【世事關心】新型美-中-台關係 調整重心還是推倒重來

點擊下載觀看Embed 1:   Embed 2:
广告

【新唐人北京時間2018年11月27日訊】【世事關心】(485)新型美-中-台關係 調整重心還是是推倒重來:每屆新政府都會重新對外交關係有所調整,從尼克松時代到奧巴馬時代,美中關係在數十年間幾經調整,現在川普政府打破了微調,川普總統呼籲美國人民從幾十年來,對中共一廂情願的期待中覺醒。美中關係,這一世界上最重要的雙邊關係,川普政府會對其重新洗牌嗎?這將如何影響台灣呢?


麥克·彭斯(美國副總統):「中國本該在自由和開放的印-太地區成為一個令它國尊重的存在。中國應該尊重它國主權,認同自由、公平、和互惠的貿易原則,支持人權和自由。這就是美國人民的唯一要求,也是中國人民和整個印-太地區人民的期望。」
Mike Pence(Vice President): “China has an honored place in our vision of a free and open Indo-Pacific if it chooses to respect its neighbors’ sovereignty; embrace free, fair, and reciprocal trade; uphold human rights and freedom. The American people want nothing more; the Chinese people and the entire Indo-Pacific deserve nothing less.”

彭斯在亞太經合組織峰會再次猛烈抨擊中共。G-20峰會上,川習會將如何?
Pence lashed out on China again at APEC. What will the Trump-Xi meeting at the G20 summit look like?

葉望輝(華盛頓DC國際顧問公司總裁):「簡而言之就是峰會不會有什麼成果。」
Steven Yates: “the simplest prediction is that there will be very little outcome。”

四十六年前,美國為了與中共建交,與臺灣斷絕外交關係。事後看來,這是一個好的政策嗎?
46 years ago, the United States severed diplomatic ties with Taiwan for China. In hindsight, was that a good policy?

葉望輝(華盛頓DC國際顧問公司總裁):「我們在與中共改善關係的時候,確實忽視了臺灣人民的政治權利,低估了臺灣人民在政治上的進步。」
Steven Yates: “there’s no question that we ignored and devalued the political progress and political rights of the people of Taiwan in pursuit of a hopeful or optimistic approach towards dealing with China. ”

蕭茗(Host/Simone Gao):「那麼您認為在川普總統當政期間,美臺關係會發生根本變化嗎?」
Simone Gao:“ So do you think the U.S.-Taiwan relationship will undergo fundamental changes under President Trump?”

葉望輝(華盛頓DC國際顧問公司總裁):「是的,我認為會的。」
Steven Yates: “Yes, I do.”

蕭茗(Host/Simone Gao):歡迎來到《世事關心》,我是蕭茗。每屆新政府都會重新對外交關係有所調整。從尼克松時代到奧巴馬時代美中關係在數十年間幾經調整,現在川普政府打破了微調。川普總統呼籲美國人民從幾十年來對中共一廂情願的期待中覺醒。美中關係,這一世界上最重要的雙邊關係,川普政府會對其重新洗牌嗎?這將如何影響臺灣呢,這個共產中國的主要對手,同時也是美國極端重要的盟邦、朋友,一個儘管感到背叛但從未離開過的朋友?我和葉望輝先生討論了這些問題。葉望輝先生曾擔任前副總統切尼的副國家安全顧問和愛達荷州共和黨主席。現任華盛頓DC國際諮詢公司的首席執行官。他在臺灣生活過很多年。
Welcome to 《Zooming In》, this is Simone Gao. Every new administration does re-balancing of foreign relations of some sorts. The U.S.-China relations have been fine-tuned for decades from the Nixon era to the Obama era. Now that fine-tuning is disrupted by the Trump administration. President Trump calls for Americans to wake up from a decades-long wishful thinking about China. Will there be a reshuffle of the most important bilateral relationship in the world under Trump? How will that affect Taiwan, Communist China’s main rival, an extremely important ally of America and a friend, who felt betrayed but never left? I discussed these questions with Mr. Steven Yates who served as Deputy National Security Adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney and Idaho Republican Party Chair. Mr. Yates is the CEO of consulting firm DC International Advisory and he spent years of his life in Taiwan.

