感谢“世界和平论坛”的邀请。我在这个时候想提出三点希望：

第一点，要恢复和增进正常外交往来。过去两年半以上的时间里，中美之间正常的往来几乎中断了，但是我觉得现在我们应该重新起步，恢复密切的外交往来。我记得1991年至1995年间，芮效俭大使担任美国驻华大使的时候，我们就开始了很多的交往，那个时候中国的智库还不发达，但是他跟我们学者之间的往来很多，我受益匪浅。对于丹尼尔·拉塞尔先生和董云裳女士，我记忆最清楚的是，2015年9月份习近平主席对美国进行国事访问之前，他们两位到中国来进行访问前夕的准备工作，当时美国驻华大使是马克斯·博卡斯，我们在北京进行了很深入的交谈。他们提出中美关系需要解决三个很紧迫的问题，一个是贸易赤字，一个是南海可能发生的冲突，第三个是网络安全。后来他们提出最紧迫需要解决的问题是网络安全问题，所以习近平主席就派遣他的特使孟建柱国务委员到美国进行访问，这是在习主席访美之前10天发生的事情，应该说是中美之间外交密切接触的一个结果，然后这个问题得到了缓解，那次访问很成功。回过头来可以想象，从2015年9月习主席到美国进行国事访问，到现在已经7年了，中国国家主席没能再到美国进行一次国事访问，而美国总统上一次到中国进行国事访问也是特朗普总统在2017年来到中国，时间也已经过去5年了。我觉得，现在虽然中美之间高层的交往还在持续，但更多还是网络上的沟通，包括中国国家主席跟美国总统在过去一年多已经有了4次电话或者网络的交谈，这应该说是非常重要的，同时我觉得这样的高层交往，包括外交官之间的交往应该继续，而且应该增加。

现在更紧迫的问题是，双方的航线应该恢复到正常状况，使双方的外交官和两国的使馆、领馆都能进行更多的正常活动，我觉得这对于防止战略误判、了解对方的内心想法非常有用。如果我们有很多具体问题需要解决的话，必须要通过外交官的接触，不光是外交官的接触，也包括商务官员之间的接触、企业之间的接触，来增进相互的交流。这是我的第一个希望，就是我们能够尽快恢复交流。我今年2月至3月间到美国进行了一个月的访问，见到了不少美国朋友，跟他们进行了深入交谈，我觉得非常有意义。

第二个希望，双方应该想办法避免战争。最近几年中美关系下滑趋势很明显，一般的判断就是，两个国家的关系如果恶化了，一步一步最后就会导致战争的发生。中美之间会不会发生战争呢？我们当然希望避免战争，但是我没有把握说中美之间一定在最近的将来不发生战争。如果双方发生战争的话，最大的危险是台湾海峡地区，也就是说，中美关系核心的问题、最敏感的问题是台湾问题。上世纪50年代，台湾海峡出现危机，但中美之间没有直接交战。1995年李登辉访问美国之后也出现了台湾海峡的紧张局势，也没有直接发生冲突。我想起现任的美国两位高级官员杰克·沙利文和库尔特·坎贝尔在《外交事务》刊物上发表文章，题为《How America Can Both Challenge and Coexist With China》，里面有一句话使我印象非常深刻。他们说“中美之间处理得最好的问题是台湾问题”。我虽然不同意这个说法，但是我觉得他们这个说法是有一定想法的，就是说两个国家通过外交的接触，通过经常的交换意见达到了一个共识，就是我们在台湾问题上不能发生战争。

到现在美国还在说美国坚持“一个中国”的政策，当然这跟我们说的“一个中国”原则是有区别的，但是美国还在坚持“一个中国”政策，还在说美国不支持台独。中国方面一直说我们坚持“和平统一、一国两制”，中国大陆对台湾的政策也没有发生实质的变化。但是为什么最近感到台湾局势非常紧张呢？我觉得，我所看到的一些舆论让我感到有些困惑或者有些吃惊。比如说，美国智库连篇累牍地发表文章，说台湾将要出大事，中美在台湾之间要打仗，中国在最近的将来或者有一个时间表要用武统的方式来解决台湾问题。我应该说非常关注台湾问题，但是没有听到过中国政府高官讲到“武统”这句话，我也没有听说他们要用武统来解决台湾问题的时间表。但是美方有人在这样鼓吹，我认为，这种鼓吹是不是有一点妄议，或者包含祸心呢？我是有这种担心的，就是有些人想把中美之间拉入战火，这是我们需要避免的。

