纽约时报说中俄朝要搞核联盟？我就问一个问题
编者按：清华大学战略与安全中心研究员周波在SouthChinaMorningPost(《南华早报》)上发文回应NewYorkTimes（《纽约时报》）有关拜登批准美国核部署机密文件的报道。周波表示，足够的核威慑力量和绝对的核反击能力，是中国倡导“不首先使用核武器“的前提条件。
此前，周波在美国ForeignPolicy(《外交政策》)杂志发文，论述五个正式核大国都应该承诺“不首先使用核武器”。
【文/观察者网专栏作者周波，翻译/李泽西核译/韩桦】
这可真新鲜：据《纽约时报》报道，美国总统拜登于今年3月批准了一份名为《核部署指南》（NuclearEmploymentGuidance）的机密文件。知情人士称，文件中阐述的战略强调，美军可能需要为俄罗斯、中国和朝鲜的“协作核对抗”做好准备。
我的首要问题是：都没有中俄朝联盟，哪来的核联盟？中俄关系虽密切，但北京并未在俄乌冲突期间向其提供任何直接军事援助，这表明中俄关系并非联盟性质。
与此同时，尽管北京与平壤之间数十年前签订了条约（编者注：中朝友好合作互助条约），要求在战时相互提供军事援助，但如今，中国与朝鲜的军事互动可能比中国与大多数非洲国家的军事互动还要少。那么，这三个国家如何协调所谓针对美国的核战略或核行动呢？
相较俄罗斯，美国在核武器上没有明显优势，未来也不会有，因为俄罗斯拥有更多的核弹头。苏联解体后，俄罗斯的常规力量急剧下降。正因为如此，俄罗斯现在比以往任何时候都更加依赖核武器。
这就解释了为什么俄罗斯在乌克兰战争期间数次发出使用核武器的隐晦威胁，并将在未来几十年继续实施“核模糊”策略。
“和平卫士”导弹弹头。AtomicArchive
此外，如果世界上所有核大国都提高核力量的战备状态，就会增加像冷战时期“虚警”事件的可能性。在早期的远程雷达时代，即使是升起的月亮也可能被误认为是导弹袭击。鉴此，随着更多核武器国家进入高度戒备状态，很可能会出现更多“虚警”或重大事故。
拜登政府的核战略令人遗憾，尤其是因为他在自己政治生涯的大部分时间都在倡导核不扩散。自二战以来，我们已经有大约80年没有发生过全球大国之间的重大战争。
如果这算是一种安慰，那么在冷战结束后约30年，我们会再次陷入冷战的可能性，又令人不安。我只能祭出牛顿的这句话：“我能计算星辰的运行，却无法计算人类的疯狂"。
（以下为英文全文）
Thisreallyisaneye-opener.AccordingtoTheNewYorkTimes,USPresidentJoeBidenapprovedaclassifieddocumentinMarchcalledthe“NuclearEmploymentGuidance”.SourcesfamiliarwiththesituationsaythatthestrategylaidoutinthedocumentemphasisestheneedforUSforcestoprepareforpossiblecoordinatednuclearconfrontationswithRussia,ChinaandNorthKorea.
Myfirstquestionisthis:whereisaChina-Russia-NorthKoreaalliance,letalonenuclearalliance?China-Russiarelationsareclose,butBeijingnothavingprovidedanydirectmilitaryassistancetoMoscowinitsinvasionofUkrainesuggeststheirrelationshipisnotanalliance.
Meanwhile,inspiteofadecades-oldtreatybetweenBeijingandPyongyangthatcallsformutualmilitaryassistanceintimeofwar,China’smilitaryinteractionsnowadayswithNorthKoreaareperhapsfewerthanitsinteractionswithmostAfricancountries.SohowcouldthethreecountriescoordinatethesenuclearstrategiesoroperationsagainsttheUnitedStates?
TheUShasnoclearadvantageintermsofnuclearweaponsoverRussia,whichhasmorewarheads,anditwon’tinthefuture.PreciselybecauseitsconventionalforceshavedrasticallydeclinedsincethedissolutionoftheSovietUnion,Russianowreliesmorethaneveronnuclearweapons.
ThisexplainswhyMoscowhasmadeseveralthinlyveiledthreatsofusingnuclearweaponsduringitswarinUkraineandwillcontinuetoplaywithnuclearambiguityinthedecadestocome.
