【09.11.09 rediff】西藏是印度对阿邦主张的合理牌
本帖最后由 渔音谦谦 于 2009-12-11 18:49 编辑【中文标题】西藏是印度对阿邦主张的合理牌
【原文标题】Tibet is India's legitimate ticket to claim Arunachal
【登载媒体】rediff网站
【来源地址】http://news.rediff.com/column/2009/nov/09/tibet-indias-legitimate-ticket-to-claim-over-arunachal.htm!
【译者】nkjch
【翻译方式】人工
【声明】本翻译供Anti-CNN使用，未经AC或译者许可，不得转载.
【原文库链接】http://bbs.m4.cn/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=205760&rpid=2958610&ordertype=0&page=1#pid2958610
As a responsible law abiding nation, India has a moral responsibility to tell the truth that Tibet [ Images ] is an occupied country, says Tashi Phuntsok.
Tashi Phuntsok说作为一个长期负责任的法制国家，印度在道义上有责任告诉世界西藏是一个被占领的国家的真相。
India and China are squabbling over Arunachal Pradesh, which historically belonged to neither country. This dispute came to light again, recently, when China protested the Dalai Lama's [ Images ] plan to visit the state. Throughout the brief history of this territorial dispute, India has chosen to be on the defensive side for all the wrong reasons.
印度和中国最近在阿鲁纳恰尔邦的问题上不停争吵，这个邦在历史上不属于任何一个国家。最近中国对达赖访问该邦的抗议使争论重燃。基于错误的理由，在历史上印度在这场领土争端中一直采取防御策略。
At the 11th round of Sino-India border negotiations in 2008 in Harbin, China, then Indian foreign minister Pranab Mukherjee [ Images ] awkwardly sounded optimistic and pragmatic about the establishment of a working group to prepare for the settlement of the Sino-India border issue.
2008年在中国哈尔滨举行的第11次中印边界问题协商会议上，印度外交部长幕克吉就为解决边界问题设立一个工作组的问题上愚蠢的表现出乐观和实用主义。
He used the language of mutual understanding, mutual accommodation, and mutual adjustment, but at the time, the language of Zhou Gang, the special consultant to the Chinese foreign ministry and former Chinese ambassador to India, did not contain mutualism.
他在讲话中谈到要相互理解，相互适应，相互调节。而在那次会议上，中国外交部特别顾问，前驻印大使周刚的讲话却没有这些内容。
The Chinese envoy firmly emphasised that India must make a substantial adjustment in the eastern sector including returning Tawang to China as a precondition to reach any settlement. It is important to notice the words 'eastern sector' which indicates that acquiring Tawang is not the end of the dispute.
这位大使坚持强调作为达成任何协议的先决条件，印度必须在东段边界上作出重大调整其中包括把达旺交还中国。“东部地区”这个词表达了一个重要的启示，那就是得到达旺并不是争执的结束。
The Chinese claim over Arunachal Pradesh is based on Tibetan history. Zhou Gang did not hesitate reminding the history of Tawang in his statement. 'I cited the following example that during my tenure as Chinese ambassador to India, I made it clear on many occasions to the Indian public -- Tawang belongs to China, it is the birthplace of the sixth Dalai Lama and the Dalai Lama is 'China's Dalai Lama', who cannot be 'India's Dalai Lama.'
中国人对阿邦提出要求是基于西藏的历史。周刚在他的声明中毫不犹豫的提及西藏的历史。“我在担任驻印大使期间引用过下述例子，我多次向印度公众解释---达旺属于中国，那是六世达赖的出生地，并且达赖喇嘛是中国的，不是印度的。”
He conveniently did not mention that China annexed Tibet in 1949, and that was how China's claim over Arunachal Pradesh began. Indian foreign policy think tanks beginning from Jawaharlal Nehru-V K Krishna Menon to current Cabinets knew that the Sino-India border never existed until the Chinese annexation of Tibet, but they always chose to ignore the historical accounts of the disputed territory.
