财新传媒
位置:博客 > 冯毅 > “双保证”可能才是朝鲜所求及中国的作用

“双保证”可能才是朝鲜所求及中国的作用

按:此文为2018年6月8日修改版本。(English translation follows)
 
朝鲜发展核武问题是当前国际紧张局势的一个重大问题。其实人们都很清楚朝鲜为了自身安全,发展核武器。问题的结症在于美国保证不侵犯朝鲜,朝鲜保证不发展核武。这一双保证应该看作一个问题的两个方面,是不生战不生乱的关键。不弃核就没有和平,没有和平也不会弃核,战争将不可避免。“恐怖和平”是危险的选择。
 
一个国家不受侵犯,是联合国宪章的基本精神,是天经地义的合法的。但美国已有大量前科,常会以某些借口将这原则予以践踏。伊拉克,利比亚和前南斯拉夫的战火还未消散,该负责的人还没受到正义的审判,这又打算在朝鲜复制。一部分人们之间弥漫着一种气氛,似乎朝鲜领导人为妖魔,应该诛之,这已超过核不扩散的范畴。我们无意评价一国领导人。但妖魔化一国领导人,我们看到这同妖魔化萨达姆,卡扎菲和叙利亚的阿萨德如出一轍,是为侵犯某国做舆论准备,卡扎非还同意放弃发展大规模杀伤武器,并巨额赔偿了洛克比空难,但也不得好死,利比亚没有大国的大后方,西方说翻脸就翻脸,令人反感,这就是所谓“利比亚模式”。难道朝鲜弃核后就换回这样的结局吗? 
     
禁止朝鲜发展核武器还有一个绕不开的问题,就是可逆不可逆的问题。我们看到在小布什取代克林顿当美国总统时,对朝鲜不侵犯的保证发生过重大逆转。这是美国4年一选举,政权不连贯的问题,后面的总统可以随意推翻其前任代表美国与他国签订的协议。这是和美国签订任何跨越选举年的长期协议所面临的风险。特朗普不计后果宣布“退出”多国签订的伊朗禁核协议,什么“推出”,就是不合我意,就撕毁协议。有这种不讲信誉的行为吗?还能和美国打交道签订任何协议吗? 美国商界也为之感到羞愧。 这要逼着伊朗走向发展核武的道路。反对伊朗发展导弹,理由也相当荒谬,说是导弹能运载原子弹。那人能够发展原子弹,连人也要消灭吗?说穿了,就是伊朗有了导弹,那在红海亚丁湾中的军舰,就不能那么为所欲为了。说威胁到美国而禁止发展导弹,难道美国有那么多导弹威胁到别的国家就行了吗?难道只准美国威胁别人,就不许别人威胁美国?如一国以导弹无故对他国进行威胁,这就是另外一回事。事实证明什么人经常对他国进行导弹威胁?美国人在国内外一些事情上常提出相当天真的一些理由,就说美国国内禁枪问题,说“枪不杀人,人才杀人”。那么发生在拉斯维加斯的一个人如何能枪杀50多人?如没有枪的帮助,一个人无论如何也打不过50多人,更不要说杀害50多人,是枪放大了杀人动机和结果。总统选举上,个人提名要靠个人捐赠,其理由也是无稽之谈,说捐赠表达了捐赠人的意愿。因为表达意愿,就允许吗?那么贿赂,也表达收买人的意愿,能合法吗?中国南海自由航行从未有过问题,但美国可以提出航海自由的理由,而派军舰搅局;利用“人权大于主权”的说法实质为侵犯他国开路,用自己定义的人权,即单讲政治上的人权,以自己的标准,管中窥豹,而不管他国经济上首先摆脱贫穷的人权,毫不尊重他人的权力,不一而足。总之,我们举这些事例,想说明和美国人打交道要格外小心。它可能提出天真荒谬的理由而撕毁协议或采取行动,这和美国霸道惯了和其文化底子有关。因此朝鲜如能禁核,并要把禁核做成不可逆转,我想得要美国同样把不侵犯朝鲜的保证做成不可逆转,即不受更换总统的影响才行,这需提醒朝鲜。
   
