【本文写于奥巴马访华之前，从习奥会的结果来看，奥巴马确实如基辛格所说展现了一定的诚意，但作者对奥巴马显然有更多期待。中美关系如要取得真正的突破，奥巴马不仅需要落实习奥会达成的“共识”，在网络监控、周边侦察、恐怖主义等问题上，也需要做出更多实际的改变。本文原载于中美聚焦网，观察者网杨晗轶译。】

美国总统奥巴马即将于本月10日访华。对他来说，这是一个书写历史的机会，要是真能有所建树，也算是对得起当年草率颁给他的那个诺贝尔和平奖。

奥巴马将出席年度亚太经济合作（APEC）峰会。此外，本月12日他还将以私人会谈的形式得到中国主席习近平的接见。奥巴马若想修复中美双边关系，为后任留下长期和平的政治遗产，此次访问可能是他最好的机会——也许是最后的机会了。

截至目前为止，奥巴马政府不但未能如诺贝尔和平奖委员会所愿减少暴力冲突，全世界的人为暴行反而呈爆炸式增长：

从北到南，我们见证了：

乌克兰对抗东部分裂势力，俄罗斯坚定反对乌克兰的西方盟友；

美国军队、军事顾问和雇佣兵在阿富汗和伊拉克越陷越深，难以撤离；

伊斯兰国使叙利亚和整个中东危在旦夕；

以色列和巴勒斯坦和解黯淡无光；

埃及和利比亚未能尝到民主果实，北方的流血暴力使这些国家内部动荡遭到忽视。

此外，全球还面临埃博拉病毒爆发的威胁。

面对这一连串悲剧，奥巴马当自问，是否应继续对中国保持紧张关系和虚假的“战略模糊”？尽管中美两国都宣称双边关系正在转暖，但它更接近于前进一步倒退一步，甚至倒退两步。

最近的例子便是：一方面五角大楼以红地毯迎接中国人民解放军高级官员，而另一方面司法部起诉五名解放军军官网络窃密。

美国年度国防预算加上老兵服务支出共计约9000亿美元。加上国债高筑，每年须还本付息4000多亿美元。这两笔开支约占美国全年GDP的30%。在令人生畏的联邦预算赤字面前，为对抗或遏制中国而设计的“亚洲核心战略”必将进一步加重美国的债务负担，奥巴马真能为这样的战略辩护吗？

奥巴马应该了解，抨击中国仅是末流政客为赢得选票惯用的手段。作为总统，他应该最清楚，美国的国家利益是在太平洋彼岸赢得一个朋友，而不是树立一个对手，他也有能力在这个问题上积极作为。他不应再去迎合那些没有大局观的人。

奥巴马需要政治勇气，方能从无到有建立起以下六点对华新思路：

习近平带领奥巴马参观中南海

1. 不要期待中国按照美国的想法出牌。尊重中国不同的视角和不同的处事方法。

2. 停止公开表述两国分歧，而应私下坦诚交流意见。两国领导人和办事官员已经建立起定期的双边会谈机制。应建设性地利用这些机制。

3. 承认中国在周边建立影响力辐射圈的意图，为表示善意，美国应停止向中国周边派遣飞机进行监视侦察。让中国与日本和其他亚洲国家妥善处理双边关系问题，美国不应成为“房间里的大象”。

4. 停止单方面拟定行为准则，例如宣称美国国家安全局的网络监控为合法，而中国的网络监控为非法。双方需要坐下来分享最佳解决方案，共同商议划定各自的底线。然后再邀请其他国家加入网络安全讨论。

5. 美国必须承认恐怖分子就是恐怖分子。只要美国将中国的恐怖分子看作潜在的自由战士，就会造成极大的问题。只有在反恐问题上达成共识，中美两个大国才会共同遏制疯狂的伊斯兰圣战。

6. 美国应牢记冷战已经结束。中国不是苏联的替身。

以上是建设全新中美双边关系的六条纲领。美国必须坚定地认清：中美是经济伙伴关系，有时是竞争关系，但不是敌对关系。批评者或许认为上述新思路流于天真，但这种天真如果能够成功，将使美国免遭不幸。当年美国人闯入伊拉克，天真地以为当地人会箪食壶浆以迎王师。这种天真给美国造成了巨大损失，最近的统计显示，伊拉克战争让美国付出了超过1万亿美元和伤亡近40000人的惨重代价。

朝鲜问题是中美共同的难题。奥巴马至少可以从表达善意的立场出发，令人信服地提出的化解朝鲜灾难的方案。

布什和奥巴马都在朝鲜去核问题上花费了许多精力，然而最终一无所成。毫无进展的美国沮丧地举手放弃，宣称只有中国才能影响朝鲜的行为。

然而现实中，朝鲜也让中国感到同样沮丧。中国唯一的杠杆是切断朝鲜的经济命脉。但中国不能让朝鲜崩溃，因为《美韩共同防御条约》将允许美军开到中朝边境。

如果奥巴马要在中美之间真正建立互信，便应许诺一旦朝韩统一，就将美军全部撤离朝鲜半岛。这样朝鲜半岛局势将完全不同。

中国将把美国看作全球事务中的合作伙伴。朝鲜只要清楚中国不再受到美军渡过鸭绿江的威胁，便会更加顺从地加入六方会谈，协商以放弃核武器换取安全保障。

韩国应当欢迎一个不那么好战的朝鲜，以开放的态度争取朝韩和解，换取终止美韩军事同盟。《美韩共同防御条约》签署于1953年，韩国对条约适用性的质疑起码可以追溯到2006年。

美国将成为最大的赢家。这样，奥巴马既可以达成朝鲜半岛无核化的目标；又建立了不断前进的对华关系；还能从年度预算中削减30000名驻韩美军的开支。

如果真有那一天，奥巴马将至少使世界的这一地区更加安全，世界也会感谢他的政治遗产。他也将无愧于诺贝尔和平奖的头衔。

（点击下一页，查看英语原文）

Time for Obama to Make a Peace Overture to China

George Koo

Next month President Obama will be going to Beijing and he has the opportunity to make history and finally make good on the Nobel Peace Prize given to him rather prematurely at the beginning of his first term.

