America
Can No Longer Afford to Leave Taiwan Out of Its China Policy
美國對中政策不能再無視台灣
〈谷歌翻譯〉
基於真實歷史人物的“三國演義”，是史詩史上最有史以來最有影響力的小說之一。他以“孫子兵法”為題材，以“孫子兵法”為題材，以“孫子兵法”為主題，以“孫子兵法”為主，
中國，美國，台灣等三個國家的浪漫主義仍然是一個持續不斷的傳奇，等待著更加充分的對待。這個故事更是史詩般的，毫不遜色，直接和間接地影響了將近一半的人口。
儘管承認中國是二十一世紀面臨的最大的挑戰，現在已經變得司空見慣，但美國的外交政策制度仍然痴迷於莫斯科作為敵對的敵人;儘管中國成功地維護自己，而蘇聯在一九九一年遇難。
為什麼美國不是更認真對待中國呢？部分原因是因為中國的真正知識在美國領導人面前令人震驚，對中國的許多神話和疑慮仍然持續搖擺不定。戰爭藝術的第一個原則就是“認識自己，認識你的對手”，只有當我們對自己和我們的對手有清醒和現實的感覺時，才能找到可行的解決辦法。
中國：
中國長期以來一直被西方誤認。很長一段時間沒有關係;因為中國很遙遠，而在於自己的世界。直到二十世紀末，西方漢學家才能說中文，更不用說讀或寫。由於西方大多數人比中國學者都更了解中國，所以他們可以毫不猶豫地消失，而且經常是錯誤的，沒有受到挑戰。
西方漢學家喜歡說中國一直受到暴政的統治，所以現在的政權只不過是過去的延續。不對。強調不是真的中國從未像中國共產黨那樣暴虐暴虐，辱罵，侵擾，控制和致命。毛澤東的極權主義並不是來自中國的傳統，也不是以任何形式存在於中國的。
毛派之前，包括蒙古入侵者在內的任何統治者都是用暴力暴力來統治中國的，但是毛澤東一再狠狠地釋放了致命的混亂。事實上，毛澤東使中國人比以前所有的中國入侵者都多死，包括日本人使用現代武器，轟炸平民百姓中心。
以前的統治者，甚至沒有試圖用中共的方式來控制中國人民生活的各個方面，包括他們在哪裡生活，工作，旅行和謀生？他們擁有，買，吃，用;他們怎麼想，說話，寫，出版和創作藝術;他們可以結婚，兄弟會和聯繫。在文革期間，中國人甚至沒有保持沉默的權利。
許多人說，改革開放以來事情發生了變化，有些事情發生了變化。最為重大的變化是，鄧小平以國家暴力取代了毛澤東的暴民暴力，這種暴力並不像瘋狂的那樣瘋狂，而且可以控制得更多。但更多的事情保持不變。國家仍然控制著各種形式的媒體，包括社交媒體。國家仍然對幼兒園到大專以上的教育施加控制。國家仍然要求孩子學習什麼，什麼不能學習。國家仍然禁止人們知道什麼，他們不知道什麼。國家升級互聯網，監測城市居民的一舉一動，一批巨魔支付審查每個不被國家批准的文章或單詞。國家仍然擁有所有的土地，人民只能在土地上租賃物業七十年，這與資本主義和土地所有權傳統的文化完全不同，數千年。政權對自己的人民使用國家暴力是殘酷和常規的;監禁往往是隨意的;流氓司法共同。中國共產黨決定家庭人數，通過監督月經週期的安全機構執行出生配額，迫使人們進行滅絕和墮胎，對不服從的人造成嚴重的罰款和家庭破壞。它是
- 而且是一種極權主義的工具，如此嚴重，如此野蠻，以至於它以前從未存在於世界其他地方。而且，中共的列寧主義制度與俄羅斯的中世紀農奴制比起中國的任何一種現代或中國的政治做法更為共同，也是無法改革的。所有的控制槓桿都牢固到位，任何極權主義或獨裁的做法，無論是嘗試還是未經批准，都可以隨意激活。
美國：
幾十年來美國人對中共和中國的看法形成的最有影響力的三本書是埃德加·雪的中國紅星，西奧多·懷特的中國雷霆，芭芭拉·圖赫曼的史帝威，以及美國在中國的經驗。這些書是由不懂中文的作者撰寫的，在中國花費的時間很少或沒有時間，不熟悉中國的政治，歷史和文化。簡而言之，他們都是操縱的主要前景，他們是由意識形態承諾的美國漢學家，毛澤東，周恩來和圖赫曼的雪。
所謂的“熊貓擁抱者”在這個操縱和錯誤的環境中出現，自1971年以來一直主宰中國的政策。他們聲稱保衛和平是一個非常可疑的主張，因為中國沒有任何條件美國。中國在美國可能不需要作出任何讓步來修補關係，或進一步分裂中蘇聯盟，因為自1957年以來嚴重緊張，然後在進一步的邊界和意識形態衝突。然而，中國的知識在美國的精英中是如此驚人的缺陷，中國的國內現實根本沒有計算。
1979年終止台灣也是一個不必要的讓步。因此，熊貓擁抱者通過授予“中華人民共和國最惠國待遇”（MFN）來彌補這一巨大的錯誤。將其重新定義為永久正常貿易關係（PNTR）仍然不能使“正常”豐富中國曾經遭受過的最野蠻暴政。
二十年來，充分證明，使中共富人不能，也不能改變中共 - 只會使他們更傲慢，增加對美國貿易頭寸和全球貿易體系的傷害。提供中華人民共和國“利益相關者”的立場沒有表明自己的野心，只允許他們更好地獲得改變國際機構的規則和規範，並有充分的機會塑造美國文化領域和市場。而且，由於中國勞動力的規模和暴政實行人為的低工資和其他反勞動做法，中國經過不公平的競爭破壞了美國的製造業。中美雙方達成交易的百分比已經獲得了巨大的收益
- 現在兩國都有前所未有的億萬富豪。中國工人不僅被人為沮喪的工資劫掠，而且還剝奪了美國工人的良好就業機會來支持家庭。此外，許多美國人受到鴉片和處方藥流行的蹂躪，其中許多這些藥物從中國和其他國外進口。美國的許多小城鎮，一旦遏制和美國民主的支柱，現在在整個大陸景觀中都是孤獨而痛苦的。一些專家認為，貿易不會造成工作的損失，不能安撫或說服在家附近找不到工作的人，只會導致他們不信任專家。當他們工資低或沒有工資時，便宜的貨物對他們都不安慰。
