アメリカの対中敵対政策の行方
トランプ政権の中国敵視政策は、狂気の福音派（筆頭がポンペイオ）が全面に躍り出て、今や完全に歯止めがかからない段階にまで立ち至っています（コロナ暴発に直面するまでは、実利本位で考えるトランプが一定のブレーキ役を果たしていました）。福音派イデオローグ支配の危険性をコロンビア大学教授のジェフェリー・ザックスが的確に指摘しています。プロジェクト・シンジケートWSに掲載された原文を参考1で付けます。
今後の米中関係を考える上では、アメリカの国際観（ゼロ・サムのパワー・ポリティックス）及びアメリカ人の対中観・認識という2つの要素を考える必要があります。
共和党であるか民主党であるかに関係なく、アメリカ人の国際観は牢固としたゼロ・サムのパワー・ポリティックス的発想に支配されています。21世紀国際社会を特徴づけるのは、人間の尊厳及びその規範的価値の承認、国際的相互依存の不可逆的進展、待ったなしの解決が迫られている地球的規模の諸問題の3つです。そのいずれもがパワー・ポリティックス的発想に最終的な引導を渡し、ウィン・ウィンの共存共嬴的発想に立つことを求めています。ところがアメリカは相変わらず、建国以来の世界の｢選良｣としての発想（｢丘の上の町｣）が清算できません。その結果、自らの指導的地位を｢脅かす｣存在をすべてライバル視し、敵視するのです。8月10日付けの朝日新聞に掲載されたシカゴ大学のミアシャイマー教授の発言はその典型です。彼は米陸軍士官学校卒業の背景もあってとりわけパワー・ポリティックス的発想に凝り固まっています。しかし、中国をライバル視する政策はトランプ政権になってからのものではなく、オバマ政権以来のものだとする彼の指摘は正しいのです。アメリカがこのゆがんだ国際観を抜本的に改めるためには、19世紀中国が体験した革命的変化（中華世界のトップから欧米列強によって世界の最底辺まで突き落とされた境遇の激変）と同じマグニチュードのショックを味わうことが不可欠でしょう。朝日新聞に載ったミアシャイマー発言は参考2のとおりです。
アメリカ人の対中観・認識に関しては、7月30日に発表された、ピュー・リサーチ・センターによる中国に対するアメリカ人の意識・認識調査結果があります。この調査結果は次の諸事実を示しています。①アメリカ人の中国に関する見方はトランプ政権時代に急激に悪化して、今やほぼ4人に3人（73％）が中国に厳しい見方を持っている。②この厳しい見方は年代が増す毎に高まっている（18歳－29歳56％→50歳以上：81％）。③中国に対する厳しい見方は共和党支持者の方が高いにせよ、民主党支持者も厳しい見方が圧倒的に多い（共和党支持者：83％、民主党支持者：68％）。④コロナ・パンデミックについては、中国の責任は大きいとするアメリカ人が圧倒的に多い（トランプ政権の宣伝がすんなり通ってしまっている状況がある）。⑤対中関係で人権問題の方が経済関係より重要だとするアメリカ人は、年齢層及び支持政党を問わず圧倒的に多い（対中関係における人権問題重視という点では、民主党は共和党以上に強硬です）。⑥中国をパートナーと見なすものよりライバル・敵と見なすものが圧倒的に多い点で、共和党と民主党との間に大きな違いはない（パートナー視：16％、ライバル視・敵視：83％）。以上の事実は、トランプ政権が続く場合はもちろん、仮にバイデン政権になったとしても、対中政策の立案・執行において、タフな国民感情を無視できないことを予想させます。ピュー・リサーチ・センターの調査結果は長いので、フォリン・ポリシーWSに載った要約記事を参考3で紹介します。
（参考1）
America's Unholy Crusade Against China
Aug 5, 2020JEFFREY D. SACHS Project Syndicate
Last month, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo delivered an anti-China speech that was extremist, simplistic, and dangerous. If biblical literalists like Pompeo remain in power past November, they could well bring the world to the brink of a war that they expect and perhaps even seek.
