X

好文分享《COC磋商背景下的英国南海情报体制研究》三

《COC磋商背景下的英国南海情报体制研究》一文,是南海研究领域关于英国介入南海和南海情报安全的新作。全文从情报竞争角度,分析了英国的南海战略期望,将域内外的国家变量,围绕英国南海情报体制作了宏观梳理。学界多从国际关系理论分析之,少有从国家安全学和情报学角度探讨之。本文充分关照南海情报实践,有方法论价值,属于针对性强的政策性研究,现将文章最后部分分享如下:

3 抵消英国南海情报体制效用的路径

3.1 加强地区情报竞争能力建设

在英国逐步丰富其南海情报体制的同时,各域内国家都在努力夯实自身情报系统,以便及时准确的感知态势发展,美国、日本、法国也步英国之后尘。长期以来,美军情报船在南海巡弋,搜集各国舰船信息。美国地理空间情报局(NGA)对南海的情报侦察信息,始终与军方和情报部门分享。2018年3月,“卡文·文森”号核动力航母编队访问岘港,标志着美越军事情报交流的新开始。编队中的导弹驱逐舰“梅耶”号长期在南海执行“航行自由”,与日本海上自卫队在南海有过联合巡航,与其他相关国家也有密切的情报往来。同时,以英国为代表的域外国家,还加大了对南海周边国家的经济、社会、科技、文化和史地等方面的情报搜集、整理与分析工作,一些非政府组织(NGO)在其中起到了重要作用。如印尼金光集团下属的亚洲纸浆业有限公司(Asia Pulp & Paper Co., Ltd.)造成了纸浆污染,英国地球之友(FOE)等环保NGO高度关注并独立调查了APP公司。[44]在此过程中,英国收集了纸浆业上下游产业链条的大量军民领域信息。

因此,在对应领域,按照相应程式,增强中国的南海情报竞争力,成为当务之急。并在此基础上,针对性的发展具有主动权的新竞争方向。综合来看,加强中国在南海地带的情报竞争能力,至少围绕四点。首先,是对竞争环境变化的观察与分析能力。在地区利益分化的背景下,“网络空间中的社会心态受到民粹主义与民族主义社会思潮的深刻影响”[45],国际关系常发生一些难以意想的变化,正如杜特尔特上台前后的中菲关系。之所以能够发生新变,部分得益于对竞选期间菲律宾社会舆论等的及时认知。针对英国与新加坡、马来西亚、澳大利亚和新西兰等域内外英联邦国家的关系变化,我方应加强观察,据情引导或调适。其次,增强获取和分析相关方竞争意图的能力。在南海问题和中英关系问题上,中英交流较为密切。卡梅伦2010年11月在北京大学发表演讲,认为自由贸易是英国DNA,英国对由自由和规范支配的国际体系有共同兴趣,与其他贸易国一样依赖马六甲海峡等海路。[46]2019年2月,驻华大使姆·巴拉·伍德沃德(Dame Barbara Woodward)认为21世纪的挑战均与英中息息相关,需要以“调整(Adapt)现有结构、构建(Build)亟需机构、创建(Create)新规则”的原则应对之,UNCLOS也应修改。[47]反映出的英方竞争意图即是对规则和航路的关注,深层次意图则是意欲重返东南亚,当前少有学者对此有认识。英方未来情报介入重点应包括此,我方应加强英涉南海的规则和航路的情报研究。再次,应夯实制定并调控竞争技略的能力。明确竞争环境、判断竞争意图是确立竞争技略的前提。针对英国南海情报体制,我方是以经济竞争等非对称技略为主,还是运用经济文化和军事政治等多管齐下的均衡技略,都应及早选取并形成有效竞争技略。一个可能预期即是:英国的军事政治干预会超越其经济文化介入,后者更多的依靠其英联邦遗产或口号宣言,实质介入应相对不明显。最后,还应构建情报安全保护机制和发展情报共享能力。英国之所以能在上述“F2”中确定主体位置,得益于成员国之间协商一致的安全保护机制,正如“眼睛”代表着情报权限那样。英国、越南、日本之间虽未形成三方情报共享机制,但充分的情报交流已为之埋下伏笔。我方应密切关注三国情报合作,加强与三方有争议且与我方争议较小或无争议的他国(如与越南有争议的印尼)的区域情报合作,抵消其不利影响。

