美军退役最高将领米利: 中国在台湾问题上是理性派
General Mark Milley: ‘Americans have kind of had it with wars’
加新网CACnews.ca| 2024-3-2 02:02 |来自: 瞰天下http://www.ftchinese.com/interactive/144555?exclusive
我们一坐下，美国美军参谋长联席会议(Joint Chiefs of Staff)刚退休的主席马克•米利(Mark Milley)便表示要“设定边界”——这是他女儿教给他的一个重要原则。我向他阐明，我们的讨论将围绕地缘政治和安全议题，但也提醒他，我们的午餐交谈可能会走向一些奇怪的方向。考虑到米利曾作为特朗普(Donald Trump)总统的首席军事顾问，他对非传统的举措并不陌生。
在他44年的军旅生涯中，这位四星级将军经历了不少海外作战。但他职业生涯中最为动荡的时期，是在华盛顿担任主席期间，特别是在特朗普总统任期的最后16个月。
米利谈到他在退休后仍时刻关注新闻动态。他还密切关注着国会山的听证会。他在国会有过一些痛苦的经历，包括共和党人指责军方“觉醒”，并质疑军方为什么要教授涉及种族特权的“批判种族理论”。“我读过毛泽东的书。我读过卡尔·马克思的著作。我读过列宁的书。这并不能让我成为共产主义者，”他打趣道，“对我们保卫的国家有一定的形势了解有什么问题吗？”
米利对技术感兴趣，在回答人工智能对军事的影响时，他认为人工智能与机器人技术相结合，将在未来军事冲突中发挥“根本性甚至可能是决定性的作用”。
中国在技术方面是否处于领先地位，或者这种担忧是否被夸大了？“目前他们还没有超越我们，”他说，“他们创建了一支非常强大的军队。他们还不能与美国平起平坐……但是这种担忧并不过分。”
米利说，避免与中国或俄罗斯等强国发生战争，关键是要拥有强大的军事力量，这关系着威慑力。过去几年，美国一直试图加强印太地区盟友的威慑力。
谈到中国，他表示，可以合理断定，威慑已经发挥作用，因为没有看到大陆对台发起攻击。
“他们使用现在的方法，部分原因是……因为中国认为公然的军事入侵代价会非常高。我想他们可能是对的。由于成本超过收益，中国无疑是一个理性行动者，他们选择现在不使用军事力量。但这并不意味着这种情况会永远持续下去。”
米利表示，中国领导人几年前曾向中国人民解放军提出要求，到2027年成为东亚最强大的军事力量，并解释说，这本质上“谈论的是台湾”。
“这个日期与中国人民解放军成立纪念日相关，因此具有象征意义。现在，他们能否实现这一目标还是一个悬而未决的问题。”米利说，并表示能力和意图是不同的。
对于一年前飞越北美的中国气球的情况。他说，美国政府得出的结论是，其情报收集工作“无关紧要”，但拒绝透露这是因为气球收集情报能力有限，还是因为美国干扰了其监视系统。
对于众议院共和党人反对提供更多资金帮助乌克兰，他表示，战争已经陷入“僵局”，美国和欧洲的支持至关重要。他警告说，如果没有这种支持，俄罗斯将随着时间的推移获得毁灭性的战略优势。“这将是悲剧性的，因为到那时乌克兰人将无法成功保卫自己。”
他认为美国人刚刚经历了二十年的阿富汗和伊拉克战争，已经受够了战争。但他强调，美国领导的基于规则的秩序和联盟有助于防止大国冲突。“这些规则对于使美国成为一个富有、强大、有能力的国家发挥了很大作用。”
对于加沙冲突，米利认为，以色列摧毁哈马斯在战术上做得“相当不错”，但他表示，由于失去国际支持，以色列正在付出巨大的战略成本。
e armed conflict between nations.
Is China leaping ahead in technology, or are such fears overblown? “They have not leapt ahead of us — yet,” he says. “They have created a very powerful military. They are not the equal yet of the United States . . . But, no it’s not overblown.”
I’ve read Mao. I’ve read Marx. I’ve read Lenin. That doesn’t make me a communist
The key to avoiding war with powers such as China or Russia, Milley says, is a strong military, which is crucial for deterrence. Washington has spent the past few years trying to boost deterrence with allies in the Indo-Pacific.
But how do you determine if deterrence is working? Milley starts by conceding that you “can’t prove a negative”.
I notice that he himself is engaging in deterrence: he has pushed away his half-eaten salad and is attacking the fries that came with his sandwich.
Returning to China, he says that while that country’s leaders have been “flexing their muscle” around Taiwan, “you can reasonably conclude deterrence has held because you haven’t seen a Chinese attack”.
“Part of the reason they’re using the methods they’re using . . . is because China thinks the cost of outright military aggression would be very high. My guess is they’re probably right. Because cost exceeds benefit, China arguably is a rational actor, they’ve chosen not to use military force yet. That doesn’t mean that’ll hold forever.”
