编者按：3月12日，由中国外文局指导，北京周报社主办的“‘重启与重塑’中美关系与全球治理”云论坛在京举办。中国人民大学重阳金融研究院执行院长王文受邀出席并发言，他表示当今中国不必谈“对美竞争”而色变，更不必一谈到“竞争”，就往战略对抗、冲突的方向去推论，去联想 。此观点也刊发在3月9日《环球时报英文版》第72篇“变局”专栏。以下为此论坛相关报道（转自3月12日“中国外文局”微信公众号）及“变局”专栏中英文版。
3月12日，由中国外文局指导，北京周报社主办的“‘重启与重塑’中美关系与全球治理”云论坛在京举办。中国外文局副局长兼总编辑高岸明出席论坛并作主旨发言。哥伦比亚大学教授、可持续发展中心主任杰弗里·萨克斯（Jeffrey D. Sachs），全球化智库（CCG）创始人、理事长王辉耀，麦肯锡咨询公司荣誉高级合伙人彼得·沃克（Peter Walker），中国人民大学重阳金融研究院执行院长王文，清华大学新闻与传播学院全球财经新闻硕士项目联合主任邓瑞克（Rick Dunham），中国人民大学国际关系学院教授、国际事务研究所所长王义桅参加论坛，围绕拜登时代的中美关系及全球治理等相关议题进行了深入研讨。高岸明在主旨发言中强调，中美两国有着广泛的共同利益，有许多可以合作的领域。双发应当把更多精力放在共同点上，去扩大共同利益。“管控分歧、聚焦合作”是推动中美关系重回正轨，改善两国竞合关系的关键。他对此提出三点建议：一是警惕中美关系分歧的“意识形态化”；二是全面恢复中美人文交流与对话机制；三是推动中美经贸关系重回合作轨道。杰弗里·萨克斯表示很多美国人认为只有当美国在世界上完全占统治地位，美国才安全，任何挑战美国统治地位的大国或地区都对美国构成威胁，都是对国家安全的威胁。这是一个非常危险的想法。他强调全球合作的重要性，并表示非常乐于见到中国、日本、韩国、新西兰、澳大利亚和东盟等国家共同合作的区域全面经济伙伴关系。他认为中国和美国也应该加强在气候变化、核不扩散等领域的合作，并且致力于加强彼此人民之间的了解。王辉耀认为，尽管中美结构性矛盾已经凸显，中美竞争趋于全面化、激烈化不可避免，但建制派拜登团队相对理性、务实，可为中美关系向好发展增添确定性。两国有望再度携手，在全球抗疫、气候变化、发展中国家债务负担、WTO改革等方面开展合作，推动完善全球治理。他强调中美官方可适时恢复双边高层次多渠道对话沟通机制，并着力缓和经贸及科技领域摩擦，在基础设施、“一带一路”、人文交流等领域加强合作。彼得·沃克认为中国和美国在文化上存在根本的差别，美国是“二元社会”，强调非黑即白，零和博弈，认为自己是“天选之子”，被选中统治世界，而中国则更注重共生、和谐与平衡，更关注国家内部事务。但“天选之子”的论调早已过时，美国应该尊重、平等对待中国。特朗普执政期间，加剧了中国关系的恶化。他非常乐观地认为，拜登将在对华态度上产生改变，更加关注和中国经济、科技领域的关系。王文认为衡量两国的关系至少可分为5个“C”，合作（Cooperation）、协调(Coordination)、竞争(Competition)、对抗(Confrontation)、冲突(Conflict)。“竞争”居中，显“中性”。当今中国不必谈“对美竞争”而色变，更不必一谈到“竞争”，就往战略对抗、冲突的方向去推论，去联想。中美两国未来的竞争应该比过去的任何大国竞争都更加文明。 邓瑞克表示美中关系是世界上最重要的双边经济关系，同时，在军事、外交和全球治理等方面，美中关系也都是至关重要。他分析了美国特朗普政府和拜登政府的执政特点，强调经贸合作对于两国关系的重要性。他还结合教育工作实际，建议美中两国加强在教育领域的沟通与合作。王义桅表示中美博弈的结果就是形成你中有我、我中有你的中美命运共同体，重建中美关系应加强政治互信。
长期以来，中国外交决策层多数时候都回避与美国竞争的话题。这句表态意味着中国已公开明确，自己对美国的全球领衔地位客观上形成了“竞争”，尽管中国主观上可能未必有这个意愿，更希望合作成分更多。这句表态也意味着中国第一时间回应美国拜登政府在3月3日对华“头号竞争对手”的战略新定位。回顾过去20年，21世纪以来的美国对华政策，一直在战略定位“中国是伙伴、对手或是敌人”之间摇摆。2021年3月3日，美国新任国务卿布林肯的首场外交政策演讲，列出美国外交八大优先任务，直接强调中国是美国的最大威胁。同日，白宫国家安全委员会公布《国家安全战略中期指导方针》，指出中国是唯一具有潜在综合实力挑战国际体制的美国主要竞争对手。至此，美国政府对华战略定位不再模糊与摇摆，而是直接明确为“头号竞争对手”。
本文英文版在 Global Times 的版面截图
经过20年的接触、琢磨、博弈、摩擦甚至低烈度的冲突与较量，美国不再把中国视为“伙伴”，也还没有将中国视为“敌人”，而是逐渐明确了对中国“头号竞争对手”的战略定位，那么，中国需要尽快给予怎样的回应呢？
在英语语境中，“竞争”不是什么坏事。衡量两国的关系至少可分为5个“C”，合作（Cooperation）、协调(Coordination)、竞争(Competition)、对抗(Confrontation)、冲突(Conflict)。“竞争”居中，显“中性”。
改革开放的40多年，尤其是2001年入世后的20年，中国经济、贸易、金融、产业、文化能在全球层面呈现崛起之势，一个重要原因就在于正视国际竞争，拥抱国际竞争，在竞争中重新认识世界，向对手学习，并在一些领域实现赶超，在另一些领域共同提升。
新时代的中国人理应更有底气，不必谈“对美竞争”而色变，更不必一谈到“竞争”，就往战略对抗、冲突的方向去推论、去联想。
即使未来中国真正采用所谓“对美竞争”的战略定位，也不会排斥“与美合作”。中国走的不是国强必霸的老路，也不是欺压他国的邪路，而是寻求新的大国良性竞争之路。
笔者看来，所谓“新大国竞争”或“良性竞争”，至少包含四类：一是楷模之争：比哪个国家在国内治国理政上更有效，哪个国家更能解决国民不断增长的美好生活需求，哪个国家更能为全球发展提供可借鉴、可参考甚至可复制的经验。
二是合作之争：比的是看哪个国家更有组织号召力，提出务实可行的解决方案与道义感召，推动双边、多边的国际合作，实现后疫情时代的疫苗普及、复苏经济、科技创新、消除贫困、维护治安、帮扶弱者等等。
三是红利之争：比的是看哪个国家能为世界经济增长提供更多推动力，为全球贸易投资提供更多的增量，为全球和平稳定提供更多贡献