出于“方便”，他没有提及西藏在1949年并入中国，而那就是为什么中国开始声称对阿邦拥有主权。印度外交政策从尼赫鲁-梅农开始到现在的内阁认为中印边界的火药桶在中国吞并西藏之前是不存在的，但他们总是选择忽视有着领土争议帐的历史。
India's ownership of Tawang came from the Simla Convention signed between British India and sovereign Tibet on July 3, 1914. The official boundary between the two nations was named the McMahon Line to honour Sir Henry McMahon, the British foreign secretary who signed the Simla Convention from the British side. So, in order to give any legitimacy to her claim over Arunachal Pradesh, India has to give her partner in the Simla Convention a sovereign political status, at least historically.
印度对达旺的所有权来自于1914年7月3日由英属印度和西藏地方签订的喜马拉雅协议。两国的官方分界线被命名为麦克马洪线，以此来纪念代表英方签订喜马拉雅协议的外交官亨利麦克马洪先生。所以，为了使印度对阿邦的主张有合法性，印度给予对方以独立国家的政治地位。
The Chinese have flatly rejected the McMahon Line. They have been loudly claiming Indian territories to be part of China in every available media outlet, but Indian leaders have not shown the courage to remind the Chinese that in more than a thousand years of history, India never had a border dispute with Tibet until China annexed Tibet.
中国人断然拒绝了麦克马洪线。他们抓住每一个机会在媒体上大声主张印度占有的领土是中国的一部分。但印度领导人并没有展现出勇气提醒中国人在中国吞并西藏之前的一千多年历史里，印度和西藏从没产生过边界争端。
In 2003 during his visit to China, then Indian prime minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee [ Images ] yielded to the Chinese pressure to accept the Tibetan Autonomous Region as an inalienable part of China in writing. To Vajpayee, perhaps that was just a semantic shift, but to the Chinese it added validity to their claim over Indian territories.
瓦杰帕伊总理在2003年访华期间向中国人的压力屈服，并在书面上承认西藏自治区是中国不可分割的一部分。对瓦杰帕伊来说，或许那只是个语义上的转换罢了，但对于中国人来说，这等于增加了他们对印度领土的主张的合法性。
India has no big card to play in this negotiation. India has sold out Tibet chiefly to China and is now paying the price of potentially losing territories in this mutual adjustment deal. Nehru's failed foreign policy of appeasing China still prevails in the Indian diplomatic book of wisdom.
印度在谈判中没有什么大牌。印度已经出卖了西藏，现在则在相互调整的谈判中为潜在的领土丢失而付出代价。尼赫鲁使中国满足的失败外交政策依然在印度外交手册上流行。
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's [ Images ] government clearly demonstrated this China appeasement policy by minimising recent Chinese military incursions into Indian territories. Sensing the weakness in Indian leaders, China has become bolder in recent times, claiming Arunachal Pradesh to be part of China publicly in a greater, assertive, tone. Last year, China denied a visa to an Indian delegate from Arunachal Pradesh and also objected to Asian Development Bank [ Get Quote ] funding for an irrigation project in Arunachal.
辛格政府以中国军队尽量减少入侵印度领土来清楚地说明中国的缓和政策。中国感觉到了印度领导人的虚弱，他们在舆论上更大，更强，更有力的主张阿邦为其所有。去年，他们拒绝了一个阿邦代表的签证，并反对亚行对阿邦一项灌溉工程的贷款。
India is an emerging world power economically, militarily, and politically. Unlike the People's Republic of China, India is a democratic and morally sensible nation. The new powerful India has no reason to bend to Chinese aggression. For her own interest, India has to resurrect the Tibet issue on the international platform and eventually bring it into the United Nations General Assembly. Several Western countries are waiting for India to take that initiative.