第一部分:不容樂觀的G20峰會
Part One: G20 Summit Not Promising

亞太經合組織APEC,週末於巴布亞新幾內亞舉行。今年的會議沒有達成協議,因為中共與美國互相不贊同對方。據說不經邀請闖入主辦國外長辦公室,要求更改官方公報,主辦方拒絕了中共官員的要求,在主辦國安全官員命令下,中共官員自行離開。中方斥此為「謠言」。
The Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation, or APEC, was held in Papua New Guinea over the weekend. This year, they didn’t reach an agreement because China and the U.S. disagreed with each other. This is highly unusual. 1989 was the last time APEC leaders did not work out a group statement. It is reported that four Chinese officials barged into the office of the host country’s foreign minister uninvited. They demanded changes in the official communiqué. The demand was rejected and Chinese officials left voluntarily after security officers were summoned. China dismissed the account as “rumors”.

在此被報導的衝突之前,副總統彭斯再次批評中國。一個月之前,副總統彭斯公開宣佈美國對華政策大翻轉。
Prior to the supposed conflict, Vice President Mike Pence openly criticized China once again. It comes after he declared an official China policy overhaul last month.

麥克·彭斯(美國副總統):「請讓我再次明確,中國如果選擇尊重鄰國主權,開展自由、公平、和對等的貿易,維護人權和自由, 中國就能佔有受尊敬的地位。美國人民並沒有更多的要求,中國人民和整個印度 - 太平洋地區應得的利益也不應該有任何折扣。」
“ And let me be clear again: China has an honored place in our vision of a free and open Indo-Pacific if it chooses to respect its neighbors’ sovereignty; embrace free, fair, and reciprocal trade; uphold human rights and freedom. The American people want nothing more; the Chinese people and the entire Indo-Pacific deserve nothing less.”

習近平批評彭斯的說法,指美國採用孤立主義和貿易保護主義的貿易政策。
Chinese President Xi Jinping rebutted Mr. Pence’s account by pointing at the U.S. as the one installing isolationist and protectionist trade policies.

習近平(中國國家主席):「走保護主義、單邊主義的老路,不僅解決不了問題,還會加劇世界經濟的不確定性。歷史已經證明,只有堅持開放合作才能獲得更多發展機遇和更大發展空間,自我封閉只會失去世界,最終也會失去自己。
Xi Jinping:“ Resorting to old practices such as protectionism and unilateralism will not resolve problems. On the contrary, they can only add uncertainties to the global economy. Only openness and cooperation can bring more opportunities and create more space for development. This is a well proven historical fact. One who chooses to close his door will only cut himself off from the rest of the world and lose his direction.”

中國是該地區第三大投資者,美國排名第四,但正迎頭趕上。彭斯宣佈美國承諾與澳大利亞、日本一起,到2030年,為巴布亞新幾內亞解決70%的電力供應。美國還將協同巴布亞新幾內亞與澳大利亞共同建設在馬努斯島的洛倫高海軍基地。據《紐約時報》報導,這一行動具有戰略重要性,因為該海軍基地能夠容納大型海軍艦艇和作戰群。
China is the third-largest donor to countries in this region. The U.S. comes fourth but is catching up. Mr. Pence announced the United States’ pledge to join Australia and Japan in helping to bring electricity to 70 percent of Papua New Guinea by 2030. The United States will also partner with Papua New Guinea and Australia on their joint initiative at Lombrum Naval Base on Manus Island. This move has strategic importance since the base is big enough to hold large naval vessels and task groups, according to the New York Times.

蕭茗(Host/Simone Gao):所以美國和中共在APEC會議上一直擰著勁兒。看起來好像是邁克·彭斯故意給習近平精心準備的一場好戲攪了局。為此峰會,北京出資修路並給主辦城市5,000萬美元用於會議中心翻新。這個APEC可能會更多地作為北京的公關工具而不是其它什麼東西。而真正的大戲是十二月的G-20,特朗普和習近平將會面。會議將會如何?這是我先前與葉望輝先生的討論。
So America and China were not on good terms at the APEC meeting. It almost seemed that Mike Pence went there and disrupted a good show Xi Jinping was trying to put on considering Beijing financed roads and a $50 million renovation of a convention center in the host city. This APEC summit probably would have served more as a PR instrument to Beijing than anything else. The real show is G-20 in December where Trump and Xi will meet. How will that meeting be like? Here is my earlier discussion with Mr. Steven Yates.