所以精英們所做的這個“大談判”呢是自從亨利基辛格1971年中華人民共和國秘密訪問以來就是隱含的，並且是由詹姆斯·伍爾西（James
Woolsey）在“南華早報”的一個選舉中明確的，美國祇要不挑戰現狀，就會接受中國的崛起，這不僅僅是白日夢，而且已經變得站不住腳了。
那些反對這種誤導中國的方式，即所謂的“龍之奴”，看到與中國的對抗是不可避免的。他們是正確的此外，近半個世紀的綏靖不僅增加了對抗的難度，擴大了對抗面積，而且由於中國軍事現代化快速發展，這是通過開放美國廣闊的市場向中國開放的，現在的對抗現在要高得多。
可悲的事實是，不要對中國的語言，文化和政治感到擔心，美國自二十世紀四十年代以來一直被中國共產黨所超越。多年來沒有關係，因為美國在很多方面都遠遠超過了美國。不再是這樣，因為在美國的不知情的幫助下，中國一直在追趕。
台灣：
當選總統當選唐納德·特朗普與台灣總統蔡英文的電話，就表明台灣是夾在兩個巨大國家之間的小國，其中一個敵對敵意。
這個問題一定要問，為什麼中華人民共和國呢這麼敵意呢？
A）因為台灣是中國的替代模式。即使中華民國是一種較為溫和的暴政，中華人民共和國不能遵守台灣的存在，而是通過演變成全球羨慕的成功民主，台灣已經成為中華人民共和國政權的存在威脅。台灣是獨立的國家，它有美國的非正式支持;因此，消除台灣並不像消除內部對手那麼簡單。中國不得不訴諸戰爭。中共已經有效地消滅了黨內外的內部反對派，並滲透了許多海外反對派團體。沒有可行的替代方案或任何可行的反對派，中共可以抵制政治改革，繼續控制中國很長時間。
B）由於中共的權力結構，以及非常殘酷的方式，也是敵對的，歸結為“你必須為我生命而死”。（你死我活）沒有談判，沒有承諾，保證誘惑或妥協可能會改變中共的權力結構和隨之而來的心態。
但是，台灣與另一個巨大的國家的問題也不盡如人意。
熊貓擁抱者一再表示願意犧牲台灣。基辛格在不經過提示，要求或談判的情況下，與周恩來首次會晤時提出台灣。吉米·卡特和布比津斯基實際上交出了“台灣關係法”的必要性。犧牲台灣，二千四百萬人民的成功民主，比澳大利亞稍微大的人口，一定會使中華人民共和國更強大，但不會使美國更美好或更安全。熊貓擁抱者不完全理解美國是民主嗎？他們渴望擁抱暴政，並沒有考慮過民主不能通過教唆暴政來改變暴政的性質的可能性更大;但事實上，這樣做會危及包括美國在內的所有民主國家。熊貓擁抱者違反了戰爭藝術的第一原則的兩個部分
- 他們對自己的自己也沒有足夠的了解，也沒有認識到自己的對手。
龍族殺戮者願意在台灣打台灣，大概在台灣。台灣作為一個小國，可能不會倖免於二巨頭之間的軍事對抗。即使台灣要生存下來，至少會犧牲一代台灣人，也遭受了這樣的破壞，要幾十年才能恢復。美國人對戰爭的胃口不大。沒有理智的人做。亞洲對美國的另一場戰爭的生命和資源的成本可能是巨大的。由於戰爭總是這樣的，所以甚至可能使美國擺脫世界優秀的權力。
簡而言之，美國對中華人民共和國的這些做法有缺陷和不足，涉及台灣的犧牲;但這就是美國所有的政策選擇，現在還不夠。
唐納德·特朗普總統的選舉已被許多人所畫，反對精英。中國人有很長的反叛歷史，但暴政從未讓他們以和平的方式反抗，就像在民主中一樣。一個扼殺中共精英壓制中國人民的中國政策是不明智的，不會被遺忘的。現在是製定一個不僅對精英有利的新的中國政策，而且對美國，中國和台灣的人民有好處。
劉德華是1990年至1998年在弗吉尼亞州斯坦滕山舉行的年度人民解放軍會議的發起人和組織者之一。她在人權，法治，民主和軍事戰略方面的著作出現在許多出版物中，其中包括“亞洲華爾街日報”，“新聞報”和“香港經濟日報”。她為國防部寫信，是1996年中國軍事現代化書籍的共同編輯。
英文原文：
America
Can No Longer Afford to Leave Taiwan Out of Its China Policy
The Romance
of the Three Kingdoms,
based on real historical figures, was one of the most epic and gripping novels
ever written. It teaches the lessons of the Art of War (孫子兵法)
better, and in an easier-to-understand form than Sun Tzu (孫子)
himself in his famous treatise.
The
romance of three states: China, the United States and Taiwan, is still very
much an ongoing saga, and awaits a fuller treatment. This tale is even more
epic, no less gripping and affects directly—and indirectly—nearly half of the
population on earth.
Even
though it has now become commonplace to acknowledge that China is the biggest
