本报记者 刘迪 (Liu Di)
上世纪80年代，世界经济中心已从大西洋转移到亚太地区。发展中国家代表了全世界近85%人口的利益，而他们正在呼唤一个全新的国际秩序。不论是金砖国家，还是“一带一路”、上海合作组织、亚投行，都表达了和往常不一样的声音。
20多年前，柏林墙的倒塌让一些人欢呼雀跃，以为“历史终结了”， 全世界都变成了“华盛顿共识”所勾勒的样子。
然而，历史的发展总会创造更多的可能。
随着新兴经济体的蓬勃发展，世界已不再只依据西方规范研判一国的文明、发展和现代化程度。
中国，作为开启另一种现代化发展模式的先行者，已经开始融入世界体系并参与全球新秩序的重塑。
6年前，一本名为《当中国统治世界：中国的崛起和西方世界的衰落》的书曾登上了世界多国畅销书榜单。
其作者马丁·雅克(Martin Jacques)以独到的眼光剖析了中国发展模式和西方模式的异同，指出21世纪西方将不再占据主导地位，中国崛起改变的将不仅是世界经济格局，还将重构我们的思维和生活方式。
【环球时报记者 宋胜霞 张 妮】[Global Times Reporter: Song Shengxia]
“第一版《大国雄心》在中国推出是2010年,虽然仅仅过去6年,中国却已进入完全不同的时代……现在的中国越发自信、乐观,中国能够做得起梦,需要有梦想了。”这是最新出版的第二版《大国雄心》中,作者马丁·雅克的观点。这位英国的中国问题专家日前在北京接受《环球时报》专访。在他看来,“中国梦”并非只是实现富裕那么简单,而是对生活多方面的设想,是追求化茧成蝶的梦。
环球时报:您在新书中重点阐释了对“中国梦”的看法。为何对这个问题特别关注?
马丁:2009年我的《大国雄心》第一版出版时,有些人质疑我对中国的乐观看法是不是太过火了。那时中国人还是更加谨慎、缺少自信。自2009年以来中国最大的变化是政府政策的变化。中国已经发展到另一个阶段,即经济增速放缓,需要一个不同于以前的发展模式。我没有预料到的是,中国领导人有关实现“中国梦”的这个目标,会这么快提出并推进。
我认为中国梦主要包含两方面内容。一是让中国人更加富裕,普通民众拥有的机会更多。未来几十年内,中国人将经历一场全方位变革,涌现更自信的一代人。中国梦的另一内容是中国的影响力不会再被简单忽略。排除事故、灾难和其他不可预见的事件,中国在未来6年内实现小康社会目标的几率非常大。在国际上,中国将发挥越来越重要的作用,但也应做好准备,因为作为领导者,中国并没有太多经验。
Hong Jiang
马丁·雅克（Martin Jacques），英国著名学者、记者，《当中国统治世界》、《大国雄心》作者，剑桥大学政治学与国际问题系高级研究员，清华大学当代国际关系研究院客座研究员。1945年生于英国考文垂。雅克从曼彻斯特大学毕业后进入剑桥大学国王学院攻读博士学位，之后在布里斯托大学任教。1977—1991年曾担任英国共产党刊物《今日马克思主义》（Marxism Today）编辑。1993年与他人一起创立智库“人民”（Demos）。雅克有丰富的新闻媒体从业经历，1994—1996年曾担任《独立报》副主编，还曾担任《星期日泰晤士报》《泰晤士报》《观察家报》等的专栏作家,现在仍然是《卫报》专栏作家。
From left: Mr Tharoor; Mr Martin Soong, anchor, CNBC Asia Pacific; and Dr Jacques. PHOTOS: CREDIT SUISSE
Jo-ann Huang
CHINA and India have long been pitted against each other. As both countries have gone under a sharp rise in economic growth, that argument no longer stands today, said panelists at the Credit Suisse Global Megatrends Conference 2016 which was held last Thursday.
Mr Martin Jacques, the author of global bestseller, When China Rules The World: The End Of The Western World And The Birth Of A New Global Order, said in a separate interview that India and China are at very different stages of development. China’s economy, he said, is about five times larger than India’s. As a result, the priorities and imperatives of both countries vary.
中国社会科学报记者 王晓真 (Shirley Wang)
4月27日下午，英国伦敦政治经济学院高级客座研究员、剑桥大学政治学与国际问题系高级研究员、著名中国问题研究学者马丁·雅克（Martin Jacques）在北京大学举办“中国模式与世界秩序”主题演讲。马丁·雅克简述了从邓小平时代到当下，中国随时代变迁发生的变化，并从社会发展模式、文化根基、民族价值观、地理环境、外交政策、全球战略定位等方面，解析了中国发展模式与西方模式的异同。
Discussions about China’s rise and its global impact have been growing more heated over the years. Martin Jacques (Jacques), a senior fellow at the Department of Politics and International Studies, Cambridge University and author of When China Rules the World, shared his thoughts with Global Times (GT) London correspondent Sun Wei.
