【新唐人2014年04月18日讯】美国国防部长查克•哈格尔日前访华，一方面加强与中国的对话，另一方面又强化美国在亚太地区的军事同盟关系。中共中央军委主席习近平，9号在北京会见哈格尔时表示，中美“双方应该坚持不冲突、不对抗、相互尊重、合作共赢的原则”进行合作。不过最近有消息强调，中共全方位的军费开销和强硬的地区行动，正让邻国不安。
数年来，中国的军费以两位数的速度增长。中共当局3月公布的2014年国防预算，约1310亿美元，是日本的两倍多，在国际上仅次于美国。
中共除了积极开展军事现代化设备，展现肌力之外，美国“新安全战略中心（CNAS）”3月发布的报告说，中共还在制定“定制胁迫”战略。
美国《防务新闻》周刊网站，4月14号也发表了《中国全面军事现代化和定制胁迫》文章。报导引述美国“AMI国际谘询公司”托尼•贝廷格的话说，中国海军现代化已经走过20多年，发展出了远洋舰队，支持中国向第一和第二岛链，投射武力的战略，和长期控制这些水域的政策。
他说：“中国海军和准海上部队（包括海警及其他海上安全船只“爱国渔船”），现在展现出他们在南海和东海执行这种战略的自信，这体现在中国与菲律宾在南沙群岛、以及中国（中共）与日本在钓鱼岛问题上，咄咄逼人的行为。”
那么，中、日两国是否因钓鱼岛主权争议，而发生军事冲突﹖
台湾“政治大学国际事务学院”教授丁树范﹕“我是觉得中、日在钓鱼岛上不会有一战，彼此只是用这种升高的民族主义，或这种情绪来作为内部政治动员的一个工具。就是说，把这种升高的紧张用来解决国内政治（问题）的一种手段。如果中、日发生小规模军事冲突的话，中国不见得会占到便宜，可是长期来讲的话，日本会不会能够讨到便宜，这变成另一个问题了。”
《新唐人》时事评论员文昭分析，大规模的消耗性长期战争，对目前中共来讲一点好处都没有。中共可能制造一些突发性事件来占点便宜，比方说击沉天安鉴、炮轰延平岛，然后对内宣称取得了胜利。
《新唐人》时事评论员文昭﹕“因为钓鱼岛它只是几个无人的荒岛，它孤悬海外，它没有任何可防守性，如果说中共这一方去夺取岛屿的话，那就实际会带来中、日两国海、空、军力量的一次全面的会战。有一方遭受决定性的损失之后，才可能在主权问题上产生永久性退让。这种局部战争的成本代价是非常高的，产生的后果是非常复杂深远的，所以说应该双方目前都没有这个打算。”
对于中共当局花费巨额军费在军事现代化上的努力，以及“定制胁迫”战略，美国能做些甚么？
日前，《美国之音》转述美国军方报纸《星条旗报》报导中，美军高官威斯勒的话说：如果我们受命夺回钓鱼岛，我们能行？当然可以。但是，我要告诉你们（记者），我们如何夺回，诸如此类的情况是否会发生，这一切，都只是纯粹的估计和猜测。
文昭表示，美国并不想和一个拥有核武器的国家，发生正面的军事冲突。
文昭﹕“所以说本身美、日也没有开战的愿望，就是进行大规模常规战争的愿望。中共的心态有一定的投机心态，向北韩那种思维方式靠拢。还有一种情况就是说，本身在钓鱼岛这个海域，只要中共不登岛、夺岛的话，大规模的军事对抗是不太可能发生的，有可能是一两架飞机、双方一两只船只，在一些外围海域的一些小磨擦，这种危险性是比较大的。”
台湾“台海安全研析中心”主任梅复兴对《自由亚洲电台》表示，如果中、日发生军事冲突，中国要嘛与日本打个平手， 要嘛略占点便宜。而美国不会坐视不管，并且会支持日本。因为一来有《日美安保条约》的规定， 二是美国至少在可预见的未来，没有打算放弃自己在亚太地区盟主的地位。
梅复兴说，如果美国与日本站在一边，中、日战争结果则很难说了。
采访/陈汉 编辑/周平 后制/李勇
A Sino-Japanese War: Competition or Not?
