【专栏】对传染病的战争，远远没有结束

点击蓝字关注我们

本文大概3000字，读完共需3分钟

编者按：在《环球时报英文版》6月1日刊发的第83篇“变局”专栏中，中国人民大学重阳金融研究院执行院长王文认为，新冠疫情再次提醒现存霸权国美国与最大崛起国中国，病毒是两国共同的敌人。未来传染病对中美两国的长期威胁，远大于战争。下文为专栏的中英文版。

本文英文版在 Global Times 的版面截图

现代科技的发展容易一度让人们尤其在发达国家产生巨大错觉，以为传染病得到了有效控制。1977年世界卫生组织（WHO）宣布，天花病毒已根除。次年，联合国所有成员国签署《健康全人类2000年》协定，预言千禧年之前，人类健康状况将发生质的提升，疾病防治的重心转移到了非传染性的所谓“富贵病”上，如心脏病、糖尿病和癌症等。事实是，艾滋病、鼠疫、霍乱、结核病等传染病在二战结束以后的增长速度仍相当快速。1945年至1993年，仅艾滋病、结核病、疟疾就夺走了1.5亿人的生命，是同期战争死亡人数（2300万人）的近5倍。所有过早死亡人群的50%以上，都与艾滋病、肺炎、结核病、腹泻病、疟疾和麻疹等六类传染病相关。1998年3亿人感染疟疾，110万人死亡。2000年肺结核夺走170万人生命。更糟糕的是，1973年以来，人类新发现了30多种传染病毒，且病毒变异并产生抗药性的周期远远超出人类研制抗生素的速度。这些传染病严重影响了二战结束后新独立的国家的经济增长与国力提升，对传统强国、现存霸权国的国家安全也造成巨大威胁。随着近代对外殖民、工业革命以及城市化进程不断受到传染病的侵蚀，欧美国家逐渐将传染病的防治从国内推向国际合作。1851年英、法、俄等12个欧洲国家召开首次国际卫生合作会议，商议烈性传染病霍乱的防疫措施。1907年，第一份《国际卫生条约》在罗马签订，此后还产生了世界上首个区域性的跨国公共卫生组织：泛美卫生组织。对传染病的重视与防疫合作，为欧美国家早期崛起、领衔现代化的全球进程奠定了良好的公共卫生基础。1948年国际卫生组织问世。1978年，世卫组织在阿拉木图召开国际初级卫生保健大会，提出人人享有健康的千禧年目标，宣告全球卫生时代的开始。然而，“西方对国境线之外的公共卫生危机不愿承担足够的道德义务”, 直到以艾滋病为代表的传染病在发达国家感染人数急剧上升，西方才逐渐开始重视传染病对国家安全、国力发展的威胁。1988年，美国国防部发布报告，论述HIV病毒引发艾滋病对美国国家安全的影响。这是历史上第一份关于传染病影响国家安全、国家发展战略的官方研究报告。2000年1月，联合国安理会首次召开以人类健康为主题的会议，重点讨论艾滋病对国际发展的影响。2020年全球肆虐的新冠疫情，重新规划着国家安全与大国兴衰的未来。2020年爆发新冠肺炎疫情，中美两个全球大国的防疫合作严重滞后于国际社会的呼吁与全球现实的需求。相反，中美大国竞争在疫情期呈现加剧的趋势。不少学者都认为，新冠疫情的防疫失效暴露了美国公共卫生防疫能力的漏洞与国家能力的不足，削弱了美国领导世界的软实力，加速美国霸权的衰落。这再次印证了全球化时代传染病仍有可能导致大国衰落的历史规律。可惜的是，特朗普执政下的美国决策层并没有认清这条铁律，不承认新冠肺炎传染病是损害美国国力、加速美国衰落的最新原因，拜登执政后，延续了特朗普对华压制的政策，试图将中国视为疫情的源头，把中国当作美国抗疫失败“替罪羊”，对华发动新冷战，试图凝聚早已分裂的美国社会之团结。 很明显，美国受传统现实主义理论桎梏太深，将大国战略视野狭窄地局限在国家与国家之间的博弈中。历史表明，如果把大国衰落简要地归结为“外敌入侵”的话，那么，传染病才有可能是真正的“战争发动者”和“战争结局的决定者”。新冠疫情再次提醒现存霸权国美国与最大崛起国中国，病毒是两国共同的敌人。未来传染病对中美两国的长期威胁，远大于战争。对于霸权国家而言，国家实力的维护不只是保证经济、军事、软实力不被崛起国家的超越，更重要的是，维护本国人口与国家安全能抵御大流行病的冲击。中美两国的竞争不在于谁打压了谁，而是比拼“谁更能解决本国的问题”，传染病的防疫是其中非常重要的一环。对此，从传染病的历史规律出发，尽快转换转变国际政治研究范式，更新霸权更替的思考框架，重新审视大国博弈的“共生性”，变得越来越重要。若能破题，将推动国际关系本体论、认识论的研究革命。传染病影响大国兴衰的研究将改变国际关系理论的范式，也将高度考验国际关系学者的高超智慧与理论创新水平。“变局”专栏系列近期文章

