Home Blog Page 788

当白宫新闻发布会变成特朗普的独角戏

0

作者:PETER BAKER  来源:纽约时报中文网

  华盛顿——特朗普总统在周二傍晚将电视摄像机召集到热浪翻涌的玫瑰园,本是要宣布针对中国的新措施,以惩罚其对香港的压制。但这并没有持续多久。

  实际上在那之后是一小时的总统意识流,特朗普似乎是随机地从一个话题转移到另一个话题,常常用同样的连缀句。即使对于一个思绪天马行空、不按剧本来的总统来说,这也是他总统任期间最糟糕的表现之一。

  他讲了中国、新冠病毒和巴黎气候变化协定以及年久失修的公路。然后又是中国及军费开支,然后还是中国,再是新冠病毒。然后是经济和能源税以及与欧洲的贸易、非法移民以及他与墨西哥总统的交情。然后,又是新冠病毒,然后移民再次被提到,以及芝加哥的犯罪率,然后是死刑,又回到气候变化、教育和伟人雕像。这还没完。

  “我们可以说上几天,”他在某一时刻说道,听上去不是难事。

  有时,他的话很难理解。他似乎在暗示,他的推定民主党竞选挑战者、前副总统小约瑟夫·拜登(Joseph R. Biden Jr.)如果当选,房屋将会没有窗户,后来又说拜登将“消灭郊区”。他抱怨拜登“已经偏得太右了”。(他的意思是偏左。)

  跟上特朗普的思路变得充满挑战,即使对于那些经常跟进特朗普并了解他的简略措辞的人。

  例如,在讨论与中美洲国家制止非法移民的合作协议时,他是这样说的:“我们有很棒的协议,当初拜登和奥巴马要把杀人犯弄出去,那边会说别把他们带回我们的国家,我们不想要。好吧,可是我们不得不这样做,我们不想要他们。他们不肯收。现在到我们了,他们就收了。总有一天我会告诉你们为什么的。总有一天我会告诉你们为什么。但他们收了,他们高高兴兴收了。过去他们把他们弄出去,如果是用飞机运,他们都不允许飞机降落。他们不允许巴士开进他们的国家。他们说,我们不想要他们。说不要,但是他们非法进入我们的国家而且他们是杀人犯,有些案子是杀了人的。”

  在另一个时刻,他攻击了拜登的心智敏捷度。特朗普说:“问他怎么定义碳这个词,他是做不到的。”这成了他最近的主题,明显地暗示拜登已经老朽。就在上周,74岁的特朗普吹嘘说他最近参加了一次认知测试并“以高分搞定”,同时坚称77岁的拜登“无法通过”这样的测试。

  然而,这种不连贯的独白可能不是最有说服力的证据。在Twitter上,他的批评者迅速将他比作一头栽进雪利酒柜的老爷爷。贝拉克·奥巴马(Barack Obama)总统的首席演讲撰稿人乔恩·法夫罗(Jon Favreau)写道:“特朗普是一个真正的病人。”反特朗普共和党组织林肯计划(Lincoln Project)创始人里克·威尔逊(Rick Wilson)称其为“胡言乱语如腹泻一般”。

  在这次公开露面同一天,总统已疏远的侄女、临床心理学家玛丽·L·特朗普(Mary L. Trump)出版了一本痛斥他的新书,质疑了他的心理健康,并断言源于其童年时期的病症正在世界舞台上发作。特朗普还没有对此书发表评论,但在过去,他通过将自己描述为“一个非常稳定的天才”来反驳此类争论。

  一位不愿透露姓名的高级官员说,拜登当天早些时候因其2万亿美元的气候计划而获得了广泛的电视报道,此后,特朗普晚上与记者见面的焦点发生了转向。表面上,香港人权法案是其公开露面的原因,但最后被当作可有可无。

  新闻发布会最终变成了竞选演讲,以此取代特朗普原定于上周末在新罕布什尔州发表的演讲,由于据说集会地点可能会有暴雨,担心参会人数减少,该演讲已经取消。虽然按说总统不应该在白宫之中公开进行竞选活动,但特朗普却毫不掩饰自己的意图——他在玫瑰园讲话时提到拜登的名字已经超过20次。

  多数时候,总统并不在意他携带的文字稿,但他最终读出了一段他宣称是拜登的竞选议程,但实际上是他自己的政治顾问拼凑的一个误导性的汇总。

  特朗普宣称:“乔·拜登的整个职业生涯都是给中共的献礼。”

  读着别人给他的文字稿,他引用了拜登的话说:“他说,中国是我们的竞争对手,这种想法真的很奇怪。”总统说。“他真的很奇怪。”

  在公开露面的那天,特朗普似乎渴望挑战惯例,有时甚至挑战基本事实。早些时候,在接受CBS新闻的采访时,他否认非裔美国人遭受的警察暴行比美国白人要多。

  当被问及为什么非裔美国人“仍然在被这个国家的执法部队杀死”,特朗普说:“白人也是如此。白人也是如此。你问的真是个糟糕的问题。白人也是如此。白人更多,顺便说一下,白人更多。”

  统计数据显示,虽然总体上有更多的美国白人被警察杀死,但将人口差异纳入考量后,有色人种被杀的比率更高。一项联邦研究调查了2009年至2012年警察使用的致命武力,发现大多数受害者是白人,但黑人被杀的可能性是白人的2.8倍。

  在同一采访中,特朗普驳斥了人们对联盟国战旗的担忧。“在我看来,这就是言论自由,”他说。“很简单。喜欢它,不喜欢它,都是言论自由。”

  当被问及那些将其视为奴隶制的痛苦象征的人时,他说:“我认识喜欢联盟旗的人,他们并没有在想奴隶制。”

  在保守派网站Townhall.com周二发布的另一次采访中,特朗普谎称圣路易斯的一对在自家门外持枪与和平游行人士对峙的白人夫妇即将遭到袭击。“他们会被狠揍一顿,房子会被洗劫一空,可能还会被烧毁,”他说。

  该事件的视频在全国范围内成为关于种族不平等争论的热点话题。视频显示,抗议者没有对这对夫妇进行人身威胁。

  特朗普在玫瑰园亮相时也有不实或误导性言论。他再次抱怨美国新冠病毒病例的上升其实是由于检测的增加。“如果我们做一半的测试,就会得到一半的病例,”他说。他还就13.6万人的死亡人数辩解,说他采取的行动救了多达300万人。

  但在民调结果落后于拜登两位数的数周之后,他急于对拜登发起挑战。从破败的公路到工厂关闭,他把各种问题都归咎于这位前副总统。“乔·拜登正在推动一个将摧毁美国经济的竞选纲领,彻底摧毁,”特朗普说。

  他还说,拜登的左倾已经到了“美国历史上任何主要政党提名人中最极端的程度”。他引用拜登的气候计划,即到2030年减少新建住宅和办公室的碳排放。“这基本上意味着没有窗子,”总统说。

  虽然被宣传为新闻发布会,特朗普实际上只回答了几个问题,在63分钟的活动中只用了六分钟的时间回答问题,然后突然中断了活动。但他承诺这一切还没有结束:“我们会再次举行这样的大会。”

  Peter Baker是《纽约时报》首席白宫记者。他为时报和《华盛顿邮报》报道了最近四任总统的新闻。他著有五本著作,最近的一本是《弹劾:一段美国历史》(Impeachment: An American History)。欢迎在Twitter和Facebook上关注他。

  翻译:晋其角、邓妍

来源时间:2020/7/15   发布时间:2020/7/15

旧文章ID:22331

韦宗友:中美将滑入两极对抗的“新冷战”吗?

作者:韦宗友  来源:澎湃新闻

  【编者按】

  2020年,俄罗斯“瓦尔代”国际辩论俱乐部发布题为《不要在“摇摇欲坠世界”中丧失理智》(《Не одичать в “осыпающемся мире”》)的报告。“摇摇欲坠世界”出自“瓦尔代”两年前发布的题为《摇摇欲坠世界中的生活》的报告。在今年的报告中,作者指出,两年前报告中提出的“国际制度危机导致无政府状态加剧——每个国家都将依靠自己去解决生存问题”的判断,正被今年发生的一系列事件所印证。

  突如其来的新冠疫情成为世界已积累的大量问题的催化剂,但世界果真“摇摇欲坠”了吗?人类将退回到不是由理性而是由本能所主导的激烈斗争?

  澎湃新闻(www.thepaper.cn)“外交学人”与华东师范大学俄罗斯研究中心合作推出“瓦尔代之辩”系列,刊出报告全文及系列专家深度评论。

  2020年的俄罗斯瓦尔代国际年度报告,提出了一个极其大胆的国际秩序命题:基于二战后的自由世界的旧秩序,已经坍塌,以中美对抗为基础的加速两极化趋势将是最有可能出现的替代性场景。而且,与20世纪属于“道德伦理范畴”的美苏冷战的“稳定模式”不同,正在加剧的中美对抗,是文化迥异的两个玩家在完全不同国际条件下的博弈,是不可调和的冲突。

  无独有偶,最近一段时间以来,无论国内还是国外,都出现了关于中美即将或已经进入新冷战的声音。

  尽管如此,断言中美将进入两极对抗的新冷战,甚或文化或文明对抗式的新冷战,如果不是危言耸听,至少言过其实。因为冷战说到底,是一种以零和博弈的方式,压倒对手或取代对方的敌对和准战争状态,双方在政治、经济、军事、文化等领域全面对峙和尖锐对抗。反观中美之间,尽管出现了美国对华贸易战和科技限制,以及在安全上的某种竞争,但远没有达到冷战的程度,而中国也完全没有推翻既有秩序或取代美国的战略意图。

  第一,当前中美之间出现的竞争乃至摩擦,不具有系统对抗性。

  冷战,说到底,是一方要取代、“埋葬”另一方的你死我活的斗争,是两种不同制度、意识形态乃至文明之间的全面对抗和对峙。之所以没有爆发大规模的正面武装冲突,不是敌对双方主观上不想,而是因为核武的出现,迫使他们采取除了热战外的对抗方式。双方的矛盾不可调和。

  反观中美之间,尽管出现了贸易战、科技脱钩乃至军事上的某种竞争,但是双方的矛盾并非不可调和,彼此间的竞争更非你死我活。中国一不输出模式,二不输出制度,三不输出意识形态,更不要挑战谁、取代谁。中国只想一心一意谋发展,造福本国人民,兼顾他国福祉。中国一再向美方表明,中国无意挑战或取代美国地位,“无意与美国全面对抗”。

  第二,建交以来的中美关系,从来不是一帆风顺的,中美之间的矛盾与摩擦,不是今天才有。

  特朗普执政后,加大中美经贸摩擦,严格限制对华科技管制,两国在经贸科技领域的摩擦和矛盾显著升级。这也进一步加剧了人们对中美关系的担心,让中美“新冷战”的声音似乎更有市场。但熟悉建交以来中美关系历史的人都清楚,即便在20世纪80年代中美关系的“蜜月期”,两国在经贸、科技和台湾等问题上也存在诸多矛盾。美国在政治上对中国进行围攻,经济上实施制裁,外交上加以孤立,中美关系面临重大挑战。但是,中国领导人通过深化国内改革,扩大对外开放,逐步打消了外界对中国的疑虑和担心,中美关系也逐渐走出困局,柳暗花明。

  此后,中美关系又经历经台海危机、炸馆事件、撞机事件等多次危机的冲击,但在双方的共同努力下,每次都最终化险为夷,转危为安。当前,特朗普政府以“美国优先”为内政外交行动指南,在对华关系上采取了施压、打压乃至抹黑、对抗的霸凌做法,但是,只要我们沉着冷静、稳住阵脚,从中美关系相处的经验中汲取历史智慧,着眼于大局,没有理由认为,中美关系不能经受住这一波冲击,不能再次转危为安。

  第三,中美两国存在大量希望改进中美关系的理性声音。

  一种观点认为,当前无论在中国还是美国国内,要求强硬的声音都在显著增强,推着两国朝着对抗、对峙和冷战的方向演进,“中美关系再也回不到过去”。但仔细观察,不难发现,无论在中国还是美国,都存在大量冷静、理性的声音。

  中国国家领导人习近平在多个场合反复强调,有一千条理由把中美关系搞好,没有一条理由把中美关系搞坏。国务委员兼外交部长王毅最近在中美智库论坛上发表演讲时指出,“中国的对美政策没有变化,我们仍愿本着善意和诚意发展中美关系”,“中国的成功得益于对包括美国在内世界各国的开放合作,而中国的发展也为美国提供了持续增长的动力和巨大的市场空间。”美国前助理国务卿坎贝尔表示,中美只能共存,双方需要寻找到一种能够在相互依存的环境下约束竞争的方法。面对新冠疫情对中美关系的搅扰,近百名美国前政府高官和专家学者联名发声,要求中美两国展开合作,联手应对新冠疫情。

  第四,中美不存在不可调和的文明或文化冲突。

  瓦尔代国际报告将中美两国的竞争视为不同文化乃至文明的对抗,是对中国文化和中美关系未来的误读和误判。拥有5000年历史的中华文化,向来崇尚和谐共生,和而不同。其志趣不在于征服、消灭对手,而在于春风化雨,美美与共。这与历史上基督教文化、伊斯兰教文化和东正教文化的扩张、征服和狂热宗教战争,有着本质差别。同样,中国化的马克思主义,也不同于苏联时期奉行扩张和对抗的意识形态。中国无意于在全球推广本国的意识形态,更不要与西方世界进行你死我活的意识形态斗争。

  当前中美关系虽然存在困难与挑战,但是中美两国国内都存在大量有识之士,不希望看到中美关系继续滑坡,更不希望看到中美关系朝着对抗、对峙方向演进。中国政府也明确表态,中国“愿意与美不冲突不对抗、相互尊重、合作共赢,构建以协调、合作、稳定为基调的中美关系”。

  (作者系复旦大学美国研究中心教授。本文首发于“华东师范大学俄罗斯研究中心”微信公众号,原标题:《【瓦尔代中俄论坛】韦宗友丨中美将滑入两极对抗的新冷战吗?》。澎湃新闻获授权转载,略有删节。)

来源时间:2020/7/15   发布时间:2020/7/15

旧文章ID:22330

中美走向新冷战:意识形态冲突加剧,对抗升级

0

作者:STEVEN LEE MYERS, 孟建国  来源:纽约时报中文网

  针对习近平关于崛起中的中国准备承担超级大国重任愿景的核心信条,美国已在逐个予以打击。

  在短短几周的时间里,特朗普政府对中国在香港和西部新疆地区的惩罚性政策采取了制裁措施。美国政府通过切断中国企业与美国的技术联系,以及迫使盟友将目光投向别处,使出了扼杀中国创新的新招。之后又在本周一宣布,中国在南中国海的大部分主权主张不合法,使更尖锐的对抗成为可能。

  华盛顿布鲁金斯学会中国战略计划(China Strategy Initiative at the Brookings Institution)主任杜如松(Rush Doshi)说,“力量差距正在缩小,意识形态差距正在拉大。”他还表示,中美两国已陷入一场用多年时间形成的“意识形态漩涡”。

  “底儿在哪里?”他问道。

  多年来,官员和历史学家们一直否认中美之间正在出现新冷战的说法。他们认为,当今世界的格局根本无法与美苏为争夺霸权展开气势汹汹的生存斗争的那几十年相提并论。这种观点认为,世界的相互联系已经太密切,不容易再以意识形态划分阵营。

  现在,这种划分正在出现,中美关系已在急剧下降,为一场将具有许多冷战特点(和危险)的对抗打下基础。随着两个超级大国在技术、领土主权和影响力上发生冲突,中美面临着同样的小争端升级为军事冲突的风险。

  中美关系越来越充满深深的不信任和敌意,充满随着两个大国争夺主导地位而来的紧张气氛,尤其是在他们的利益发生碰撞的地方:在网络空间和外太空,在台湾海峡和南中国海,甚至在波斯湾。

  新型冠状病毒大流行,加上中国最近在从太平洋到喜马拉雅山脉等边境地区的挑衅性行动,已经将现存的裂痕变成了难以逾越的鸿沟,无论今年美国总统大选的结果如何。

  从北京的角度来看,是美国把中美关系降到了中国外交部长王毅上周所说的1979年两国重新建立外交关系以来的最低点。

  “当前美国的对华政策基于缺乏事实依据的战略误判,充满情绪化的宣泄和麦卡锡式的偏执,”王毅说道,他对目前关系紧张程度的描述唤起了冷战回忆。

  “似乎每一项中国投资都包含政治目的,每一位留学人员都带有间谍背景,每一项合作倡议都别有所图,”他说。

  两国的国内政治都在使观点变得更强硬,给鹰派提供了把柄。新冠疫情也让紧张局势加剧,尤其是在美国。特朗普总统用有种族主义色彩的词语描述新冠病毒,北京则指责他的政府攻击中国是为了转移人们对美国政府控制病毒失败的注意力。

  “中国与美国之间现在还有什么合作?”新加坡国立大学东亚研究所所长郑永年问道。“我看不到任何实质性的合作。”

  中美两国都在迫使其他国家选边站队,即使它们不愿意这样做。例如,特朗普政府已经向盟国施压,要求它们在5G网络建设中抛弃中国科技巨头华为,这在澳大利亚,以及本周二在英国取得了一些成功。在新疆和香港政策上面临外界谴责的中国,已在争取他国公开表态,支持这些政策。

  在日内瓦举行的联合国人权理事会上,包括白俄罗斯和津巴布韦在内的53个国家签署了一份声明,支持中国为香港制定新国家安全法。联合国人权理事会中只有27个国家批评了新国安法,其中大多数是欧洲民主国家,加上日本、澳大利亚和新西兰。在冷战最激烈的时期,这种阵营并不陌生。

  中国还将自己巨大的经济实力作为政治胁迫的工具。因澳大利亚政府呼吁对新冠疫情的起源进行国际调查,中国停止了从澳大利亚进口牛肉和大麦。周二,北京表示将制裁美国航空航天制造商洛克希德·马丁公司(Lockheed Martin),因为该公司最近曾向台湾出售武器。

  在世界被新冠疫情分散了注意力的时候,中国也开始动用军事力量,正如它于今年4月和5月在与印度有争议的边界所尝试的那样。中国的做法导致了1975年以来该地区的首次致命冲突。对中印两国关系的破坏可能需要数年时间才能修复。

  中国似乎越来越愿意接受此类冒险行动。仅仅几周后,中国就向不丹提出了新的领土要求。不丹是一个与印度关系密切的山地王国。

  随着中国在南中国海威胁来自越南、马来西亚和印度尼西亚的船只,美国上月派出两艘航空母舰从该水域驶过,以咄咄逼人的方式展示实力。现在,美国国务院已宣布中国对南海的大部分主权主张非法,进一步的边缘政策似乎不可避免。

  中国外交部发言人赵立坚周二说,美国的声明将破坏该地区的和平稳定,他声称中国对该海域岛屿的控制“已达上千年”,但事实并非如此。正如他所说,中华民国只是在1948年才正式提出主权要求,中华民国当时由蒋介石的国民党军队控制。

