【世事關心】利害,危險,代價和希望——就香港抗議活動專訪葉望輝

【新唐人北京時間2019年08月06日訊】【世事關心】利害,危險,代價和希望——就香港抗議活動專訪葉望輝

百萬港人反「送中」的抗議活動已經擴大到其他領域,目前還沒有停止的跡象,中共政權的對策何在?香港的形式攸關各方的利益,哪一方會做出最直接的反應?如果解放軍介入對港人的鎮壓,是否會讓蔡英文成為下一屆中華民國總統?台灣問題攸關美國的哪些利益?在港人的抗議活動風起雲湧之際,我採訪了葉望輝,他在2001-2005年曾任前副總統切尼的副國家安全顧問,他是大陸和台灣問題專家。

================================================

利害,危險,代價和希望——就香港抗議活動專訪葉望輝

The Stakes, the Dangers, the Sacrifices and the Hopes: An Interview with Stephen Yates on Hong Kong’s Protest

 

Hong Kong’s million people protest against the Extradition Law has spilled over to broader areas and the Hong Kongers are not stopping. What are the Chinese Communist regime’s options  in Hong Kong?

百萬港人反「送中」的抗議活動已經擴大到其它領域。目前還沒有停止的跡象。中共政權的對策何在?

 

葉望輝(華府國際顧問公司執行長/曾任副總統切尼的副國家安全顧問):「世界上的大多數人都無法理解中共的所作所為。」

Stephen Yates :“The Communist Party of China has done things that are inconceivable to most people in the wider world. ”

 

蕭茗(Host/ Simone Gao):「您說我們不了解中共,只了解美國。那您看如果中共像『六四』那樣屠殺港人,美國會如何因應?」

Simone: “So you said we don’t know China but we know the US. What do you think the US would do if there was another Tian Anmen square in Hong kong, or maybe not to that degree, but the Chinese military get involved in the suppression of the Hong Kong people. ”

 

葉望輝(華府國際顧問公司執行長/曾任副總統切尼的副國家安全顧問):「這肯定會成為總統大選的議題。我認為國會的反應將非常激烈。我預測美國政府的反應不會比『六四』時弱。」

Stephen Yates: “It would certainly color the presidential election conversation. So there would be, I think pretty loud voices in Congress. I would expect the United States government to do no less than it did at the time of Tiananmen. ”

 

香港的形勢攸關各方的利益,哪一方會做出最直接的反應?

Hong Kong’s situation is relevant to many stakeholders, but who would react to it in the most direct way?

 

蕭茗(Host/ Simone Gao):「如果解放軍介入對港人的鎮壓,是否會讓蔡英文成為下一屆中華民國總統?」

Simone:“ If the PLA get involved in Hong Kong, Will Cai Yingwen become the next president of the Republic of China?”

 

葉望輝(華府國際顧問公司執行長/曾任副總統切尼的副國家安全顧問):「我認為會對此產生很大影響。」

Stephen Yates: “I think it has a significant effect like that.”

 

臺灣問題攸關美國的哪些利益?

And what is America’s real stake in Taiwan?

 

蕭茗(Host/ Simone Gao):在港人的抗議活動風起雲湧之際,我採訪了葉望輝,他在2001-2005年曾任前副總統切尼的副國家安全顧問。他是大陸和臺灣問題專家。我們討論了香港的抗議活動對一些重大問題的可能影響。這些重大問題包括:臺灣2020大選、美中(共)貿易戰、廣義上的美中(共)對抗,以及對中國大陸人民反共抗暴鬥爭的激勵作用。我是蕭茗,您正在收看《世事關心》。

Simone:Amidst the ongoing protest in Hong Kong, My interview with Stephen Yates, He was the Deputy National Security Adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney from 2001 to 2005, and an expert on China and Taiwan. Stephen and I discussed what the Hong Kong protest could do to Taiwan’s presidential election in 2020, to the U.S. China trade war and the broader U.S.- China confrontation, and finally to the inspiration of the mainland Chinese people in their own struggle. I am Simone Gao and you are watching Zooming In. 

