邱腾华：风暴中的灯塔：如何在困难时代护航APEC行稳致远

导语：11月，APEC领导人非正式会议将在深圳举行。会期渐近，亚太合作的议程渐次铺开：贸易投资、数字经济、绿色转型、供应链韧性……议题各有侧重，落点却殊途同归——如何让开放、包容与共享，继续成为亚太发展的底色。APEC的独特制度基因，在于以协商一致、自愿参与和开放区域主义，在差异之中维系合作，并由此不断拓展成......本文来自微信公众号： IPP评论 ，作者：邱腾华，原文标题：《重磅｜邱腾华：风暴中的灯塔——如何在困难时代护航APEC行稳致远》导语：11月，APEC领导人非正式会议将在深圳举行。会期渐近，亚太合作的议程渐次铺开：贸易投资、数字经济、绿色转型、供应链韧性……议题各有侧重，落点却殊途同归——如何让开放、包容与共享，继续成为亚太发展的底色。APEC的独特制度基因，在于以协商一致、自愿参与和开放区域主义，在差异之中维系合作，并由此不断拓展成员基础、深化区域联结。然而，它的长处，如今恰是最受考验之处：当地缘政治不断侵入经贸领域，保护主义与阵营化持续抬头，一个依靠共识而非强制、依靠开放而非排他的合作机制，还能否在分化加深的时代继续凝聚共同利益？在IPP第十三届国际会议上，香港特别行政区政府前商务及经济发展局局长邱腾华在主旨演讲中，围绕APEC的现实困境与未来出路，给出了他的“诊断”与“药方”。他指出，今天的APEC正面临多重危机，数十年来积累的贸易自由化成果，正被关税、出口管制和单边制裁侵蚀。但危机之下，APEC的体量、务实灵活的合作传统、抵御危机的韧性以及区域协同能力均未消失；遍布亚太的双边和诸边贸易协定，更构成了风暴中的制度“救生衣”。面对新的现实，他主张拒绝“封闭俱乐部式格局”，以RCEP、CPTPP等现有机制重新推动区域贸易自由化。“只要我们拥抱彼此深刻的结构性相互依存，坚持开放的区域主义，把务实合作置于意识形态分歧之上，APEC就依然能够成为它本该成为的样子：一座巍然屹立于亚太、照亮共同繁荣之路的坚定灯塔。”他如此殷切期望道。香港特别行政区政府前商务及经济发展局局长、香港大学当代中国与世界研究中心非常驻杰出研究员邱腾华以“⻛暴中的灯塔：如何在摩擦时代护航APEC”为题发表演讲。图源：IPP尊敬的各位嘉宾、女士们、先生们：大家早上好！能够出席本届IPP国际会议，与各位杰出的嘉宾共聚一堂，我深感荣幸。今年，APEC系列会议和活动在中国举办，领导人非正式会议也召开在即，各方寄予厚望。当前，国际地缘政治形势复杂动荡——此时此刻，我们为了APEC相聚于此，愈显这次交流弥足珍贵，更为亚太合作打开了一扇希望之窗。我相信，在座的绝大多数人——都对2026年APEC深圳峰会翘首以盼，希望会议顺利举行、取得丰硕成果。于我而言，十数年来，我一直以中国香港部长级代表的身份参与APEC事务。因此，对峰会顺利举行，我自然也由衷期盼。但作为APEC的老朋友，我无法回避内心的忧虑：在摩擦不断加剧的时代，我们究竟能否护航APEC行稳致远？APEC这座灯塔，能否在风浪之中屹立不倒，并在风浪过后依然照亮亚太合作的前路？我今天演讲的题目，正由此而来。2018年11月15日，时任香港特区政府商务及经济发展局局长邱腾华（左）在第30届亚太经合组织（APEC）部长级会议全体会议上发言。图源：香港特区政府新闻网首先，请允许我向各位提出一个问题——一个APEC各经济体领导人无法回避的问题：APEC是否仍然具有现实意义？APEC是否仍能继续为其长期倡导的开放区域主义引航？还是说，在贸易战与地缘政治冲突的风暴席卷之下，APEC的光芒已摇曳黯淡，甚至偏离自由开放贸易的方向？这些话听起来或许过于直接，甚至有些许尖锐。但今天，我不再以香港特区政府贸易官员的身份发言，而只是以一名长期关注国际关系的观察者身份与大家交流。在这样的时刻，我们需要的是坦诚，而非外交辞令。面对问题，我们不能视而不见，或埋首沙堆。我们需要直面这个棘手的问题，如今支撑区域合作的结构性基础，正在承受巨大的压力。从更直观的角度来看，当前形势下的APEC正处于一种脆弱状态——“APEC”这四个字母所代表的四重核心内涵，无一例外都在承受现实冲击：首先是字母“A”——“Asia-Pacific”（亚太）。亚太正面临一场深刻的身份认同危机。我们可以观察到，一些力量正试图以新的地缘政治概念——例如以“Indo-Pacific”（印太）来取代“Asia-Pacific”（亚太）。这种转变不仅模糊了APEC赖以建立的地理与经济区域边界，也动摇了这一地区概念的基础。与此同时，诸如“印太经济框架”（IPEF）以及“四方安全对话”（Quad）等具有竞争色彩、更侧重安全议题的伙伴关系安排，也可能在APEC经济体之间以及区域伙伴之间造成新的分化。对此，我们必须明确指出：一个缺失亚洲、或者亚洲地位被削弱的“亚太”，不仅在逻辑上难以成立，甚至可能带来危险与分裂。在传统亚太合作机制之外，以“印太”为名的小多边安排仍在扩展。2026年7月，美、日、印、澳四国外长再次举行Quad会议，将合作范围延伸至海上安全、经济安全和关键技术等领域。图源：路透社我们再来看看字母“P”，也就是“Pacific”（太平洋）。历史上，太平洋一直是一片相对和平的海域，贸易与商业也得以乘风而行、畅通往来。但如今，这片海洋再也无法保证一帆风顺。倘若我们放松警惕，周边冲突和战区掀起的风暴，随时可能外溢到本地区，拍击这片海域，力度更胜从前。随后是字母“E”，也就是“Economic”（经济）。我们的经济导向正面临被政治和安全议题取代的风险。借用美国政治中一句广为人知的口号并加以改写：“笨蛋！问题在于政治，而不是经济。”越来越多的时候，国家安全已经成为推动全球化逆转过程中最常被滥用的理由。贸易——这一曾经用来解决经济问题的主要工具——已被彻底武器化；一些国家或地区动辄挥舞关税和贸易制裁的大棒，已致他人累累伤痕，其中还不乏自伤。全球化则成了政治上的“替罪羊”：从收入差距、贸易逆差，到移民问题、发展赤字，越来越多的国家内部矛盾，都被算到了其头上。最后，我们来看字母“C”所代表的“Cooperation”（合作），正逐渐让位于“Confrontation”（对抗）。我们正在看到一个日益碎片化的经济格局：曾经关系密切、优势互补的伙伴，如今却在敌意与对立中渐行渐远。世界最大的几个经济体深陷旷日持久的贸易争端和人为炮制的政治紧张，而高度不稳定的中美关系，正是其中高度敏感的引爆点。更令人担忧的是，这种系统性紧张已越过太平洋两岸，往更大范围蔓延。这些现实说明，APEC如今已不像过去那样，能够顺利兑现其名称所承载的承诺——为本地区带来经济繁荣与发展。8月27日，2026年亚太经合组织（APEC）第三次高官会开幕式在辽宁大连举行。图：新华社今年早些时候，在深圳举行的“APEC中国年·大湾区学术圆桌会：引航亚太开放合作”活动上，我曾提出，APEC如今就像一名患病的人，我们可以借用了中国传统医学中的诊疗框架——“望、闻、问、切”——来为其诊断。然而，随着APEC领导人非正式会议临近，我们需集思广益，进一步开出对症的“药方”。我想，归根结底，我们需要回答两个问题：APEC是否值得继续维护？如果答案是肯定的，我们又该如何修复它？让我们从三个清晰的视角出发，来审视这一问题：（a）当初是什么造就了APEC的成功；（b）究竟发生了哪些根本性的变化；（c）为什么APEC对于我们共同的未来仍然至关重要。“APEC奇迹”的核心支柱要判断APEC面临的是不可逆转的挫折，还是仍有可能实现历史性转折，我们必须回到它的起点，重新思考APEC为何会应运而生。想必许多人还记得，1989年11月6日至7日，APEC首次部长级会议在澳大利亚堪培拉举行，APEC由此诞生。会议由澳大利亚总理鲍勃·霍克（Bob Hawke）推动促成，12个创始经济体的27位部长出席。1989年11月6日至7日，首届亚太经济合作部长级会议在澳大利亚堪培拉举行，来自12个经济体的部长代表齐聚一堂，开启了亚太经济合作进程。图源：APEC当时，APEC成立的主要驱动力非常明确：一方面，是为了应对优惠贸易集团不断兴起的趋势——尤其是欧洲经济共同体单一市场扩张，以及《美加自由贸易协定》的形成；另一方面，则是为了打破《关税与贸易总协定》（GATT）乌拉圭回合谈判长期陷入僵局的困境。更为关键的是，APEC自诞生之初就肩负着一重使命：作为一支平衡力量，为亚洲充满活力、出口导向的经济体护航；同时，它还承载着更高的全球愿景——向世界证明，超越排他性的区域壁垒的开放贸易依然行得通。这一理念在当时既充满前瞻性，也颇具远见。正是“开放区域主义”（open regionalism）这一理念，从根本上将APEC与传统贸易集团区别开来。其创立之初所坚持的核心原则是：区域内部作出的贸易让步，应当按照非歧视性的最惠国待遇（Most-Favored-Nation,MFN）原则，向全球开放。这种方式鼓励各经济体自愿、单方面削减关税，既催化了共同增长，又无需成员经济体退守保护主义壁垒之后。也正因如此，APEC从成立之初就确立了自身的战略定位——成为“GATT/WTO+”的孵化平台：既推动区域合作超越自身的地缘经济边界，迈向更宏大的愿景；也以远远领先于多边谈判的步伐，探索和推进贸易自由化。无论从理念还是实践来看，APEC都成功成为“边境后”（behind-the-border）结构性改革（一国或经济体内部影响贸易和投资的制度与监管改革，如市场准入、投资规则、技术标准和监管协调等，与关税、配额等“边境措施”相区别）的先行孵化平台，也是全球贸易体系建设的重要推动者。1994年，APEC确立“茂物目标”，推动亚太地区逐步实现自由开放的贸易与投资。此后，APEC经济体平均关税水平持续下降，贸易便利化和结构性改革议程则进一步向海关、监管、投资和服务贸易等“边境后”领域延伸。