China’snuclearcapabilities,includingthenumberofnuclearwarheads,areconsideredstatesecrets.Therefore,itisunlikelythatanyoneinChinawillpubliclyconfirmtheaccuracyoftheStockholmInternationalPeaceResearchInstitute’sestimates.ThethinktankreleasedareportinJuneindicatingChina’snucleararsenalhadincreasedfrom410warheadsinJanuary2023to500thisJanuaryandthatforthefirsttimeChinacouldbedeployingasmallnumberofwarheadsonmissilesduringpeacetime.
Ina2019defencewhitepaper,Chinasaiditwould“keepitsnuclearcapabilitiesattheminimumlevelrequiredfornationalsecurity”.Evidentlythis“minimumlevel”cannotbequantifiedbecausenationalsecurityneedsvaryindifferenttimesandenvironments.
EvenifChina’snucleararsenalhasgrownto500warheadsandcouldgrowaslargeas1,500by2035,accordingtoPentagonestimates,BeijingcanstillarguethatitisstillmuchsmallerthanRussia’sroughly6,000warheadsandthe5,400oftheUS.AttheheightoftheColdWar,theSovietUnionhadmorethan40,000nuclearwarheadswhiletheUShadmorethan23,000–enoughtodestroythewholeplanet.WhywouldChinachoosetobecomeinvolvedinsuchmadness?
Inmyunderstanding,“minimumlevel”referstoathresholdthatnoothernuclearpowerwoulddaretocrosswithapre-emptivenuclearstrikeonChina,evenifChinamaintainsapolicyof“nofirstuse”ofnuclearweapons.Preciselybecauseofthispolicy,Chinahastobuildadequatestrengthfordeterrence.ItrequiresChinatohavesufficientnuclearwarheadstoresistanenemy’sfirststrikeandensureChinahassecond-strikecapability.
Withsuchnuclearcapabilities,China’smilitarycouldhaveabetterchanceofemergingvictoriousovertheUSintheeventofaconventionalwar,suchasoneintheTaiwanStrait.GiventhatthegapbetweentheconventionalmilitaryforcesofChinaandtheUSisalreadyclosing,ChinahavingalargeenoughnucleararsenalwouldforcetheUStogiveupanyideasofusingnuclearweaponsfirst.
Chinacallfora“nofirstuse”policymightlooktosomepeoplelikewishfulthinkingatatimewhennuclearweaponsseemtobegrowinginimportanceamidtheongoingwarsinUkraineandGaza,butitisn’t.Nuclearweaponsarenotanomnipotentforce,andhavingthemisnoguaranteeofsuccessinaconflict.IfChina,theUS,Russia,BritainandFrancecanallagreethatanuclearwarcannotbewonandthereforeshouldneverbefought,thenwhycan’ttheycommittotheirown“nofirstuse”policy?
Muchhasbeenwrittenaboutwhethertheworldhasenteredanewcoldwar.IftheUSreallyispoisedtoresumeconductingnucleartests,assomereportssuggest,thiswouldbetantamounttoanofficialannouncementofanewcoldwar.
ThesightofrenewedUSnucleartestingwouldalmostcertainlyusherintestsbyothernuclearpowers,spellingdoomfornuclearnon-proliferationefforts.Thiswouldlikelyswellthenumberofstateswithnuclearweaponsbeyondthecurrentnine,resultinginaconsiderablereductionintheconventionalforcesuperiorityoftheUSanditsallies.
Furthermore,ifalltheworld’snuclearpowersincreasethereadinessoftheirnuclearforces,itcouldincreasethechancesoffalsealarms,likethoseseenduringtheColdWar.Duringtheearlydaysoflong-rangeradar,evenarisingmooncouldbemisinterpretedasamissileattack.Onecaneasilyconcludethatwithmorenuclearweaponsstatesonhighalert,therecouldbemorefalsealarmsorsignificantincidents.
TheBidenadministration’snuclearstrategyisashame,notleastbecausethepresidentspentsomuchofhispoliticalcareeradvocatingfornuclearnon-proliferation.Wehavehadnosignificantwarsbetweenglobalpowersforsome80yearssinceWorldWarII.
Ifthisisasolace,itisalsodisturbingtothinkwemightenterintoanothercoldwarsome30yearsafterthefirst.IcanonlyconcurwiththesewordsattributedtoIsaacNewton:“Icancalculatethemovementofthestars,butnotthemadnessofmen.”
来源|底线思维