|
The following article by former Chinese Vice Premier Qian Qichen, originally carried in International Studies, issued No.1, 2004 and reprinted on Page 3 of People's Daily January 19, is translated by PD Online.
In recent years, the hottest topic of discussion in the world is about US national security strategy adjustment. Various research reports and commentaries have been published one after another by research institutes and authoritative newspapers and magazines of various countries. Public opinions are divergent, this is because, stunned by the "September 11" attacks, the Americans have drastically adjusted their national security strategy and have thus caused changes in the international relations early in the new century.
Part I
After the "September 11" incident, the United States held that the primary target of its global strategy is no longer precaution against the potential strategic adversary, but is to eliminate the threat caused by terrorism in various parts of the globe by non-traditional means and weapons of mass destruction (WMD). To this end, the United States launched wars against Afghanistan and Iraq.
US security strategy adjustment has roughly undergone three stages:
The first stage began at about the time of the "September 11" event and ended in early 2002. Internally, the United States vigorously strengthened domestic defense; internationally, it made delineation on the anti-terrorism basis, it mobilized all its diplomatic resources to promote the establishment of an international counter-terrorism alliance and speedily destroyed Afghanistan Taliban regime and the headquarters of the Qaeda terrorist network.
At this stage, fight against terrorism became the common concern of the international community. The international community strongly condemned terrorist attacks, various countries expressed their sympathy with and support for the United States. America regarded other big countries as its cooperative partners who, in tern, actively carried out counter-terrorism cooperation with the United States, seizing the opportunity to improve ties with America. Russia made a strategic choice, agreed to US entry into the Central Asian region and provided important support for US military moves in Afghanistan.
The second stage extended from around January 29, 2002 when President Bush issued the State of the Union Message to US publication of the Counter-Terrorism Strategy in February 2003. The United States released a series of documents including the National Security Strategy and the Counter-Terrorism Strategy. In his State of the Union Message and his speech delivered at the West-Point Military Academy, President Bush set forth his important concepts of the "axis of evils" and "pre-emptive strike".
In the early period of this stage, relations among big powers continued to be improved, the heating up of the Russian-US ties was especially attractive. Actively seizing the opportunity of US attention to cooperation among big powers, Russia regarded stability and development of relations with the United States as the focus of its diplomacy, in coordination with US anti-terrorism actions, Russia made important compromise on such major issues as the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty" (ABM), the reduction of strategic weapons and NATO eastward expansion to the three Baltic nations. Bush visited Russia in May 2002, during which the United States and Russia declared an end to mutual hostility. Several days later, Russia signed with NATO the Rome Statement on the establishment of new-type cooperative relationship.
But after the United States put forward the "pre-emptive strike" strategy and directed the spearhead at Iraq, most countries expressed their worries, if the United States is allowed to implement the strategy of "pre-emptive strike" and one-sidedly used force to change the regime of another country, it would inevitably lead to the magnification of anti-terrorism struggle and would thus seriously threaten the current international system built on the basis of the "United Nations Charter". After nearly two months of arduous consultations, the UN Security Council in the end unanimously passed the 1441 Resolution on November 18, 2002, deciding to resume and strengthen the work of inspection of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, continuing its efforts to solve the Iraq issue by political and diplomatic means within the framework of the United Nations. The important significance of Resolution 1441 lies in ruling off the possibility of automatic authorization of the use of force, thus maintaining the initiative of the UN over the Iraq issue.
The third stage ranges from around March 2003 up to the present. In defiance of the strong opposition from the international community, main allies and domestic public opinion and under the circumstance of getting no UN Security Council's authorization for the use of force, the United States, together with Britain and a few other countries, launched war against Iraq. This was US first attempt in its implementation of the strategy of "pre-emptive strike".
After the outbreak of Iraq war, the coalition troops of the United States and Britain swiftly occupied all parts of Iraq. However, victory on the battlefield did not bring peace and stability to Iraq, nor security and glory to the United States. On the contrary, the war has created a greater number of more complicated problems.
The coalition troops of the United States and Britain have been occupying Iraq for over half a year, they have captured Saddam Hussein, but haven't found out WMD or conclusive evidence proving links with al-Qaeda terrorist network. The rationality and effectiveness of the "pre-emptive strike" strategy were put to extensive question. US troops in Iraq suffer casualty almost every day and are bogged down in the mire of guerrilla war.
In the face of internal and external pressure, the Bush administration is compelled to adjust its policy toward Iraq, it puts forward the plan of "letting Iraqis govern Iraq" and considers transferring more power to Iraq to quicken Iraq's constitutional and electoral process. On November 19, 2003, while making a speech in London, President Bush stressed that America would devote itself to the strengthening of the United Nations and other international organizations so as to commonly cope with threat to global security.
Part II
The adjustment of US national security strategy is closely associated with the rise of the new conservative trend of thought.
