中華人民共和國虛偽的宣傳系統
9月9日，中國共產黨的主要宣傳報紙《人民日報》拒絕刊登我們在北京的泰里·布蘭斯塔德大使所撰寫的署名文章，並列舉了一連串的不滿。具有諷刺意味的是，這篇署名文章呼籲在我們兩國間建立更積極的關係，並要求「通過不受限制的交往和不受審查的討論來建立關係」。《人民日報》的回應再次暴露了中國共產黨對自由言論和認真嚴肅的思想辯論的恐懼，以及北京方面在抱怨其他國家缺乏公平對等待遇時的虛偽。
相反，在我們有活力而自信的民主政體中，中國政府官員享有與美國人民直接對話的能力，並通過我們的自由媒體呈現了其政府的觀點。光是中國駐美國大使崔天凱今年就在《華盛頓郵報》和Politico這類知名美國新聞機構發表過五篇署名文章，還接受過諸如美國有線電視新聞網（CNN）、美國哥倫比亞廣播公司（CBS）等媒體的專訪。 中共外交部以及像《環球時報》、《中國日報》這樣的國有宣傳機構經常暢通無阻地利用推特（Twitter）和臉書（Facebook）這類美國社交媒體平台來攻擊我們的政策、我們的生活方式，以及恰恰保護着他們自由言論能力的系統。他們在其他民主國家也這樣做。
如果共產主義中國真心實意地想成為一個成熟的大國並加強與自由世界的關係，那麼習近平總書記的政府就會尊重西方外交官直接與中國人民對話的權利，允許外國記者回到中國，並停止恐嚇和騷擾調查記者——無論是外國人還是中國人。這些記者努力堅持新興自由媒體的誠信以服務公眾利益。他們拒絕這樣做，表明中國未經選舉的政黨精英多麼害怕他們自己的人民有自由思想，害怕自由世界對中國內部治理做法的評判。
這是布蘭斯塔德大使擬發表的署名文章：
布蘭斯塔德大使署名文章：
基於對等重置關係
我們長期以來總說我們想要有建設性、重結果的對華關係，這個觀點沒有改變。有建設性的關係意味着我們不僅要對我們共同的利益誠實坦率，也要對讓我們產生分歧的問題開誠佈公。我們需要的不僅是不停地重申我們各自的利益，還有真正讓我們的人民受益的切實成果。
從美國的角度來看，我們取得的進展少之又少。多年以來，中國領導層呼籲我們專注於合作的領域，同時擱置我們的分歧。而這些年來，美國同意了這種處理方式，期望隨着時間的推移，我們也會着手解決我們的關切。但是中國領導層利用了這種處理方式。中國領導層常常堅持要求我們對分歧避而不談，以此作為接觸的前提。有時，中國領導層做出了承諾要着手解決我們的關切，但卻未能跟進行動。結果就是我們的關係帶來的對美國人民重要的結果越來越少。
同時，這段關係變得越來越不平衡。一個例子是對於美國公司、新聞工作者、外交官乃至公民社會來說不平等的准入機會。作為一個開放的社會，美國歡迎了中國公司進入我們的市場，向美國消費者售賣產品，進行投資和參與項目競標，還有募集資金。我們歡迎了中國學生和研究人員來我們的大學和實驗室，他們在這裏獲取了知識用來實現中國經濟的現代化和發展。當美國新聞工作者在報道、甚至進入中國都面臨限制時，中國的國家媒體工作人員卻可以長久以來在美國不受限地進行報道。中華人民共和國的外交官可以不受限地進入美國社會，而我們在中國的外交官需要應對一套國家批准系統，哪怕是和中國人民進行最基本的互動。
中國政府在從我們的開放獲益的同時利用了我們的開放——以一種與國際準則越來越不一致的方式。有些中國實體收購了美國公司不是為了創造工作機會，而是為了獲得技術，然後拿到中國，進行開發與我們競爭。有些中國公司在我們的股票交易市場募集了資金，但拒絕接受標準的審計規則，而所有其他上市公司都被要求遵從這些規則，無論是美國公司還是外國公司。一小部分中國學生和研究人員利用進入我們的大學、研究機構和公司的機會竊取美國的知識產權。這些行動不僅損害了我們的雙邊關係，還讓非凡而合理的經濟進步——中國人民正當地為之驕傲——蒙上污點。
特朗普總統上任，發誓要讓整體關係更加平衡和對等。第一階段貿易協議和美國最近的政策行動是我們尋求為美國利益攸關方創造真正的公平競爭環境的重要一步。許多人聲稱，這是為了阻撓中國合理的發展願望，為了「遏制「中國的崛起或者為了與中國「脫鈎」。這完全是錯誤的。當前美中關係緊張的根本原因，是中國長期以來的策略只選擇性地與美國「掛鈎」、系統性地控制美國人進入中國社會。在我們的大學中，我們繼續歡迎絕大多數的中國學生，但我們已採取行動，對那些非法獲取美國知識產權和研究成果的人，或那些獲取知識以便在21世紀的前沿技術領域與我們進行不公平競爭的人拒發籤證。我們還對中國公司採取了行動，其中包括像華為這樣的知名公司，這些公司竊取了美國的知識產權，規避了美國的出口管制，或對我們公民的私人數據和通訊網絡安全構成了威脅。
我們是兩個不同的國家，有着不同的歷史。美國繼續從自己的錯誤中吸取教訓，為創造更好的未來繼續前行。我們希望中國也能如此。在這一努力中，我們需要建立相互理解和真正對等的基礎。這必須從中國政府願意解決我們對兩國關係失衡的關切開始，並允許我們兩國人民通過不受限制的交往和未經審查刪除的討論來建立關係。只有到那時，我才能享有與中國人民交往的自由，就像我們保證崔大使在美國所做的那樣，也只有到那時，我們才能擁有真正對等和真正平衡的關係。
了解更多：
https://china.usembassy-china.org.cn/zh/the-hypocrisy-of-the-prcs-propaganda-system-zh/
The Hypocrisy of the PRC’s Propaganda System
On September9, the Chinese Communist Party’s main propaganda newspaper, the People’s Daily, refused to run an Op-ed written by our Ambassador in Beijing, Terry Branstad, citing a litany of grievances. Ironically, the Op-ed called for more positive relations between our two countries and asked to「build relationships through unrestricted engagement and uncensored discussion.」 The People’s Daily’s response once again exposes the Chinese Communist Party’s fear of free speech and serious intellectual debate– as well as Beijing’s hypocrisy when it complains about lack of fair and reciprocal treatment in other countries.
