By Xiang Haoyu

項昊宇

An article by Japan's newly elected Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba published by Hudson Institute, an American conservative think tank, has sparked controversy. The article, titled "The Future of Japan's Foreign Policy", asserted the establishment of an "Asian version of NATO" on the pretext that "the absence of a collective self-defense system like NATO in Asia means that wars are likely to break out because there is no obligation for mutual defense. Under these circumstances, the creation of an Asian version of NATO is essential to deter China by its Western allies."

近日，日本新任首相石破茂在上臺前夕發(fā)表于美國保守派智庫哈德遜研究所的一篇文章引發(fā)了不小的爭議。這篇題為《日本外交政策未來》的文章闡述了關(guān)于創(chuàng)設(shè)“亞洲版北約”的主張，聲稱“由于亞洲不存在北約這樣的集體防衛(wèi)體制，沒有相互防衛(wèi)的義務(wù)，就容易發(fā)生戰(zhàn)爭。為了懾止中國，西方盟國應(yīng)當(dāng)創(chuàng)設(shè)亞洲版北約”。

The idea of forming an "Asian version of NATO" is laden with Cold War-style bloc confrontation and zero-sum mentality. It is completely divorced from the reality in the Asian region known for its complexity and diversity and goes counter to Asian countries' wishes to seek common ground, shelve differences, and pursue inclusive cooperation. Therefore, it came as no surprise that the article soon triggered universal opposition and questioning from Japan itself, other Asian countries, and even the US. It is overwhelmingly believed that what Japan's new prime minister suggested has no viability because it is against Japan's domestic law and regional realities, nor is it in line with America's policy objectives.

這篇文章有關(guān)“亞洲版北約”的觀點充斥著冷戰(zhàn)性質(zhì)的陣營對抗和零和思維，既嚴(yán)重脫離亞洲地區(qū)復(fù)雜多元的現(xiàn)實，也不符合亞洲國家求同存異、包容合作的訴求。果不其然，這一觀點迅速引發(fā)日本國內(nèi)、亞洲各國乃至美國的普遍反對和質(zhì)疑，絕大多數(shù)意見認(rèn)為這一主張有悖日本國內(nèi)法律和地區(qū)現(xiàn)實情況，也不符合美國的政策目標(biāo)，根本不具可行性。

After WWII, the US has maintained its dominance in the Asian security order leveraged on the bilateral "hub-spoke" system encompassing its regional allies such as Japan, ROK, Australia, and the Philippines. International strategists believe there are two reasons why the US didn't forge a collective security architecture in Asia. First, bilateral alliances enable it to better manage and control its allies, preventing them from unilateral actions that may embroil the US into unnecessary conflicts. Second, Asia doesn't have the tradition and collective recognition of multilateral defense cooperation, and America's Asian Pacific allies are geographically far from each other with different security concerns and demands, making shared strategic objectives almost impossible. Therefore, an "Asian version of NATO" has no viability in the region.

二戰(zhàn)后，美國主要依托日本、韓國、澳大利亞、菲律賓等條約盟友，采取雙邊性質(zhì)的“軸輻”體系來維持對亞洲安全秩序的主導(dǎo)權(quán)。國際戰(zhàn)略界認(rèn)為美國在亞洲沒有打造集體安全架構(gòu)的原因在于，一是通過雙邊同盟，可以更好管理和控制盟友，防止其采取可能將美國卷入不必要沖突的單邊行為；二是亞洲地區(qū)，不僅缺乏多邊防務(wù)合作傳統(tǒng)和集體認(rèn)同，美亞太盟友地理位置分散，彼此之間安全利益關(guān)切訴求不同，難以凝聚起共同的戰(zhàn)略目標(biāo)。因此，“亞洲版北約”在本地區(qū)嚴(yán)重缺乏現(xiàn)實可行性。

Between the aggravated China-US rivalry and the prolonged Ukraine crisis, there has been renewed attention to an "Asian version of NATO" in the international community over recent years. Washington has sped up its deployments around China in the name of its "Indo-Pacific" strategy, and its minilateral cooperation has kept deepening through the US-Japan-India-Australia quadrilateral mechanism (the Quad), the US-UK-Australia (AUKUS), and the US-Japan-Philippines and US-Japan-ROK alliances, giving rise to a composite and multi-tiered alliance system. In the meantime, leaders of Japan, ROK, Australia and New Zealand have been invited to NATO summits for three years in a row, indicating their intensified military and security cooperation. The NATO 2022 Strategic Concept labeled China as a "systemic challenge", with which the organization began to extend its antenna to Asia Pacific. All these moves are signs that NATO is trying to enhance its presence in the Asia Pacific.

