美、中兩國在東海與南海之戰略競爭的比較──兼論日本的角色

A Comparison of U.S. and China's Strategies in the East China Sea and the South China Sea-and Japan's Role on the Controversies

相較於近年來各方在南海主權問題上的爭論不休，東海主權爭議似乎顯得沈靜許多。然而，對美國與中國而言，不論是南海或是東海，此兩片水域皆有地緣政治上重要的戰略意義。首先，在南海主權爭論上，北京對南海當中「島嶼的實質佔有與控制」乃為其戰略上的優勢，其填島造陸的策略更是增加了美國與日本所欲干預，甚至是控制與支配南海海域的困難。其次，在東海主權爭議上，相反地，北京則不具備它在南海上的優勢—「島嶼的實質佔有與控制」。因為無此一優勢，中國無法具體、確切地對東海進行控制與支配。而東京對釣魚台列嶼/尖閣諸島則是具有實質的控制力量，加上華盛頓對其的支持與背書，以及美日兩國共同尋求強化彼此的軍事同盟關係。很顯然地，美國與日本在東海上則是較中國具有戰略上的優勢。但是，他們在南海上卻無此一優勢。因此，本文歸結：在具有領土主權爭議的海域中，「島嶼的實質佔有與控制」是強權實際發揮其影響力，並保有戰略競爭優勢的關鍵。本文分別依據美、中兩國在東海與南海的戰略「優勢」（advantage）與「劣勢」（disadvantage），分析兩國在此兩大海域所採取的戰略競爭策略，並觀察日本在此當中所扮演的角色。

Compared to their severe disputes in the South China Sea (SCS), Washington, Beijing, and Tokyo seemed relatively quiet in the East China Sea (ECS) over the past years. On any matter, however, both the ECS and SCS are critical to the United States (also Japan) and China, geopolitically and strategically. It is interesting to see that Beijing possesses a strategic advantage of de facto occupation and effective control of some of islands in the SCS, but not in the ECS. In contrast, Tokyo (also Washington) holds this advantage in the ECS, but not in the SCS. Furthermore, China's continuing building of manmade bases in the SCS since 2014 has raised difficulties to the United States and Japan to intervene in the SCS dispute. Similarly, not only does Japan control the Diaoyutai Islands/Senkaku Islands well, but also its action is endorsed by the United States and protected under the 1960 U.S.-Japan Security Treaty. This does place a hurdle for China to cross the first island chain in the West Pacific. Based on their advantages and disadvantages in the ECS and the SCS, this paper compares and contrasts Washington and Beijing's strategies toward each other in these two waters. And it also examines Japan's role in U.S-China territorial controversies.