  “中国始终致力于同直接相关的主权国家通过谈判磋商解决有关领土和管辖权争议,”赵立坚说。

  但中国的邻国并不这么看。日本本周警告说,中国正在试图“改变东海和南海的现状”。它称中国是比拥有核武器的朝鲜更严重的长期威胁。

  美国驻俄罗斯前大使迈克尔·A·麦克福尔(Michael A. McFaul)说,中国最近的行动看来“过度扩张和过份”,他将中国的做法比作冷战期间最令人担忧的时刻之一。

  “这确实让我想起了赫鲁晓夫,”他说。“他先是抨击,然后突然之间,与美国发生了古巴导弹危机。”

  对北京的抵制似乎正在增长。表现在科技领域的紧张关系尤为明显。中国寻求在人工智能和微芯片等尖端技术领域与世界竞争,同时严格限制国内人民能读到、看到和听到的东西。

  如果说柏林墙是第一次冷战的实物象征,那么“防火长城”很可能是新冷战的虚拟象征。

  开始的时候,防火长城是一个将中国公民与未经中共授权的观点隔离开来的网络空间分界线。现在,事实已证明,它是中国与西方世界许多国家之间更深层次分歧的先觉标志。

  王毅在讲话中说,中国从不寻求把自己的做法强加给其他国家。但中国正是这么做的,它让Zoom审查在美国开的会议上的发言,以及在全球各地对维吾尔人的网站发动攻击。

  中国的控制在国内压制异见人士和帮助培育国内互联网巨头上非常成功,但几乎没有为中国赢得海外影响力。印度封禁58款中国应用程序的做法,可能会阻碍中国迄今在海外最成功的、充满米姆的短视频应用TikTok的发展。

  上周,由于中国在香港颁布了新国安法,TikTok在香港停止服务。美国科技巨头Facebook、谷歌(Google)和Twitter都已表示,在公司评估新国安法的限制期间,他们将停止接受香港当局提出的数据请求。

  “中国很大,它能取得成功,它将开发出自己的技术,但它能做的事情是有限的,”为华盛顿战略研究中心撰写关于网络安全和间谍的文章的前美国官员詹姆斯·A·刘易斯(James A. Lewis)说。

  就连在中国已经成功销售了自己技术的地区,形势似乎也在发生变化。

  中国政府最近的强硬态度,已导致英国停止华为的新设备进入其网络,特朗普政府切断华为所需的微芯片和其他部件的决心已定。为应对这种情况,北京已在加倍努力进行本土制造。

  让美国科技企业与中国供应链完全脱钩的呼声,短期内是不现实的,长期来看,成本会非常巨大。尽管如此,美国已采取行动,将对华为和其他中国科技企业的供应链至关重要的台湾微芯片制造吸引到离自己后院更近的地方,美国计划为台积电在亚利桑那州设厂提供支持。

  中国外交部长王毅敦促美国后退一步,寻求两国可以合作的领域。不过,对两国关系的悲观情绪仍然普遍存在,尽管大多数中国官员和分析人士指责特朗普政府试图转移人们对其控制疫情失败的注意力。

  “不难看出,在新型冠状肺炎疫情冲击下,美国大选年各方势力进行政治角逐的中心正在聚焦中国,”清华大学国际关系学系教授赵可金在最近一篇文章中写道。“中美关系面临着自建交以来最严重的时刻。”

  虽然赵可金有意避开新冷战的概念,但他取而代之的说法并不更让人放心:“中美关系的新现实并非是走向‘新冷战’,而是呈现为‘软战’格局。”

  Steven Lee Myers是《纽约时报》北京分社社长。他1989年加入时报,此前曾驻莫斯科、巴格达和 华盛顿。他著有《新沙皇:弗拉基米尔·普京的崛起和统治》(“The New Tsar: The Rise and Reign of Vladimir Putin”)一书,该书由阿尔弗雷德·A·克诺夫出版社(Alfred A. Knopf)于2015年出版。欢迎在Twitter和Facebook上关注他。

  孟建国(Paul Mozur)是一名科技记者,主要报道亚洲科技和地缘政治之间的交汇。他曾两次入围普利策奖。欢迎在Twitter上关注他:@paulmozur。

  Claire Fu自北京、Lin Qiqing自上海及Motoko Rich自东京对本文有报道和研究贡献。

  翻译:纽约时报中文网

来源时间:2020/7/15   发布时间:2020/7/15

旧文章ID:22329

Donald Trump Press Conference Transcript on Hong Kong, July 14, 2020

0

作者:Donald Trump  来源:www.rev.com

""
Donald Trump: (00:00)
Too hot, but it’s pretty warm. Thank you. So we’ve had a big day in the stock market. Things are coming back and they’re coming back very rapidly. A lot sooner than people thought. People are feeling good about our country. People are feeling good about therapeutics and possible vaccines, but we’re going to go over quite a bit and maybe at the end, we’ll take some questions if we have time, it’s not too hot. Today, I signed legislation and an executive order to hold China accountable for its oppressive actions against the people of Hong Kong. The Hong Kong Autonomy Act, which I signed this afternoon, passed unanimously through Congress.

Donald Trump: (00:53)
This law gives my administration powerful new tools to hold responsible the individuals and the entities involved in extinguishing Hong Kong’s freedom. We’ve all watched what happened, not a good situation. Their freedom has been taken away. Their rights have been taken away and with it goes Hong Kong, in my opinion, because it will no longer be able to compete with free markets. A lot of people will be leaving Hong Kong, I suspect. And we’re going to do a lot more business because of it because we just lost one competitor. It’s the way it is. We lost a very, very serious competitor. A competitor that we incentivized to take a lot of business and do well and we gave them a lot of business by doing what we did. We gave them things that nobody else had the right to do, and that gave them a big edge over other markets.

Donald Trump: (01:43)
And because of that edge, they’ve done really historic business, tremendous business, far bigger than anybody would have thought years ago when we did this gift. It was really a gift to freedom. Today, I also signed an executive order ending US preferential treatment for Hong Kong. Hong Kong will now be treated the same as Mainland China, no special privileges, no special economic treatment and no export of sensitive technologies. In addition to that, as you know, we’re placing massive tariffs and have placed very large tariffs on China. First time that’s ever happened to China. Billions of dollars have been paid to the United States of which I’ve given quite a bit to the farmers and ranchers of our country because they were targeted. And that’s been going on for three years. It’s the first time anybody’s ever done anything like that. And prior to the plague pouring in from China, they were having the worst year as you know, in 67 years.

Donald Trump: (02:50)
And I don’t want them to have a bad year. I want them to have a good year, but they were taking advantage of the United States for many, many years, and that’s stopping. But then the virus came in and the world is a different place, but we’re now getting back and one of the reasons the market’s doing… so it’s almost at the point that it was at prior to the plague. Almost, we’re getting very close. It’s a great thing. It’s an amazing thing what our people have done and what they’ve endured. No administration has been tougher on China then this administration. We imposed historic tariffs. We stood up to China’s intellectual property theft at a level that nobody’s ever come close. We confronted untrustworthy Chinese technology and telecom providers. We convinced many countries, many countries, and I did this myself for the most part, not to use Huawei because we think it’s an unsafe security risk.

Donald Trump: (03:52)
It’s a big security risk. I talked many countries out of using it. If they want to do business with us, they can’t use it. Just today, I believe that UK announced that they’re not going to be using it. And that was up in the air for a long time but they’ve decided. And you look at Italy, you look at many other countries. We withdrew from the Chinese dominated, WHO and we fully rebuilt the United States military. The WHO, World Health Organization, we were paying close to $500 million a year. China was paying $39 million a year. And China had too much say, they worked it very hard, which is a bad thing done by our past administrations. But we were tough and we were saying, I was asking, I said, “Why are we paying so much more than China?” China has 1.4 billion people. We have 325, probably 325 million approximately, nobody can give the exact count.

Donald Trump: (04:59)
We’re trying to get an exact count, but you have over the years, many illegals who have come into the country. So it depends on how you want to count it. But you could say 325 to 350 million people, as opposed to 1.4 billion people. And the World Trade is terrible, that deal is terrible. The World Health is terrible deal. We’ve been very tough on the World Trade Organization and we’ve been, I guess, as tough as you can get on World Health. We withdrew our money. We told them we’re getting out. It doesn’t mean that someday we won’t go back in. Maybe we will when it’s correctly run, but they made a lot of bad predictions and they said a lot of bad things about what to do and how to do it and they turned out to be wrong. And they were really a puppet of China.

Donald Trump: (05:49)
And make no mistake, we hold China fully responsible for concealing the virus and unleashing it upon the world. Could have stopped it, they should have stopped. It would have been very easy to do at the source when it happened. In contrast, Joe Biden’s entire career has been a gift to the Chinese Communist Party and to the calamity of errors that they’ve made. They made so many errors and it’s been devastating for the American worker. China has taken out hundreds of billions of dollars a year from our country. And we rebuilt China. I give them all the credit in the world. I don’t give the credit for the people that used to stand here because they allowed this to happen where hundreds of billions of dollars were taken out of the United States Treasury in order to rebuild China. There’s no company and no country in the world, no country in the world has ever ripped off the United States like the incredible job that they did on this country and the people that ran it.

Donald Trump: (07:03)
Possibly, it’s one of the reasons, certainly it’s one of the very big reasons trade and things related to trade that I got elected in the first place. I’ve been talking about it for a long time, along with many other subjects, frankly. Joe Biden supported China’s entry into the World Trade Organization. One of the greatest geopolitical and economic disasters in world history. If you look at China, you look at the moment they joined the World Trade, they were flatlining for years and years and years and decades. And then all of a sudden they joined the World Trade Organization and they went like a rocket ship. They were given all sorts of advantages. They were considered a developing country. As a developing country they got tremendous advantages over the United States and other countries, and they took advantage of those advantages and then some. Biden personally led the effort to give China permanent, most favored nation status, which is a tremendous advantage for a country to have. Few countries have it. But the United States doesn’t have it. Never did, probably never even asked for it because they didn’t know what they were doing. As Vice President Biden was a leading advocate of the Paris Climate Accord, which was unbelievably expensive to our country. Would have crushed American manufacturers while allowing China to pollute the atmosphere with impunity yet one more gift from Biden to the Chinese Communist Party. They took all of the advantage away from us. They took everything away. They don’t have oil. We would have had to close up a tremendous amounts of our energy to qualify, eventually, not too far into the future. We would have had to do things that would have been unbelievably destructive to our country, including the possible closing of 25% of our businesses, think of that.

Donald Trump: (09:10)
And it was going to cost us hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars for the privilege of being involved in the Paris Climate Accord. And you just have to look at what took place this year in Paris and France, where money was being sent to countries all over the world and the people of France didn’t want to take it. And they didn’t. And they did a lot of rioting. They had their taxes raised. We would have had to raise our taxes and it was a disaster. I’ve been given a lot of credit for what I did there. Took a certain amount of courage, I guess, because it sounds so nice, the Paris Climate Accord. But it wasn’t good for us at all. America lost nearly 10,000 factories while Joe Biden was Vice President, think of that. 10,000 factories. He wrote something today and he made a statement today that I wrote down. It’s pretty accurate.

Donald Trump: (10:13)
So Biden was here for 47 years. Eight years, the last eight years, not long ago as Vice President he said, “One in five miles of our highways are still in poor condition.” Well, we’re doing a good job on highways, but why didn’t he fix them three years ago? Why didn’t he fix them? Tens of thousands of bridges are in disrepair and on the verge of collapse. Well, that’s probably not a right number, but we have bridges that should have been fixed. Why didn’t he fix him? He was here for eight years with President Obama. Why didn’t they fix them? Tens of thousands of bridges. This is what he wrote. High speed broadband. We want high speed… well, why didn’t they get it? Three years ago is not a long time and he didn’t do any of the things, but now he says he’s going to be president and as president, he’s going to do all the things that he didn’t do.

Donald Trump: (11:10)
He never did anything except make very bad decisions, especially on foreign policy. So Joe Biden and President Obama freely allowed China to pillage our factories, plunder our communities and steal our most precious secrets. And I’ve stopped it, largely, but I’ve stopped it and it wasn’t easy because you talk about a certain power of the telephone and the calls where they would call and say, “No, we don’t want to do that.” And other countries would call on behalf of China, but I did it. I did what has to be done. And you just take a look at what’s gone on and take a look at the numbers where they devalued their currency in order to pay the tariffs. Now, the Democrat party is calling for defunding of our military, think of that.

Donald Trump: (12:02)
Defunding, they want to defund our military when China is building a massive military. They’re building a massive military and Biden wants to defund our military and the world needs American strength right now, more than ever. And we’ve got it. We’ve got now, soon as all this equipment comes in, all made in the USA, we’ve got the newest, most incredible weapons anywhere in the world. We have the best tanks, the best ships, the best missiles, rockets. We have the best of everything. We have the best fighter jets, the F-35, the F-18. All of these assets are being built, tankers, incredible tankers, bombers. Hope we don’t have to use them, but we have the most incredible military. When I came in the military was totally depleted. It was at a level that was just absolutely incredible. You know the statements, I made the statements before. I told you what generals told me about our military and I’ll make them again.

Donald Trump: (13:13)
If somebody needs them, we’ll give them to you. Very well documented. As Vice President Biden opposed tariffs, and he was standing up for China. He didn’t want to do anything to disrupt the relationship with China even though China was taking us to the cleaners. He opposed my very strict travel ban on Chinese nationals to stop the spread of the China virus. He was totally against it. Xenophobic, he called me. Xenophobic. A month later, he admitted I was right. We would have had thousands of people additionally die if we let people come in from heavily infected China, but we stopped it. We did a travel ban in January. Nancy Pelosi was dancing in the streets of Chinatown in San Francisco a month later and even later than that and others too. They all thought what I did was a terrible mistake. We would have lost… in fact, Dr. Fauci said we would have lost thousands of additional people if President Trump had to do that. And I was a crowd of one, because even experts didn’t want to do it. They thought it was a mistake.

Donald Trump: (14:25)
And then I did Europe. When I started seeing what was going on in Italy and Spain and France and other countries in Europe I did a ban on people coming in from Europe. That would have been disastrous for our country also. And we saved tens of thousands of lives, but we actually saved millions of lives. By closing up, we saved millions, potentially, millions of lives. Could be, a number that we’re actually working on, but it could be 2 to 3 million lives. So we’re at 135,000, which is terrible. One is too much, but we would have had millions of people dead from this curse that came at us, but we did what we had to do. And now we’ll put out the flames as it happens. We have to get the schools open. We have to get everything open. A lot of people don’t want to do that for political reasons, not for other reasons.

Donald Trump: (15:23)
But if we had listened to Joe Biden, hundreds of thousands of additional lives would have been lost. And if you look at the job he did on swine flu, I looked at a poll. They have polls on everything nowadays and they got very bad marks on the job they did on the swine flu. H1N1, he calls it N1H1. H1N1 got very poor marks from Gallup on the job they did on swine flu. And they stopped very early on, testing. They totally stopped it. They just said stop. And frankly, if we didn’t test, you wouldn’t have all the headlines because we’re showing cases.

Donald Trump: (16:03)
And frankly, if we didn’t test, you wouldn’t have all the headlines because we’re showing cases. And we have just about the lowest mortality rate. But if we did… Think of this, if we didn’t do testing, instead of testing over 40 million people, if we did half the testing, we would have half the cases. If we did another… You cut that in half, we’d have yet again, half of that, but the headlines are always testing. Now the testing is a good thing, but at the same time, it’s fodder for the fake news to report cases. So we’re doing 40 million plus, going to be very close to 45 million people. And when I turned on the news, I see cases, cases, cases. They don’t talk about deaths being cut down to a level that actually tenfold they use. I got that from one of the very respected media outlets, tenfold, cut tenfold, yes, but they don’t talk about that.

Donald Trump: (17:01)
They talk about cases and the cases are created because of the fact that we do tremendous testing. We’re the best testing in the world. We now make ventilators for the world. We had very few ventilators. There wasn’t one person in any hospital anywhere in this country that needed a ventilator that didn’t get it. And that was because we mobilized to a level, using the Purchasing Act in some cases, we mobilized to a level that nobody thought possible. Nothing’s happened like that since World War II. Our task force has done a great job. Mike Pence works so hard, gets so little credit. Sad to see that actually, but he works so hard, gets so little credit. The governors would tell us, we’d be on the phone with 50 different governors, they’d all tell us what a great job, great job. And then they’ll go to the media and say, “Well, they didn’t do such a good job.” Well, we did a great job. We made a lot of governors look fantastic.

Donald Trump: (17:57)
We did in New York, what we did in New York was one of the most incredible things, 2,800 bed in Javits Center, but the governor used very few of them unfortunately. Then we moved in our great hospital ship, one of our two great… We move one also to Los Angeles. And we could have used that for our senior citizens. We could have used it for other people. They could have used it instead of sending our seniors back into nursing homes that were infected where you lost thousands of people. Thousands of people in New York died because of poor management by the governor. And it’s a very sad thing to see and very sad to watch and very sad to look at those statistics.

Donald Trump: (18:38)
But we have an incredible Javits Center that we built with thousands of beds. I think it was 2,800 all ready to go and they could have sent people there, or they could have sent senior citizens there instead of sending them into the nursing homes. And after all of that work and getting it done, the Army Corps of Engineers, I mean, the job they did was incredible. They built it in a matter of days. When it was all completed, FEMA, everybody was there, doctors. We ended up getting doctors. They said, “We can’t man it.” I said, “So we’ll man it and woman it.” And that’s what we did. We brought in doctors, nurses, everything, we’re all set. We said, “Where are the people?” They didn’t send the people. Very few people came in. They could have sent them into the Javits Center. They could have sent him to the hospital ship, which was virtually unused. But we were there.

Donald Trump: (19:34)
By contrast, my administration acted very early to ban travel from China, from Europe, saving all of these lives, incredible. And I want everyone to know, I want every citizen now that we’re using the full power of the Federal government to fight the China virus and to keep our people safe. Through Operation Warp Speed, we will deliver a vaccine in record breaking time. We’re doing very well on the vaccines. We have many, many different vaccines being studied right now, many of which are looking really good. And we’re ready to distribute the vaccine when we get it. We’re all set, taking a risk, an economic risk of preparing for delivery because we feel very certain it’s going to be there, but logistically we have our military ready to go. We have generals that that’s all they do is distribute things and they’re going to be distributing hopefully a vaccine or a therapeutic, and it’s coming out really well.

