“印太战略”:以美印日澳的战略逻辑、利益与策略选择为分析视角

"印太战略"是美国均势+有限遏制+规制+话语诋毁的混合型战略。它意在前沿、中间地带与后方的三层构建不对称的对华遏制性力量,突破中美双边、单区域战略竞争的狭窄战略空间;在多地域与多维度孤立中国,拉拢更多国家在产业价值链、数字经济等层面与中国切割;制订基础建设投资透明化的新标准,嵌入有利于美国利益的规制;通过国际法、舆论等软性手段抹黑中国的"一带一路"与海权发展。虽然共同逻辑都是制衡中国崛起,但日澳印在策略上强调非对抗性。其中避免成为中国优先反制是日本重要的策略目标;印度在拉达克边界冲突后尚没有形成一个完全倒向美国的战略,因为这必定使其背上沉重的战略包袱,成为美国的附庸;澳大利亚作为地缘政治影响有限的中等国家,在美国反华行动中冲在最前列已使其利益严重受损。而"印太战略"与东盟所推动的包容性、合作安全理念也有着本质的区别,东盟要在"印太地区"发挥中心领导作用,定位"印太"为对话与合作区域。所以由于东盟的抵制、印日澳的消极政策,这个战略形成的攻势将很难保持可持续性,其长期前景并不看好。

Indo-Pacific Strategy:Analysis from the Lens of Strategic Logic,Interest,and Tactic of the US,India,Japan,and Australia

Indo-Pacific Strategy is a hybrid strategy,including balancing,limited containment,new regulations,and discourse defamation. It aims to construct a tri-front dissymmetry containing power-line in the forward,intermediate,and rear position of the region for the US,breaking through the narrow strategic competition space between China and the US,currently limited in the bilateral relations and in a sole-area. It also contains isolation of China in the multi-region,drawing more countries to decouple with China on industries value-chain and digit-economy,working out new and transparent criterion and norms on infrastructures construction investment differently with China,favorable to the US interests,and by the international laws and media,to stigmatize China’s BRA and maritime power development. Notwithstanding the common logic against China’s rising,Japan,Australia,and India tend to adopt a non-confrontational approach. Prevention from becoming a prime target of China’s counter-balancing is Japan’s vital tactics;India,yet,forms a strategy tilting to the US overall in the post-Ladakh border conflict with China,since a upending strategy will inevitably lead to a heavy burden as well as an American junior partner for New Delhi;As a medium power,Australia has a limited influence in the geo-political arena and it has been incurred heavily by China’s trade punishment as it spearheads to antagonize China following the US action in the Trump administration. The ideas of inclusiveness and cooperative security that the ASEAN seeks are different significantly from Indo-Pacific Strategy,which calls for itself a centrality role in the Indo-Pacific region,in which a place of dialogue and cooperation is defined. Therefore,with the resistance from ASEAN,a half-hearted stand from India,Japan,and Australia,this strategy could not be sustainable inthe long-run,its prospects are dim and murky.