U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel
recently visited China.
He paid attention to the dialogue with China. He also
strengthened the military alliance with the United States,
in the Asia-Pacific region.
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Central Military
Commission Chairman Xi Jinping met Hagel on April 9.
He said both sides should adhere to principles such as mutual
respect, no conflict or confrontation, and win-win cooperation.
However, recent news stressed that the military spending and
tough regional action disturbed the neighboring countries.
Over the years, China's military spending increased with
double-digit growth rate.
The CCP announced the $131 billion defense budget
in March 2014.
This is more than twice the spend compared to Japan, and
second to the United States.
The CCP showed its strength by actively carrying out military
equipment modernization.
According to a report published by Center for a New American
Security (CNAS), the CCP is also developing a "customized
stress" strategy.
The "Defense News" also published an article – "China's
comprehensive military modernization and customized stress"
on Apr. 14.
The report quoted Tony Bettinger from AMI international
consulting company who said that the Chinese naval
modernization has taken about 20 years.
A fleet of ocean-going vessels were developed to support
forcible attention in the first and second island chain of China.
A long-term control policy in these waters was
developed at the same time.
He said: "The Chinese navy and prospective maritime forces
(including the Coast Guard and other maritime safety vessels)
are showing confidence to perform such a strategy in the South
China Sea and East China Sea.
The confidence was reflected in the aggressive action of
China on the Spratly Islands issues with Philippines and the
Diaoyu Islands issues with Japan."
Will there be a military conflict due to the Diaoyu Islands
sovereignty dispute between China and Japan?
Ding Shufan, professor of the College of International Affairs,
Chengchi University: "I do not think there is a war on over the
Diaoyu Islands.
Both countries used the increased nationalism or sentiments
as a tool for internal political mobilization.
This increased tension was put out as a means to solve
domestic political issues.
If a small-scale military conflict occurred, It might not be to
the best benefit of China.
However, it could become another problem if the Japanese
are able to take the advantage of it in a long term."
Wenzhao, a NTD commentator analyzed that a long-term
and large-scale war brings nothing to the current CCP.
The CCP may create some unexpected events, e.g. sinking
Cheonan and shelling Yeonpyeong island.
Then the CCP could claim victory for the Chinese people.
Wenzhao: "Diaoyu Islands includes only a few uninhabited
desert islands.
The islands are overseas without defenses. If the CCP seized
the island, there would be a battle between China and Japan.
Only after one party suffered a decisive loss, could it create
permanent concessions on the sovereignty issue.
The cost of this local war is very high, and the consequences
are far-reaching and complex.
So, both sides should not have such an intention."
With the huge military spending and the "customized stress"
strategy of the CCP, what can the U.S. do?
Recently, "Voice of America" quoted U.S. military official
Whistler's words in "Stars and Stripes":
"If we are ordered to retake the Diaoyu Islands, can we do it?
Of course we can.
But I want to tell you, how do we recapture it? Could this
sort of situation happen?
All this is just pure speculation and estimation."
Wenzhao said that the U.S. does not want to start a military
conflict with a country holding nuclear weapons.
Commentator Wenzhao: "There is no desire for war for the
U.S. and Japan.
I mean the large-scale conventional war. The CCP has some
speculative mentality.
The way of thinking is closer to North Korea. The situation
is as long as the CCP does not seize the island, large-scale
military confrontation is unlikely to happen.
There could be small friction in the peripheral waters between
one or two aircrafts or vessels, this risk is relatively high."
Mei Fuxing, the director of Taihai Security Research Center
told Radio Free Asia that, if there was a military conflict
between China and Japan, they could play for a draw, or
China could take some advantage of it.
The U.S. will not sit idly by – it must support Japan.
There is the "Japan-US Security Treaty", and the U.S. did not
intend to give up its position in the Asia-Pacific region at least
for the foreseeable future.
