2020年全球新冠疫情的暴发不仅未能使中美关系有所缓和，反而进一步加剧了两国
关系的恶化。最近，随着美国大选日益临近，美国国务卿蓬佩奥接连发表反华讲话
（包括涉南海问题声明、在尼克松图书馆的演讲以及在参院外委会听证会上的发言
等），大有要把中美关系一举推进冷战深渊之势。

中美两国将不可避免地走向冷战吗？答案当然是否定的，但我们决不能忽视中美发
生冷战的严重风险。

在当前中美关系严重恶化的背景下，三大风险可能使中美陷入一场新冷战：一是关
系脱钩；二是形成政治制度与意识形态对抗；三是爆发军事冲突。

一段时间以来，美国鹰派势力在经贸、科技、人文交流等领域强行推动对华脱钩，
企图使中美形成当年美苏经济、社会完全隔绝的状况。但这一做法也会给美国带来
巨大损害，美国国内也有各种反对声音。中国的对策应该是坚持改革开放，尽力与
美方保持各种合作交流，争取在国际法、国际规则基础上逐步形成良性竞争。这将
是挫败美国鹰派脱钩图谋的最好途径。

近三年来，中美竞争与摩擦已迅速扩展到各个领域，但尚未达到对抗的程度。最近
美国鹰派势力极力把中美竞争归结为意识形态之争，欲把中美竞争推向零和、对抗。
对此，中国决不会上当。不搞社会制度与意识形态输出，不与美国搞意识形态对抗，
争取两种社会制度和平共处，应是中国坚定不移的政策。这对防止中美爆发新冷战
将发挥重大作用。

当前，最可能使中美陷入冷战的风险或导火索是中美爆发军事冲突。近两年来，双
方在台海、南海的军事博弈、摩擦呈现直线上升的趋势，如果爆发危机，管控难度
将极大，一旦发生军事冲突，即使是有限冲突，也将从此打开中美长期冷战的大门。

台湾问题涉及中国核心利益。近年来，随着台湾岛内的分裂势力持续发展，中国政
府不断加强反“台独”斗争和对“台独”势力的军事威慑。然而，中美对坚持台独
党纲的民进党蔡英文政权的看法严重对立，美国国会更出台一系列严重违反“一中”
原则的涉台法案，要求政府提升对台关系，加强对台“防卫”。当前，中美在台海
的军事活动都明显加强，双方因误判或擦枪走火爆发军事危机、军事冲突的可能性
加大。而更大的风险是，如果“台独”势力和外国干涉势力公然越过中国《反国家
分裂法》设定的红线，中国将被迫采取包括军事手段在内的非和平手段进行反分裂
斗争，在此形势下，中美有可能陷入一场严重军事冲突，甚至是战争。

中国与美国在南海的摩擦主要集中在美方对中国的近岸军事侦察、美军在中国岛礁
周边水域持续强化所谓“航行自由行动”、美国与盟国不断在南海举行大规模联合
军演，以及美国公开介入中国与邻国的主权争议等问题上。最近蓬佩奥发表的南海
声明，更显现了其公然煽动激化中国与南海有关国家间的海上争议、破坏中国与东
盟国家磋商建立“南海行为准则”以维护南海稳定的图谋。与台海不同，在南海，
中美双方底线并不清晰，两国军机、军舰频繁相遇，双方发生擦枪走火的风险更高。

当前，在美国大选前后的高风险期，中美双方如果要避免在台海、南海爆发军事危
机、军事冲突，加强危机管理将是唯一可行的办法。

第一，中美应尽快重启两军及两国外交部门的沟通渠道，特别是发挥国防部热线的
作用，就当前双方的各种军事危机风险进行通报、沟通。最近，美防长埃斯珀提出
希望年内访华，与中方建立必要的危机沟通体系，这是个积极的信号。双方不妨先
从线上沟通做起，并可先通过两国的大使馆进行相关磋商。

第二，双方必须把危机防范与规避放在第一位。因疫情停滞的中美海上军事安全磋
商机制应以线上对话方式首先恢复，双方应重申认真遵守执行“海上意外相遇规则”，
以及中美“重大军事行动相互通报”和“海空相遇安全行为准则”两个互信机制及
其附件，并要求一线官兵的行动与此保持一致。