NEW YORK – Many white Christian evangelicals in the United States have long believed that America has a God-given mission to save the world. Under the influence of this crusading mentality, US foreign policy has often swerved from diplomacy to war. It is in danger of doing so again.
Last month, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo launched yet another evangelical crusade, this time against China. His speech was extremist, simplistic, and dangerous – and may well put the US on a path to conflict with China.
According to Pompeo, Chinese President Xi Jinping and the Communist Party of China (CPC) harbor a "decades-long desire for global hegemony." This is ironic. Only one country – the US – has a defense strategy calling for it to be the "preeminent military power in the world," with "favorable regional balances of power in the Indo-Pacific, Europe, the Middle East, and the Western Hemisphere." China's defense white paper, by contrast, states that "China will never follow the beaten track of big powers in seeking hegemony," and that, "As economic globalization, the information society, and cultural diversification develop in an increasingly multi-polar world, peace, development, and win-win cooperation remain the irreversible trends of the times."
One is reminded of Jesus's own admonition: "Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye" (Matthew 7:5). US military spending totaled $732 billion in 2019, nearly three times the $261 billion China spent.
The US, moreover, has around 800 overseas military bases, while China has just one (a small naval base in Djibouti). The US has many military bases close to China, which has none anywhere near the US. The US has 5,800 nuclear warheads; China has roughly 320. The US has 11 aircraft carriers; China has one. The US has launched many overseas wars in the past 40 years; China has launched none (though it has been criticized for border skirmishes, most recently with India, that stop short of war).
The US has repeatedly rejected or withdrawn from United Nations treaties and UN organizations in recent years, including UNESCO, the Paris climate agreement, and, most recently, the World Health Organization, while China supports UN processes and agencies. US President Donald Trump recently threatened the staff of the International Criminal Court with sanctions. Pompeo rails against China's clampdown on its mainly Muslim Uighur population, but Trump's former national security adviser, John Bolton, claims that Trump privately gave China's actions a pass, or even encouraged them.
The world took relatively little notice of Pompeo's speech, which offered no evidence to back up his claims of China's hegemonic ambition. China's rejection of US hegemony does not mean that China itself seeks hegemony. Indeed, outside of the US, there is little belief that China aims for global dominance. China's explicitly stated national goals are to be a "moderately prosperous society" by 2021 (the centenary of the CPC), and a "fully developed country" by 2049 (the centennial of the People's Republic).
Moreover, at an estimated $10,098 in 2019, China's GDP per capita was less than one-sixth that of the US ($65,112) – hardly the basis for global supremacy. China still has a lot of catching up to do to achieve even its basic economic development goals.
Assuming that Trump loses in November's presidential election, Pompeo's speech will likely receive no further notice. The Democrats will surely criticize China, but without Pompeo's brazen exaggerations. Yet, if Trump wins, Pompeo's speech could be a harbinger of chaos. Pompeo's evangelism is real, and white evangelicals are the political base of today's Republican Party.
Pompeo's zealous excesses have deep roots in American history. As I recounted in my recent book A New Foreign Policy, English protestant settlers believed that they were founding a New Israel in the new promised land, with God's providential blessings. In 1845, John O'Sullivan coined the phrase "Manifest Destiny" to justify and celebrate America's violent annexation of North America. "All this will be our future history," he wrote in 1839, "to establish on earth the moral dignity and salvation of man – the immutable truth and beneficence of God. For this blessed mission to the nations of the world, which are shut out from the life-giving light of truth, has America been chosen..."
On the basis of such exalted views of its own beneficence, the US engaged in mass enslavement until the Civil War and mass apartheid thereafter; slaughtered Native Americans throughout the nineteenth century and subjugated them thereafter; and, with the closure of the Western frontier, extended Manifest Destiny overseas. Later, with the onset of the Cold War, anti-communist fervor led the US to fight disastrous wars in Southeast Asia (Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia) in the 1960s and 1970s, and brutal wars in Central America in the 1980s.
