Monday, June 17, 2019

From the CPE Working Group on Empire--A Thoughtful Exposition of the Chinese Position in the Current Conversation Between China and the U.S.:《美国陷阱》揭露了一个骇人听闻的霸凌主义案例 [Jiang Shigong, "The 'American Trap' Exposes a Shocking Case of Hegemonism"]



This post continues the Coalition for Peace and Ethics Working Group on Empire examination of the question of paths to empire performed through the choices being made by stakeholders as they adjust their operations to the emerging new era of global trade and production organized around leadership cores [领导核心] of states and undertaken by corresponding leadership cores of enterprises within demarcated market groups. 

The focus this time is on a particularly powerful response by a highly regarded member of the Chinese intellectual class.  Jiang Shigong (强世功), the Director of the Rule of Law Research Center of Peking University, and a Professor of Law, has produced, for publication in  the important journal  Qiushi (Seeking Truth), no. 12, 2019, an essay entitled 《美国陷阱》揭露了一个骇人听闻的霸凌主义案例 [Jiang Shigong, "The 'American Trap' Exposes a Shocking Case of Hegemonism"].
It represents a truly important intervention of an important Chinese intellectual in the increasingly high stakes negotiations between the United States and China for the control of the normative discourse on global trade, and for the way in which global production consequentially will be ordered. His work, always worthy of careful consideration, is worthy of even closer examination now.

Empire is now certain, the only question is whether it will come on U.S. or Chinese terms.  The dress rehearsal for this was the great battle over the Trans Pacific Partnership--a great battle that the U.S. had won except for the phlegmatic action of the Obama administration and the calculated hostility of the Trump administration, both of which, and in very different ways, history might judge, made regrettable choices for very political reasons. The former might be understood to have disastrously dragged their feet in the face of an inward looking intellectual and political class who in retrospect might be judged to have arrogantly played class politics with the tools of the state apparatus; and the later might have succumbed to a temptation which later generations might judge as misguided to use TPP as a sacrificial lamb whose slaughter might have been necessary, in their minds, to launch their new vision, the America First Initiative. 

Professor Jiang now offers us a clear eyed view of the approach of the most sophisticated elements within the Chinese State and Party apparatus.  It will not do to engage in the usual reaction common to, and now expected from, factions of our sclerotic and self-referencing intellectuals. Starting from the perspective that they serve the only legitimate values for a legitimate ruling class worthy of that status, and that everyone else is in a state of development toward that goal (an ironic adaptation of Marxist notions of the inevitable movement from feudalism through capitalism to the idealized communist society), the analysis that this group might produce might take one of two forms. One is to ignore essays like this entirely or dismiss it as merely political work.  The other is to speak past the analysis grounded on a reading of these quite powerful statements through their own viewpoints and agendas. Something more is necessary now; something that is unlikely to come from the "usual suspects" in Europe and North America who will likely be charged with the "official" response.  That is a pity.

CPE's Working Group on Empire will provide its own analysis of this text in the context of the rapidly evolving situation. We hope it will be of some use; and perhaps serve as an antidote to the official responses that are sure to follow in short order. 

For this post, the original essay follows below (Chinese Only) along with an English language summary.  Those interested in the English translation should contact the Coalition for Peace & Ethics.






Source URL: http://www.qstheory.cn/dukan/qs/2019-06/16/c_1124628340.htm?spm=zm5062-001.0.0.1.v06rJD

来源:《求是》2019/12 作者:强世功 2019-06-16 09:00:00

  《美国陷阱》是20194月中信出版社出版的中译图书。该书以作者皮耶鲁齐的亲身经历,揭露了美国政府打击美国企业竞争对手的内幕。这本书的出版,让我们充分认识到美国法治的两面性,即对内保护资本集团的利益,对外维护美国霸权。美国一些人所推动的全球法律治理,无论是高调宣扬海外反腐,还是扩展长臂管辖原则,实质都是将本国国内法和司法权凌驾于国际法和国际社会之上,通过建构全球法律秩序来维护全球霸权。

  一、美国陷阱的双重含义:司法陷阱经济陷阱

  法国阿尔斯通公司作为世界工业巨头,一直是法国传统工业的骄傲。进入21世纪后,公司在并购扩张过程中由于受到次贷危机影响而几度陷入财务危机。美国电力巨头通用公司很快就瞄上了这块肥肉,并展开收购阿尔斯通的商业谈判。在谈判过程中,阿尔斯通公司的高管皮耶鲁齐在美国机场被美国司法部门以违犯《反海外腐败法》为由逮捕,并由此陷入美国陷阱

