奥运危机中的机遇
对于crisis一词，中文翻译极妙。它包含着两个汉字：危和机。每一个危机都必然包含危险，但也常常提供机遇。目前的奥运危机也如此。它给印度提供了一个机遇，向中国发出一些强有力的长期信号。
要明白这样的信号将如何获得接收，我们必须明白中国领导人当前的心态。他们很可能真的迷惑了。中国调动巨大的经济资源去确保北京奥运的成功。中国人用现代建筑与技术工具创建有史以来最好的奥运村。他们还深挖中国传统，为奥运开幕选择吉日。数字8被中国人视为幸运数字。因此，奥运开幕的日子2008年8月8日可能被视为最幸运的日子。
然而，中国的运气显然在奥运开始之前就已经用尽。示威者试图扑灭奥运火炬的场景得到广泛传播，造成奥运全球危机的印象。国际奥委会主席罗格公开表示，这是一次危机。
中国领导人很可能被这场危机搞糊涂了，因为到目前为止，他们很好地利用传统的政治和经济关系杠杆，甚至动用经济援助创造中国与所有合作伙伴之间可靠的长期相互依赖关系，出色地处理中国的国际与地缘政治关系。事实上，中国最大的经济援助项目给了美国。通过不断购买低息美国债券，中国实际上在津贴美国经济。反过来，中国进入美国市场，世界最大的新兴大国和世界最大的国之间建立了稳定的地缘政治关系。所有这些都是中国出色的地缘政治战略的一部分。
奥运危机将让中国领导人逐渐意识到第四维（fourth dimension）的存在，中国迄今为止很少注意到它。第四维存在于国际媒体与非政府组织所产生的国际公众舆论精神空间。在理论上，媒体与非政府组织没有实权。在实际上，它们有实力，因为它们塑造了国际舆论。全球反对中国奥运的示威者在数量上可能微不足道，但他们的全球影响力惊人。这种扩大效应来源于第四维。
中国人对第四维缺乏认识，这也表现在他们组织博鳌论坛的方式上。博鳌论坛是达沃斯论坛的中国竞争者。出于中国政府巨大的双边影响力，很多政府和商界高层会出席每一次博鳌论坛。但它缺少达沃斯的火花，因为它没能邀请独立知识分子、媒体和小说家及剧作家等文化人士——他们驱动第四维的国际生活。
相反，西方政府很明白第四维如何发挥作用。西方领袖很清楚在摄像机前如何表现。他们争相展示他们如何顺应“国际”意见。因此，萨尔科奇、默克尔和布朗争相展示他们在奥运问题上如何做到政治正确。
有点不同寻常的是，布什以突出的政治家态度应对奥运危机。他坚称他将出席奥运开幕式。美国的自由派批评者，包括民主党候选人希拉里和奥巴马可能会攻击他。但布什立场坚定，意味深长地强化他的出席对中国政府的价值。通过这样做，他也大大增强了他的谈判杠杆。因此，北京将处于巨大的压力之下，极尽克制以确保布什没有借口取消出席。在某种程度上，可以说这是美国总统的出色举动。
印度政府可以同样出色。通过早早宣布新德里不会抵制奥运开幕式，印度也将收获在北京的政治杠杆力量。同样重要的是，这将令印度获得更多政治空间，寻求西藏问题的解决。
许多西方示威者相信，通过争取抵制奥运或者令奥运挫败，他们就可以取得巨大成功。很少人意识到如果他们得逞，会造成巨大伤害。到目前为止，尽管共产党政府继续延续，中国已经致力于与开放、自由的全球经济融合，处于成为全球体系“负责任的利益攸关者”的进程中。想一想，如果中国政府为了回应奥运失败所引起的民族主义反弹，决定不理会世界，那会产生什么样的效果啊。一个对世界封闭的中国，其少数民族的政治空间会更小。因此，那些真正关心藏人利益的人应该希望奥运成功，成功的奥运将反过来继续中国向世界开放的进程。在这个可塑的时刻，印度可以做很多事情，确保更明智的长期战略得到采纳。
（原标题：不是更高、更快、更强；作者：Kishore Mahbubani，新加坡李光耀公共政策学院院长）
原文地址：http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?id=e58fc4e6-ee74-414b-8483-d21b08b1593a&ParentID=041e3d4f-5c26-4b29-a946-095ae130fde1&&Headline=Not+higher%2c+faster%2c+stronger
原文：
The Chinese have a brilliant translation of the word ‘crisis’. It combines two Chinese characters: danger and opportunity. Each crisis inevitably contains dangers but it often provides opportunities. So too does the current Olympics crisis. It provides India an opportunity to send some powerful long-term signals to China.
To understand how such signals will be received, it is important to understand the current mindset of the Chinese leaders. They are probably genuinely bewildered. China has marshalled enormous economic resources to ensure the success of the Beijing Olympics. The Chinese used the tools of modern architecture and technology to create and build the best-ever Olympic village. They also dug deep into Chinese tradition to pick an auspicious date to launch the Olympics. The number ‘8’ is considered lucky for the Chinese. To launch the Olympics on ‘8/8/08’ is, therefore, considered the luckiest possible date.