图源：APEC依托非约束性、协商一致的特质，APEC率先构建了跨境投资、海关现代化、电子商务、监管协调等领域的早期合作框架——在传统关税持续下降的同时，已着手破解更复杂的非关税壁垒。APEC的“开放区域主义”证明，区域合作机制可以成为推动自由贸易的垫脚石，而不是阻碍自由贸易的绊脚石。就我个人经历而言——我曾先后以香港特区政府环境、贸易两个政策范畴的部长级代表身份参与APEC事务，并曾是香港APEC经济体领导人的幕僚长——我深切体会到，直到风向转变前，APEC内部的讨论与谈判一直非常务实，注重解决实际问题。正因为APEC始终着眼于拆除壁垒，而不是筑起高墙，它才能推动经济增长，并促进共同繁荣。在我任职的大部分时期，尽管起草部长级声明和领导人声明始终是一项漫长且艰巨的工作，但这些声明几乎从未偏离APEC一贯坚定的承诺——成为多边贸易机制的基石，并坚定维护以世界贸易组织（WTO）为核心的多边贸易体系。然而，今天摆在我们面前的关键问题是：这种精神，以及APEC曾经充满自信的愿景，是否仍然能够经受住风暴的考验？除了其创立目标之外，APEC还拥有一些至关重要的核心特质。我将其概括为“五个S”。我认为，尽管当前逆风不断，但这些核心优势依然蕴藏着巨大的力量：1.“Size and Scale”——举足轻重的体量与规模APEC并非又一个普通的区域性对话平台；它代表着全球经济的重心。21个成员经济体合计约占全球人口的38%，贡献超过全球GDP的60%，推动近50%的全球贸易。如此规模的经济合作体，其重要性不可能被忽视。2.“Significance”——无可替代的重要性亚太地区仍然是无可争议的全球增长引擎。根据国际货币基金组织（IMF）的数据，亚太地区贡献了全球经济增长约60%。即使在全球普遍进行宏观经济调整的时期，APEC经济体的增长速度仍持续跑赢全球平均水平。数据显示，2025年APEC地区经济增长3.3%；2026年预计增长3.2%，高于全球3.0%的平均水平；2027年预计增长3.0%。尽管全球经济面临多重不确定性，亚太仍是世界经济增长的重要引擎。3.“Savviness”——务实灵活的智慧亚太地区拥有根深蒂固的经济务实精神和合作智慧。即使在贸易摩擦激烈的时期，APEC经济体仍完成并实施了《区域全面经济伙伴关系协定》（RCEP），持续按照世界贸易组织（WTO）原则推进经济融合，并始终优先保持外交沟通管道畅通。各国领导人依然高度重视APEC，将其视作开展经济外交的重要平台。4.“Sailing Rather Than Sinking”——逆水行舟的韧性APEC展现出了难得的逆风前行能力。历史经验表明，面对亚洲金融危机以及“9·11”事件后的安全冲击，APEC都依靠集体行动守住了区域经济，避免其一路下滑甚至走向分裂。当时，我们主要依靠的是一套务实的政策组合：推动贸易、便利营商、加强合作，同时辅以有针对性的能力建设。即使在当前贸易战时期，大多数APEC经济体仍通过调整供应链布局和强化区域内贸易网络继续向前发展，使企业能够在逆风之中保持航行。也正是这种韧性，使APEC整体在应对全球风暴时，比一些制度化程度更高的区域表现出更强的适应能力，例如欧盟，甚至《美墨加协定》（USMCA）框架下的北美地区，正如近期报导所见，这些地区已出现停滞与摩擦。5.Synergy——协同合作的力量APEC共同体内部，存在一种独特而有韧性的默契。这种默契很大程度上依托于处理冲突的“亚洲方式”：强调共识、自愿承诺，并保留灵活性。东盟就是一个很好的例子。尽管内部差异显著、经济发展水平不一，东盟仍然展现出很强的团结能力，并长期发挥着区域稳定器的作用。“东盟+1”等合作机制，以及东盟同区域伙伴之间持续开展的集体合作，也逐步形成了一套行之有效的协同方式。后来，这种做法进一步延伸到RCEP这样的具有约束力的区域贸易协定之中，也说明APEC自成立以来所倡导的开放区域主义，确实能够创造互利共赢的空间。这样的合作架构，为各方保留了足够的外交缓冲空间，让领导人即使存在分歧，也还能会面而不是断联；仍能选择对话，而不是走向对抗。此外，我们也不能忽视与这一合作机制并行发挥作用的重要协同力量——APEC工商咨询理事会（ABAC）。它确保现实层面的商业合作能够与政治对话并行推进、相互呼应。2026年亚太经合组织工商咨询理事会（ABAC）第三次全体会议官方合照。图源：APEC严峻现实与系统性损害然而，我们不能将“韧性”等同于“免疫力”。当前贸易体系所受到的冲击是真实的、系统性的，几乎没有哪个经济体能够置身事外。先来看关税削减进程正在发生的逆转。在APEC成立以来的数十年里，各方通过经济合作，将区域平均关税水平从17%降至约5%。这是来之不易的成果。然而，几乎就在一夜之间，形势发生了逆转。如今，这一历史性成果正面临严重倒退。惩罚性关税、大范围出口管制以及单边制裁，正在破坏曾经支撑贸易自由化进程的制度护栏。更令人担忧的是，要修复保护主义造成的这些损害可能需要付出沉重代价。这对APEC意味着什么？实际上，这一变化已经让建设全面亚太自由贸易区（FTAAP）的长期愿景被迫搁置。而它带来的损害主要体现在两个方面：第一，是显性成本（Nominal Costs）。它直接给企业带来沉重的经济负担，推高结构性通胀，扰乱区域供应链，并削弱整体消费需求。第二，是系统性侵蚀（Systemic Erosion），它正在瓦解制度信任。当多边争端解决机制被单边施压所取代时，经济关系就容易滑向零和博弈：一方的所得，被视为另一方的损失。这样的逻辑一旦形成，彼此之间就不再寻求协调和化解分歧，而是转向报复与反制，这最终只会让自身伤得更重。不过，这一趋势中也并非没有令人鼓舞的例外。香港就是一个值得关注的例子。香港同样受到贸易战的冲击，但面对外部带有敌意、缺乏正当依据的贸易限制，香港始终坚持自由开放市场的原则，并没有采取报复性关税措施。结果显示，香港的贸易份额并未下降。相反，去年香港在商品贸易方面升至全球第五大贸易实体，创下新的历史纪录。这充分证明，在实践中，自由市场和开放贸易最终能够取得胜利。世界贸易组织数据显示，2025年香港商品贸易总额同比增长17.5%至1.585万亿美元，升至全球第五大商品贸易实体，较2024年上升两位。图源：路透社然而，从整个亚太地区来看，冲击依然十分明显，贸易和经济数据已经清楚反映出这些摩擦带来的影响。在APEC区域内，经济增长动能正在明显减弱，今年区域GDP增速预计将放缓至2.9%。近期偶尔出现的贸易增长，也未必意味着经济回暖。很大程度上，这是企业为了赶在关税生效或贸易紧张进一步升级之前集中“抢出口”、提前发货所带来的短期现象。与此同时，年初作出的经济预测到了年中被下调，也越来越常见。新的冲突和不确定因素不断出现，进一步加剧了贸易政策的不确定性，导致投资趋于停滞，企业信心明显受挫。当然，APEC部分经济体仍然展现出较为亮眼的增长表现，包括中国、部分东盟成员以及香港。比如，中国在2025年录得接近1.2万亿美元的商品贸易顺差，创下历史新高。但这同样是一把双刃剑。一方面，它固然体现了中国突出的产业竞争力；但另一方面，如此巨大的“贸易失衡”也可能引发贸易伙伴的焦虑和政治压力。尤其当这种现象被置于零和博弈的框架下解读时，它可能为保护主义进一步推波助澜。因此，有清醒判断力的领导人和学者们最终都会得出同一个结论：贸易战没有赢家。风暴中的“救生衣”那么，APEC的存续已经丧失希望了吗？对此，我并不悲观。我仍然把希望寄托在APEC各成员过去几十年共同打下的坚实根基上。亚太经济一体化已经发展到相当深的程度，不可能仅凭政治言辞就轻易被拆散。如今，把这一地区维系在一起的，是一张由近200项双边和诸边贸易协定织成的密网——其数量接近全球贸易协定总数的一半。这其中不乏由坚定支持自由贸易的经济体签署的高标准协定。若单纯按照政治立场划线，其中一些经济体原本很难走到同一份贸易协定之下。也正因此，这些协定构成了我们抵御风暴的重要制度保障。这些协定正是我们制度层面的“救生衣”。除了近期见诸报端的极少数争端，APEC区域内绝大多数贸易协定运转良好，继续为缔约各方维护着一个可预期、以规则为基础的贸易环境。此外，我们还看到一个深刻变化：地缘经济正在悄然中和地缘政治的极端倾向。我们期待，局势的“钟摆”能够从极端逐渐摆回理性与平衡。因此，以下几项进展尤其值得视为希望所在。1.中国—东盟自贸区3.0升级中国—东盟自贸区3.0升级进一步强化了中国与东南亚之间强大的供应链协同效应，展现出现代贸易可以成为一种互利共赢的合作安排，而不必陷入零和博弈。2.RCEP扩容《区域全面经济伙伴关系协定》（RCEP）展现了务实主义超越政治立场的成功。它将高度多元、政治立场存在差异的国家和经济体纳入共同的、结构化的关税削减路线图之中。通过聚焦务实的区域一体化，并为未来进一步扩员留下空间，RCEP体现了一种很重要的理念：不要让“完美”成为“优秀”的敌人。更重要的是，RCEP的存在本身证明，在极端地缘政治分歧之外，经济理性正在重新发挥作用。此外，APEC已经证明，它是大国之间开展对话不可或缺的平台。认为APEC能够完全与地缘政治隔绝，或许并不现实。但APEC提供了一个独特而稳定的空间，使彼此存在分歧甚至对立的各方，仍然必须坐在同一张桌子前。正如我们所看到的，尽管由于俄乌冲突，俄罗斯面临来自部分西方国家的强烈反对，但俄罗斯仍持续参与APEC活动；与此同时，即使中美双方不断在贸易领域采取各种工具和措施，两国领导人仍持续利用这一年度平台，就贸易、关税以及高层政治议题开展重要对话。2023年11月，当贸易摩擦高度紧张之际，中国国家主席习近平赴美国旧金山出席APEC会议，这一场景正是最清晰的体现。展望即将于2026年11月在深圳举行的APEC领导人非正式会议，世界主要领导人持续参与这一高级别交流平台，再次彰显了APEC持久的外交吸引力。简单而言，当一份统一的联合声明难以达成时，一次面对面的会晤、一场会议场边的私下交流，甚至一张共同合影，有时都可能比文字发挥更大的作用。