Donald Trump: (20:35)
And I think you’re going to have some good news very, very quickly having to do with the vaccines. We’re also working with many other countries on the vaccine. Many countries are working with us. We’re unleashing our nation’s scientific genius to kill the virus. Joe Biden didn’t just side with China on the virus, he did. He called me again, xenophobic. That’s what he said. You all heard it many times. He described the rise of China as “a very positive development”. It’s not a positive development. Not for us it’s not. He said that the idea that China is our competition is really bizarre. He’s really bizarre. He said, “China is not a problem.” No, nobody’s ripped us off more than China over the last 25, 30 years, nobody close. And he says China is not a problem. Now he takes it all back. Now he wants to be Mr. Tough Guy.

Donald Trump: (21:32)
But for years, 47 years, he never came out against China, never say anything bad. Just the opposite. His son walked out with $1.5 billion of money to invest where he’ll make hundreds of thousands of dollars, maybe millions of dollars a year, walked out with $1.5 billion. I asked one of the biggest people on Wall Street, maybe the biggest, “Is that possible?” He said, “No,” he’s never seen it. They don’t do that. But Hunter, where’s Hunter, where is Hunter by the way? Hunter Biden walked out with $1.5 billion. In Ukraine he got $83,000 a month and I guess an upfront payment of $3 million. So he went from not having job to getting $83,000 a month with a lot of money paid up front to work for Burisma. And you all know about Burisma, but nothing happens, nobody cares. And he was unemployed as you know, he was unfortunately forced to leave the military. He was forced to leave. Didn’t have a job and all of a sudden he’s making a fortune, but nobody talks about that. Indeed Biden expressed more fawning praise about China on an ordinary day than about America. On the 4th of July, the last Independence Day, Biden attacked the United States and said we had, “never lived up to the ideals of our fathers, our forefathers, or our founding fathers, those founding ideals.” And yet he enthusiastically stated that China is a great nation and we should hope for its continued expansion. Well, we all wish well to China, but what China has unleashed on the world, it’s hard to even fathom. I see people now, friends of mine, they walk up, they want to say hello, and they have to keep their distance and they’re all covered up like you’re all covered up with face masks. It’s a different world, but we’re coming out on top.

Donald Trump: (23:40)
Biden sides with China over America time and time again. And he said on the 4th of July, “American history is no fairytale.” And yet blindly celebrates China saying few nations in history have come so far so fast. He’s so proud of them. He’s so proud of them. Now, Joe Biden is pushing a platform that would demolish the U.S. economy, totally demolish it. So we built the greatest economy in the history of our country, greatest in the history of the world. That was a few months ago. Best unemployment numbers ever, best for African American, Asian American, Hispanic American, best for women, best for everybody, best for young people that didn’t have a high school diploma, didn’t have a college diploma. They had a diploma, they were really in good shape.

Donald Trump: (24:39)
We built the greatest ever stock market, highest ever in history. We had 143 days of all time stock market highs in just less than three and a half years. And we had to close it down because we did the right thing by doing that. As I said, we saved millions of lives, but China was saying this is incredible what’s going on. China was for the first time respecting the United States and now they want to do something that’s much different, Joe Biden.

Donald Trump: (25:12)
So I’ve watched this and I’ve watched it with great interest. We’re building our economy again. I guess the stock market went up almost 500 points today or something thereabouts, you’ll check. But it was up a lot when I left. And our economy is coming back. We’re almost at a level where even though it’s long before the very important, maybe the most important ever, election of November 3rd. We’re long before that, but we’re close to record stock markets again. And NASDAQ hit an all time high for the 16th time. Think of that, for the 16th time over the last month or so, for the 16th time. So one of our markets already hit an all time high. Today Joe Biden gave a speech in which he said that the core of his economic agenda is a hard left crusade against American energy. He wants to kill American energy. He wants to reenter the unfair one sided Paris Climate Accord, which will destroy us at the expense of many other nations who benefit. It was actually drawn in my opinion, to take advantage of the United States, just like so many other deals that are done to take advantage of the fools running the United States. But this would do nothing for the environment, but would cripple American industry while greatly helping China. He wants to impose massive energy taxes and job crushing mandates to eliminate carbon from the United States economy. Let him define the word carbon because he won’t be able to. Obliterating American oil, clean coal, natural gas, and the natural energy resources that supply countless American jobs.

Donald Trump: (27:06)
Joe Biden put AOC, a young woman not talented in many ways, in charge of his energy plan and the environment essentially. Her and Bernie Sanders who ran a lot of times for president, never made it. Good base, but that’s about it. In other words, he wants to impose the Green New Deal on our country. When I first saw the Green New Deal, I thought it was a joke. I said, “This will never go anywhere.” Now they’re trying to impose it. This will destroy our country and make us non-competitive with other countries. Don’t forget, we’re in competition with China and with many other countries throughout the world. We’re in tremendous economic competition, including Europe, which has never treated us well.

Donald Trump: (27:59)
The European union was formed in order to take advantage of the United States. They formed and they take advantage of the United States. And I know that, they know I know that, but other presidents had no idea. Last week, Joe Biden released his unity platform developed with socialist Bernie Sanders, describing what he would do if elected president. The Biden Sanders agenda is the most extreme platform of any major party nominee by far in American history. I think it’s worse than actually Bernie’s platform. It’s gone so far, right? And he’s doing that because he’s begging for that vote. But one of the things I just asked my people to do is just draw up for me just quickly some of the things that we’ve been hearing about over the last couple of weeks. And these are actual key elements of the Biden Sanders unity platform.

Donald Trump: (28:58)
Abolish immigration detention, no more detention. You come in here illegally, no more detention. Stop all deportations. So if we get a MS-13 gang member, which we’ve taken out of our country by the thousands, brought them back to Honduras, Guatemala, can’t do that anymore. El Salvador, can’t do that anymore. Stop all deportations. In other words, we’ll take all of these people, many of whom are in prison for rape, murder, lots of other things. End prosecution of illegal border crossers. Oh, okay. They come in illegally and we have to stop the whole process. Support the deadly sanctuary cities where many of these people are protected better than the American citizen is protected. Incentivize illegal alien child smuggling. Give it an incentive because if you look at what they’re saying, that’s exactly what they do. Incentivize illegal alien child smuggling. They’re incentivized by what this plan calls for.

Donald Trump: (30:05)
Expand asylum for all new illegal aliens. How about that one? All new illegal aliens, expand asylum. Cancel all asylum cooperation agreements in the Western hemisphere. Well, we have agreements with Honduras, Guatemala, with El Salvador, we have great agreements where when Biden and Obama used to bring killers out, they would say, “Don’t bring them back to our country. We don’t want them.” Well, we have to, we don’t want them. They wouldn’t take them. Now with us, they take them. Someday I’ll tell you why. Someday I’ll tell you why, but they take them and they take them very gladly. They used to bring them out and they wouldn’t even let the airplanes land if they brought them back by airplanes. They wouldn’t let the buses into their country. They said, “We don’t want them.” They said no, but they entered our country illegally. And they’re murderers, they’re killers in some cases. And they said, “Nope, we don’t want them.” They turned the bus around. They turned the plane around that land in the United States and who knows what happened to him, but it wasn’t good.

Donald Trump: (31:15)
Taxpayer-funded lawyers will be given to all illegal aliens. So we’re going to pay now for the lawyer’s lobby and we’re going to give all illegal aliens taxpayer-funded lawyers. How does that sound? Pretty good. In other words, come in here illegally, we’re going to give you free legal advice. We’ll take you up to the Supreme Court as much as possible. Abolish immigration enforcement against illegal workers. Think of that, abolish immigration enforcement. They’re going to abolish immigration enforcement. Well, basically, as you know, what they’re going to do is they’re going to rip down the wall. They’re taking it down. They want to take down the wall, which we fought hard for up to 259 miles right now of great powerful wall that’s really working because if you look at the numbers, in addition to the fact…

Donald Trump: (32:03)
Wall that’s really working because if you look at the numbers, in addition to the fact that Mexico, for various reasons, has 27,000 soldiers on our southern border to keep people out of our country. And I appreciate it. We had a great meeting last week with the President of Mexico. Great guy, friend of mine, become a friend of mine. A lot of people thought that couldn’t happen because we’re very opposite in terms of our views, maybe even in terms of our temperament, but he’s a great guy, and he’s a friend of mine, and they’ve been terrific. Mexico has been terrific. 27,000 soldiers on our border, Mexican soldiers, and we have great, great numbers. We got rid of so many different things.

Donald Trump: (32:45)
Catch and release is gone. So many different things have taken place. We used to catch them, take their name, and release them into our country. We don’t do that anymore. We now release them back where they came from. Sometimes we’ll bring them back to their country. Grant work permits for illegal aliens, so if you come in illegally, you get a work permit. People that live here don’t get work permits, many cases. Provide taxpayer subsidies and welfare for illegal aliens and new immigrants. So we want to provide taxpayer subsidies and welfare for people that come into our country illegally, illegal immigrants. They want government healthcare for all illegal aliens. This is part of their plan. I’m not making this up. This is all down in their plan from last week.

Donald Trump: (33:37)
And this is good compared to what I heard today. Federal student aid and free community college for illegal aliens. What do you think about that? Federal student aid and free community college. We’re going to have every person in the world pouring into our country from all over the world. And by the way, the wall was so timely because it stopped people coming in from heavily infected areas of Mexico. If we had that, we would be in trouble like you wouldn’t believe. You wouldn’t believe. And remember, cases is different than deaths. And cases, we give you because our testing is the best in the world.

Donald Trump: (34:19)
And by the way, by far the most, find out which country tested 45 million people. If China, if Russia, if India tested 45 million people, or if they did tests like we did, check out how many cases they’d have. But it’s still, we’ve done a great job. Get no credit for it. And I don’t want the credit. I want the people that have done this great job. The people that have done such an incredible job when building the ventilators, and doing the testing, and building a testing platform that’s been amazing. We have many platforms. Many companies have come up with different forms of tests. When we started there was no such thing.

Donald Trump: (34:58)
Sign new immigrants up for welfare immediately. This is Joe Biden. So they walk off and they come in and they put a foot into our land, and we sign up new immigrants up for welfare. We sign them up immediately. They get welfare benefits. United States citizens. Don’t get what they’re looking to give illegal immigrants. Think of that. Sign up. It’s hard to believe I’m even reading that, new immigrants for welfare immediately. Not to mention the cost of this which is incalculable. The cost of this is so crazy.

Donald Trump: (35:39)
End requirement for immigrant self-sufficiency and maximize their welfare. Now, this is us writing this. Who’s not coming to the United States? Every person from South America is going to pour in. Every person from other countries, they’re going to be pouring in. End requirement, think of that, for immigrant self-sufficiency and remember to maximize welfare. So we give it a maximum. Then we have massively expand immigration during a global pandemic, taking jobs from unemployed Americans. End all travel bans including from Jihadist regions. So now we have travel bans. A lot of you said I didn’t get the travel ban and you were wrong. We got the travel ban. We lost in the Ninth Circuit. We lost again in the Ninth Circuit. And then we won in the Supreme Court. We have a very strong travel ban, and we don’t want people that are going to come in and blow up our cities, do things.

Donald Trump: (36:49)
And frankly, with the liberal Democrats running the cities that we do have where they do have problems, maybe they wouldn’t mind, but I would mind, and the people of this country mind. So listen to this. End all travel bans. He’s talking about the ban that I won that everybody said I didn’t win. They said I didn’t win because in the Lower Court we lost, that we lost in the Appellate Division and then we won in the Supreme Court. So they said, “He lost,” and they’re right at the Lower Level. But in the meantime, we won in the Supreme Court. So it’s in effect, but they didn’t say that. They said he lost, which again is fake news, but that’s the way they do it. So end all travel bans including from Jihadist regions, they specify that.

Donald Trump: (37:32)
Grant mass amnesty. Everybody gets amnesty, mass amnesty. Think of that. And this has created a roadmap to citizenship for massive, massive numbers. And we’re not talking about DACA because I’m going to take care of DACA much better than the Democrats did. The Democrats had their chance and they blew it. But we’re going to take care of DACA because I’m going to be doing, in the not too distant future, pretty soon I’m going to be signing a new immigration action, very, very big merit based immigration action. That based on the DACA decision, I’ll be able to do. Vastly expand low-skilled immigration to the United States. So they want a lot of people come in with low skills. I like merit. Think of that. Vastly expand low-skilled immigration to the United States. These are the things that are in the plan. This is Biden. Biden’s gone radical left.

Donald Trump: (38:36)
Increase refugee admissions by 700%. Huh? That’s a lot, by 700%. Nobody’s ever heard of such a thing. Increase refugee admissions by 700%. Abolish law enforcement as we know it. I think the police do an incredible job in this country. And you’re going to have a rogue, terrible cop on occasion, like you do doing any industry, in any business, in any profession. But I think they do an incredible job. Abolish law enforcement as we know it. End cash bail, no bail. Just, we let you right out. Look at what’s happened to New York. Crime is up. Shootings are up at numbers that nobody’s ever seen before. Look at Chicago. What a disaster. And we’re waiting for them to call us because we’re all set to go. We have the FBI. We have Homeland Security. We have everybody ready to go. We have the National Guard. They’re all ready to go. End cash bail, releasing dangerous criminals onto our streets, cash bail. New York just did that. Other places have done it. They haven’t turned out too good.

Donald Trump: (39:53)
Abolish completely the death penalty. And I know there’s a lot of debate on the death penalty and that has been for a long time, but sometimes you use the death penalty depending on the crime. You know what happened today with regard to the death penalty. Appoint social justice prosecutors in order to free violent criminals. So they want to appoint social justice prosecutors to free violent criminals. End mandatory minimums. And that’s by empowering judges to determine appropriate sentences by fighting to repeal mandatory minimums at the federal level and give states incentives to repeal their mandatory minimums. We could go on for days.

Donald Trump: (40:48)
Incentivize prison closure. So they want to close our prisons. They want to abolish our police departments. They want to abolish our prisons, I guess. Incentivize jail and prison closures as populations decline. Ensure the resources saved are invested directly into those communities. So they want to close them rather than have them for some very bad people, people that are not going to behave when they get out. You see that in New York. They allowed a lot of criminals out and those criminals are causing havoc. And then they got rid of their incredible and legendary crime squad and bad things are happening in New York. Bad things are happening. I love New York. I hate to see what’s going on.

Donald Trump: (41:41)
End solitary confinement. Free federal housing for former inmates. So federal housing now can go to inmates, former inmates. Rejoined Paris climate accord, and seek an even higher level of restrictions. Oh, I didn’t notice that. Oh, I see. So they want to rejoin the Paris climate accord and they want to seek an even higher level of [inaudible 00:42:09]. In other words, make it worse than it was. Mandate net zero carbon emissions for homes, offices, and all new buildings by 2030, that basically means no windows, no nothing. It’s very hard to do. I tell people when they want to go into some of these buildings, “How are your eyes? Because they won’t be good in five years.”

Donald Trump: (42:35)
And I hope you don’t mind cold office space in the winter and warm office space in the summer, because your air conditioning is not the same as the good old days. Mandate zero carbon emissions from power plants by 2035. Zero, we’re talking about zero. Nothing can go in the air. Mandate net zero carbon emissions by 2050. And I believe he’s changing that. He’s bringing it down. He wants no petroleum product. He wants no oil or gas. I don’t think Texas is going to do too well. They’re going to get rid of about 7 million jobs if you go by the Biden plan. I don’t think that Oklahoma, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, you’re going to be too happy with that, and many other states, Ohio.

Donald Trump: (43:25)
Mandate all 500,000 school buses and all three million government vehicles be changed to zero emission vehicles within five years. I’ve heard of worse than that. Install 500,000 taxpayer funded charging stations nationwide. Here’s a bad one, really bad one. End school choice. There is nothing that the African American community wants more than school choice, and mothers and fathers are going to be very happy to see him be defeated just on that alone. End school choice. So Joe Biden wants to end school choice. End tax credit scholarship serving disadvantaged students in 26 states. Oppose 14 million Americans with education savings accounts and get rid of school choice, having to do with school choice. Eliminate school choice in Washington, D.C. You know what they’ve done in Washington. They have some incredible example right here, example. I know of one example. I think they have a number of them, but one is incredible. Abolish all charter schools. Charter schools are doing great. Ban funding for charter schools in poor neighborhoods. We don’t want charter schools in poor neighborhoods.

Donald Trump: (44:53)
Well, that’s not fair. Abolish educational standards. Abolish, in the suburbs, you’re going to abolish the suburbs with this, and force Obama/Biden’s radical AFFH, that’s the AFFH regulation that threatens to strip localities of federal affordable housing funds or less unless they changed their zoning laws to fit the federal government’s demands. So what you have, I mean, I’ve been watching this for years in Westchester, coming from New York. They want a low income housing built in a neighborhood. Well, I’m ending that rule. I’m taking it out. So I had spoke with Ben Carson the other day. We’re going to be taking it out. I’ve watched that whole thing go, and now they want to make it twice as bad in the suburbs, ib the suburbs. Mothers aren’t happy about that. Fathers aren’t happy about that. They worked hard to buy a house and now they’re going to watch the housing values drop like a rock. And that has happened. Drop like a rock. So we’re not going to do that. We’re going to do the exact opposite.

Donald Trump: (46:04)
Probably there has never been a time, and this is just a few. It’s much worse than that. We did this very quickly. There’s probably never been a time when candidates are so different. We want law and order. They don’t want law and order. We want strong, closed borders with people able to come in through merit, through a legal process. They don’t want to have any borders at all. They’re going to rip down the wall. It was hard to get that built. And now it’s almost completed. It’ll be completed by a little after the end of the year. They want to rip it down and it’s had such an impact. It’s incredible. It stops trafficking, human trafficking of women and children, but women mostly. Human trafficking, one of the worst things ever, all at a that it’s never been at because of the internet. You think of it as an ancient statement. You wouldn’t think that’s possible today, but it’s human trafficking of women and children. And they want to let that continue. The wall has stopped it so much because they will go over to a section where there aren’t people, not an entry point, and they’ll make a left into the United States and they’re on their way. They can’t do that anymore. We have a 30 foot wall that goes six feet into the ground, stops a lot of the tunneling, because they’re pretty good at tunnels. But we watch the tunnels and we have equipment for that. You can’t make a left anymore and come into the United States loaded up with human traffic. So they want to take down the wall. They want to have open borders. Think of open borders today though with the pandemic. I mean, the timing is sort of interesting, but with the pandemic.

Donald Trump: (47:49)
So there’s never been a time when too candidates were so different. I mean, I’ve seen races where it’s like the same exact platforms. I’m even talking about essentially Democrat Republic-

Donald Trump: (48:03)
… exact platforms. I’m even talking about essentially Democrat, Republican, there’s not that much difference. There’s a little difference, but there’s not much. You choose one because you like the way they look, you like the way they sound. You like the way they talk. You like something about one, and you don’t like the other, but there have never been a difference. Here’s one of the greatest ever.

Donald Trump: (48:21)
This is without question the single biggest difference. If you want law and order, for instance, I enacted recently when I saw what was going on with federal monuments, we don’t have the right to do states, although we’re trying to find it. But with the monuments, where they wanted to rip down Andrew Jackson. They wanted to rip down George Washington. They were actually heading over to the Jefferson Memorial, if you can believe that. But this has been going on, and I found an act that we’ve used and we have many, many people in jail right now. Many, many people in jail, all over the country, because they tried to destroy or in some cases got it down, a federal statue or monument.