3.2 推动COC框架下的域内合作

阿米塔·阿查亚(Amitav Aharya)指出,战后东南亚国家的安全议题,聚集于依靠域外大国防止外部侵略与内部颠覆。[48]新世纪以来,在传统安全威胁的基础上,诸如东南亚海盗、恐怖主义和实体性反政府组织等非传统威胁逐步上升。尽管海洋领土和权益争端是域内国家争夺的焦点,但在非传统威胁面前,唯有地区合作才能有效应对。域外大国也常因非传统威胁而导致在南海有利益受损,也希望与域内外国家合作,“老树发新枝”,增添新内容。在COC磋商背景下,英国引导建立了包括防长、参谋长、防务部门秘书(长)、防务部门代表和防务专家在内的新的FPDA组织体系。在此基础上,五国军演规模和频次加大,联合作战能力快速提升、武器系统通用性也大大改善,增加了海上军民融合内容。2006年联演中,首次增加了海上军民协作。并在2014年“MH370”事件中,展现出联合搜救能力。

相比英国,中国与其他声索国有着更广阔的合作空间。一方面,中国对东南亚国家的经济溢出效应强于英国。20世纪90年代以来,中国与东盟国家经贸来往密切,“中国对东盟国家存在显著的经济溢出效应”[49]。2019年一至二季度,英国GDP季度环比下降0.8个百分点,境内总储蓄率下降3.1个百分点;2019年6月至7月,英国贸易逆差从12893.9百万美元增长至22681.7百万美元,税收减少43886.56百万美元,工业生产指数下降0.3个百分点;2019年7月至8月,英国M1货币和M2货币差,显示出国内需求不旺;8月至9月的黄金储备和外汇储备下降均较明显。[50]因此,中国应充分利用溢出效应,在“一带一路”倡议下,为与声索四国的经贸发展创造更好的机制与环境。另一方面,中国的区域公共产品供给能力优于英国,新建五座大型灯塔,发挥了距离和空间优势,在海洋生态、资源开发、技术研发、教育文化与旅游、政府互信等方面的合作不断深化。此外,高位政治领域的合作频次也相应加大。2018年10月,中国与东盟举行“海上联演—2018”,这是东盟首次与单一国家联演,也是中国与东盟首次海上军演。2019年4月,“海上联演—2019”接踵而至,涉及编队离港、通信、分航与运动演练等,形成了共同标准,为继后合作做了铺垫。

东盟部分国家是COC磋商涉及方,在南海问题上,东盟一直以整体姿态发声。从近年来的经贸等低敏度合作到军事安全等高敏度合作的现实来看,推动COC框架下的域内多维合作潜力巨大。甚至连RUSI也认为,“多边合作更能实现中国在南海的‘野心’”[51]。今后合作重点应是建立导向性的双边或多边合作机制,可采取渐进式的小双边或多边主义合作理念。洛瑞·梅卡福(Rory Medcalf)认为“小多边主义”是次级国家群体为弥补域内双边和多边合作的自主选择。[52]因此,针对共同领域,在COC框架内,可建立相应的对话与合作机制。

