朝鲜:中国的“麻烦盟友”

The anthem of the Chinese “volunteer” army that fought against the US in the Korean war is rarely heard these days, aside from in a few patriotic films. But it still describes the basic strategic orientation of China in North Asia 63 years after the war ended without a peace treaty: “The good sons and daughters of China, hearts united as one; Resist the US, protect Korea, smash the American wild wolves.”

在朝鲜战争中与美国作战的中国人民“志愿”军的那首战歌，除了在几部爱国主义影片中唱起以外，如今已很少听到。但在那场未签署和平条约的战争结束63年后，这首歌依然描绘了中国在北亚的基本战略定位：“中国好儿女，齐心团结紧。抗美援朝打败美帝野心狼。”

The wolf metaphors have been dropped, but Beijing is still “resisting the US, protecting (North) Korea” as if the strategy was trapped in amber.

虽然野心狼的比喻已不再提及，但北京方面仍在“抗美援朝”，这一战略仿佛被牢牢地困在了琥珀之中。

Economically, things have changed utterly. The deep and symbiotic commercial relationship that has grown between the US and China drove more than half a trillion dollars in bilateral trade last year. Hundreds of thousands of Chinese students — including offspring of the ruling Communist elite — studied at US colleges. Chinese companies spent $51bn acquiring US counterparts, a three-fold jump on the previous year.

在经济方面，形势已经发生了翻天覆地的变化。美中之间建立起的深入、共生的商贸关系，促使去年的双边贸易额超过了5000亿美元。数十万中国留学生（包括执政的共产党精英的后代）在美国的大学深造。中国企业斥资510亿美元收购美国企业，是前一年的3倍。

So why, then, has China stuck by Pyongyang, even as the impoverished state terrorises its neighbours by developing a nuclear arsenal that is probably only a few years away from being able to strike US territory? How is Beijing served by prioritising loyalty to an isolated, volatile dictatorship over ties with the world’s superpower?

既然如此，那中国为什么还会被平壤困住，即便这个贫困的国家通过发展核武器——可能距离能够打击美国本土只差几年时间——来恫吓其邻国？将扶持一个孤立、反复无常的独裁政权置于其与世界超级大国的关系之上，对中国有何好处？

Such questions have acquired added urgency since Donald Trump warned this month that “if China is not going to solve North Korea, we will”. This signal was backed up by orders for an aircraft carrier group to be deployed in waters near the Korean peninsula. This week Lieutenant General HR McMaster, the US national security adviser, threatened “other actions” if Pyongyang conducts further nuclear tests.

自唐纳德?特朗普(Donald Trump)本月警告“如果中国不打算解决朝鲜，我们会出手解决”以来，这些问题的紧迫性已进一步加剧。特朗普将一个航母战斗群部署在朝鲜半岛附近海域的命令有力地支持了这一信号。本周，美国国家安全顾问、陆军中将赫伯特?雷蒙德?麦克马斯特(HR McMaster)威胁称，如果朝鲜再进行核试验的话，美国将采取“其他行动”。

Such US brinkmanship is aimed at coercing Pyongyang to drop its nuclear weapons programme. But it throws China into a highly conflicted position; Beijing’s alliance with North Korea derives from a founding narrative that asserts that China has struggled against the west to make its way in the world. This creates common cause with the hermit kingdom. Even though a nuclear-armed North Korea led by the mercurial, 33-year-old Kim Jong Un is deeply unpalatable to Beijing, it has been seen as preferable to a regime collapse and the entire Korean peninsula falling under a US security umbrella.

美国这种战争边缘政策(brinkmanship)旨在迫使朝鲜放弃其核武计划。但这把中国逼到了一个高度矛盾的位置；中朝联盟源于中国在建国方面的叙事，即中国通过反抗西方的斗争才在世界立足。这为中国与这个隐士王国创造了共同的事业。即便由33岁、反复无常的金正恩(Kim Jong Un)领导的拥有核武器的朝鲜会让北京深感不快，但北京方面认为，这比其政权崩溃、整个朝鲜半岛落入美国保护伞之下要好。

“North Korea is a public-relations nightmare for China every time it does something bad,” says Victor Cha of the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. “But Beijing is wedded to the strategic stability that a junior communist client state on its border provides in a region filled with US military allies.” He argues that Mr Trump is trying to force a change: “It takes a crisis to pry this loose.”