Mei Fuxing said, if the U.S. and Japan stand on the side, it will
be hard to say what the result of the war will be.
Interview/Chen Han Edit/Zhou Ping Post-Production/Li Yong
数年来，中国的军费以两位数的速度增长。中共当局3月公布的2014年国防预算，约1310亿美元，是日本的两倍多，在国际上仅次于美国。
中共除了积极开展军事现代化设备，展现肌力之外，美国“新安全战略中心（CNAS）”3月发布的报告说，中共还在制定“定制胁迫”战略。
美国《防务新闻》周刊网站，4月14号也发表了《中国全面军事现代化和定制胁迫》文章。报导引述美国“AMI国际谘询公司”托尼•贝廷格的话说，中国海军现代化已经走过20多年，发展出了远洋舰队，支持中国向第一和第二岛链，投射武力的战略，和长期控制这些水域的政策。
他说：“中国海军和准海上部队（包括海警及其他海上安全船只“爱国渔船”），现在展现出他们在南海和东海执行这种战略的自信，这体现在中国与菲律宾在南沙群岛、以及中国（中共）与日本在钓鱼岛问题上，咄咄逼人的行为。”
那么，中、日两国是否因钓鱼岛主权争议，而发生军事冲突﹖
台湾“政治大学国际事务学院”教授丁树范﹕“我是觉得中、日在钓鱼岛上不会有一战，彼此只是用这种升高的民族主义，或这种情绪来作为内部政治动员的一个工具。就是说，把这种升高的紧张用来解决国内政治（问题）的一种手段。如果中、日发生小规模军事冲突的话，中国不见得会占到便宜，可是长期来讲的话，日本会不会能够讨到便宜，这变成另一个问题了。”
《新唐人》时事评论员文昭分析，大规模的消耗性长期战争，对目前中共来讲一点好处都没有。中共可能制造一些突发性事件来占点便宜，比方说击沉天安鉴、炮轰延平岛，然后对内宣称取得了胜利。
《新唐人》时事评论员文昭﹕“因为钓鱼岛它只是几个无人的荒岛，它孤悬海外，它没有任何可防守性，如果说中共这一方去夺取岛屿的话，那就实际会带来中、日两国海、空、军力量的一次全面的会战。有一方遭受决定性的损失之后，才可能在主权问题上产生永久性退让。这种局部战争的成本代价是非常高的，产生的后果是非常复杂深远的，所以说应该双方目前都没有这个打算。”
对于中共当局花费巨额军费在军事现代化上的努力，以及“定制胁迫”战略，美国能做些甚么？
日前，《美国之音》转述美国军方报纸《星条旗报》报导中，美军高官威斯勒的话说：如果我们受命夺回钓鱼岛，我们能行？当然可以。但是，我要告诉你们（记者），我们如何夺回，诸如此类的情况是否会发生，这一切，都只是纯粹的估计和猜测。
文昭表示，美国并不想和一个拥有核武器的国家，发生正面的军事冲突。
文昭﹕“所以说本身美、日也没有开战的愿望，就是进行大规模常规战争的愿望。中共的心态有一定的投机心态，向北韩那种思维方式靠拢。还有一种情况就是说，本身在钓鱼岛这个海域，只要中共不登岛、夺岛的话，大规模的军事对抗是不太可能发生的，有可能是一两架飞机、双方一两只船只，在一些外围海域的一些小磨擦，这种危险性是比较大的。”
台湾“台海安全研析中心”主任梅复兴对《自由亚洲电台》表示，如果中、日发生军事冲突，中国要嘛与日本打个平手， 要嘛略占点便宜。而美国不会坐视不管，并且会支持日本。因为一来有《日美安保条约》的规定， 二是美国至少在可预见的未来，没有打算放弃自己在亚太地区盟主的地位。
梅复兴说，如果美国与日本站在一边，中、日战争结果则很难说了。
采访/陈汉 编辑/周平 后制/李勇
A Sino-Japanese War: Competition or Not?
