张晓通:武汉大学政治与公共管理学院教授,博士。研究方向:经济外交、地缘政治。
D81
基金项目:本文受国家社科基金一 般项目“高铁走出去的地缘政治风险研究”(项目编号: 15BGJ046)的资助。
格雷厄姆·艾利森在描述当前中美关系时引入“修昔底德陷阱”概念,把雅典与斯巴达间的战争归因于新兴大国对守成国的挑战,由此推论日益崛起的中国与居于全球领导地位的美国爆发战争是大概率事件。然而,仔细研读修昔底德《伯罗奔尼撒战争史》对双方战争的叙述,会发现将雅典与斯巴达类比中国与美国,有明显的削足适履之嫌。“修昔底德陷阱”实质上是艾利森对修昔底德的误读,一定程度上误导了国际舆论,从而形成了一种新的认知陷阱——“艾利森陷阱”。其谬误在于:伯罗奔尼撒战争爆发的真正原因不是雅典力量的壮大,而是雅典的过度扩张政策和实践;权力格局变化不是战争爆发的唯一决定性因素;中美之间和雅典斯巴达之间也不具有相似性。伯罗奔尼撒战争对中美外交的启示在于:坚持和平崛起;妥善处理守成国面对崛起国的恐惧。
Graham Allison introduced the concept of Thucydides's Trap to describe the current Sino-USrelations and attributed the war between Athens and Sparta to the challenge of the emerging power against theestablished power, thus inferring that the outbreak of war between the rising China and US as the leader inthe world is a high probability event. However, looking back to Thucydides 's description of the war betweenthe two sides in the History of the Peloponnesian War, it seems that the analogy between the two sides wouldbe inappropriate to apply to the prediction of Sino-US relations. The Thucydides's Trap is essentially amisunderstanding of Thucydides by Allison, which misleads international public opinion to a certain extent, thusforming a new cognitive trap-the Allison's Trap, to interpret pessimistically Sino-US relations. The fallaciesare: the Peloponnesian War was caused by the overexpansion of Athens, instead of its rise; the contrastingpattern of powers is not the decisive factor in the outbreak of war; the relationship of China and the UnitedStates can't be compared with that of Athens and Sparta. Therefore, the enlightenments of the History of thePeloponnesian War on China 's diplomatic strategy toward the United States lie in: persisting in the peaceful rise andavoiding excessive expansion; properly handling the fear of the defending country in the face of a rising country.
张晓通,郝念东.“修昔底德陷阱”还是“艾利森陷阱”?——兼论中国的应对之策*[J].上海对外经贸大学学报,2020,(1):13-21.
复制