四是视野之争：比的是看哪个国家能为人类面临贫富与区域分化、智能科技的伦理挑战、生态恶化的生存威胁，勾勒出更高明的战略远见，带领人类走进下一个文明时代。
从这个角度看，只要是良性竞争、公平竞争，中国没有理由去拒绝、逃避或害怕。70多年前，以五个常任理事国为大国协调核心的联合国宪章设立，本身就是力求创造比19世纪、20世纪初更先进的大国竞争文明。
未来的中美竞争，理应比过去任何一组大国竞争更文明、更体现人类的进步性。
以下为英文版
US-China competition needs to be civil
By Wang Wen
China-US Photo:GT
During his press conference on the sidelines of the ongoing two sessions, Chinese State Councilor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi said, it is not surprising that there is competition between China and the US as their interests are intertwined, but the two sides should have healthy competition on the basis of fairness and equity. Many people may have not yet perceived the subtleties of this crucial statement. For a long time, China's diplomatic policymakers have been avoiding topics related to competition with the US. However, Wang's statement means China has publicly made it clear that the scenario of the China-US competition for global leading role has been taking shape, although China may not necessarily wish for such competition and is hoping for more cooperation. It is also a response to the Interim National Security Strategic Guidance, issued on March 3 by US President Joe Biden's administration. It describes China as "the only competitor potentially capable of combining its economic, diplomatic, military and technological power to mount a sustained challenge to a stable and open international system."Over the past 20 years, the US strategic definition of China has been swaying among "partner," "competitor" and "rival." During his first major foreign policy speech on March 3, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken listed eight priorities for US diplomacy, stressing China is US' "biggest geopolitical test." It mirrors the fact that the US strategic positioning of China is no longer vague or swaying. It is clear-cut now: China is US' No.1 competitor. After 20 years of contact, games, friction and even low-intensity conflicts, the US no longer treats China as a partner, but a primary competitor. How would China respond? In English, competition is not necessarily a bad thing. Among the words that could measure ties between any two countries, there are at least five Cs: cooperation, coordination, competition, confrontation and conflict. Competition is neutral. Over the past 40 years of reform and opening-up, especially the 20 years since the 21st century, China's economy, trade, finance, industry and culture are rising rapidly. An important reason for that is: China has been facing competition squarely. It has been embracing the international competition, re-understanding the world through competition, learning from its