近年來，在中美博弈加劇和烏克蘭危機延宕的背景下，國際上對于“亞洲版北約”關(guān)注再度升溫。美國以“印太戰(zhàn)略”為名在中國周邊加快投棋布子，美日印澳“四邊安全機制”、美英澳（奧庫斯）、美日韓和美日菲等小多邊合作不斷加深，初步形成一套復(fù)合型、圈層嵌套的網(wǎng)格化盟伴體系。與此同時，日韓澳新四國領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人連續(xù)三年受邀參加北約峰會，與北約強化軍事安全合作。2022年北約發(fā)表新版“戰(zhàn)略構(gòu)想”將中國定位為“系統(tǒng)性挑戰(zhàn)”，并將觸角伸向亞太地區(qū)。這些動作被視為“亞太北約化”和“北約亞太化”正在同步發(fā)展。

Yet the US is actually very cautious about establishing the so-called "Asian version of NATO". Senior officials in the Biden administration have said repeatedly on various occasions that they had no such intention. After the US-Japan-ROK meeting at Camp David last year, US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan expressly denied that the trilateral security relations constituted a new NATO in the Pacific, and US Defense Secretary Austin said they didn't want to form another NATO in the Indo-Pacific even though they valued the relations with their allies and partners. At the same time, countries in the Asian Pacific region are passive or opposed to the idea. Former Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong used to express his opposition publicly, and a Singaporean scholar, when receiving an interview from a Japanese media outlet about Shigeru Ishiba's article, asserted that no country wants an Asian collective security organization except Japan.

但實際上，美方對于建立“亞洲版北約”的態(tài)度卻頗為慎重，拜登政府高層多次在不同場合表態(tài)無意建立“亞洲版北約”。去年的美日韓戴維營峰會后，美國總統(tǒng)國家安全事務(wù)助理沙利文明確否認(rèn)美日韓安全關(guān)系是“太平洋地區(qū)的新北約”。美國防長奧斯汀曾稱，盡管美珍視與盟伴關(guān)系，但美國“并不是要在印太地區(qū)建立一個北約”。與此同時，亞太地區(qū)各國對于“亞洲版北約”均持消極或否定態(tài)度。新加坡前總理李顯龍就曾公開表達反對立場。針對石破茂文章的觀點，新加坡學(xué)者在接受日媒采訪時更是斷言：“除了日本，沒有國家想要亞洲集體安全組織?！?/p>

While the "Asian version of NATO" won't become Japan's policy any time soon, we must be alert to the deep-rooted Cold War mindset of some Japanese political elites exposed by this idea – they are not small in number. Their bigoted obsession with zero-sum confrontation has presented itself in the foreign policies and actions of several Japanese administrations from Shinzo Abe to Fumio Kishida. If the new Prime Minister continues to adopt a "beggar-thy-neighbor" foreign strategy and serves as a proponent of ideological competition and geopolitical confrontation, he will further split the region and exacerbate geopolitical tension. That will do no good to Asia's stability and development, neither will it bring real security to Japan in the end.

盡管“亞洲版北約”尚難轉(zhuǎn)化為日本的現(xiàn)實政策，但需要警惕的是，這一主張暴露出的是日本一些政策精英中根深蒂固的冷戰(zhàn)思維，在日本國內(nèi)有一定代表性。這種僵化偏執(zhí)的零和對抗性思維，實際上已經(jīng)鮮明體現(xiàn)在從安倍到岸田內(nèi)閣的對外政策行動中。石破茂內(nèi)閣的對外戰(zhàn)略如果繼續(xù)以鄰為壑，充當(dāng)意識形態(tài)競爭和地緣政治對抗的推手角色，只會進一步割裂地區(qū)，激化地緣矛盾，不僅對亞洲的穩(wěn)定發(fā)展無益，最終也難以給日本帶來真正的安全。

(The author is a special research fellow at the Department for Asia-Pacific Studies, China Institute of International Studies)

（作者是中國國際問題研究院亞太研究所特聘研究員）

Editor's note: Originally published on huanqiu.com, this article is translated from Chinese into English and edited by the China Military Online. The information and opinions in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of eng.chinamil.com.cn.