Donald Trump: (49:09)
We haven’t had anybody making a move since I enacted this. I signed an executive order a couple of weeks ago, and it says very simply, “10 years in jail. You do it, 10 years in jail.” The amazing part is we’re able to catch everybody, because thanks to all of you on television, we appreciate it. But we have their pictures, they have the man standing on Andrew Jackson’s horse. We have the man standing by General George Washington. We have everybody standing… and oh, they were going to go for the Emancipation Proclamation, Abraham Lincoln, standing with a young man who is being freed. And we said, “We’re going to do something. We can’t let this happen.”

Donald Trump: (50:04)
Now, it could be removed at some point. You go through a process, a legal process, go through Congress, whatever. I understand that. At the same time, some people like these statues and monuments, but it can be removed, but you have to go through a legal process. So they were going to have 20-25,000 people that night, nobody showed up. Nobody. You know that, because you were disappointed to see that. The next night, I believe 22 people showed up. They said, “We’re going to make it Friday night instead,” and 22 people showed up. Four were actually arrested, because we have pictures of them knocking down other statues, so they’re in jail now.

Donald Trump: (50:45)
So there has never been an election where we’ve had this kind of difference. We want strong borders, without borders, you’ve heard me say it a thousand times. Without borders, you don’t have a country. They don’t want to have borders. They want to have open borders. It’s radical left and it’ll destroy our country. 20 years ago, Venezuela was a very rich country, one of the richest. One of the richest anywhere, per capita one of the richest. Tremendous oil reserves. Now they don’t have water, they don’t have food, they don’t have medicine. We do everything we can to take care of the people, but they have nothing.

Donald Trump: (51:29)
And that’s exactly the ideology that you have going over here. If I wasn’t there to stop it, if I wasn’t here to say, “No way, that’s not going to happen,” we’d be in some mess. We’d be in some mess, and Pelosi and Schumer and Bernie and Joe, they’ll never stop it. They don’t have the power, the strength to stop it. It’s beyond them, but we do. So there’s never been a time like this, where you’ve had an election of people so different. Okay, couple of questions? Yeah, please. Go ahead.

Speaker 1: (52:11)
Sir, you just spent the better part of an hour explaining why Americans should choose you and not your opponent. Yesterday, you said on Twitter, “Be careful what you wish for.” I guess the question is, do you see yourself as the underdog in this race? Do you see yourself losing in the fall?

Donald Trump: (52:23)
No, I don’t. I think we have really good poll numbers. They’re not suppression polls, they’re real polls. You look at the intercostal in Florida, you look at the Lakes, you see thousands of boats with Trump signs, American signs, you’ve got the Trump Pence sign all over. You look at what’s going on, you look at bikers for miles and miles riding up highways proudly with their signs. We won a race where it was the same thing, 2016. We had polls that were fake. They turned out to be fake. Not all, a couple of them got it right. Three of them, to be exact. Three of them. One of them was unsuspecting, but they got it right. They were very proud of it.

Donald Trump: (53:09)
But we had in 2016 something even more so, but we got in and we had 306 to I guess, 223, which was a tremendous margin of difference. You remember, they all said, “He cannot get to 270.” I went to Maine a number of times, where we just freed up lobster fishing and fishing. They took away 5,000 square miles from Maine. I just opened it up and I just got rid of tariffs in China. And we’re working on European Union, which charge our fishermen tariffs, and I said, “You’re not going to do that.” So we freed it up for Maine, but if you take a look, we went up there recently. There were crowds; thousands of people lined up going over to a factory where we were opening up for… We’re making swabs. A beautiful big, new factory making swabs.

Donald Trump: (53:59)
I think that the enthusiasm now is greater and maybe far greater than it was in 2016. I think a lot of people don’t want to talk about it. I think they’re not going to say, “Hey, I’m for Trump, I’m for Trump,” they don’t want to go through the process. And I fully understand that, because the process is not fair. The media doesn’t treat us fairly. They never have, and perhaps they never will. But maybe they will when we turn this around for a second term, and it’s going to happen very quickly.

Donald Trump: (54:27)
When we turn it around for a second time, maybe they will. I think we’re doing very well in the polls, and I think you have a silent majority the likes of which this country has never seen before. This is a very important election. We’ve done a great job. We had to turn it off, as I said. Turn it off, and now we’ve started it again. As you know, they announced two weeks ago record job numbers, almost five million people. And that beat the last month, which was also a record, 2.8 million people. Nobody’s ever done what we’ve done, and now we’re doing it twice. I think by election day, you’re going to see some incredible numbers. The third quarter is going to be really good. Fourth quarter’s going to be great, but next year’s going to be one of the best economic years. So, hopefully I’ll be able to be the President where we say, “Look at the great job I did.”

Speaker 2: (55:22)
[inaudible 00:55:22] This point?

Donald Trump: (55:23)
I think great. I think we have a great chance. I think we’re going to have a lot of people show up. I’m very worried about mail-in voting because I think it’s subject to tremendous fraud and being rigged. Do you see that Paterson, New Jersey, where I believe it was 20% of the vote was fraudulent? It was all sorts of things happened. I understand a mailman was recently indicted someplace for playing games with the mail-in ballots.

Donald Trump: (55:48)
You’ll have tremendous fraud if you do these mail-in ballots. Now, absentee ballots are okay, because absentee ballots, you have to get applications. You have to go through a process. If I’m here, and I vote in Florida, you get an absentee ballot. But you have to go through a process. Absentee ballots are great, but mail-in voting, where a governor mails millions of ballots to people all over the state. California, millions and millions of ballots, as an [inaudible 00:56:15]… and then they come back, they don’t come back. Who got them? Did you forget to send them to a Republican area or a Democrat area, I guess you could say? But if you take a look at all of the unbelievable fraud that’s been involved with mail-in voting over the last even short period of a while, but look at Paterson, New Jersey.

Donald Trump: (56:35)
It was a massive error and a massive miscalculation and there was incredible fraud. Look at the city council, what’s happened to it. This is one place, but you have many places and they’re all over. Yes, please?

Speaker 3: (56:53)
Thank you, sir. I wanted to know, when’s the last time you spoke with President Xi of China, and do you plan to speak with him in the near future?

Donald Trump: (57:00)
No, I haven’t spoken to him. No, I don’t. I have no plan to speak to him. Yeah, please. Go.

Speaker 3: (57:04)
Sir, a follow [crosstalk 00:57:05]-

Speaker 4: (57:06)
Do you want to do a follow up?

Speaker 3: (57:06)
Yeah, if you don’t mind.

Speaker 4: (57:08)
Okay. Yeah. Is it okay?

Donald Trump: (57:08)
Yeah, go ahead.

Speaker 3: (57:11)
I just wanted to know, Ruth Bader Ginsburg was hospitalized today with an infection. Wanted to know if you had any reaction to that news?

Donald Trump: (57:17)
No, I wish her the best. I hope she’s better. I didn’t hear that, actually. She was just hospitalized? No, that’s too bad. No, I wish her the best.

Speaker 4: (57:26)
[crosstalk 00:57:26]-

Donald Trump: (57:26)
She’s actually giving me some good rulings. Okay? So, you know that, right? People are surprised. No, I wish her the absolute best. Please.

Speaker 4: (57:36)
Thank you, Mr. President. So, you had mentioned the travel bans, and I wondered when do you plan to review that because the European continent is… Their situation is under control, much a better place than the US and there is no [inaudible 00:57:49] for other hot spots like Russia and India. So what will be the criteria to change that? And another question-

Donald Trump: (57:55)
We banned for Europe, and at some point, that’ll come off. And we’re dealing with them all the time. The relationship’s very good, they just don’t treat us very well on trade. They have been very unfair to us over many, many decades. We’re doing that. It’s very easy to solve. I was all set to solve it, actually, and then we got hit with the plague. But we have a travel ban on various countries, and that travel ban remains until such time as we say it doesn’t remain.

Speaker 4: (58:21)
And [crosstalk 00:58:22]-

Donald Trump: (58:22)
We want our country safe. Unlike Biden, we don’t want to have criminals pouring into our country. We don’t want to have open borders. We’re not going to have that, and we want to take care of our police. We want to actually fund our police, not defund them. We’re not going to abolish our police and we’re not going to make our military small and weak because probably or at least at top of the level, we need our military right now. Yeah, go ahead please.

Speaker 4: (58:50)
So, how do you think an America First policy can work during a pandemic? Aren’t you concerned that this could actually damage the US and make China more influence around the world?

Donald Trump: (59:02)
Okay, look, my policy’s America First. We’ve lost hundreds of billions of dollars a year with China and many other countries. What we’re doing is just handing everybody everything. It’s just sad. I’ve watched it, I’ve looked at it. We did the US Mexico, you saw that? USMCA? We made a very fair deal on trade. We had the worst deal ever. Right, you know that? We had the worst deal ever, and it replaced that. It replaced that horrible NAFTA deal that was one of the worst trade deals ever made.

Donald Trump: (59:35)
I’ll tell you, the only deal that might be worse is the WTO, World Trade Organization. Maybe worse. OAN, please?

OANN Reporter: (59:43)
Thank you, Mr. President. Your administration has taken tangible steps to ensure that Chinese companies are not taking advantage of our US stock markets-

Donald Trump: (59:54)
It’s true.

OANN Reporter: (59:54)
… our trade. Last week, your administration sent a letter to the Railroad Retirement Board, asking them to reconsider investments in Chinese defense firms.

Donald Trump: (01:00:06)
Meaning, not to invest?

OANN Reporter: (01:00:08)
Correct.

Donald Trump: (01:00:08)
That’s correct.

OANN Reporter: (01:00:08)
So, where is that request now? And are you taking tangible actions to ensure that US investments don’t continue to fund-

Donald Trump: (01:00:16)
Yes.

OANN Reporter: (01:00:16)
… defense firms in China?

Donald Trump: (01:00:18)
Yes, and you’ll see more coming. This was a very important bill that we signed, but you’re going to see more coming over the next short period of time. But yes, we don’t want them investing in Chinese military companies, okay?

OANN Reporter: (01:00:30)
What [crosstalk 01:00:30], I mean, what actions can be taken to ensure that that does not happen?

Donald Trump: (01:00:33)
Well, you got a lot of actions we can take, including the increase. Right now, people don’t know, China’s paying a lot of tariffs. We made a China deal, and they bought just I think the third highest amount of corn ever in world history, they just bought from us. The highest amount, which is great for our farmers, but I view it differently than I did before I made the deal. When I made the deal, I thought this was a great deal. After what happened to us, what happened to the world coming from China, I view it much differently. But we can impose massive tariffs on China if we want, and other countries, if we want.

Donald Trump: (01:01:12)
And we’ll see. We just want to be treated fairly. We want a level playing field. Our farmers were never treated properly by anybody, and they were targeted by China. I paid our farmers $28 billion over a two-year period, because they were targeted to that amount of money, to that exact amount of money. $28. They were $16 billion, and it was $12 billion, $28 over a two-year period, and we gave $28 billion to our farmers. That’s why they’re all here, and now they’re doing very well. Our farmers are doing very well, because we made really great trade deals. USMCA just kicked in. The China deal, they’re buying a lot. They are buying a lot, we’ll say that. They’re buying a lot. A lot of people ask, “How are they doing on the trade deal?” They’re buying a lot.

Donald Trump: (01:01:54)
So I want to thank everybody, and we’ll be having these conferences. Again, we’re going to be signing an immigration act very soon. It’s going to be based on merit. It’s going to be very strong. We’re going to work on DACA, because we want to make people happy. And I’ll tell you, even conservative Republicans want to see something happen with DACA. The Democrats had their chance for three years to do something with DACA, and they always turned it down. They always turned it down. They used it as politics. I’m using it to get something done, but we’ll be signing a very powerful immigration act. It’ll be great. It’ll be merit-based.

Donald Trump: (01:02:32)
The country’s tried to get it for 25 or 30 years. It’ll be strong on the border, but you’ll come in legally and you’ll be able to come in legally, and very importantly, we’ll be taking care of people from DACA in a very Republican way. Republicans, I’ve spoken to many Republicans, and some would like to leave it out. But really, they understand that it’s the right thing to do, so we’re going to be taking care of DACA. We will be doing for DACA what the Democrats had a chance to do and they never did it. Okay? Thank you all very much.

Press: (01:03:03)
[crosstalk 01:03:03] Florida, sir? What’s your advice to Governor DeSantis [crosstalk 01:03:17]-

Press: (01:03:17)
[crosstalk 01:03:17], Sir?

Press: (01:03:29)
Mr. President, a record number of deaths today in Florida. What are you advising Governor DeSantis to do? [crosstalk 01:03:29].

来源时间:2020/7/15   发布时间:2020/7/14

旧文章ID:22327

美方拚到底 北京示弱?解讀陸鴿派聲音 專家意見分歧

0

作者:  来源:中時電子報

近2年來美國在香港、南海、台灣、華為5G、駐美媒體等幾乎所有層面對大陸採取更加強硬的政策,擺出決心與大陸脫鉤的「新冷戰」姿態,在大陸的媒體與網路輿論幾乎都一面倒地激發出強烈的民族主義鷹派反應。但近日政府官員與媒體上陸續出現鴿派聲音,指稱大陸可能誤判了美國的政策走向,但北京對美態度是否已經軟化,美國分析人士間也出現截然不同的解讀。

美國持續對中國大陸採取強硬對抗政策,近期就南海主權問題轉變立場,還推出令北京惱怒的《香港自治法》。在美中關係嚴重惡化的氛圍下,大陸內部最近出現不少認為「中國誤判美國」的看法。

《美國之音》報導說,大陸前中聯部副部長周力最近告誡,要積極主動做好應對外部環境惡化的6大準備,排在首位的就是「要做好中美關係惡化加劇、鬥爭全面升級的準備」。

他認為,中方必須有「脫鉤」最終難以避免的清醒認識,美方一心一意要「拼到底」的心態,切不可低估,更不能畏懼。目前面對的困難和挑戰空前複雜、空前嚴峻,尤要防範美追責索賠的風險。

大陸網路近日也廣傳一篇題為《2020,對美國的4個想不到與10個新認識》的文章,作者是以反美立場而著稱的前解放軍空軍大校戴旭。文章提到「4個想不到」:美國對中國有這麼大仇恨、美國政府下手這麼狠、時間如此緊迫、容不下談判的時間,這是絕大多數大陸官員和專家預測不到的。而且沒有一個國家站出來表示同情和支持中國大陸,美國國內竟然也形成了統一戰線。因此,大陸有必要對美國重新認識,否則在戰略和戰術上會犯重大錯誤。

大陸外交部長王毅日前說,中美關係面臨1979年建交以來最嚴重的挑戰,他強調,「中國從來無意挑戰或取代美國,無意與美國全面對抗。」

分析人士認為,王毅的說法是向美方釋出和解訊號,但是有些專家有不同的解讀。美國智庫國際與戰略研究中心(CSIS)中國實力專案主任葛來儀(Bonnie Glaser)表示,王毅正在向世界其他國家發出信號,即中國是講理的,並且願意改善與美國的關係,好為北京指責川普政府的策略贏得支持。大陸並未調整對美策略,而是因為「狼戰外交對中國的形象沒有帶來積極的效果,所以現在他們正在嘗試另一種方法」。

布魯金斯學會中國問題研究員何里安(Ryan Hass)認為,王毅的這個講話是在美中關係中宣示原則立場,而不是調整對美政策。美國卡特中心中國專案主辦的《中美印象》網站主編劉亞偉說,從大陸官員最近的講話中看不出來他們認為對美國存在誤判因此要調整策略的意思。在中美關係如此惡劣的情況下,中方還要說要與美國合作,凸顯搞好中美關係對北京的重要性。只是現在中方把關係惡化歸咎於美方的說法,美國根本聽不進去。

来源时间:2020/7/15   发布时间:2020/7/15

旧文章ID:22326

濠江客:中美关系恶化之下,傅莹要求中国想清楚

作者:濠江客  来源:濠江客

据观察者网报道,7月9日上午,由中国公共外交协会、北京大学和中国人民大学联合主办了“相互尊重、信任合作——把握中美关系的正确方向”中美智库媒体视频论坛。中国国委兼外长王毅、美国前国务卿基辛格等先后作主旨发言。
""

对王毅外长的发言,濠哥曾在上周五撰写的《中方要求与美对话:现在强调中美合作还来得及吗?》一文中,进行了点评。

今天想研究一下王毅外长的前同事——前副外长、清华大学战略与安全研究中心主任傅莹在论坛上的演讲。



濠哥关注到傅莹的演讲,最主要是因为其中有这样一段话(蓝色字体为原文):


21世纪的中美关系,中方面临着一些大的问题需要把它想清楚,需要和美方探讨清楚。从中方角度来讲,我们应该如何应对这种挑战:




如何判断世界潮流?冷战之后我们对世界潮流的判断是和平与发展,这个潮流如今是不是改变了?是不是要变成冲突与对抗了呢?还是会继续和平发展?


中国自身的发展是要实现“两个一百年”的目标,这个进程如何避免被打断?我们在自身发展过程中需要和平与合作的国际环境。如何保障这个环境?


我们对世界未来的构想是构建人类命运共同体。如何在这条道路上有效开展国际合作?



这些都是中国在21世纪历程中必须面对的大问题。而中美关系发展方向的选择将决定对上述问题的回答。



傅莹提到了21世纪中国面临的三大问题:如何判断国际大势?如何持续发展自己?如果与国际社会合作?


傅莹要求中国人用自己的脑袋想清楚,这三大问题都必须由中美关系来解决:


一是要自己想清楚,二是要和美方讨论清楚。




濠哥也不知道自己的理解对不对。


如果是对的,那么,傅莹的这段话就非常的有意义。因为她说出了中国当下问题及中美关系问题的实质。


经常有网友在濠哥文章后台留言质问:离开美国,中国会死吗?没有美国,中国还不发展了?——这就像一个人说:我每天吃三个土豆加一杯凉水就会死吗?——没人跟你较这种劲,智商都这样了,还有什么好讨论的。


傅莹这段话的最大价值就是说明白了一个问题:中国的核心问题,就是中美关系的核心问题。


这是一个问题,而不是两个问题,它们是看待同一个问题的两个角度或两种说法。


傅莹还说:


未来中美两国是继续在同一个全球体系内解决分歧,还是分道扬镳、剥离成为两个相对独立且又彼此连接的体系,各行其是?