competitors, catching up with them in some sectors, and making progress together with others in other fields. The Chinese people in the new era are supposed to be more confident. They are not supposed to turn pale at the mention of competition, or associate competition with strategic confrontation and conflicts. Even if China adopts competition as its strategic positioning of the US, it won't exclude the possibilities of cooperating with the US. Hegemony will never be China's choice - even when the country become stronger. China will not bully other countries. It is pursuing a path of healthy competition with major powers. As far as I am concerned, the new type of major power competition, or healthy competition, includes at least four categories. First, the competition for model, which focuses on governance of domestic affairs. Or in other words, it is a competition to see which country can better meet their people's ever-growing needs for a better life and can provide experience to other developing countries. Second, the competition of cooperation, which focuses on which country has the stronger capability to organize and promote bilateral and multilateral cooperation, helping to boost vaccination coverage, and to realize economic recovery, technological innovation, poverty alleviation, etc, in the post-pandemic era. Third, the competition of dividends focuses on which country can offer more impetus to world economic growth, promote global trade and investment, as well as peace and stability. Fourth, the competition of vision, focuses on which country has more far-sighted views to resolve the polarization between the rich and the poor, ethical challenges posed by intelligent technologies and deteriorating ecology, leading mankind to the next era of civilization.As long as the competition is fair and square, China has no reason to refuse, fear or avoid it. The Charter of the UN was signed in 1945 with the five permanent members of the UN Security Council playing the role as the core in major power coordination. The move was an attempt to create a more advanced major power competition. The future competition between China and the US should also be more civilized than any major power competition in the past. And it should reflect the progress of humankind. （The author is professor and executive dean of Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies at Renmin University of China.）
中国人民大学重阳金融研究院（人大重阳）成立于2013年1月19日，是重阳投资向中国人民大学捐赠并设立教育基金运营的主要资助项目。
作为中国特色新型智库，人大重阳聘请了全球数十位前政要、银行家、知名学者为高级研究员，旨在关注现实、建言国家、服务人民。目前，人大重阳下设7个部门、运营管理4个中心(生态金融研究中心、全球治理研究中心、中美人文交流研究中心、中俄人文交流研究中心)。近年来，人大重阳在金融发展、全球治理、大国关系、宏观政策等研究领域在国内外均具有较高认可度。
扫二维码｜关注我们
微信号｜rdcy2013
新浪微博｜@人大重阳