  

蕭茗(Host/ Simone Gao):「好的,史蒂文,非常感謝你再次到這裡。」

Simone: “Alright Steve, Thank you so much for coming here again. ”

 

葉望輝:「我很榮幸。」

Stephen Yates: “My Pleasure”

 

蕭茗(Host/ Simone Gao):「好吧,談談香港,你知道香港的事態一直在升級。 現在他們計劃在8月5日舉行總罷工,昨天中共軍隊駐港部隊的指揮官首次隊抗議活動發表講話說,抗議者的暴力是絕對不能容忍的。 幾週前,就是這個指揮官告訴來訪的高級美國官員,香港的解放軍駐軍不會介入處理香港抗議者。 你認為中共對於如何與香港人打交道的想法有所改變嗎?」

Simone: “All right, talking about Hong Kong, You know the Situation in Hong Kong has been escalating. now they’re planning on a general strike on August 5th and yesterday the commander of the Chinese military garrison in Hong Kong addressed the protest for the first time saying, you know, the violence by the protesters is absolutely not tolerated. Well, the same commender a few weeks ago told the visiting high ranking US official that the PLA in Hong Kong would not get involved in the handling of the Hong Kong protesters. Do you think there’s a change in the CCP’s thinking of how they are going to deal with the people in Hong Kong?”

 

葉望輝(華府國際顧問公司執行長/曾任副總統切尼的副國家安全顧問):「嗯,當然我認為西方或外界正在把這些話作為一個警告,就是可能會發生類似天安門那樣形式的驅散人群。 我不相信北京任何有理性的人認為這樣的做法對中華人民共和國的國際聲譽會有好處。近年來,全球對中國的印像已經變得更加負面,習近平個人的聲譽已變得更加負面。 這對他們來說會是一個災難性的舉動。 如果這是它的方向,那麼對香港人民來說是悲慘的。 但最近幾週,我們看到解放軍和北京方面還有其它成 選項。 他們雇了暴徒毆打和平的抗議者。他們有一些小流氓四處跑、打臉年輕的抗議者。互聯網上廣傳的視頻在某種程度上顯示了年輕示威者巨大毅力和耐心,他們決然的不去對身體受到的虐待作出反應。 這是、而且一直是一個引人注目的形象。 對於抗議者來說,他們越是站在非暴力的一邊,並且安全部隊那邊有某種進攻性的的反擊,如果解放軍再有任何公開的參與進來,我認爲這會極大的、極大的增加國際上對港人願望的同情,同情他們挺身而出捍衛一絲的自治權。世界在看著呢, 來自北京的咆哮並不奇怪,因為這是他們的想法,但是他們應該走這一步嗎? 我認為這將是非常悲慘的,非常非常的慘,我認為這對中國不利。」

Stephen Yates:“Well, certainly I think the West generally or the outside world is taking those words as a warning that a Tiananmen like disbursement of the crowd could take place. I don’t believe that any rational person in Beijing could think that that would go well for the international reputation of the People’s Republic of China, and in terms of where the global impression of China in recent years has become more negative and the personal reputation of Xi Jinping has become more negative. That would just be a disastrous move on their part. It would be tragic for the people of Hong Kong if that’s the direction it was going. In recent weeks though, we’ve seen that the PLA and Beijing generally have other options. They have rented thugs to go in and beat peaceful protesters. They have sort of random bullies that will go around and punch young protesters in the face. And there’s videos that go around the internet showing in some ways a tremendous amount of fortitude and patience on the part of the young demonstrators where they decidedly do not respond to the physical abuse. And it’s, that’s been a compelling image. And for the protesters, the more that they stay on the side of nonviolence, and, and there’s some kind of aggressive pushback by security forces, and if there is any open involvement with PLA, it will I think greatly, greatly increase the international sympathy for the desire of the Hong Kong people or just standing up for holding onto a shred of autonomy. The world is watching. Uh, the bluster from Beijing is not surprising because that’s how they think, but should they take that step? I think it would be quite tragic and very, very, I think negative for China. ”

 

蕭茗(Host/ Simone Gao):「是,人們一直猜測他們的真實意圖是什麽。 如果這只是一個威脅,或者他們真的打算做這樣的事情。 如果發生這種情況,對各方、特別是臺灣的影響會是什麽呢?」

Simone Gao:“Right, People have been guessing what their real intention is. If this is just a threat or if they really are planning on doing something like that. And if that happens, what do you it will do to a number of parties, most importantly, Taiwan?”

