人大重陽網 西方常在敏感熱點上歪曲抹黑中國,該如何回應?王文 外媒專訪 講述經驗
    <cite id="he0xj"></cite>
    1. <cite id="he0xj"></cite>
      <tt id="he0xj"></tt>
      <tt id="he0xj"></tt>

      
      
        <rt id="he0xj"></rt>

        <rp id="he0xj"></rp>
        <tt id="he0xj"></tt>

        西方常在敏感熱點上歪曲抹黑中國,該如何回應?

        發布時間:2022-05-13作者: 王文 

        如何回應老外對疫情、俄烏與臺海的誤解,是中外交流近期難點。中國人民大學重陽金融研究院執行院長、中美人文交流研究中心執行主任王文結合其近期接受外媒專訪等經驗,在其《環球時報》英文版第92篇“變局.專欄”中講述經驗。 

        編者按:如何回應老外對疫情、俄烏與臺海的誤解,是中外交流近期難點。中國人民大學重陽金融研究院執行院長、中美人文交流研究中心執行主任王文結合其近期接受外媒專訪等經驗,在其《環球時報》英文版第92篇“變局.專欄”中講述經驗。該文中文版在新媒體上引起廣泛關注,“重頭說起”也錄制了該篇相關內容。人大重陽君推薦文章、視頻如下:


        視頻來源:5月13日重頭說起欄目


        因為職業的關系,我會接觸到不少外國人。近期我在線參加了不少與美國、歐洲國家的智庫對話,也與不少西方國家駐中國使館的外交官交流。他們提出一些關于俄烏沖突、中國經濟等敏感問題的觀點,具有普遍性。這期我想與大家分享自己的回答,供大家參考。


        問題一:一些西方國家的外交官通常會質疑說,上海疫情的經濟沖擊,怎么可能中國2022年一季度GDP增長有4.8%呢?一些外國外交官質疑中國GDP數據,其潛臺詞是認為中國政府公布數據缺少公信力。回應這個問題,其實不只是經濟學的技術問題,更是一個政治學的立場問題。


        其實,數據公布當天,我所在的智庫就推出《4.8%,有些意外,卻是情理之中》的長篇評論,其中講述增長9.7%的投資、增長10.7%的進出口貿易來。我的回答通常是,中國很大,此處不亮,他處亮。要相信中國經濟的韌性。

        上海疫情的確引起的普遍情緒焦躁,這完全是應被理解的。但我始終相信,從長期主義的視角看中國,短期的問題總會被解決。試想,如果學歐美完全“放開”,有越來越多的老人因感染而死去,到時候的問題會不會更嚴重呢?我自己始終堅持,對中國長期的看法,這是對中國國情的理性,更是對中國發展的信仰。

        ?

        問題二:一些西方國家的外交官通常會質疑,中國在俄烏沖突問題上的立場。俄羅斯對烏克蘭動武,為什么中國不譴責?不稱俄是“入侵”?這個邏輯,其實也對一些中國老百姓有影響。


        我通常的解釋是,大國有比中小國家更廣的安全邊界。正如美國無法容忍1962年蘇聯在古巴部署導彈,甚至用“洗衣粉”為由2003年對伊拉克所謂的“威脅”進行預防性戰爭。這西方國家怎么沒說美國入侵呢?


        我經常舉一個例子,如果見到兩人打架,首先做得是勸架,再是討論為什么要打,然后再判定誰對誰錯。西方現在邏輯是,先動手那一方,肯定是錯的。要號召大家團結起來制裁先動手那一方,不跟著制裁的也是有責任的。我覺得,這個邏輯看上去盛氣凌人,其實這樣的邏輯不講法理,也不符倫理,更沒有道理。


        全世界只有30多個西方國家制裁俄羅斯,連紐約時報近期都發文認為,西方被世界孤立了。這恰恰證明了當下中國立場的正確、西方邏輯的謬誤。現在西方外交官、一些西方媒體聚焦在“中國為何不譴責俄羅斯入侵”,其實是轉移話題,回避戰爭背后的復雜原因。


        外國朋友更應把關注力放在誰是這場俄烏沖突的幕后黑手,而不是隨著美國與西方媒體的指摘將話題轉移到中國的立場。


        中國立場是長期一貫與富有邏輯的。國家之間首先應相互尊重,再是協商解決。做不到這兩點怎么辦?中國認為,那也應保持和平。實在保持不著,爆發戰爭了呢?就應該按是非曲直來做判斷。


        戰爭,中國肯定應反對。制裁同樣,中國也應反對。中國是過去40年最不愿意戰爭、最追求和平、最少制裁他國的大國。對戰爭譴責,不應偏袒任何一方,也不應是雙重標準。從這個角度看,只有中國是最客觀中立的。

        ?

