}

金刻羽 西方严重误解中国,对华政策或适得其反

金刻羽:中国被西方严重误解,拜登对华政策或适得其反

FARAH NAYERI  2023年9月27日
 
经济学家金刻羽曾在美国接受教育,现为伦敦政治经济学院副教授。她的父亲金立群是总部位于北京的亚洲基础设施银行行长。
经济学家金刻羽曾在美国接受教育,现为伦敦政治经济学院副教授。她的父亲金立群是总部位于北京的亚洲基础设施银行行长。 
 
本文系雅典民主论坛与《纽约时报》合作的特别报道。
 
作为交换学生来到纽约时,金刻羽还是一名14岁的北京女学生。她住进一个美国寄宿家庭,就读于布朗克斯的私立高中霍勒斯曼。她被哈佛大学录取,在那里获得了经济学学位,包括博士学位,现在是伦敦政经学院的副教授。
 
40岁的金刻羽生活在伦敦和北京,浸淫于两种文化,现在她把自己的双重视角带到了讲座、演讲和写作里。《中国策略》(The New China Playbook)一书于今年5月出版。
 “如今,我童年时落后的祖国已成为世界第二大经济体,”她在序言中写到。“然而,世界上很多地方仍在问同样的问题,仍在将中国与那些前共产党国家的专制和压迫政权相比较。”
 
金刻羽的父亲曾任中国财政部副部长,现任总部位于北京的亚洲基础设施投资银行行长。她本周将在雅典民主论坛上发表演讲。在最近的一次电话采访中,她谈到了自己对中美关系现状的看法。虽然在一些人看来,她的回答可能对中国政府比较宽容,但她表示,她提供了一个不同的视角。
 
“我愿意在采访中谈论人们缄口不言之事,”她说。“我喜欢平衡一下对话,而不是人云亦云,来证明另一面的存在。”
 
访谈经过编辑和压缩。
 
你在书中写道,中国基本上被西方误解了。这是怎么回事?
 
中国是一个幅员辽阔、非常复杂,而且处于不断发展中的国家。中国创造了一种独特的政治集权模式,同时伴随一种很强的经济分权形式,这一点被严重误解了。
 
很长一段时间以来,西方一直把中国描绘成国家与私营部门的对立——对后者进行打压。事实上,中国政府需要整个私营部门的繁荣。为什么?因为它推动经济增长,提供了大部分就业机会,也是实现科技实力的关键所在,这是领导层的主要战略目标。
为什么美中关系目前如此令人担忧?
 
竞争加剧所致,同时也是文明的冲突:两个国家拥有不同的价值体系和潜在的不同世界观。由于缺乏有效的对话和沟通,大大加剧了紧张局势。两个国家倾向于各执一词,或者是各说各话,而不是互相交流。更好的沟通和更狭义的竞争政策将带来更好的结果。开展竞争性合作是最好的选择。
 
拜登总统是如何加剧紧张局势的?
 