  在这本书中,美国陷阱具有双重含义。第一层含义,是指皮耶鲁齐被美国逮捕而陷入美国诉讼法中辩诉交易司法陷阱。美国诉讼法秉持一种当事人自由博弈的仲裁原则,诉讼主要取决于控辩双方的博弈,法官只是消极的仲裁者,由此形成美国诉讼法上的一个特殊的制度安排——“辩诉交易。如果被控告方能主动认罪,控诉方可提出减刑或免刑,而一旦双方达成协议,法官就予以认可。这种诉讼理念和制度安排,无疑有利于作为强者的政府和资本家。

  在这个案件中,面对辩诉交易司法陷阱,假如皮耶鲁齐拒不认罪,就意味着自己必须在证据收集和法律辩护上足以对抗美国的司法机关。但是,皮耶鲁齐的律师都是美国人指定的,巨额律师经费也不是他个人能承担的,更何况美国监狱的私营化还意味着必须交付大量资金来承担自己在监狱中的漫长对抗。特别是一旦自己的辩护失败,就意味着可能被处以125年的监禁。皮耶鲁齐作为弱小的外国人,根本无力对抗庞大的美国司法机器,最终他被迫认罪,作为交易条件换取轻刑。

  皮耶鲁齐选择认罪之后,实际上落入了美国陷阱的第二层含义,即国家与国家之间展开经济竞争和政治竞争的经济陷阱甚至政治陷阱。美国司法部对皮耶鲁齐的调查醉翁之意不在酒,判皮耶鲁齐125年监禁对美国意义并不大,其真正意图是作为证据证明阿尔斯通违背了美国的《反海外腐败法》,并以此作为筹码帮助美国通用公司顺利收购阿尔斯通。因此,当皮耶鲁齐主动认罪,实际上就变成了美国司法部门的人质,阿尔斯通若不接受通用公司提出的商业并购方案,就面临美国司法部以其违犯美国《反海外腐败法》而做出的巨额重罚。可以说,美国将《反海外腐败法》推向全球,将其作为开展全球治理的法律工具,实质是为打击竞争企业而设计的陷阱。由此,司法陷阱经济陷阱实现了无缝连接。

  皮耶鲁齐在书中一针见血地指出,这是一场地下经济战。美国不仅利用通用公司在地上的市场交易与法国公司展开竞争,而且通过隐蔽的司法陷阱来与法国展开经济竞争,以达到控制法国经济命脉的目的。皮耶鲁齐认为,美国陷阱就是美国利用法律作为经济战的武器,削弱竞争对手,最终达到低价收购对手,从而维持经济垄断的地位。


  二、美国陷阱的本质:全球帝国的法律建构

  《美国陷阱》提供了一个生动案例,揭示了美国推动全球法律治理的本质。逮捕皮耶鲁齐,表面上看起来是打击全球腐败的个案行动,实际上则是在动用政府权力介入到通用公司并购阿尔斯通的市场经济活动中。在这场商业交易中,阿尔斯通公司的对手不仅是通用电气,还有美国司法部。这个案例让人们认识到,美国经济体制实质上是这个世界最隐蔽、也是最大的国家资本主义,而这种国家资本主义是以精巧的法律之手建构起来的。

  美国司法部介入跨国公司的全球市场交易,是由美国的国家资本主义性质所决定的,在这个社会中,企业利益与国家利益进行了深度捆绑。美国企业在全球经济竞争中的失败也必然导致美国在全球政治竞争中的失败。因此,美国设计这种精巧的司法陷阱经济陷阱,用以捍卫美国企业在全球竞争中的绝对优势。在这个意义上,《美国陷阱》展现了美国一些人建构全球霸权的政治经济学逻辑。

  西方资本主义历史是私人海上贸易与海军扩张相伴而行的历史,是全球商业贸易与殖民争霸相伴而随的历史。私营企业之间的竞争变成国家之间的政治和军事竞争,市场与战场紧密地结合在一起。欧洲殖民争霸引发的两次世界大战,都源于私营经济在全球市场上的竞争。今天美国对中国乃至欧盟、日本、印度、墨西哥等发起不同形式的贸易摩擦,实际上就是由美国国家资本主义性质所决定的。

