中國國家主席習近平與俄羅斯總統普京2月4日在北京會晤，簽署了一系列合作協議，包括天然氣供應協議，兩國並發表了對中俄美關係和東亞國際安全具有重大政治影響的聯合聲明。
批評「少數勢力」干涉他國內政
中俄關於新時代國際關係和全球可持續發展的聯合聲明，主要內容如下：
首先，雙方一致認為，各國人民有權選擇適合本國國情的民主實踐形式和方式。「國際上少數勢力繼續頑固奉行單邊主義，訴諸強權政治。」聯合聲明沒有點名「少數勢力」是哪些國家，但是批評這些國家干涉他國內政。
其次，聯合聲明呼籲各國加強對話，增進互信，凝聚共識，捍衛和平、發展、公平、正義、民主、自由的「全人類共同價值」，尊重各國人民自主選擇發展道路的權利。
第三，雙方一致認為，民主是全人類共同價值，是「公民參與管理本國事務的途徑，旨在增進民生福祉，實現人民當家做主」。中俄申明，「民主制度的實踐不是刻板的」，應考慮到不同國家的社會政治制度和歷史、傳統及文化特色。各國人民有權選擇適合本國國情的民主實踐形式和方式」。
然而，「個別國家企圖以意識形態劃線，強迫他國接受這些國家的『民主標準』……聯盟壟斷民主定義權」， 此類謀求霸權地位的行徑，對地區和全球和平穩定構成威脅。
積極奉行多邊主義
第四，雙方將積極推進共建「一帶一路」與歐亞經濟聯盟（EAEU）的對接合作，深化中國同歐亞經濟聯盟各領域務實合作。
第五，雙方承諾加快落實聯合國2030年可持續發展議程，包括將減貧、糧食安全、抗疫和疫苗、發展籌資、氣候變化、綠色和可持續發展、工業化、數字經濟、互聯互通等作為重點合作領域。
第六，雙方呼籲各國加強可持續交通和智能交通領域合作，包括發展營運北極航道等。
第七，俄羅斯和中國在抗擊新冠病毒方面加強雙邊合作，包括加強防疫措施協調對接、健康信息共享、建立邊境地區聯防聯控機制，以及加強疫苗和新冠病毒藥物研發生產合作等。
第八，俄方重申恪守一個中國原則，反對任何形式的台獨，反對「顏色革命」，反對外部勢力干涉主權國家內政。
反對北約繼續擴張
第九，雙方反對「北大西洋公約組織繼續擴張」，呼籲北約「摒棄冷戰時期意識形態，尊重他國主權、安全、利益及文明多樣性」。 中方支持俄方在烏克蘭問題上的立場，因為俄方不願看到北約對烏克蘭的影響力增加。烏克蘭向北約靠攏的趨勢，引起了俄羅斯的憤怒和地緣軍事衝突的敏感性。
第十，雙方認為，所有核武器國家應摒棄冷戰思維與零和博弈，降低核武器在國家安全政策中的作用，「不允許毫無限制地發展全球反導系統」。 雙方同時肯定《不擴散核武器條約》的重要性。
十一、雙方對日本擬將福島核電站事故放射性污染水向海洋排放，以及其對環境的潛在影響表示嚴重關切，強調日方「須與周邊鄰國等利益攸關方及有關國際機構充分協商」，「以負責任的方式」妥善處置放射性污染水。
十二，雙方敦促美國放棄在亞太和歐洲部署陸基中程和中短程導彈計劃。
十三、中俄將加強在人工智能治理、國際信息安全、太空活動、太空資源利用、防止外太空軍備競賽方面的合作，重申維護《禁止生物武器公約》的權威性和有效性。
最後，中俄聯合聲明強調，兩國「友好沒有止境，合作沒有禁區」， 這些合作領域包括踐行真正的多邊主義、促進多邊貿易體制、支持二十國集團（G20）恢復和促進世界經濟、提高金磚國家國際協作水平、擴大上海合作組織地區反恐怖機構職能、推動上合組織成員國經濟合作升級、加強與亞太經合組織協作，促進區域貿易和投資、繼續在中俄印機制框架內開展合作，深化與東盟的合作和協調。 總之，區域組織和國際組織是中俄在參與和尋求世界和平時不可或缺的機構。
聯合聲明的政治意義是顯而易見的。在俄美關係因烏克蘭加入北約的爭議而緊張時，美國認為俄羅斯「入侵烏克蘭」迫在眉睫；俄羅斯認為北約東擴是軍事侵略之際，中俄聯合聲明可以解釋為在烏克蘭問題上，雙方反對美國和北約東擴的共同政治立場。
此外，政治利益的交換在聯合聲明的內容中也很明顯。中國在烏克蘭問題上站在俄羅斯一邊，而俄羅斯重申恪守一個中國原則及反對台獨的立場。
積極參與所有區域組織和國際組織，已成為中俄雙方的共識。這種參與在某種程度上，反映了美國特朗普前政府退出國際組織和美國優先外交政策是開歷史倒車，破壞了美國在國際政治領域的領導地位。儘管拜登政府一直在採取更全球化、更少單邊主義的外交政策，但傷害已經造成，美國政府如何修復這嚴重傷害，仍有待觀察。
意識形態分歧仍顯而易見
中俄聯合聲明證明，全球化的新時代見證了意識形態的永恆性。中俄兩國都奉行本身的民主理念，即公民參與國家治理，而非西方民主概念中強調的互相制衡。即使在人權問題上，中俄都承認這是一種普世價值，但其實踐在世界各國之間存在差異──一些發展中國家很容易認同美國干涉別國事務，是「霸權」凌駕「人權」。中國和俄羅斯擔心美國主導的「促進民主」項目，可能會令「顏色革命」席捲全球各地。因此，聯合聲明帶有強烈的意識形態色彩，尤其是在中國於 2021 年底發表《中國的民主》白皮書和《「一國兩制」下香港的民主發展》白皮書之後。
聯合聲明的基調，是對日本處理福島核電站廢水的方式採取抵制態度，同時肯定了利用中俄印平台處理中印之間任何爭端的重要性。由於日本是美國在東亞盟友中不可或缺的一分子，聯合聲明自然明確表達了對日本處理核廢水的擔憂。不過，中俄兩國事實上均重視亞太經合組織、東盟等區域性組織，這有利於地區和平與繁榮的積極發展。
中俄聯合聲明發表之際，正值北京冬奧會舉辦之時，中俄戰略協作夥伴關係正處於歷史巔峰時期，主要原因是俄美關係日益緊張。儘管與特朗普治下日趨緊張的美中關係相比，拜登政府改善了美中關係，但美國堅定支持台灣的政策，仍然是中國大陸領導人心中的一根刺。
因此，聯合聲明表明，中國決心爭取俄羅斯重申一個中國原則，中國則支持俄羅斯在烏克蘭問題上的立場作為交換。聯合聲明的其他方面體現了俄羅斯和中國的共同利益。只要新冷戰的陰影籠罩着世界，只要超級大國美國及其盟友視俄羅斯為侵略性的老對手，而將中國視為經濟和軍事領域的新對手，意識形態的衝突，仍將繼續主宰未來數十年的國際政治。
Sino-Russian Joint Statement and Its Political Significance
A meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping in Beijing on February 4 led to the signing of a series of cooperative agreements, including an agreement on the supply of natural gas, and the publication of a Joint Statement that has tremendous political implications for Sino-Russo-US relations and East Asian international security.
The Joint Statement of the Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) on the international relations entering a new era and the global sustainable development has the following main points.