根据美国的历史看,从两次世界大战看,美国在无绝对把握取胜和可能反受其害的时候,是不会轻易发动或参与任何战争的,但保持世界各地的紧张局势是另一回事,这是它拿手的好戏。它在东亚的朝鲜,在欧洲的乌克兰制造紧张局势,在中东挑起战火,全面开花,全面做出要打的招式,不讲策略,一看就是假的,目的在于世界的资金,但也要真放几个导弹,以使戏演得逼真。
 
美国远离亚欧非大陆,如果世界局势紧张,那么资金就会逃离亚欧非大陆而流向美国这远离紧张中心的避风港,事实也是这样,在美国的这种操作下,使世界的资金流入美国,其道指在过去的十年间由7000点上升到26,616高点;如果世界搞建设,如一带一路,美国远离大陆的现实就对美国非常不利。这决定了美国希望采取维持世界各地紧张的策略,但并不是真要开战,保持紧张对美国最为有利,所以世界的金主不必对美国的行动太认真。
 
韩国自从平昌冬奥会先做了大量努力,赢得金正恩的感动,投之以李,报之以桃。于是朝鲜可以先炸毁核试验场,以表示弃核决心。我们是这样看的。但美国不这样看,他仗着其军事的强大,只顾摆横蛮。既然朝鲜已表示弃核换和平的意愿,而且采取行动,下面该怎么办?按常人的想法,这时美韩应暂缓军事演习,应予以积极回应,如朝鲜没有跟进,再可恢复军演不迟。不管朝鲜是出于对韩国文昌奥运做法的感动,还是特朗普强压的结果,这不重要,重要的是朝鲜已再次明确表示弃核换和的意图,美国要真是为了世界着想防止核扩散,那么政策上就应表现足够的灵活性.
 
我们想战乱绝不是韩国愿意看到的结果,也不是中国愿意看到的结果。韩国首先面临战争的风险,可能真是希望和平,朝鲜南北双方非常在乎和平,弃核明确的目的就是为了和平为了建设。但文在寅和南韩需认清形势,只要希望和平是真诚的,韩国就需积极采取行动予以配合,而不是相反。美国一些人的僵硬只能客观解释为其政策的重点不在乎朝鲜半岛是否和平,也不在乎弃核,恐怕在美国政府中还有人骨子里还想推翻朝鲜现政权和维持东亚的紧张局势。大量的事实证明,世界上没有一个民族在面临死亡的威胁时,愿意放下一切可以有效反抗的武器。
 
朝鲜要真的永久弃核也不必非对美国保证不行,如美国在朝鲜弃核后不能认真保证朝鲜半岛的永久和平,可对有中俄参与的联合国保证弃核的决心,并换取联合国对半岛保证和维护永久和平,中俄应主动发起安理会会议,争取改变联合国65年前支持朝鲜南方打北方的错误,再次出面,派维和部队,采取绝对中立的态度,在三八线上维护和平,不使南北朝鲜发生战乱。在联合国的监督下在中国或俄罗斯可永久封存朝鲜的核武。   
 
朝鲜战争停战协议签字方是朝方,中国人民志愿军及联合国。中国人民志愿军撤消可随时恢复,只要恢复一个总部就够了。但签字的另一方是联合国,而并非美国。尽管美国是主要参战国,美国仍不能一方单独代替联合国。联合国至少必须召开有中国参与的安理会会议并通过决议,由三方共同签订终止战争的协议。在安理会讨论终战协议时,需一并表达维护朝鲜半岛的永久和平和朝鲜永远弃核的保证,朝方需要中俄的参与,可提供中俄对和平的保证与见证。如联合国不行,朝鲜应对中俄讲清楚保证弃核的决心,以换取中俄联合保证朝鲜半岛的永久和平。这点必须现在就讲清楚,使美国意识到,朝鲜弃核后,保卫其和平还有中俄两国,以使美国必须认真对待朝鲜和平的要求。
 