  必须认识到,基于赤裸裸的国家暴力和殖民掠夺来保持在全球市场中的优势地位,乃是资本主义的初级形态。两次世界大战之后,美国代表的新世界开始兴起,对西方资本主义体系进行了一次大规模的升级换代。美国一些人毫无掩饰地宣称美国的目标就是建立一个主宰全球的新罗马帝国。而这个,就在于将赤裸裸的军事征服尽可能隐蔽起来,更多采用法律规则、投资贸易、金融体系、知识产权、人权、法治和文化意识形态渗透等来征服和扩大全球市场。比如挟持国际组织的权威来支配主权国家,在商业贷款中附加私有化、市场化和民主化改革要求,用所谓华盛顿共识来控制弱小国家的经济命脉和政治力量,甚至采取颜色革命的战术来摧毁主权国家等。

  美国一些人正是企望依靠复杂多样的手段来维持其全球帝国地位。任何国家若在经济力量上挑战美国,即便是盟国也会遭到各种打压。美国历史上逼迫日本签署广场协议,就是最著名的例子。对欧元的打压,针对关键人员设计司法陷阱也有目共睹。因此,皮耶鲁齐的故事绝不是一个孤立的个案,实际上揭示了用来打压经济和政治的竞争对手以维持全球帝国霸权的重要手段。

  三、长臂管辖:美国司法霸凌与全球治理的矛盾

  《美国陷阱》出版之后,很多人追问:为什么美国司法部可以调查一起法国公司与印度尼西亚的商业交易?为什么美国法院对美国领土之外的经济活动拥有司法管辖权?为什么美国可以将自己的国内法凌驾于国际社会?在全球法律治理中,谁来制约不受约束的美国霸权,尤其是美国通过其国内法的长臂管辖所形成的全球司法霸凌主义?

  所谓长臂管辖,是指美国州司法机构对与该州发生最低联系的他州公民或法人行使司法管辖权。二战后,长臂管辖也通过美国法逐渐延伸到对美国公民和企业在全球活动的司法管辖权。其中最重要的一次扩展,就是1977年的《反海外腐败法》中明确禁止美国公司向外国的公职人员行贿。冷战时期,美国在全球扶持了很多腐败政府,美国公司通过商业贿赂来打开外国市场已成为全球丑闻。在当时美苏竞争的背景下,美国制定该法的首要目的是为了树立美国在国际上的道德形象。因此,这个法律在道德上的宣传效果远远大于实际效果。从1977—200120多年间,美国司法部只惩罚了21家美国公司,而且通常都是不重要的二线企业。

  随着美国迈向全球帝国,美国加快了将长臂管辖延伸到全球的步伐。一方面,美国运用其对盟国的政治影响力,将《反海外腐败法》加以国际法化;另一方面,美国修改法律,将长臂管辖原则伸向外国公司和个人。任何一家外国公司,只要用美元计价签订合同,或者仅仅通过设在美国的服务器(如谷歌邮箱或微软邮箱)收发、存储(甚至只是过境)邮件,都进入到美国的长臂管辖范围。可以说,美国通过长臂管辖赤裸裸地将国内法凌驾于国际法之上,使得其他国家的公司和公司管理人员都变成美国司法长臂管辖下的臣民。《反海外腐败法》从约束美国公司,变为对竞争对手发动经济战的神奇工具。由此看到,随着美国企业在全球竞争力的下降,美国政府越来越频繁地利用该法律所设置的司法陷阱来打击竞争对手。2004年,美国政府利用该法对外国企业的处罚所得仅为1000万美元,然而,到了2016年则猛增至27亿美元。特别是“9·11”事件之后,通过《爱国者法案》赋予美国政府以反恐名义大规模监视外国企业及其员工的权力,这更加便利美国司法部门收集证据。利用这两部法律,惩罚了很多与美国企业竞争的商业巨头。比如,2010年处罚英国宇航公司4亿美元,2014年处罚法国巴黎银行89.7亿美元,2017年处罚德意志银行72亿美元。

  需要注意的是,美国的长臂管辖之所以发挥作用,不仅基于法律,更重要的是法律背后金融、互联网技术的支撑。由于美国控制着美元交易和互联网,以至于任何公司和个人只要进入这个世界,就很容易落入美国陷阱

  经济全球化应当是全人类的全球化,应当属于全人类。如果美国一些人随心所欲地对其他竞争国家展开美元金融战、互联网战和长臂管辖的法律经济战,那就是将全球变成美国的殖民地。由此人们要问:这个世界究竟是全人类的世界,还是美国的世界?是基于人类命运共同体理念,采取一种每个人和每个国家都平等参与的思路来推动全球治理,还是基于西方种族主义的新罗马帝国理念,采用一种美国优先的帝国霸权思路推动全球治理?这些是经济全球化以来全球治理面临的根本问题。