He will be in China to attend the summit of the annual Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation. In addition, he will also have a private meeting with China’s President Xi. This trip could be Obama’s best chance and possibly the last chance to radically alter the bumpy bilateral relations and leave a lasting legacy of genuine peace.

During his administration so far, instead of a tapering of violent conflicts that the peace committee had anticipated, the world’s arc of manmade mayhem has exploded.

From north to south, we now have:

Ukraine confronting its eastern secessionists with Russia squarely opposing Ukraine’s western allies;

Afghanistan and Iraq becoming tar babies where American troops/advisors/mercenaries can’t extricate;

ISIS threatening the very existence of Syria and the entire Middle East;

Israel and Palestine making no progress towards even a faint glimmer for peace;

Egypt and Libya enjoying none of the fruits of democracy, while their worsening instability has been largely overlooked because of the more bloody violence to their north.

On top of all that, a worldwide Ebola outbreak threatens.

Given the litany of woes, Obama should be asking why he would want to maintain the tension and pretense of “strategic ambiguity” with China. Despite both sides claiming a warming of bilateral relations, it has been more of one step forward and one step backward, sometimes even two steps back.

The latest example was for the Pentagon to give a senior PLA official the red carpet treatment while the Justice Department was very publicly indicting 5 PLA soldiers alleging illegal cyber attack.

The current U.S. annual defense budget plus the cost of veteran services is around $900 billion. Annual debt service of the mounting national debt is more than $400 billion. Together, the total represents about 30% of the GDP. While facing the daunting task of taming the federal budget deficit, can Obama justify adding to the nation’s financial burden with a “pivot” to Asia designed to confront if not to contain China?

Obama should understand that petty politicians take pot shots at China for perceived profit at the polls. Of all people, as president, he should see that it is in America’s national interest to have a friend and not an adversary across the Pacific and he can do something proactive about it. He should stop pandering to those that do not see the big picture.

All it takes is political courage and a start from scratch with a new approach to China. The new approach should include the following:

1.Stop expecting China to do what we want them to do. Respect that they have a different point of view and a different way of getting things done.

2.Stop articulating differences publicly but by all means discuss them frankly but in private. Already in place are regularly occurring bilateral meetings between leaders and working level officials. Use them constructively.

3.Recognize that China wishes to establish its sphere of influence around its borders, and as an act of good faith, stop surveillance flights near China. Let China work out their bilateral relations with Japan and other Asian states without the U.S. being the elephant in the room.

4.Stop writing rules of conduct unilaterally, such as proclaiming that cyber activity by the NSA is legitimate but any from China is not. Instead both sides need to sit down together, share best practices and agree on lines on the sand that neither side would cross. Then invite other nations to join in the discussion.

5.Agree that terrorists are terrorists. So long as the U.S. sees terrorists in China as possible freedom fighters, there is a big problem. Agreement on the other hand would allow the two major powers to work together in stemming the jihadist madness.

6.Remember that the Cold War is over. China is not a stand-in for the former Soviet Union.

The above six basic planks for developing a new bilateral relations with China represent an affirmation that China is a economic partner, sometimes a competitor but not an adversary. Critics might consider the proposed approach naïve. But the naiveté if it succeeds will save America from grief. In contrast when Americans charged into Iraq expecting a liberating hero’s welcome, that naiveté cost the U.S. dearly, last count exceeding $1 trillion and close to 40,000 casualties.

At least starting from a position of goodwill, Obama can credibly propose resolving the North Korea debacle as a common problem to tackle between friends.

Both Bush and Obama had expended a lot of energy on getting North Korea to undo their nuclear program to no avail. When the lack of progress frustrated the U.S., they would throw up their hands and proclaimed that only China can influence the North Koreans to behave.

In reality China has been just as frustrated by North Korea. China’s only leverage is to sever the economic lifeline that has been keeping North Korea alive. China can’t afford to let North Korea collapse because the existing treaty between the U.S. and South Korea would allow American troops to move right up to the China/North Korea border.

If Obama were to build real mutual trust between China and the U.S. and, in the context of building trust, pledge to withdraw all U.S. troops from the Korean peninsula upon the reunification of Korea, there would be a whole new ball game.

China would look at the U.S. as a real working partner in the global arena. North Korea, knowing that the prospect of American soldiers leering across the Yalu River no longer works as a threat to China, would have to be more amenable to joining the 6 party talks and negotiate for security assurances in exchange for giving up the bomb.

South Korea should welcome a less belligerent north and be open to reconciliation in exchange for the cancelling the military alliance with the U.S. The treaty was established in 1953 and the South Koreans have been questioning the relevancy of the treaty since at least 2006.

The U.S. would be the biggest winner of all. Obama can claim to finally achieve a nuclear free Korean peninsula, have created go-forward progressive relations with China, and deduct the cost of stationing 30,000 troops in South Korea from the annual budget.

The world will thank him for the legacy of at least making one part of the world safer then he found it. He can then rightfully be a Nobel laureate.