我个人对于中国的和平统一是抱有信心的，因为中国在发展，在继续繁荣，经济在繁荣，而且非常强调法治。在台湾问题上，我觉得台湾回归祖国只是时间问题，“台独”是没有希望的，美国不支持“台独”，“台独”也就难以成功。所以我觉得我们需要做很多事情来保持台海局势的稳定，包括在舆论方面，不能再允许这样过火的言论战占领我们舆论的中心，这样就不会出现中美的大战。我觉得中美之间的冲突跟竞争是不可避免的，可以避免的就是发生战争。

第三个希望，继续发展经贸关系和科技交流。其实在中美关系已经下滑的情况下，中美之间的经贸交流还可以保持一定规模，甚至于最近的消息是，2021年美国对华货物贸易的出口达到了历史新高，就是说中美之间货物的贸易是在增加、而不是在减少。

特朗普政府对中国打了贸易战之后，中美双方都受到损失。就我看到的资料，美方损失更大，美方企业受到很大损失，所以我期待美国要减免一些中美贸易之间的关税。我在访问美国的时候，听到了一种让我感到非常不高兴的言论——“国家安全高于经济利益”。经济利益不就是国家安全的一部分嘛，怎么能说国家安全比经济利益更重要呢？把国家安全和经济利益对立起来，我认为是不正确的。最近我的一个朋友埃文·格林伯格、他的父亲莫理斯·格林伯格，他们都主张中美经贸关系要继续发展。埃文在CSIS发表了一个演讲，他的基调是，要基于利益来处理对华经济关系，而不是基于美国人所说的意识形态原则或者其他东西。我是非常赞成这个观点的。但是他也提出来，好像在美国持有这种观点的人会在政治中受到排挤，甚至有人诽谤他们。我觉得这个政治障碍应该解除。同时，我知道我们中国企业界的朋友非常急切地要恢复中美之间正常的经济交流，特别是中国企业在美国投资。美国企业也希望在中国投资。

我觉得下一步的中美关系，在我所希望的目标有所实现后，就是说两个国家能够恢复和增进正常的外交往来之后，是不是能够达成一个共识。我们要做什么，我们不能做什么，这个共识现在不是很清楚。中美双方各自发表了自己的看法，但是在一些具体的问题上，我觉得双方还有一些可以探讨的余地。有人提出中美之间需要有第四个联合公报，我觉得第四个联合公报恐怕是做不到的，那样一个全面的状态、一个非常完美的、有历史意义的共识可能很难达成。但是起码双方可以谈起来，在未来我们怎么样避免冲突，怎样增进合作，我们需要具体化。

刚刚有人提到了中美两国都有不同的声音，特别是在智库，我认为这是一个现实存在的事实，而且改变不了。在网络时代，各种声音发出来都是很正常的。我想如果说我们需要做什么的话，只能说，我们自己认为正确的声音要使劲地说。但是大家都认为自己正确，这个当然就需要政府出来说到底是怎么样的，需要有一些澄清。美国人在任何情况下、在任何问题上都有不同的声音，所以我希望他们这些不同的声音发出来，尤其是一些比较温和、比较理性的声音发出来。美国媒体这方面也应该起点作用。

刚刚芮效俭大使提到了一点，乌克兰冲突刚刚发生的时候，美国有人把中国说成是和俄罗斯同等的，现在也有。但我觉得美国政府如今的看法已经跟战争刚刚开始的时候不完全一样了。美国没有把中国跟俄罗斯看成是同等的问题，或者说“中国事先参与了策划对乌克兰的进攻”这个怀疑已经打消了。中国政府和我们的秦刚大使作了多次的澄清，说中国事先并不知道俄罗斯要对乌克兰发动它所说的特别军事行动，而且中国到现在为止没有对俄罗斯进行实质上的军事上的支援，这个美国政府是很清楚的。