3.3 强化海域内军事先制能力建设

英国始终打着“航行自由”的旗号审视COC磋商,竭力反对中国在南海岛礁的基建和防御性部署,声称这将破坏地区和平,不利于磋商。从其南海情报体制特性来看,英国却又是主动拉拢相关方,有意构建南海军事行动体系,其情报体制的军事特性明显。以经济社会情报合作增强军事情报互信,扩展军事情报信息共享范围,弥补其暂时性的军事情报能力不足。英国多次声称将派出“伊丽莎白”号航母(Queen Elizabeth aircraft carrier)巡弋南海,重建英国在东南亚的军事存在。由此观之,在自身区域实力未能有效建构前,英国始终预防域内大国的海域军事实力增长,以保证自身在未来拥有压倒性优势。在其难以阻止域内大国的岛礁战备能力提升时,会寻求第三方介入而暂时助其抵消之,其长期战略目标是要构建具有充足影响力的英国东南亚军事能力。英国岛屿争夺史也能佐证这一判断,海峡群岛主权危机中,英国针对性的部署军事力量,“军事存在是国家海疆权益存在的基本标志”。[53]马岛战争中,英国在“特混舰队”未形成优势前,充分争取国际舆论支持,有效利用国际法和国际规则,连与阿根廷向来交好的美洲国家组织成员国也纷纷谴责阿根廷。[54]而当特混舰队4月26日攻下南乔治亚岛并于30日完成对马岛周围200海里范围的海空封锁后,英国一改弱势姿态。“高冲突频率的南海声索国国防预算投入大,军事能力发展非以防御为主”[55],因此,发展海域军事先制能力是应对英国南海情报体制的必由之路,这并非是在南海奉行战争主义或军备竞赛,而是一种现实主义的防御性策略。

加强中国在南海的军事先制能力,首先是加强军事情报先制力,即在地区情报竞争力建设的基础上,注重军事情报竞争力建设,这主要是由于英国当前在南海的情报竞争重点所致,也与海域潜在军事冲突或紧张态势高度相关。事实上,良好的军事情报先制力,有助于先发制人,使对手在短期内失去对抗能力,放弃对抗意志,从而降低特定时段下在特定地域的危机等级和冲突系数。发展“灰色地带”竞争能力则是和平时期的另一种军事先制力,该词被美国用来描述中国非战非和性的敌对行动,如中国的“海上民兵”。美军认为“灰色地带”是国家间或国家与非国家行为体间的介于战和二分法的竞争性互动,其特征在于冲突性质模糊、参与者不明确、政策法律不明确。[56]作为英国的重要盟国,美国始终担忧中国的“灰色地带”优势。[57]英国也认为“中国有能力在与美国不战的情况下控制南海”[58]。“灰色地带”竞争的难以避免性,迫使中国必须重视建设“灰色先制力”。当然,最根本的军事先制力则是具有全维贯穿性的海上作战能力,即加强岛屿作战能力、海域军事管控能力和区域联合作战能力建设。

4 结论与展望

COC磋商是当前南海和平进程中的关键举措。长期以来,中国主张适时生成COC框架文本,以此促成和平之南海、友谊之南海。在磋商中,中国着眼“东盟国家”的概念,而非东盟概念,目的是避免东盟机制的不当介入,毕竟并非所有的东盟成员国都是声索国。然而,英国有意过度强调东盟机制,其外交博弈和战略用意极其明显。中国也始终在磋商中强调COC不能脱离DOC而存在,DOC是在COC推行困境中产生的,具有历史性,抛弃了DOC的COC,显然缺乏“地气”。但英国在各种场合,与其情报合作对象倡导所谓的“规则”,认为应当基于“规则”而生成案文,根本上是基于其对航道和贸易的既得利益和错误的惯性认知,不符合域内声索国利益,不利于南海降温与稳定。此外,中国始终强调案文磋商的政治性,谨慎对待相关国家关于COC的法律约束性诉求。英国强调UNCLOS与COC磋商的关系本无可厚非,但有意凸显二者间本不存在的法理联系,并将其置入英国南海情报体制之中,其利益之思昭然若揭。事实上,COC主要是冲突管控机制,根本上看,并非冲突解决机制。