I ask Milley about the timelines that several top US officers had issued publicly for possible Chinese action against Taiwan — including one that warned about 2027 — and why no officers have piped up over the past year. He says he did not tell the senior brass to quieten down and is not aware of defence secretary Lloyd Austin having done so.
Milley says Xi Jinping challenged the People’s Liberation Army a few years ago to be the most powerful military power in east Asia by 2027, explaining that what the Chinese president was essentially “talking about is Taiwan”.
“That date is tied to the anniversary of the founding of the PLA, so there’s symbolism there. Now, can they achieve that or not is an open question,” says Milley, adding that capability and intent are two separate things.
Shifting course, I ask about the suspected Chinese spy balloon that flew over North America a year ago. He says the US government concluded that its intelligence collection effort was “inconsequential” — but declines to say if that was because the balloon had limited capabilities or because the US jammed its surveillance systems.
We pivot to Ukraine and the opposition from Republicans in the House of Representatives to provide more money to help the country. He says the war has reached a “stalemate” and that US and European support is critical. Without that support, he warns, Russia will over time gain a strategic advantage that will be devastating. “It will be tragic, because at that point the Ukrainians will no longer be able to successfully defend themselves.”
He sees the debate in Congress as a test of whether you think US support for the rules-based international order is important. He sides with those who say that not backing Ukraine is “signalling a deathblow” to that order.
Does he think part of the problem is that Americans have just seen two decades of war — in Afghanistan and Iraq? “Absolutely. 100 per cent,” Milley says emphatically. “They’ve kind of had it with wars and forever wars.”
But he stresses that the US-led rules-based order with its network of alliances has helped prevent great power conflict. “Those rules have done a lot to make the United States a very rich, powerful, capable country.”
It will be tragic [if western support falls away], because at that point the Ukrainians will no longer be able to successfully defend themselves
Moving to the conflict in Gaza, does he agree with President Joe Biden that the Israeli military response has been “over the top”? He demurs, saying he will not weigh in on the president’s comment.
Israel responded to Hamas’s October 7 attack “in many ways like any nation-state would”, he says. But it faces a “very difficult military problem”, given how Hamas governs the densely populated Gaza Strip through “the barrel of a gun”. Milley argues that Israel has done “pretty well” tactically in destroying a lot of Hamas, but says it is paying an “enormous” strategic cost with the loss of international support.
I have finished my burger by now, but Milley is pacing himself. I abruptl
y interrupt him when I notice that an associate nearby has taken out a credit card. The FT has to pay, I say, before realising that she is paying her own bill. “Can someone pay for me?” Milley asks with a mischievous grin.
“I’ll pay for you,” I reassure him, thinking that I may not have clearly explained the FT’s “boundaries”.
We are close to finishing our lunch, and I realise that in addition to the bill (which the FT will pick up), I will be personally on the hook for $5 because he has failed to mention the Treaty of Westphalia.
Back on the conflict in Gaza, Milley says “Israel might be better served by shifting gears a little bit and doing an intelligence-driven special operations, precision-guided munitions type of approach.” He thinks they may be contemplating that but sees another problem. “The key is a political strategy, and I don’t see a political strategy.”
I quickly move to the proverbial elephant in the room — and increasingly in rooms around the world: Trump. Does Milley have a patriotic duty as a citizen to talk about things that happened when he worked with Trump? Milley is widely believed, for example, to have played a key role in making sure that Trump did not attack Iran in late 2020.
Milley used to carry a copy of the US constitution as a reminder that the military swears to defend the constitution — not the president. A reference to not taking an oath to a “wannabe dictator” in his retirement speech was widely interpreted as a jibe at Trump. But Milley pushes back at my line of questioning, saying that a retired general is never really a “private citizen”.
“I’ve fought for my freedom of speech. I’ve fought for the constitution,” he says. “There’s nothing technically illegal about speaking out . . . But I think it’s highly inappropriate for generals, retired or active, to opine on politics.”
Recommended
War in Ukraine
Ukraine war pushes US to review arms stockpiles (February 2023)
We have to wrap up. He has eaten only half of his sandwich. Is he taking his kids’ advice about his health? His associate signals that he has to go, but perhaps noticing that I have had a second glass, Milley makes clear he has a final mission to accomplish. “I want to finish my wine,” he declares.
Days later, I text him to check a detail. Milley can be very jocular, particularly when he is talking in private, but he never forgets the sombre side of his heritage. Now he reminds me that it is the 79th anniversary to the day that his father landed on the Japanese island of Iwo Jima for a battle that took the lives of 7,000 Marines.
“We should never forget and always honour their sacrifice,” he says.
Demetri Sevastopulo is the FT’s US-China correspondent
Find out about our latest stories first — follow @FTWeekend on Instagram and X, and subscribe to our podcast Life & Art wherever you listen