因为这些互动能够跨越深刻的政治分歧，搭建彼此之间的桥梁，而这正是阻止不信任螺旋上升、维系区域稳定所必不可少的力量。结语：以务实、包容的方式迈向未来如果我们希望APEC避免在风浪中逐渐失去活力，我坚信，未来的努力必须建立在五个务实支柱之上。1.拒绝“封闭俱乐部式格局”，坚守APEC的传统与价值理念APEC若要继续保持生命力，就绝不能沦为由少数强势力量攫取大部分利益的“封闭俱乐部”。我们不能屈服于经济胁迫；如果一个体系最终只让少数人成为赢家，也就谈不上真正的“共同繁荣”。真正的区域韧性，意味着既要抵御单边压力，同时也要确保经济发展的成果能够安全、广泛地惠及21个经济体。《2040年亚太经合组织布特拉加亚愿景》（The APEC Putrajaya Vision 2040）所确立的承诺——推动制定经济政策使所有人民都能够参与经济并从中受益，营造一个包容性的环境——以及《旧金山原则》（San Francisco Principles）中进一步强调的“为所有人民带来利益”，都必须得到坚定维护。2.履行东道主责任，践行包容性领导就此而言，今年中国肩负的责任尤为重大。作为本地区最大的贸易实体，也是在多重全球挑战叠加之际主办这场关键APEC峰会的东道主，中国必须切实确保APEC始终是面向所有成员的平台——任何经济体都不应被边缘化，任何伙伴都不应掉队。真正的领导力，在于充分发挥东道主作用，强化以规则为基础、开放包容的合作架构，让最小的发展中经济体与最大的超级大国，拥有同样的话语权，分享同样的利益。我相信中国必将不辱使命。3.促进共同繁荣中的共享价值我们需要在商品贸易和服务贸易中创造更广泛的共同利益。不可否认，中国在制造业能力方面拥有巨大的结构性优势；但做大区域经济的蛋糕，绝不只体现在工厂产出和出口数字之中。优化区域供应链、提升电子商务发展、简化海关便利化流程、持续推动市场开放，以及扩大本地消费、增加进口吸纳能力，都是充满增长潜力的重要方向。更重要的是，释放服务贸易的增长潜力，是所有成员经济体都可以共同参与的巨大机遇。清洁能源与可再生能源、数字技术、绿色环保服务等高增长领域，不仅蕴含巨大的市场潜力，也能够带来各方迫切需要的经济与社会改善。只要区域贸易流动不受到保护主义壁垒或政治阵营化因素的人为阻碍，这些潜力就能够得到充分释放。这正是东道主应当推动营造、集体领导必须共同巩固的开放环境。4.围绕多边和诸边合作基础重新布局亚太自由贸易区（FTAAP）这一覆盖整个区域的目标，如今或许比过去更加遥远，但我们不能因此放弃。相反，我们应进一步巩固RCEP、CPTPP等现有而灵活的合作机制，以此作为现实基础，从区域合作层面逐步重启贸易自由化进程，并证明即使世界日益碎片化，经济一体化依然具有生命力。5.深化第二轨工商界参与当官方外交管道陷入僵局，私营部门就应当挺身而出充当好“压舱石”。通过APEC工商咨询理事会（ABAC）保持扎实有效的对话，紧盯企业界的优先关切，我们就能确保商业现实、供应链的完整性和跨境伙伴关系，继续驱动区域议程向前推进。APEC不能像世界杯看台上的观众一样，旁观全球经济挑战的演变。我们不是看客，而是场上的球员；更重要的是，在APEC的旗帜下，我们都是队友。我多年亲身参与APEC部长级进程，深知这不是一场轻松的战斗。这或许是迄今我们遭遇过的最猛烈的一场风暴。能否取胜，我们难以预言；但我们都清楚：赢不了，就会出局——而到那时，我们所有人都将是输家。如果我刚才的话听起来过于直接，甚至不够“外交”，还请各位见谅。我要感谢主办方给予我这一难得机会，让我能够与如此杰出的演讲嘉宾一道，分享自己的思考。只要我们拥抱彼此深刻的结构性相互依存，坚持开放的区域主义，把务实合作置于意识形态分歧之上，APEC就依然能够成为它本该成为的样子：一座巍然屹立于亚太、照亮共同繁荣之路的坚定灯塔。让我们共同期待APEC走向更好的未来。谢谢大家。邱腾华先生在会议互动环节回应提问。图源：IPP邱腾华先生发表主旨演讲，现场座无虚席。图源：IPP*以下附邱腾华先生英文演讲原文，可上下滑动查看。Good morning,distinguished guests,ladies and gentlemen.It is indeed my honor and privilege to speak at this forum,organized at a critical juncture with such a distinguished group of participants—all eager to see the success of our country in hosting APEC 2026 conference especially its upcoming Leaders’Meeting.The fact that we gather during a troubled time in geopolitics underlines the significance of this opportunity as a genuine window of hope.I believe most,if not all,participants hold high hopes for the smooth conduct and fruitful outcomes of the Shenzhen APEC summit.I share this wish wholeheartedly especially with my decades long association with APEC as Hong Kong’s ministerial representative,but being a loyal friend of APEC,I cannot deny my concern if and how we can keep APEC afloat in an age of friction—and how this prominent organization can remain a beacon during and after the storm,as titled in my address today.Let me begin by putting before you a question that leaders of APEC economies can no longer avoid:Is APEC still relevant?Is it still functioning as a beacon of light for its long-advocated open regionalism,or is it slowly guttering toward exhaustion under the gathering storm of trade wars and geopolitical conflicts going against free and open trade?Forgive me if this sounds blunt and harsh.But as an interested observer of international relations—speaking to you today without my old hat as a minister of trade—candor is being called for than diplomatic platitudes.We simply cannot afford to bury our heads in the sand.There is every reason to ask this thorny,pointed question because the structural foundations of our regional cooperation are under immense stress.To put it plainly and graphically,APEC is vulnerable as all four letters in "APEC" appear to be under threat in the face of our current challenges:First,look at the letter“A.”The "Asia-Pacific" is facing a profound identity crisis.We have all witnessed deliberate attempts to substitute a new geopolitical nomenclature—for instance,the "Indo-Pacific"—in place of the Asia-Pacific.This shift serves only to blur the core boundaries of the geographic and economic region where APEC is firmly premised.Concurrently,the creation of competitive,security-oriented partnerships like the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework(IPEF)and the Quad risks driving a wedge within APEC economies and among its neighbors.Let us be clear:an