蕭茗(Host/Simone Gao):「美中關係。G-20峰會即將來臨。您覺得川習會成果會怎樣?」
“U.S.-China relations. The G-20 is coming up. What do you think will be the outcome of the Trump-Xi summit?”

葉望輝(華盛頓DC國際顧問公司總裁):「嗯,就我以前經驗看,不會有什麼成果。通常領導人會面,就是談各自觀點,瞭解對方想要的。簡而言之就是峰會不會有什麼成果。大部分領導人峰會都是這個結果。偶爾會有些不同,你能得到比如尼克松訪問中國大陸(那樣的結果),或是美國的根本政策發生大的變化。我不認為G20這樣的會議(美國)會有根本政策上大的變化。川普總統剛剛經歷中期選舉,就我們觀察,習主席在國內正在經受巨大經濟和政治壓力。我不認為川習任何一方在這次會議上會做出重大讓步。這是雙方領導人展開對話的重要時機。我覺得川普總統不覺得有必要或者有意願根本上改變他的對華貿易政策。我認為他會在經濟上對中國保持非常強大的壓力,至少一直到下一次他參加總統選舉,過了那時也許還會持續施壓。這些理念,幾十年來川普總統一直在強調,關乎美國經濟政策以及美國貿易政策對如何影響美國工人。這幾乎是他政治哲學的一部分。因此我不認為他會做出重大改變或者退讓。我從中共方面聽到的,他們派使節來美國,幾乎是自吹自擂他們佔據有利地位,那是從他們角度看。到現在為止,美國方面,就我理解,其實是我讚同,在對華經濟政策上川普政府的辦法。我看這政策不會變化。我看到中共方面,更多是重復同樣的陳詞濫調,比如『我們很強』、『美國正被我們趕下世界經濟龍頭地位』、『因為你們的貿易保護主義政策,你們正在變成孤立主義者』。川習二人是在各說各話,這次G-20峰會也會(和過去的會談)差不多。川普總統會重申他的優先事項,他會說,自己願意達成交易。但我估計習主席現在沒有準備好接受川普總統的條件。那麼這種反來復去的關注,時斷時續的談判,至少未來兩年可能一直持續。」
Stephen Yates:“Well, my experience tells me that expectations should be pretty low. Usually when leaders get together, they exchange talking points, they have some sense of what each is seeking, and the simplest prediction is that there will be very little outcome. And most of our leadership meetings are like that. Occasionally it’s different. You end up with something like Nixon going to China or having a big fundamental change in American policy. I don’t think this kind of meeting is a big fundamental change. President Trump has just gone through a midterm election; President Xi is under what we perceive to be strong economic and political pressure inside China. I don’t think either leader is looking to make big concessions in this meeting. That’s an important time to have a conversation between the two leaders. I don’t believe that President Trump feels the need or the desire to fundamentally change his trade policy. I think he intends to keep very strong pressure on China economically, at least through his reelection campaign, and maybe even beyond. These are beliefs about economic policy and the impact that U.S. trade policy has had on American workers that he has articulated for several decades. This is part of his political theology almost. And so I don’t expect him to make a significant change and concede. What I’m hearing from the Chinese side, they send envoys to the United States almost sounding boastful that they’re actually in a strong position, from their point of view. And so, so far, on the U.S. side, what I understand, and actually agree with, on the Trump administration approach on economic policy towards China, I don’t see that changing. And then what I see from China is more of the same theater of saying we’re strong, we are displacing the United States as the economic leader of the world, you are becoming isolationist because of your protectionist policies. And we have two leaders talking past each other. That’s what I think the G20 meeting is likely to be like. That President Trump will restate his priorities. He will speak in terms that say he’s open to a deal, but it’s a deal that President Xi is not prepared to accept in my estimation right now. And so the back-and-forth attentions, the on-again, off-again negotiations are likely to go on for at least the next two years.”

蕭茗(Host/Simone Gao):「那這次峰會目的到底是什麼呢?大家猜測可能是習近平提出要求開這次會的,是嗎?」
“ Then what’s the purpose of this meeting after all. I mean It is speculated that Xi Jinping initiated the request to meet, right?”

