《欧洲论坛》报2023年8月12日讯：当我们回溯历史就会发现，美国企图破坏国家稳定的许多行动都收效甚微。尽管普京的推论违背北约和美国的意图，这些推论中的深意在未来几年内还会被讨论，但毫无疑问，这场战争受到美国外交政策的影响。
叙利亚总统阿萨德也向俄罗斯寻求更多帮助，这是美国的政策失误。俄克拉荷马大学中东研究中心主任约书亚·兰迪斯(Joshua Landis)认为，美国发现自己处于“一个糟糕的境地，他们正在坚持一项基于十年错误假设和错误分析的叙利亚外交政策”。
同样的情况也发生在西藏。在上一代，中华民国和中华人民共和国都与达赖喇嘛持有相同的观点，即西藏是中国的一部分。但为了阻碍中国共产党的崛起并遏制其声望，美国中央情报局与达赖喇嘛的哥哥嘉乐顿珠达成协议，制造叛乱。
这个故事还有两个鲜为人知的方面：一是嘉乐顿珠现在承认自己与中情局的合作让他终生遗憾；二是当中情局训练的部队空降西藏时，他们的一个兄弟进行了揭发，因为他不希望局势回到老路上去，于是把他们交给了解放军。这表明，美国，至少是美国中央情报局，误判了局势。
与此相同，台湾正在被误读和曲解，也因此对“国际社会”造成误导。
台湾不会成为下一个乌克兰，主要原因是没有人希望如此。即使是布林肯也在上个月公开宣布，美国不寻求独立，而根据调查，大多数台湾人也不寻求独立。美国只是希望像70年前在西藏一样，成为“红军难以承受之痛”。
正如努里·维塔奇(Nury Vittachi)和菲尔·海因斯(Phil Hynes)所指出的那样，就在俄罗斯越过乌克兰边境的几周前，美国已经承认自己愿意迫使中国 “发射第一颗子弹”。这当然得不到民主支持，但民主从来都只是一个借口。20多年来，越南、伊拉克和阿富汗这些国家从未实现过美国所谓的民主，乌克兰也一样。乌克兰在2022年5月禁止了反对党，在2022年7月将电视媒体合并到一个权力机构之下。
维塔奇和海因斯指出，美国希望在一场小规模战争后迅速投降，但考虑到他们的历史和在这方面缺乏成功经验，这种可能性很小。
冷战期间，美国的经济实力远远超过俄罗斯，但对中国却无法做到这一点。特朗普的前战略家埃尔布里奇·科尔比(Elbridge Colby)强调，需要改变策略。他在《拒绝战略》一书中指出，最符合美国利益的方式不是与中国开战，而是诱使中国与其他国家开战。
维塔奇和海因斯列出了实现这一目标的方法，即通过西方媒体的三点策略支持代理人战争：
1.媒体淡化美国的侵略行径，并将中国的合理反应放大为侵略行径；
2.将中国关于捍卫其领土的一贯声明曲解为新的侵略威胁；
3.夸大中国在香港、西藏和新疆有关的错误信息，这很可能促使台湾担心如果他们不战斗，同样的事情也会发生在他们身上。
外交事务部的杰西卡·T·马修斯指出了科尔比战略的缺陷，它所做出的一些重大假设很容易被证明是错误的。
首先，虽然美国想要与中国对抗，但它并不希望通过军事对抗，而是寻求伙伴联盟，即代理人战争。这些合作伙伴主要来自中国的邻国，但他们并不像美国一样渴求对抗。
布林肯、奥斯汀等人曾访问过的邻国，要么不愿意，要么没有能力支持他们的目标。
越南是中国的好友，越共领导人和国家主席最近都访问了中国。菲律宾新任总统最近也访问了中国，尽管他接待了许多美军，但他会从历史中明白与哪一方成为朋友更好。
日本或许有意愿参与，但需要几年时间重建军队。2022年12 月，日本宣布，到2027年日本防卫支出将达到“北约标准”，即占GDP的2%。韩国也有可能参加，但可能性不大，因为韩国的 GDP已经缩水，而且面临着美国对华贸易限制带来的紧缩货币政策。他们一定也意识到，美国的政策会使他们的经济雪上加霜，而军事干预将带来灾难性后果。
那么就只剩澳大利亚了。澳大利亚自愿参与美国的每一场战争，但它只拥有一支规模很小、训练有素的军队。与日本一样，澳大利亚也承诺加大军费开支，并将士兵人数增加到8万人，但目前还少得多，仅有41艘军舰。
关于中国军队的规模，存在不同的估计。有人说是40万士兵，也有人说将海军和空军的所有人员都算在内，估计有250万人，而中国海军拥有约340艘军舰。澳大利亚需要考虑的是，如果决定参加一场有美国提供后勤保障却不派遣战斗人员的战争，自己将面临什么。
这也意味着澳大利亚将与自己最大的贸易伙伴开战，一个贸易顺差高达170亿美元的合作伙伴。这些都将止于敌对行动开始的那一天。企业将立即倒闭，资源公司将游说议会阻止这种疯狂行为，因为成千上万的澳大利亚人会因此失业。澳大利亚的经济将陷入停滞，而美国可能会“提供支持”，使澳大利亚面临几代人的债务或借此控制基础设施，正如美国目前对乌克兰的所作所为。
美国对台湾野心的大前提是建立在一个被误解的“事实”上，即中国准备入侵台湾。但中国从未这样说过，没有哪个领导人、军人、政府发言人或中国媒体说过中国将要、也许、可能或应当入侵台湾。西方媒体选择曲解中国的声明，误导读者。
海峡两岸学生交流访问比美国领导人访问海峡更有前景。要了解中国大陆和台湾岛民的真实想法，我们应该问问他们。《环球时报》做了这样的调查，实际情况与媒体的报道大相径庭。馈赠礼物、欢迎访客，两岸关系的故事比比皆是——当然，我们不会在西方媒体上看到这些。
