四月青年社区

 找回密码
 注册会员

QQ登录

只需一步,快速开始

查看: 1187|回复: 4

[翻译完毕] 【2010.8.19 华尔街日报】Obama's Timidity on Tibet

[复制链接]
发表于 2010-8-20 19:56 | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703649004575438582076910038.html


AUGUST 19, 2010



Obama's Timidity on Tibet

The Obama administration's silence only encourages China's abuses.

By ]ELLEN BORK

Over the past few years, Beijing's repressive policies have increasingly alienated Tibetans. One indication was the March 2008 uprising and riots across Tibet. Yet Beijing responded not by moderating its policies but by intensifying repression—launching a "patriotic education" campaign and targeting members of the educated elite, many of whom have long gotten along with, and even flourished within, the communist system. Among these are the writer Tragyal, long associated with the state publishing house, who awaits trial on charges of "splittism," and Dorje Tashi, a businessman and hotel owner, who received a life sentence in June for allegedly collaborating with human-rights groups abroad.

Beijing has taken the same approach to criticism from abroad over its handling of Tibet, significantly raising the stakes by identifying Tibet as a "core interest." Beijing has given notice that unless the world adopts a "correct understanding" of Tibet by spurning any view contrary to the Communist Party line, there will be consequences for bilateral relations and it will be difficult for China to cooperate on the global economic recovery or other issues.

Tibetan women walks past Chinese paramilitary police in Lhasa





Washington has bent under the pressure. President Obama refused to schedule a meeting with the Dalai Lama until after his November 2009 visit to Beijing, although he did speak about Tibet there. Afterward, U.S. Ambassador to Beijing Jon Huntsman adopted Beijing's line, stating that the president's meeting with the Dalai Lama, and recent U.S. arms sales to Taiwan, had "trampled on a couple of China's core interests." These actions have serious implications for U.S. support for Tibet, for activists for freedom inside China, and the Dalai Lama and his democratic government in exile.

Often, when Chinese officials present their position on Tibet, senior U.S. officials cede ground by saying nothing publicly. Indeed, the words "Tibet" and "Dalai Lama" have gradually disappeared from the administration's vocabulary. Washington's official statements about the April earthquake in Yushu, an area that is 97% Tibetan, did not refer to Tibetans or Tibet.

The silence was even more troubling at the Strategic and Economic Dialogue, major talks the U.S. and China held in Beijing in May. State Councilor Dai Binguo presented China's view on Tibet in his remarks at a joint session but Secretary of State Hillary Clinton did not respond or mention Tibet publicly. It was left to Xinhua, the official Chinese news agency, to state the U.S. position.

At a routine press briefing several days later, State Department Spokesman P.J. Crowley deflected a question about the way Tibet was handled during the talks, saying "It's hard for me from halfway around the world to describe everything we discussed," despite having just given remarks on the U.S. positions on Burma and North Korea presented during the S&ED.

The silence of the Obama administration is peculiar since U.S. policy on Tibet is clear. Spelled out in the Tibet Policy Act, it supports, among other things, talks between the Dalai Lama and Beijing and respect for Tibetans' human rights and religious, linguistic and cultural heritage.

Past administrations have faithfully carried out this policy. The 2009 annual report on negotiations between Beijing and the Dalai Lama, required under the Act, recounts extensive contacts about Tibet between President George W. Bush and General Secretary Hu Jintao as well as between Chinese interlocutors and other American officials, such as the coordinator for Tibetan affairs, a position first created by Secretary of State Madeleine Albright.

The current Tibet coordinator, Under Secretary of State for Global Affairs Maria Otero, was not included in the giant U.S. delegation to the Strategic and Economic Dialogue. Her predecessor in the post, Paula Dobriansky, traveled to China four times and met with the Dalai Lama 13 times. The 2010 report, due in March, was only submitted to Congress on Wednesday.

The administration's downplaying of Tibet undermines Chinese liberal intellectuals and activists who have criticized Beijing's policies on Tibet at great risk to themselves. After the March 2008 uprising, a Chinese think tank called the Open Constitution Initiative issued a report challenging Beijing's position that the riots were incited by the Dalai Lama and criticizing the crackdown that followed. This organization was later shut down and its staff harassed.