 

葉望輝(華府國際顧問公司執行長/曾任副總統切尼的副國家安全顧問):「對,肯定會對臺灣人的一些看法產生衝擊,但最近這些事件已經對臺灣對共產黨的看法、『與中國接觸』的看法產生了巨大的影響。而且正在影響明年1月舉行的臺灣總統和立法會選舉的政治態勢。但如果他們要來一個類似天安門的事件,那會產生一個巨大的、大得多的戰略衝擊。我們需要記住,你回到這些年來,中國經濟基本停滯不前,甚至可能處於衰退狀態,因為他們的統計數據不真實。因此,中國經濟在萎縮而國際制裁在加碼。中國的經濟已經受到來自美國的關稅和其它的壓力的鉗制,但不僅僅是美國。你要加上國際上對其聲譽的譴責,以及不可避免隨之而來的制裁,加上失去香港作為國際金融中心的經濟價值的損失。我認為,隨著商業的逃離會對中國造成災難性打擊。 記得天安門事件發生後,香港當時還是一個殖民地,對於留在香港的人來說,仍然有很多信心。 如果在香港本土發生這樣的事件,我們就進入了一個陌生的危險地帶。 然後它也成為『一囯兩制』的終結,就只有一國了。 因此向鄧小平向臺灣建議的『一囯兩制』,如果現在還沒有死,那到時也死了。」

Stephen Yates:“Right, well certainly would be…would have an impact on perceptions in Taiwan, but these recent events have already had a dramatic influence on Taiwan’s perceptions of the Communist Party, Taiwan’s perceptions of engagement with China generally. And it’s influencing the politics of the presidential and legislative races in Taiwan, that will come to a head in January of next year, but it would also have a much, much bigger strategic impact if they were to have a Tiananmen like event that, you know, we need to remember, you go back all those years, China’s economy ground to a near stop and probably was in very negative territory because their statistics are not honest. And so China’s economy contracted international sanctions piled up. China’s economy is already under strain with tariffs and other pressures from the United States, but not just the United States. You add on top it international, condemnation on reputation, and the sanctions that inevitably would follow from something like that, plus the loss of the financial value of Hong Kong as an international financial hub. The fleeing of business would, I think have just a catastrophic impact, on China. Remember post Tiananmen, Hong Kong was still a colony and there was still a lot of confidence of, in terms of people staying in Hong Kong. and if there was actually an event like this in Hong Kong itself, we’re in uncharted waters. And then it also becomes the end of one country, two systems. It’s just one country. And so the offer to Taiwan of one country, two systems that Deng Xiaoping made, if it isn’t already dead, it would be dead then.”

 

蕭茗(Host/ Simone Gao):「好的。 你覺得解放軍只要參與香港(事務),蔡英文就會成為中華民國的下一任總統嗎?」

Simone Gao:“Okay. Would you say PLA get only involved in Hong Kong, Tsai Yingwen would become the next president of the Republic of China?”

 

葉望輝(華府國際顧問公司執行長/曾任副總統切尼的副國家安全顧問):「我認為會有這樣顯著的影響,不一定是因為蔡總統個人,她自己正在為連任競選。 但如果你看當共產黨做了壞事,成爲國際新聞,成爲在臺灣的新聞的時候,它往往會增加對臺灣內部那些希望和美國及其盟友,特別是那些關注其與中囯糾纏的盟友,成爲最好朋友的人們的支持,同時大大削弱臺灣內部主導要尋求與中共達成和平協議的一方。 因此,當這些事情發生時,它肯定會產生對臺灣黨派政治的衝擊。 我們有習近平新年夜發表的講話,有強烈的指向性,影響了臺灣的初選。從某些方面說,蔡總統如果能夠對此事做出回應,這會鞏固她的地位。在香港發生的那些戲劇性的大規模群眾示威活動,迫使臺灣所有的主要提名者都拒絕把『一國兩制』的模式用到臺灣。蔡總統對此的反應是,一個國家只能有一位總統,這是她固有的優勢。而且現今一個普遍的認知,中國正在一個錯誤的方向上行進。然後,你把它放在一個注重政治機構完整性、媒體完整性、商業供應鏈完整性的國際背景下,你再給它加上極大的政治風險和安全風險。那麼,我想這只會極大地加強那些想要自治的人,那些不想和中國保持長期政治合作關係的人和想在攻擊性衝擊的受到保護的人。」

Stephen Yates:“I think it has a significant effect like that, not necessarily because of President Tsai as a person, she’s running for reelection in her own right. but if you look at when bad things are done by the Communist Party, and make international news make the news in Taiwan, it tends to increase support for those broadly in Taiwan who want to make best friends with the United States and its allies who are concerned about entanglements with China, and it greatly weakens the dominant party in Taiwan that has sought to make a peace agreement with the CCP. So it, it definitely has a, partisan political impact in Taiwan when these things are done. We had the New Year’s Eve address, that was delivered by Xi Jinping that that was somewhat blustery and it, it colored the, the competition for the primaries, in Taiwan. And in some ways it bolstered President Tsai’s standing when she was able to respond to it. These dramatic demonstrations in Hong Kong with such a high proportion of the population demonstrating it’s forced all of the major nominees in Taiwan to disavow one country, two systems as a model for Taiwan. And President Tsai’s reaction to it, there’s only one president at a time, gives her a natural advantage. But it also is resting upon a broad popular perception that China is today going in the wrong direction. And you put that in the context of things international, where there are concerns about the integrity of political institutions, the integrity of media, the integrity of business supply chains and you add on top of it profound political risk and security risk. Then I think that it just dramatically bolsters those that want self government, that want to have no long-term relationship politically with China and want to be protected against these kinds of aggressive moves.”

