本公众号将从粉丝赞赏（30%）、流量收入（每月30-100元）等公众号收入中抽取部分用于捐献，并将截图在每期文章开头部分公开。本次捐款如图所示：
大家好，欢迎来到Soren读外刊，我是Soren。今天，我们将通过《经济学人》，来聊一聊中美之间的冲突。
这篇文章选自《经济学人》
2017年7月8日的那一期
，文章的具体内容与观点可以收听下方的音频：
听完音频，我们再用文字把本文章的要点罗列如下：
-
什么是“修昔底德陷阱”？
修昔底德是一个古代的历史学家，他写了一本书，名字叫《伯罗奔尼撒战争史》，书中有这么一句话：当年正是雅典人的崛起，导致占支配地位的斯巴达人逐渐心生恐惧，推动他们最终走向战争。后来，“修昔底德陷阱”指当一个崛起大国挑战守成大国时，通常会导致战争。
When a rising power challenges an incumbent, carnage often ensues. Thucydides, an ancient historian, wrote of the Peloponnesian war of 431-404 BC that “It was the rise of Athens and the fear that this instilled in Sparta that made war inevitable.”
-
哪些情况下，崛起大国挑战守成大国时，不会导致战争？或者，“修昔底德陷阱”有哪些局限性？
a. 崛起大国不挑战守成大国的领导权；
b. 崛起大国的发展源于国内发展，不挑战守成大国的领导权；
c. 崛起大国和守成大国多年来是盟友关系，经济、政治、文化、历史等方面拥有共同的纽带；
d. 衰落大国忙于其它战争，需要崛起大国的支持。
Organski (1968: 362–363) notes that the transfer of systemic leadership from the United
Kingdom to the United States is an exception and that there are four factors which influence the
probability of peaceful transition of power. First, if the rapidly rising power does not challenge the
leadership and is ‘reluctant to accept it even after her power had grown to such a point that her
dominant position was obvious to everyone’, then the power transition period can be peaceful
because the rapidly rising power is ‘much less offensive and much less obvious’ until after it overtakes
fully the declining dominant power. Second, if the rising power’s rapid growth rate is ‘due
almost entirely to internal developments’ that do not threaten the declining dominant power, then
it can simply pass the declining hegemon without any serious conflict of interests between the two.
Third, if the rapidly rising power and the declining dominant power ‘have been staunch friends for
many years’, have fought wars together, and are ‘tied to each other not only by economic and
political ties, but also by language, culture, and a common history’, then power transition between
the two may be peaceful. Fourth, Organski suggests that if the declining dominant power is busy
fighting other wars and need.
——【韩】金宇翔，同盟转移理论
-
格雷厄姆·艾利森在《中美必有一战：中美能否摆脱“修昔底德陷阱”的宿命？》中的主要观点是什么？
中美两国并不一定会爆发战争，但爆发战争的可能性非常之大。
Mr Allison does not say that war between China and the United States is inevitable, but he thinks it “more likely than not”.
-
中美之间矛盾的根源是什么？
美国根据自身的利益建立了一系列的全球规则，而中国的价值观和利益与美国的不同，而且希望其他国家能包容、接受自己的模式。如此一来，矛盾不可避免。
America has shaped a set of global rules to suit itself. China has different values and different interests which it would like others to accommodate. Disagreements are inevitable.
-
中美之间有哪些可能会引爆战争的导火索？
中美两国可能因为一系列的失误而引发一场战争。比如台湾问题的升级，再比如金正恩去世，却没有明确的继承人，从而导致国内混乱，中美两国特种部队进入朝鲜，以确保该国核武器的安全，从而发生冲突。还比如中国对美国发动黑客攻击、美国对中国防火墙进行攻击、特朗普的贸易战等，都可以导致中美两国之间爆发冲突。
China and America could blunder into war in several ways, argues Mr Allison. A stand-off over Taiwan could escalate. North Korea’s dictator, Kim Jong Un, might die without an obvious heir, sparking chaos. American and Chinese special forces might rush into North Korea to secure the regime’s nuclear weapons, and clash. A big cyber-attack against America’s military networks might convince it that China was trying to blind its forces in the Pacific. American retaliation aimed at warning China off might have the opposite effect. Suppose that America crippled China’s Great Firewall, as a warning shot, and China saw this as an attempt to overthrow its government? With Donald Trump in the White House, Mr Allison worries that even a trade war might turn into a shooting war.
-
《经济学人》认为，格雷厄姆·艾利森的观点过于悲观，中美两国爆发冲突的可能性并不大，原因有哪些？
原因有二，其一，中国是一个谨慎的超级大国，虽然对内存在民族主义，但对外却没有体现出军事扩张主义。台湾问题和南海问题可能充满危机，但中国不同以往，并没有兴趣建立一个广袤的帝国。第二个原因是，艾利森研究的战争样本都是核武器出现之前的样本。目前，中美两国都拥有足以毁灭世界的核武器，仅仅这一点，中美之间就不太可能爆发冲突。
But Mr Allison’s overall thesis is too gloomy. China is a cautious superpower. Its leaders stoke nationalist sentiment at home, but they have shown little appetite for military adventurism abroad. Yes, the Taiwan strait and the South China Sea are dangerous. But unlike the great powers of old, China has no desire to build a far-flung empire. And all the wars in Mr Allison’s sample broke out before the invention of nuclear weapons. China and America have enough of these to destroy the world. That alone makes war extremely unlikely.
以上便是文章的要点，关于文章原文，可以看文章下方留言区的置顶留言，获得下载链接。下面，我们就文章的两个语言点进行分析：
一，sail through
文章如下：
ON JULY 2nd an American guided-missile destroyer sailed within 12 nautical miles (22.2km) of Triton, a tiny Chinese-occupied island in the South China Sea.
It was on a “freedom of navigation” operation,
sailing through
disputed waters to show China that others do not accept its territorial claims.
Such operations infuriate China. But they have not brought the two superpowers to blows. So far.
里面有这么一个词组：sail through，文中表示“穿行，穿越”，但我们今天要补充它的另外一个意思：“顺利通过（考试、面试等）”，英文解释为：to succeed very easily in sth. 这个表达很有画面感：在考场上一马平川，就像船只在海面上畅通无阻的航行一样。
《柯林斯双解词典》中有这么一个例句：
While she sailed through her maths exams, he struggled...
她顺利地通过数学考试，而他却异常地吃力。
《经济学人》中也出现过这么一个句子：
More broadly, Indonesia's global stature is rising. The public finances are sound and the economy has sailed through the financial crisis. Among G20 economies, only China and India grew faster than the 4.5%. Indonesia achieved last year.
更广泛地说，印尼的国际地位正在提升。公共财政稳健，经济顺利度过金融危机，在G20国家中，只有中国和印度的增长率超过了印尼去年实现的4.5%的增长。