第三，一旦出现海上突发事件，为防止危机升级与失控，双方应立即开展并保持现
场沟通，并且应进行高层热线沟通，还可派遣特使进行紧急磋商。此外，在危机中，
采取大致对等的军事行动应是双方进行危机管理必须遵循的基本原则。

第四，在度过美国大选前后的高危期后，双方应继续就加强两国安全危机管理机制
做出重要努力。新的努力可包括两国、两军领导人就进行危机管理的基本原则达成
协议；充实与建立更多的军事安全信任措施；恢复两军联合参谋部对话和启动中美
战略稳定对话（该对话主要涉及中美战略核关系，同时涉及相关外空、网络安全问
题和危机稳定问题），使危机管理成为中美军事安全对话中的一项重要内容；建立
两国相关战区之间的热线机制，等等。

总之，在中美竞争严重加剧的形势下，必须防止两国因全面脱钩、出现政治制度与
意识形态对抗和爆发军事冲突而陷入冷战。相比较而言，当前双方最紧迫的任务是
为防止在台海、南海发生军事冲突而加强危机管理。

在美苏冷战中，危机管理曾是美苏两个敌国为避免直接军事冲突、战争特别是核战
争而开展的唯一“合作”。当前中美之间的危机管理则有很大不同，它是仍处在竞
合关系中但竞争严重加剧的中美两国为防止发生军事冲突与战争、防止两国关系堕
入冷战深渊而做出的重大努力。中美两国、两军都应对此予以高度重视。 

英文(in English)

Avoiding a New Cold War
Zhang Tuosheng
(Member of Academic Committee of Huazhi Institute for Global Governance, Nanjing University)

On top of failing to ease strained relations between China and the U.S., the global 
outbreak of COVID-19 has actually made things worse.As the U.S. presidential 
election draws near, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo delivered a series of anti-China 
screeds, including a statement on the South China Sea, a speech at the Richard 
Nixon Presidential Library and a speech before the Senate Foreign Relations 
Committee. He seems determined to push China-U.S. relations into the abyss of 
a cold war.

Are the U.S. and China moving inevitably into a cold war? The answer, of course, 
is no. But we must not lose sight of the serious risk.

Against the background of severe deterioration in relations, three major factors 
could lead the two countries into a new cold war: first, decoupling; second,
 a confrontation of political systems and ideology; and third, a military conflict.

For quite some time, the hawks in the U.S. have been pushing for decoupling 
with China in the fields of economy, trade, science, technology, and people-to-people 
exchanges. They want to steer the two into mutual economic and social isolation,
 the same as developed between the U.S. and the USSR.This, however, will also 
be hugely damaging to the U.S., and there is substantial opposition in the U.S. 
The Chinese strategy should be to persist in reform and opening-up, try its best 
to sustain all kinds of cooperation and exchanges with the U.S. and strive to 
gradually develop a benign kind of competition on the basis of international 
rules. That will be the best way to thwart the American hawks' decoupling attempts.

Over the past three years, competition and friction between China and the U.S. 
have rapidly expanded into various fields but stopped short of confrontation. 
Recently, the American hawks have gone all out to boil China-U.S. competition 
down to an ideological contest and have attempted to push it to zero-sum and 
confrontation. China will not be fooled. It should be China's unswerving policy 
to not export its social system or ideology nor engage in an ideological confrontation 
with the U.S. but to strive for the peaceful coexistence of the two social systems. 
This will play an important role in preventing a new cold war.

At present, the most likely risk or trigger is a military conflict. Over the past two 
years, military movements and frictions in the Taiwan Strait and South China Sea 
have risen sharply. If a crisis breaks out, it will be extremely difficult to manage 
and control. If a military conflict occurs, no matter how limited it might be, it 
will open the door to a protracted cold war.

