Cold Warriors’ Over-Active Imagination

Published in Zaobao.com
(China) on 14 May 2010
by 区言 (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Christine.xiao. Edited by Catherine Harrington.
Is President Obama blaming China or revealing his expectations for China?

President Obama will visit Australia this June. On April 15 the Australian Broadcasting Corporation aired an exclusive interview with him, with part of the interview recently quoted out of context and spread widely on the internet in China. Looking at the headlines, you can see what caused outrange in some “netizens.”

“Obama: The Wealth of 1.3 billion Is a Disaster for Humankind”
  
“Obama Carelessly Divulged Americans’ True Feelings toward the Chinese: Indignance!”

“American President’s Speech Irritates Chinese People”

“Obama’s New Speech: A Public Provocation to the Whole Chinese Nation”

“Anger: Obama Finally Showed His Repugnant Logic”
  
To what speech by Obama are these titles referring? It can be found in the following paragraphs from an article which appeared in Zaobao.com, “Comparisons of the East and the West: Is the West Facing an Economic or Political Crisis?” written by frequent Paris-based blogger Song Luzheng.

“While the West has to acknowledge the success of the Chinese model, they do feel a bone-deep threat. This is fully reflected in the interview with Obama conducted by the Australian Television Station. Obama claimed: ‘You know if you talk to Chinese leaders I think they will acknowledge immediately that if over a billion Chinese citizens have the same living patterns as Australians and Americans do right now then all of us are in for a very miserable time, the planet just can’t sustain it, so they understand that they’ve got to make a decision about a new model that is more sustainable that allows them to pursue the economic growth that they’re pursuing while at the same time dealing with these environmental consequences. So I think they understand intellectually.’ ”

"Obama made a very strategic speech. He expressed his real thoughts through his speculation and assumptions about Chinese leaders (In fact how could Chinese leaders acknowledge this?). Here, his purpose is not to negate the American life model, but to negate that Chinese people live the same way as Americans do. He hopes China can change its development model. But the core question is: Is the big problem with the American model rather than the Chinese model? What needs to change is the Western model rather than the Chinese model. Why doesn’t America take the lead in creating a new sustainable model? The emergencies created by the West have dominated the world for five hundred years; why haven't they created a sustainable model until now? Moreover, why do they want to promote their model globally as based on universal values? Even by military force (Afghanistan, Iraq)? Isn't this abandoning the very ‘advice’ Obama gave to China?” 

"This time, Obama uttered a fact: China can have the western system, but cannot enjoy the same living standard as Americans. However, he should know, the reason why many third-world nations take the U.S.A. as an example is because they expect to have the same living standards as Americans. Hasn’t his declaration denigrated the whole world's yearning for the American system? It seems that Obama's real intention is revealed in the end."
  
As a matter of fact, what did Obama say in the interview? Readers can read the original full English transcript at this link: Face to face with Obama http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2010/s2872726.htm

Now, let us take a practical approach and see exactly what Obama said that irritated the netizens.
  
The Australian television reporter Kerry O’Brien finished asking questions about Iraq and then turned to global climate change.
Kerry O'Brien: "You've described nuclear terrorism as America's greatest risk in the short and long term, but climate change has also been described as the greatest single risk to humanity. You met Chinese president Hu on Monday. Did you two make any progress on climate change, because surely the solution is largely in the end in your hands and his?"

President Obama: "Well I would dispute that any two countries can dictate a solution here, we’re going to have to have an investment by all nations in dealing with what I think is a very real problem. Australia has a significant carbon footprint just like we do, and certainly per capita, our two countries have some of the biggest carbon footprints … I know that both in the United States and in Australia, there is a concern that somehow there is a conflict between economic growth on the one hand and dealing aggressively with climate change. What I’ve been trying to say here in the United States and I would say to the world is that if we focus our attention, our ingenuity, our innovative capacity on transforming from a fossil fuel based economy to a clean energy based economy then potentially we can not only solve the problem of climate change but unleash an enormous amount of economic growth for the future but it’s going to take some time, and there’s going to be some transition and people are understandably resistant.”

Kerry O'Brien: “Do you feel that you are making headway with President Hu on this front?”

President Obama: “Well you know I think China has an enormous interest in solving this problem. You know if you talk to Chinese leaders I think they will acknowledge immediately that if over a billion Chinese citizens have the same living patterns as Australians and Americans do right now then all of us are in for a very miserable time, the planet just can’t sustain it, so they understand that they’ve got to make a decision about a new model that is more sustainable that allows them to pursue the economic growth that they’re pursuing while at the same time dealing with these environmental consequences. So I think they understand intellectually. Right now though they’re understandable impulse is to say well let’s let the developed countries, the Australias, and the Americas deal with this problem first and we’ll get to it when we’ve caught up a little bit in terms of our standard of living. The point we’ve tried to make is we can’t, we can’t allow China to wait. We have to take responsibility and do what needs to be done, but if emerging countries not just China but also India, Brazil and others are pursuing a path in which they replace us as the largest carbon emitters, that’s not a sustainable practical approach, so we’re going to have to have everybody moving on the same track at the same time.”