Asia-Pacific region with "Asia" missing or undermined is not just nonsensical;it is dangerous and divisive.Secondly,look at the letter“P.”The Pacific,historically a peaceful ocean where trade and commerce surfed comfortably on the trade winds,no longer guarantees smooth sailing.If we fail to exercise vigilance,sweeping tornadoes from nearby conflicts and war zones risk spilling over into our region,hitting our waters even harder than before.Thirdly,look at the letter“C.”"Cooperation" is losing ground to confrontation.We are witnessing a fragmented economic landscape driven apart by hostility between players who were once close and complementary allies.The world's largest economies are locked in protracted trade disputes and politically manufactured tensions,driven by a highly volatile flashpoint in US-China dynamics.Worryingly,these systemic tensions are now spreading far beyond the two sides of the Pacific.Finally,look at the letter“E.”Our "Economic" focus risks being overridden by politics and security.To rephrase a famous political quote:“It’s politics,not the economy,stupid!”Increasingly,national security has become the most abused justification for throwing globalization into reverse gear.Trade—once our primary tool to fix economic problems—has been thoroughly weaponized,and toying with tariff and trade sanctions have caused wounds,multiple and self-inflicting included.Globalization is now treated as a political scapegoat for domestic issues ranging from income disparity and trade deficits to immigration and development deficits.These are the realities keeping leaders and ordinary citizens awake in the middle of the night.They signal that APEC is no longer as forthcoming in bringing the region economic prosperity and development as its name proudly proclaims.Earlier this year,at a separate forum held in Shenzhen,I suggested that APEC is a patient suffering from self-inflicted wounds,and I used a traditional Chinese medical framework—Wang,Wen,Wen,Qie(望聞問切)—to diagnose its ailments.But as APEC prepares for the upcoming leaders'gathering,it is high time to pull our heads together to find cure than mere diagnosis.In so doing,the ultimate question remains:Is APEC worth preserving,and if so,how do we fix it?Let us try to address this by looking at our situation through three clear lenses:(a)what made APEC successful in the first place,(b)what has fatally changed,and(c)why APEC remains vital to our collective survival.Part I:The Core Pillars of the APEC MiracleTo evaluate whether APEC faces a permanent setback or can achieve a historic turnaround,we must first return to its origin and recall why it was forged in the first place.As many of us remember,APEC was inaugurated at its first ministerial meeting in Canberra on November 6–7,1989,convened by Australian Prime Minister Bob Hawke and bringing together 27 ministers from 12 founding economies.The primary driving forces behind its creation were clear:to counter the emergence of preferential trading blocs—specifically the single market expansion of the European Economic Community and the US-Canada Free Trade Agreement—and to break the paralyzing stalemate of the GATT Uruguay Round.Crucially,APEC was conceived as a vital counterweight to shield Asia’s dynamic,export-oriented economies,while championing a far higher global ideal:proving to the world that open trade beyond discriminatory regional walls was still viable.This looked promising and visionary.It is this concept of "open regionalism" that fundamentally set APEC apart from traditional trade blocs.At the core of its founding philosophy was the noble conviction that regional trade concessions should be extended globally on a non-discriminatory,Most-Favored-Nation(MFN)basis.This approach encouraged voluntary,unilateral tariff reductions that catalyzed collective economic growth without forcing member economies to retreat behind protectionist barriers.From day one,this defined APEC’s strategic positioning as a "GATT/WTO-Plus" incubator—driving collective regional efforts toward a vision far bigger than its immediate geo-economic boundaries,and at a pace far ahead of slow-moving multilateral negotiations.In both principle and practice,APEC succeeded as a pioneering incubator for "behind-the-border" structural reforms and a builder of global trade architecture.Leveraging its non-binding,consensus-driven nature,APEC spearheaded early frameworks on cross-border investment,customs modernization,e-commerce,and regulatory coherence—tackling complex non-tariff barriers even as traditional tariffs continued to fall.APEC’s“open regionalism”proved that regional agreements could serve as stepping stones rather than stumbling blocks for free trade.