如果出现后一种情况,那也就意味着全球化的终结和现存体系的瓦解。




我们经常听到欧洲、日本等“中间地带”国家的学者对目前的形势表示担心,因为不愿看到中美分裂,不愿世界分裂,不愿选边站队。他们希望中美关系能够在方向上有一个理智选择。刚才陆克文说到,中国人常说“正确的方向”,正确不正确是中国人的概念,关键是有利于大家的方向,希望能够做一个更理性的选择。






傅莹的这一段话,濠哥不太同意。


中国的问题,可能取决于中美关系,不一定世界的问题也取决于中美关系。


中美决裂、分道扬镳,是不是就能终结全球化、瓦解全球现存体系,关键在于世界其他各国——或傅莹说的“中间地带”国家,是不是真的就会选边站,分裂成两大对立的派系。


濠哥不认为会发生这样的情况,不管中美是不是决裂或分道扬镳。


比如:在当前中美关系不断恶化的情况下,“中间地带”国家选边站了吗?没看到,也没有。


这一点,濠哥认为,中国人也要想清楚:一旦中美闹到决裂或分道扬镳的程度,有没有国家会选边站到中国一边?


换句话说,中美决裂之后的世界,究竟是中国军团+美国军团,还是中国+美国军团+其他国家?


傅莹建议:中国需要对未来中美关系发展做认真思考和设计,主动提出能够维护中国根本利益、能够解决美方合理关切、同时也符合世界和平发展大方向的选择和方案。


她的具体建议有四条:


第一,中方应该主动提出在哪些关键领域进行坦诚对话,而且要认真倾听彼此,而不是事先就认为对方都是错的,自己都是对的,这样就会陷入无休止的辩论和辩解循环;




第二,现在海上安全问题令人担心。中国需要让防卫政策和目标更加透明,尤其对海上的诉求和利益边界要更加清晰,加强危机管控机制建设,避免发生误判;




第三,面对后疫情时期的世界,我们需要尽可能多地开展协商,协助各国解决问题,多做“加法”,多“赋能”,承担合作型大国的责任;




第四,让世界多了解中国的真实情况和中国人的想法。




濠哥完全同意傅莹前副外长的上述四点意见,尤其海上,冲动是魔鬼。




濠哥再次强调,傅莹这篇讲话的最大贡献,就在于她不是单向的指责或谴责美国多么多么的坏,或罗列美国如何如何坏的斑斑劣迹,而是要求中国人想清楚:我们到底要什么,我们应该做什么。


在这篇讲话的最后,傅莹还含蓄的谈到了美国是不是衰落的问题。她是这样说的:


美国现在有很多困难,无论是国内还是和世界的关系都处于调整阶段,它能不能调整过来,能不能恢复起来,这是美国自己的事,不是别的国家说什么能决定的。同时,中国国内也面临非常严峻的任务,要实现“两个一百年”的目标,今年要完成脱贫攻坚任务,我们还在制定“十四五”计划,自身的任务非常繁重。中美两国在国内都有非常重的任务,我们没有必要相互“踩”对方,各自解决好自己的问题,同时相互合作,从积极的角度去帮助世界,这是我们两国应有的姿态。




这段话说得非常有意思。


濠哥给翻译成大白话:美国是不是衰落了,这是美国自己的事。中国决定不了美国的衰落,也不会因为你天天说人家衰落人家就会真的衰落。中国自己的事情、自己的问题也很多,别把精力放在唱衰美国上——没有必要相互“踩”对方。中美两个大国现在既需要解决好本国自己的问题,也需要相互合作并帮助世界,这才是大国范儿!


对么?

来源时间:2020/7/15   发布时间:2020/7/15

旧文章ID:22325

濠江客:现在强调中美合作还来得及吗?

作者:濠江客  来源:东亚红书房

忽如一夜春风来,中国外交部部长王毅、副部长乐玉成相继发声,呼吁中美合作和对话,为正在下坠的中美关系张开“降落伞”。

7月8日,外交部网站发表外交部副部长乐玉成的讲话,题目是:中美走向合作的大势是挡不住的!

7月9日,王毅国委兼外长在中美智库媒体论坛上致辞,题目是:守正不移,与时俱进, 维护中美关系的正确方向!

仅从讲话标题看,满满的都是正能量。
""

对此,无论是“人类公敌”——美国国务卿蓬佩奥,还是中国网友戏称的“川建国”——美国总统特朗普,通过他们灵敏八方的情报系统,都能及时捕捉到中国高级官员释放的这些“止战、吁和”的正面信息。

乐玉成在中国人民外交学会和美国亚洲协会共同举办的中美关系视频对话上发表主旨演讲。他指出,面对百年大变局和世纪大灾疫,面对层出不穷的新威胁、新挑战,世界都期待中美密切合作、积极互动,以化解危机,而现实却是美方越来越突出对华“战略竞争”,宣扬“脱钩”、“新冷战”,从而使危机雪上加霜。中美关系也因此被推向十字路口,面临何去何从的历史性抉择。

乐玉成强调,中美关系为两国人民带来沉甸甸、看得见的好处,为应对全球性挑战,促进亚太和世界和平与发展发挥举足轻重的作用。


关于中美关系的未来,乐玉成表示,尽管现在乌云密布,但天塌不下来,太阳总是要出来的,中美走向合作的大势是挡不住的。

濠哥认为,乐玉成的讲话,最重要的有两点,一是强调了中美友好为两国人民带来了“沉甸甸、看得见的好处”,作为高级官员公开承认这一点,挺不容易的;二是在当前中美冲突加剧的情况下对两国的未来表示乐观。这也很不容易。

此前一天,美国政府宣布,7月9日起对98类中国商品恢复加征25%的关税(涉及约340亿美元中国商品)。

据资料,此次涉及的340亿美元商品,是美贸易代表办公室(USTR)此前宣布的针对3000亿美元中国输美产品清单的一部分。此前根据中美磋商等,这部分商品获得关税豁免至2020年7月9日。

美方此举是不是意味着中美第一阶段贸易协议就此“触礁”了呢,目前官方没有给出明确的说法。

但至少说明,美国那边,目前没有收手的信号。

7月9日,王毅外长在向中美智库媒体视频论坛发表致辞时表示,中美关系不应另起炉灶、不能强行脱钩,而应继往开来,与时俱进。

王毅说,美国国内有人提出,过去几十年的对华接触政策失败了,美国在对华合作中吃亏了。这种说法既不尊重历史,也不符合事实。中美两国二战时曾是并肩作战的盟友。上世纪70年代,双方在尊重彼此不同制度的前提下,重新打开建交大门。两国对话合作走到今天,凝聚着几代人的政治智慧和不懈努力,也反映了两国关系发展的内在规律和必然趋势。

王毅表示,建交40年来,中美充分发挥互补优势,已经形成相互融合的利益共同体。中国的成功得益于对包括美国在内世界各国的开放合作,而中国的发展也为美国提供了持续增长的动力和巨大的市场空间。中美合作已经办成了很多有利于双方、有利于世界的大事。有人说,中美关系已回不到过去,但这并不意味着可以无视历史另起炉灶,更不意味着可以不顾实际强行脱钩。而是应当继往开来,与时俱进。


王毅表示,即使在当前疫情冲击下,74%的美国在华企业仍表示计划扩大对华投资,191个农业团体联名致信美国总统呼吁继续执行第一阶段经贸协议,多所美国大学公开支持加强中美教育交流,多国领导人也呼吁中美加强沟通对话、避免对抗分裂。这是中美双方应当倾听的声音,更是两国共同努力的方向。

看见王外长这篇讲话,濠哥要感动得流下泪来。

濠哥认为,对上述关于中美关系的陈述,中国官员只要真信,并发自内心,然后秉承这一真心真意处理中美关系,如果还搞不好中美关系,就是没天理了。

濠哥还认为,如果我们在中美关系友好之时,也这么讲;在我们决策中美事务、对内和对外介绍中美事务时,也这么想,如果还搞不好中美关系,就没有任何理由了。

据报道,当天的论坛由中国公共外交协会、北京大学和中国人民大学联合举办,主题为“相互尊重、信任合作——把握中美关系的正确方向”。前国务院新闻办主任赵启正,清华大学战略与安全研究中心主任、前外交部副部长傅莹,美国前国务卿基辛格,澳大利亚前总理、美国亚洲协会政策研究院院长陆克文,美国前东亚事务助理国务卿坎贝尔等中美双方多位前政要、知名智库专家学者、媒体机构负责人参加。

问题是,现在是中美关系自1979年1月1日正式建交以来,40年间最恶劣的时候。

问题是,当下的中美关系仍然继续滑落,下跌趋势已成,如何止跌,何时止跌,一切都是未知数。

对此,王毅就推动中美关系走出困境、重回正轨提出三条建议:

一是激活和开放所有对话渠道;

二是梳理和商定交往的清单,形成双方合作、对话与管控三份清单;

三是聚焦和展开抗疫合作。

关于三份清单,王毅表示,第一份是合作清单,明确中美在双边领域及全球事务中需要而且能够合作的事项,这份单子越长越好,而且不应受到其他问题的干扰;第二份是对话清单,列出双方尽管存在分歧但有望通过对话寻求解决的问题,尽快纳入现存的对话机制和平台;第三份是管控清单,本着求同存异的精神搁置并管控好少数难以达成一致的难题,尽可能减少对两国关系的冲击和破坏。

对上述建议,濠哥想起在朝鲜半岛问题上,王外长曾经提出的“双暂停”方案——朝鲜暂停核导活动,美韩暂停联合军演,重新回到谈判桌。这一方案,没有得到主要各方响应,当时无效、后来无效,未来也无效。

在“双暂停”方案基础上,中方提出的“双轨并进”思路——将实现半岛无核化和建立半岛和平机制结合起来,同步对等地解决各方关切,最终找到半岛长治久安的根本之策,也不了了之。
""

原因在哪里?“双暂停”方案不成功,“双轨并进”思路不被接受为什么?就在于这一方案隐含着一个前提:默认朝鲜拥有核武器。

中方提出这一方案,表明中国首先就默认了朝鲜拥有核武器这一事实。也就从根本上否认了中国参与朝鲜半岛事务的前提。

也因此,中国在朝鲜半岛问题上,始终是受害者,不管他们谁赢谁输。朝鲜有核武器,我们是输家,因为身边莫名其妙就多了一个管不了、管不住的核国家;朝鲜没有核武器,我们还是输家,原因不说了。

回到中美关系问题上,王外长的对话建议及“三份清单”建议,是否可行呢?

濠哥认为,要回答这个问题,中国人必须自问:现在还有人相信中美应该友好吗?

当有人呼吁中美友好的时候,中国网友是骂他傻瓜呢,还是骂他汉奸呢。

如果我们在骨子里就不认为中美应该友好,也不认为中美能够友好,那么,美国人凭什么就认为美中应该友好、能够友好呢。

牛顿力学的最大贡献之一,就是说明了作用力与反作用力大小相等、方向相反。

中国人如何对付美国,美国就应该如何对付中国,否则,就有一方是SB。

当美国人承认自己很傻很天真的时候,就等于承认自己是SB。

所以,我们看到,特朗普政府最坏的地方,就是在处理对华关系的时候,反复强调:对等,对等,还是对等。

但濠哥反复强调,中国绝对不能跟美国搞对等。

如果与美国搞对等,我们还如何获取大把大把的美元呢,还如何以大把的美元搞定我们想要搞定的一切呢。最近十年,中国最强大的武器,就是美元。

因此,濠哥感情上很支持,但理性上不看好上述关于中美对话和“三份清单”的建议,也不认为美方会正面回应。

当下的特朗普政府还有没有精力和关注度处理对华关系,濠哥也表示怀疑。

结论:中美当下合作不了,也友好不了,甚至对话也很困难。

那怎么办呢?

濠哥认为,风雨中抱紧普京,继续对美强硬,准备更坏的情形。直到让中美两国朝野、上下都在关系变坏的场景中对未来感到胆战心惊,让亢奋的脑袋渐渐冷却,中美关系再重新启动,以中美建交时的起点,再造中美关系第二个40年。

至于现在,就一个字:打!

回想我大清之年,如果没有义和团无知无畏地打,如何没有八国联军逼上门来打,如果没有太后带着皇上一路视察国情、民情到陕西,怎么会有后来的晚清新政与改革开放呢?

不要怕。外交部发言人赵立坚说的话,中国人不是吓大的!

来源时间:2020/7/15   发布时间:2020/7/11

旧文章ID:22324

尼尔·弗格森:美国正步入中国设计的“黑暗森林”?

作者:尼尔·弗格森  来源:文化纵横

【导读】

越来越多的战略家开始讨论中美脱钩、进入“新冷战”的可能性,这其中甚至包括了当年促成中美建交的美国前国务卿基辛格,以及当年提出“中美国(Chimerica)”的本文作者、历史学家弗格森。弗格森认为,这场新型冷战不仅不可避免,而且不一定是件坏事,因为它让美国摆脱了自得意满的心态,迫使其奋进创新,力求不让中国在人工智能、量子计算和其他关键战略技术方面超过自己。同时,他指出,目前美国存在一些支持中美保持合作的观点,但如果中国像《黑暗森林》中的法则一样决定进入冷战的话,决定权就不在美国了。

本文于2020年7月5日发布于彭博新闻观点栏目,由“聽贰拾肆橋”翻译后首发,感谢授权。尼尔·弗格森是美国重要学者,其对华态度体现了美国战略界的一种颇具代表性的声音,

仅代表作者观点,供诸君思考。

美国和中国正步入“黑暗森林”

(America and China Are Entering the Dark Forest)

“我们正处在一场冷战的前沿地带。”去年11月,亨利·基辛格在北京的彭博新经济论坛(Bloomberg New Economy Forum)上接受我采访时这样讲。这一观察本身并不全然令人震惊。自去年年初,我就清楚意识到,美中之间已开启一场新的冷战。这一洞见不只依据对资深政治家的访谈。我是在疯狂阅读中国科幻小说时得到这一想法的,尽管这可能显得反常识。

先来看历史。2018年初,围绕关税和知识产权盗窃的贸易争端开始,到当年年底,贸易争端演变成了一场技术战争,主题关乎中国公司华为在5G 网络通信领域的全球主导地位;演变成了一场意识形态方面的对抗,这是对北京的民族政策和处置香港问题做法的回击;也演变成了一场有关台湾和南海的旧摩擦的升级。

尽管如此,尤其是对基辛格而言,承认我们正处于冷战的开始阶段依旧不同寻常。自1971年首次秘密访问北京以来,基辛格一直是美中接触政策的总设计师。四十五年来,这一政策成了美国外交政策的主旋律,从根本上改变了冷战中期的均势,构成不利苏联的局面。它为历史上规模最大、速度最快的中国工业革命创造了地缘政治条件。在中国加入世界贸易组织后,它带来了一种极不一般的金融互利关系,2007年,莫里茨·舒拉里克(Moritz Schularick)和我将这一关系命名为“中美共同体”(Chimerica)。

""

北京和华盛顿之间的关系何以恶化得如此之快,乃至于基辛格眼下都谈起了冷战?这一问题的常规答案是,唐纳德·特朗普总统像一只落锤般荡入了“自由主义国际秩序”,第二次冷战只是他的“美国优先”战略的负面后果之一。但这一看法过于重视美国外交政策2016年以来的变化,而不够重视四年之前中国外交政策的变化。未来的历史学家会发现,中美共同体的败落始于全球金融危机之后,当时,一位领导人得出的结论是,中国再也没有任何必要韬光养晦了,那曾是邓小平的著名建议。

四年前,美国中部的选民投下了支持特朗普的选票,当时,这在一定程度上是对接触政策的不对称回报及其经济上的必然结果即全球化的杯葛。不仅中美共同体的经济利益不成比例地流向了中国,不仅其成本不成比例地由美国工人阶级承担,而且同样一些美国人眼下看到,在一个新的战略超级大国诞生的时刻,他们在华盛顿选出的领导人充当了助产士的角色:这个甚至更难对付的新的战略超级大国正在挑战全球主导地位,因其经济实力强过苏联。

不只是基辛格承认美国与北京的关系恶化了。另一位接触政策的长期支持者奥维尔·谢尔(Orville Schell)最近也承认,接触方式已告失败,“因为以真正有意义的方式展开接触,可能激发人们实施更多改革、推动更多变化的诉求,并最终造成党的灭亡,党对这样的方式深感犹豫。”

与此同时,批评接触政策的保守派人士急于在这一政策的坟墓上跳舞,他们敦促在经济上“隔离”中华人民共和国,并大幅弱化其在全球供应链中的地位。在特朗普行政分支的更多恐中成员,特别是国务卿迈克·蓬佩奥(Mike Pompeo)、副国家安全顾问博明(Matt Pottinger)和贸易顾问彼得·纳瓦罗(Peter Navarro)那里,这方面的举动出现了大跃进。在过去三年半的时间里,他们一直认为,特朗普担任总统期间唯一重要的事情是,他改变了美国对华政策的路线,即从接触转变为竞争,这一点在2017年的《国家安全战略》(National Security Strategy)中得以阐明。2020年的诸多事件或将证明他们的正确。

自2017年以来,美国公众尤其是老年选民对中国的态度明显更加强硬。中国是近年来两党达成真正共识的少数议题之一。民主党总统候选人乔·拜登的竞选团队显然打算把拜登刻画成在中国问题上持有比特朗普更强硬的立场,这是这个时代的标志。而在香港问题上,众议院民主党议长南希·佩洛西与蓬佩奥一样愤愤不平。

我曾指出过,这场新的冷战既是不可避免的,也是可取的,这尤其是因为它让美国摆脱了自得自满,转而砥砺奋进,力求不让中国在人工智能、量子计算和其他关键战略技术方面超过自己。但对我的这一观点,目前依旧存在明显的抵触,在学术界尤其如此。

上周,约翰斯·霍普金斯大学基辛格全球事务中心(Kissinger Center for Global Affairs)组织了一个有关疫情后世界秩序的论坛。在这个论坛上,绝大多数发言者就新冷战的危险性提出了警告。但谷歌公司前主席埃里克·施密特倡导一种“竞合”(coop-etition)的“对立-伙伴关系”(rivalry-partnership)模式,在这种模式下,美中两国或可再度以三星和苹果公司行之多年的那种方式展开竞争和合作。

哈佛大学的格雷厄姆·艾利森(Graham Allison)是畅销书《注定一战: 中美能避免修昔底德陷阱吗?》的作者,他给出了十一世纪的中国宋朝皇帝和辽国在中国北方边境地区“亦敌亦友的关系”(frenmity)作为例证。艾利森认为,大流行病“让这一点明白无误:即要将中国清楚确定为敌人或朋友是不可能的。对立-伙伴关系听起来或许复杂,但生活就是复杂的”。

国际货币基金组织前第一副总裁约翰·利普斯基(John Lipsky)写道:“建立一种富有成效且可预期的美中关系,是巩固全球治理机构的必要条件。”美国前副国务卿詹姆斯·斯坦伯格(James Steinberg)评论说,上一次冷战“曾在数十年间投下一场全球大屠杀的阴影”。“为形成一个限制对立、创造合作空间的环境,我们可以做些什么呢? ”

我在胡佛研究所的同事易明(Elizabeth Economy)给出一个答案:“美国和中国可以……合作应对某个全球性挑战”,也就是气候变化。布鲁金斯学会的汤姆·怀特(Tom Wright)采取了类似的路线:“只关注大国竞争而忽视合作的需要,实际上不会给美国带来相较于中国的持久战略优势。”

所有这些听来都极其合理,但忽视了一点。中国共产党不是三星公司,更不是辽国。相反,今天“对立-合作关系”的支持者忽视了一种可能性,即中国人对亦敌亦友这种关系没有兴致:第一次冷战中(尤其是1968年之后)正是如此,当时的学者往往是鸽派,而非鹰派。他们非常清楚这是一场冷战,因为这是他们挑起的。

诚然,也有中国学者痛惜接触政策的一去不回。经济学家余永定最近加入到波士顿大学凯文·加拉格尔(Kevin Gallagher)的行列,他赞成华盛顿和北京之间再度实现和解。但那并非北京的官方意见。去年,我开始在一些会议中公开谈到第二次冷战,当时令我惊讶的是,没有中国代表反驳我。9月,我问其中一位国际问题学者为什么会那样,对方笑着回答我说:“因为我同意你的看法!”

