Dr. Kissinger: Sino-US Joint Pacific Community

"The world is in great change. When upheaval occurs, people think it is a conflict, in fact, it requires a corresponding adjustment between countries. There may be some conflicts in the United States and China, but no policy based on conflict consciousness. 40 years from now, when we look back, we will be proud of our collective efforts today that are not based on the idea of conflict. "January 4, 2011, Dr. Henry Kissinger said in an interview with Caijing correspondent at his office in Manhattan Park Avenue 51-52, New York. The politician who had a turning influence on Sino-US relations in the 1971 had a diplomatic career with four generations of Chinese leaders and eight U.S. presidents. In the 40, Sino-US relations experienced hardships, from "hostile confrontation" to "strategic alliance", from "Sino-American Honeymoon" to "crisis four", from "Reef clusters" to "economic interdependence", and even embarked on an uncertain future. The Sino-US relations at this stage are not only the condensed and concentrated embodiment of China's modernization process and historical rise and the existing international political and economic order, but also a special historical period in which the two countries seek their own interests in the rapidly changing international system and adjust their foreign policies and strategies accordingly. The eventual formation of the global economic order will depend to a large extent on how the US and China deal with each other in the years ahead, the 88-Year-old Kissinger told Caijing reporters. "This generation of leaders has the opportunity to shape a trans-Pacific system of relations that deals with the common destiny of Nations, like the transatlantic system after the end of World War Ii."　　"Kissinger said the financial reporter Zhang Yandong/from New York's fragile U.S.-China strategic base?" The problem is not the label of the U.S.-China relationship, but the connotation of the U.S.-China relationship. The development of cooperative relations between the two countries is not a boon to the other party but is in the common interest of both parties. The goodwill of the US and China will be tested on many issues: what did you think about 40 years ago when you visited China secretly on a Pakistani plane?　　At that time, for the common strategic interests of both countries, China and the United States temporarily shelved the Taiwan issue, so that the two peoples can "end an era, start a new Era", then do you expect the world today's pattern? Kissinger: When I visited China 40 years ago, I did not anticipate what would happen. Until the first few months of our visit to China, we did not have any contacts, I am not familiar with China and China affairs, because I have studied the European problems in the past.　　Before I leave, I'm just thinking about who I'm going to see in China, what we're going to talk about and what kind of dialogue we'll have. To be honest, when the plane landed, I didn't say to myself: "We are changing history, and it is a lifetime history."　　"Furthermore, I did not think that China would develop a country like today, and I am sincerely pleased that the Chinese people have made remarkable achievements in the past 40 years," he said. Caijing: So what is the difference between China-US relations at the strategic level and 40 years ago? Whether there is a strategic basis for China-US relations today, we know that gramsDuring the administration of Linton, China and the United States have put forward the concept of "constructive strategic partnership". Kissinger: 40 years ago, we mainly considered the Soviet factor, because we feared that the Soviet Union would become a hegemonic state. At the same time, we are still stuck in the plight of the Vietnam War. Between 1971 and 1972, President Richard Nixon and Chairman Mao Zedong resumed diplomatic contacts not because the American and Chinese ideologies had something in common, but because of geopolitical needs. The US and China have been involved because the leaders of both countries recognize the common threat they face.　　At the same time, China's relatively low economic level, the United States and China's trade is far less than the United States and Central American trade, when China does not constitute an economic factor. During the late 80, the political and psychological underpinnings of the development of strategic Sino-US relations were waning during the two administrations of George W. Bush and Clinton.　　Despite the Clinton administration's consolidation of economic ties between the two countries, support for China's accession to the World Trade Organization and the resumption of normal trade relations with the US, he has never offered a compelling geopolitical justification.　　Indeed, the concept of "engagement" was promoted to "constructive strategic partnership" during the second term of Clinton, implying that the two countries had established some kind of cooperative relationship on a global scale, but because of the influence of domestic politics, the "strategic partnership" of U.S. policy towards China appeared to be empty. During the Bush administration, U.S. policy towards China was still subject to domestic politics.　　