葉望輝(華盛頓DC國際顧問公司總裁):「是。嗯,事情一部分是這樣的,當世界主要領導人舉行多邊會談,我們知道川普總統不喜歡多邊會談,這些主要領導人會與關鍵對家舉行雙邊會談。即便對於美國的利益相關方而言,比如投資於華爾街的人還有美國週邊的製造廠商,他們也感到了貿易關係緊張的一些影響。僅僅看到我們的領導人與中共的領導人會談,就已經讓這些利益相關方感到放心了,儘管兩家沒有做出各自讓步、或是調整、或是達成新協議。如果美中雙方不再對話,那麽這些利益相關方就會感到一定的不確定性,而這種不確定,會是美國政治和政策的問題。所以儘管這次峰會有些逢場作戲,但是這齣戲對於一些關鍵的美國利益相關方,有著重要影響。我覺得習近平主席在中國國內也一樣,需要大家看到自己在和美國總統會談,儘管沒有清晰成果可以拿回國說:『看,這是我從會議上帶回來的。』這就是我對這個會議目的的看法,但我覺得,儘管宣佈了一些事情,這個會議產生重大政策進展的可能性極低,那些事情更多是象徵性宣言,而非經濟關係上的主要突破或是可度量的改變。」
Stephen Yates:“Yeah. Well, it is part of a pattern that, when major leaders go to these multilateral gatherings, and we know President Trump doesn’t like multilateral gatherings, that they’ll have bilateral meetings with key counterparts. Even to American stakeholders, say, like investors in Wall Street and farmers and manufacturers around the United States, they’re feeling some of the effects of the trade tension. And so it’s reassuring to them to see our leader engage the Chinese leader even if they’re not making concessions or accommodations or reaching a new deal. If there was no conversation going on, that could create a degree of uncertainty among some of these economic and political actors that would be a problem for U.S. politics and U.S. policy. And so even though this is somewhat theater, I think that that theater has an important impact on some key American stakeholders. I expect that President Xi Jinping has similar needs inside China to be seen engaging the U.S. president even if there isn’t a clear, definable outcome to come home and say this is what I got from the meeting. So that’s what I assume the purpose of this meeting is. But I would put it at extremely low chances of a significant policy development coming out of the meeting, even if something is announced, it’s probably a symbolic announcement more than a major breakthrough or change in the economic relationship.”


蕭茗(Host/Simone Gao):「但是美中之間的區別是,中共承受不了長期貿易戰,美國可以承受。」
“ But the difference between the U.S. and China is, China cannot afford a prolonged trade war, the U.S. can.”

葉望輝(華盛頓DC國際顧問公司總裁):「我相信是這樣的,儘管我微不足道,我覺得川普總統也是這麼想的。而且,儘管很多中國問題專家、經濟專家眾說紛紜,誰會贏、誰會輸、誰面臨何種風險、何種壓力,美國總統覺得有道理的,壓倒一切的分析是,對中共壓力越大,給中國大陸經濟造成的負面影響就越超過美國經濟受到的影響。大量美國選民、美國工人感到數十年來美國對華政策不公平地置他們於不利地位。因此短期內雖然他們付出一定代價,很多人說,如果結果是美中經濟關係恢復平衡,更正常、更公平、更為互惠,他們願意接受這個代價。川普政府在與中共對話中也提到了這些,這也是許多美國人贊同的。關鍵要看我們是否走過了這個有風險和緊張的階段,並得到了好的結果。現在說還太早。但是我支持當前政策的走向。我覺得總統不會改變這個走向。而且當總統考慮他2020年選舉,對勝選極為關鍵的那些州,正是對北美自由貿易協定以及美中貿易持強烈批評態度的那些勞工運動和其它維權組織所在的州。迄今為止川普總統的貿易談判正中他們下懷,我想川普總統必須保持他政策的一致性。」
Stephen Yates: “I believe that to be true. But as unimportant as I am, I believe that President Trump believes that to be true. And, while there are many analytical fights among China experts and economic experts about who’s winning, who’s losing, who’s facing what kinds of risks and pressures in this, the dominant analysis that the President of the United States accepts is that there’s more pressure on China, it’s having a more negative effect on China’s economy than on the American economy, and there are large numbers of American voters and workers who feel like decades of U.S. policy towards China has unfairly disadvantaged them. So even if they’re paying a price in the short term, a lot of them say that they’re willing to accept that price if it results in a rebalancing of the U.S.-China economic relationship towards something more normal, more fair, more reciprocal. And those are the words that the Trump administration has been using. And those are ideals that a large number of Americans would agree with. The key test is do we go through this period of risk and tension and get better results. And so far, it’s too soon to say. But I support the direction the policy is going. I don’t think the president is going to change it. And when the president looks at his 2020 reelection campaign, those states that are very key for him to keep in his coalition to get reelected are the states where labor movements and other activist groups were very critical of NAFTA and of U.S.-China trade. And so what he’s done on trade negotiations so far is very much aimed at those geographies, and I think he has to keep consistent with his policies.”