印度在政治经济军事上是一个逐渐展露的世界力量。不像中华人民共和国，印度是一个民主的精神上更加明智的国家。新的强大的印度没有理由向中国侵略屈服。为了她的利益，印度将不得不在国际舞台上重提西藏问题并最终将它带入联合国大会。许多西方国家正等着印度挑头。
Tibet is India's legitimate ticket to its claim over Arunachal Pradesh and this claim is based on historical fact. The McMahon Line is the legitimate Indo-Tibet border. As a emerging regional superpower, India must show courage to present the truth for her own sake, if not for the unfortunate Tibetan people who have lost everything in this long standing illegitimate border dispute between China and India. As a responsible law abiding nation, India has a moral responsibility to tell the truth that Tibet is an occupied country.
西藏是印度在阿邦问题上合情合理的一张牌，而且这是基于历史事实的。麦克马洪线是合法的印藏边界线。作为一个逐渐崛起的地区超级力量，印度必须勇敢的为她的理由展示真相，要不然不幸的西藏人将在中印间不合理的长时间的边界争端中失去一切。作为一个负责人的法治国家，印度有责任讲出西藏是一个被占领的国家的真相。
Tashi Phunstok is a high school teacher and Tibet activist in the US. He can be contacted at tashpy@yahoo.com
Tashi Phunstok是一个高中老师和西藏积极分子，它的邮箱：tashpy@yahoo.com 我到学校第一天就有人告诉我，你要在这个学校站住脚就要打一场狠架，把最横的那个打的头破血流就没人敢惹你，后来我发现所有人都对我毕恭毕敬，那些不敢胆小怕事的，被欺负了一个学期， 关于一千多年的事，好吧，我们有必要再拔印度分裂成几个小国，然后再来谈边界问题。 西藏纳入中国版图的时间，就不用说了，懒得和那些历史白痴再重复了。借用一句话，西藏纳入中国版图的时候，某些唧唧歪歪的国家还不存在，所以他们无法理解。 笑话，原来是先假定藏独是合法的再以此推出的结论。。。。。。。。。。。。。不说元朝就是清朝主权也很明晰吧 印度也算负责人的法治国家？？ 我靠 他们真恶心！！ Tashi Phunstok is a high school teacher and Tibet activist in the US.
Tashi Phunstok是一个高中老师和西藏积极分子
漏了 in the US，这个人在美国。 回复 8# rlsrls08
不好意思当时很着急 将历史分成块，相当于断章取义！中国的历史不是60年而是几千年！ 印度人从来就没有觉得西藏是中国的一部分。他们认为是他们政府被迫承认的，而不是他们承认的。我们随便做什么都是错的，所以别人越是反对我们越要做，因为他们越反对的就是他们越害怕的，就说明越是真正有效的。
所以应该正大光明的在雅江建坝，正大光明的移民。如果我们真把它当作自己的领土，我们心里不应该有任何理亏。 印度绝不会和中国有任何让步，与其永无休止的忍让纠缠下去，对方不停的使非事实成为既成事实，而我们却始终对谈判抱有幻想从而对自己正当的事情反而束手束脚，使事实成为非事实，不敢建坝，不敢移民，搞得好像我们还理亏一样，但不论我们做什么，换不来西方和印度的任何同情和道德施舍。不如务实一点，干自己的事。该建的坝还是得建，正如印度该占的藏南他是不会还的一样。 关于一千多年的事，好吧，我们有必要再拔印度分裂成500多个小邦，然后再来谈边界问题。 印度本来就逃不掉被征服的命运，而它过去的全部历史，如果还算得上是什么历史的话，就是一次又一次被征服的历史。印度社会根本没有历史，至少是没有为人所知的历史。我们通常所说的它的历史，不过是一个接着一个的入侵者的历史
————马克思
确实，浮尸国应该考虑的是这样的前景：印度这个劣等文明被彻底打回原形——大大小小的独立土邦林立的局面。
页:
[1]