选。
在一位业主印象中，诚基中心自打一住人，就没消停过。装修完以后，就有了群租房、隔断房。群租房，是员工群居一屋，如集体宿舍。隔断房，是隔开小房间，对外出租。两室一厅可隔成5个小间，小隔断只能放下一张床，大隔断多放一个电脑桌，月租金从六七百元到千余元。一年左右，这里又有了日租房，秩序开始大乱。
业主们把日租房、群租房、隔断房称为三大房。与之一起出现的，还有大大小小的公司、家庭餐馆、汗蒸房、美容院、洗脚房、按摩房等，以及南腔北调的外来人员。
“三教九流，社会上有嘛，这里有嘛。”业主们向财新记者介绍，二号楼34楼的一个设备间，一度被人辟成“溜冰”（吸食冰毒）间，业主们在那里发现了冰壶。“三号楼更凶猛一点。时常打架，流氓和流氓打起来了，老百姓和流氓打起来了，太正常了。”
又不知从何时起，诚基中心成了远近闻名的“炮楼”、华北地区的小东莞。那些隔断房和群租房引来了小姐。“不出楼，就能把小姐找了。”2009年4月，和平公安分局在一号楼21层端掉了一个丝袜秀场，搜出大量壮阳药、护士服等，还有特殊器具为喜欢SM的客人服务。顾客来后，小姐们先穿上不同服装进行表演，再提供“冰火两重天”等服务。
业主介绍，日租房还成了一夜情的“圣地”。行人路过南京路，就有人给你发日租房的小广告。在日租房开房，不需要证件，其便利之处还引来了中学生——诚基中心周边有天津最好的中学。某年正月十五，业委会的人在一间日租房里，发现了俩小孩，“光腚屁溜在里头”。
诚基中心庞杂的人流，也给电梯等公用设施带来了灾难。三幢大楼，住着5400多户，一万五六千人。“三大房”一来，人口就无法估计了，电梯更难以承受。住在三号楼15层的业主李先生在附近上班，路上只有一刻钟，每天早晨7点刚过，他就要出门，因为等电梯下楼就得20分钟。
数百家隔断房、群租房、日租房，每天往来的外来人员，也使得大楼里火灾隐患不可避免，时有商户随意堵塞消防通道现象。数年来，诚基中心已发生火灾十几次，仅2013年2-4月就三次起火。
一位曾在楼里公司上班的职员以“脏乱差”概括诚基中心：都四十多层楼了，每天都能飞进几只大苍蝇，蚊子也很多；来往人员又杂又乱，经常有人丢失东西；楼里闷，根本不透气，电梯也是臭烘烘的，楼道内随处可见办证、按摩之类的小广告，住户门上的小广告更是密密麻麻，如上百只彩色苍蝇叮在上面。
“在诚基，活得人不人，鬼不鬼。”一位业委会成员对财新记者说，他们想拍一部电视剧，就叫《人鬼情未了》。
诚基中心的乱象在2014年5月甚至登上了《人民日报》。其现状让一位天津市民想到美国大片《执法官》，贫民挤在高层大厦里，人员混杂，环境恶劣，犯罪率居高不下，随着时间的推移，一个立体贫民区就诞生了。
诚基中心似乎正把这种担忧变成现实。越来越多的业主卖掉房子脱身，但卖房也不容易。当附近房产每平方米达到四五万元时，诚基中心的房子标价1万元每平方米居然都难卖出。
出租也不容易。业主李明在诚基中心购买的房子，建筑面积60多平方米，收拾得干干净净，家具全新。想卖卖不出去，只能出租，但人家租一年，就不会再租了，月租金一路下滑，从2400元变成2300元、2200元，再到1700元。到后来，李明灰心了，“只要是正当人家，别惹事，给多少钱都租”。
对于诚基中心之乱，不少业主认为物业管理是罪魁祸首，但物业也有苦衷，称诚基中心先天设计不足，三幢高层却拥有5000个居住单元，每栋楼都有数个出口，难以把控。
也有业主称，这种乱象不是物业的事，再来五个物业也不行。物业公司不是万能的，他们没有执法权。没有政府的支持，就控制不住局势。在他们看来，诚基中心是由政府职能部门审批的，先有审批后有建造，然后才产生“诚基难民”。政府把控不严谨、不周全，不能让业主埋单。
发现问题之初，业主们就以不同形式向政府反映问题。为了引起政府重视，一些业主甚至提出游行、拉横幅、到北京上访等。
“诚基中心日益成为和平区的麻烦，让政府头疼。”该区一名警察对财新记者说。
2013年，天津市和平区政府专门成立了诚基中心联合治理小组，和平区公安分局也在诚基中心成立了治安办。在一幢住宅大楼里设立治安办，在天津并不多见。
据《每日新报》报道，仅2014年10月，和平区对诚基中心进行的综合治理，当场查扣燃气瓶30余个，拆除违法隔断14个，清理影响防火安全的管道井1300个、设备层3个、地下设备间12间，关闭日租房、群租房、隔断房142间。
至2014年11月，据初步统计，诚基中心仍有188间隔断房，113间群租房，315间日租房。一位业委会成员说，这个数字还应该上浮15%-20%。
尽管多次治理，诚基的问题并未根治，而是像瘟疫一样，向周边扩散，已影响到附近高档楼盘的品质，甚至蔓延到了数公里外同样是小户型的君临天下。
“诚基中心一清理，很多租户就跑过来了。”君临天下的业主告诉财新记者。君临天下也开始乱了，业主们有时能在楼道里看到吸毒的工具，看到吸毒者吸完了在一楼的沙发上休息；大楼里也开始有了小姐，穿着吊带裙，在楼道里一溜飘香。