拜登提出了对半导体的出口管制,因此美国公司不能向中国出口某些类型的芯片。有大量证据表明,这可能会适得其反。首先,这促使中国为大型科技公司的利益调动国家资源。阿里巴巴、腾讯和华为正联手克服美国对中国提出的技术挑战。它们以前不太可能成为合作伙伴——中国的竞争非常激烈。所以整个国家团结起来支持一个战略目标。我不确定这是不是美国的预期目标。
对于围绕台湾的地缘政治紧张和中国的好战姿态,你怎么看?
挑衅是双向的。说中国平白无故就好战起来是不对的。有大量证据表明,这种立场很大程度上也是对美国在该地区挑衅的回应。我认为两国需要缓和姿态,继续对话。
不要低估中国人民有多看重和平。他们经历过动荡时代,老一辈人对此的记忆是很清晰的。新一代人则是独生子女的一代。想象一下独生儿子的父母吧。他们是否愿意支持军事行动也是个问题。
西方社会以自由民主和法治为基础。在美国,前总统特朗普都得多次出庭接受起诉。这在中国是难以想像的。
中国人与权威的关系并没有得到很好地理解。这不仅是人民与国家之间的事,也是父母与子女、老师与学生之间的关系。在某种程度上,任何中国人都得在个人主义和服从权威之间找到平衡。这不是非黑即白的,而是一种灰色地带。
思想的活力不仅存在于自由民主国家。尽管一些政治敏感议题受到审查,但中国境内的信息流动其实非常自由。各个互联网平台上存在大量活跃的民间讨论。
但异见人士和活动人士在中国遭到监禁和虐待,维吾尔少数民族也受到迫害。你不觉得你对中国所作所为的评价有点过于温和吗?
我愿意在采访中谈论人们缄口不言之事。我喜欢平衡一下对话,而不是人云亦云,来证明另一面的存在。中国是个复杂的国家。有好的地方也有坏的地方,还有我们都必须了解的未来。我想呈现的是一幅现实图景。中国存在很多问题,任何社会都一样。
但世界其他社会并没有迫害维吾尔人那样的少数民族。
我认为这样的情况是不幸的,我不是这方面问题的专家。但据我所知,新疆的再教育营已经关闭。游客可以自行去看看。
我不是在为这样的事找借口。我只是从经济学家的角度看到了无数人的福祉和不断变化的环境。在某些领域有所改善,而在另外一些领域则有所倒退。
鉴于你的背景,你是否认为你的身份有助于弥合这两个世界超级大国之间的裂痕?
如今站中间立场可不是件易事,因为你会被两面夹攻。我个人更愿意抛开主观感情,关注事实、真相和数据,并希望在我认为存在盲点或误解的地方做出贡献。两国都太过意气用事,这无助于让世界变得更好。
中美之间的冲突会发展到什么程度?
我认为目前的状态是一种拉锯而非关系破裂。这更像是一场口水战,以及经济交往的整体缓慢下降,无论是在贸易还是相互投资方面。
我不知道这种状态是否会永久持续下去,因为中国是世界第二大经济体。如果中国的经济增长率每年超过美国1.5个百分点,虽然不多,但它也会将在10年左右的时间里成为世界第一经济体。美国企业将不得不扪心自问,是否真愿意放弃这个世界上最大的市场。而中国企业也必须问自己同样的问题。
 
One View: Behind China-U.S. Tensions Are Misunderstandings, Author Says

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/26/world/asia/china-us-tensions-keyu-jin-interview.html?_ga=2.184205411.452759687

In an interview, the economist Keyu Jin says much of the world is asking the wrong questions — and so is drawing outdated conclusions.

 

Keyu Jin stands before a dark gray background in a red dress.

The economist Keyu Jin was educated in the United States and is now an associate professor at the London School of Economics. Her father, Jin Liqun, heads the Beijing-based Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank.Credit...Edwin Koo for The New York Times

This article is from a special report on the Athens Democracy Forum in association with The New York Times.


Keyu Jin was a 14-year-old schoolgirl in Beijing when she transferred as an exchange student to New York. She moved in with an American host family, and attended Horace Mann, a private high school in the Bronx.

She was accepted to Harvard University, where she picked up economics degrees, including a Ph.D., and is now an associate professor at the London School of Economics.

Steeped in the two cultures — she divides her time between London and Beijing — Ms. Jin, 40, now brings her dual perspective to lectures, talks and in writing. A book, “The New China Playbook,” was published in May.

“Today the backward homeland of my childhood has become the world’s second-largest economy,” she writes in the introduction. “Yet so much of the world is still asking the same questions and still comparing China to former Communist countries with their autocratic and repressive regimes.”

 

Ms. Jin — whose father, a former Chinese vice finance minister, now heads the Beijing-based Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank — is a speaker at the Athens Democracy Forum this week. In a recent phone conversation, she discussed her views on the state of play between China and the United States.

While her answers might sound lenient to some toward China’s government, she said she was offering a different perspective.

“In interviews, I like to talk about what has not been said,” she said. “I like to balance out the conversation a little bit, rather than join the chorus — show that there’s also another side.”

The conversation has been edited and condensed.

You write in your book that China is basically misunderstood by the West. How so?

China is a very large and complex nation that is constantly evolving. What is very much misunderstood is that China has created a unique model of political centralization, coupled with a strong form of economic decentralization.

 

For a long time, the West has depicted China as the state versus the private sector — a suppression of the private. In fact, the Chinese government needs every bit of the private sector to be thriving. Why? Privately owned companies drive economic growth, they provide the lion’s share of employment, and they are the ones that will carry out the key strategic objective of achieving technological prowess, which is the leadership’s main goal.

