2010年后中美关系调整 ——基于“制度体系”理论解读 / The Readjustment of China-US Relations After 2010 - Based on The Theory of 'Institutional System'

Abstract

二战后，国际体系逐渐从“权力体系”进入“制度体系”时代，国际制度成为国际体系建设的核心，大国围绕制度结构中优势地位的争夺变为推动彼此关系变化的主要动因。“制度体系”背景下，国际制度主导国为维护自身主导地位，往往使用“安全杠杆”，在维持国际市场开放性前提下，建立“歧视”崛起国的国际经济制度，推动经济要素向着有利于己方的方向流动，削弱崛起国的物质基础和政策自由度。2010年前后，国际制度结构进入加速调整期，重点是在东亚地区，中国则是主要推动力。国际制度结构的调整威胁了美国原有的主导地位。因此，2010年前后，中美之间的矛盾瞬时尖锐起来。中美此轮博弈的焦点是东亚国际制度主导权，美国的安全战略只是手段，面对美国即将建立的针对中国的“歧视”性国际经济制度安排（TPP），中国需在更大范围内的加大开放，以“共同发展”应对该歧视战略。

After World War II, international order gradually changed from a 'power-centered system' to an 'Institution-based System'. International Institution became the core stone in the construction of the international order. Occupying an advantageous position in the institutional structure became the main factor in driving relational changes between major powers. Against the background of 'institutional system', the dominant countries are inclined to use the 'security lever' as a tool to maintain their dominant position. In order to promote economic factors conducive to their own benefit, these dominant powers set up a series of discriminative international institutions against emerging powers by weakening their material foundation and their room for maneuver in policy-making without destabilizing the liberalization of global market. After 2010, the international order entered into a period of re-adjustment during which East Asia became the pivotal center of attention while China became the main driving force. This situation was seen as a threat to the existing US hegemony. Therefore, before and after 2010 the contradictions between China and the United States were intensifying, and the focus of this round of China-US power struggle aimed to occupy the hegemonic position in shaping the international order in East Asia. Perceiving the US “security strategy” as a means and facing the US-led discriminative international economic order (TPP), China needs to broaden its openness and to use the "common development" strategy to deal with the US discriminative strategy.