challenge that the United States faces in the twenty-first century, the
American foreign-policy establishment is still obsessed with Moscow as the
implacable enemy; despite the fact that the PRC succeeds in preserving itself,
while the USSR met its demise in 1991.
Why
isn’t China taken more seriously by the American establishment? Partly it is
because genuine knowledge of China remains shockingly deficient among America’s
leaders, and many myths and cliches about China continue to hold sway. The
first principle of the Art of War is “know thyself, know thy opponent.” Only
when we are clear-sighted and realistic about ourselves and our opponents, can
we come up with workable solutions.
China:
China
has long been misperceived by the West. For a long time, it didn’t matter;
because China was far away, and it was in its own world. Few Western
sinologists, until the late twentieth century, could speak Chinese, let alone
read or write it. Since most in the West know even less about China than the
sinologists, they could get away with knowing pitifully little, and being very
often wrong without being challenged.
Western
sinologists like to say that China has always been ruled by tyranny, so the
current regime is simply a continuation of the past. Not true. Emphatically not
true. China has never seen a tyranny as brutal, abusive, intrusive, controlling
and lethal as the China’s Communist Party (CCP). Mao Zedong’s totalitarianism
did not come from the Chinese tradition, and had not existed in China before in
any form.
No
rulers before Mao, and that includes the Mongol invaders, had ever ruled China
by using mob violence; but Mao did, repeatedly and callously unleash lethal
chaos. In fact, Mao caused more Chinese to die than all the previous invaders
of China combined, and that includes the Japanese using modern weapons and
heavy bombing of civilian population centers.
No
previous rulers had even attempted to control every aspect of Chinese people’s
lives the way the CCP did, and that includes where they lived, worked, traveled
and earned a living; what they owned, bought, ate and used; how they thought,
spoke, wrote, published and created art; whom they could marry, fraternize and
associate with. During the Cultural Revolution, Chinese didn’t even have the
right to remain silent.