In addition, 29 intellectuals, lawyers and activists signed an open letter in March 2008 supporting dialogue with the Dalai Lama and urging and end to official propaganda vilifying him and Tibetans. One of them, Liu Xiaobo was later prosecuted on subversion charges for his writings and sentenced to jail for 11 years.

American officials should know by now that nothing is gained by acquiescing to China's overbearing behavior on Tibet or any other issue. Adapting to Beijing's "correct understanding" of Tibet undermines not only the Dalai Lama and human rights for Tibetans, but also America's own "core interest" in seeing these respected in Tibet and China as well. To be credible, America must clearly and publicly pursue a well-established policy on Tibet.

Ms. Bork is director of democracy and human rights at the Foreign Policy Initiative.

评分

1

查看全部评分

 楼主| 发表于 2010-8-20 20:04 | 显示全部楼层
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 2010-8-20 20:05 | 显示全部楼层

Comments

18 hours ago.
nick Jones-Brown wrote:
.
Journal Communityclose window   Send a Message    Type your personal message.   Journal Communityclose window   Your message has been sent.Close window  Message Journal Communityclose window  Make a Connection  Type your personal message.    Journal Communityclose window   Your message has been sent.Close window  Connect Barack Obama and his administration appears to be very weak in foreign and security policies. This is visible not only in their Tibet policy but also in policies regarding China's human rights abuses in Xinjiang, Inner Mongolia, and other places, and aggressive and militant postures in South China Sea, Yellow Sea and Central Asia.

Let's hope that Mr Obama will be only one time and weak president in US history! Shame on Obama and his administration for kow-towing to the Chinese communist thugs and goons!


12 hours ago.
Don Mallen wrote:

.
Journal Communityclose window   Send a Message    Type your personal message.   Journal Communityclose window   Your message has been sent.Close window  Message Journal Communityclose window  Make a Connection  Type your personal message.    Journal Communityclose window   Your message has been sent.Close window  Connect I totally agree with the previous comment. Even George Bush would meet with His Holiness, and the Congress awarded Him a Gold Medal. Obama is embarassing our nation, founded on human rights and liberty, by sucking-up to the Chinazis to obtain monetary gain, "the 30 pieces of silver". Obama should be recalled as he doesn't deserve to be President. For shame.




5 hours ago..
Li-shi Chen wrote:

.
Journal Communityclose window   Send a Message    Type your personal message.   Journal Communityclose window   Your message has been sent.Close window  Message Journal Communityclose window  Make a Connection  Type your personal message.    Journal Communityclose window   Your message has been sent.Close window  Connect The author brings to light many important problems regarding the Tibet situation and the administration's action (or lack of action) on it. However, the real problem with this editorial is not the writer but the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal. The editorial team obviously overlooks many issues just so it can find some space to print another article attacking the Obama administration. This is not to apologize for the Obama administration; it can do that itself and I am neither interested in nor paid to apologize for it. As a subscriber, though, seeing the editorial team take a convenient professional siesta for political reasons is concerning.

First, both Republicans and Democrats are focused on domestic and economic issues for a reason – we are in one of the greatest recessions in nearly a century. One could understand why even a president who campaigned on foreign policy issues, such as the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, has had to put most foreign policy issues farther down on the priority list as he deals with the downturn and nearly 20% unemployment. This is not to say Tibet is unimportant; it is incredibly important. However, few other administrations in the past decade or more have had to deal with this kind of recession and unemployment. Bork’s criticism of not doing enough on Tibet – and the editors should have pointed it out when reviewing the article – at this current time is like criticizing a policeman for not going after a jaywalker running to safety during a major earthquake.

Secondly, with the economic downturn came another startling reality that no US president or politician (or US citizen, for that matter) can simply ignore nor has had to deal with in the past: China is our largest creditor and we are its largest debtor. This is not to suggest China has the right to tell us to keep quiet on Tibet or any other issue. However, comparing what presidents did in the past with China on Tibet to what is being done now on Tibet is blindly ignoring that so much of the US-China relationship has changed. When you are at 20% unemployment and trillions in debt, I believe most in America will put possible currency manipulation issues or unfair trade practices ahead of Tibet. Moreover, how we communicate what we want with China, given the new dynamic, means comparison with the past must be made much more carefully than the author has and than the editorial board at the Journal cares to recognize.