The problems of trade or other times, such as the environment, are not enough to produce a directional orientation, and it is difficult to rationalize the complicated Sino-US relations at the turn of the century.　　But we believe that the leaders of the United States and China are now trying to push the U.S.-China relationship in the 21st century forward in a positive direction.　　Today, we can see that both President Obama and President Hu Jintao have a positive desire to promote cooperation between the United States and China.　　Caijing: Do you mean that, because of the influence of domestic politics, the concept of "constructive strategic partnership" proposed by Clinton during the second term does not have substance, so the current situation is compared with 40 years ago?　　Kissinger: Now that China and the United States are engaged in world affairs globally, the areas and scope of Sino-US bilateral relations are increasing. When I first visited China, the problem was that we had a common adversary. Now, we don't have any rivals, but we have a common opportunity. A series of contemporary problems facing the world, such as the environment, climate change, nuclear proliferation, and the interaction and dependence of economic globalization, are not existed 40 years ago.　　In many aspects of these areas, cooperation between the United States and China will be at the heart of a constructive solution to these problems.　　For the time being, there is a need to build consensus between the United States and China, one on the global financial and economic framework and system, and the other on possible common ideas on these issues. This is important because if a treaty is to be concluded internationally, there can be no lack of consensus between the United States and China on the issues on which the two sides cannot agree.Misunderstanding will deepen.　　"Caijing": Does the concept of your strategic dimension, which has shifted from geopolitics to "common opportunities" and "economic dependence" between China and the US, mean that the strategic underpinnings of both countries are becoming more fragile, or should we think differently about today's Sino-US relations? Kissinger: In fact, the problem is not the label of the U.S.-China relationship, but the connotation of the U.S.-China relationship. The development of cooperative relations between the two countries is not a boon to the other party but is in the common interest of both parties.　　The sincerity of the US and China will be tested on many issues. "Caijing": In some Chinese people's view, the closer the economic ties between China and the United States, the more the United States will encircle China militarily.　　Others believe that the United States in order to delay China's development process, the military practice of containment of China's "C-encirclement." Kissinger: I don't understand what "surround China" means.　　China is a big country, a big country with 14 neighboring countries, and it has been surrounded by other nations. The real question for the United States is whether it is in America's national interest to prevent China from developing or, if possible, delaying its rise.　　In my opinion, it is not in the interest of the United States to do so. Caijing: Why is there always talk of strategic competition between China and America inevitable?　　In your opinion, even if China-US cooperation has a competitive side, what is the same or different from the "containment" policy of the US-Soviet Cold War period? Kissinger: Quite different from the Soviet Union at the time. China is not an adversary, I regard China as a partner. During the American-Soviet confrontation, the United States viewed the Soviet Union as a military threat.　　At the same time, the Soviet Union Chen Bing millions on China's borders and threatened China. But now we see China as a friendly country and the United States does not want conflict between the two countries.　　The Sino-US conflict is disastrous not only for the people of China and the United States, but also for the world.　　Caijing: In the United States, there are those who compare the rise of China with that of Germany in the 19th century, which is similar to the power of Britain in the international system during the rise of the year, do you think it is comparable? Kissinger: No, it has a completely different background.　　Germany has taken great pains to strengthen its military, while China is committed to economic growth and economic strength, while China is undergoing tremendous economic and social change. It is true that a rising China is often seen as a rising Germany in the 19th century. The rise of Germany culminated in the First World War. The First World War, however, was the failure of politicians. If you look at the conflict between Germany and Britain then it will be a huge disaster for both the British and German people.　　Who did not want a chance to change their decisions when the war-making politicians of the 1914 looked back at the wars and saw the catastrophe that had been brought about by the long-term prospects of their society, of European civilization and of the world as a whole? I would like to stress once again that the conflict between the United States and China will not only be detrimental to the peoples of the United States and China, but also to the global catastrophe.　　