中国还在停火协议下负有保卫朝鲜北方不受侵略的责任。但因中国已参加了安理会,形势发生了变化,要更好的利用联合国名义,尽管此方法不容易,但值得努力。韩国也需考虑美国的做法是否得当,考虑美军完全撤出韩国,把韩国的命运掌握在自己的手里。我想这是韩国,朝鲜,中俄以及世界爱好和平的国家共同的诉求。如美国政策这样僵硬,那就不得不考虑代替美国,因他的僵硬政策换不来弃核保和的目标。
 
朝鲜北部政权,是当年毛主席为给外国侵略者以痛击,(美国当年虽然打着联合国的旗号,但外国军队是干预朝鲜内部事务,并侵犯朝鲜。后联合国宣布派军进入一国,只能是维持和平,不能帮助一方打另一方,这等于对以前参于一方打另一方行动的否定);是进一步保卫新生的中国不受侵犯,将保卫中国的战争进行于已发生的境外,以牺牲几十万中国将士的生命保护下来的,我们怎能不理呢?朝鲜战争只是签订了停战协议,仍不得以任何理由破坏停战协议,所以中国仍然具有保护朝鲜和平与安全的责任。这就是另一种保证,即中国对朝鲜安全的保证,这应是责无旁贷的保证。不用等待美国的保证,更不用幻想美国把其保证做成不可逆转。我们必须认清此点,要准备单独承担上述的责任。
 
用中俄对朝鲜和平的共同保证,换取朝鲜不发展核武器,在这基础上,中俄也将反对联合国对朝鲜的一切封锁,当然朝鲜也不要对南韩对外主动挑衅,中国可以经济援助朝鲜使其专心搞建设。     朝鲜可以改善投资环境,最高领导机构做出相关的决议,以吸引和保证国际投资。中俄的这种意愿可单方面通过中俄国防部联合声明,公开表达出来。在国际问题上要坚持有理有利有节的策略才能迎来尊重,才能施展抱负,这成本最小。我们搞好中朝两国关系,事关我国周边的安宁,不容他国随意破坏。
   
特朗普要是积极配合,他自己可随意争取诺贝尔和平奖。当然特朗普还有一种考虑,就是在其主持下,朝核问题给伊核问题做出个“好榜样”,在朝鲜弃核弃导弹后,美国怎样给朝鲜带来和平和繁荣。但朝鲜和伊朗不同,在朝鲜弃核弃导弹后对不怎么讲意识形态的特朗普和美国没有重要价值,且朝鲜有中国的大后方,但伊朗没有。而沙特和以色列还担心伊朗发展做大,决不会象韩国那样对美国起到调和的作用。如特朗普不配合,其政策将极可能最终引发核战争,朝鲜半岛如产生战乱,有难民问题,那时别说中国搞建设,还会被朝鲜半岛的战乱所殃及,对中国尤为不利,那时再恢复和平成本就大了。所以中国不能不管,中国不能不在适当的时机,更积极的参与进去。如联合国不行,在韩国要求美军完全撤离的基础上,中俄或中国将不得不单独肩负起维护朝鲜南北双方不生战不生乱的和平责任。这是中国须提前与俄罗斯商议准备这不得不面对的选择。
 
"Double guarantee" is what North Korea seeks and China’s Function
(revised in June 6, 2018)
 
The problem of North Korea's development of nuclear weapons is a major international tension. In fact, it is clear that North Korea is developing nuclear weapons for its own security. The “double guarantee” is that the United States guarantees not to invade the DPRK, who guarantees not to develop nuclear weapon. This “double guarantee” should be regarded as the two sides of one problem of the key for no wars and no disorders happened. There is no peace if no the abandonment of nuclear weapons, same as no the abandonment no peace, and war will be inevitable. "Peace of terror" is a dangerous choice.
 