After the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the evangelical ardor was directed against "radical Islam" or "Islamic fascism," with four US wars of choice – in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and Libya – all of which remain debacles to this day. Suddenly, the supposed existential threat of radical Islam has been forgotten, and the new crusade targets the CPC. Pompeo himself is a biblical literalist who believes that the end time, the apocalyptic battle between good and evil, is imminent. Pompeo described his beliefs in a 2015 speech while a Congressman from Kansas: America is a Judeo-Christian nation, the greatest in history, whose task is to fight God's battles until the Rapture, when Christ's born-again followers, like Pompeo, will be swept to heaven at the Last Judgment.
White evangelicals represent only around 17% of the US adult population, but comprise around 26% of voters. They vote overwhelmingly Republican (an estimated 81% in 2016), making them the party's single most important voting bloc. That gives them powerful influence on Republican policy, and in particular on foreign policy when Republicans control the White House and Senate (with its treaty-ratifying powers). Fully 99% of Republican congressmen are Christian, of whom around 70% are Protestant, including a significant though unknown proportion of evangelicals.
Of course, the Democrats also harbor some politicians who proclaim American exceptionalism and launch crusading wars (for example, President Barack Obama's interventions in Syria and Libya). On the whole, however, the Democratic Party is less wedded to claims of US hegemony than is the Republican Party's evangelical base.
Pompeo's inflammatory anti-China rhetoric could become even more apocalyptic in the coming weeks, if only to fire up the Republican base ahead of the election. If Trump is defeated, as seems likely, the risk of a US confrontation with China will recede. But if he remains in power, whether by a true electoral victory, vote fraud, or even a coup (anything is possible), Pompeo's crusade would probably proceed, and could well bring the world to the brink of a war that he expects and perhaps even seeks.
（参考2）
対中強硬、バイデン氏でも続く 米シカゴ大教授・ミアシャイマー氏
2020年8月10日 5時00分 朝日新聞デジタル
米中対立の激化は、避けられないのか。２０年以上前から衝突を予測してきた、米シカゴ大のジョン・ミアシャイマー教授（国際政治学）は悲観的だ。衝突の背景にある理由や、米国の今後の動きの予測をテレビ電話で尋ねた。
――２００１年に出版した「大国政治の悲劇」では「中国の平和的な台頭はありえない」とし、米国との対立を予測していました
「米中対立は、中国が成長を始めた１９９０年代から始まりました。現在、強国になった中国は、アジアの覇権国になろうと、攻撃的になっているのです。一方、米国はそれを容認できません。米中関係は根本的な転換期を迎えています」
――コロナ禍が米中対立の激化の原因になっているという見方もあります
「コロナやイデオロギー対立は重要な要素ではありません。米中両国間の力関係が変化して利害がぶつかるようになり、競争が激しくなっているのです」
「米国が他国と権力を共有することはありません。仮に中国がアジアで覇権を握ることを許せば、中南米や欧州への関与を強めていくでしょう。こうした事態を防ぐために、米国は中国の封じ込めを進めているのです」
――米国はトランプ政権になって対中政策が強硬になったのですか
「それは違います。オバマ政権の時から対中政策は強硬になっていました。１１年、当時のクリントン国務長官が『リバランス（均衡の再調整）』と呼ばれるアジア重視戦略を打ち出したのが転換点でしょう。米国として中国との関係に問題があることを認め、封じ込めに動き出す内容でした」
――トランプ政権の対中政策をどう見ますか
「トランプ大統領が、中国を封じこめる行動を起こしたことは正しかったと言えます。しかも、軍事面だけではなく経済面でも中国に圧力をかけることが重要であることをしっかりと理解しているようです」
――しかし、成果を出せているとは言えません
「最大の問題は、米国が日本や韓国などの同盟国を敵視したことです。中国封じ込めのためには米国が指導力を発揮する必要があります。民主党のバイデン前副大統領が大統領選で勝てば、同盟国との関係は修復されるでしょう」
――バイデン氏は、対中強硬政策を見直すのではないのでしょうか
「民主党政権になっても、対中封じ込めが緩むことはないでしょう。中国側もそのことを理解しています。昨年１０月に訪中した際、中国の外交当局者が『大統領選の結果は米中関係に重要ではない。いずれの政権も中国に銃を突きつけてくるだろう』と話していたのが印象的でした」
――中国の軍事増強に対して日本はどう対処をすればいいのでしょうか
「日本を射程に収める中国軍の中距離ミサイルの脅威が高まっています。現時点で日本は米国の『核の傘』による抑止力を信頼してもいい。ただ、核兵器を使わない中距離ミサイルの独自配備を日本が検討することも必要になるでしょう」（編集委員・峯村健司）
Ｊｏｈｎ Ｍｅａｒｓｈｅｉｍｅｒ １９４７年生まれ。米陸軍士官学校卒。大国は生存のために合理的に行動し、必ず覇権を求めようとするという「攻撃的現実主義」の代表論者。
（参考3）
When It Comes to China, Americans Think Like Trump
Recent data suggests that most voters share the White House's hawkish approach to China.