[Consider APEC’s track record as a WTO-Plus incubator:in 1996,APEC leaders reached a landmark agreement in Manila to eliminate tariffs on information technology products.That regional consensus was taken directly to the WTO Ministerial Conference in Singapore just weeks later,giving birth to the global Information Technology Agreement(ITA).Time and again,APEC tested high-standard trade facilitation measures—such as the APEC Business Travel Card(ABTC)and early frameworks on environmental goods and services—and offered them to the world,pulling the multilateral WTO framework forward in the process.]Speaking from my own personal experience—having served as a participating minister in both the environment and trade portfolios,and as chief of staff to my APEC Economic Leader—I can attest that APEC discussions and negotiations were,until the current tide turned,remarkably pragmatic,problem-solving,and reassuring.Exactly because the focus was on tearing down walls rather than building them up,APEC was able to drive economic growth and foster shared prosperity.Throughout most of my tenure,while drafting ministerial and leaders'declarations was always an arduous and lengthy exercise,those statements almost never failed to reiterate APEC’s unwavering commitment to serve as a building block for the multilateral trading regime,nor did they waver in our categorical determination to uphold the multilateral trading system with the WTO at its core.The key question before us today is whether this very spirit,along with its self-assured vision,can still endure the storm.In addition to its founding goals,APEC possesses essential core attributes,which I summarize as the five“Ss.”I venture to say that despite prevailing headwinds,these elements still retain incredible underlying strength:1.Size and ScaleAPEC is not just another regional talking shop;it represents the heavy center of gravity for the global economy.Our 21 member economies together comprise approximately 38%of the world's population,generate over 60%of global GDP,and drive nearly 50%of global trade.You cannot bypass or ignore an economic bloc of this magnitude.2.SignificanceThe region remains the undisputed engine of global growth.According to the International Monetary Fund(IMF),the Asia-Pacific accounts for roughly 60%of all global economic growth.Even during periods of widespread macroeconomic consolidation,APEC’s expansion consistently outpaces the global average.3.Savviness(Business and Political)There is a deep-seated economic,pragmatic intelligence native to this region.Even at the height of bitter trade frictions,APEC economies successfully finalized and implemented the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership(RCEP),steadily integrated under World Trade Organization(WTO)principles,and consistently prioritized keeping diplomatic channels open.Leaders remain highly motivated to use APEC as a premium venue for economic diplomacy.4.Sailing Rather Than SinkingAPEC has demonstrated a unique capacity to sail against the tide.Experience tells us that APEC survived the Asian Financial Crisis and post-9/11 security shocks through collective efforts to prevent the regional economy from spiraling downward and breaking apart.Pro-trade,business-facilitating,collaborative policies coupled with targeted capacity-building efforts were the common tools we successfully deployed.Even in the current trade war era,the majority of APEC economies have pushed forward through adjusted supply chains and robust intra-regional trade networks,keeping businesses