英国基于其海洋战略规划和“全球英国”构想,在南海的情报体制构建不会偃旗息鼓。相反,在COC案文磋商未最终完成之际,英国会加大在南海的情报投入,其“B-F2-JV”情报体制也会进一步扩展,甚至会像“五眼联盟”的形成过程那样,拉入其他域内外国家。在特定时刻,甚至会以军事行动来维系其情报体制。即使是今后完成了案文磋商并依循行事,英国的南海情报体制依然会继续运转,并将产生新的分化与整合。因此,在其南海情报体制未完全成型的当下,加强相关研究,有利于抵消其情报体制的运转效用,有助于COC磋商进程朝着有利于我方的态势发展,降低未来英国在南海的不恰当影响。


参考文献:

[1]John E. Wills, Jr., “The South China Sea is not a Mediterranean: Implications for the History of Chinese Foreign Relations,” in Tang Shi-Yeoung, ed., Essays in Chinese Maritime History(Vol. 10), Taipei: Research Center for Humanities and Social Science, Academia Sinica, 2008.

[2]郭渊. 冷战初期英国政府对南沙问题的讨论及立场[J]. 太平洋学报, 2018, 27(10): 95-106.

[3]韩永利, 胡德坤. 20世纪70年代英国官方档案论证南沙群岛属于中国[J]. 边界与海洋研究, 2017, 2 (3): 107-116.

[4]“National Security Strategy and Strategic Defence and Security Review 2015,” HM government, 23 November 2015, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-security-strategy-and-strategic-defence-and-security-

review-2015.

[5]Liu Jin, Evolution, Drives and Implications of the UK’s South China Sea Policy[J]. China International Studies, 2019(January/February): 165-180.

[6]Hemmings J., Rogers J., The South China Sea: Why It Matters to “Global Britain”, London: Henry Jackson Society, 2019, pp. 7-8.

[7]Maritime Forces, “Escalation in the South China Sea,” RUSI Newsbrief, 28 July 2011, https://rusi.org/

publication/newsbrief/escalation-south-china-sea.

[8]胡杰. 英国介入南海问题的海洋安全逻辑——以《英国国家海洋安全战略》为中心[J]. 边界与海洋研究, 2019, 4(3): 69-80.

[9]张飚. 英国南海政策的变化、动因及走向[J]. 现代国际关系, 2019(7): 29-44+61.

[10]British Embassy Beijing, “Declaration by the High Representative on behalf of the EU on recent developments in the South China Sea,HM government, 18 March 2016, https://www.gov.uk/government/news/declaration-by-

the-high-representative-on-behalf-of-the-eu-on-recent-developments-in-the-south-china-sea.

[11]Filed M., “the Rules-Based International System,” HM government, 25 February 2019, https://www.gov.uk/

government/speeches/speech-by-the-minister-for-asia-and-the-pacific-on-the-rules-based-international-system.

[12]Nouwens V., “China’s latest defence white paper repeats many concepts already known but does include a number of interesting novelties,” Commentary, 1 August 2019, https://rusi.org/commentary/another-chinese-

defence-white-paper-what-impact-uk.

[13]Graham E., “The South China Sea: Europe's Problem Too,” RUSI Newsbrief, 28 September 2011, https://

rusi.org/publication/newsbrief/south-china-sea-europes-problem-too.

[14]Swire H., “UK speaks in support of EU statement on tensions in South China Sea,” HM government, 10 May 2014, https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-speaks-in-support-of-eu-statement-on-tensions-in-south-

china-sea.

[15]Roberts P., “Royal Navy chief vows to send ships through South China Sea,” RUSI News, 22 October 2018, https://rusi.org/in-the-news/royal-navy-chief-vows-send-ships-through-south-china-sea.

[16]Harvey N., “Future Maritime Operations,” HM government, 7 July 2010, https://www.gov.uk/government/

speeches/2010-07-07-future-maritime-operations-conference--2.

[17]Stanhope M., “Navies in the age of austerity,” HM government, 2 October 2012,https://www.gov.uk/

government/speeches/2012-10-02-navies-in-an-age-of-austerity.