清华大学国际关系研究院院长阎学通最近认为,不同于第一次冷战,第二次冷战将是纯粹的技术竞争,没有代理战争和核边缘政策。

北京大学国家发展研究院院长姚洋在接受《文化纵横》杂志专访时也同样坦率:“现在其实已经形成了‘新型冷战’的局面”,他表示。“之所以形成这种局面,我认为有两个原因。首先是西方政客‘甩锅’的需要。”他补充说:“其次,进一步看,现在西方想把这个问题变成一个制度问题,他们说中国能做到这么严厉的防控措施,是因为你是一个非民主的社会,所以有这么大的权力和能力去做这件事情。”

""

但是,就今天的中国如何看待美国和世界,于我最有教益的著作并非政治文本,而是一部科幻小说。《黑暗森林》是刘慈欣获得巨大成功的作品《三体》的第二部,2008年出版。很难夸大刘慈欣在当代中国的影响:他受到深圳和杭州一些技术公司的敬重,在一次官方背景的会议上还被尊为中国二十一世纪创新面孔之一。

《黑暗森林》延续了冷酷无情、技术优越的三体人入侵地球的故事,介绍了刘慈欣“宇宙社会学”的三大公理:

首先,“生存是文明的第一需要”;

其次,“文明不断增长和扩张,但宇宙中的物质总量保持不变”;

第三,“猜疑链”和另一个文明中的“技术爆炸”风险意味着太空中只能有丛林法则。用该书英雄人物罗辑的话来讲:

宇宙就是一座黑暗森林,每个文明都是带枪的猎人,像幽灵般潜行于林间,……竭力不让脚步发出一点儿声音……他必须小心,因为林中到处都有与他一样潜行的猎人,如果他发现了别的生命,不管是不是猎人,不管是天使还是魔鬼,不管是娇嫩的婴儿还是步履蹒跚的老人,也不管是天仙般的少女还是天神般的男孩,能做的只有一件事:开枪消灭之。在这片森林中,他人就是地狱……任何暴露自己存在的生命都将很快被消灭……

当然,你可能会说,这只是科幻小说。是的,但《黑暗森林》让我们意识到:假如中国已对我们宣布实施冷战,那么是否与中国进行冷战就不取决于我们。我们不只已然处在新冷战的前沿地带;那些地带还被中国设计的一座黑暗森林覆盖着,无从识透。

来源时间:2020/7/15   发布时间:2020/7/15

旧文章ID:22323

与许纪霖、刘擎等商榷:“(反)政治正确”框架的思维陷阱

作者:林垚  来源:澎湃新闻

“(反)政治正确”这个论述框架本身其实完全是一种话术。它不但无助于推动更深入的关于表达自由与身份政治等议题的公共讨论,而且通过其笼统性与选择性,让习惯了这个论述框架的人陷入思维盲区,看不到现实案例中的种种复杂性,并且下意识地在社会文化议题上采取保守姿态,拥抱现状、抗拒变革。

2020年6月22日晚,华东师范大学ECNU-UBC现代中国与世界联合研究中心组织了一场四位老师的线上对谈,围绕美国当前的反种族主义抗议运动展开讨论。整体而言,四位老师均对这场运动持同情理解的立场,这一点我非常赞同;但对话中的一些具体论述及其背后的思维框架,在我看来仍有可议之处,因此不揣冒昧,提出了一些商榷意见。由于未能现场聆听此次对谈,我的回应只能以事后整理的对谈文字整理稿为依据,如有误解几位老师观点之处,这里先行致歉。

本文的商榷,集中于整场对谈始终依托着的“(反)政治正确”论述框架。西方的“政治正确”是近年中文互联网讨论中常见的一个概念;近两个月来,诸如HBO暂时下线《乱世佳人》、《老友记》制片人对演员族裔多元性不足表示后悔、南方邦联将军雕像被抗议者推倒等事件,也被一些评论者作为“抗议运动已经进入扩大化、‘政治正确’化阶段”的证据。此次对谈中,许纪霖老师作为主持人,同样选择从“政治正确”这一角度切入议题、设定了随后讨论的框架(framing)。

作为回应,其它三位与谈者并没有去挑战这一框架本身,而是不约而同地采取了让步式的论述,来委婉地为被反对者指为“政治正确扩大化”的反种族主义运动辩解。比如白彤东老师的论述策略是:美国的“政治正确”可能有点走过头了,但有些言论里种族歧视、性别歧视、地域歧视等“政治不正确”盛行,本身亟需“政治正确”观念的矫正。刘擎老师的论述策略是:“政治正确”意识中蕴含着文明的底线,与现代自由平等尊重的进步主义事业密不可分,所以不能完全放弃“政治正确”,只需注意在追求“政治正确”的过程中把握住分寸感。吴冠军老师的论述策略是:“政治正确”确实会让有些人不敢说话,但是美国黑人整日遭受警察暴力与系统性歧视而性命堪忧,是比言论自由更为急迫的问题,此时心平气和的公共讨论空间早已丧失,“政治正确”问题自然也可以暂时搁置不谈。

三位老师虽然因此对这些被指为“政治正确”的事件抱有理解的态度,但整场讨论仍未能摆脱“(反)政治正确”这一话术本身所设下的论述框架和思维陷阱。其实,“(反)政治正确”这个说法,本质上是一种修辞或话术,旨在通过偷梁换柱的方式混淆问题的焦点、转移公共讨论的注意力;一旦我们接受了“政治正确”这一词汇对语言的污染,在其设定的框架下讨论“‘政治正确’的尺度在哪里”,便已是陷入到了一个扭曲的话语体系中,从而容易忽视真正问题所在。

注意,说“‘(反)政治正确’是一种话术”,并不是说(美国的)“社会文化力量压制言论自由”的可能性不存在,也并不是否认许多人在使用“政治正确”一词时,对“社会文化力量是否会(或者是否已经在)压制言论自由”这个问题抱有真实的关切与焦虑。恰恰相反,指出“(反)政治正确”的话术性质,正是为了摈除修辞的喧嚣,完整呈现出那些被其掩蔽与扭曲的值得关切的议题,从而提高相关公共讨论的深度与质量。

那么,“(反)政治正确”为何是一种话术,这种话术又如何设下思维陷阱、污染公共语言呢?要回答这一点,我们不妨先想一想,当我们在说某个事件构成“政治正确”、或者某种表达遭到“政治正确”打压时,我们所指的、所关心的究竟是什么?使用“(反)政治正确”这个词,是有助于还是有碍于我们去恰当地澄清、分析、理解和评判相关的现象?从这个思路出发,我们可以发现,“(反)政治正确”这个论述框架因为两方面原因而有碍于公共讨论的有效展开,一是其在概念上过分笼统,二是其选择性的聚焦与失明。

一、“政治正确”概念的笼统性

先说笼统性。在西方世界,当许多人在说“政治正确”时,其所指的现象大致可以这样定义:某个群体出于某些政治上或者意识形态上的考虑,将有违于特定政治偏好或意识形态偏好的表达(可能是因为表达的内容,也可能是因为表达的方式)排斥在某些言论平台之外。

可以看到,一旦我们给出了这样一个相对详细的定义之后,许多原本笼统归纳在“政治正确”这个语焉不详的词语之下的现象,其性质上的差别就得以显现出来,使得我们能够更细致地去辨析哪些现象合理、哪些现象不合理。比如,采取排斥行动的主体是谁,遭到排斥的是什么类型的言论,发生排斥的是什么性质的平台,排斥的具体方式如何,对被排斥者造成什么样的个人影响,用来为排斥辩护的意识形态或政治考虑有哪些,等等,这些因素都有可能对具体事件的合理性造成影响。

""

以“行动主体的性质”为例:国家暴力机器以法律手段限制或禁止某一言论表达,与(不具有垄断地位的)某个企业出于迎合其目标客户群体的考量而拒绝特定表达,二者之间恐怕存在天壤之别。比如HBO对《乱世佳人》增加“种族主义历史背景介绍”后重新上架,但想要看“无背景介绍”版《乱世佳人》的观众仍然可以自由选择去Amazon Prime等其它视频网站;这和假如美国政府哪天宣布《乱世佳人》为禁片、任何人不得播放或观看,显然是两码事。这个区别对于那些主张“市场自由”的人来说尤其重要:如果你认为企业有权为了利润而迎合消费者的偏好,那么理当接受企业为了利润而迎合消费者的政治偏好(包括将遭到目标消费群体反感的产品下架),而不是批评它们“向政治正确低头”;将消费者自身的“政治正确”观念(而非国家暴力机器强加的“政治正确”)视为对市场秩序的干扰,显然是自相矛盾且讽刺的。当然,特定情况下国家是否有权干涉企业的某些表达(比如种族主义餐馆老板拒绝让某些种族的顾客进门消费),以及当某个企业形成垄断地位之后,其“为了追求利润而拒绝特定表达”的权利应当受到怎样的限制,这些都是可以进一步讨论的议题;但恰恰是跳出了“政治正确”这个语焉不详的框架,切换到上述详细列出各个因素的定义,这种进一步的讨论才能有效进行下去。

同理,被排斥言论本身的性质、排斥方式、排斥造成的个人影响等等,都是评判具体案例时需要考虑的因素,这里就不再一一举例。总之,即便我们要讨论“政治正确是否过火”的问题,也要首先把“政治正确”这个词拆解成更详细的定义,才能基于具体案例中的各个因素有效地加以分析;只笼统地说“(反)政治正确”,其实是拒绝正视具体案例的多样性与复杂性。

如果只是笼统,倒也罢了;“(反)政治正确”这个说法的更大问题,在于它会导致整个公共讨论对同一范畴内不同现象的选择性聚焦与选择性失明。这种选择性具体又体现在两个方面:一是“(反)政治正确”这个说法在冷战晚期以来西方内部左右翼“文化战争”语境中的党派针对性,由此造成思维上的“党派盲区”;二是这个论述框架本身对现状的自然化与正常化,由此造成思维上的“现状盲区”。

二、“政治正确”话术的党派盲区

刘擎老师在对谈中提到了“政治正确”在西方语境下从早期左翼内部的自黑,转变为保守派攻击进步派的修辞武器的历史;这一点我在2018年的讲座《“政治正确”与言论自由》中也有提及。在西方世界,从八十年代开始,对“政治正确”一词的使用开始带有明确的党派针对性,由保守主义右派用于指控左派,声称后者试图在高校内部以及公共舆论场域中打压右派的言论自由;反过来,对于右派打压左派言论自由的种种行径,则并没有人用“政治正确”来指称。如此一来,跟着使用起“(反)政治正确”一词的人,也就不知不觉间跟着接受了这种说法所附带的刻板印象(“政治正确”是左派专属现象),进而注意力受到其引导,在思考与讨论时聚焦于左派的相关言行,而忽略掉与此同时发生在右派一方或主流社会里的、笼统而言本来同样可以称为“政治正确”的、而且性质往往更加严重的钳制言论事件。

比如现在有许多人指责Black Lives Matter(BLM)运动“大搞政治正确”;但他们不知道的是,真要说“政治正确”的话,BLM运动的支持者才是美国右翼势力及主流社会“政治正确”的受害者。2016年,全美橄榄球大联盟球员卡佩尼克(Colin Kaepernick)在赛前演奏美国国歌时单膝下跪(马丁路德金在民权运动时曾经做过的动作),以此表达对警察暴力和系统性种族主义的抗议、唤醒公众对这些问题的关注。这一行为迅速遭到了部分媒体的围攻,指责他胆敢对国歌不敬;2017年特朗普上任后,也公开叫嚣说橄榄球大联盟必须开除卡佩尼克。联盟在这些压力下迅速抛弃了卡佩尼克,后者从此失业,直到今年乔治·弗洛伊德死亡事件引发又一波BLM运动,卡佩尼克的遭遇才被媒体重新提起。卡佩尼克事件无疑是对言论自由的压制,但无论是美国还是中国,那些口口声声担忧“政治正确过火”的人,没有一个想过要把此事纳入“政治正确过火”的范畴来思考和讨论;其中一些人或许根本没有听说过这个事件,另一些人甚至可能转头就会为联盟开除卡佩尼克的做法辩护(比如“国歌就是不容玷污”、“体育不该卷入政治”之类)。

""

美国纽约持续抗议警察暴力执法

再举一个例子。在今年初美国国会对特朗普的弹劾表决中,共和党参议员密特·罗姆尼(也是2012年共和党的总统候选人)投下了赞成票,成为美国历史上第一个(也是唯一一个)投票支持弹劾本党总统的参议员。罗姆尼的这一行为无疑体现了巨大的勇气(也反衬出其它共和党议员的蝇营狗苟),但他也因此成为美国各路保守派势力的众矢之的,被随后的“保守派政治行动会议(Conservative Political Action Conference)”等大型活动取消参加资格、拒之门外。如果我们套用“(反)政治正确”的论述框架的话,完全可以说罗姆尼是美国保守派内部“政治正确”的受害者。当然我们也可以说,一场活动想邀请谁不想邀请谁,完全是组织者的自由;但这个辩护,对于许多被指责为“左派大搞政治正确”的案例,其实同样适用(这又回到前面说的,“政治正确”这个说法太笼统,没有办法用来区分哪些做法可以接受、哪些做法不可接受)。

总之,由于“(反)政治正确”这个话术的党派针对性,导致使用这个概念的人很容易受其误导,而陷入一种思维定势:一方面目光紧盯当代左翼社运的一举一动,稍有不同意处便先入为主地认为是对自由表达的压制(这种先入为主既源于对冷战时代苏东阵营“左翼政权”的记忆与联想,同时“政治正确”一词的笼统性也强化了这种先入为主);另一方面对右翼一方发生的事情视而不见或者听过便忘,低估后者的实际威胁。这样一来,“(反)政治正确”这个论述框架,就在无形中扭曲了我们对“当代欧美社会中言论自由的真正威胁来自何方”的认知。

三、“政治正确”话术的现状盲区

在西方世界,除了党派盲区之外,从更一般的意义上说,“政治正确”作为一种话术,本身就有碍于公众对事态的认识和对现状的挑战。“政治”一词带有一种“人为”、“不自然”的色彩;当我们贬低某些做法为“政治正确”时,实际上也是在将被这种做法挑战的现状“自然化(naturalize)”、“正常化(normalize)”,同时将被命名为“政治正确”的挑战“人为化(artificialize)”、“问题化(problematize)”,为现状罩上一层天然、正当、合理的面纱,而忽略了现状本身同样是人为建构的产物,也就忽略了主流社会对现状的维持本身就是一种更为隐蔽、更为根深蒂固的“政治正确”。

以中文互联网上近来热议的“CK大码模特”一事为例。内衣公司CK在一幅最新的广告中,启用了一名身材魁梧、相貌也不符合所谓“主流审美”的黑人跨性别模特,因此遭到一些网民的抨击,指责该公司“屈服于政治正确”。但是如果我们抛开“政治正确”的话术成分,反过来想一想:在这幅广告以前,内衣公司在父权社会“主流审美”的文化霸权下,在挑选模特时以满足男性凝视为先,而长期无视自身顾客的真实需求(比如现实生活中许多身材魁梧的女性,无法参考模特清一色的消瘦身材来挑选合适自己的内衣),内衣公司也因此损失了来自这部分顾客的潜在利润,这难道不才是真正需要反对的“政治正确”吗?

