小i导读
近日，美国、以色列对伊朗实施军事打击，引发地区紧张局势升级，破坏中东和平与稳定。北京大学国际关系学院教授、中外人文交流研究基地执行主任王栋接受国际知名媒体《印度教徒报》（The Hindu）专访，从中方视角评析此次伊朗危机。
王栋表示，中国立场一贯而坚定：反对并谴责对主权国家使用武力，始终主张尊重国家主权、独立与领土完整，呼吁立即停止军事行动。近期对委内瑞拉、伊朗的相关干预，体现出美国对军事优先主义的迷信，以及对国际法与主权平等原则的漠视。当前世界多极化深入发展，国际社会反对战争的呼声高涨，各国经济相互依存日益紧密。军事冒险无法带来胜利与稳定，只会引发动荡与长期衰退，这一教训必须引以为戒。
以下是采访英文全文，以及对照中文翻译。
In an interview with The Hindu, Wang Dong, professor at the School of International Studies at Peking University and executive director of the Institute for Global Cooperation and Understanding, who is a leading Chinese expert on global governance and China-U.S. relations, shares a perspective on how the attack on Iran by the U.S. and Israel, and the ongoing crisis engulfing West Asia, is being seen in Beijing.
作为全球治理及中美关系领域的资深学者，北京大学国际关系学院教授、中外人文交流研究基地执行主任王栋接受《印度教徒报》（Hindu）专访，就美国与以色列对伊朗的袭击，以及当前正席卷西亚地区的危机分享了中方立场的观点。
Interview edited for clarity：
以下采访内容经过编辑整理：
Q: How do you view the strikes by the U.S. and Israel and the latest developments in Iran? Are you surprised?
问：您如何看待美国和以色列的打击行动以及伊朗的最新局势发展？您对此是否感到惊讶？
A: The latest military strikes against Iran have triggered a dangerous escalation in the Middle East [West Asia], pushing the region to the brink of a full-scale conflict. As an observer, I am deeply alarmed, rather than surprised. For years, tensions have been building over regional security, nuclear non-proliferation, and external intervention. What has happened is a reckless breakdown of restraint, violating the sovereignty of a UN member state and disregarding basic norms of international relations. Such moves will not resolve disputes; they will only fuel cycles of retaliation, humanitarian suffering, and wider instability. The international community should recognise that military adventurism carries catastrophic, long-term costs for the entire region and global energy and security systems.
答：近期针对伊朗的军事打击在中东（西亚）地区引发了危险的局势升级，将该地区推向了全面冲突的边缘。作为一名观察者，我深感警惕，而非惊讶。多年来，围绕地区安全、核不扩散以及外部干预的紧张局势一直在不断蓄积。当前事态的发展，是对克制局面的鲁莽破坏，侵犯了联合国成员国的主权，也无视了国际关系的基本准则。此类行为不会解决争端，反而只会加剧报复的恶性循环、人道主义苦难以及更广泛的动荡。国际社会应当认识到，军事冒险主义将给整个地区以及全球能源与安全体系带来灾难性的长期代价。
Q: China’s initial official statement on February 28 said it was "highly concerned over the military strikes" and called "for an immediate stop ofthe military actions". But it did not condemn the strikes, which struck me as a rather measured response. How did you see China’s statement?
问：中国在2月28日的初步官方声明中表示“高度关切军事打击”，并呼吁“立即停止军事行动”。但声明并未对打击行动作出谴责，这在我看来是一种较为克制的回应。您如何看待中国的声明？
A: First, I need to correct this factual inaccuracy: China has explicitly and clearly condemned these military strikes. China’s position is consistent and firm. It opposes and condemns the use of force against sovereign states, stresses respect for sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity, and calls for an immediate end to military actions. This is not "measured restraint" but a principled stand anchored in the UN Charter and international law. China’s response is calm, responsible, and focused on deescalation, not inflammatory rhetoric. It rejects bloc confrontation and power politics, and advocates dialogue as the only viable path. This is what a responsible major power should do.
