南德智库报告假设的美中系统性低烈度战争情景

　　在南德智库报告《大国战争的回归-美中两国系统性冲突情景》（The Return of Great Power War——Scenarios of Systemic Conflict Between the United States and China）一共分为八章，共约七万字（英文）。在第六章中，对未来美中之间可能发生的军事冲突——低烈度战争进行了假设预想，以下笔者摘取一些段落跟大家分享。

　　有意思地是，报告第六章开篇叙述基本契合美中关系当前态势：

　　总结第五章我们可以发现，地缘政治背景是两国都进入了敌对状态。也就是说，彼此都把对方定为"敌国"，认为对方有意图和能力危害自己的基本安全。因此，无论是否需要正式宣战，两个国家的政府均会重新调整国家和安全战略，以优先考虑这场确定冲突。这种决定将使多年来不断升级的紧张局势达到顶峰，两国在广泛的经济、政治、安全、技术和其他问题上经常发生争吵。此外，美中竞争与其他国家的竞争和争端重叠的趋势也将达到高潮，其中一些国家保持或加强了与敌对大国结盟的国家之间的争斗。按照以往的先例，其他国家的参与会使美中紧张局势的升级更加难以解决，因为它为冲突的持续提供了重要的国际支持。这反过来又会刺激两国的政府在自己的斗争中利用这种多边争斗来获取利益。在这种情况下，由两个大国组成的多边组织很可能会因为僵局而瓦解，导致国际社会在面对集体威胁时无所作为。蔓延的国际混乱可能会通过引入或加剧对国际安全的多重威胁而使对抗更加复杂。它还会提高竞争的利害关系，因为双方都会有动力去指责对方，并可能利用一些混乱来损害对方的利益。这反过来又会加重人们对威胁的看法，并鼓励双方的政府更加努力地争取对“敌国”的决定性优势。

　　To summarize the findings of Chapter Five, the geopolitical context is one in which both countries have entered a state of hostilities. That is to say, each nation has designated the other as an “enemy” state that it regards as having both the intent and ability to endan-ger its own basic security. Regardless of whether this entailed a formal declaration of war, both capitals would reorder their national and security strategies to prioritize the conflict. The decision would culminate years of escalating tension in which the two nations regu-larly feuded over a broad range of economic, political, security, technological, and other issues. Moreover, it would culminate trends in which the U.S.-China rivalry overlapped with rivalries and disputes involving other countries, some of which maintained or stepped up their own feuds with countries aligned with the rival great power. Following past prec-edent, the involvement of other countries would add to the intractability of escalating U.S.-China tension by providing a significant international constituency for the continua-tion of the conflict. This could in turn incentivize both capitals to exploit such multilateral feuds for advantage in their own struggles. In such a situation, multilateral organizations featuring both powers would likely have broken down due to gridlock, resulting in interna-tional inaction in the face of collective threats. Spreading international disorder could com-plicate the rivalry by introducing or aggravating multiple threats to international security. It could also elevate the stakes of the contest, since both sides would be incentivized to blame the other and possibly exploit some of the disorder to harm the interests of the other. This in turn would aggravate threat perceptions and encourage both capitals to drive even harder to achieve a decisive advantage over the other.