sailing ahead despite the headwinds.This resilience has allowed the bloc as a whole to navigate global storms far better than other highly institutionalized regions,such as the European Union,or even North America under the USMCA,where we have seen pauses and friction as recently reported.5.SynergyThere is an unusual,resilient chemistry within APEC's community.It relies on the "Asian way" of dealing with conflict—emphasizing consensus,voluntary commitments,and flexibility.ASEAN as a group has brilliantly demonstrated solidarity despite its internal diversity and economic disparity,serving as a vital stabilizing force.Its "ASEAN Plus One" frameworks and collective engagement with regional partners have provided a proven formula for synergy.The extension of this approach into a binding regional trade agreement like RCEP is a clear manifestation of the mutual gains possible under the open regionalism APEC has aspired to since its inception.This architecture provides enough diplomatic cushion for leaders to meet in maintaining instead of breaking ties,and to talk instead of attacking.Furthermore,let us not overlook the critical synergy operating in tandem with this through the APEC Business Advisory Council(ABAC),which ensures that real-world commercial cooperation runs parallel to political dialogue.Part II:The Hurting Realities and Systemic DamageWe cannot,however,mistake resilience for immunity.The damage being inflicted on our trading system is real,systemic,and deeply painful to all.Consider the reversal of our tariff progress.Over the lifetime of APEC—representing decades of collective effort—targeted economic cooperation managed to bring average regional tariffs down from 17%to roughly 5%.This was a remarkable success,until the tide reversed almost overnight.Today,that historic achievement faces severe rollbacks.Punitive tariffs,sweeping export controls,and unilateral sanctions have broken the very guardrails that once sustained trade liberalization.Worse still,reversing this protectionist damage will be incredibly difficult,if not impossible,without immense pain and suffering.What does this mean for APEC?This shift has effectively put the long-term vision of a comprehensive Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific(FTAAP)on ice.And the collateral damage is doubled:First,Nominal Costs:It imposes immediate,hard financial penalties on businesses,drives up structural inflation,disrupts regional supply chains,and dampens overall consumer demand.Secondly,Systemic Erosion:It dismantles institutional trust.When multilateral dispute settlements are replaced by unilateral coercion,economic relations degrade into a zero-sum game—a toxic dynamic where one partner's gain is inevitably viewed as another's loss.The common defense is no longer mediation,but retaliation,which unfortunately deepens the self-inflicted wound.Yet,there are inspiring exceptions to this trend.Look at Hong Kong’s unique experience:First and foremost,we are not spared from the trade war attack.But we steadfastly maintained our principled status as an open and free market,imposing zero tariffs in response to hostile and unjustified trade restrictions elsewhere.Remarkably,the result was not a decline in our trade share,but a rise to a record global ranking as the world's 5th largest trading entity in goods trade last year.This demonstrates the ultimate victory of free market and open trade in practice.Nevertheless,the region as a whole has been suffering.We see the damage of this friction clearly in the trade and economic statistics.Across APEC,the momentum of growth is visibly slowing,with regional GDP growth projected to moderate down to 2.9%this year.The sporadic trade growth observed recently is deceptively artificial—repeatedly driven by businesses desperately "frontloading" shipments to avoid impending tariff deadlines and threats of escalating trade tensions.It is also common to see earlier yearly projections adjusted downward midyear to reflect emerging conflicts,resulting in severe trade policy uncertainty,stalled investment,and a sharp erosion of business confidence.True,there