让君临天下业主窝心的还有电梯。君临天下每层40户，算上夹层有47层，共2525户，有12部电梯。还在2009年6月，十多个业主到11楼看房，下楼时被关在电梯里，里面的报警铃和对讲机形同虚设，大家踹门，嚎叫，均无人回应，十多人挤在狭小的空间里，温度至少有40多度，小孩都哭得快休克了，过了恐怖的50分钟，才来人修电梯。
之后君临天下的电梯时有故障。2013年8月2日，大厦的3号电梯在下行至十层时突然失控，迅速下坠，此后三次颠簸，最终停在大厦一层与负一层之间。14人被困受伤，其中8人伤势较重。
13、佛挡杀佛
在赵晋打造房产帝国的征途中，一路高歌猛进，如坦克滚滚向前，凡阻碍者必碾于车下，不仅视业主维权如螳臂当车，即使是其多年的合作伙伴也不放过，在执法部门表现出极强的影响力。
江苏宜兴太湖地基工程有限公司（以下简称宜兴地基），即为一例。2006年，经朋友介绍，赵晋把这家公司带到了天津，双方合作的第一个项目是君临天下。该项目时为天津最高建筑，施工难度大，很多企业不敢做，宜兴地基把这块骨头啃下来了，赵晋很满意。
此后，宜兴地基又在天津为赵晋做了恒盛SOHO、水岸银座、名门广场的地基工程，在南京合作了卓越名座。
但宜兴地基的项目经理老冯发现，在水岸银座的地基工程中，赵晋数次调整桩的基础，“我们有时干完活，退场了，过了一段时间，又叫我们去干”。业界认为，一座大楼要修改规划，盖加层，调整桩子是必须的。
至名门广场时，这种调整的次数更多了，开发商对已经过规划部门审定的施工图纸一再变更，反复让地基施工队进场补充施工。返场的次数多了，冯经理数次向开发商提出意见甚至抗议，如楼间距越来越窄，消防通道被挤占，会造成安全隐患等，双方关系开始僵硬。
“2013年结算工程款时，赵晋说工程有问题，拖着不肯给。”宜兴地基方面介绍，在双方合作的楼盘中，君临天下的工程款已结清，恒盛SOHO、水岸银座、名门广场的工程款，尚余3000多万元，要了两三年，赵晋都没给。
赵晋指责宜兴地基在施工中没有做一种叫后压浆的工艺。宜兴地基方面称，公司对后压浆工艺过程控制严格，从头到尾都是经理看着做的，并留有记录，但把资料拿过去，赵晋不承认，为此公司数次去天津协调，董事长和常务副总都去找赵晋谈过。“在做出让步之后，双方谈得蛮好的。但过了半小时又不行了。赵晋说，他得罪我了，就要搞死他。”
2013年底，天津公安机关成立专案组，对宜兴地基的冯经理立案侦查，并于2014年1月以涉嫌工程重大安全事故罪对其网上追逃。最早报道该案的《法治周末》曾援引北京律师张保军的言论称，根据法律规定，工程重大安全事故罪属结果犯，只有在因工程质量问题而发生重大安全事故时，才能追究直接责任人的刑责。而宜兴地基承接的工程，并未因质量问题造成人员伤亡和财产损失，却被立案侦查，这或许与赵晋背后的人为操作不无关系。
冯案并非唯一。知情者称，对于合作单位，赵晋往往利用施工企业可能存在的小过错，用其雄厚的背景实力查封对方账户、私下通过公安关系到处抓人，威胁施工企业赔偿几十倍到上百倍的费用，如果施工企业不肯就范，则扬言灭了该企业。
在天津的房产开发中，赵晋是神挡杀神，佛挡杀佛，翻手覆手，游走于法律和政策的边缘。前述开发诚基中心的天津泰瑞地产用注销公司来躲避责任和诉讼，开发君临天下的天津星际地产，则是“死了又活、活了又死”，工商机关对于公司注销的严格规定，在赵晋那里如同虚设。
2011年12月21日，君临天下的多位业主委托律师，状告天津星际地产擅自变更房屋设计及环境布局。他们当时并不知道，一个月前，天津星际地产已向工商局出具清算报告，递交公司注销登记申请书，并于2011年底完成注销。
然而，被注销的天津星际地产，之后仍在进行正常的经营活动。2012年2月，天津星际地产与深圳一家空调供应商签订抵房合同，约定天津星际地产代购水岸银座的商品房，用于冲抵空调采购款。
与此同时，天津星际地产还在告君临天下的电梯供应商。2012年6月，在天津星际地产注销半年之后，其股东山东诚基地产向天津市河北区工商分局出具情况说明，称天津星际地产的财产清算报告中未注明与电梯商相关诉讼未结案事项，至其注销后，法院相关诉讼无法解决，请求撤销注销。当日，河北区工商分局即撤销了天津星际地产的注销登记。
天津星际地产复活，和电梯商亚太区公司的诉讼继续进行，此后又起诉了该电梯商的中国区公司。2013年11月，天津一中院做出裁定，该电梯商的外籍高管被限制离境。这个裁定让电梯商难以接受，此前该公司已向法院提交了1800万元的冻结款，而其与天津星际地产的合同总额也只有1600万元。数月后，电梯商无奈接受了天津星际地产提出的赔偿要求。
但电梯商并不知道，天津星际地产其实此时已不复存在了。2013年10月，天津星际地产成立清算组进行清算。当年12月31日，经河北区工商分局审核批准，该公司注销。
前述在天津星际地产第一次注销后仍与其签订抵房合同的深圳空调供应商，因天津星际地产未履行给付商品房义务，于2013年八九月将其诉诸法庭。他们同样惊讶地发现，死而复生的天津星际地产，在起诉期间居然又一次注销了。