 

蕭茗(Host/ Simone Gao):「在這整個局勢中有一個不可控的因素。我們知道,中共給臺灣設置了一個底線,一條紅線,那就是北京是不容忍臺灣獨立的。現在的情況是,如果中共部隊插手香港,如果這激怒了臺灣,臺灣島內獨立的聲音突然變強。你覺得這會引發或某種程度上迫使中共對臺灣採取極端行為?」

Simone Gao:“There is an uncontrollable element in this whole situation. You know, the CCP has set a bottom line, a red line for Taiwan. That Is Beijing is not going to tolerate Taiwan’s independence. Now the thing is, if PLA gets involoved in Hong Kong and if that provoked Taiwan and all the sudden the independence voice in Taiwan gets bigger. Do you think that could trigger and in a sense force the CCP to do something radical to Taiwan?”

 

葉望輝(華府國際顧問公司執行長/曾任副總統切尼的副國家安全顧問):「嗯,沒有辦法消除這些想法和顧慮。我沒有證據說這是中共的陰謀,在某種程度上是為了對此制定計劃,或對於此相關的行動發出警告。但是《反分裂國家法》是這樣寫的,如果事情做得太過火了,或者發生了動亂,或者發生了什麽,在某些情況下,他們保留了幹涉臺灣的權利。北京如今對待香港的態度似乎在反分裂國家法的邏輯中有暗示了。此外,對北京來說,更大的不確定性是是否會發動對香港人民採取極端行動,而我們也還不知道這是否會發生。我們在觀望和等待,不確定的發展伴隨著這些持續的示威。也許他們不會停止。但是如果有那樣的極端行動,現實的問題是,在中國的其它地方會產生什麼效應?全世界都記得1989年的天安門集會。但是他們不那麼清楚的是,當時的中國群眾有組織的反腐敗、反通貨膨脹和其它社會問題不只有北京。因此,一個更為深刻的問題是,中國人民是否會開始意識到中國夢的許諾不是來自中共、也不是來自習近平?所以,是否有,北京是否需要更加專註於來自中國國內的壓力,而不是努力壓制政治和臺灣。如果他們有理智,他們會從歷史看到,臺灣人民是不可能被外部勢力統治的。日本人將臺灣作為殖民地長達五十年之久,而臺灣憑藉自我認同存活下來。國民黨來了制定了戒嚴令,實施了嚴密的控制,但臺灣依舊憑藉自我認同走過來了。中共試圖想吞併這只豪豬?我想對中共並不會是一頓美餐。將引起混亂,可能會付出慘重。但是最終臺灣人民經歷各種外敵的幹擾和侵占,將證明他們非凡的韌性。所以我希望,中南海能夠在一定程度上保持理性,中國人民將以某種形式或方式把他們的意志強加給政府。我們不必極端考慮這些『如果』。」

Stephen Yates:“Yeah. Well, there’s no way to eliminate these kinds of thoughts or calculations. I have no evidence that this is a plot by the CCP, to sort of chart this course or warn about actions along these lines. But the anti secession law was written in a way that sort of said if a things went too far or if there was unrest or what have you, that there were certain conditions under which that they reserve the right to intervene in Taiwan. Well, this seems to be somewhat of an anti secession law logic implied in what Beijing’s messaging is to Hong Kong right now. Also, the bigger uncertainty though for Beijing is if there is this dramatic move against the people of Hong Kong and we don’t know whether that’s going to happen yet, we’re kind of watching and waiting and uncertain development with these sustained, demonstrations and maybe they don’t stop. But if there is that kind of move, the real question is, will there be consequences in the rest of China? The whole world kind of remembers in 1989 the filling of Tiananmen Square, but what they don’t have the same impression of is that Beijing was only one of many geographies where people were rising up in an organized way to demonstrate against corruption and inflation and other kinds of problems in China. And so it’s really a broader question of will the people of China begin to see that the promise of a China dream is not coming from the CCP, it’s not coming from Xi Jinping. And it would, will there be a…will there be pressure internally that Beijing has to be more concerned about than trying to hold down politics and Taiwan, if they’re rational, they’ll know from history that the people of Taiwan are ungovernable by outside powers. The Japanese had Taiwan as a colony for 50 years and the people of Taiwan, emerged with their own identity. The KMT came and established martial law, imposed heavy controls and the people of Taiwan, emerged with their own identity and the CCP wants to try to swallow this porcupine? I think it will not be a pleasant meal for them to try. It would be disruptive. It would be tragic. But ultimately the people of Taiwan, have proven remarkably durable through all kinds of outside influences and occupations. So my hope is that some degree of rationality will prevail in Zhongnanhai and that the people of China will impose their will on their government in some form or fashion. We don’t have to get to these extreme considerations of ‘what ifs’.”

