周波：AUKUS毫无疑问是针对中国的，澳大利亚总是在打别人的仗（中英对照）

Club提要：日前，清华大学战略与安全研究中心研究员周波接受澳大利亚广播公司（ABC）采访，就中国如何看待澳英美三边安全伙伴关系（AUKUS）发表见解。

ABC近期推出了系列采访报道，聚焦公众对AUKUS的疑虑，涉及成本、就业、核安全、战略、军事和地缘政治等多个领域。当前，澳大利亚正积极探讨如何应对中国崛起带来的潜在安全挑战，尤其就AUKUS是否是最佳应对方式及其战略影响方面展开广泛讨论。

周波的采访是该系列第三期博客节目“AUKUS与中国”的一部分。

Club Briefing: Recently, Zhou Bo, a senior fellow at the Center for International Security and Strategy at Tsinghua University, was interviewed by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), where he shared his views on how China perceives the AUKUS trilateral security partnership between Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

ABC has launched a series of interviews exploring public concerns over AUKUS, covering a wide range of issues including cost, employment, nuclear safety, strategy, military affairs, and geopolitics. As Australia grapples with the potential security challenges posed by China’s rise, the debate has intensified over whether AUKUS is the best response—and what its broader strategic implications might be.

Zhou Bo’s interview appears in the third episode of the series’ podcast, titled “AUKUS and China.”

澳大利亚陆军军官培训学院邓特伦（图源：澳大利亚国防部）

ABC：周波大校不仅是中国最资深的安全分析家之一，而且他对澳大利亚十分了解。早在1999年，他曾在澳大利亚陆军军官培训学院邓特伦（Duntroon）学习3个月。我很想知道，中国是如何看待AUKUS的？

周波：我们不喜欢AUKUS。近年来，印太地区出现了两个重要动向：一个是四边安全对话（QUAD），另一个是AUKUS。我的看法很简单：QUAD的出现是因为中国，而AUKUS则是针对中国。

ABC：那么，在你和中国决策者的心目中，中国无疑认为自己是AUKUS的主要针对目标，是吗？

周波：是的，AUKUS毫无疑问是针对中国的。这在中国任何人看来都是毋庸置疑的。我们从一开始就不喜欢它，并认为它不应继续发展。但即使它继续发展，也不会产生太大影响，因为它并未改变规则。

ABC：为什么？

周波：因为澳大利亚大概要花20年的时间才能拥有8艘核潜艇。即使20年后全部建成，与中国的军事发展相比，到那个时候中国人民解放军海军不知道会达到什么水平——毕竟中国海军已经是世界上最大的海军了。

ABC：你的回答恰恰反映了AUKUS的成立原因。中国军事快速发展，海军规模不断壮大，成为世界上最大的海军。你能理解像澳大利亚这样的国家觉得面对这种重大变局时，需要有所准备吗？

AUKUS潜艇效果图（图源：英国海军）

周波：这是AUKUS毫无疑问是针对中国的没有道理的。我可以告诉你，在过去的40年里，中国的军费开支只占GDP的1.5%左右，有时会低于这个数字，但从来没有超过GDP的2%。是的，中国的经济体量很大，因此1.5%可能很大，但中国希望以可持续的方式稳步发展军队，因此我们没有与任何人进行军备竞赛，中国在按照自己的节奏和逻辑发展军队。

ABC：AUKUS是否在你参与的中国会议中被讨论过？

周波：AUKUS在中国经常被提及和讨论，这并不是秘密。我的看法是，AUKUS基本上是美国让盟国为其军费分担成本的一种努力。很明显，美国现在更加依赖盟友。这是拜登政府的外交核心理念之一。特朗普政府的口号是“美国优先”，但对拜登来说，可能是“盟友优先”。拜登政府为什么如此重视盟友？因为美国意识到自身已无法单独维持全球存在，需要盟友的支持。

ABC：你是否暗指澳大利亚被视为美国的延伸？

周波：这可能是另一种解读。无论如何，美国确实需要澳大利亚，因为美国知道自身力量不足。

2023年，美国、澳大利亚和英国举办首次AUKUS峰会（图源：彭博社）

ABC：（AUKUS支持者）认为，这些核潜艇将起到远程威慑作用，可能会让正在扩军的中国 “三思而行”，并在未来改变其战略思维。你能理解这其中的逻辑吗？

周波：完全不能理解。澳大利亚真的有人相信中国会突然以任何理由攻击其本土吗？显然不会。澳大利亚唯一可能卷入冲突的地方是台湾海峡或南海。这意味着冲突将发生在离中国更近的地方，而不是相反。所以，如果我们谈论威慑，威慑什么，针对谁？这又回到了刚才的问题：美国想联合澳大利亚，是因为自身力量不足，需要盟友帮助。

从历史上看，坦率地说，除了二战期间，澳大利亚几乎总是在帮别人打仗。无论是一战中的加里波利，还是越南、阿富汗或伊拉克。澳大利亚似乎从未学会平衡的艺术。

ABC：那么，澳大利亚人应该得出什么结论？你的意思是，我们应该认为中国是一个本质和平的国家吗？

周波：我们仍未完成国家统一，因此在别无选择的情况下，我们可能不得不通过武力解决统一问题，但这并不意味着一定会使用武力。中国人民是热爱和平的。中国不喜欢战争。想一想，美国发动了多少次战争；而自1979年以来，中国从未在境外杀害过一个外国人，除了中印边境的一次冲突，造成4名中国士兵和20名印度士兵死亡。但这是一场边境冲突，涉及主权问题。你找不到一个例子，说明中国如何威胁任何国家。中国何时威胁过澳大利亚？何时干涉过南海的航行自由？你无法举出这样的例子。