U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel
recently visited China.
He paid attention to the dialogue with China. He also
strengthened the military alliance with the United States,
in the Asia-Pacific region.
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Central Military
Commission Chairman Xi Jinping met Hagel on April 9.
He said both sides should adhere to principles such as mutual
respect, no conflict or confrontation, and win-win cooperation.
However, recent news stressed that the military spending and
tough regional action disturbed the neighboring countries.
Over the years, China's military spending increased with
double-digit growth rate.
The CCP announced the $131 billion defense budget
in March 2014.
This is more than twice the spend compared to Japan, and
second to the United States.
The CCP showed its strength by actively carrying out military
equipment modernization.
According to a report published by Center for a New American
Security (CNAS), the CCP is also developing a "customized
stress" strategy.
The "Defense News" also published an article – "China's
comprehensive military modernization and customized stress"
on Apr. 14.
The report quoted Tony Bettinger from AMI international
consulting company who said that the Chinese naval
modernization has taken about 20 years.
A fleet of ocean-going vessels were developed to support
forcible attention in the first and second island chain of China.
A long-term control policy in these waters was
developed at the same time.
He said: "The Chinese navy and prospective maritime forces
(including the Coast Guard and other maritime safety vessels)
are showing confidence to perform such a strategy in the South
China Sea and East China Sea.
The confidence was reflected in the aggressive action of
China on the Spratly Islands issues with Philippines and the
Diaoyu Islands issues with Japan."
Will there be a military conflict due to the Diaoyu Islands
sovereignty dispute between China and Japan?
Ding Shufan, professor of the College of International Affairs,
Chengchi University: "I do not think there is a war on over the
Diaoyu Islands.
Both countries used the increased nationalism or sentiments
as a tool for internal political mobilization.
This increased tension was put out as a means to solve
domestic political issues.
If a small-scale military conflict occurred, It might not be to
the best benefit of China.
However, it could become another problem if the Japanese
are able to take the advantage of it in a long term."
Wenzhao, a NTD commentator analyzed that a long-term
and large-scale war brings nothing to the current CCP.
The CCP may create some unexpected events, e.g. sinking
Cheonan and shelling Yeonpyeong island.
Then the CCP could claim victory for the Chinese people.
Wenzhao: "Diaoyu Islands includes only a few uninhabited
desert islands.
The islands are overseas without defenses. If the CCP seized
the island, there would be a battle between China and Japan.
Only after one party suffered a decisive loss, could it create
permanent concessions on the sovereignty issue.
The cost of this local war is very high, and the consequences
are far-reaching and complex.
So, both sides should not have such an intention."
With the huge military spending and the "customized stress"
strategy of the CCP, what can the U.S. do?
Recently, "Voice of America" quoted U.S. military official
Whistler's words in "Stars and Stripes":
"If we are ordered to retake the Diaoyu Islands, can we do it?
Of course we can.
But I want to tell you, how do we recapture it? Could this
sort of situation happen?
All this is just pure speculation and estimation."
Wenzhao said that the U.S. does not want to start a military
conflict with a country holding nuclear weapons.
Commentator Wenzhao: "There is no desire for war for the
U.S. and Japan.
I mean the large-scale conventional war. The CCP has some
speculative mentality.
The way of thinking is closer to North Korea. The situation
is as long as the CCP does not seize the island, large-scale
military confrontation is unlikely to happen.
There could be small friction in the peripheral waters between
one or two aircrafts or vessels, this risk is relatively high."
Mei Fuxing, the director of Taihai Security Research Center
told Radio Free Asia that, if there was a military conflict
between China and Japan, they could play for a draw, or
China could take some advantage of it.
The U.S. will not sit idly by – it must support Japan.
There is the "Japan-US Security Treaty", and the U.S. did not
intend to give up its position in the Asia-Pacific region at least
for the foreseeable future.
Mei Fuxing said, if the U.S. and Japan stand on the side, it will
be hard to say what the result of the war will be.
Interview/Chen Han Edit/Zhou Ping Post-Production/Li Yong