First, both sides believe that a new era of global interdependence between states has envisaged a trend toward “redistribution of power,” and that “some actors representing but the minority on the international scale continue to advocate unilateral approaches to addressing international issues and resort to force.” Without naming the countries that represent the minority, the Joint Statement criticizes these actors for interfering with the domestic affairs of other states.
Second, the Joint Statement calls for the need for all states in the world to build dialogue and establish mutual trust and understanding, while championing “universal human values” such as peace, development, equality, justice, democracy, freedom and the respect of the rights of peoples to “independently determine the development paths of their countries.”
Third, both sides agree that democracy is a universal human value, but its definition refers to “a means of citizens’ participation in the government of their country with the view to improving the well-being of population and implementing the principle of popular government.” Both Russia and China affirm that “there is no one-size-fits-all template to guide countries in establishing democracy,” because “a nation can choose such forms and methods of implementing democracy that would best suit its particular state, based on its social and political system, its historical background, traditions and unique cultural characteristics.” However, some states attempt to “impose their own ‘democratic standards’ on other countries, to monopolize the right to assess the level of compliance with democratic criteria, to draw dividing lines based on the grounds of ideology.” These attempts are hegemonic and pose a threat to global and regional peace.
Fourth, both sides seek to link their developmental plans of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) and the Belt and Road Initiative, promoting greater connectiveness between EAEU and the Asia-Pacific region.
Fifth, both sides vow to work towards the United Nation 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, including poverty reduction, food security, climate change, green development, digital economy, biological diversity, global governance, vaccines production, epidemics control, and infrastructure connectivity.
Sixth, both sides call on all states in the world to strengthen cooperation in the areas of sustainable and smart transport, including the use of Arctic routes.
Seventh, Russia and China strengthen their bilateral cooperation in the fight against Covid-19, including the implementation of quarantine measures, the sharing of health information, the adoption of anti-pandemic measures at border checkpoints, and the development and manufacturing of vaccines.
Eighth, while Russia supports the one-China principle and opposes any form of Taiwan independence, both sides oppose color revolutions and counter interference by outside forces in the domestic affairs of sovereign states.
