重评1961—1968年的中美大使级会谈

A Reappraisal of Sino-Amertcan Ambassadorial Talks in the 1960s

在中美关系激烈冲突与对抗的1960年代,华盛顿和北京竭力维持着双方惟一的直接对话渠道一中美华沙大使级会谈。本文在深入研究分析美国国家档案馆有关20世纪60年代中美大使级会谈的原始档案及美国外交文件集相关文件的基础上,认为肯尼迪及约翰逊两届政府对中美华沙谈判渠道给予了一定的重视,并努力在谈判桌上引入新议题。同时,中文资料显示,中国领导人也重视华沙渠道。即使在中国最激进的"文化大革命"期间,中国政府并没有取消大使级会谈。这是因为华盛顿和北京都看到华沙渠道对处理紧张而脆弱的中美关系的作用,因而竭力维持其存在。根据以上档案材料,本文着重分析20世纪60年代中美两国所处国际国内背景,研究探讨每次大使级会谈前双方相互的策略分析与预测、会谈所涉及的主要问题、谈判桌上的讨价还价以及会谈后的对策及跟踪措施。本文试图通过揭示中美双方是如何看待相互关系中所存在的利益与威胁,进一步论证这种对利益与威胁的考量是如何在谈判桌上反映出来的。本文结论部分分析中美双方维系大使级会谈的理由,剖析60年代大使级会谈未出现实质性突破的原因以及会谈的历史意义。

No full-length study has made the Sino-American ambassadorial talks from 1961 to 1968 its principal focus.The few studies on Sino-American ambassadorial talks tend to underestimate the importance of the talks during these eight years.Another problem with the current scholarship is that the topic has been given short shrift.What we have now are either a Chinese or an American perspective,and only giving the talks in the 1960s a passing treatment.No one has tried to offer a balanced account of the Sino-American talks in the 1960s by looking at both sides. New documentation from both U.S.and Chinese sources shows that the two Democratic administrations took the Warsaw channel seriously,and made steady efforts to introduce new initiatives at the negotiation table.For the PRC side,the Chinese leadership attached importance to the talks as well,and even during the most radical phase of the Cultural Revolution,Beijing did not call off the talks although the two ambassadors met at much less frequency.Based on these new sources,this article analyzes the context of the Sino-American talks in the 1960s,the major issues discussed,actual bargaining process, approaches,maneuvers,rhetoric and follow-up actions.It attempts to disclose how the two sides perceived interests and threats in their relationship,and how the perception of interests and threats reflected at the negotiation table.It concludes with some observations on the rationale for Washington and Beijing to keep on talking,and why no serious breakthroughs occurred at the negotiating table in the 1960s.