Obama’s final remarks about the China issue: “It is in our interests, both of our countries interests for China to be successful, for China to be prosperous, because that means they’re more likely to be stable, that means they’re more likely to be able to deal with issues like the energy efficiency of their industries, and reduce pollution, and so we’re not interested in constraining China, we want China to do well. The only thing we want to make sure of is that a country like China as it is growing and inevitably will end up being the largest economy just because of the enormous size of their population, that they are also taking their international responsibilities seriously and that they recognize that with great power comes great responsibility.”
  
Twenty years have passed since the Cold War. During this time period, America has tried to dominate the world but instead sank into war. And as a consequence its economy has suffered. Since the president took office, he has brought a new tone to international politics. No matter how many conflicts there are between the interests of America, China and Russia, Cold War confrontations seldom occur. Instead, leaders are starting to solve problems and ease conflict through rational dialogue. But some people still cannot get rid of the cold-war mentality. In their mind, there must still be a simulated enemy. They easily project their enemy’s character to be reflected by the rich, the rebellious, the bad, as opposed to the right people in the international system. The chief executive of U.S. imperialism "that expects China to play an active role in the international arena” unfortunately becomes the object of their projection.




奥巴马总统对中国是指责还是期待?

[2641] (2010-05-14)

早报导读

中日韩领导人会议 没公开谴责朝鲜
第三次中日韩会议昨天举行,会议没有公开谴责被国际调查组认为是击沉了韩国天安号军舰的朝鲜。
官方媒体坦承 中国患精神病者上亿人
台湾首富郭台铭 霸气与纪律打造“紫禁城”
泰国首相阿比昔:今年举行大选很困难

疱疹—湿疣—口服疫苗!
★早泄-阳痿-别盲目补肾
糖尿病—化糖清血新突破
牛皮癣—排毒净血抗复发



  奥巴马总统将于6月访问澳大利亚。4月15日,澳大利亚电视台播出对他的专访。这个专访的部分内容最近被断章取义地在中国网络上热传,看以下帖子的标题就可知道一些网民们愤怒:

  奥巴马:13亿中国人如果富裕起来是人类的灾难

  奥巴马不小心说出美国人对中国的真实意图,气愤!

  美国总统奥巴马的言论让中国人愤怒!!!

  奥巴马的新言论,是对全体中国人民公开挑衅!

  愤怒:奥巴马终于说漏嘴了 完全是流氓逻辑思维!

  这些标题到底对奥巴马的哪些言论感到那么愤怒呢?经常发表博文的巴黎宋鲁郑先生投给《联合早报网》的《东西对比:西方是经济危机还是政治制度危机?》一文中有一段话很好地体现出来。他写道:

  “中国模式的成功,西方在不得不承认的同时也感到了刻骨的威胁。这一点在美国总统奥巴马近日在白宫接受澳大利亚电视采访时,得到了完整的体现。他这样声称:如果你同中国的领导人交谈,他们会立刻认同,如果超过10亿的中国居民现在过着和澳大利亚人与美国人同样的生活模式,那么我们都将陷入非常悲惨的状况,这个地球无法承受,所以,中国的领导人清楚,他们不得不下决定创建一种可持续的新模式,使得他们在追求他们想要的经济增长的同时,处理所出现的环境污染的后果。所以我想他们会从知性上理解。

  “奥巴马的发言很策略,他以对中国领导人的推测和假设,来表达自己的真实看法(事实上中国领导人怎么可能会认同呢?)。在这里,他的目的不是在否定美国人的生活模式,而是否定中国也像美国人一样,希望中国改变发展模式。但核心在于,现在大出问题的是美国模式而不是中国模式。需要改正的是西方模式而不是中国,为什么美国不带头创建一种可持续的新模式?西方崛起主导世界五百年了,为什么到现在还创建不出一种可持续的新模式?不仅如此,为什么还要把自己的模式当作普世价值全球推销?甚至武力推销?(阿富汗、伊拉克)这不是和奥巴对中国的“建议”南辕北辙吗?

  “奥巴马这一次实是讲出了一个事实:中国可以有西方的制度,但不能享有如美国般的生活水平。可是,他应该知道,全球许多第三世界国家只所以以美国为榜样,就是期待能过上美国哪样标准的生活。他这个宣言岂不等于打消了全球对美国制度的向往?看来奥巴马是真的要图穷匕见了。”

  事实上,奥巴马在访谈中讲了什么呢?读者可在网络链接Face to face with Obama http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2010/s2872726.htm 读到访谈的英文全文。

  现在,我们实事求是地了解奥巴马到底说了哪些令上述许多网民恼火的话。

  澳大利亚电视台记者奥布赖恩问完有关阿富汗的问题后就转到全球气候变化的问题上。他问:“您把核恐怖主义描述成美国短期与长期的危险,但气候变化也被人们描述成人类单独最大的危险。您星期一与中国国家主席胡锦涛会谈过。由于气候变化问题的解决终究主要取决于您们两人,您们两人在谈论这问题时有无取得进展?”