  如果说人类历史是一部不断迈向经济全球化的历史,那么,这部经济全球化的历史也就是在全球治理中不断用民主政治原则来打破独裁专制主义的历史。西方威斯特伐利亚体系的建立,就是欧洲列强打破西班牙和葡萄牙的早期天主教帝国专制,实现列强之间的平等。而一战后国际联盟以及二战后的联合国建立,就是苏联、美国以及中国、新兴的民族独立国家共同打破欧洲垄断全球治理,进入到全人类参与全球治理的新时期。然而,美国一些人为了摆脱国内经济危机,公然公器私用,将经济全球化建立起来的经济、法律体系异化为对其他国家开展经济战和科技战、实现美国利益优先的工具,不断将国内法凌驾于国际法之上,赤裸裸地展现在全球的司法霸凌主义。

  《美国陷阱》一书不仅揭露了美国越来越严重的司法腐败,即美国的商业公司、律师、执法机关和司法机构形成了隐蔽的腐败团体,因为他们操纵着法律,从而变成了一股不受约束的力量;而且揭露了这种司法腐败的背后乃是美国单极霸权不受任何约束的腐败。正因为如此,皮耶鲁齐呼吁欧盟在政治、经济和法律上更加独立于美国,从而制约美国霸权带来的全球治理难题。事实上,美国的司法霸凌主义正在不断瓦解美国过去所树立的道德形象,让全世界人民日益看清楚美国抡着贸易战的大棒,试图将其霸权建立在恐惧之上的专制主义本质,看清楚美国在美国优先口号下以邻为壑、将全球秩序变成美国秩序的真面目。世界人民都有天下苦美久矣的感受。从这个意义上讲,《美国陷阱》的出版,让世人更加深切理解美国一些人在全球采取司法霸凌的专制主义实质。

作者:北京大学法治研究中心主任、法学院教授

__________

The jumping off point of the essay is a book published by Frederic Pierucci--The American Trap. Mr. Pierucci is perhaps most famous for his indictment by the U,S, federal government on bribery charges related to activities in Indonesia over a decade ago (see, e.g., here). That provides the doorway necessary to the analysis that follows. That analysis os grounded on the certainty that the United States operates principally to protect its private enterprises internally, and its national hegemony externally. Those objectives have been undertaken through the construction of the pre 2016 global order. 

The essay starts with a consideration of the dual meaning of the "American Trap" as the "judicial trap," and the "economic trap."  These were the traps into which Mr. Pierucci fell in his dealings with the Americans. The "judicial trap" is the trap of plea bargaining.  The economic trap referred to the way in which the United States used its laws and judicial process to hold Mr. Pierucci hostage during  the course of negotiations by a U.S. company for his own.   This, it is argued, evidences the way that the United States engages in economic warfare. 

The essay then considers the second meaning of the American trap--the legal architecture of global empire.  It suggests the way that U.S. law has become, like the U.S. Dollar, the "coin of the realm" for ordering economic arrangements in global production. U.S. legalization, it is argued, hides the reality that the United States is the largest system of state capitalism in the world. The essay suggests the connection between naval power and economic hegemony.  This is ten tied to European colonialism and imperialism. Reference is made, in line with certain elements of Western intellectual traditions, that conflate capitalism, colonialism, and state violence.  The essay then suggests the foundation of the American imperial project from out of this context. 

The essay then extends on its analysis of the mechanics through which the U.S. maintains and veils its empire.  The focus is on U.S. "long arm jurisdiction and the contradiction between what thje essay references as American judicial hegemonism and global governance. The essay suggests a connection between the judicial power to bring into its courts all parties with minimum contacts with the United States, and the projection of U.S. power extraterritoriality through the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. These serve as the fundamental mechanics of American imperial practice. That template was then followed by other statutes, again the use of American legalism to veil an imperial project in aid of American economic power. 

The essay than makes a plea for the preservation of what is described as a democratized globalization.  That objective is impossible in the face of a global system grounded in American legalism and its mechanics of hegemony. Here the essay makes discursive use of the meaning its implies from what for the essay is aptly names the American First Initiative.  Rather, the essay points to the long arc of (European) history, and the establishment of the post 1945 global trading order, one which is being broken my post 2016 American political initiatives.  The essay suggests that the free, open, and democratic post 1945 global order has been undermined by the United States after 2016 with its new America First Initiative.      

The essay ends where it began, with insights drawn from Mr. Pierucci's book.  It suggests that the corruption of the American system is inherent in the construction of its legal order, within which the lawyers, judges enforcement agencies and business leaders form the leading group.  That, the essay suggests, is the great value of Mr. Pierucci's book--its exposure of the America First Initiative for what it is.

No comments:

Post a Comment