Many
have said that things have changed since the onset of “reform and opening.”
Some things have changed. The most consequential change was that Deng Xiaoping
had replaced Mao’s mob violence with state violence, which is not nearly as
insane, and far more controllable, as the means to rule. But far more things
have remained the same. The state remains in control of all forms of media,
including social media. The state still imposes controls on education, from
kindergarten to tertiary levels and beyond. The state still dictates what the
children learn and what could not be learned. The state still proscribes what
the people can know, and what they cannot know. The state has upgraded its
internet to monitor every move of its urban residents, and an army of trolls
paid to censor every post or word not approved by the state. The state still
owns all the land, and the people can only lease properties on the land for
seventy years—this is totally alien from a culture with a tradition of
capitalism and land ownership going back thousands of years. The regime’s use
of state violence against its own people is brutal and routine; imprisonments
often are arbitrary; and miscarriages of justice common. China’s Communist
Party decides the size of the family, enforces birth quotas with security
agents monitoring menstrual cycles, forces people to get sterilizations and
abortions, inflicts heavy fines and home destruction for those who disobey. It
was—and is—a totalitarian instrument so gross and so barbaric that it has never
existed anywhere else on earth before. Moreover, the CCP's Leninist system,
which has more in common with Russia’s medieval serfdom than with any modern or
traditional Chinese political practices, could not—and cannot—be reformed. With
all its control levers firmly in place, any totalitarian or dictatorial
practices, both tried and untried, can be activated at will.
The
United States:
The
three most influential books that had shaped for decades Americans’ perceptions
of the CCP and China were Edgar Snow’s Red
Star Over China,
Theodore White’s Thunder Out of China and Barbara Tuchman’s Stilwell
and the American Experience in China.
These books were written by authors who did not know Chinese, had spent very
little or no time in China, and were not familiar with Chinese politics,
history and culture. In short, they were all prime prospects for manipulation,
and they were—Snow by Mao, White by Zhou Enlai and Tuchman by ideologically
committed American sinologists.
It
is in this manipulated and misinformed milieu that the so-called
“panda-huggers” emerged, and have dominated China policy since 1971. They claim
they have preserved peace—a very dubious claim, since China was not in any
condition to fight the United States. The PRC was so weak and ravaged at the
time that the United States probably didn’t need to make any concession to mend
relations, or to divide further the Sino-Soviet alliance, badly strained since
1957, and then on the edge of further border and ideological clashes. Yet, the
knowledge of China was so shockingly deficient among America’s elite that the
domestic reality of the PRC did not come into their calculations at all. The
derecognition of Taiwan in 1979 was also an unnecessary concession. The panda
huggers have since compounded this monumental error by granting the PRC Most
Favored Nation Status (MFN). Renaming it as Permanent Normal Trade Relations
(PNTR) still doesn’t make it “normal” to enrich the most barbaric tyranny China
ever had.
Two
decades on, it has been amply demonstrated that making the CCP rich didn’t and
couldn’t change the CCP—it has only made them more arrogant, and increased the
harm they could do to the U.S. trade position and the global trading system.
Offering the PRC “stakeholder” positions has not stated their ambition, it has
only allowed them better access to change the rules and norms of international
institutions, and ample opportunities where they could shape American cultural
spheres and marketplaces. Moreover, because of the scale of China’s labor
force, and the artificially low wages and other anti-labor practices enforced
by tyranny, China has, through unfair competition, devastated America’s
manufacturing sector. The one-percenters in China and the United States who
made the deals with each other have reaped the great benefits—now there are
unprecedented numbers of billionaires in both countries. It is not just the
Chinese workers who are being robbed by the artificially depressed wages, the
American workers are also being deprived of good paying jobs to support their
families. Moreover, many Americans are being ravaged by an opiate and
prescription drug epidemic, with many of these drugs imported from China and
other foreign places. Many of America’s small towns, once the bulwark and
mainstay of American democracy, now lie forlorn and distressed across the
continental landscape. The assertions by some experts that trade didn’t cause
the loss of jobs don’t comfort or convince those who can’t find work near their
homes, but only leads them to distrust the experts. Cheaper goods are no
consolation to them either when they have low or no wages.
So
this “grand bargain” made by the elites, which was implicit since Henry
Kissinger’s secret mission to the PRC in 1971, and made explicit by James
Woolsey during the 2016 presidential election campaign in an op-ed in
the South China Morning Post—that the United
States would accept China’s rise as
long as it doesn’t challenge the status quo—was never much more than a
daydream, and has already become untenable.