[18]Astor, “The maritime security challenge,” HM government, 22 March 2012,https://www.gov.uk/government/

speeches/2012-03-22-the-maritime-security-challenge.

[19]Mordaunt P., “Defence Secretary keynote speech at the Sea Power Conference 2019,” HM government, 15 May 2019,https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/defence-secretary-keynote-speech-at-the-sea-power-

conference-2019.

[20]Swire H., “The UK in the Asian Century,” HM government, 16 July 2014, https://www.gov.uk/ government

/speeches/the-uk-in-the-asian-century.

[21]Williamson G., “Defence Secretary at Atlantic Council,” HM government, 8 August 2018, https://www.gov

.uk/government/speeches/defence-secretary-at-atlantic-council.

[22]Tunningley J., “The South China Sea Dispute: China's Polygonal Defence of Core Interests,”Commentary

, 12 July 2016, https://rusi.org/commentary/south-china-sea-dispute-chinas-polygonal-defence-core-interests.

[23]Ministry of Defence, “HMS Echo returns from 19-month deployment,” HM government, 16 August 2012,

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/hms-echo-returns-from-19-month-deployment.

[24]Jones P., “UK/US naval partnership 2016,” HM government, 17 May 2016, https://www.gov.uk/

government/speeches/ukus-naval-partnership-2016.

[25]Williamson G., “Hard as well as soft power: the case for modern defence,” HM government, 15 March 2018,https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/hard-as-well-as-soft-power-the-case-for-modern-defence.
[26]同24。

[27]Williamson G., “Defence in Global Britain,” HM government, 11 February 2019, https://www.gov.uk/

government/speeches/defence-in-global-britain.

[28]Walker G., “Personnel visit Singapore for international tri-Service exercise,” HM government, 2 November 2012, https://www.gov.uk/government/news/personnel-visit-singapore-for-international-tri-service-exercise.

[29]Hammond P., “Foreign Secretary's speech on the UK in Asia Pacific,” HM government, 30 January 2015, https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/foreign-secretarys-speech-on-the-uk-in-asia-pacific.

[30]Wightman S., “UK is extensively involved in Southeast Asia,” HM government, 18 July 2018, https://

www.gov.uk/government/speeches/uk-is-extensively-involved-in-southeast-asia-speech-by-scott-wightman.

[31]FCO, “Second Japan-UK Foreign and Defence Ministerial Meeting,”HM government, 8 January 2016, https://www.gov.uk/

government/news/second-japan-uk-foreign-and-defence-ministerial-meeting.

[32]Cameron D., “PM statement at press conference with Japanese Prime Minister Abe,” HM government, 5 May 2015, https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-statement-at-press-conference-with-japanese-prime-

minister-abe-5-may-2016.

[33]Johnson B., “Foreign Secretary holds press conference in Tokyo, Japan,” HM government, 21 July 2017, https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/foreign-secretary-holds-press-conference-in-tokyo-japan.

[34]May T., “PM press conference with PM Abe of Japan,” HM government, 31 August 2017, https://www.

gov.uk/government/speeches/prime-ministers-press-statement-in-tokyo.

[35]FCO, “UK-Japan Foreign and Defence Ministerial Meeting 2017 - Joint Statement,” HM government, 15 December 2017, https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-japan-foreign-and-defence-ministerial-meeting-2017-

joint-statement.

[36] FCO, “Foreign Office Minister hosts first ever UK-Vietnam strategic dialogue,” HM government, 26 October 2011, https://www.gov.uk/government/news/foreign-office-minister-hosts-first-ever-uk-vietnam-strategic-dialogue.

[37]FCO, “UK-Vietnam strategic dialogue,” HM government, 5 July 2015, https://www.gov.uk/government/news

/uk-vietnam-strategic-dialogue.

[38]MoD, “Dreadnought submarine programme: the facts,” HM government, 28 October 2016, https://www. gov

.uk/government/collections/dreadnought-submarine-programme-the-facts.