The Taiwan question bears on China's core interests. In recent years, with the 
expansion of separatist elements in Taiwan, the central government has steadily 
strengthened its stance against Taiwan independence. It has enhanced its military 
posture against pro-independence forces by warning of dire consequences.
However, the U.S. and China have sharply different views of the administration 
of Taiwan leader Tsai Ing-wen. Her party, the DPP, has an independence agenda. 
Moreover, the U.S. Congress adopted a number of Taiwan-related acts, seriously 
violating the one-China principle to which America had agreed and requiring 
the U.S. government to elevate its relations with Taiwan and strengthen its defense 
capability.At present, both countries have significantly increased their military 
activities in the Taiwan Strait, and the possibility of a military crisis or conflict 
due to miscalculation or accidental fire has risen palpably.But there is an even 
greater risk: If the pro-independence forces in Taiwan and foreign interlopers 
blatantly cross the red line set in China's anti-secession law, China will be forced 
to resort to non-peaceful means, including military force, to prevent a split. In 
such a situation, China and the U.S. could be plunged into a serious military 
conflict, or even all-out war.

Frictions in the South China Sea occur mainly over American military 
reconnaissance near Chinese shores, increased freedom of navigation operations 
in waters surrounding Chinese islands and reefs, large-scale joint military exercises 
with allies in the area and open involvement and interference in China's 
sovereignty disputes with its neighbors. In his recent statement on the South 
China Sea, Pompeo incited and intensified the maritime disputes between China 
and other countries in a blatant attempt to undermine China's negotiations with 
ASEAN countries on a code of conduct aimed at stability.Unlike the Taiwan Straits, 
the two sides' bottom lines in the South China Sea are not clear. But their military 
aircraft and warships meet frequently and game each other fiercely, so the risk 
of an accidental incident is obviously higher.

In the high-risk period ahead of the American presidential election, if China and 
the U.S. want to avoid a military crisis or conflict in the Taiwan Strait or the South 
China Sea, strengthening crisis management is the only feasible way.

First, China and the U.S. should reopen, as soon as possible, the communication 
channels between the two militaries and diplomatic services. In particular, the 
hotline between the respective defense agencies should be fully tapped to notify
each other and communicate the presence of various risks that might lead to 
a military confrontation.Recently, U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper expressed 
his hope to visit China within this year to try and develop a crisis communication 
system. It was a positive signal. The two sides may wish to start with online 
communication and engage in consultations through the two embassies.

Second, the two sides must prioritize crisis prevention and avoidance. The maritime 
military security consultation mechanism, stalled because of the COVID-19 pandemic, 
should resume in the form of an online dialogue. The two sides should reaffirm their 
adherence to agreed codes of conduct for unplanned encounters at sea, including 
mutual notification of major military activities. The security of encounters at sea 
and in the air, including their annexes, should be included. They should also order 
their front-line officers and soldiers to act in accordance with those agreements.

Third, to prevent a crisis from escalating beyond control, the two sides should, in 
the event of a maritime emergency, immediately initiate and maintain on-site 
communication, have a high-level conversation through hotlines and dispatch 
special envoys for urgent consultations. Moreover, in managing a crisis, taking 
roughly equivalent military action, not escalation, should be the basic principle 
followed by both sides.

Fourth, after we move past the high-risk period preceding the U.S. presidential 
election, both sides should continue to make significant efforts to strengthen 
their security crisis management mechanisms.New efforts should be made to 
seek agreement by political and and military leaders on the basic principles of 
crisis management, additional confidence-building measures for military security, 
resumption of the joint chiefs of staff dialogue and the launch of a strategic 
stability dialogue focusing mainly on strategic nuclear relations and covering 
the militarization of space, cyber-security and crisis stability. In this way, crisis 
management will become an important part of the military security dialogue, 
with potential hotlines between the respective military theater commands.

In short, in a situation where competition has seriously increased, China and 
the U.S. must stop themselves from falling into a cold war as a result of all-around 
decoupling, ideological differences or a military conflict. At present, the most 
urgent task is to strengthen crisis management to prevent military conflicts in 
the Taiwan Strait and the South China Sea.

During the U.S.-Soviet Cold War, crisis management was the only form of 
cooperation the two countries had available to avoid direct military conflict or 
war, especially a nuclear one. The current crisis management setup between 
China and the U.S. is very different. It represents a major effort by both countries 
— which are in a hybrid relationship of cooperation and increasing competition 
— to prevent a military conflict or war and avoid falling into the abyss of a cold war. 
Both countries and their militaries should take it seriously.

 中美聚焦