The US should always be clear on its intentions and commitment to religious freedom and human rights. Certainly over the years, both parties have done at best a less-than average job of voicing those concerns, more often than not putting economic interests before religious freedom and human rights concerns. It seems during what are historically difficult times economically here at home as well as what is shaping up to be a transformational point in terms of US-China relations, arguing that the current administration is not doing enough with regards to Tibet is blindly missing many of the realities of the current economic and political situation. Moreover, with the $1 million donation by the owner of the Wall Street Journal now in the RNC’s bank account, it is clear that in this now-partisan, post-donation era, the editors at the Wall Street Journal are keen to deliver the message of donors from whom they are not getting paid sponsorship dollars but are instead, strangely enough, paying themselves. With that neat trick, I suppose congratulations should go out to the WSJ for taking an important issue such as brutality in Tibet and turning it into an opportunity to help the RNC attack the current administration. Strangely, I doubt that if the Republicans win big this November and again in 2012, the editors at the Journal will even care about what is going on in Tibet.


2 hours ago.
Brent Bell wrote:

.
Journal Communityclose window   Send a Message    Type your personal message.   Journal Communityclose window   Your message has been sent.Close window  Message Journal Communityclose window  Make a Connection  Type your personal message.    Journal Communityclose window   Your message has been sent.Close window  Connect Chinese businesses take orders from WalMart; Chinese rulers don't take orders from presidents, and don't even appreciate suggestions: irritating them will, if anything, only make them more reluctant to change their domestic policies, and will make it only more difficult for the US to deal with them in pursuing its own interests.



1 hour ago.
nick Jones-Brown wrote:

.
Journal Communityclose window   Send a Message    Type your personal message.   Journal Communityclose window   Your message has been sent.Close window  Message Journal Communityclose window  Make a Connection  Type your personal message.    Journal Communityclose window   Your message has been sent.Close window  Connect @chen

an exellent pro-chinese message from a Chinese who pretends to be an american. I did notice that many Chinese in China and ethnic Chinese in other countries including Chinese in US, Europe, and South East Asia leave pro-chinese messages by preteding to be Americans. I could have left a long message that disputes all your points about Obama's weak foreign policies regarding China. But there is no point. As a Sinologist who speaks fluent Mandarin and lived and worked in PRC, Taiwan , and Hong Kong for 15 years, and published many research articles and a couple of books by prestigious US university presses on China's foreign and security policies and human rights abuses, and its stregnths and weaknesses, I learned that it is just waste of time to argue with the Chinese on many issues because Chinese become angry, emotional and irrational when they hear strong counter -arguments they can not digest and understand. No wonder, northern nomads' favorite war strategy (for 5000 years) against numerous Chinese was to humiliate and insults their emperors and generals so that they lose temper andbecome angry and make irrational decisions which are likely to be fatal mistakes that nomads can take an advantages.

By the way, the attack on WSJ editors is a new strategy of the Chinese Communist Party Propaganda Department to influence the Western Media outlets and make them mouthpieces of the communist party like all the media in China increasingly in Greater China.




44 minutes ago..
Li-shi Chen replied:

.
Journal Communityclose window   Send a Message    Type your personal message.   Journal Communityclose window   Your message has been sent.Close window  Message Journal Communityclose window  Make a Connection  Type your personal message.    Journal Communityclose window   Your message has been sent.Close window  Connect Nick, you are a bit delusional...or perhaps quite a bit. Either that is not your name or you have no record of publishing anything. Nice try though. Lying is always fun, especially when we were kids.

If you really have nothing honest to say, why post at all? This is (or, at least in the past was ) a serious business publication, not "Cracked Magazine".

I am sure one of your numerous pieces you published will get a good read by the editors here. Just throw in a few "Marxist Obama" and "leftist (you fill in the derogatory term)" and it will get in. You won't even have to have a point or a good argument. I can see you are already writing, in fact, in your reply to me.
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-8-22 11:11 | 显示全部楼层
认领
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-8-26 18:23 | 显示全部楼层
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 注册会员

本版积分规则

小黑屋|手机版|免责声明|四月网论坛 ( AC四月青年社区 京ICP备08009205号 备案号110108000634 )

GMT+8, 2024-6-10 12:07 , Processed in 0.055205 second(s), 31 queries , Gzip On.

Powered by Discuz! X3.4

© 2001-2023 Discuz! Team.

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表