[39]British Embassy Hanoi, “UK - Vietnam Defence Working Group discussed bilateral defence collaboration in 2015,” HM government, 9 January 2015,https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-vietnam-defence-working-

group-discussed-bilateral-defence-collaboration-in-2015.

[40]British Embassy Hanoi, “Joint statement by the UK and Vietnam on UK Prime Minister's visit to Vietnam

,” HM government, 9 January 2015,https://www.gov.uk/government/news/joint-statement-by-the-uk-and-

vietnam-on-uk-prime-ministers-visit-to-vietnam.

[41]FCO, “Joint communiqué on fifth UK-Vietnam Strategic Dialogue,” HM government, 7 March 2016, https://www.gov.uk/government/news/joint-communique-on-fifth-uk-vietnam-strategic-dialogue.

[42]FCO, “Joint communiqué on sixth UK-Vietnam Strategic Dialogue,” HM government, 5 January 2018, https://www.gov.uk/government/news/joint-communique-on-sixth-uk-vietnam-strategic-dialogue.

[43]FCO, “Joint communique on 7th UK-Vietnam Strategic Dialogue,” HM government, 2 July 2012, https://

www.gov.uk/government/news/joint-communique-on-the-7th-uk-viet-nam-strategic-dialogue.

[44]张云. 东南亚环境治理模式的转型分析——以“APP事件”为例[J]. 东南亚研究, 2015(2): 69-77.

[45]吴志远. 喧哗与躁动:南海争端事件中的网络社会心态研究——基于南海仲裁案的网络舆情分析[J]. 情报杂志, 2018, 37(5): 103-110.

[46]Cameron D., “We want a strong relationship with China,” HM government, 5 May 2015, https://www.gov.

uk/government/speeches/prime-minister-we-want-a-strong-relationship-with-china.

[47]FCO, “UK-China in 2019: How can diplomacy rise to the challenges of the 21st century,” HM government, 25 February 2019, https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/uk-china-in-2019-how-can-diplomacy-rise-to-the-

challenges-of-the-21st-century.

[48][加]阿米塔·阿查亚著.王正毅,冯怀信译.建构安全共同体:东盟与地区秩序[M].上海:上海人民出版社, 2014: 72.

[49]徐东波, 刘雅珍, 孙若涵.中国与东盟国家的空间溢出——基于空间面板杜宾模型的实证分析[J]. 经济问题探索, 2019(1): 123-130+142.

[50]CEIC Data. UK economy indicator[DB/OL]. [2019-9-16]. https://www.ceicdata.com/zh-hans/indicators.

[51]Yu K., “China’s Strategic Path after the Arbitral Ruling on the South China Sea,” RUSI Newsbrief, 5 December 2016, https://rusi.org/publication/newsbrief/china%E2%80%99s-strategic-path-after-arbitral-ruling-

south-china-sea.

[52]Medcalf R., “Squaring the Triangle: An Australian Perspective on Asian Security Minilateralism,” in Assessing the Trilateral Security Dialogue,The National Bureau of Asian Research, 2008, p. 25.

[53]于文杰, 詹墨奴. 英属海峡群岛的主权危机及其应对方式[J]. 史学月刊, 2017(10): 91-107.

[54]徐东波. 马岛战争中英国战争动员的维度与启示[J]. 深圳社会科学, 2019(2): 106-112+159

[55]舒洪水, 胡望洋. 南海声索国家(地区)军事能力量化评估研究[J]. 情报杂志, 2019, 38(8): 51-55+50.

[56]United States Special Operations Command, “White Paper: The Gray Zone,” pp.1–8, https://publicintelligence

.net/ussocom-gray-zones/.

[57]戴正, 洪邮生. 美国学界对“灰色地带”挑战的认知[J]. 国际展望, 2019(4): 80-97+155.

[58]Thu L., “‘Short of War’, No Peace in the South China Sea,” RUSI Newsbrief, 1 April 2019, https://rusi.org/

publication/rusi-newsbrief/‘short-war’-no-peace-south-china-sea