are exceptional growth experiences among selected member economies in the APEC region,including China,several ASEAN members,and Hong Kong.For instance,China recorded a history-making merchandise trade surplus close to 1.2 trillion US dollars in 2025.This,however,is a double-edged sword.While it underscores China's exceptional industrial competitive edge,such an extreme trade imbalance is reactive and can inadvertently stoke anxiety and political discomfort among trading partners.It risks adding fuel to protectionist fires if interpreted through a zero-sum lens.That is why clear-minded leaders and academics always arrive at the same conclusion:there is no winner in a trade war.Part III:The Life Jackets in the StormSo,are we losing all hope that APEC can survive?I refuse to be overly pessimistic.I still pin my hope on the key fundamentals we in APEC built together over the past decades.Our economic integration runs too deep to be unraveled by political rhetoric alone.The region is held together by an intricate web of nearly 200 bilateral and plurilateral trade agreements—representing close to half of all trade pacts globally.This network includes extensive,high-standard agreements between steadfast advocates of free trade,bringing together economies that would never share a pact if aligned purely by political affiliation.These act as our institutional life jackets.Except for a very limited number of disputes recently in the news,most of these agreements in APEC are functioning well and maintaining a predictable,rules-based trading environment among contracting parties.In addition,we are seeing a profound shift where geo-economics is quietly neutralizing the extremes of geopolitics.We hope to see the pendulum to swing back from its extremes.It is therefore worth consider these critical developments as sign of hope:The China-ASEAN FTA 3.0:This timely upgrade reinforces the powerful supply chain synergies between China and Southeast Asia,demonstrating how modern trade can operate as a win-win arrangement rather than a zero-sum dispute.The Expansion of RCEP:RCEP stands out as a triumph of pragmatism over political alignment.It brings highly diverse,politically competing nations into a shared,structured tariff-reduction roadmap.By focusing on practical regional integration and preparing for future membership expansion,RCEP embodies the philosophy of not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good.More importantly,its existence demonstrates the return of economic rationality over extreme geopolitical divides.Furthermore,APEC has proven to be an indispensable venue for great-power dialogue.It is naive to think APEC can be entirely insulated from geopolitics,but it provides a uniquely stable arena where adversaries are obliged to sit at the same table.As we have witnessed,Russia continues to participate in APEC despite intense hostility from certain Western allies due to the war with Ukraine,and US and Chinese leaders have consistently utilized this annual forum for vital trade,tariff,and high-level political dialogue in spite of the exchanges of trade weapons.We saw this clearly in November 2023,when President Xi Jinping traveled to San Francisco at the height of intense trade frictions.Looking ahead to the upcoming Economic Leaders'Meeting this November 2026 in Shenzhen,the continued high-level engagement from major global leaders underscores APEC’s enduring diplomatic charm.Put simply,when a unified joint statement is difficult to negotiate,a face-to-face meeting,a quiet pull-aside conversation,or even a shared photograph sometimes speaks better than words—building bridges across deep political divides that are essential in holding the line against a further spiral of mistrust.Conclusion:A Pragmatic,Inclusive Way ForwardIf we want to keep APEC from fading into exhaustion,I firmly believe we must anchor our efforts around five pragmatic pillars:1.Rejecting the "Closed Shop" Dynamic,which goes against APEC tradition and values.First and foremost,for APEC to stay relevant,it must absolutely refuse to become a "closed shop" where one or two dominant parties take