以下为英文版

How history teaches diseases change world power

By Wang Wen

Illustration: Liu Rui/GT

The development of modern technology can easily lead to misperceptions that infectious diseases can be effectively controlled in developed nations. For example, the last naturally occurring case of variole was diagnosed in October 1977, and the World Health Organization (WHO) certified the global eradication of the disease in 1980. 

In 1978, the UN members signed the Alma-Ata Declaration which predicated, "an acceptable level of health for all the people of the world by the year 2000 can be attained." This focus of disease prevention began to shift to diseases associated with higher life expectancy and with lower mortality, ranging from diabetes mellitus to heart disease to cancer, to name a few.

But the fact is that diseases such as the plague, tuberculosis and AIDS infected more people with fast growth in the second half of the 20th century well into the 21st century. This has moved in lockstep with scientific advances in detection and treatments. Since 1973, humanity has detected more than 30 infectious diseases, learning that viruses mutate much faster than humanity's speed to produce antibiotics. 

These diseases seriously affected the economic growth and national strength of newly independent countries after WWII, posing heavy threats to the national security of traditional powers and existing hegemonic forces.

Nonetheless, Western countries were not willing to shoulder due moral responsibilities for public health crises beyond their borders. Only until the number of infections, such as AIDS, in developed countries increased sharply, did the West begin to pay importance to threats posed by infectious diseases - recognizing how it could negatively impact their national security and development. 

A clear case in point: In 1985, the US Department of Defense began screening all applicants for military service for HIV-1. In April 2000, the Clinton administration officially designated HIV/AIDS as a threat to US national security. A special session of the UN was held in 2001 in an effort to intensify international activity to fight HIV/AIDS and mobilize necessary resources. 

The ravaging COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 redefined national security and the rise and fall of big powers. Cooperation on virus prevention between the two major powers - the US and China - largely fell behind the call of the international community and global reality. On the contrary, competition between the two intensified. 

Many experts believe the failure of Washington to address the pandemic exposed the loopholes in the US public health sector and the lack of national strength. It weakened US soft power and accelerated the decline of Washington-led world order. This once again demonstrates a historical principle that in a globalized era, infectious diseases can still play parts in the downfall of great powers. 

Regrettably, decision-makers under Trump's rule did not recognize this principle. They did not admit that COVID-19 was the latest reason for the US' eroded national strength and accelerated decline. Biden is continuing Trump's policy to suppress China and trying to make China culpable as the origin of the virus. This is a move to scapegoat an imagined enemy instead of addressing US failures to tackle the pandemic. It is even attempting to launch a new cold war against China and reunite a heavily divided US society.

Obviously, Washington's "beltway" is deeply confined in realpolitik theory, and it views national strategies through the narrow-minded lens of a zero-sum competition between nations.

History proves that if the decline of a major power is to be attributed to the invasion of external enemies, then infectious diseases are likely the launcher of wars - or the deciding factors in certain conflicts.

The COVID-19 pandemic reminds the existing Washington hegemonic leader and the biggest rising power China that this virus is their common foe. The long-term threats of infectious diseases on the two countries are far more perilous than any war. 

For hegemonic powers, they not only have to make sure that their economy, military and soft power are not surpassed by rising challengers; more importantly, they have to protect the population and national security from being affected by pandemics. The competition between China and the US does not lie about who suppresses whom - it sheds light on who can solve its own problems. Chief among these factors regards who can properly prevent infectious diseases. 

Therefore, it is particularly vital to change hegemonic thinking and review the symbiosis of any major power competition. 

The research into the impact of infectious diseases on the rise and fall of major powers alters the patterns of international relations theories. It further tests the wisdom and theoretical innovation levels of international relations scholars too. 

（The author is professor and executive dean of Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies at Renmin University of China.） 

// 人大重阳    

/// 

RDCY

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

我知道你“在看”哟～