辽宁号海军舰队（图源：法新社）

编者按：在同期节目中，澳大利亚海军司令马克·哈蒙德（Mark Hammond）和澳大利亚国防部副部长休·杰弗里（Hugh Jeffrey）也接受了采访，后者负责AUKUS非核潜艇项目的指挥与协调工作。两人强调，澳大利亚的国家安全高度依赖海洋自由。他们认为，AUKUS能够让澳大利亚更有效地威慑并应对潜在威胁，至少确保潜在对手需要“三思而行”。尽管他们承认中国可能无意攻击澳大利亚，但与中国迅速扩张的海军规模相比，澳大利亚的海军力量显得微不足道。他们还指出，许多国家都在扩充军备，这凸显国际环境变得更加不稳定，澳大利亚不能落伍。

对于一些批评者认为AUKUS可能“无关紧要”的观点，两人表示，只有通过展现自卫决心，当真正的冲突爆发时，澳大利亚才能获得盟友的保护。同时，AUKUS将帮助澳大利亚提升自主制造核潜艇的能力，减少对外部支持的依赖。

他们还谈到了澳大利亚海军的社会和外交作用，以及AUKUS在核潜艇项目之外的其他军事合作机遇。

以下为采访原文：

Zhou Bo: Hi, I'm senior colonel Zhou Bo, a retired senior colonel of the PLA, and now a senior fellow of the centre for international security & strategy at Tsinghua University

ABC: Senior Colonel Zhou Bo is not only one of the best-informed security analyst in China, but he knows Australia well, having spent 3 months at Duntroon, the Australian Army's officer training college, back in 1999. I was keen to know, what is the view inside China about AUKUS

Zhou Bo: I don’t believe we like AUKUS, because in recent years there are two developments in the Indo-Pacific: one is quad, another is AUKUS. The difference between the two, in my opinion, is very simple. Quad is because of China, and AUKUS is against China.

ABC: So, there is no doubt in your mind and in the minds of decision makers in China that it sees itself as the principal Target of AUKUS, does it?

Zhou Bo: Yeah, AUKUS is certainly against China, there is no doubt for anybody here in China, we don't like it from the very beginning, and we believe it should not continue to grow, but even if it grows, it won't matter that much, because it won't be a game-changer.

ABC: Why not?

Zhou Bo: Because it would take Australia probably about two decades to have eight nuclear submarines, so even if you have 8 of them all together in 20 years, compared with China's military development, what standard would the PLA navy have become by that time, because Chinese navy is already is the largest in the world.

ABC: Your very answer is the reason why this whole development is underway. Your rapid military buildup, the size of your growing Navy, it’ll become the biggest in the world, can you understand why a country like Australia would think, well we can't be completely exposed in the light of these big changes?

Zhou Bo: That is not something justifiable. If I just can tell you that over the last four decades China's the military expenditure is just around 1.5% of GDP, it is sometimes less than that, but it is never over 2% of GDP. Yes, China's economy is big, so therefore 1.5% could be big, but China wants to develop its military in a sustainable way, in a steady manner, so we are not entering into arms race with anyone, I think China is developing the military according to his own tempo and logic.

ABC: I wonder whether AUKUS is ever mentioned at some of the meetings you attend, is AUKUS on the table or not?

Zhou Bo: AUKUS is frequently mentioned and discussed in China, so it is not a secret, everyone knows about it. I believe AUKUS is basically an American effort to let these allies to subsidise its military, because clearly the US now relies more on its allies, and this is almost the benchmark of the Biden administration. Now, Trump’s slogan is America first, but maybe for Biden, it’s his allies first. Then, why would Biden administration give unprecedented importance to allies? Because it knows, America knows that says United States can no longer afford a global presence, it needs allies.

ABC: You definitely say that Australia is seen as an extension of the United States.

Zhou Bo: That could be another interpretation another way, but basically you're needed because the United States knows that its own strengths would not be enough.

ABC: We are told that the nuclear subs we're talking about will act as a deterrent at a distance, and that in fact it might give pause to a nation that is rearming, as you talk about, and to change its strategic thinking in the future. Can you see the logic to that?

Zhou Bo: Not at all. Does anybody in Australia believe that all of a sudden China is going to launch attack against Australia for any reasons? No, the only possible scenario for a conflict involving Australia is in Taiwan Strait or in the South China Sea. That means you would have a conflict closer to our doorstep, it’s not the other way around. So if you are talking deterrence, deterrence for what, against what? So again this is the same situation: the United States wants to gang up with you, because they want you to help itself, whose strength is not enough. Historically speaking, let me be frank, Australia always fight other people's wars, except during the second World War; apart from that, you're always fighting other people's wars, be it in Gallipoli, be it in Vietnam, be it in Afghanistan or Iraq. So, I don't leave Australia has ever learnt the art of the balancing.

ABC: I wonder what a final message is to Australians then. Do we see China as inherently a peaceful country, is that what you're saying to us?

Zhou Bo: Well,you see, we are still a country divided, so as a last resort, we may have to use force to resolve this issue for reunification, but it is not certain that we would definitely use force. But if you look at China beyond this issue, you would find that Chinese are very much peaceful. China doesn’t like war. Just think how many wars did United States launch; ever since 1979, China has not killed a single foreigners elsewhere, apart from China-India border, where we have a deadly clash, resulting in the death of four Chinese soldiers and 20 Indian soldiers, but that is about border clash, about sovereignty, you can't just give me an example of how China has threatened anyone, and has China ever threaten Australia, and how has China ever interfere with freedom of navigation to South China Sea? You just can't give me such an example.