all the spoils.We cannot bow to the pressure of economic coercion,nor can we claim to achieve "mutual prosperity" if the system only produces a handful of winners.True regional resilience means resisting unilateral pressure while ensuring that economic benefits are safely and broadly shared across all 21 economies.The commitments to "drive economic policies that provide for all our people to participate in and benefit from the economy,fostering an environment that is inclusive," as stipulated in the Putrajaya Vision 2040,and the reinforcement of "delivering benefits for all our people" in the San Francisco Principles,must be fiercely upheld.2.Upholding Host Responsibility and Inclusive LeadershipIn this regard,a tremendous responsibility falls upon China this year.As the largest trading entity in the region and the host of this critical APEC summit during a time of compounding global challenges,China must actively ensure that APEC remains a forum for ALL its members.No economy should be sidelined;no partner should be left behind.True leadership means leveraging host status to reinforce a rules-based,open architecture where the smallest developing economy has the same voice and stake as the largest superpower.I have every confidence that China will rise to this occasion.3.Fostering Shared Value in Common ProsperityWe must foster shared value across the wider trade in both goods and services.While China undeniably enjoys a massive structural edge in manufacturing capability,the broader economic pie is far larger than factory output and export figures alone.The optimization of regional supply chains,e-commerce enhancement,streamlining of customs facilitation,a continued commitment to market opening,and the boosting of local consumption to embrace imports are all avenues ripe for growth.More importantly,unleashing the growth potential of trade in services is completely up for grabs by all member economies.High-growth sectors—such as clean and renewable energy,digital technology,and green environmental services—offer immense market potential alongside the economic and social improvements badly needed by everyone.This potential can be fully realized provided that regional trade flows are not artificially hindered by protectionist barriers or political alignment.This is precisely the open environment a good host can push for,and collective leadership must reinforce.4.Realigning Around Plurilateral Building BlocksWhile a total,region-wide FTAAP may be a more distant goal than before,we must not lose hope.Rather,we must reinforce flexible,existing arrangements like RCEP and the CPTPP as the practical foundations to slowly reignite trade liberalization from the ground up,proving that economic integration remains viable even in a fractured world.5.Deepening Track-Two Business InvolvementWhen official diplomatic channels lock up,the private sector must step in as a stabilizing anchor.By maintaining robust dialogue through ABAC and tracking private-sector priorities,we ensure that commercial realities,supply chain integrity,and cross-border partnerships continue to drive the regional agenda forward.APEC cannot afford to watch global economic challenges unfold like passive spectators at a World Cup match.We are players on the field,and more importantly,we are all on the same team under APEC’s flag.From the firsthand experience I have had in the APEC ministerial processes throughout my career,I know that this is not an easy battle.Perhaps this is by far the worst storm we have ever encountered.It is hard to say whether we will win,but we all know that if we cannot win,we will be out—and we all stand to lose.Forgive me if I have sounded too blunt or undiplomatic.I thank the organizers for giving me this exceptional opportunity to share my thoughts alongside such distinguished speakers.By embracing our structural interdependence,practicing open regionalism,and focusing on pragmatic cooperation over ideological division,we can ensure that APEC remains what it was always meant to be:a powerful,steady beacon of shared prosperity in the Asia-Pacific.Let us hope for APEC’s best.Thank you.