It is the fundamental spirit of the Charter of the United Nations that one country does not suffer any invasion. This is a legitimate spirit. But the United States has a large number of previous convictions trampling this spirits on some excuses. The smokes of wars in Iraq, Libya and the former Yugoslavia have not yet disappeared and the blamed has not been tried in justice they planned the duplication in North Korea. There is an atmosphere permeated among some people that the North Korean leader seems the devil which should be punished. It has exceeded the scope of non-nuclear proliferation. We have no intention to evaluate any leaders of countries. But trying to demonize a country leader, we see this is the case same as to demonize Saddam, Al-Gaddafi and Assad in Syria. The case is to make public opinion to prepare the invasion to a country. Gaddafi had agreed to give up the development of weapons of mass destruction and nuclear weapons, and compensated a huge amount for the Lockerbie air crash, but ended up of bad death, Libya has no the backside of a big country. The West wanted to turn against Gaddafi, then immediately did it. It is repugnant. This is the so-called "Libya model"? And did North Korea abandon its nuclear weapon and expect such an outcome? 
 
There is another issue of irreversibility in prohibiting the development of nuclear weapons by the DPRK. We saw that when George W. Bush replaced Clinton as president of the United States, there was a major reversal for the guarantee of non-aggression to North Korea. This is the problem of the 4-year elections in the United States. The regime is incoherent that the new president can arbitrarily overturn his predecessor's agreement signed on behalf of the United States. This is the risk of signing any long term agreement with the United States across the election year. Trump recklessly announced the withdrawal of the Iran nuclear ban agreement signed by many countries. What is so called withdrawal? It is nothing short of tearing it up. When facing this kind of credit standing, can we be able to deal with USA and sign any agreements with the United States? American businessmen should also be ashamed of it. This would force Iran to move towards along the road to develop the nuclear weapons. It is also absurd words to oppose Iran against the development of missiles. It is said that missiles can carry atomic bombs, we say man can develop atomic bombs and so even the man has to be killed? To put it clearer, if Iran has missiles, and the warships in the Gulf of Aden, the Red Sea cannot do what they want to. When banning the even development of missiles it is only because of threatening the US security, the US has so many missiles that can threaten other countries. Is it true to only allow the United States to threaten other countries, and others are not allowed to threaten the United States? If a country often threatens the others by missiles, it will be another matter. As matter of fact, what country often threatens others by missiles? Americans often put forward some naive reasons for many affairs at home and abroad, for example of ban- gun problem in the United States, we can often hear that “guns do not kill people but only people kill people. How could one person kill more than 50 people in Las Vegas? Without the help of a gun, one could not defeat more than 50 people, not to mention killing more than 50 people. It is a gun that magnifies the criminal motive and killing. In presidential elections, one person’s nomination as president candidate depends on large amount of donations. The reason of it is also absurd, saying donation expresses the wishes of donors. Is it legal only because of expressing the will? So bribes also express the willingness to buy people, can it be legal? There has never been a problem in free navigation in the South China Sea, but the United States can make a reason saying for freedom of navigation, and send a warship to stir it up. Using "human rights outweigh sovereignty" is essentially another excuse to invade other countries. The super power uses his own standard of human rights, looks at political side of human rights only and observes it by his own standards, looks at a part as the whole thing, neglect the economical efforts of other countries that realize the human rights to get rid of the poverty as the first efforts, does not to respect the others’ rights at all. On the whole, we take only a few things herewith as example, which can illustrate that we must be very careful in dealing with US Government. It may tear up any agreement or take some actions by some naive and absurd reasons. These relate to the long-lasting American hegemony and its shallow cultural foundations. So if North Korea can get rid of nuclear weapon and make it irreversible, I think the United States has to make the guarantee of non-invasion to the DPRK as irreversible as well. That is to say it will not be affected owing to changes of presidents. This needs to remind the DPRK.
 
According to the history of the United States and from the two World Wars, the United States will not easily start or participate in any war when it is not absolutely sure of winning and avoiding its harm, but it is another thing to keep the tensions around the world, and it has such skills of it. It has made tension in Korea in East Asia and in Ukraine in Europe, provokes wars in the Middle East in all-round way, considering no any tactics. We can see it all as false only by the first glance. It aims at capitals of the world. But it must launch a few missiles to make the tricks as real.
 