Sino-US conflict, we do not want to think about it, we should not think. Financial》: According to your point of view, the current Sino-US relations are different from the Cold War period of the U.S.-Soviet relationship, but also different from the 19th century German rise in the relationship with the United Kingdom, then the Sino-US cooperation and competition between the relationship is what kind of relationship?　　And what kind of a Sino-American relationship are you looking forward to? Kissinger: First of all, let us remember that the rivalry between the US and China is normal and unavoidable, but the conflict is unfortunate for both countries, avoiding conflict.　　Secondly, what I want to see is cooperation, because many of the problems facing the world today can only be solved by the cooperation of the United States and China. In the near term, it is important for the United States and China to maintain continuous dialogue. Because our two countries have completely different backgrounds and histories, the mutual understanding and exchanges between the leaders of the two countries are essential.　　So I look forward to President Hu Jintao's visit to the United States. Caijing: Two months ago, Lieberthal, director of Asian affairs at the former National Security Council, said one of the biggest problems between the two countries was a lack of trust and China's fear that the US would contain China, while the US feared that China's challenges to the US, especially China, had an unpredictable uncertainty.　　Do you think "distrust" is a big problem between China and America? Kissinger: China has a population of a billion of and the United States has 300 million people. I know the United States government well and I am familiar with the major leaders in the government who very much want the United States to maintain good relations with China. They may not know what to do in all circumstances and conditions, because it is a new problem for them. But their intentions and aspirations are positive. I do not wish to have a mistrust between the two countries. I will be firmly committed to avoiding it.　　I believe that we can avoid. I always feel uneasy when people talk about how America is, how China is, or when it comes to strategic rivalry between the United States and China.　　But I do not think there is a mistrust at the level of government in both countries.　　Caijing: You seem to be optimistic about the future of China-US relations, and what causes your optimism? Kissinger: As I emphasized earlier, the leaders of the two countries need to understand that the conflict is not good for both the US and the world. So they must be clear and make a decision, only cooperation can be mutually beneficial. I do not want the U.S.-China conflict, because conflict is a disaster.　　This is the common interest between us.　　America's return to Asia? When reference and "back to Asia" actually refer to a more proactive American foreign policy. "To return to Asia" should not be viewed from the perspective of "encircling China". The US and China should join together to conclude a "Pacific community", rather than the US and Chinese parties, "caijing": The Obama administration is talking about "returning to Asia", what does that mean?　　How does it affect the U.S. policy towards China? Kissinger: The idea of "returning to Asia" would sound good in a speech, but you have to understand that Obama criticized the Bush administration for not paying enough attention to foreign affairs at the time of the election. And Mr Obama feels that China may also think so. But I think China is still satisfied with the Bush administration. Therefore, a desire for the United StatesThe idea of righteousness has a completely different meaning to China. Caijing: In the United States, a more popular argument is that when Obama first took office, he found that during George W. Bush, the United States ignored the importance of Asian geopolitics because of counter-terrorism. Some people think that the old Bush and Clinton know the importance of Asia in the world, but Bush did not know.　　The Obama administration's "return to Asia" was the result of George W. Bush's missteps in U.S.-Asian policy. Kissinger: Not exactly. When reference and "returning to Asia" actually refer to a more proactive American foreign policy, we have always pursued a proactive foreign policy.　　Therefore, we should not look "back to Asia" from the perspective of "encircling China".　　Caijing: Do you mean to say that "return to Asia" has its domestic political elements?　　Kissinger: Yes, domestic political factors. Caijing: But the reality is that America's Asian policies are increasingly making Chinese feel targeted at China. You once said, "The United States is a Pacific country and it cannot be ruled out of Pacific affairs." America's interest in Asia is to boycott any country dominating Asia. "In fact, the United States has never left Asia, and China has never ruled out America's interests in Asia," he said.　　In your opinion, is China, the world's second-largest economy, hurting America's Asian interests? Kissinger: I think China will continue to develop and should continue to develop. A strong China is in the interest of the United States. I believe it is advantageous that the Chinese and American sides should jointly conclude a "Pacific community", rather than China and the United States.　　