 

蕭茗(Host/ Simone Gao):「人們普遍認為,對於中國政府來說,這一代價太高,難以實現。但你認為他們不排除真的這麼做的可能。你不認為這純粹只是一個威脅。」

Simone Gao:“The general perception is that the price is too high for Beijing to go that direction. But for you, you do not rule out the possibility of them actually doing it. You don’t think this is a pure threat only.”

 

葉望輝(華府國際顧問公司執行長/曾任副總統切尼的副國家安全顧問):「嗯,我的意思是,中共所做的事情是世界上大多數人無法想象的。在大躍進期間,中國實施激進的經濟政策,導致數以百萬計的人民餓死。在文化大革命中,為了政治目的,它謀殺了數以百萬計的中國人,它摧毀了中國悠久的文化和傳統。在中國,家庭團體從根本上被摧毀,宗教團體也被徹底摧毀。語言的使用已經發生了根本性的變化。他們反對孔子,然後現在又離奇地使用孔子學院作為在國際上做宣傳的重要手段。所以中共對中國、對中國人民所做的事情,大多數人、世界上的大多數人都會認為它是喪失理性的。我們甚至沒有提到天安門事件,所以如果他們有妄想癥或者擔心失去權力,我不能排除他們會做出令人發指的行為,或者我認為的非理性的行為,他們是不願意容忍的。但是,我想相信,最終賦予理性的、充滿希望的、有責任感的中國人會意識到,共產黨員僅是一個極小的人口比例,他們並不是全部中國人。因此,中國人民有實現他們意願的可能。當然,就我個人而言,我希望中國人民能享有象世界其它地方人那樣的自由。但如果沒有這些,我希望他們至少能迫使自己的政府關注他們,迫使政府去照顧他們,而不是去幹預這些本應由自治政府管轄的範圍。我的意思是,畢竟香港應該以高度自治的方式治理香港,這是寫入《基本法》的聯合聲明所承諾的。那麼,北京爲什麼要在這個時候找麻煩呢? 他們本可以讓香港保持高度自治,自行處理內地的問題。」

Stephen Yates:“Well, I mean, the Communist Party of China has done things that are inconceivable to most people in the wider world. It literally starved millions of its people imposing radical economic policies during the great leap forward. It literally murdered multiple millions of its own citizens for political purposes in the cultural revolution. And it destroyed several elements of longtime Chinese culture and tradition. The institution of the family has been fundamentally destroyed inside of China. The institutions of religion have been fundamentally destroyed inside of China. The very use of language has been altered in fundamental ways. They fought against Confucius and then now oddly use Confucius institutes as points of propaganda internationally. So there’s things that the CCP has done to China, to the Chinese people that most other people, most people around the world would consider to be wildly irrational. We didn’t even mention Tiananmen in that list. And so I can’t rule out any kind of outrageous or what I would consider to be irrational action by them if there’s a sense of paranoia or a potential loss of power, that they are not willing to abide. But, I want to believe in the ultimate rationality and hopefully, the responsibility of the Chinese people themselves to recognize that this relatively small percentage of their population that is in the communist party is not all Chinese people. And that maybe they can impose their will. And of course, from my point of view, I’d like the people of China to enjoy the freedom that the rest of the world does. But in the absence of that, I hope that they can at least impose a degree of caution on their own government and force their government to take care of them instead of intervening in these other areas that really are supposed to be left to self-government. I mean, after all Hong Kong is supposed to be governing Hong Kong with a high degree of autonomy, that was the promise of the joint declaration that was written into the Basic Law. And so why is Beijing bothering at this time? They could have left Hong Kong to its high degree of autonomy and taken care of problems inside the mainland itself.”

 

蕭茗(Host/ Simone Gao):「是的,你剛剛提到的這個問題,確實,中共政府對香港、新疆等地做的這些都是沒必要的。但是他們為什麼要做呢?」

Simone Gao:“So yeah, that’s the question you just talked about, you know, there was actually no need to do what they did in Hong Kong and Xinjiang and things like that. But then why did they do that?”