        問題三:一些西方國家的智庫學者、外交官近期經常討論臺灣問題。他們甚至會說,中國在臺灣問題太敏感。我們近期的前高官去臺灣訪問,他們并不代表我們政府立場。


        這個邏輯,我也不贊同。你們退下的高官,沒什么事去臺灣做什么?發表臺灣言論,也不考慮一個中國的感受?臺灣是中華民族的紅線。不要碰!不要碰!不要碰!重要的事情說三遍。但美國和西方國家一些政客總是抖機靈,以不代表政府身份為由訪問臺灣,為那些前高官開托,還怪中國不理解他們的體制。行吧,那就別怪中國政府制裁或者有對等反應。


        近期,我經常提醒一些西方國家外交官,現在最擔心的事情是,美國“以烏制俄”戰略占到了小便宜,會讓美國同樣在臺灣炮制一場戰爭,以此實現“以臺制華”的目的,延緩中國崛起的速度。這真是一場賭局,美國又想做莊。如果那樣,就別怕中國后發制人,那將是人類災難,但后果都要你們負。


        當然,這三個問題肯定不能窮盡西方對中國的話語與意識形態的陷阱。我先舉個別例子呢,是想真誠與一些朋友分享,當我這么回答時,一些西方外交官是接受的。


        現在中國與西方話語與意識形態的沖突很嚴重。根子是在,西方還完全不能接受與適應中國崛起以后的對外交往方式。


        說實在的,所有人必須適應與跟進中國作為全球大國的樣子,包括我自己。人人都要有大國國民的樣子。學者也要做大國學者。比如,十年前,作為智庫學者,我無須那么頻繁地對外發聲;而現在,對外講好中國故事,發表英文文章,變成我的重要工作之一。


        另一方面,我也要說,一定要加強與外國人的交流。任何時候,交流都是重要的。應該想辦法,拆除那些阻礙溝通與交流的圍墻。現在,西方國家對中國的誤解、抹黑很深,要交流、傾聽,對的則傾聽,錯的則反駁。


        中國要成為謙遜的大國,也要成為真誠的大國,當然,如果別人欺侮、故意抹黑咱們,咱們也要據理力爭。這就是我的一些對外交往的真實感受。


        以下為《環球時報》英文版內容


        Talk is vital for mutual understanding, but China won’t hesitate to fight back West’s smear


        By Wang Wen


        Illustration: Liu Rui/GT


        Because of my occupation, I often come into contact with many foreigners. Recently, I participated in many webinars with think tanks from the US and Europe, and also communicated with diplomats from a number of Western embassies in China. They put forward some common views on sensitive issues such as the Russia-Ukraine conflict and China's economy. I'd like to share my views.


        The first question most have is how could China's GDP growth of the first quarter be 4.8 percent given the serious impact of the epidemic in Shanghai. This question underlines doubts about the credibility of China's official statistics.


        The answer to this question is not only an economic one, but a political one. We should trust the resilience of the Chinese economy. The anxiety caused by the epidemic in Shanghai is completely understandable. But I always believe when we look at China from a long-term perspective, short-term problems will be solved. Just imagine, if we follow the US and Europe to completely "open" our society, more and more elderly people would die, and wouldn't the problem be more serious then? A long-term view of China requires a rational view of China's national conditions and belief in China's development.


        The second question is: why didn't China condemn Russia's military action in Ukraine and why not call it an "invasion"? I would argue that big countries have wider security borders than smaller ones - just as the US could not bear the Soviet Union's deployment of missiles in Cuba in 1962. Similarly, it used "washing powder" as an excuse to conduct a preemptive war against Iraq in 2003. Why didn't Western countries blame US invasion?


        I often cite an example. If you see two people fighting, you should first try to persuade them, then discuss why they fight, and then decide who is right and who is wrong. The current logic of the West is that the one who makes the first move is definitely wrong, therefore it calls on everyone to unite and punish the one who makes the first move and those who do not follow the sanctions are also responsible. This logic looks domineering, but in fact it is not legal, ethical or justified.


        Even an article in The New York Times recently said that the West is isolated by the world. It just proves the correctness of China's current position and the fallacy of Western logic. Now some Western diplomats and media's focus on "why China didn't condemn Russia's invasion" is actually diverting the topic and avoiding the complicated reasons behind the war. Foreigners should attach more importance to who is the real initiator behind the scene.


        China's position is consistent and logical. Countries should first respect each other, and then resolve through consultation. What if they can't do these two things? China believes that they should remain peaceful all the same. What if peace can't be maintained and a war breaks out? Then the case should be judged on the basis of right and wrong.


        China should oppose war as well as sanctions. In the past 40 years, China has been the major country least willing to go to war, pursues peace the most, and imposes the least sanctions on other countries. The condemnation of war should not be biased toward any side, nor should it be a double standard. From this perspective, China is the most objective and neutral nation.


        The third question concerns Taiwan island. Think tank scholars and diplomats from Western countries often talk about the Taiwan question and claim that China is too sensitive toward it. They assert that the visit to Taiwan by their former officials did not represent the position of their governments.


        I don't agree with it. The Taiwan question is the red line of the Chinese nation and should not be crossed. Some politicians from the US and Western countries play the tricks and send former government officials to Taiwan, and blame China for not understanding their system. They could only expect sanctions or countermeasures from the Chinese government.


        I have often reminded diplomats of some Western countries that what they should be most worried about now is that the US strategy of "containing Russia by making use of Ukraine" has gained certain advantage - and this may prompt the US to initiate a war in the Taiwan Straits as well so as to realize the goal of "containing China by making use of Taiwan and slowing down the speed of China's rise.'' This is a gamble. In that case, one should expect China's countermoves. It will be a disaster for mankind, but the West will pay for the consequences.


        Now the conflict in discourse and ideology between China and the West is serious. The root cause is that the West has not been able to accept and adapt to the way of engaging with China after the rise of China. Western countries have deep misunderstandings of China. We should communicate with and listen to them, and we should pay heed to what is right and refute what is wrong.


        (歡迎關注人大重陽新浪微博:@人大重陽 ;微信公眾號:rdcy2013)

        快三平台