The United States is located far away from the big continent of Asia, Europe and Africa. If the world is tense, money will escape from the center of tensions and flow to the United States, so called the safe haven. In fact, under this operation of the USA, the world's large amount of capitals has flown into the United States, and its main stock index DJI has risen from about 7,000 to 26,616 in the past ten years; And if the world is in building and constructions, such as The Belt and Road, the fact USA is far from the big continent would make it very unfavorable position. So the USA tends to adopt such a strategy of keeping the world in tension that is most favorable to it. But USA does not want immediate and real wars at all, so the world's money owners do not have to be too serious about the actions of the United States.
 
South Korea has made great efforts since the Pyeongchang Olympic Games; it has won Kim Jeong-eun's movement. Chinese saying: “If you invest with plum, you can expect peach (much good result) as income”. North Korea blew up the nuclear test site to show its determination as give up nuclear weapon. That's the way we see it. However, the United States does not see it in this way. He relies on his military strength and only shows its boorish face. Since North Korea has expressed their desire to abandon nuclear weapon for the peace and took real action, what should we do next? According to the sense of common people, the US and South Korea should postpone military exercises at this time, and should respond positively. If North Korea fails to follow up, it can resume military exercises, it’s not too late. Whatever North Korea is moved because the efforts South Korea did since the Pyeongchang Olympic Games or the result of Trump's extreme coercion, it is not important. The most important is the DPRK has expressed clear intention to abandon the nuclear in exchange of peace. If American really wants nuclear non-proliferation for the world, then its policy to North Korea should be flexible enough.
 
We think that neither South Korea nor China will want to see any chaos and wars in the peninsula. South Korea is the first one who faces the risk of war. So POK may really want peace and Both the north and South Koreas care very much about peace well. The goal of abandoning the nuclear weapon is for peace and for the economic development. But Moon Jae-In and South Korea should be clear about the present situation. As long as the hope for peace is genuine, South Korea needs to take active action to cooperate, rather than vice versa. The rigidity of some American can only be interpreted objectively as neither to pay attention to the peace of Korean Peninsula, nor does it care about non-nuclear proliferation. Perhaps some ones in the US government still want to overthrow the North Korean regime and maintain the tension in East Asia. A large number of facts have proved that no nation in the world is willing to lay down all effective weapons when facing the threat of death.
 
It is not necessary for the North Korea to sear oaths of the permanent abandonment of nuclear weapon only in front of USA. If the United States cannot seriously guarantee the permanent peace in the Korean Peninsula after the North Korea abandon the nuclear weapon, DPRK can guarantee the abandonment of the nuclear weapon in front of the United Nations participated by China and Russia, and exchange for the guarantee for the permanent peace in the peninsula from the UN and so does in front of China and Russia. Two countries can jointly call a meeting of the Security Council of the UN, and make efforts to correct the mistakes made by the UN to support South Korea against the North Korea 65 years ago and again send the peacekeeping forces in absolutely neutral position to maintain peace on the 38 line and prevent against any chaos and wars between the north and the south. Under the supervision of the UN, nuclear weapon of North Korea can be permanently sealed in China or Russia.
 
The signatories to the Agreement ending Korean war are the DPRK, the Chinese People's Volunteers Army (CPVA) and the United Nations. The repeal of the CPVA can be resumed at any time, the resumption of CPVA headquarters only is enough. But the opposite side of the Agreement is the UN instead of USA. Although the USA is the main belligerent country, it alone cannot replace the UN. The UN must at least convene a security council meeting participated by China and adopt a resolution, and the three parties concerned shall jointly sign an agreement to end the war. When discussing the Agreement in the Security Council meeting, it is necessary to express the guarantee of the permanent peace on the Korean Peninsula and the permanent abandonment of nuclear weapon of the North Korea as well. The DPRK needs China and Russia to participate in it, and so provide the Chinese and Russian guarantee and witness the peace. If the UN do not work, the DPRK should make clear about its determination of the abandonment of nuclear weapons to China and Russia in exchange for joint guarantee of China and Russian for the permanent peace in the Peninsula. This point must be made clear now, making the US realize that after North Korea abandon nuclear weapon, they will have China and Russia who can defend the Peninsula peace, so that the US must take the peace requirement of the DPRK seriously.
 