Clearly, however, Chinese luck has run out even before the Olympics have begun. The widely broadcast scenes of demonstrators trying to snuff out the Olympic torch have created the impression of a global crisis around the Games. The head of the International Olympic Committee, Jacques Rogge, said so openly: “It is a crisis, there is no doubt about that.”
The Chinese leaders are probably bewildered by the crisis because so far they have done a brilliant job of managing China’s international and geopolitical relationships by using well the traditional levers of political and economic ties and even financial aid to create sound long-term mutual interdependence between China and all its partners. Indeed, the largest financial aid programme of China is to the United States. By continuing to buy US Treasury Bills at low interest rates, despite the depreciating value of the US dollar, China is essentially subsidising the American economy. In return, China gets access to American markets and a stable geopolitical relationship between the world’s greatest emerging power and the world’s greatest power. All this has been part of a brilliant geopolitical strategy by China.
The Olympics crisis will gradually make the Chinese leadership aware that there is a fourth dimension to international relations that China has hitherto paid little attention to. This fourth dimension exists in the ethereal space of the international public opinion generated by international media and non-governmental organisations (NGOs). In theory, the media and NGOs have little real power. In practice, they do because they shape international opinion. The actual number of demonstrators against the Chinese Olympics may have been a minuscule number in global terms. But their global impact has been phenomenal. This multiplier effect has been generated by the fourth dimension.
The Chinese lack of understanding of this fourth dimension is also shown in the way they organise their Boao forum, the Chinese competitor of the Davos forum. Using the enormous bilateral clout of the Chinese government, many senior government and business leaders attend each Boao forum. But it lacks the sparks of Davos because it fails to invite the independent intelligentsia, the media and the cultural figures like novelists and playwrights who drive the fourth dimension of international life.
By contrast, the Western governments understand well how this fourth dimension works. Western leaders know precisely how to posture when the TV camera lights come on. They compete with each other to show how attuned they are to ‘international’ opinion. Hence, Nicolas Sarkozy, Angela Merkel and Gordon Brown have been competing with each other to show how politically correct they are on the issue of the Olympics. When asked whether he supported a boycott, Sarkozy said he “could not close the door to any possibility... our Chinese friends must understand the worldwide concern that there is about the question of Tibet”. Germany announced in late March that Merkel will not attend the opening ceremony. Brown has indicated that he will not boycott the Olympics but remains cryptic on whether he would be attending the inauguration.
Somewhat unusually, George W Bush has been reacting with a remarkably statesmanlike approach to the Olympic crisis. He continues to insist that he will attend the Olympics opening ceremony. His liberal critics in America, including the Democrat presidential candidates, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, are likely to attack him. But by standing firm, Bush has significantly enhanced the value of his participation to the Chinese government. In so doing, he has also significantly increased his bargaining leverage. Beijing will, therefore, be under great pressure to exercise every restraint to ensure that no excuse is given for Bush to cancel his participation. In some respects, it could be argued that this was a brilliant move by the American President.
The Indian government could be equally brilliant. By declaring early that New Delhi will not boycott the opening ceremony, India will also significantly gain political leverage in Beijing. Equally importantly, it will gain India more political space to work towards a settlement of the Tibetan issue. In theory, it should be possible to do so. The Dalai Lama is advocating autonomy, not independence. The Chinese government also believes in autonomy. The official Chinese government policy paper on Tibet says that it “regards exercise of regional ethnic autonomy in areas where ethnic communities live in compact communities as a basic policy for solving the ethnic issue”.
Despite this agreement in theory, no movement has been possible in generating a dialogue between the Dalai Lama and the Chinese government. There has been a complete breakdown of trust. To make matters worse, the violent protests in Tibet and elsewhere have re-ignited a very powerful Chinese nationalism that has further constrained the political options for Beijing. In the Chinese blogosphere, a political explosion has occurred that the Chinese government cannot ignore. This may explain why the Dalai Lama has strongly argued against violence. In the long run, the people most damaged by this violence will be the Tibetans.
Many Western demonstrators believe that they would achieve a huge success by securing either a boycott or a perceived failure of the Beijing Olympics. Little are they aware of the huge damage they would do if they succeed. So far, despite the continuation of the Communist Party government, China has committed itself to integrate with the open and liberal global economy and in the process become a common ‘responsible stakeholder’ of the global system. Consider the impact on the world if the Chinese government, in response to a nationalistic backlash of a failed Beijing Olympics, decides to turn its back on the world. A China that becomes more closed to the world will provide even less political space to its ethnic minorities, including the Tibetan people. Hence, paradoxically, those who really care for the Tibetan people should hope for a successful Olympics, which will in turn continue the process of opening up China to the rest of the world. At this plastic moment, India can do a lot to ensure that a wiser long-term strategy is adopted.
(Kishore Mahbubani, is Dean, Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, Singapore and author of The New Asian Hemisphere)