 

葉望輝(華府國際顧問公司執行長/曾任副總統切尼的副國家安全顧問):「我的意思是,我只能推測。而且,我們不瞭解習近平或其他中國最高領導人的想法。他們是一個祕密政府,實際上並不對人民負責。他們祕密地進行審議。所以,除了中國極少數未經選舉、不負責任的領導人,世界上沒有其他人知道他們爲什麼要這麼做。我們真的不知道他們(中共)到底是如何將事情搞砸到這種地步,我認為事情發展到這個地步是非常不理性的。除非他們(中共高層)知道自己對於中國內部問題的認知程度遠超一般社會大眾,或許中共對經濟、政治、警察或其他更廣泛等機構的掌控程度遠弱於他們目前為止所願意讓我們知道的。就是說,他們這些不理性的行為是出自於恐懼、焦慮及對權力即將消失的認知,因為這一切根本說不通。這些事情(香港追求民主)看起來是在有基礎且漸進的情況下發展的,並且這將使得中國政體朝更寬廣的方向上邁進。誰知道中共為何要破壞香港政體原有健康的發展進程?」

Stephen Yates:“Well, I mean, I, I can only speculate. And, we do not have the blessing or the curse of knowing the mind of Xi Jinping or the other top leaders of China. They are a secret government that is not actually accountable to its people. They conduct their deliberations in secret. And so no, one in the world knows why they’re doing what they’re doing, except for the very small number of unelected, unaccountable leaders in China. We don’t really get to know why they’ve gone down this path that I think is irrational, unless the reality to them is they know more about what’s happening inside China and maybe the Communist Party’s grip in controlling institutions of the economy, politics or broader government is weaker than they’ve let us know. And so it’s out of fear, anxiety, perception of loss, that they’re acting out in more extreme ways because it just doesn’t make sense. These things seem to have generally on a gradual basis, been moving broadly in their direction. So why rock the boat?”

 

蕭茗(Host/ Simone Gao):「你剛談到了我們不知道中共到底在做些什麼,但我們知道美國在做些什麼。為什麼你會認為若天安門事件在香港重演,或在香港若發生類似當年天安門的事件,比如中國解放軍參與了對香港人民的鎮壓,美國就一定會採取某些行動呢?」

Simone Gao:“So you said we don’t know China but we know the US. What do you think the US would do if there was another Tian Anmen square in Hong Kong, or maybe not to that degree, but the Chinese military get involved in the suppression of the Hong Kong people.”

 

葉望輝(華府國際顧問公司執行長/曾任副總統切尼的副國家安全顧問):「我想若事情真發生了(解放軍鎮壓香港人民),將會震驚非常多的美國人。在香港已有大量的遊行活動,但我不知這些香港的消息是否已成為大多數美國家庭飯桌上的話題。這個議題必會豐富人們討論總統大選時的談話內容。所以我認為這將會在國會中引起非常大的迴響。每位參與總統大選的候選人將會被迫必須針對這些問題說些什麼。現在在民主黨中有非常多的人角逐欲成為黨內提名人。我認為他們將爭先恐後地喚起近年來民主黨已漸漸忽視的中國人權問題。在六四天安門事件後就進入國會的現任眾議院發言人Nancy Pelosi,是當時批評中共人權聲浪之中的發聲者之一,他常說中國國內正在發生的事情是非常嚴峻的。某些方面來說,中共在國際上的名聲已大不如前。人們對於過去幾年中國政體上的發展方向感到越來越悲觀。有人說習近平透過一種新的文革已成為進化版的毛澤東,這種文革的氛圍散布在中國境內。美國一般民眾的想法以及他們口頭表達出的意見因為習近平的關係,如今已經很不一樣了。當今民眾的觀感以及國際對於中國當今狀態的反應相較於過去會有相當大的不同,在某種意義上,人們會更快的訴諸於制裁中共。由於當年布希政府敲響了天安門事件的警鐘,美國與北京當局保持良好關係這種令人失望的舉動將會減少。現在也不存在類似1989年的冷戰背景,當年基辛格還說我們需要北京的力量來平衡冷戰中與莫斯哥當局的軍備競賽。現今所有的情況都與當年有著本質上的不同。」