I have seen some speeches, such as Dai Bingguo in the "Stick to the road of peaceful development" in the article on this issue, I basically agree with his point of view. Caijing: Can you explain what you call the "Pacific Community"?　　You have repeatedly stressed that the centre of international Affairs is shifting from the Atlantic to the Pacific and the Indian Ocean in your articles on "three revolutions" and "opportunities for a New World order" and in your speeches, but the mechanism of the United States in Pacific affairs is far less than the mechanism between it and the Atlantic countries. Kissinger: That's why the U.S.-China relationship is so important.　　This relationship stems from the strategic interest of both sides to curb a common opponent's original intention, but after decades of relationship evolution gradually formed a pillar of the international system.　　Either side of the Pacific needs the cooperation of the other to deal with the effects and consequences of the current global economic crisis, and the eventual formation of the global economy will depend to a large extent on how the US and China deal with each other over the next few years. A disgruntled China could revisit Asia's regional landscape with a xenophobic eye.　　If protectionism were to rise in the United States, if China is seen as a long-term enemy, the last mantra we would like to see will be the reality that China will turn to mercantilism and become more politically conservative, which will lead to the diplomatic landscape of the 19th century, where the world has long been mired in competing divisions. The US-China relationship needs to be elevated to a new level. BigThe proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, energy, environment and other issues require cooperation between the two countries.　　Of course, the realization of its vision must include the participation of countries such as Japan, Korea, India, Indonesia, Australia and New Zealand, whether they are part of the trans-Pacific structure or regional arrangements, and should be involved in addressing these common problems facing humankind.　　It seems to me that this generation of leaders has the opportunity to shape a trans-Pacific system of relations involving the common destiny of Nations, just as the transatlantic system was shaped after the end of World War Ii.　　But, unlike the international architecture of the Second World War, the challenges now facing them are more in the political and economic spheres than in the military. Caijing: Your "Pacific Community" still has differences and possible competing interests between the United States and China in Asia. Last October, in a speech, Mrs Clinton highlighted U.S. alliances in Asia and U.S. leadership in Asia and the Pacific by strengthening cooperation with Asia through three ways with "alliance countries, emerging partner countries and regional cooperation mechanisms".　　Mrs Clinton seems to see China as an uncertain country, and is she proposing "frontier deployment diplomacy" against China? Kissinger: I remember Chairman Mao once told me that it is important to focus on Japan. For the United States, we have some traditional friends in Asia, we have a relationship with them earlier than China, and maintain good relations with them, not against China. It is also in the interest of the United States to establish an Asian mechanism that cooperates with all countries.　　What I am advocating is that the United States and China work together in the Pacific and conclude a "Pacific community". Caijing: Lieberthal said that in the eyes of the White House, China's Asian policy is changing and heading in a bad direction. In particular, after the international financial crisis, China's attitude to its neighbors has changed, allowing neighboring countries to find the United States to express concern about China. He also suggested that in the past China had been very diplomatic about its neighbors, but now it is becoming more and more "publicized".　　What do you think of China's Asian policy? Kissinger: In fact, the neighbors ' perception of China took place in an unusual context, when China's economy was very weak and Asian tigers were booming. But now, China is developing rapidly, so it is facing the adjustment of policy and relations.　　Of course, China's development has also aroused some concern in some countries around Asia. I hope your leaders will understand that. We will not reach a consensus on all issues, as in important countries such as the United States, but we can agree on some common goals and work together to achieve them.　　The leaders of the two countries can decide what to do with disagreement, but the overriding theme is cooperation.　　Caijing: What are your suggestions for China's complexity in dealing with Asia-Pacific relations, apart from the unique geopolitical security of the US sandwiched between the two oceans and the complex and delicate geopolitical situation in China and its neighboring countries? Kissinger: First of all, on the Asian issue, I think the need for dialogue between the US and China is crucial. For the neighbor of ChinaCountries, if China can engage in dialogue in the economic and political spheres, without involving force and military, it is the most successful. But the world is in great change. It can not be avoided that when the upheaval occurs, people think that the conflict, in fact, this requires a corresponding adjustment between countries. There are some conflicts in the United States, but we cannot formulate policies based on conflict consciousness.　　