In contrast, in our vibrant and confident democracy, Chinese government officials have enjoyed the ability to talk directly to the American people and provided its government’s views through our free media. China’s Ambassador to the U.S. Cui Tiankai alone has published five Op-eds this year in prominent U.S. news outlets such as the Washington Post and Politico, and given exclusive interviews to the likes of CNN and CBS. China’s Foreign Ministry and state-owned propaganda organs like the Global Times and China Daily regularly use free access to American social media platforms like Twitter and Facebook to attack our policies, our way of life, and the very system that protects their ability to speak freely. They do this in other democratic countries, too.
If Communist China is sincere about becoming a mature power and strengthening relations with the free world, General Secretary Xi Jinping’s government would respect the right for Western diplomats to speak directly to the Chinese people, allow foreign journalists back into China, and stop the intimidation and harassment of investigative journalists, foreign and Chinese, who strive to uphold the integrity of the fifth estate to serve the public good. Their refusal to do so shows just how much China’s unelected Party elites fear their own people’s free-thinking and the free world’s judgment about their governance practices inside China.
This is Ambassador Branstad’s proposed op-ed:
Resetting the Relationship Based on Reciprocity
by The Honorable Terry Branstad, U.S. Ambassador to China
We have long said we want a constructive, results-oriented relationship with China, and that view has not changed. A constructive relationship means that we are honest and candid not only about our shared interests, but also about the issues that divide us. We need not just endless reaffirmations of our respective interests, but concrete outcomes that truly benefit our peoples.
From a U.S. perspective, we have made too little progress. For years, the Chinese leadership has urged us to focus on areas of cooperation while setting aside our differences, and for years, the United States had agreed to that approach in the expectation that, over time, we would address our concerns as well. But the Chinese leadership has exploited this approach. Often it has insisted we sweep differences under the table as a prerequisite for engagement. Sometimes it made promises to address our concerns yet failed to follow up. As a result, our relationship has delivered fewer and fewer of the results that matter to the American people.
At the same time, the relationship became increasingly imbalanced. An example is unequal access for U.S. companies, journalists, diplomats, and even civil society. As an open society, the United States has welcomed Chinese companies into our markets to sell products to American consumers, to invest and bid on projects, and to raise capital. We have welcomed Chinese students and researchers into our universities and laboratories, where they have acquired knowledge to modernize and develop China’s economy. While U.S. journalists face restrictions on reporting and even entering China, Chinese state media workers have long enjoyed open access in the United States. PRC diplomats have open access to American society, while our diplomats in China are required to navigate a state approval system for even the most basic engagements with the Chinese people.
The Chinese government, while benefiting from our openness, has exploited it– in a way that is increasingly inconsistent with international norms. Some Chinese entities have purchased American companies not to create jobs, but to acquire technology that is then taken back to China and developed to compete against us. Some Chinese companies have raised money on our stock exchanges yet refused to subject themselves to the standard auditing rules required by all other listed companies, U.S. or foreign. A small number of Chinese students and researchers use access to our universities, research facilities and companies to steal American intellectual property. These actions have not only harmed our bilateral relations but also tarnished the remarkable legitimate economic progress that the Chinese people are rightfully proud of.
President Trump came to office vowing to make the overall relationship more balanced and reciprocal. The phase one trade deal and recent U.S. policy actions are an important step in our quest to create a genuine level playing field for American stakeholders. Many claim this is an effort to thwart China’s legitimate development aspirations, to「contain」 China’s rise, or to「decouple」 from China. This is categorically false. The root cause of the current tensions in the relationship is China’s longstanding strategy of only selectively「coupling」 with the United States and systematically controlling the access of Americans to Chinese society. At our universities, we continue to welcome the vast majority of Chinese students, but we have taken action to deny visas to those who illegally acquire U.S. intellectual property and research results, or who gain knowledge in order to compete unfairly with us in the cutting edge technologies of the21st century. We have also taken action against Chinese companies, including well known ones like Huawei, that have stolen U.S. intellectual property, circumvented U.S. export controls, or posed a threat to the security of our citizens』 private data and our communication networks.
We are two different nations with different pasts. The United States continues to learn from its mistakes and push forward to forge a better future. We hope that China can do the same. In this endeavor, we will need to build a foundation for understanding and true reciprocity. It must start with the Chinese government being willing to address our concerns about the imbalance in the relationship and allowing our two peoples to build relationships through unrestricted engagement and uncensored discussion. Only then will I enjoy the freedoms to engage the Chinese people that we guarantee Ambassador Cui in the United States, and only then will we have genuine reciprocity and a genuinely balanced relationship.
Read more here:
https://china.usembassy-china.org.cn/zh/the-hypocrisy-of-the-prcs-propaganda-system-zh/
