【中国外交部前副部长、中国社科院国家全球战略智库首席专家傅莹，应约为美国《华盛顿邮报》撰写关于朝核问题的评论文章，于今日刊发，本文为中文版。】
外交成功的基础是了解和理解对方，唯此方能在谈判中做出正确判断，采取正确步骤。
两千多年前，中国古代哲学家庄子在辩论中遇到过这样的问题：“子非鱼，焉知鱼之乐？”。与美国人讨论朝核问题时，我常引用这个典故，因为美国人常倾向于用自己的假设去推断朝鲜。
比如认为，朝鲜追求的终极目的是拥核，安全关切只是借口。何以见得呢，核武器不能当饭吃，如果朝鲜能够获得安全的生存和发展环境，为什么不能放弃导致外部环境严重恶化和国家陷入被制裁深渊的核武器呢？然而，如果国家安全不保，朝鲜必铤而走险地坚持拥核道路。这正是过去15年我们所看到的半岛安全困境。
现在，朝核问题出现了难得的和平解决机会。历史上，能够引发好结果的多种条件同时出现是比较罕见的，而现在我们正目睹这样的景观。
首先，韩国总统文在寅是理念和平主义者，上任之初就积极倡议和平对话，主动向北方送出和谈的橄榄枝，就像没有系安全带就从高空跳下。所幸有人接住了，朝鲜抓住了文在寅伸出的和平之手。2017年9月朝鲜第六次核试之后，声称达到威慑目标，显然，进一步发展核技术很难，需要顺势进入集中精力发展经济的轨道，这个和平转机恰逢其时。
更重要的是，美方对朝核问题的认识有了新的转变，特朗普政府看到前两任美国政府只施压不认真和谈导致的严重后果，且经过2017年秋以来对军事等强硬手段的测试，也认识到战争代价之巨大。特政府上任以来一方面加大严格的制裁，让朝鲜感觉到疼；同时，对朝鲜表达的接触意愿比过去任何时期都认真和连贯。蒂勒森前国务卿的“四不”承诺——美国不要求改变朝鲜国家体制、不要求搞垮朝鲜政权、不急于南北统一、美军不对朝进行军事进攻——给予了朝鲜一直所期待的尊重感。朝鲜应该是在认真研究特朗普政府的声明及其背后的意图。
而中方的立场是连贯的，一直坚持以和平方式实现半岛无核化的立场，反对半岛生战生乱，积极推动美国和朝鲜走上和平谈判的路径。目前的事态完全符合中方一直以来所主张和支持的方向，中方在其中发挥的促进作用相当关键。
现在看来，经过几个月的磨合和反复，朝美首脑会晤将于6月12日在新加坡举行，机遇之窗即将打开。双方为此已做出过去难以想象的让步。国际社会期待会晤取得蓬佩奥国务卿称之为“重大而大胆的”好结果。
诚然，天下没有免费的午餐。在这样的大难题面前，任何一方要想实现自己的意图，都要做出调整和让步，大家都要相互妥协。对朝鲜而言，此事关乎生死，会很认真，但也会很脆弱、敏感和紧张。金正恩追求的，跟他祖父和父亲时代孜孜以求的都是一样的，就是国家安全和政权安全。朝鲜发展核武器是为此，放弃核武器也是为了实现这个目标，因此，朝鲜的路数是清楚的。
美方的路数是否清楚呢？美国人对核问题有相当透彻的分析，对弃核步骤和方式也有具体要求，但是很少听到美国人讲自己准备为换取朝鲜弃核付出什么样的代价。当美国人提出要一步到位地实现弃核（front-loading）时，是否考虑过如何一步到位地解决朝鲜的安全关切？当美方希望朝鲜在短时间内“永久性”地实现弃核时，是否想到朝鲜的安全能永久性地得到保障吗？这些问题呼唤同理心，需要各方都能进行双向考虑。无论会晤的锣鼓敲得多么响亮，任何一方若只想索取而不想付出，就有可能再现过去的反复。
特朗普与金正恩的会面不难取得成功。他们见面本身就能向世界展现和平的功绩，甚至可能达成新的协议，开启一个重要的进程。
此刻各方都需要避免提出现阶段不可能实现的要求，把自己困住。应该留一些空间，让彼此都舒适，使得这个进程可以继续，这样就很了不起了。半岛问题经历60多年的复杂演进，冰冻三尺非一日之寒，需要善心、耐心和恒心。
中国的作用可以用“锚定”来形容。中国始终是推进和平、反对战争的坚定力量，朝核问题的和平解决符合中国和本地区各方的根本利益。中方将继续为未来半岛的和解与和平发展发挥积极推动和保障作用。同时，中方也需要为和谈脱轨的可能性做充分准备，继续发挥“锚定”作用，避免形势再次滑向冲突的危险方向。
对中国人来说，半岛和平是我们的根本愿望，期待看到朝鲜人民走上经济发展的道路。这次机遇是历史性的，希望各方都能抓牢。（完）
傅莹是中国外交部前副部长、中国社科院国家全球战略智库首席专家
英文原文如下：
At the North Korea summit, empathy is the key
by Fu Ying
Fu Ying is China’s former vice foreign minister and was once a member of China’s delegation in the six-party talks on North Korea.