答：首先，我需要纠正这一事实性错误：中国已经明确且清晰地谴责了这些军事打击。中国的立场是一贯且坚定的：中方反对并谴责对主权国家使用武力，强调尊重主权、独立和领土完整，并呼吁立即停止军事行动。这并非所谓的“克制反应”，而是基于《联合国宪章》和国际法原则的原则性立场。中国的回应是冷静、负责任且以降级局势为导向的，而非煽动性言辞。中国反对集团对抗和强权政治，倡导对话是唯一可行的路径。这正是一个负责任大国应有的作为。
2月28日，在伊朗南部米纳卜市一所被袭击的小学，救援人员和当地居民试图从废墟里营救伤员。新华社/迈赫尔通讯社
Q:China is among the biggest importers of oil from Iran. Do you see any impact on China’s energy security? How in your view will Beijing deal with this new situation?
问：中国是伊朗最大的石油进口国之一。您认为这对中国的能源安全有何影响？在您看来，中国将如何应对这一新局面？
A: Escalating tensions in the Persian Gulf inevitably create uncertainties for global energy markets and importers like China. Disruptions to production and shipping could push up prices and increase supply volatility, which does not serve anyone’s interest. However, China’s energy security strategy is diversified: it relies on multiple sources, routes and types of energy, reducing over-dependence on any single region. Beijing will continue to pursue normal economic and energy cooperation with Iran on the basis of mutual respect and international law. At the same time, China will step up diplomacy to promote de-escalation, because stability in the Middle East [West Asia] is the fundamental guarantee of energy security. Short-term market fluctuations are manageable; long-term regional chaos is the real risk.
答：波斯湾不断升级的紧张局势不可避免地给全球能源市场和像中国这样的能源进口国带来了不确定性。对石油生产和运输的破坏可能会抬高价格并加大供应的波动性，而这不符合任何人的利益。然而，中国的能源安全战略是多元化的：它依赖于多种来源、路线和能源类型，从而减少了对任何单一地区的过度依赖。中国将继续在相互尊重和国际法的基础上，与伊朗开展正常的经济和能源合作。与此同时，中国将加强外交斡旋以促进局势降温，因为中东（西亚）的稳定是能源安全的根本保障。短期的市场波动是可控的，长期的地区动荡才是真正的风险。
Q: Iran is a member of both the BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation. How do you see this crisis as a challenge to the relevance of these groupings, and where do they go from here?
问：伊朗是金砖国家（BRICS）和上海合作组织（SCO）的成员国。您如何看待这场危机对这些机制相关性的挑战？它们未来将何去何从？
A: The crisis does pose a test for BRICS and the SCO, as both are platforms for multilateral cooperation that uphold sovereignty, dialogue and collective security. The challenge is whether these mechanisms can translate their principles into coordinated action to cool tensions. Rather than being weakened, these groupings can play a unique role: they are not military alliances, so they can act as honest brokers. They can urge respect for sovereignty, push for ceasefire and negotiation, and help insulate economic and development cooperation from geopolitical confrontation. This crisis actually underscores why such inclusive, rule-based multilateral frameworks are indispensable: they provide an alternative to bloc politics and unilateralism.
答：此次危机的确对金砖国家机制和上合组织构成了考验，因为二者都是倡导主权原则、对话机制与集体安全的多边合作平台。关键问题在于，这些机制能否将其原则转化为协调行动，从而为紧张局势降温。与其说它们因此被削弱，不如说这些机制能够发挥独特作用：它们并非军事同盟，因此可以充当公正的斡旋者。它们可以呼吁尊重主权、推动停火与谈判，并努力将经济和发展合作同地缘政治对抗相隔离。事实上，这场危机恰恰凸显了为什么这种包容性、基于规则的多边框架是不可或缺的：它们为集团政治和单边主义提供了一种替代方案。
Q: President Trump is expected in Beijing in a few weeks. Do you see any impact on the upcoming China-U.S. Summit?