Ninth, both sides oppose the “further enlargement of North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)” and call on it to “abandon its ideologized cold war approaches, to respect the sovereignty, security and interests of other countries.” China backs up Russia’s position on Ukraine because the latter does not want to see NATO’s increase in its influence on Ukraine, whose tendency to shift toward NATO has aroused Russia’s anger and geo-military sensitivity.
Tenth, both sides believe that all nuclear-weapons states should abandon the cold war mentality and zero-sum perspectives, that they should reduce the role of nuclear weapons in their national security policies, and that they should “eliminate the unrestricted development of global anti-ballistic missile defense system.” Both sides affirm the importance of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.
Eleventh, both sides express their concerns about Japan’s plans to release nuclear contaminated water from the Fukushima nuclear plant into the ocean, because there would be potential environmental impact. As such, the disposal of nuclear contaminated water must be tackled with “responsibility” and “carried out in a proper manner based on arrangements between the Japanese side and neighboring states.”
Twelfth, both sides call on the United States to abandon its plan to deploy intermediate-range and shorter-range ground-based missiles in Asia and Europe.
Thirteenth, both Russia and China consolidate their cooperation in other areas, including artificial intelligence, international information security, space activities, the use of space resources, the prevention of arms race in outer space, the implementation of the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and their Destruction.
Finally, the Sino-Russian friendship has “no limits” and “no forbidden areas of cooperation.” These cooperative areas include the pursuit of multilateralism, the promotion of non-discriminatory international trade, the work with G20 to propel the growth in international economy, the partnership with BRICS, the consolidation of anti-terrorist and economic work with the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the collaboration with APEC to promote trade and investment, the strengthening of cooperation within the Russia-India-China format, and the increased interactions with ASEAN. In short, regional and international organizations are the bodies cherished by Russia and China in their engagement and quest for world peace.
The political significance of the Joint Statement is obvious. At a time when Russian-US relations are strained by their dispute over Ukraine, where the US believes that a Russian “invasion” would be imminent and where Russia sees the NATO expansion as militarily aggressive, the Sino-Russian Joint Statement can be interpreted as a joint political stance against the US and NATO over the issue of Ukraine.
Furthermore, the exchange of political interests is apparent in the content of the Joint Statement. While China sides with Russia on Ukraine, Russia affirms the one-China principle and reiterates its opposition to any Taiwan separatism.
The affirmation of the need to engage all regional and international organizations has become the consensus of China and Russia. Such engagement signals to some extent the withdrawal and overprotective nature of the former Donald Trump administration, whose foreign policy turned the clock backwards and undermined the American leadership in the world of international politics. Although the Biden administration has been adopting a more globalist and less unilateral foreign policy, the damage had already been done and it remains to be seen how the US government will continue to repair the severe damage.
The Joint Statement proves that the new era of globalization witnesses the permanence of ideology. Both Russia and China adopt their own notion of democracy as citizen’s participation in their governance rather than institutional checks and balances as emphasized in the Western concept of democracy. Even on the issue of human rights, both Russia and China admit that it is a universal value, but its practices vary across states in the world – a position easily shared by some developing states which find the US “hegemony” and championship of “human rights” as outside interferences. China and Russia are concerned about the likelihood of “color revolutions,” which swept across various parts of the world due to the US-led democracy promotion project. As such, the Joint Statement carries strong ideological overtone, especially after China has published its White Paper on democracy and another White Paper on Hong Kong’s democratic development by the end of 2021.
The Joint Statement carries a tone of adopting a resistant attitude toward the Japanese way of handling the contaminated waters of the Fukushima nuclear plant, while affirming the importance of using the Russia-India-China platform to deal with any disputes between India and China. As Japan is an indispensable part of the US alliance in East Asia, it is natural that the Joint Statement explicitly expresses its concern about Japan’s treatment of the contaminated waters. However, the fact that both Russia and China attach importance to such regional organizations like the APEC and ASEAN is a positive development conducive to regional peace and prosperity.
In conclusion, the Sino-Russian Joint Statement came at a time when the Winter Olympic Games were held in Beijing and at a juncture where the Russo-Chinese partnership is at its historical apex mainly because of the increasingly strained relations between Russia and the United States. Although the Joe Biden administration has improved the US relations with China compared with the increasingly tense US-China relations under Donald Trump, the US policy in stanch support of Taiwan remains a thorn in the mind of mainland Chinese leaders. As such, the Joint Statement shows the PRC determination to solicit the Russian reaffirmation of the one-China principle. In exchange, the PRC backs up Russia in the latter’s position on Ukraine. Other areas of the Joint Statement show the commonality of interests shared by Russia and China. As long as the shadows of a new Cold War are hanging over the world, and so long as the superpower US and its allies see Russia as an aggressive old adversary and China as a newly assertive rival in economic and military spheres, ideological conflicts are continuing to shape the international politics in the coming decades.
原刊於澳門新聞通訊社（MNA）網站，本社獲作者授權轉載。