BEIJING — One of the important conditions for diplomatic success is to understand the other party, so as to form the right judgement and the right moves in negotiations.
In the 4th century B.C., Zhuangzi, an ancient Chinese philosopher, was challenged with the following question, “As you are not a fish, how can you say this fish is happy?” I often quote this when discussing the Korean nuclear issue with Americans, as I often have found them judging Pyongyang with their own assumptions.
For example, some have asserted that North Korea’s ultimate objective is to possess nuclear weapons and that talk about their security concerns is merely an excuse. Why would that be the case? Nuclear weapons are not food. If North Korea can be assured of its survival and opportunities for development, why wouldn’t it want to give up the nuclear weapons that have only gotten them mired in sanctions and confronted with a worsening environment? A North Korea in a constant state of insecurity would only go down further along the dangerous track of nuclear development. This has been the security dilemma that we have seen on the Korean Peninsula over the past 15 years.
Now, an unprecedented opportunity for peaceful resolution has emerged. We are witnessing a confluence of multiple favorable factors rarely seen in history and that may lead to a positive outcome.
First, South Korean President Moon Jae-in is a man of peaceful convictions. He began calling for peace and dialogue shortly after taking office last year, extending an uninvited olive branch to North Korea. In the context of the Korean Peninsula, this is like a bungee jump without a rope. Fortunately, he was caught safely by Pyongyang, which did not let go of his outstretched hand of peace. Following its sixth nuclear test in September 2017, North Korea claimed that it had reached its target of nuclear deterrence. Since then, the state has announced it would shift its focus to economic development. This turning point could not have come at a better time.
More importantly, we have also seen a turn of mind in the U.S. perception of the Korean nuclear issue. The Donald Trump administration came to realize the serious consequences of the approach taken by the previous administrations, which was characterized by pressure alone without serious peace talks. U.S. policymakers have also acknowledged the huge cost of war after toying with the military option and other tough measures.
On the one hand, the Trump administration slapped down more stringent sanctions on North Korea to impose more pain. Yet at the same time, it has gone further than any previous administrations in terms of the earnestness and consistency of its openness to engagement. Former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s “four nos” commitment — that the United States was not seeking regime change in Pyongyang, nor collapse of the North Korean state, nor premature reunification with South Korea, nor sending American forces into North Korea — gave the North Koreans the respect for which they longed. That statement was not lost on their leadership.
China’s position has been consistent. China is firmly committed to a nuclear-free Korean Peninsula reached through peaceful means and is opposed to war and chaos on the peninsula. The fact that Pyongyang and the United States are embarking on a journey of peaceful negotiations is in the right direction — a direction China has all along called for and has played a vital role in making possible.
Indeed, success of the summit between Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un is not impossible. Both sides have made previously unimaginable concessions to make this happen. The summit may even lead to a new agreement and usher in an important stabilizing process.
Naturally, there’s no such thing as a free lunch. When faced with such a grave challenge, all parties need to make adjustments and compromises if they wish to achieve their respective objectives. For North Korea, this is a matter of life or death, and it will certainly take a very serious approach. Yet, it will be vulnerable, touchy and nervous at the same time. What Kim Jong Un has been after is no different from what his father and even grandfather had always wanted: national and regime security. No matter what North Korea does — be it nuclear development or abandonment — it would be for the same purpose. So, Pyongyang’s calculations are not difficult to gauge.
But what do we know about the U.S. approach? The Americans have been working on a thorough analysis of the nuclear issue and have detailed requirements as to how denuclearization should take place. But we rarely hear what they are ready to offer to North Korea in return. When the Americans propose a front-loaded denuclearization, have they thought about how to “front-load” North Korea’s security concern? When the United States demands that Pyongyang’s denuclearization be “immediate” and “permanent,” have they considered how to “permanently” guarantee Pyongyang’s security? The key is whether the parties can have empathy and step into the other’s shoes for a moment.
The parties are well-advised to avoid trapping themselves by making demands that are impossible to meet at the current stage. Some room should be left to make both parties comfortable enough to allow the process to proceed, which would be a remarkable achievement in itself. As the Chinese saying goes, “Three feet of ice does not form in a single cold day.” As the Korean nuclear issue has undergone a complicated evolution over many decades, its solution will take goodwill, patience and perseverance.
As a firm proponent of peace and a voice against war, China’s role has been similar to an anchor which moors the resolution of this conflict to a peaceful course. We will continue to actively encourage and facilitate conciliation. To play the stabilizing role of an anchor, however, China also needs to be ready for a possible derailing of the talks and be prepared to prevent the boat from drifting or even capsizing.
For the Chinese people, a peaceful Korean Peninsula is our fundamental aspiration. We would like to see the people of North Korea able to embark on a path of economic development. We sincerely hope that the parties rise to the challenge of this historic moment.
This was produced by The WorldPost, a partnership of the Berggruen Institute and The Washington Post.