40 years from now, when we look back, we will be proud of our collective efforts today that are not based on the idea of conflict. Caijing: Last year, when you were interviewed by an American journalist about whether the situation in North Korea was scary for you, you replied, "Fear is not the quality that a politician needs." These events indicate that some regional conflicts may occur, but they do not necessarily or must occur. North Korea is a relatively weak country, limited by its national capabilities, and historically, China's relationship with the world is far more important than the North Korean issue itself.　　"Today, do you still think so?" Kissinger: Yes, I still think so. I understand that both North Korea's history and geopolitics are of special importance to China. But I do not think it is easy to look at the problems of China and North Korea, but should put it in the context of North-east Asia and the Pacific in view of the DPRK.　　I hope that China and the United States can find a common solution to the North Korean problem.　　"Caijing": You have confidence in this?　　Kissinger: I am hopeful.　　"Caijing": So, how to put the DPRK issue into the framework of Sino-US relations to think, the North Korean issue on the strategic level of the relationship between China and the United States have any impact? Kissinger: First, the North Korean nuclear issue is a threat to everyone. But in the long run, the threat to China is much greater than that of the US.　　Therefore, on the issue of nuclear weapons, the United States and China share common interests.　　Second, China has a special political interest in North Korea geographically, and the United States understands that.　　Third, North Korea is in the midst of a change, and its regime is gradually changing into a new, untested leader. There is no need for China and the United States to get into a dispute over North Korea, which affects our fundamental interests as a nation.　　Therefore, the DPRK issue is both a challenge and a test as well as an opportunity for both China and the United States. To create a new world both China and the United States must learn how to participate in world affairs. The United States is still the most powerful country in the world, but it no longer has the absolute dominance it must use its "leadership" wisdom, not as the only dominant country but as an outstanding leader in the complex world stage "Caijing": Six months ago, you said, "China is going in the right direction of peaceful development",　　Still think so? Kissinger: I still think so, I believe China is moving in a positive direction. Both countries, of course, have emphasized the factors of conflict.　　My new book, which I have just completed, also has a lot of emphasis on my ideas, and I think both sides should look in the positive direction. The English of this book is called "Onchina", Chinese name is not yet good.This is a book about China, which will be published in the United States this May. The book focuses on the history of China-US exchanges and how China has dealt with diplomacy and strategy in history, as well as China's impact on the global balance of power in the 21st century.　　I would like to explain how China's two great men--Mao Zedong and Deng Xiaoping--have shaped and changed the fate of modern China by analyzing the diplomatic affairs of China during some critical periods. Caijing: In your book The American Global Strategy, China has had little experience of equal interaction with other societies in its long history.　　Does this mean that China, in its dealings with the international community, is only good at "looking down" or "looking up" at others, and not being good at "head-up" others? Kissinger: I have highlighted this point in my new book, but I did not say that China looks up to other countries. Before 19th century, when China was strong, it dominated Asia.　　For more than hundreds of years, China has rarely encountered a country as large and complex as itself, a "central power" that sees the relationship between China and neighboring countries with the concept of tributary system, and regards neighboring countries as their own dependencies. In the 19th century and the first half of 20th century, it was humiliated by Western powers. China's experience in the past, the modern state of the sovereign equality of the diplomatic concept does not exist. Before 1648, there was no such idea in Europe.　　This is history. Caijing: But China's modernization and integration of the international system began in the "revenge", a strong contrast to the Chinese psychological loss of balance, pride and humiliation, xenophobia and fawning, inferiority and self-reliance are persistent and contradictory combination of the Chinese people.　　You have said that China is likely to challenge the United States is not Marxism, but nationalism, why do you think so? Kissinger: There is a real nationalist sentiment in China. But from my experience with Chinese leaders and Chinese scholars, I have not found this problem. I think China needs to be interpreted and controlled in a systematic and rational way, which is why I think the US and China need to understand and cooperate more and see cooperation as the cornerstone.　　