Time for the Chinese Public to Be Loud Like Americans

Published in Huanqiu
(China) on 16 April 2010
by The Editors (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Mark Frank. Edited by Catherine Harrington.
Over the past two weeks, American President Obama has continually voiced a desire to improve Sino-American relations, but the implications are mixed in this country with its party divisions, and where the voice of the media is never in total consensus with the government.

Look closely and you will notice that much of the American media applauds Sino-American reconciliation, but those who challenge these efforts, lashing out at China and advocating putting pressure on China, have not been idle either. They intentionally take advantage of these opportunities to attack China, hoping that it will amplify their voices. They come from different backgrounds; there are those who come from a point of philosophical dissent, those who come from special interest groups, and those who simply want to sing a tune to rival the government, all feeding into the complicated “voice of America.” Some of them may unwittingly fall into compliance with the government, or at least produce effects largely in compliance with its wishes.

The American media speaks with many mouths that fundamentally serve to voice their own interests to the international community, but it is precisely these voices that the American government borrows from when it wishes to add weight to its international criticisms, create imperatives and afford itself room to maneuver.
The formula “public opinion + media + politics” is often employed by America in the Sino-American game. At many key moments, because the American media plays the role of a third-party meddler, Sino-American relations are no longer “government versus government” but rather “China versus American society.’’ By playing on this situation, it is easier for the American government to manipulate freedom of expression.

If China wishes to stop being passive and start being active, it needs to face the fact that in the current Sino-American game, America is strong and China is weak. We have no way to change the structure of the American media, nor can we demand that the American government get the media completely under control. Since we cannot change the American media, all we can do is adjust our own position. For this reason China’s policies towards America should also be complex and layered. National policymakers can represent the voice of caution and reason while the people are complicated and impulsive. In Chinese academic circles there should not only be doves, but also hawks. This sort of China would be truer to itself, able to fight fire with fire in its dealing with the United States.

Some may worry that China would be shooting itself in the foot by doing this. In fact these fears are unnecessary. China’s view of the outside world has always been complex whether or not it has been expressed to the world. The difference is that in the past China has borne the burden of these complexities in silence rather than letting other countries deal with them. By venting these complexities and exerting the same sort of pressure, foreign governments will be faced with the same forces that Chinese policymakers face now, and may even have to bear the bulk of the burden.

Returning to the issue of Sino-American relations, the difficulties of the past two months indicate that the overall trend is one of improved relations, but that reaching consensus between the two countries may very well resemble Zeno’s paradox from the field of physics: They are constantly approaching a shared goal, but never able to reach it. In this brand of interaction that involves friction and competition, whoever vents the most steam, whoever is more adept at picking topics of debate is the dominant player. Foreign relations have become the fastest-growing national endeavor in China, and a larger number of tasks require newer, more effective methods of cooperation. The ability to vent appropriately through the Chinese media would let Americans know the awesome power of the Chinese media, making the future of the Sino-American situation healthier and more stable.


环球时报社评:纽约时报为何不怕破坏中美关系

这两天,《纽约时报》连续刊发社论,指责中国人权、施压人民币汇率。不了解国际局势的人多半会以为,当前中美两国还在大打汇率、人权舆论战呢,哪里会想到中美关系正在转暖。其实,这恰恰是中美关系多元化、分层化、复杂化的缩影。
  尽管两周来,美国总统奥巴马不止一次声明要改善美中关系,但在利益混杂、党派分化的美国,媒体舆论的声音永远不可能与政府保持绝对的一致。
  只要细细观察,就会发现,有不少美国媒体在为中美关系转圜叫好,但那些给中美关系挑刺、抨击中国、主张对华施压的人也没闲着。他们故意借这个机会来指责中国,希望自己的声音能够因此而放大。这些人的出发点不同,有的出于价值观的分歧;有的背后是某些利益集团的推动;有的就是为了要跟政府唱对台戏,构成了复杂多元的“美国声音”。它们可能无意与政府配合,却在相当大的程度上达到了配合的效果。
  美国媒体发出不同声音,原本是要向政府和国际社会传递其所代表群体的利益诉求,而政府恰恰可以在外交中,利用这种有别于政策口径的论调,以“顾及本国社会中部分群体的利益”为由,增加在外交谈判中的砝码,创造必要的空间和回旋余地。
  这招美国“民意+媒体+政治”拳法,同样常常运用于中美博弈中。在许多关键时刻,因为美国媒体作为第三方介入,中美关系不再是“政府VS政府”的关系,而往往会形成“中国国家VS美国社会”的局面。政府加以利用,就更容易掌握话语权。
  中国要化被动为主动,就必须正视当前博弈中“美国强、中国弱”的事实。我们无法改变美国媒体的结构,也无法要求美国政府完全控制住媒体。正因为我们无法改变美国,我们唯一可做的就是调整自己。中国的对美政策也因此应当分出层级,国家决策部门代表慎重和理性,民间却永远复杂和冲动得多。中国学术界不仅有 “鸽”,还应当有“鹰”。这样的中国更真实,也最有可能对应美国社会,在对美交往中“兵来将挡,水来土掩”。
  一些人或许会担心,这样做中国有可能首先乱了自己。其实这种担心是不必要的。中国的对外看法本来就是多元的,对外表达不表达都一样,只不过过去这种复杂性更多由中国自己承受,而外国承受的却很少。将这种复杂性释放出来,同样的压力,外国政府将被迫与中国决策部门共同承担,甚至外方将成为承担的主体。
  再拿中美关系来说,过去两个月的曲折表明,两国关系的大势只能好不能坏,但两国利益的一致性很有可能像物理学中“芝诺悖论”那样,不断接近相同的目标,但永远无法到达。在这种摩擦与竞争并存的互动中,谁释放的声音更多,设置话题的能力更强,谁就更主动。对外关系已成为中国国家事务增长最快的方向,更多的使命需要更新、更有效的手段相配合。适当释放中国媒体的能量,让美国人也知道些中国媒体的“厉害”,中美两国的未来才会更稳定、更健康。▲
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Russia: Political Analyst Reveals the Real Reason behind US Tariffs*

Taiwan: Making America Great Again and Taiwan’s Crucial Choice

Afghanistan: The Trump Problem

Topics

Afghanistan: The Trump Problem

Taiwan: Making America Great Again and Taiwan’s Crucial Choice

Russia: Political Analyst Reveals the Real Reason behind US Tariffs*

Poland: Meloni in the White House. Has Trump Forgotten Poland?*

Germany: US Companies in Tariff Crisis: Planning Impossible, Price Increases Necessary

Japan: US Administration Losing Credibility 3 Months into Policy of Threats

Mauritius: Could Trump Be Leading the World into Recession?

Related Articles

Afghanistan: The Trump Problem

Taiwan: Making America Great Again and Taiwan’s Crucial Choice

Germany: US Companies in Tariff Crisis: Planning Impossible, Price Increases Necessary

Hong Kong: Can US Tariffs Targeting Hong Kong’s ‘Very Survival’ Really Choke the Life out of It?

Cuba: Trump, Panama and the Canal