Stephen Yates:“Well, I think those images would be broadly shocking to a lot of Americans. You know, I think there’s been broad coverage of the demonstrations in Hong Kong, but I don’t know that it’s become kind of a kitchen table conversation among a large majority of American households. It would certainly color the presidential election conversation. So there would be, I think pretty loud voices in Congress. Every candidate running would be pressed to speak. There are now many, many candidates running for the Democrat nomination. My guess is they would have to compete to revive some position on human rights in China, that has somewhat waned in the Democratic Party in recent years. Nancy Pelosi, who’s the speaker of the house, entered Congress in the times, soon after Tiananmen square and was a vocal proponent of human rights in China at a critic of the Communist Party and a speaker she has from time to time, said things that were critical of what’s happening inside of China as speaker. I would expect her to be a leader in denouncing actions that would be taken if that were to be the direction things went in Hong Kong, I would expect the United States government to do no less than it did at the time of Tiananmen. But who knows, we’re in different times. Well, in some ways the global reputation of China has been going down. Over the last year, people have grown increasingly pessimistic about the direction China is going, politically,. There’s talk of Xi Jinping being Mao Zedong 2.0 in a new form of Cultural Revolution, spreading inside China. So the, the mood music as someone might say colloquially in the United States has been very, very different leading to this point. So perceptions and international response could be quite different in the sense that people might be more quick to resort to sanctions. There might be less of a desperate move to preserve relations with Beijing as there was in the wake of Tiananmen by the Bush administration at the time. And also we don’t have the Cold War backdrop that existed at the time of 1989 where there was still a Kissinger draw that we needed Beijing as a balance against Moscow in the Cold War competition. All of that context is just fundamentally different today.”

 

蕭茗(Host/ Simone Gao):「參議員Marco Rubio在7月13日重申了香港人權及民主活動的問題。在這其中,他要求美國國務院每年都要評估香港的經濟及政治情況,依此來判斷香港是否具有足夠的自主程度能讓美國繼續給予其特別的待遇。你認為這條法案有可能被通過嗎?你認為美國在這方面對於香港的情況有什麼解決方法?

Simone Gao:“On June 13th Senator Marco Rubio re-introduced the Hong Kong human rights and Democracy Act 2019. In it, among other things, it requires the State Department to have an annual review of Hong Kong’s economic and political situation to decide whether it’s still autonomous enough to receive the special treatment from the US. What do you think this bill will be passed and what is the US approach with regard to the situation in Hong Kong?”

 

葉望輝(華府國際顧問公司執行長/曾任副總統切尼的副國家安全顧問):「我很感激參議員Rubio正在推動這個想法。我想對於這些事情,我們這些所謂的專家都很糾結到底利用什麼方式去幫助香港才是正確的,什麼方式對香港、對香港民眾是有幫助的。同時,若北京當局或其支持者欲破壞香港人民的自主,我們也將讓他們付出代價。從某種程度上來說,一國一制真的打著共產黨的痛處嗎?若香港真的漸漸走向一國一制,美國很自然的會開始認為或許不該再將香港視為獨特的關稅區。或許我們根本不應該再給被北京控制的香港政府特權。如果香港與北京同屬一個政府管轄,那他(香港)就該被當作中國領土的一部分來對待,這才合理。但與此同時這(香港的地位)也存在著合理的爭論,但爭論這些對香港人民有幫助嗎?我們如果有動機要去維護1984年簽署的聯合聲明,如果我們嘗試去督促北京履行當初在基本法中所承諾的內容,如果我們的最終目標是中國當初承諾予香港人民的普選制度、高度自主……這種開倒車、承諾香港的特殊地位究竟對香港是有利還是有弊? 並且這不是個能夠簡單回答的問題,因為北京必會為其舉動付出一些代價,且若在國際上香港自主不被當作一回事,香港人民與香港政府必須意識到北京若採取動作後所產生的風險。但與此同時,我想對大部分美國人來說,我們關註及在乎的是根據香港人民立法上的願望作對的事。這對我們來說不是一個能夠簡單回答的問題。

Stephen Yates:“I appreciate Senator Rubio pushing the idea. I think that all of us that are supposed to be expert on these things struggle with what are the right tools to use to be helpful and supportive of the Hong Kong people, but also to try to impose costs on Beijing or Beijing supporters if they undermine what should be the autonomy of the people of Hong Kong. In some ways, does it really hurt the communist party for there to be one country, one system? And if it is increasingly one country, one system, it’s natural that the United States should think about, well, maybe we shouldn’t treat Hong Kong as a separate customs territory. Maybe we shouldn’t give privileges to a Beijing controlled Hong Kong government. If it really is one government, it should be treated like the rest of China. That is rational. But at the same time, there’s a reasonable debate to have but does that help the people of Hong Kong? Ultimately if we are motivated to try to uphold the international agreement, that is the 1984 Joint Declaration, If we’re meant to try to hold Beijing accountable for the promises made in the Basic Law, if our ultimate objective is what was written into those promises of universal suffrage for the people of Hong Kong, for them to have that high degree of autonomy…Does kind of pulling back, on recognition of special status help the people of Hong Kong or hurt the people of Hong Kong. And it’s not an easy question to answer because there does need to be a cost to Beijing for its actions and the people and the government of Hong Kong needs to recognize the risks that it will be playing with if there isn’t a clear international sign that autonomy is being respected in Hong Kong. But at the same time, I think for a lot of Americans, our concern and our motivation is to do right by the legitimate wishes of the people of Hong Kong. And it’s just not an easy question for us to answer.”