台湾问题不太可能引发冲突，中国人民不希望发生冲突，台湾人民也不希望发生冲突。但如果“受制者联盟”决定要这样做，那也是因为他们(再一次)被误导而陷入一场自己制造的冲突，而且这场冲突不会有好结果。
(杰瑞·格雷)
Taiwan won't be another Ukraine
EUROP’S TRIBUNE WEEKLY :
If we learn anything from history is should be that the many efforts to destabilise countries by the USA have had very limited success. While the nuances of Putin’s reasoning against the wishes of NATO and the US will be debated for many years to come there is no doubt whatsoever that this war, is influenced by US foreign policy.
Syria too where President Assad has asked Russia for more help; is a US policy error. According to Joshua Landis, Director of the Centre for Middle East Studies at the University of Oklahoma, the USA found themselves in “a terrible position where they’re upholding a Syria foreign policy that’s based on 10 years of bad assumptions and wrong analysis”.
The same happened in Tibet, a generation ago, both the RoC and PRC share the same view as the Dalai Lama, that Tibet is part of China but, in an effort to hamper the emergence and stem the popularity of the Communist Party of China, the CIA entered into arrangements with Gyalo Thondup the brother of the Dalia Lama to create resistance.
Two less well-known aspects of this story are that Thondup now admits to a lifelong regret of his involvement with the CIA and that when CIA trained forces were parachuted into Tibet, they were exposed by one of their brothers, not wanting the situation to return to the old ways, and handed to the PLA. That story demonstrates the USA, or at least it’s CIA, had misinterpreted the situation.
Taiwan is no different, it is being misread, misinterpreted and consequently, the “international community” are being misled.
The island province will not become the next Ukraine and the main reason is because no one wishes it to be so. Even Blinken publicly announced last month that USA does not seek independence and neither, according to surveys, do most of the people in Taiwan. The US simply wish, as they did in Tibet 70 years ago, to be a “running sore for the reds”.