（此文摘自凤凰网报道，为作者在第十届世界和平论坛上的讲话。）

Right now I have three wishes:

First, normal diplomatic exchanges should be restored and increased. In the past more than two and a half years, normal exchanges between China and the United States have almost been cut off, but I think now is the time for us to restart, and restore close diplomatic exchanges.I remember between 1991 and 1995, when Stapleton Roy was U.S. ambassador to China, we began to have lots of exchanges. Although think tanks were underdeveloped in China at the time, he had a lot of exchanges with us scholars, from which I benefited greatly. As to Daniel Russel and Susan Thornton, what has remained most vividly on my mind is that before President Xi Jinping's September 2015 state visit to the U.S. — when Max Baucus was U.S. ambassador here — they came to China in preparation for that visit, and we had in-depth talks in Beijing. They pointed out that China-U.S. relations needed to solve three pressing issues — trade deficits, possible conflict in the South China Sea and cybersecurity. Later they stated the most imperative issue was cybersecurity. So President Xi sent State Councilor Meng Jianzhu as his special envoy to visit the U.S. 10 days before his trip. As a result of close contacts between the Chinese and U.S. sides, the issue was eased then, and the visit was very successful.Looking back now, seven years have passed, and the Chinese president hasn't paid another state visit to the United States. Five years have passed since Donald Trump paid a state visit to China as U.S. president in 2017. I think that while high-level exchanges between China and the U.S. have persisted, they have mostly been online communications, including the four talks between the Chinese and U.S. presidents, by telephone or visual dialogues. These are very important, but I think such high-level exchanges, including those between diplomats, should continue — and be increased.

Currently, the pressing issue is that direct flights between the two countries should be restored to normal levels, so that both sides' diplomats as well as embassies and consulates can carry out more normal activities, which I believe will be very conducive to preventing strategic misjudgments and to understanding the other side's thinking. If we have many specific problems to address, it must be done through contacts — not just between diplomats but also between business officials and enterprises to facilitate two-way communication.This is my first wish, namely to restore exchanges as soon as possible. I had a month-long visit to the U.S. in February and March, during which I met with quite a few American friends, including Ambassador Roy, Danny Russel and Susan Thornton, and had profound communication with them, which I think was very meaningful.

Second, the two sides should find ways to avoid war. Considering the very obvious trend of declining China-U.S. relations, the popular judgment is that if relations between two countries deteriorate, bit by bit it will lead to a war. Will there be a war between China and the U.S.? Of course we hope war can be avoided, but I can't say for sure that one will not break out in the near future. If one does occur, the biggest danger lies in the Taiwan Strait. The most sensitive, core issue in China-U.S. relations is Taiwan.There were crises in the Taiwan Strait in the 1950s, but there was no direct military conflict. There also were tensions following Lee Teng-hui's U.S. visit in 1995, but no direct conflict. Which reminds me of an article by two incumbent ranking U.S. officials, Jake Sullivan and Kurt Campbell, titled “How America Can Both Challenge and Coexist with China” in Foreign Affairs in 2019 (when they were not in government). One line impressed me profoundly: “Taiwan is not only a potential flash point. It is also the greatest unclaimed success in the history of U.S.-Chinese relations.”Though I don't totally agree with them on this point, I do think their idea makes some sense. That is, through diplomatic engagement and frequent exchanges of ideas, the two countries have reached a consensus that they shouldn't't enter a war over Taiwan.