""

换句话说,当网民们指责内衣公司更换模特是“屈从于政治正确”时,他们其实是在使用“政治正确”这一话术,将“内衣广告优先满足男性凝视而非考虑女性顾客需求”这一现状及其背后的男权主义意识形态加以“正常化”,将更换模特一事对现状构成的挑战加以“问题化”,从而达到维持现状(从而继续享受凝视特权)的目的。假如我们要保留“政治正确”这个词(以及它的贬义用法)的话,我们完全可以说:CK换模特的做法,不但不是“屈从于(当代左翼身份政治运动的)政治正确”,而且恰恰相反,是对“(男权社会长久以来的)政治正确”的反抗与冲击;如果你真心反对“政治正确”的话,你就应该大声赞赏CK换模特的做法,而且应该积极推动其它内衣公司也把它们的模特换得更加多元、更加不受所谓“主流审美”的拘束。

再比如说,主持人许纪霖老师在对谈中声称,美国的立国之本是“从基督教内化而来的现代性文明”,是以“盎格鲁·撒克逊的美国”为基础和核心的“文化大熔炉”,诸如此类。先不说此类“大熔炉叙事”近几十年来不断遭到来自美国移民史等领域更深入研究的挑战、驳斥和证伪,在事实层面便站不住脚;单就其在现实中扮演的角色而言,这种“以基督教文明为基础、以盎格鲁撒克逊为主体的文化大熔炉”式的自我认知,恰恰是建国两百多年来被美国主流文化奉为“政治正确”加以捍卫的观念,和用以打击“异端”与“外来者”的工具。正是通过把“真正的美国”等同于“基督教传统”和“盎格鲁撒克逊身份遗产”,主流社会才可以堂而皇之地以华人(或者其它亚洲人)在种族、文化、宗教信仰上与“真正的美国人”存在根本差别为由,制定诸如1882年“排华法案”、1924年“排亚法案”等歧视性的移民法规、以及各种禁止跨种族通婚(anti-miscegenation)的法律。即便在这些法律层面上的歧视被废止之后,主流社会仍然一方面通过“大熔炉叙事”的文化压力,迫使少数族裔移民放弃原先的语言与文化认同,“融入”以美国城郊中产白人生活模式为代表的所谓“美国文化”中去,否则便会被视为“不够美国”;另一方面无论这些少数族裔移民如何努力融入,仍然因为不属于“盎格鲁撒克逊身份遗产(以及更广泛的白人身份)”谱系,而无法得到主流文化的完全接纳,生活中时不时会遭遇到“永远的外邦人(perpetual aliens)”的尴尬。

从这个意义上说,近年来多元文化主义对美国主流社会这种“基督教盎格鲁撒克逊基础上的大熔炉”式自我认知的挑战,恰恰是在打破既有的“政治正确”,将各个移民群体从这种观念的桎梏中解放出来;反倒是中国学者往往因为缺乏对美国社会政治文化历史的深入了解,对隐含在主流话语中的此类“政治正确”不假思索地接受和内化,最终跟着美国右翼一起,将当代身份政治运动反思主流现状的倡议斥为“数典忘祖”。

最后再举近期网上热议的“推倒雕像”风潮为例。在右翼的论述框架中,“推倒雕像”是当代左翼身份政治运动“大搞政治正确”的体现;但反过来想,大力主张某些雕像意义重大不能被推倒、以及一开始树立起某些雕像的做法本身,又何尝不是在构建或维护某种更加根深蒂固的“政治正确”?我在以前的文章中曾经提到过,任何一座雕像的树立与保留,都不是自然而然的事情,而是特定历史时期社会政治氛围的反映。比如如今遍布美国南部与中西部各州的“南方邦联(Confederacy)”将领雕像,集中修建于几个历史时期,包括20世纪初“第二波3K党运动”兴起期间、以及五六十年代白人至上主义者执政保守州对抗民权运动期间;修建这些雕像的目的,正是为了洗白南方各州为了维护奴隶制而发动内战的事实、同时展示白人至上主义势力反对种族平等的决心。

在树立这些雕像的同时,南方政客与文人也一直在积极地构建并传播相应的文化迷思,比如声称建立邦联雕像只是为了“纪念南方文化遗产”(倘若如此,为什么内战中站在联邦政府一边反对南方叛国的肯塔基、西弗吉尼亚等州,以及根本没有卷入内战的中西部各州,后来也纷纷竖起邦联雕像呢?),以及大力宣扬罗伯特·李的个人修养(却对其残酷对待手下奴隶的行径避而不谈,并将“败局已定下主动投降”这种理所应当的行为吹捧成“不忍苍生涂炭”与“渡尽劫波兄弟在”的典范)。邦联雕像将这些文化迷思实体化和具象化,这些文化迷思反过来又被内化为“不能拆除邦联雕像否则就是不尊重历史”的理由;二者共同构建和维持着主流社会以十九世纪末二十世纪初以来对内战性质的“修正派”历史叙事(“奴隶制并非内战的真正原因”、“南方人只是在保家卫国”)为基础的、同情“南方文化遗产”的“政治正确”。近年来“拆除邦联雕像”呼声的兴起,恰恰意味着美国人开始反思起弥漫在主流叙事中的这种文化迷思,开始对雕像背后的白人至上主义政治意图加以警惕与反省;换句话说,恰恰是在挑战一个多世纪以来“修正派”内战叙事对现状的“政治正确”式绑架。如果你真心反对“政治正确”,恰恰应该大力支持拆除邦联雕像才对。

对于其它非“南方邦联”的雕像,也是同样的道理。比如我个人尽管并不主张拆除华盛顿的雕像;但“政治正确过火”这种论述框架,有助于我们理解和讨论“是否应当拆除华盛顿雕像”这个议题吗?试想,“华盛顿是国父,没有华盛顿就没有美国,拆除华盛顿雕像就等于否认整个美国历史”这样的叙事,难道不正是主流社会尊奉迄今的“政治正确”?从这个角度看,拆除华盛顿雕像,同样恰恰是在“反政治正确”,而不是在“搞政治正确”;即便你认为主张拆除华盛顿雕像的人是“无理取闹”,也应该说他们是“反政治正确反过了头”,而不是“搞政治正确搞过了头”。或者退一步说,我们既可以用“搞政治正确”去描述这件事,也可以用“反政治正确”去描述这件事;这也就意味着“政治正确”这个论述框架实际上没有起到任何帮助我们更深入地剖析“是否应当拆除华盛顿雕像”的正反理由的作用,而仅仅是通过这种论述框架自带的笼统性与“现状盲区”效应,不加反思地唤起我们对挑战现状者的怀疑与反感。

正是在这些意义上说,“(反)政治正确”这个论述框架本身其实完全是一种话术。它不但无助于推动更深入的关于表达自由与身份政治等议题的公共讨论,而且通过其笼统性与选择性,让习惯了这个论述框架的人陷入思维盲区,看不到现实案例中的种种复杂性,并且下意识地在社会文化议题上采取保守姿态,拥抱现状、抗拒变革。

来源时间:2020/7/15   发布时间:2020/7/14

旧文章ID:22319

美国反种族主义抗议潮中的“塑像之争”

0

作者:林玲  来源:《世界知识》2020年第14期

2020年5月25日,美国非裔男子弗洛伊德遭白人警察暴力执法致死。该事件引发了席卷全美的反种族主义抗议浪潮,其爆发规模、影响程度,已经超过了2014年因密苏里州弗格森小镇白人警察枪杀黑人青年事件引发的“黑人的命也是命”的抗议行动。在这一波反种族主义抗议声浪中,再度出现“倒像”呼声。随着抗议行动的蔓延,“倒像”声势不断高涨,美国多地的南部邦联领导人和将士的塑像被相继推倒或拆除,被民权人士视为蓄奴制与种族主义历史产物的邦联塑像再度成为抗议行动的矛头所向。

""

非裔男子乔治·弗洛伊德之死,再度掀起美国清除涉种族主义塑像与纪念标识的运动。图为弗吉尼亚州首府里士满市中心的南方邦联将领罗伯特·李雕像。

邦联塑像的由来与争议

据美国民权团体“南方贫困问题与法律中心”统计,全美现有1500多处邦联标志物,其中包括700多座邦联纪念碑、塑像以及100多处以邦联代表人物命名的街道、村镇和公立学校建筑等,主要集中于南部各州。邦联标志是美国南北战争期间南部邦联的历史产物,而南部邦联的成因与南部的蓄奴制历史密不可分。19世纪中期以来,南部蓄奴州与北方自由州之间一直存在着土地和物产资源的争夺以及在蓄奴制问题上的政治理念冲突,长期积累的南北矛盾最终引发了政治危机。1861年,美国南部蓄奴州宣布退出美国联邦,成立“美利坚邦联”,由杰斐逊·戴维斯任邦联总统,南北战争随之爆发。1865年,南北战争以南部战败告终,联邦政府废除了南部奴隶制,南部邦联也相应解体。而自19世纪末以来,随着内战后南北和解进程的加速,在以“邦联之女联合会”为代表的南部白人组织的推动下,南部各地相继建造了南部邦联领导人与将士的纪念碑和塑像,此后逐步扩展到一些北方州。对于推动邦联纪念物建设的南部白人而言,这是一项伟大而神圣的建设事业,那些矗立于南部各地市中心和公共空间的邦联纪念碑与塑像、飘扬于市政广场的邦联国旗寄托着他们对于南部邦联的伤逝与怀念,也成为旧南部社会秩序的历史见证。然而,对于众多非裔美国人而言,邦联纪念物则代表了蓄奴制与种族压迫的历史记忆,自20世纪60年代黑人民权运动以来,邦联塑像所在地往往成为民权人士抗议示威的集会地。每当美国社会出现大规模的黑白种族冲突,移除邦联纪念物的呼声就会应声而起,一波波抗议声浪的背后是不同族群历史记忆与文化认同的冲撞。

2015年震惊全美的南卡罗来纳州查尔斯顿市黑人教堂枪击案就曾引发了一轮“倒像”运动。当年6月17日,一名白人至上主义者持枪袭击了查尔斯顿的伊曼钮尔非裔卫理圣公会教堂,造成九人死亡,成为当地历史上最严重的枪击案。伊曼钮尔教堂是美国最古老、最知名的黑人教堂之一,具有历史文化象征意义,黑人民权运动领袖小马丁·路德·金就曾到访过该教堂。枪击事件致使2014年以来爆发的“黑人的命也是命”抗议行动持续升级,而事发后枪手手持南方邦联国旗、宣扬种族仇恨照片的流传更进一步激发了反种族主义抗议者要求移除邦联标志物、推倒邦联塑像的诉求。据“南方贫困问题与法律中心”2019年的统计,自查尔斯顿事件后,已有114个邦联标志物被移除。然而,在拆除塑像风潮的背后是反种族主义者与右翼种族主义势力的对峙,2017年弗吉尼亚州的夏洛特维尔冲突事件更加凸显了族群矛盾的激化。2017年8月11日晚,在夏洛特维尔市议会决定移除市中心公园的邦联统帅罗伯特·李将军塑像之后,数百名反对拆除塑像的白人至上主义者聚集在塑像所在地,高举带有种族主义色彩与纳粹标志的旗帜,与民权人士发生群体性冲突,一名白人极端分子开车冲向人群,造成1人死亡、19人受伤。夏洛特维尔事件后,美国各地不断涌现移除邦联纪念物的呼声,呼吁重塑美国内战史观,还原历史真实。

在许多非裔美国人和反种族主义者看来,在公共空间展示各种纪念邦联将士的塑像和标志物,意味着捍卫蓄奴制的南部邦联将士不仅被视作内战史上的英雄,而且还占据了公众话语的中心地位,这种代表旧南部奴隶主利益的历史叙事理应加以改写。在这种基于南部白人视角的历史书写中,奴隶制的黑暗被掩饰,黑人在内战中的自由解放经历被刻意抹杀,而内战后的南北和解及主流社会舆论导向无疑为这一历史叙事的构建开辟了空间。

南北和解与历史记忆

美国内战后,一种旨在宣扬南部邦联战争正义性——“失去的事业”内战史观兴起于战败的南部。在这一史观中,南部邦联对北方联邦军队的战争是一场伟大的战斗,旨在捍卫南部各州的“州权”与独立自治,虽败犹荣。而在这场战斗中,南部邦联军队最终未能抵挡实力占优的联邦军队的“入侵”,致使其捍卫南部传统社会秩序的使命遭受挫败。20世纪初,在联邦政府力图促进南北双方和解的背景下,这一“失去的事业”论调开始逐步融入联邦政府的政治话语中。1912年塔夫脱总统出席在首府华盛顿召开的“邦联之女联合会”第19次全国年会,他在会议致辞中明确提出:“奴隶制度不是引发南北战争的主因,州权主义才是导火线”,因而“北方将士是为了维护统一而战,南部将士也是为了捍卫独立与自治而战,所有的将士都是为了自由制度而战。”塔夫脱的致辞无疑肯定了南部的“州权主义”与邦联战争正义论。事实上,自19世纪末美西战争爆发以来,联邦政府为了得到南部的支持,开始着手致力于促进南北双方和解,并将对南部邦联阵亡将士的悼念与追认纳入到和解进程的重要议题中。1900年,麦金莱政府将128具南部邦联军队将士遗骸庄严地安葬于阿灵顿国家公墓。1903年,联邦政府举行了首次纪念南部阵亡将士的扫墓活动,并于1905年将联邦军队在内战期间缴获的邦联军旗全数归还南部。南北和解大力推动了南部邦联纪念物的建设。

需要指出的是,20世纪初的南北和解进程是南部在内战后实施种族隔离的历史背景下推进的。1877年,联邦政府与南部签订《海斯—蒂尔顿协定》,联邦政府从南部撤军,结束了对南部的军管,标志着南部民主重建以南北双方的妥协而告终。撤军后,内战前的白人奴隶主以地主和种植园主的新身份重新掌控了南部各州,而刚从奴隶制枷锁中解放出来的黑人很快又沦为种植园主的佃农。此后南部各州开始陆续施行《吉姆·克劳法》,确立了种族隔离制度。1896年,联邦最高法院在《普拉西诉费格森案》中裁定,“隔离但平等的教育设施符合宪法”,从而为种族隔离提供了法律依据。自此,19世纪末以来,联邦政府与南部在“失去的事业”内战史观、“州权主义”等问题上达成了和解,而这种在南部种族隔离背景下实现的南北和解,事实上意味着联邦政府对于南部种族隔离制度的妥协,进而助长了内战后南部种族主义社会秩序的回归。

“失去的事业”内战史观蕴含了南部白人对于内战前奴隶制社会秩序的深切怀念,这种对于旧日南部的眷恋也时常体现在一些文艺作品中,1936年出版的畅销小说《飘》(Gone with the Wind)便是其中的典型代表。小说被视作一曲献给旧南部的赞歌,根据这部小说改编的电影曾荣获八项奥斯卡奖。然而,因作品内容包含了对旧南部奴隶制社会秩序的美化、对黑奴形象的扭曲,以及带有种族歧视的语言,该作品和改编的电影一直备受争议。正因为此,在当前新一波反种族主义抗议潮中,美国家庭大票房平台(HBO)暂时下线了该电影。

塑像存废问题引发的思考

弗洛伊德事件引发的新一波抗议潮不仅把矛头指向邦联将士与领导人塑像,还波及了其他一些涉及蓄奴制与种族主义、殖民主义的历史人物。在纽约,美国自然历史博物馆移除了位于入口处的前总统西奥多·罗斯福的塑像。塑像中老罗斯福骑在马背上,两旁分立着一位印第安人和黑人,塑像因此被视为含有征服原住民与黑人的隐喻。在曾经的南部邦联首府、弗吉尼亚州小城里士满,一座哥伦布塑像被涂鸦、焚烧后抛进了湖中,塑像沉湖处留下一张书写着“种族主义,你不会被怀念”字样的手绘图。在里士满一条历史悠久的陈列邦联塑像的纪念碑大道,前南部邦联总统杰斐逊·戴维斯的塑像被抗议者推倒后,弗吉尼亚州长还宣布将拆除纪念碑大道上的罗伯特·李将军塑像。然而,州政府的举措遭到了当地一些居民的反对。他们将州政府告上了联邦法庭,声称塑像是19世纪末建造的历史文化遗迹,属于当代居民的公共财产。联邦法庭对此颁布了强制令,禁止州政府移除塑像。这一案例可以说集中体现了塑像之争背后不同群体在理念、现实考量与诉求上的冲突。

塑像存废不是根本问题

随着2020大选临近,塑像存废问题也成为两党政治博弈的角力场。国会大厦的塑像厅内陈列有100座塑像,由全美50个州各指定两座塑像在厅内展示,其中有包括前南部邦联总统、副总统、李将军等人在内的11座邦联塑像。6月10日,民主党领袖、众议院议长佩洛西致信国会图书馆,要求移除这些邦联塑像。她在信中表示,国会大厦内的塑像应该体现美国人的最高理想,以“展示我们是谁,以及我们想要成为谁”,而“立碑纪念那些为了明显的种族主义目的而鼓吹残酷与野蛮行径的人,是对这些理想的嘲讽与侮辱”,因此“保留这些塑像是在向仇恨致敬,并非向历史遗产致敬”。6月18日,国会大厦内四名曾在南部邦联任职的前众议院议长的肖像被撤下。值得一提的是,6月19日是美国奴隶制终结155周年纪念日,佩洛西在纪念日的前一天撤下肖像,具有一定象征意义,意在表明当今民主党人支持反种族主义抗议运动的立场。非裔美国族群是民主党的传统支持者,如今大选将近,民主党人的表态与政策举措显然具有选举政治上的考量。

对于如何处理邦联纪念物及标识的问题,掌控众议院的民主党人与占参议院多数的共和党人之间存在明显分歧。而对于“倒像”运动,特朗普总统采取的是一贯强硬的态度,并强调维护“法律与秩序”的重要性。6月26日,特朗普签署了一项行政令,要求保护邦联历史建筑、纪念碑和塑像,严惩破坏者,同时指示美国司法部长重点调查、起诉破坏邦联纪念物者,并警告一些没有保护好纪念物的地方政府和执法部门,将冻结对其联邦资金的支持。可以预见,塑像之争所呈现的种族主义沉痼,将与司法不公、警方暴力执法等问题交织在一起,进入大选公众议题,进一步加剧两党争斗与当前美国政治的极化。

值得关注的是,在弗洛伊德事件持续发酵的过程中,美国民众对于司法体系中存在的“系统性种族主义”的认知度显著提升。《华盛顿邮报》6月9日公布的一项民调显示,对于2014年一系列警方暴力执法事件引发的全美“黑人的命也是命”的抗议运动,当时只有43%的人认为暴力执法的根源在于种族主义,但弗洛伊德事件之后的民调显示,有超过2/3的人认为,警察暴力背后有更大的“系统性种族主义”因素。同样,在当前抗议潮中“倒像”运动的蔓延也体现了公众对于种族主义历史根源的认识。然而,正如根除司法体系中的“系统性种族主义”需要深刻的社会变革,消除种族主义也不能仅仅停留在制止警方暴力执法和推倒塑像、移除公共空间的邦联标志物等层面。对此,美国莱斯大学“种族主义与种族经历研究”项目主任、非裔教授托尼·布朗认为,不应简单地移除塑像,而应该将塑像展示于特定的语境与空间,并加以阐释,以起到警示历史真相、提升公众意识的作用。在这一点上,休斯顿市的做法提供了一个很好的例证。休斯顿市政府曾将一座名为“邦联精神”的塑像移除,这座邦联塑像一百多年来一直矗立于该市的山姆·休斯顿公园,如今被陈列于休斯顿非裔美国文化博物馆,成为博物馆展览的一部分,以告诫人们铭记种族主义历史。因此,邦联塑像的存废本身不是问题的根本,而如何还原塑像所承载的历史的本来面目,重塑历史记忆,以构建反种族主义的社会认知,才是当今美国社会修复种族主义历史之殇、化解种族矛盾所真正需要反思的问题。

(作者为上海外国语大学英语学院教授、美国研究中心执行主任)

来源时间:2020/7/15   发布时间:2020/7/15

旧文章ID:22315

葛林、麦艾文 :台湾会是下一个香港吗?