蕭茗(Host/Simone Gao):「這就更讓我想知道,習近平對此如何想了。如果川普總統不肯讓步,而中共又無法承受長期貿易戰,習近平會如何做?」
“So that makes me wonder what Xi Jinping’s thinking is even more. If President Trump won’t make concessions and China can’t afford a prolonged trade war. What is he going to do?”

葉望輝(華盛頓DC國際顧問公司總裁):「嗯,我想說,坦率講,我不關心他怎麼做,這是他的事。然而,美國對華政策的難點,就是如何才能有效地讓中國民眾,瞭解貿易戰對中國經濟的負面影響,這事關中國民眾的切身利益。中共可以造假經濟數據,他們可以造假領導聲明,他們可以把自己說成比實際要好。那麼會有很多中國民眾想,嗯,可能只有我一個人覺得糟糕,或是只有我們村情況不好,但是中國其它地方都不錯,而且出於愛國主義,他們願意犧牲小我,如果比自己大的中國會好的話。這種宣傳已經保護中共領導人很長時間了。 」
Stephen Yates:“Well, I would say, somewhat candidly, I don’t care what he does because it’s his job to figure that out. The biggest obstacle, though, for American policy, and I think for the benefit of the Chinese people, is how effective are we in helping the Chinese people know the truth about the economic impact this has? Because the Communist party still has near total control on information. They can make up their own statistics; they can make up their own leadership statements; and they can say that they are doing better off than they are. And there could be a large number of Chinese people that think, well, maybe I’m the only one feeling this pain. Or my village is the only one feeling this pain, but the rest of China is doing okay. And out of a sense of patriotism, they’re willing to sacrifice in their own small universe if bigger China is doing better. And that kind of propaganda has protected Communist Party leaders for a very, very long time.”

接下來請關注:美國是否已經對中共發起了一場新冷戰?
Coming up: Has the U.S. started a new cold war with China?

第二部分:一場新的冷戰?
Part Two: A New Cold War?

麥克·彭斯(美國副總統):「 因為美國人們應該知道,正如我們所說的,北京傾舉國之力,使用政治、經濟、軍事、以及宣傳手段,在美擴展其影響並牟取利益。中共較此前更為主動地運用力量,影響我國國內政策、幹涉我國國內政治。在川普總統領導下,美國採取堅決行動回應中國,在這間大廳(哈德遜研究所)中長久得到支持的原則與政策,得以實施。」
Mike Pence(Vice president of the United States): “But I come before you today because the American people deserve to know that, as we speak, Beijing is employing a whole-of-government approach, using political, economic, and military tools, as well as propaganda, to advance its influence and benefit its interests in the United States. China is also applying this power in more proactive ways than ever before, to exert influence and interfere in the domestic policy and politics of this country. Under President Trump’s leadership, the United States has taken decisive action to respond to China with American action, applying the principles and the policies long advocated in these halls.”

蕭茗(Host/Simone Gao):這是副總統彭斯大約一個月前發表的一篇針對中共的激烈演講。這是新冷戰的宣言嗎?下面請聽葉望輝先生的評論。
That was a scorching speech made by Vice president Pence on China about a month ago. Is it a declaration of a new cold war? This is what Steven Yates has to say.

蕭茗(Host/Simone Gao):「一提到彭斯副總統的講話,人們就說這意味著與中共的新冷戰。請問您怎麼看呢?」
“Talking about Vice President Pence’s speech, people say that seems like a declaration of a new cold war with China. What’s your opinion?”