问：特朗普总统预计将在数周后访问北京。您是否认为此次危机会对即将举行的中美峰会产生影响？
A: The recent U.S. military operations against Iran have added new uncertainties to regional and global security, and have inevitably affected the external environment for China-U.S. relations. As a scholar, I believe such escalating tensions in the Middle East [West Asia] are not conducive to building a stable and constructive atmosphere for high level exchanges between major countries.
On the prospect of a possible China-U.S. presidential summit, it should be emphasised that China has not confirmed any relevant arrangements. We have maintained that the two sides are in communication and coordination, and no final decision has been made. Major-country diplomacy requires careful preparation and a sound atmosphere. At a time of heightened regional tensions and complex global dynamics, it is even more necessary to conduct thorough communication and ensure that any high-level meeting will be constructive.
China always advocates resolving disputes through dialogue and diplomacy. We are committed to managing differences with the U.S. in a constructive manner and are open to high-level interactions on the basis of equality and mutual respect. The timing and agenda of any summit should serve the steady and sound development of China-U.S. relations, rather than being disrupted by unexpected regional conflicts.
答：美国近期针对伊朗的军事行动为地区和全球安全增添了新的不确定性，也不可避免地影响了中美关系的外部环境。作为学者，我认为，中东（西亚）局势升级不利于营造大国高层交往所需的稳定与建设性氛围。
关于可能举行的中美元首峰会，需要强调的是，中方尚未确认任何相关安排。双方保持沟通与协调，但尚未 作出最终决定。大国外交需要周密的准备和良好的氛围。在地区紧张加剧、全球局势错综复杂的背景下，更有必要进行充分沟通，以确保任何高层会晤都具有建设性意义。
中国始终倡导通过对话与外交方式解决争端。我们致力于以建设性方式管控与美国的分歧，并在平等和相互尊重的基础上对高层互动持开放态度。任何峰会的时间与议程安排，都应服务于中美关系的稳健、健康发展，而不应受到突发地区冲突的干扰。
Q: Have the developments in Venezuela and now Iran changed your view of, firstly, U.S. foreign policy under Trump, and secondly, how we mightlook at U.S.power in the world today?
问：近期委内瑞拉和伊朗的局势发展是否改变了您对特朗普执政下美国外交政策的看法？我们又应如何看待当今美国在世界中的权力地位？
A: Recent interventions in Venezuela and Iran reveal a consistent pattern: a reliance on unilateral coercion, regime-change attempts, and military means as tools of foreign policy. This approach reflects a belief in military primacy and a disregard for international law and sovereign equality. It is also important to note that a majority of the American public actually opposes these military actions.
As for U.S. power, these actions show that the U.S. still possesses strong military and coercive capabilities,but they also expose the limits of military supremacy.Unilateral moves generate strong resistance, damage U.S. credibility, and alienate partners. Hard power alone cannot sustain legitimate leadership; it breeds resentment and counterbalancing. U.S. influence is increasingly contested, and its ability to impose outcomesunilaterally is declining.
答：近期在委内瑞拉和伊朗的干预行为揭示了美国的一种连贯模式，即依赖单边胁迫、企图更迭政权，以及将军事手段作为外交政策的工具。这种做法反映了对军事优先主义的迷信，以及对国际法和主权平等原则的漠视。值得注意的是，大多数美国民众实际上反对此类军事行动。
至于美国的权力，这些行动表明美国仍然拥有强大的军事与胁迫能力，但也暴露了军事霸权的局限性。单边行动会引发强烈反弹、损害美国信誉并疏远合作伙伴。单靠硬实力无法维持合法的领导地位，相反它会滋生怨恨与制衡。美国的影响力正日益受到挑战，其单方面强加结果的能力正在衰退。
Q: Have the pastfew months changed your view ofthe world order as it stands today? Do these events speak to a world that’s still very much unipolar, or on the other hand, do these developments in some sense reflect a transition away from a unipolar, U.S.-led world?