0

作者:葛林、麦艾文/文;赵北客、赵丹宁/翻译  来源:中美印象

  “印象观智库”第九期

葛林Michael Green),乔治城大学外交学院亚洲研究教授,美国战略及国际研究中心亚洲项目高级副总裁,曾在2004-2005年担任美国国家安全委员会亚洲事务高级主任。麦艾文(Evan Medeiros),乔治城大学外交学院亚洲研究教授,曾在2013-2015年担任美国国家安全委员会亚洲事务高级主任。原文于202078日刊发于《外交事务》网站。】

""
来源:CNN
    香港的泛民主抗议活动已经持续了超过一年的时间。现在,中国中央政府通过并准备实施港版国家安全法,这一法律不仅会破坏香港的自治权,并且会进而破坏它独特的身份。这项新法律对香港人民来说是一场深刻的悲剧,但不幸的是,国际社会几乎没有办法制止该法令的实施。虽然美国总统唐纳德·特朗普的内阁暗示它将加大对香港政府的压力,但是这样做,给香港经济造成的损害可能比对北京的伤害更严重,并可能加速香港被中国华南地区的吞并。
    因此,一些分析人士建议美国保持克制,并称柔和的对华政策可能会使得北京方面放缓对于港版国安法的实施,并避免使情况恶化。但是,事情并没有那么简单。美国政策制定者们在回应北京方面时需要考虑的不能仅仅是香港。美国的温和反应可能会使北京认为它在亚洲其他争议问题上的举动也不会受到相应的惩罚。如果是这种情况,那么台湾的处境就会变得异常危险。美国必须表现出决心和能力来抵抗中国的压迫和侵略,否则中国领导人最终可能会认为,未来对台发起军事行动的风险和成本至少是可以容忍的。
    诚然,香港的现状并不一定会是台湾的未来,解放军武力犯台亦不是迫在眉睫或不可避免的。但是北京最近在香港以及亚洲其他地方的所作所为,引起了人们对中国不断发展的战略目标和其使用胁迫战术来实现这些目标的意愿的担忧。简而言之,当北京将自己定位成一个要博得亚洲未来的多领域竞争者时,美国必须小心谨慎,不要局限自己,更不能在香港问题上因小失大。
""

香港民主运动对于亚洲地区的影响
    在习近平主席的治理下,中国在国际事务中对于使用武力冲突的接受度比以往任何时候都要高得多,并且在利用胁迫手段促进中国利益方面更加大胆,这通常伴随着牺牲美国和其他大国(例如日本和印度)的利益。最近几个月,中国向印度、日本、越南、马来西亚、印度尼西亚等与其有领土争端的国家不断施加军事压力。无论这些激进的举动是想要对世界展现中国的决心,还是要利用新冠病毒疫情所引起的国际社会的混乱,它们都在提醒我们习近平对风险的欲望、对发动冲突的高容限以及对巩固领土主权的渴望。
    刚刚过去的几年已经向我们证明,面对肆意蔓延的领土收复主义,国际社会体系是很脆弱的。当俄罗斯总统普京于2014年决定入侵乌克兰并吞并克里米亚时,他汲取了2008年入侵格鲁吉亚时的经验教训。入侵格鲁吉亚给俄罗斯造成的损失微乎其微,国际社会仅仅以强烈谴责敷衍了事。因此,入侵格鲁吉亚为普京创造了宽松的环境以进攻乌克兰。虽然台湾和乌克兰处在非常不同的地缘政治背景中,但是就像普京将美国对俄罗斯入侵格鲁吉亚的反应纳入其侵略乌克兰的考量中一样,中国领导人也会将美国对香港国家安全法的反应纳入其对亚洲未来侵略的决定中。 迄今为止,鉴于北京对香港的镇压几乎没有付出任何代价,我们担心北京会错误评估其对台进行武力胁迫的代价。
    无论从北京、香港还是台湾人民看来,港台之间的共同点远不止许多分析家所认为的那些。去年在香港持续不断的抗议活动引起了台湾人民和领导人的深刻共鸣。台湾人民向香港的抗议者提供防护装备,多次公开表示支持香港民主运动的蔡英文则一扫2018年民进党九合一选举中的颓势,在一月份强势赢得连任。同时,民进党、国民党和其他政党采取了罕见的跨党派合作,共同表达了对北京国家安全法的 “遗憾和严厉谴责”。台湾官员还承诺为逃离中国压制的香港居民提供避难所,一些香港人也似乎已接受他们的提议。据综合报道,2020年前四个月移居台湾的香港居民数比去年同期增长了150%。
    香港的民主运动不仅受到台湾人民的支持,亚洲的其他国家也纷纷响应。例如,许多反对中国民族主义和国安法的香港人、台湾人和泰国人通过网络凝聚在了一起,创立了一个以奶茶命名的社交媒体运动:“奶茶联盟”。最近,“奶茶联盟”走向了菲律宾,一些公民加入了这个在线运动,以表达对中国在南海的侵略行径的担忧。但是,不论香港、台湾和其他亚洲国家的人怎么看待这种通过网络来动员人民支持普世民主价值的方式,中国政府认为这是属于“ 搞分裂主义”的危险运动。北京认为这种运动归根结底的目的就是破坏中国主权、分裂中国领土、传播西方价值观、阻止中国走出亚洲。所以,中国当局经常将把“境外敌对势力”归咎为香港抗议活动的“主谋”,并认为台湾和其他亚洲国家对香港民主运动的支持也是由这些“境外敌对势力”所一手炮制的。
""

中国对于台湾的压力
    中国的历任领导人都一直坚称,不论是为了防止台湾在法律上取得独立,还是为了迫使台湾与大陆统一,他们都不放弃武力犯台的战略选项。而习近平上任后,他在措辞和行动上则采取了更加强硬的路线。在2017年中国共产党第十九届全国代表大会上,他宣布统一台湾与他的民族复兴“中国梦”密不可分。自那以来,他曾两次表示,中国大陆和台湾的分离“不应世代相传”。他在2019年1月的演讲中说:“祖国必须统一,也必然统一。”
    无独有偶,中国国务院总理李克强在五月份的第十三届全国人民代表大会第三次会议开幕词中,省略了“统一”之前的 “和平 ”一词。几天后,国务委员兼外交部长王毅在全国人大发言中也同样省略了“和平”二字。作为国务院台湾事务办公室的前负责人,王毅很清楚这种言辞变化的重要性。不过,在全国人大为期两周的会议结束时,“和平统一”又回到了李克强政府工作报告的最终版本中。因此分析人士指出,两会开幕式上“和平”二字的遗漏完全是由于政府官僚之间的沟通不畅,但是这种解释并不是很令人信服。
    除了加紧对台湾的舆论攻势外,中国还试图通过外交手段孤立台湾。在过去的五年中,北京已经夺走了台北的七个邦交国,使得承认台湾(中华民国)独立的国家仅剩15个。在国际组织方面,尽管台湾在防范和遏制新冠肺炎的工作上处于全球领先地位,但中国仍然通过各种方法将台湾排除在日内瓦举行的世界卫生组织年会之外。
    同时,中国也加大了对台湾的军事压力。美国战略与国际研究中心(CSIS)葛莱仪(Bonnie S. Glaser)和富奈奥尔(Matthew P. Funaiole)的研究表明,自一月中旬以来,中国的空军和海军已在台湾岛附近进行了十多次过境和军事演习,其中包括越来越多的蓄意入侵台湾领空的假想情况。 2019年3月,两架中国空军的战斗机在20年来首次越过台湾海峡中线。自此,解放军开始频繁越过海中线并派遣越来越多的军机。最近几个月,中国的战略轰炸机也多次环绕台湾岛飞行,同时,其他中国军机也越过了台湾和日本之间的宫古海峡。所有这些军事行动的目的都是证明北京随时准备对台湾使用武力。
    对于蔡英文而言,除了接受中共方面定义的“一个中国”和北京的“一国两制”,她并没有多少牌可以出,并且几乎没有办法说服中国撤回现有的外交和军事压力。然而,香港所发生的事情证明了“一国两制”是行不通的。在中国领导人的眼中,蔡英文对台湾独立的承诺、对岛内“去中国化”所作的努力、港台与民主世界之间日益紧密的联系使得加大对台军事压力甚至是武力犯台合理化。不论正确与否,习近平对于蔡英文的看法似乎已经是不会改变的了。他和中国领导层仍在权衡对台湾采取强硬路线的利弊,并在揣摩美国和国际社会的意志。因此,这就是为什么美国对于香港国安法的反应如此重要。
""

改变北京的算计
    为了阻止北京进一步的侵略,美国必须明确国家安全法将带来的影响,尤其是北京可能利用它来为其逮捕或引渡在港记者、和平活动家和正式候选人做辩护。美国国会通过了两党立法,授权特朗普政府对直接参与打击香港行动的人实施拒签和其他有针对性的制裁,特朗普政府表示已准备实施这些措施。实施有针对性的制裁对美中关系以及香港人民来说并不是没有代价的,但是美国可以通过与其他大国相协调,循序渐进、成比例地实施这些制裁,以此减少附带损害。
    特朗普政府需要从改善美国与欧洲和亚洲盟友间的协调关系开始。特朗普政府先后同澳大利亚、加拿大、英国,以及七国集团就香港问题发表了具有象征意义的重要联合声明,但是,仍需要借助更丰富的外交手段,以扩大联盟并协调各方向北京施压。令美国担忧的是,批评中国新法律的亚洲政府仅占少数,欧盟也只在最初承诺会“密切关注事态发展”。但是在华盛顿能够召集其欧洲、亚洲盟友,对香港发出统一的信息之前,应该先停止对这些国家的打击。特朗普单方面从北约撤军、对东京和首尔提出极端要求、威胁要从韩国撤军、对G-7和其他组织不感兴趣,这些都在将那些本愿意接受美国领导的盟国推开。这些行为也向北京传递出了西方盟友之间的脆弱、不团结和缺乏决心的信号。
    但是北京正在为美国主导的对香港的外交创造有利条件。北京所谓的“战狼外交”,旨在恐吓那些对中国应对疫情的方式持批评态度的国家,加之中国最近在领土问题上的侵略行为,已经疏远了世界很多国家。美国应该抓住这个机会,将香港作为外交的优先方向。在九月将举行的香港立法委员会选举的准备期间,华盛顿应领导G-7、东南亚国家联盟、欧盟、以及美国、日本、澳大利亚和印度四方发表联合声明和并开展行动,警告北京不要逮捕他们不喜欢的政治候选人。
    美国及其欧洲和亚洲盟友也应该考虑向香港公民提供居留权和公民身份,就像英国所做的那样。如果香港的形势恶化,例如,在九月的选举中逮捕了候选人,美国应该考虑制裁对此负责的中国官员。这些措施不会在近期恢复香港的自治,但是可以阻止蓄意的镇压行为,并且重塑北京对台湾问题的认识。
    然而,无论是在台湾,还是亚洲的其他地区,想要避免中国的侵略,美国也需要谨慎对待其在西太平洋的军事威慑。中国人民解放军在过去二十年中取得的进步严重削弱了美国在西太平洋(特别是台湾周围)的军事力量。美国海军两个航母战斗群最近在中国南海的演练是威慑力的重要展示,但其实际能力也很重要。正如美国前国防部副部长罗伯特·沃克(Robert Work)写道,美国军方现在面临着在与中国大陆的保卫台湾战争中失败的前景。五角大楼一直专注于建造大型平台,如航空母舰和大甲板两栖舰,但这些军备无法有效打击中国的反介入和区域封锁能力。美国需要重新思考它的前沿态势,增进与其盟国,如日本的合作与互通性,并提升其在高度竞争环境下的竞争能力,包括通过更好地使用无人系统。美国众议院和参议院军事委员会提出了一项太平洋威慑倡议,这将大大有助于恢复美国在这些领域的竞争优势。美国国会应该为该计划提供资金,并由五角大楼负责及实施。
""

    在美国遏制中国侵略的努力中,援助台湾并与其开展合作是至关重要的。华盛顿应该帮助台湾提高其政治体系在面对来自中国大陆的压力时的弹性,并帮助台湾军队在战争中进一步削弱中国的实力。特朗普政府于2019年批准的对台出售价值数十亿美元的M1A2坦克并不会有助于实现后一项目标。这些举措对阻止中国的海空导弹联合作战作用不大,而且在一场地面战中,解放军总是比台湾军队更为庞大、装备更为精良。相反,美国应该与台湾合作发展非对称的军事能力,从而有机会阻止中国大陆的侵略或对关键基础设施的攻击。五角大楼应进一步协助台湾军方改革其预备役和动员系统,这对机构长期优势的形成至关重要。与此同时,美国应与日本等其他盟国一同秘密加紧准备工作,以应对台湾地区的突发事件。
【来源:中美印象;引用或者转发请注明来源;本文原文来自《外交事务》网站。】

来源时间:2020/7/15   发布时间:2020/7/15

旧文章ID:22308

特朗普说美国“重建”了中国

0

作者:斯韧,张月如  来源:中美印象

《美中关系快报》第59期

美国东部时间7月14日下午5点,特朗普总统在白宫玫瑰园举行记者招待会。记者被告知,特朗普将就他签署《香港自治法案》(Hong Kong Autonomy Act)和终止香港特殊贸易地位的行政命令发表讲话并回答问题。(点击这里查看特朗普讲话英文原文)
     然而,特朗普把这个记者招待会变成了竞选集会,自己“独白”52分钟,回答记者问题不到10分钟就拂袖而去。
     他在“独白”中先是恶心中国,然后把民主党总统候选人拜登副总统说得一钱不值。
     美国哥伦比亚广播公司(CBS)白宫首席记者盖若特(Major Garrett)说,这场新闻发布会显示特朗普总统和竞选团队已经意识到特朗普最近在民调中的下滑,因此,他们感觉必须要做一些强烈的举动来为选举注入新的活力。
   《纽约时报》称这次记者招待会是特朗普表现最差的讲话之一,语无伦次,一个小时的“意识流”。
""
    在中国问题上,特朗普都讲了什么?

一、我们不会犯错误,我们要让中国对掩盖病毒的流行并让它流向全世界承担责任。(中国)可以终止它的外流,也应该终止它的外流。在疫情刚开始的时候,在源头上非常容易做到这一点。相比而言,拜登的整个生涯对中国共产党就是一个礼物。……中国每年从我们国家拿走数千亿美金。我们重建了中国。我说他们干得不错,但之前站在这里的人一塌糊涂,因为他们造成了中国从我们的国库拿走千万亿美元。 ……

二、拜登亲自给了中国最惠国待遇,这对任何一个国家都是一个巨大的优势。没有多少国家可以享受最惠国待遇。美国没有,从来就没有,也许从来没要过,因为他们不知道自己在干什么。

三、你们知道,我们征收了大量关税,我们向中国强征高关税。中国给美国支付了数以千亿计的关税,其中很大一部分我给了我们的农民和牧民。因为他们被中国敲诈勒索。我们这样做已经3年了。这是历史上第一次有人这样做。在新冠病毒之前,中国正经历自己67年历史上经济发展最差的一年。

四、没有哪一届政府比我这一届对中国更凶。我们向中国征收史无前例的关税。没有人象我们这样对中国盗窃知识产权说不。我们对不值得信任的中国科技和电讯公司说不。我们还说服很多国家也这样做。这基本上是我一个人在做。不要用华为的东西,因为我们认为它不安全,对我们的安全构成威胁。我说服很多国家不要跟华为有来往。如果它们要跟我们做生意就不能用华为。今天,联合王国宣布他们不会使用华为设备。这件事拖了很久,但他们做出了决定。

五、你看看意大利,你看看其他许多国家。我们从被中国控制的世界卫生组织退出了。我重建了美国的军队。我们一年给(世界卫生组织)5亿美元,中国一年给它3900万。但中国对它的影响太大。他们对它盯得很紧。这是我之前的政府干的坏事。我们很猛,我们说,我问,为什么我们要比中国付的多的多?中国有14亿人,我们有3亿2千5百万人,也许是这个数,谁知道呢,没人能说清我们的人口是多少。

六、我下令不允许来自中国的人入境时,公卫专家都表示反对。

七、拜登的儿子从中国弄了15亿美元。
      八、CBS的记者14日也采访了特朗普,当问到与中国的关系时,特朗普说,1)目前没有任何兴趣跟中国对话;2)贸易谈判第一阶段的协议墨迹未干,中国就用病毒攻击美国;3)我还会继续“收拾”中国,咱们走着瞧。(点击这里查看《纽约时报》对这一记者招待会的报道;点击这里查看CBS对特朗普的采访。)

""""
来源:Chanel Rion OAN Twitter

以下为美联社对特朗普白宫讲话的报道

  The legislation and order are part of the Trump administration’s offensive against China for what he calls unfair treatment by the rising Asian superpower, which hid details about the human-to-human transition of the cornoavirus. The almost daily administration broadsides against China come as Trump is defending his response to the virus, despite a surge in COVID-19 cases, in the United States and as he works to portray Biden, his expected presidential challenger, as weak on China.

  “So Joe Biden and President Obama freely allowed China to pillage our factories, plunder our communities and steal our most precious secrets,” Trump said, adding, “I’ve stopped it largely.”

  Trump added: “As vice president, Biden was a leading advocate of the Paris Climate accord, which was unbelievably expensive to our country. It would have crushed American manufacturers while allowing China to pollute the atmosphere with impunity, yet one more gift from Biden to the Chinese Communist Party.”

  Trump didn’t limit his criticism of Biden to China. He delivered broadside after broadside against Biden on issues from energy to the economy, education to immigration. Aides have pushed the president to go more negative on Biden, whom Trump has largely spared from attacks — save for the “Sleepy Joe” nickname. Trump has gone after Biden far less aggressively than he did against his 2016 opponent, Hillary Clinton.

  Trump, once more, talked up his own tough approach to Beijing, though he spent the early weeks of the pandemic praising Chinese President Xi Jinping, in hopes of securing a new trade deal. But since the two nations signed phase one of a deal, the talks have stalled with virtually no hope of restarting before the November election.

  The legislation Trump signed into law targets police units that have cracked down on Hong Kong protesters as well as Chinese Communist Party officials responsible for imposing a new, strict national security law widely seen as chipping away at Hong Kong’s autonomy. The mandatory sanctions are also required to be imposed on banks that conduct business with the officials.

Lawmakers from both parties have urged Trump to take strong action in response to China’s new national security law that erodes the “one country, two systems” framework under which Britain handed Hong Kong over to China in 1997. Hong Kong is considered a special administrative region within China and has its own governing and economic systems.

  “This law gives my administration powerful new tools to hold responsible the individuals and the entities involved in extinguishing Hong Kong’s freedom,” Trump said. “Their freedom has been taken away. Their rights have been taken away, and with it goes Hong Kong in my opinion because it will no longer be able to compete with free markets. A lot of people will be leaving Hong Kong, I suspect.”

以下为《香港自治法案》的部分内容(Hong Kong Autonomy Act

This bill imposes sanctions on foreign individuals and entities that materially contribute to China’s failure to preserve Hong Kong’s autonomy.

Hong Kong is part of China but has a largely separate legal and economic system with protections for civil rights such as freedom of speech. This arrangement is enshrined in (1) the Joint Declaration, a 1984 treaty pertaining to the United Kingdom’s transfer of Hong Kong’s sovereignty to China; and (2) the Basic Law, Hong Kong’s constitutional document.

The Department of State shall report annually to Congress information about (1) foreign individuals and entities that materially contributed to China’s failure to comply with the Joint Declaration or the Basic Law; and (2) foreign financial institutions that knowingly conducted a significant transaction with such identified individuals and entities. An individual, entity, or financial institution may be excluded from this report for various reasons, such as to protect an intelligence source.

The President shall impose property-blocking sanctions on an individual or entity named in a report, and visa-blocking sanctions on a named individual. The President shall impose various sanctions on a financial institution named in a report, such as prohibiting the institution from receiving loans from a U.S. financial institution.

The President may waive or terminate the imposition of sanctions under this bill. Congress may override such a waiver or termination by passing a joint resolution of disapproval.

来源时间:2020/7/15   发布时间:2020/7/15

旧文章ID:22307