葉望輝(華盛頓DC國際顧問公司總裁):「9·11事件發生時,我在白宮任職,當時開展了所謂的『反恐戰爭』。那時有個說法讓我久久縈懷,那就是,我們沒有向恐怖分子宣戰,是恐怖分子向我們宣戰,直到9·11事件之後我們才決定做出系統性的反擊。我對中共的挑戰也持同樣看法。我們沒有向中共宣戰,長期以來,中共一直同美國冷戰。」
Stephen Yates:“Well, I served in the White House when 9/11 happened and the so-called “war on terror” began. And one way that was talked about that resonated with me was that we didn’t declare war on the terrorists, the terrorists had declared war on us. And it took until 9/11 for us to decide that we were going to systematically respond. And that’s how I think about the China challenge. We are not declaring a cold war on China; China has engaged in a cold war against us for a very long time.”

蕭茗(Host/Simone Gao):「從何時開始的呢?」
“since when?”

葉望輝(華盛頓DC國際顧問公司總裁):「也許始自中共建立。也許(中共對美國的冷戰)從未停止過。至少,也是從鄧小平改革開放時期以來,用川普總統的說法,中國的民族主義者積極實施『中國優先』的政策以謀求優勢。他們這麼做本來沒錯,錯在我們沒有認識到這一點,錯在我們沒能面對這個挑戰。當你看1990年代,尤其是那時以來,我們有了有關中共商人介入美國選舉的財務醜聞,以及他們試圖花錢影響我們政治體系的醜聞。一直到最近幾十年,中共商人進入我們的公司,大搖大擺地帶走金融或智慧財產,(情況嚴重)到了那些公司或是面臨競爭 。與此前比,我們處境真的徹底不同了。我估計,這是中共全盤謀劃、處心積慮的政策的一部分,以此方式與美國作戰,實際上是從我們的強項獲益,把這些強項帶給中共。看上去公平,但他們試圖從內部癱瘓我們。我覺得大家剛剛開始談論這些,意識到這些。我的經驗,很多民主黨人有這方面擔心。我記得在1990年代的眾議院議員和眾議院委員會的中共政策辯論中,民主黨人大聲表達了有關上面問題的擔心。 所以我們大家剛剛談了個開頭,不僅僅是美國川普政府、新的國會如何應對中共挑戰,而且是歐洲以及亞洲更廣泛地區,我們如何組織和加強相對自由的社會對抗這種侵略。這不是一個容易回答的問題。我認為是中共在這些政策上發起冷戰,我們剛開始談論如何應對,還談不上真正的應對。」
Stephen Yates:“Well, maybe since the founding of the Communist Party. And maybe that never stopped. And at the very least, going through even the reform and opening period of Deng Xiaoping, there were many things that are, to put it in President Trump parlance, China-first policies that were nationalist, aggressively seeking advantage, and there isn’t necessarily something inherently wrong with that. There’s something inherently wrong with failing to recognize that that’s what they’re doing and meeting the challenge. And so when you look from the 1990s, especially forward, when we started to have campaign finance scandals of Chinese business people and others trying to buy influence in our political system, all the way through recent decades, where you have Chinese business people going into companies and conspicuously being able to walk away with financial or technological intellectual property to the point where there’s competition or crippling of those companies, we’re just at a fundamentally different place now than we were. And it’s my estimation that it’s been a part of a very systematic and cognizant policy of the Communist Party to engage America in this way and basically benefit from our strengths with the hope of bringing some of those strengths to China, which seems fair enough, but at the same time to find ways to cripple us from within.
And that’s the part which I think people are just beginning to talk about and have more of an awareness of. In my experience, there have been many Democrats who have had these kind of concerns. I remember in the 1990s engaging in China policy debates with committees in Congress and members of Congress, and there were Democrats that were very vocal about their concerns on these ideas. And so we’re at the beginning of a conversation of -- not just what an American response would be – in the Trump administration, in the new Congress, but also in Europe and in broader parts of Asia about how do we organize and strengthen relatively free societies against this kind of aggression. And it’s not an easy question to answer. So I think that cold war was declared by China in engaging in these policies, and we’re just now beginning to talk about how to respond, which is not the same thing as actually responding.”

蕭茗(Host/Simone Gao):「所以你是說美國並沒有與中共展開新的冷戰,而是中共政權自掌權以來一直與美國打冷戰,美國現在才意識到這一點並做出回應。」
“So you are essentially saying the United States did not start a new cold war with China. The Chinese Communist Regime has been in a cold war with the U.S. ever since they took power. And only now the United States starts to realize it and respond to it.”