GT: In your book When China Rules the World, you argued that “China will become the dominant global power within decades, and it won’t become more westernized but will make the rest of the world more Chinese.” Do you still stick to this conclusion now?
Jacques: Yes, very much so. Of course, as China has become increasingly integrated into the global economy, it is being influenced by other countries and cultures, especially Western. But as China rises, it is clear that it is exercising a growing influence on the world. Countries around the world are looking to China, and pivoting to China because they see China as increasingly central to their own futures. This is abundantly clear in East Asia, but also Africa and indeed Europe. Major European countries, notably Germany, France and the UK, are more and more orientating themselves towards China. If Westernisation was the dominant trend for over two centuries, we are now seeing the beginnings of a process of Sinicisation. That doesn’t mean that Westernisation is no longer important, but it is no longer the overwhelming influence that it was in the past. What is remarkable since the publication of my book in English in 2009 is now far this process has gone in such a short period – and this is only the beginning of the process.
Watch Martin Jacques in conversation with Shashi Tharoor, exploring what will define the progress of China and India over the coming years.
By 2030, China and India’s economies are forecast to collectively be twice as large as that of the United States. The discussion explored which of the two powers will emerge as the larger economy in the next decade. From their types of government to their economic policies, however, each country is distinctly different. In a pluralist, multipolar world, is a “China versus India” debate still relevant? If so, who will emerge economically stronger and why? Is it policy, politics, resources, or demographics that provide an advantage to one over the other?
For a report on the discussion please see this article by Jo-ann Huang in The Straits Times.
Carmen N Pedrosa
We are ecstatic that the Filipino crowd has finally found its strength and the way to express it. For the moment Duterte supporters are full of hope that Rodrigo Roa Duterte, an obscure mayor from Mindanao is the answer. He has come forward with his program and he has a party to implement it – the PDP Laban. He is serious about constitutional change that will transform the Philippines into a parliamentary system with a federal structure. He will have many enemies but he will also have friends and a multitude of supporters to carry out the difficult task.
I don’t think he needs to be told about the treachery of evil. He has lived with it when he was mayor of Davao. But caveat emptor (avoid danger) the famous Latin quotation is relevant to him as well as to us. Evil is a constant in reality. The danger is to think that it can be destroyed with a magic wand. No matter how much he may wish it, it will not happen overnight. Nation building is a slow process of creating effective institutions that should last long after he is gone. And most of all he must keep in mind that as leader of the Filipino crowds that waited for him to remember always that he must not make “the perfect come in the way of the good.” That I believe is the temptation for a man with a heroic bent like Duterte. He wants to do good, he lives humbly and speaks in the language the masses understand. Never mind the critics who tell him that he needs to speak with the Arrneow accent.
His role in history is to begin the process of change. We were subjected to an imperialist constitution from the Americans in favor of a presidential system. That ensured the rule of oligarchy as its new channel to imperialist rule. The all powerful Philippine President would act like the all powerful American governor general.
Jeffrey Wasserstrom
Growing up in California with no special interest in China, one of the few things I associated with the big country across the Pacific was mix-and-match meal creation. On airplanes and in school cafeterias, you just had “chicken or beef” choices, but Chinese restaurants were “one from Column A, one from Column B” combination domains. If only in more debates on China, a similar readiness to think beyond either/or options would prevail!
I thought of this early in 2013 when I saw a January 10 Reuters assessment of Xi Jinping’s actions during his first few weeks as head of the Chinese Communist Party (C.C.P.). The article carried this “chicken or beef” headline: “China’s New Leader: Harbinger of Reform or Another Conservative?” Previous Chinese leaders had often turned out to have both reformist and conservative sides. Even Deng Xiaoping, considered the quintessential reformer due to his economic policies, held the line on political liberalization and backed the brutal 1989 crackdown. Despite what the headline suggested, I joined with those analysts who thought it most likely that Xi, too, would end up ordering from both the reformist and conservative sides of the menu. And that’s what he has done. For example, he has instituted a dramatic change in the way rural property rights are handled, something that economist Barry Naughton, hailing it as one of several key important recent economic reforms, lauds for finally giving farmers “a clear system to support renting, leasing, and mortgaging land.” But, conversely, Xi has also done even more than his predecessor did to rein in civil society and shown an even greater penchant than Hu for celebrating traditional Confucian values.