Viewed from US domestic politics, since the end of the 1980s, conservatism has gradually held a dominant position in the US political life. Although liberalism still has a fairly great influence on the US society, particularly in the academic circles, the conservative tendency keeps strengthening among the US public. It was against such background that the Republican Party in 1994 gained the control power in the Senate and the House of Representatives and won complete victory in the mid-term election in 2002. This was the first time that the political party under the current president won the control power simultaneously in the Senate and the House of Representatives during the mid-term election since the 1933 administration of President Franklin Roosevelt.
Viewed from the ideological foundation, drawing on the "natural justice" theory of the West's modern political philosophy, new conservatism holds that there exists a kind of absolute right and wrong standard that transcend history and society, denies the multi-variant concept of value, and firmly believes that the US concept of value is applicable to the globe as a whole. So the United States should make full use of the current unprecedented powerful strength to push through its concept of value all over the globe, so as to establish a world order under US power politic as the target.
Viewed from the religious background, Bush himself and the body of his administration, deeply influenced by its Christian new reformist idea, advocate and deeply believe that the United States shoulders the sacred mission of "leading the world", therefore they are prone to identify some policy proposals of new conservatism.
However, due to US predicament in Iraq and the continuous increase in casualties, new conservatism and the strategy of "pre-emptive strike" it holds in esteem are subject to increasing criticisms at home. Some people proposed that the strategy of "pre-emptive strike" should "disappear quietly " from the dictionary of US national security. Thirty-two renowned US international experts of political science jointly advertised in the New York Times, openly stating that they oppose the Bush administration's strategy of "pre-emptive strike", thinking that this strategy would possibly lead to the absolute insecurity of the United States and the decline of "US empire" due to excessive expansion. In the opinion of Joseph Nye, president of the Kennedy Government School of Harvard University, new conservatism underestimates the soft strength and the role of the international system, thus depriving America of certain most important tools for pursuing the new strategy for national security.
Many US scholars hold that along with the deterioration of the Iraqi situation, the new conservative trend of thought is on the decline and the influence of the US government is weakening. We still have to observe what kind of influence this will exert on the US national security strategy.
Part III
The development of international relations in recent years indicates that despite the rapid development of economic globalization and informationization, the independence of state and nation and the awareness of autonomy have not weakened, the multiplication of cultural traditions and the diversity of development modes have not vanished. Given this situation, it is impracticable to insist on identity, and it is not advisable to assume an air of self-importance. Although launching "pre-emptive strike" by relying on military advantage may lead to the capture of cities and seizure of territory, it is, however, impossible to eradicate threat, still less to win the hearts of people, on the contrary, it would cause tension in international relations and turbulence in the world situation. In the world featuring multiplication and diversity and inter-dependence, only equality and mutual benefit can make it possible to share opportunities; and only harmony and cooperation can overcome challenges. Only the endeavor to seek peace and development and to realize coexistence and all wins and thereby achieve harmony of diversity conforms to the fundamental interests of humankind.
In the face of change in the international situation that appeared at the beginning of the new century, China advocates compliance with the historical trends, strengthening international cooperation, establishing a new concept of security, promoting democratization of international relations and safeguarding the common interests of all mankind.
China favors democratization of international relations. Various countries should fully understand that defending peace and promoting development concern the wellbeing of the people of various countries, it is the common desire of people of the world as well as an irresistible historical trend. While handling international relations and specific matters, various countries should fully respect and serve this greatest popular will, discard Cold War mentality, overcome the zero-sum mindset, seek common ground and reserve differences, strengthen cooperation, bring about mutual benefit and achieve "win, win" result.
China stands for the establishment of a new concept of security centered on mutual trust, mutual benefit, equality and cooperation. Various countries should, taking the purposes of the "UN Charter" as well as the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence as the political foundation for safeguarding international security; and mutual benefit and cooperation and common development as the economic guarantee for safeguarding international security, strive to strengthen international cooperation, bring about closer mutual harmony, and make comprehensive use of political, economic, diplomatic, military and lawful means to commonly create an international environment featuring long-term stability, security and reliability.
China holds that global challenge needs global cooperation which in turn needs a global mechanism. The United Nations is the most universal, representative and authoritative international organization in the world. In the past 58 years since its founding, the achievements the UN has gained in defending world and regional peace and promoting human progress and development are obvious to all. At the beginning of the new century and in the face of new challenges, various countries around the world should make common efforts to actively safeguard the authority and leading position of the United Nations in international affairs. A highly efficient, united and powerful United Nations represents the hope of the world. The Iraq issue has once again proved that casting aside the United Nations and abandoning multilateral cooperation are impracticable.
In brief, in the international relations in the new century, favorable and unfavorable conditions for the realization of peace and development intertwine with each other, positive and negative factors transform into each other, and thus forming a dialectical relationship featuring the unity of opposites between opportunity and challenge. In the face of this complicated situation, the international community should firmly grasp the main theme of the times featuring peace and development, comply with the historical trend of cooperation and progress, persist in multilateralism, strengthen international cooperation, maintain common security and realize common development. This should be the orientation for the common efforts of various countries.
(People's Daily January 21, 2004)
|