Even today, the U.S. insists that it adheres to the “one-China policy,” which is certainly different from our “one-China principle,” but the U.S. remains committed to its position and continues to say that it does not support Taiwan independence. On the Chinese side, we've always said we adhere to “peaceful reunification” and “one country, two systems.” And there been no substantial change in the mainland's Taiwan policy.Yet why have we felt such tensions over Taiwan? Some media rhetoric has really been perplexing and surprising to me. For instance, American think tanks have published a series of articles claiming something big will happen regarding Taiwan and that China and the U.S. will fight over the island, and China will use military force to resolve the Taiwan issue in the near future (or has a timetable for doing it).I've paid close attention to the Taiwan issue, but have never heard any ranking official in the Chinese government mention unification by force, nor have I heard anything about a timetable. However, some on the U.S. side have been preaching this. I wonder if there is some ulterior agenda behind it. I worry that some people want to drag China and the U.S. into war, which is what we need to avoid.

I have confidence in China's peaceful reunification, because China continues developing — prospering economically — and has placed considerable emphasis on the rule of law. As for Taiwan, I think its return to the motherland is only a matter of time. Taiwan independence has no future, and cannot succeed without U.S. support, so I think we need to do a lot of things to preserve stability of the Taiwan Strait, including on public opinion. We should no longer allow such radical clamors to take center stage, so that a major war between China and the United States can be prevented. I think conflict and competition are inevitable, but war can be avoided.

Third, we should continue developing economic and trade ties, as well as scientific and technological exchanges. In fact, against the backdrop of sliding China-U.S. relations, economic and trade exchanges have retained a certain scale. According to recent reports, U.S. exports of goods to China set a historical record in 2021, meaning trade in goods between China and the U.S. is increasing, not decreasing. 

Both China and the U.S. have suffered losses since the Trump administration launched its trade war against China. According to data available to me, the U.S. side has lost more, and American firms have suffered dearly. So I expect the U.S. to reduce or exempt some tariffs on bilateral trade.During my latest U.S. visit, I heard one statement that made me very uneasy: “National security transcends economic interest.” Isn't economic interest a part of national security? How can one say national security is more important than economic interest? It's not right to put national security against economic interest. Both my friend Evan Greenberg and his father, Maurice Greenberg, advocate continued development of China-U.S. economic and trade ties. Evan delivered a speech at CSIS recently, the basic idea of which was to handle economic relations with China based on interest rather than on what Americans put as ideological principles or anything else. I appreciate this idea very much. But he also pointed out that it seems people with such opinions may face political exclusion in the U.S., or even be subject to slander. I think such political obstacles should be removed. Meanwhile, as I know, many friends in the Chinese business community are anxious to restore normal economic exchanges between the two countries, especially Chinese investment in the U.S. American companies also want to invest in China.

I wonder — after China-U.S. relations make progress in the above three aspects and manage to restore and increase normal diplomatic exchanges — whether they could reach a consensus on what we should do and what we shouldn't't do. This remains unclear, and each side has expressed its opinions. But I think there still is room on some specific issues for them to explore. Some people suggest China and the U.S. need a fourth joint communique, which I'm afraid is unrealistic, as it is difficult to maneuver a consensus as comprehensive and perfect as the previous three, and with that kind of historical significance. However, the two parties can at least begin talking about how to avoid conflict and increase cooperation in the future. We need to work out the details.

Some people just mentioned different voices in both countries, especially from think tanks. I think this is a reality, and there is no way to change it. It is normal for various voices to be aired in the era of the internet. If there is anything we need to do, it is to speak out loudly on what we believe is correct. Of course, everyone believes he or she is correct and should speak louder. So this calls for the governments to make corresponding clarifications. Americans have different voices under any circumstances and on any subjects, so I hope all the different voices can be heard, especially the moderate, rational ones. American media should also play a role in this regard.

Ambassador Roy just mentioned that at the beginning of the Ukraine conflict, some people in the U.S. saw China and Russia in the same light, and believed China was complicit with Russia. Even today some people still see China that way. But I don't think the U.S. government is holding the same view of China's role as it did at the outbreak of the war. The U.S. is not treating China as it does Russia — as equally threatening — so far as Ukraine is concerned. In other words, the suspicion that China participated in planning a Ukraine attack has subsided. The Chinese government and our ambassador to the U.S., Qin Gang, have clarified this repeatedly, saying China had no knowledge of Russia's so-called special military operation against Ukraine beforehand. So far China has provided no substantial aid or military support for Russia. The U.S. government knows this very well.