As Nury Vittachi and Phil Hynes accurately pointed out, just weeks before Russia crossed Ukraine’s borders, the USA has admitted it is willing to force China into “firing the first bullet”. There is certainly no democratic support for this but democracy has always just been an excuse, more than 20 years in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan and none of those countries have what the US like to call democracy, neither for the record, has Ukraine which banned opposition parties in May 2022 and consolidated TV media under one authority in July 2022.
Vittachi and Hynes point out that USA would like a small war followed by a quick surrender but given their history and lack of success in this, it’s highly unlikely.
During the Cold War, USA simply outspent Russia, but the same can’t be done with China. Former Trump strategist, Elbridge Colby, highlighted that a change of tactics was needed. His book The Strategy of Denial points out that US interests are best served not by going to war with China but by goading China into war with others.
Vittachi and Hynes listed the methodology towards this through a three-point Western media strategy to support a proxy war:
• Media trivializing aggressive moves by the USA and amplifying reasonable responses by China as aggressive;
• Misinterpreting age-old statements made by China of defending its land as new and aggressive threats to invade;
• Exaggerating misinformation relating to China in Hong Kong, Tibet and Xinjiang, presumably to encourage fears in Taiwan of the same happening to them if they don’t fight.
Jessica T Matthews of Foreign Affairs, points out flaws in Colby’s strategy, it makes some grave assumptions which could very easily prove to be wrong.
First of all, while the USA has a willingness to confront China, it does not have a willingness to do so militarily, it seeks a coalition of partners, in other words, a proxy war. Primarily these partners would be drawn from China’s neighbours but China’s neighbours do not have the same thirst for confrontation.
The neighbours Blinken, Austin and others have visited to support their goals are either unwilling, or unable.
Vietnam is a good friend to China with the head of the Communist Party and the President both visiting China recently. The relatively new president of the Philippines has also recently visited China and, although he plays host to many US forces, he would know from history which side is better to be friends with.
Japan is a possibly willing participant but needs several years to rebuild its military. In December 2022 Japan announced it will increase to NATO goal of 2% of its GDP by 2027. South Korea is also a potential but unlikely participant after seeing its GDP shrink and facing a tight monetary policy brought about by US restrictions on trade with China. They must now be realising they are economically worse off following a US policy and a military intervention would be disastrous.
This leaves Australia; a willing participant of every US war, with a very small, well-trained military. Like Japan, Australia has committed to increasing spending and the number of soldiers to 80,000 but currently has a lot less and has just 41 ships.
There are varying estimates of the size of China’s army. Some say 400,000 soldiers but others include all personnel in the Navy and Airforce and estimate 2.5 million. While the navy has about 340 ships. Australia needs to consider what it faces if it decides to enter a war with logistic support but no combatants from the USA.
Australia would also be fighting their largest trading partner, one with which it has a trade surplus of $17 billion. Which would stop the day hostilities started. Businesses would immediately close, resource companies would be lobbying parliament to stop this madness as hundreds of thousands of Australians would be rendered unemployed. Australia’s economy would grind to a halt while the USA might “lend support” leaving Australia facing generations of debt or US control of infrastructure, as it is currently doing in Ukraine.
The entire premise of USA’s ambitions on Taiwan are based on one misunderstood “fact” that China is poised to invade Taiwan. But China has never said this, no leader, military person, government spokesperson or Chinese media has ever said China will, might, could or should invade Taiwan. Western media have chosen to misinterpret China’s statements and misinform their readers.
Visits by students across the straits show more promise than visits by US leaders to the straits, to find out what real people in China and on the island of Taiwan are thinking, we should ask them. Global Times did and the reality on the ground is very different from the perception in media. Stories of gift giving, welcoming visitors and cross straits relationships abound – but of course, we won’t see these in Western media.
It is unlikely there will be conflict over Taiwan, The people of China don’t want it, the people of the region don’t want it and the “coalition of the coerced”, if they decide they do want it, will only do so because they have (again) been misinformed and misled into a conflict of their own making and one which cannot end well.
（Jerry Grey )