美媒：用“胡锦涛计划”引领全球体系 （附英文原文）

美国《基督教科学箴言报》06/28/2011

“中国已经超越美国成为世界第一大债主，北京现在必须承担起随之而来的领导角色。为此，不需要什么“马歇尔计划”，何不以“胡锦涛计划”重新利用中国经济顺差惠及全球体系呢？”这是美国《基督教科学箴言报》6月28日评论文章一大提议。

基辛格此次访华前不久曾出席一场美国智库“全球化”主题的讨论会。当时，基辛格将现在的中国比作1947年的美国。当时，美国推出了马歇尔计划（The Marshall Plan）引领了二战后世界经济体系的恢复与发展，并同时抗衡苏联和共产主义势力在欧洲的进一步渗透和扩张，对欧洲国家的发展和世界政治格局产生了深远的影响。该计划因时任美国国务卿乔治·马歇尔（George Marshall）而得名。

左图：“马歇尔计划”的宣传画之一

基辛格称，拿破仑战争结束后，英国崛起成为第一强国的地位保持了一个多世纪。1947年，英国告知美国，“作为世界最大的债权人，美国必须在重塑世界新秩序方面担任起领导作用。所以，美国推出了“马歇尔计划”，以美元主导世界经济体系，并在20世纪下半叶在国际地位一直保持优势地位。而现在中国作为世界第一大债权人，也正站在和美国1947年同样的历史地位。

今年阿拉伯民主浪潮开始时，有关向中东和北非国家推行“马歇尔计划”的谈论很多。在今年G-8峰会期间，法国总统萨科齐甚至提出拿200亿美元用于这种计划的实施。但是，考虑到发达经济体深陷财政赤字难题和债务危机，萨科齐此番承诺似乎就显得很空泛。

为此，为何不能由G-20支持提出一种“胡锦涛计划”（Hu Jintao Plan）替代所谈的“马歇尔计划”解决全球体系严峻形势呢？

按照基辛格看法，一种体制至另外一种体制的转化至少需要另外30年，而中国的作用势将逐年增长，而帮助重塑全球体系，将世界重心由北大西洋转至中国和其他新兴经济体，也符合中国自身利益。而当前西方金融体系的诟病，尤其是在欧洲债务危机阴影下，则正需中国发挥领导力。而发挥这种领导力最首要的是G-20，通过这一多边机制，各国可以找到符合自己利益的国家抱负，以避免经济增长竞争国之间的“零和游戏”。

左图：根据“马歇尔计划”美国援助欧洲的货箱上的标签

美国和G-7体制确实无法源源不断地主导在安全、金融稳定和主要储备货币等方面“全球公共物品”的供给。但是，中国引领G-20或金砖五国（BRICS)等机制和其他新兴经济体建立全球管制体系面临诸多挑战。其中一项挑战就是由那一个国家作为主导力量发号施令。中央党校原副校长、中国“和平崛起”的提出者郑必坚曾指出，21世纪中国崛起是和平崛起文明崛起，无论多肥都是不会威胁西方国家的羔羊，为了不刺激西方发达国家，和平崛起应改为和平发展。

2010年12月1日，美国著名杂志《外交政策》公布了2010年度“全球百大思想者”的排名，地缘战略家郑必坚入选，入选理由：提出中国“和平崛起”的概念。他认为，中国也要超越“和平崛起”的理念，“扩大和加深同其他国家的全球利益交汇点”。也就是说，当彼此交汇利益不断聚集时，各个国家就可以找到各自共同利益的坚实基础。这些“交汇利益”也就是21世纪的全球公共事务，如气候变化、有关低碳经济的联合项目。这需要同其他国家，尤其是美国的协作。
除了气候变化和全球金融稳定，G-20还必须逐步采用包括人民币在内的“全球多元货币储备体系”以替代美元地位，还必须构建反映新兴经济体实力的世界货币基金组织（IMF)新监管架构，以及重启或重塑多哈贸易谈判等。中国作为世界最大债权人，可以在帮助稳定中东和北非发挥关键作用，主要是通过经济发展及影响力，这不但关系能源安全，而起也有利于整个世界利益。而且，中国目前已经在深陷债务危机的欧洲购买债券，发挥了重大作用。

如基辛格所说，“马歇尔计划”正是美国在20世纪下半叶需不断承担重塑世界秩序时产生的，也符合美国自身利益。眼下也可以是中国以同样方式担此重任的时候。美国既然能够听从英国建议推行“马歇尔计划”，中国也应该听从美国（基辛格）建议，推行“胡锦涛计划”，引领全球体系发展。

-----------------------------------------------

英文原文：

China should listen to Kissinger: You're on top now, start leading

China has surpassed the US as the world's largest creditor. Beijing must now take on the accompanying leadership role. Instead of a 'Marshall Plan,' why not a 'Hu Jintao plan' that recycles some of China's surplus to benefit the whole global system?

by Nathan Gardels

Beijing

When the now 88-year-old Henry Kissinger sat down with Chairman Mao to discuss opening up China back in the 1970s, America was at the peak of its power. It surely never entered Mr. Kissinger’s mind at the time that less than half a century later, as the Communist Party of China confidently celebrates its 90th anniversary, he would be back in Beijing passing the baton of global leadership on to his hosts.

Opening a conference of China’s most important think tank on globalization last Saturday, the great statesman compared China today to the US in 1947.

After the Napoleonic Wars, Kissinger observed, Britain emerged as the top world power and stayed that way for over a century. But by 1947, Ernest Bevin, foreign secretary in the waning days of the empire, felt compelled to tell his American counterpart that, “as the largest creditor, the US must now take the lead in shaping the new order.” Hence the Marshall Plan launched by the Americans to rebuild after the war, the dominant role of the dollar, and America’s ascendant path for the rest of the 20th century.

As the world’s largest creditor, China is now where America was in 1947, on the cusp of the next world order. Kissinger told his hosts that while this transition from one system to another will likely take another 30 years, China’s role will only grow because it is obliged by its own self-interest to shape the global system that has shifted away from its “North Atlantic pole” toward China and the emerging economies.

In Kissinger’s view, China will be drafted into leadership at an accelerating pace because of the ongoing paralysis in the West. America, he put it politely, “is absorbed in a debate over the role of government and the sources of vitality in the United States; over how much government we should have and who should pay for it.” Europe is gripped by both “a financial and conceptual crisis, suspended between a national framework and its substitute.”

“A sense of cooperation is critical,” said Kissinger, “because we have entered a new era of complexity and are looking for an overriding framework. We have to adjust to the entry of a whole series of new players” on the global scene. For Kissinger, the “principal instrument of adjustment is the G-20,” where each country must fit its national aspirations into an international arrangement “that avoids a zero sum competition for economic growth.”

A shifting world order

Kissinger is right. In the past two centuries, Britain and then the United States were the hegemonic powers that imposed the “global public goods” of security, financial stability, a major reserve currency, and open trade. Today, the US and the G-7 advanced economies are increasingly unable to provide them. Yet, the emerging economies, led by China, are not yet able to do so.

For this reason, the G-20, which combines both the advanced and emerging economies, must collectively provide these global public goods. In a truly multi-polar world, even one in which China will be the largest economy by 2050, this will be the “new normal” for the foreseeable future.