Under the cease-fire agreement, China has the responsibility to defend North Korea from any aggression. But because China has taken part in the Security Council, the situation has been changed. It needs make better use of the name of the UN, although this method is not so easy, it is worth efforts about it. South Korea also needs to consider whether the US is handle the thing properly, considering the complete withdrawal of the US troops from South Korea and control the fate of South Korea in its own hands. I think this is the common aspiration of South and North Korea, China, Russia and all the peace loving countries in the world. And if the US policy is so rigid, it will have to consider replacing the US, because of the rigid policy cannot realize the target to abandon nuclear weapon and maintain the peace.
 
North Korea's government was fought for by Chairman Mao to defeated the foreign invaders at that time, (although the US invated on behalf of the UN, it was the foreign forces who intervened in the internal affairs of the Korea and invaded Korea. The later time the UN announces the UN army enters into any country can only be doing task of peacekeeping and cannot help one side to fight the other. It is equal to deny the previous participation of the one side against the other), is the further defense of the new China, and kept the war happened outside China in the place where the war already started, at the expense of the lives of hundreds of thousands of Chinese soldiers. How can we ignore it? The Korean War stopped only on signature of a cease-fire agreement, and therefore it could not allow anyone sabotage the cease-fire agreement for any reason. Therefore, China still has the responsibility to protect North Korea's peace and security. This is another guarantee i.e. China's guarantee for North Korea's peace and security which is an unshakable. No need to wait for the US guarantee, let alone expectation of the USA to make its guarantee irreversible. We must aware of this point and be prepared to take the above responsibilities alone.
 
On the basis of joint guarantee for Korean peace between China and Russia, they also oppose the United Nations’ blockade of the DPRK, who should also not initiate any wars to other foreign countries and South Korea. China can assist to North Korea and let him focus on economic development. The DPRK can improve the investment environment for foreign direct investments, and its top leading bodies should make relevant resolutions to attract and guarantee the international investments. This intention of China and Russia can be publicly expressed unilaterally or jointly in a statement of the Ministry of Defense of China and Russia. On any international issues, we must adhere to the strategy of "rational, beneficial and abstemious" so that can win the respects and we can fulfill our great tasks, which is the least cost as well. We keep good relation between China and DPRK, so to keep our peaceful environment around and not allow any country to destroy it at any time.
 
If President Trump actively cooperates, he could try to win the Nobel peace prize at his will. Of course, Trump has another consideration, under his strategy, the DPRK case can set a “good example” to Iran, let world see how the US will bring peace and prosperity to the DPRK after the DPRK abandons nuclear weapon and the missile. But unlike Iran, North Korea has no important value for the USA and Trump, who does not care about the ideological difference too much only want to get rid of threat of DPRK by its nuclear weapon and missiles. And the DPRK has a large backside of China and Russia, but Iran does not. Saudi Arabia and Israel are also worried that Iran's development and the growth up, so they will never play a role in reconciling the United States as POK does. If Trump does not cooperate, then its policy may ultimately lead to a nuclear war. If there are chaos and wars on the Korean Peninsula, then the problem of refugees would occur. At that time China won’t be able to focus on economic development and may deeply affect by the Korean chaos and wars. It is particularly bad for China, and then the cost of restoring peace will be great. Therefore, China cannot afford to ignore it, and China must take a more active part in it at the right time. If the UN does not work, then on the basis of the full withdrawal of American troops from POK, China and Russia or China alone will have to take the responsibility of maintaining the peace between North and South Korea. This is the choice that China has to discuss with Russia now and prepare to take.
推荐 0