葉望輝(華盛頓DC國際顧問公司總裁):「對。尼克松、基辛格與中華人民共和國妥協的基本假設是,美國可以對無產階級文化大革命的絕對殘暴,大躍進以及其它可怕的共產黨強加給中國人民的政策所導致的貧困視而不見。我們可以忽略這些弱點和缺陷,我們把在冷戰時期推動中共與蘇聯抗衡,看的重於揭露中共的邪惡本質。因此,我們允許自己暫停對中共體制的性質和健康的質疑,以爭取對抗蘇聯的地緣政治優勢。當與蘇聯的競爭發生根本性變化時,我們已經習慣了這種對質疑的擱置,我們只是繼續這些假設。然後,我們一廂情願的設想如果讓中國大陸變得更加富裕並與融入世界,那麼隨之而來的生活水平提高以及被納入國際體系,將改變共產黨的政策。中國共產黨將只會是徒有其名,政府和黨的質變將使我們的分歧變得更少,合作領域將擴大。那時,美中關係將得以正常化。這就是我們一直所秉持的理論。它一直是我們的大學,共和黨和民主黨政府的主導理論。我們是第一次有人在領導層面上願意說我不再相信這些,並開始採取不同的方法與一個被接受了很長時間的形像並不相符的國家談判,所以我認為這對我們來說實際上是一個非常具有歷史意義的重要時刻。目前還不清楚我們是否會堅持這種不同的應對方法,或者我們是否在國會和總統競選連任中遭遇壓力。如果其他人當選,他們是否會繼續採取川普對待中共的一些方式?或者他們會回到主流,重拾對中共更加縱容的觀點。這是在兩三個選舉週期後才能回答的問題。」
Stephen Yates:“Right. The fundamental assumption of the Nixon-Kissinger compromise with the People’s Republic of China was that the United States could look past the absolute brutality of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution and look past the very obvious self-inflicted poverty that the Great Leap Forward and other terrible policies of the Communist Party had imposed upon China. We could ignore these weaknesses and flaws because the value of having China balance against the Soviet Union in some fashion in the Cold War competition exceeded what benefit we thought we could get by confronting these truths about where China was. So we allowed ourselves to suspend disbelief about the nature and health of the Chinese system in order to have geopolitical advantage in the world against the Soviet Union. By the time the competition with the Soviet Union fundamentally changed, we were so accustomed to this suspension of disbelief that we just continue with these assumptions. And then the assumption becomes, well, if we just allow China to become more well off and more integrated with the world, that that improvement in standards of living, in integration into the international system, will change the nature of the policy of the Communist Party of China. And it will be communist only in name only, and the nature of the government and the party will be one where our differences will become fewer, and areas of cooperation will expand. And we can normalize what China is like and what the relationship between the U.S. and China is. That’s been the theory. And it’s been the dominant theory in our universities and in our government and in Republican and Democrat administrations. We’re just at the first time that someone’s been willing, in a leadership level, to say I don’t believe that anymore and to start taking a different approach to how to negotiate with a country that doesn’t resemble this image that has been accepted for far too long. So I think it’s actually a very historic and important moment for us. It’s unclear whether we will stick to this different approach or whether we have pressures in Congress and in the reelection campaign and, if some other leader is elected, will they continue some elements of the Trump approach towards China? Or will they go back to the mainstream, more accommodating view. And that is something that only two or three more election cycles can answer.”

(待續)

「新型美-中-臺關係」 ——專訪第二部分下週播出,敬請收看

===================================
Producer:Simone Gao
Writer:Simone Gao
Editors:Julian Kuo Bonnie Yu Frank Lin Melodie Von York Du
Narrator: Kacey Cox
Translation:Greg Yang Chu Yue Juan Li Guiru Zhang Bin Tang
Transcription: Jess Beatty
Cameraman:York Du
Special Effects:Harrison Sun
Assistant producer: Bin Tang Merry Jiang
Feedback:ssgx@ntdtv.com
Host accessories are sponsored by Yun Boutique

New Tang Dynasty Television
《Zooming In》
November, 2018
=============================================















回頂部

Copyright © 2002-2018 NTDTV CANADA. All Rights Reserved.
NTDTV 新唐人電視台 420 Consumers Rd, North York, ON M2J 1P8 電話 1-877-666-8388

fresh-things-article
熱門話題