At the same time, in my view, the characteristics of self-development in the course of China's interaction with the West will continue to shape or influence its policies and attitudes towards the outside world. I have been urging the United States not to threaten China.　　I think China should not threaten the United States, of course, this is not your basic policy. "Caijing": the United States in the process of becoming a world power, the world has experienced two wars. Although the United States at the beginning of the 20th century economic and technological strength and the United Kingdom, but the real world leader is in the "Second World War", the United States reluctantly involved in world affairs, before the pursuit of isolationism.　　What can China learn from American historical experience in its ascent? Kissinger: The American experience is very special. When we become a big country, we are the only important industrial country, but now there are many important industrial countries.　　This is a very different background.　　I am one of the few people who have seen all the Chinese leaders. I'm printing to the Chinese leadersAs deep as they are, they will find a solution to the thorny problems of the moment. Mao Zedong completed the revolution and established a system of government, and Hu Jintao is continuing to build a regime created by Mao, even though they face different problems.　　I can't seem to give China any good ideas, and China's leaders have enough capacity to solve their own problems.　　Caijing: Now that the United States is asking China to take on more international responsibilities, do you think China needs and is ready to take on more international responsibilities? Kissinger: It's an American story, I don't like it.　　Because it means that the United States teaches China what to do. I think both China and the United States should define what is the joint responsibility of both countries. Of course, China needs to define and participate in international affairs and assume international responsibility. From my contacts and perceptions of China's leaders, they are ready and able to do so. What is important is that China is limited in what particular areas. China is active in the world and has the ability to assume international responsibilities.　　But China cannot be asked to take on international responsibility, which is limited by Americans. "Caijing": In another 20 years, assuming that China's GDP is comparable to that of the US, how will the United States treat China?　　Is America ready for China's rise? Kissinger: Can China's strength be comparable to that of the US? I think this is going to happen soon. China will become an equal partner with the United States. In fact, in many ways, China is already comparable to the United States, although in some ways it is not as good as America. The United States needs to see China as an equal partner, and that is the future.　　And that will be the case.　　"Caijing": After the Cold War, you are always reminding your country that "this is the first time in history that there is a dilemma that can neither quit nor dominate the world arena", and you often suggest that America's "power" in the world is relatively transformed into a "leader" position, and what kind of "leadership" status do you expect from America? Kissinger: The United States did not participate in international affairs until nearly 70 years after the end of the Second World War in 1945, when the United States was the country's most powerful nation, which accounted for about 35% of the world's gross national product, and China recently began to participate in international affairs.　　Therefore, two countries must learn how to participate in international affairs.　　In my view, the United States is still the world's most powerful country, but it no longer has the absolute dominance, it must use its "leadership" wisdom, not as the only dominant country, but as an outstanding leader in the complex world stage. Caijing: What do you expect from Hu Jintao's visit?　　What does the U.S. government expect? Kissinger: I think the leaders of both countries have had a difficult time and a clash of problems, and I am sure they will have more understanding of how China and the US can cooperate in the coming years, especially in the last five years.　　I am optimistic that Hu Jintao will have a successful visit. The relationship between nations as a family, brothers and sisters will be in all the same attitude on all issues? It is normal for China and the US not to agree on all issues. But it is not whether the two countries can achieve their goals together, but whether they can findTo the ways and means to solve the problem.　　This is the point I want to express, do you think I made it clear? Caijing: What you mean is that both China and the United States should be calm in the face of possible competition and a kind of uncertainty and strive for cooperation.　　If so, it heralds the beginning of another new era. Kissinger: Yes! To be exact, there are some uncertainties facing some limited uncertainty.　　In short, we need to strengthen cooperation to create a new world together. Our correspondent Wang Yu and United Nations translation crimson also contributed to this article