 

蕭茗(Host/ Simone Gao):「這或許正是送終條款至今尚未被貿然通過的原因。」

Simone: “And maybe that’s why this legislation is not being rushed so far.”

 

葉望輝(華府國際顧問公司執行長/曾任副總統切尼的副國家安全顧問):「我認為聽證會已經提到日程上了,開放的討論是有建設性且有實際作用的。或許正是因為有這樣一個法案擺在這兒很重要,可以放出一個訊號,你知道,我們這套工具可能不完善,但是這裏有些後果將會起作用。並且我們想讓香港人民、香港政府,甚至讓共產黨明白這些。如果國會對待這些議題態度明確,或許會對行政部門有幫助,行政部門就可以把這個法案放在與中國進行廣泛協商以及對付香港政府的一攬子措施之中。因此,我們在政治和安全方面所看到的,與貿易再平衡是分開的。我認為,這些緊張的局勢有可能會成為更加危險的衝突。各方可能會在公海上彼此誤判,同時解放軍會冒險挑釁、搞擴張。與更廣泛的貿易再平衡、再新談判相比,可能對香港自治的破壞,外界對中國看法的影響更大,從根本上說,我認為貿易再平衡不是反華。而其它這些舉動,我認爲中共冒的風險是非常非常可觀的,可能引發廣泛的對中國這個品牌的負面反彈。因此,我認為它們是獨立的,不同的議題,我不認為貿易談判是必然的壞事。即使對中國而言,在某種程度上它也在重新平衡,中國最終可能會與美國建立更加持久的經濟關係。我認為這就是川普總統的願景,就是要努力的方向。但不同的是,中國的領導層似乎並不願意在目前在這一點上作出這種讓步。所以也許他們正試圖等待2020年大選,看看他們是否可以與另一位總統達成更好的協議。我不知道他們的算法是什麼。但是貿易談判本身並不一定是人們通常認為的那樣是戰爭,即使它被説成那樣。」

Stephen Yates:“I think a hearing is in order, and open discussion is constructive and useful. And it might be that this bill is important to put in place so that there’s a signal sent that, you know, we may have an imperfect set of tools, but there are these consequences that will come into play and we want the people of Hong Kong, the government of Hong Kong, but also the CCP to understand this and it might help the administration if Congress takes a clear view on these kinds of issues and the administration can then put that into its toolbox of negotiations with China broadly and its dealings with the government in Hong Kong. And so what we’re seeing in politics and security is separate from the trade rebalancing. And those are where tensions could become, I think, more dangerous conflicts. Miscalculation on the high seas with the PLA being too adventurous and too expansionist. The potential destruction of autonomy in Hong Kong has bigger consequences for perceptions of China  at writ large, than the broader trade rebalancing renegotiation, And fundamentally I don’t think that the trade rebalancing is anti-China. Whereas these other moves, the CCP risks I think are very, very substantial, broad based negative backlash towards China as a brand. So I see them somewhat as separate and different and I don’t see that the trade negotiations as something that’s necessarily bad. Even for China, in some ways it’s rebalancing and China could end up with a more sustained glide path for economic relations with the United States. I think that’s what president Trump’s vision was meant to try to move towards. The difference though is the leadership of China doesn’t seem willing to make that kind of concession at this point. And so maybe they’re trying to wait out the 2020 election to see whether they can get a better deal with a different president. I don’t know what their calculus is. But the trade negotiations themselves are not necessarily what one would normally think of as a war, even though it gets talked about that way.”

 =======================

Producer:Simone Gao
Writer:Simone Gao
Editors:Julian Kuo, Bin Tang
Narrator: Rich Crankshaw
Transcription: Jim Battaglini
Translation: Linda Du, Juan Li, Tung Tung, Chao Yu, Frank Yue
Proofread: Greg Yang
Cameraman: Wei Wu, Jimmy Xie, York Du
Special Effects:Harrison Sun
Assistant producer:Bin Tang, Merry Jiang
Feedback:ssgx@ntdtv.com

 New Tang Dynasty Television
Zooming In
August, 2019
===========================

 

相關文章
評論