问：过去几个月是否改变了您对当今世界秩序的看法？这些事件是否表明世界依然是单极结构，抑或某种程度上反映出从美国主导的单极世界向其他结构的转型趋势？
A: The past months have reinforced my judgment: we are in an era of transition from unipolarity to multipolarity, not a still unipolar world. The U.S. still tries to act unilaterally, but it faces stronger pushback from sovereign states, regional groups and global public opinion. More countries refuse to choose sides or accept hegemonic dictates. The very fact that many nations, including major powers, condemn or oppose military strikes shows that the old unipolar system no longer works. These crises are not proof of lasting unipolar dominance; they are the last spasms of a fading order. The trend toward greater pluralism, multipolarity and rule of law is irreversible.
答：过去几个月的事态进一步强化了我的判断：我们正处于一个从单极向多极过渡的时代，而非仍然处于单极世界。美国仍试图采取单边行动，但它面临着来自主权国家、地区组织及全球舆论更强烈的抵制。越来越多的国家拒绝选边站队，也不再接受霸权指令。包括主要大国在内的诸多国家对军事打击表示谴责或反对，这一事实本身就说明旧有单极体系已难以为继。这些危机并非单极主导持久存在的证明，而是一个衰落秩序的最后挣扎。迈向更大的多元化、多极化和法治化的趋势是不可逆转的。
Q: Going back to the U.S. war in Iraq, whatimpact do you think it had on both China-U.S. relations and China’s rise in the decades since? Do you see any parallels today?
问：回顾美国发动的伊拉克战争，您认为它对中美关系以及此后数十年中国的崛起产生了怎样的影响？您认为当今形势有任何相似之处吗？
A: The Iraq War was a turning point. It drained U.S. resources, eroded its moral authority, and diverted its strategic focus, creating a relatively permissive external environment for China’s development. It also deepened global scepticism about unilateral military intervention. For China-U.S. relations, it highlighted the costs of hegemonic overreach and gradually shaped a more competitive yet interdependent structure. There are surface parallels today: reliance on military force, disregard for international norms, and intervention in the Middle East [West Asia]. But the world is fundamentally different. Global multipolarity is deeper, public resistance to war is stronger, and economic interdependence is far more complex. The lesson from Iraq is clear. Military ventures do not bring victory or stability. They bring chaos and long-term decline. That lesson must not be ignored.
答：伊拉克战争是一个转折点。它消耗了美国的资源，侵蚀了其道义权威，并分散了其战略重心，从而为中国的发展创造了相对宽松的外部环境。它也加深了国际社会对单边军事干预的质疑。对于中美关系而言，这场战争凸显了霸权过度扩张的代价，并逐渐塑造出一种既相互竞争又相互依赖的结构。当今形势确实存在某些表面上的相似性：对军事力量的依赖、对国际规范的漠视，以及对中东（西亚）的干预。但世界已经发生根本性变化。全球多极化更加深入，公众对战争的抵制更加强烈，经济相互依赖也更加复杂。伊拉克战争的教训十分清晰：军事冒险不会带来胜利或稳定，而是带来混乱与长期衰退。这一教训绝不能被忽视。
《印度教徒报》（The Hindu）是印度历史最悠久、兼具公信力与权威性的英文日报之一，同时也是全球范围内具有高度知名度与权威性的主流媒体。该报1878年创刊，初期为周报，1889年转为日报，总部位于金奈（原马德拉斯）。《印度教徒报》以严谨、客观、专业的报道风格著称，不仅在印度政界、学界、精英群体中拥有广泛受众，同时也在国际舆论场中具有重要影响力。
本文中文版为iGCU首发，欢迎转载，转载时请标明文章来源：北京大学中外人文交流研究基地
原文：《印度教徒报》（The Hindu），原标题“‘Military ventures bring long-term decline’: How Beijing views the Iran crisis”
订阅