BY DAN HAVERTY, AUGUSTA SARAIVA
| JULY 30, 2020, 6:34 PM FOREIGN POLICY WS
Large majorities of the U.S. public, both Democrats and Republicans, align with the Trump administration's dismal view of China, giving the embattled president a potential appealing drum to bang in an increasingly uphill reelection campaign, according to a new survey by the Pew Research Center.
According to the survey, 73 percent of Americans hold an unfavorable view of China, up from 47 percent just two years ago. The main complaints echo President Donald Trump's: the nature of the two countries' economic relationship and China's handling of the coronavirus pandemic.
Some 64 percent surveyed felt that China had done a bad job handling the pandemic, and 78 percent believe the Chinese government deserves at least some blame for the global spread of the virus.
Meanwhile, more than two-thirds of respondents said U.S.-China economic relations were in bad shape. While Republicans are more likely to hold a negative view of China on most issues than Democrats, U.S.-China economic ties particularly concern Democrats, with 73 percent saying relations are bad—10 percentage points more than Republicans—which could offer Trump a lifeline in must-win Rust Belt states hit hard by years of Chinese economic depredation and the ongoing trade war.
This poll comes as Trump and his administration have taken an increasingly hawkish stance on China. U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo capped a quartet of tough administration speeches last Thursday by slamming the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), accusing it of having designs on "global hegemony" and calling on "the freedom-loving nations of the world [to] induce China to change." While giving testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Pompeo called the CCP "the central threat of our times."
The two countries have also ramped up their diplomatic quarrel, with Pompeo slamming China's maritime pretensions in the South China Sea and both states closing each other's consulates.
The Trump administration has been of two minds about China from the start, with many hawks inside the administration seeking a confrontational approach and an outright decoupling of the world's biggest economic relationship. Trump, meanwhile, coddled Chinese President Xi Jinping, held off criticizing Chinese actions in Hong Kong and Xinjiang, and touted his mini trade deal with China this year as an economic panacea. (Spoiler: It wasn't.)
But the new survey suggests that American public attitudes toward China have hardened for good, which indicates that the Trump administration's aggressive approach could become the new norm, burying nearly 50 years of engagement kicked off with President Richard Nixon's famous visit to Beijing in 1972. (And the feeling is mutual: A poll released by the Eurasia Group Foundation in April found that only 39 percent of the Chinese public held a favorable view of the United States.)
That could hem in any effort by a future Joe Biden administration to chart a more moderate course toward China—if there remains any desire by a Democratic president to return to a less confrontational stance. One caveat: According to Pew, there is a slim, but shrinking, majority for building a stronger economic relationship, which could give the next administration leeway to back off the Trump administration's harshest measures.
But Americans are still largely divided over the best way forward. Fifty-one percent still believe it is more important to build a stronger relationship with China, but 46 percent feel that the get-tough approach will be more effective. Despite that discrepancy, the number of those who favor a more aggressive stance has risen sharply since 2019.
Not that a return to the old politics of engagement is necessarily in the cards. "Trump is defining the 2020 electoral agenda in other ways. He has ramped up his isolationist and Sinophobic rhetoric … and accused his rival of being soft on Beijing," Foreign Policy's Michael Hirsh wrote this month. "As he is doing with the culture war, Trump is forcing Biden to respond to his lead, rather than merely reacting to his challenger's attacks."