  奥巴马回答:“我不认为任何两个国家可以强制推行它们的解决方案,这个(气候变化)问题是一个非常实际的问题,我们需要所有国家都积极投入参与解决。澳大利亚跟我们一样,碳足迹(即碳排放量)很大,我们两国的人均碳足迹无疑属于最大一类的。……我知道在澳大利亚和美国,同样有人担忧在发展经济与积极解决气候变化问题,两者之间会有冲突。我迄今在美国尝试传达的信息,也是我要向全世界传达的信息是,如果我们集中我们的精力、我们的才能、我们的发明创造能力使一个基于化石燃料能源的经济转换成一个基于洁净(再生)能源的经济,那将意味着我们不仅可以解决气候变暖的问题,也可为将来带来很大的经济发展空间。不过这需要时间,还需要有一些过渡措施,许多人不予合作是可以理解的。… …”

  奥布赖恩又问:“您觉得您与胡主席在这条阵线上的工作有进展吗?”

  奥巴马回答:“我认为中国抱有很大的兴趣解决这个问题。如果你同中国的领导人交谈,他们会立刻认同,如果超过10亿的中国居民过的生活方式跟现在澳大利亚人与美国人过的生活方式相同,那么等待我们所有人的将是悲惨境遇,这个地球绝无法承受(这种生活方式),所以,中国的领导人清楚,他们不得不下决心创建一种新的模式,这个新的模式将是可持续性的,将使他们在追求他们想要的经济增长的同时,处理所出现的环境污染的后果。所以我认为他们在思想上已认识到这个问题。然而,目前他们的自然反应是可以理解的,就是说‘让澳大利亚、美国等这些发达国家先去解决这个问题,等我们的生活水平赶上一些之后再着手去解决’。我们想阐明的一点是,我们不能让中国袖手旁观。我们应该承担起责任,做我们应该做的事。但是,如果崛起中的国家,不仅中国,还有印度、巴西和其他国家所追求的发展道路导致最终取代我们而成为最大的碳排放者,那他们的发展道路将不是可持续的、可行的途径。所以,我们所有人都必须同时在同一条道路上并行前进。”

  奥巴马说的这些话是对中国的公开挑衅?是对“中国模式”感到刻骨的威胁?他明显地说中国人不应该摹仿澳大利亚人与美国人那种导致大量碳排放的生活方式,这种生活方式不值得效仿,因为它不可持续。在这一点上他认为他与中国领导人有共识。他认为人类要解除气候变暖的威胁只有共同在发展再生能源上下功夫。这些话有什么值得恼火的?中国不是已意识到问题,在发展再生能源上已跻身世界前列吗?

  奥巴马就有关中国的提问最后说道:“就我们双方(澳美)的利益来说,我们希望中国成功,希望中国繁荣起来,因为那意味着他们国家更加稳定,从而也就更有能力解决诸如能源效率、减少污染等问题。我们并不想限制中国发展,我们希望中国的事越办越好。我们唯一想确信的是,一个像中国这样不断发展的国家将由于其人口的巨大规模而不可避免地成为最大的经济体,这样他们也就应该认真地承担起他们在国际上的责任,并且意识到成为强国有强国须要承担的重大责任。”

  冷战结束已逾20年,美国在这期间曾试图独霸天下而陷入战争泥淖,难以自拔,经济也因此受到拖累。奥巴马总统上台后给国际政治带来了新气象。美中俄欧大国之间不管核心利益有多大冲突,那种冷战式的对抗对峙已较少发生,取而代之的是领导层之间通过理性对话方式来解决问题或减缓矛盾。但有些人总抛不掉冷战思维,脑里还存在着假想敌,动辄把他们的敌人意象Feindbild投射到他们自认为国际上的地、富、反、坏、右人身上。一个期待中国在国际舞台扮演积极角色的“美帝国主义头子”不幸成为他们的投射对象。

  区言于德国法兰克福

《联合早报网》
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Austria: It’s High Time Europe Lost Patience with Elon Musk

Spain: Not a Good Time for Solidarity

Palestine: Ceasefire Not Peace: How Netanyahu and AIPAC Outsourced Israel’s War to Trump

Germany: Trump’s Disappointment Will Have No Adverse Consequences for Putin*

             

Topics

Germany: Musk Helps the Democrats

India: Peace Nobel for Trump: It’s Too Long a Stretch

Ecuador: Monsters in Florida

Austria: It’s High Time Europe Lost Patience with Elon Musk

Singapore: The US May Win Some Trade Battles in Southeast Asia but Lose the War

Ethiopia: ‘Trump Guitars’ Made in China: Strumming a Tariff Tune

Egypt: The B-2 Gamble: How Israel Is Rewriting Middle East Power Politics

China: 3 Insights from ‘Trade War Truce’ between US and China

Related Articles

Indonesia: US-China: Tariff, Tension, and Truce

China: US Chip Restrictions Backfiring

Thailand: US-China Trade Truce Didn’t Solve Rare Earths Riddle

Taiwan: Taiwan Issue Will Be Harder To Bypass during Future US-China Negotiations

Hong Kong: Amid US Democracy’s Moral Unraveling, Hong Kong’s Role in the Soft Power Struggle