Those
who oppose this misguided approach to China, the so called “dragon slayers,”
see confrontation with the PRC as unavoidable. They are correct. Moreover,
nearly half a century of appeasement not only has increased the difficulty and
enlarged the area of confrontation, but because of China's rapid military
modernization, which was made possible by opening the vast American market to
the PRC, the level of violence of such a confrontation will now be far higher.
The
sad truth is, not bothering to know enough about China’s language, culture and
politics, the United States has been consistently outsmarted by the Chinese
communists since the 1940s. For many years, it didn’t matter—because the United
States was far superior in so many ways. This is no longer the case, because, with
unwitting help from the United States, the PRC has been catching up fast.
Taiwan:
The
furious reactions to then President-elect Donald Trump’s phone call with
Taiwanese president Tsai Ing-wen has laid bare the fact that Taiwan is a small
state sandwiched between two giant states, one of them implacably hostile.
The
question must be asked, why is the PRC so implacably hostile?
A)
It is because Taiwan points to an alternative model for China. Even when the
Republic of China was a milder form of tyranny, the PRC was unable to abide
Taiwan’s existence; but by evolving into a successful democracy admired around
the world, Taiwan has become an existential threat to the PRC regime. Taiwan is
an independent state, and it has the informal backing of the United States;
hence, eliminating Taiwan is not as simple as eliminating internal opponents.
China has to resort to war. The CCP has already effectively exterminated its
internal opposition, both within and outside of the Party; and has penetrated
many overseas opposition groups. Without feasible alternatives, or any viable
opposition, the CCP can resist political reform and continue to control China
for a very long time.
B)
It is also hostile because of the way CCP’s power is structured, and the
extremely cruel way it is employed, which boils down to “you must be killed for
me to live.” (你死我活.) No negotiation, no promise, assurance, inducement
or compromise could change the structure of power of the CCP, and the mentality
that goes with it.
However,
the problems Taiwan has with the other giant state are no less daunting.
The panda huggers have demonstrated
time and again their willingness to sacrifice Taiwan. Kissinger offered up
Taiwan in his first meeting with Zhou Enlai without prompting, demands or
negotiations. Jimmy Carter and Zbigniew Brzezinski actually delivered,
necessitating the Taiwan Relations Act as a corrective. Sacrificing Taiwan, a successful
democracy with twenty-four million people, a population slightly larger than
Australia’s, will certainly make the PRC stronger, but it won’t make the United
States better or safer. Do the panda huggers not fully comprehend that the
United States is a democracy? In their eagerness to embrace tyranny, they have
not considered enough of the more likely eventuality that democracy cannot
change the nature of tyranny by abetting tyranny; but doing so would, in fact,
endanger all democracies, including the United States. The panda huggers have
violated both parts of the first principle of the Art of War —they failed to know
enough about one’s own self, and also one’s opponent.
The
dragon slayers are willing to fight the PRC over Taiwan, probably on Taiwan.
Taiwan, as a small state, may not survive a military confrontation between two
giants. Even if Taiwan were to survive, it would have sacrificed at least one
generation of Taiwanese, and suffered such devastation that it would take
decades to recover, if ever. The
American people do not have much appetite for war. No sane people do. The costs
of another war in Asia to the United States, both in lives and resources, could
be monumental. Since wars are always such crapshoots, it may even cause the
United States to fall from the position of preeminent power in the world.
In short, both these approaches the
United States has towards the PRC are deficient and inadequate, and involve
sacrificing Taiwan one way or another; but that was all the policy options the
United States had on the table, and now it is not enough.
The
election of President Donald Trump has been painted by many as a revolt against
the elite. Chinese people have a very long history of rebellion, but tyranny
has never allowed them to rebel in a peaceful manner, as it can happen in a
democracy. A China policy that abets the CCP elite in their oppression of the Chinese
people cannot be wise, and won’t be forgotten. It is time to devise a new China
policy that is not just good for the elites, but good for the peoples of the
United States, China and Taiwan.
Dimon Liu was one
of the originators and the organizer of the annual People’s Liberation Army
Conference at Staunton Hill, Virginia from 1990 to 1998. Her writings on human
rights, the rule of law, democracy and military strategy have appeared in many
publications, including the Asian Wall Street Journal, Newsday and
the Hong Kong Economic Journal. She has written for the Department
of Defense, and is the co-editor of the 1996 book, China’s Military Modernization.
他和國會不合，politically isolated. 還好他不是黨主席。
回覆刪除