 

Why are U.S.-China relations so fraught at the moment?

Rising competition and, at the same time, a clash of civilizations: two countries with different value systems and potentially different world views. The tension has been greatly exacerbated by a lack of effective dialogue and communication. The two countries tend to talk past each other, or talk at each other, not with each other. Better communication and more narrowly defined competitive policies would lead to a much better outcome. Competitive collaboration would be best.

How has President Joseph R. Biden contributed to the tension?

Biden came out with export controls on semiconductors, so U.S. companies can’t export certain kinds of chips to China. There’s plenty of evidence suggesting that this could possibly backfire. First of all, this is pushing China to mobilize national resources for the benefit of the big Chinese tech companies. Alibaba, Tencent and Huawei are all coming together to overcome the technological challenges that the U.S. has placed on China. They were unlikely partners before — China is hugely competitive. So you get a whole nation coming together to back a strategic objective. I’m not sure that was the U.S.’s intended goal.

What about the geopolitical tensions around Taiwan and China’s bellicose stance?

The provocations go both ways. It’s incorrect to say that China is being bellicose on its own. There’s plenty of evidence that much of it is also a response to U.S. provocations in the area. I think they need to take the temperature down and to continue the dialogue.

 

I wouldn’t underestimate how much peace matters to the Chinese people. They have gone through turbulent times, and it’s fresh in the memory of the older generation. The new generation is a one-child-only generation. Imagine the parents of only sons. Whether they are willing to support military action is also in question.

Western societies are predicated on liberal democracy and the rule of law. In the U.S., we’re seeing former President Donald Trump appear multiple times in court to be indicted. This would be unimaginable in China.

Our relationship with authority is something that is not well understood. This is not just between the people and the state: It’s also between parents and children, students and teachers. A Chinese person always has to make that balance between individualism and deference to authority, to a certain degree. It’s not black and white, it’s gray.

Dynamism in ideas doesn’t only exist in liberal democracies. Information within China, despite censorship of some politically sensitive issues, is actually very free-flowing. There is a huge and dynamic civil debate on internet platforms.

But dissidents and activists are being imprisoned and mistreated in China, and the Uyghur minority is being persecuted. Don’t you think you’re a little soft on China?

 

In interviews, I like to talk about what has not been said. I like to balance out the conversation a little bit, rather than join the chorus — show that there’s also another side. China is a complex country. There’s the good, the bad, and the future that we all have to learn about. I want to show a realistic picture. There are lots of problems with China, as with any society.

But other societies around the world don’t have a minority such as the Uyghurs that they’re persecuting.

I think these are all unfortunate circumstances, and I’m not an expert on these issues. But from what I’ve learned, the Xinjiang camps are closed. Visitors can go there to examine them.

I’m not trying to make any excuses for any of these things. I just see, from an economist’s point of view, the welfare of hundreds of millions of people, and the changing circumstances. There are improvements in certain areas and regressions in certain other areas.

Given your background, do you see it as your role to bridge the gap between the two world superpowers?

 

It’s very difficult at the moment to take up that position in the middle, because you’re attacked from both sides. I personally prefer to rise above the emotions and look at the facts, the truths, the data, and hopefully contribute where I think there are blind spots or gaps in understanding. Being too submerged in emotional attitudes, which is true of both countries, is not going to help make this world a better place.

How far is the conflict between China and the U.S. going to go?

I think it’s a tussle but not a break. It’s more a war of words, and a slow structural decline in economic engagement, whether in terms of trade or mutual investment.

I don’t know if this is going to be permanent, because China is the second-largest economy in the world. And if China outpaces the U.S. in growth rates by 1.5 percentage points a year, which is not a lot, it will become the largest economy in the world in a little over 10 years. American businesses will have to ask themselves whether they want to forsake the largest market in the world. And Chinese enterprises will have to ask themselves the same question.

A correction was made on 
Sept. 26, 2023

A caption in an earlier version of this article incorrectly identified the economist Keyu Jin as head of the Beijing-based Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. The investment bank is headed by Ms. Jin’s father, Jin Liqun, not by Ms. Jin.

How we handle corrections

Farah Nayeri writes on art and culture in Europe. She is the author of “Takedown: Art and Power in the Digital Age.” More about Farah Nayeri

登录后才可评论.