“朝鲜每次干坏事对中国来说都是一场公关梦魇，”华盛顿战略与国际问题研究中心(CSIS)的维克托?查(Victor Cha)说，“但北京一向极为重视这个边境上的共产主义附庸国在一个到处是美国军事盟友的地区提供的战略稳定。”他表示，特朗普正试图强行改变这一现状：“这需要一场危机才能撬动。”

But when Lt Gen McMaster insisted this week that Washington was “going to have to rely on Chinese leadership” to apply economic pressure on Pyongyang, he asked for something that Beijing has obdurately refused to furnish in any real sense.

但当本周麦克马斯特坚称华盛顿“将不得不依赖中国领导人”对平壤施加经济压力时，他提出的要求是北京方面一直以来都拒绝在任何真正意义上满足的。

There is no doubt that China has the ability to bring North Korea’s economy to its knees. It can cut trade links and oil supplies, shut down the internet, banking services and tourism. “These things would devastate the North Korean economy,” says Minxin Pei of Claremont McKenna College. “But the reality is that Beijing is far from this point.”

毫无疑问，中国有能力让朝鲜在经济上屈服。中国可以切断贸易联系和石油供应，关闭互联网、银行服务和旅游。“这些措施将摧毁朝鲜经济，”克莱蒙特-麦肯纳学院(Claremont McKenna College)的裴敏欣(Minxin Pei)说，“但现实是，北京绝不会这样做。”

The uncomfortable truth for the US is that Beijing remains inclined to tolerate its exasperating client state for as long as Washington looms as China’s chief strategic competitor. This orientation is so entrenched that anything less than a genuine — and potentially terrifying — crisis may fail to shift it.

令美国不安的事实是，只要华盛顿还是中国主要的战略竞争对手，北京方面就仍会倾向于容忍这个令人气恼的附庸国。这种倾向如此根深蒂固，除了一场真正（且可能可怕的）危机，没什么能使之发生转变。

As US-China rivalries escalate in the South China Sea and several other theatres, the idea that Beijing may jettison a longstanding ally to please its biggest rival may prove to be wishful thinking.

随着美中之间的较量在南中国海及其他几个地区不断升级，认为北京有可能抛弃一个长期盟友以取悦其最大竞争对手的想法，可能只不过是一厢情愿。

It is possible that China may apply judicious pressure on Pyongyang to de-escalate tension, but according to analysts, these would fall well short of the merciless intimidation required to force Mr Kim to scrap his nuclear ambitions — which bestow legitimacy upon his bellicose regime.

中国有可能对平壤施加审慎的压力以缓和局势紧张，但分析人士表示，这与迫使金正恩放弃核野心所必需的严酷威慑相去甚远——拥有核武器才能给他好战的政权带来合法性。

For Beijing, the priority remains keeping North Korea viable enough to forestall the feared spectre of US troops pressed up against the Yalu river border between China and North Korea.

对北京而言，首要任务仍是保持朝鲜足够的生存能力，以预防美军可怕的幽灵向中朝之间的鸭绿江边境压来。

“There are 35,000 American GIs just over North Korea’s southern border,” says Paul French, author of North Korea: State of Paranoia. “I think what is lost in all the chatter about Kim’s weirdness and murderous tendencies is that North Korea is still primarily for China a buffer state.”

“有3.5万名美国大兵就驻扎在朝鲜南部边界另一侧，”《朝鲜：偏执之国》(North Korea: State of Paranoia)一书作者保罗?弗伦奇(Paul French)说，“我认为，人们喋喋不休地谈论金正恩古怪、凶残的性情时遗忘的是，朝鲜对中国而言首先仍是一个缓冲国。”