[加评论] 页面有问题?请点击打印板-》打印版                  [推荐此文给朋友]
[博讯主页]->[大众观点]
   

秦晋:澳洲铀-中国-非民主化中国对世界的影响
(博讯2006年7月15日)
    
    “大众政治论坛”是澳洲悉尼的一个具有左翼倾向的政治论坛。2006年7月14日的论坛演讲主题是“向中国出售铀的后果”(Selling Uranium to China – Consequences!)。本次论坛主持帕特.汤姆斯女士根据斯图亚特.里兹教授(悉尼大学“和平与冲突研究中心”主任)的推荐邀请了澳大利亚民主中国阵线主席秦晋作为本次论坛的主讲人之一,另一主讲人为理查德.布罗伊诺斯基先生。布罗伊诺斯基先生是悉尼大学客座教授、前澳洲资深外交官,曾出任过越南、南韩和墨西哥大使。以下是秦晋“大众政治论坛”演讲全文。
     (博讯 boxun.com)

澳洲铀-中国-非民主化中国对世界的影响

    
    我很高兴通过悉尼大学里兹教授的介绍接受“大众政治论坛”的邀请今晚在这里表达我对澳洲出售铀矿给中国的看法。也感到很荣幸能与悉尼大学客座教授、前澳洲驻亚洲多国大使、《事实与裂变》一书的作者理查德.布罗伊诺斯基先生同台演讲。我感谢今晚的主持帕特.汤姆斯女士给我这个表达我观点的机会。
    铀有多种用途,可发电,也可发展核武器。澳洲铀只售给核不扩散协定签约国,并且允许国际检查来保证确实只用于和平用途。根据中国领导人的承诺,中国表面上满足了这两项要求。
    我们假定中国履行协议,由于澳洲不是唯一向中国售铀的国家,完全有可能中国将从澳洲购得的铀用于和平之途,而将其他来源的铀用于核武器的发展。向中国出售铀矿也许符合澳洲的短期经济利益,但在我看来,一定不符合澳洲长期国家安全利益。怎能根据中国政府的一纸协议来确保中国仅用于和平建设而不用于军事发展呢。
    我这里举两例来说明中国政府长期以来在国际交往中是如何藐视和背弃承诺的。
    
    • 98年中国政府就签署了联合国关于国公民和政治权利、经济社会文化权利的两个国际公约,但是迄今未获得人大正式的批准,这两个公民权利的公约就无法在中国实行。
    
    • 中国加入世界贸易组织之后,中国政府有没有按照加入世界贸易组织的承诺做一个守法成员国去进行金融和传媒的自由化和市场化。
    
    中国政府非常擅长于隐瞒事实真相,我给个中国政府是如何熟练地运用这种技巧的例子。
    • 当萨斯病毒在中国爆发的时候,中国官方的第一反应是否认和隐瞒。中国官方为了瞒过世界卫生组织的检查,将萨斯病人装在救护车里,在北京城里满世界地转,一直等到检查官员满意地认为北京没有萨斯的威胁,才把一车车的病人送回病院。
    
    澳洲有什么保证中国方面不再使用这种技巧来躲避澳洲方面的检测,有什么样的检测机制来保证出售的澳洲铀不被错误地使用?
    现在我想提供一些关于中共新近的政治思维作为参考。
    2006年5月中国社科院发布《世界社会主义黄皮书》,书中讲道,由于苏东剧变、苏联和东欧集团解体,使社会主义运动处于空前的低潮,资本主义则处于二战之后的峰巅,然而世界社会主义运动不仅顶住了苏东剧变的巨大冲击,而且得到了一定程度的恢复和发展。特别是占世界人口五分之一的中国,坚持社会主义方向,坚持改革开放,取得了巨大的成就。世界社会主义运动已经开始走出低谷,并逐步走向复兴。该书预言,以美国为领导的资本主义全球化必将被以中共为领导的社会主义全球化所替代。
    
    这是一个不可忽视的信号。伴随着综合国力的增长,中共当局对当初邓小平制定的“韬光养晦”的外交政策显得不满足了。韬光养晦就是暗中培养实力。它应该被这么读解:所谓坚持中国特色的社会主义,就是坚持中共一党专制;所谓以中共为领导的社会主义全球化,就是一党专制的全球化;所谓以中共为领导的社会主义全球化取代以美国为领导的资本主义全球化,就是在全球范围内以专制取代民主。
    
    近来一个可见的事实就是,中共的反民主立场比过去更加强硬。中共排斥西方民主但又声称中共的一党专制本身就是民主。
    
    今年3月,中共发布的民主白皮书宣布中国实行的民主是在共产党领导下的民主。白皮书指责西方舆论对中国的民主建设有偏见,以西方的民主标准来衡量中国。中国在过去二十多年里保持了9%以上的经济增长速度,若在没有民主的专制制度下,这样的经济增长是不可想像的。唯一的、普遍适用的和绝对的民主模式是不存在的,真正的民主在于是否符合国情,是否符合国家发展的需要。
    
    我想诸位还都记得今年四月的布、胡记者会,当被问及中国是否要实行民主的时候,胡是这么回答的:“我不知道所提出的民主国家是什么概念,但我们一贯认为,没有民主就没有现代化。”
    
    许多评论者给出了完全错误的解释,他们以为胡锦涛要推动我们所期待的民主改革了。其实胡锦涛的意思正好相反。胡锦涛的意思是:你们西方有你们西方的民主,我们中国有我们中国的民主。既然中国在现代化上取得了如此巨大的成就,那就足以证明中国现行的政治制度是符合中国国情的,是体现中国人民利益的,因此也就是民主的。显然,这不是对民主的推崇,而是对民主的否定。
    
    现在我想说的是,如果事情照这样下去,我的担忧就是自由世界的命运了。因为中国是一个大国,中国不是古巴,不是北韩。中共专制政权在和平崛起的幌子下一旦拥有了超级大国的实力,它必将给全世界都带来巨大的威胁与灾难。到那个时候它一定会与民主世界摊牌的。
    
    我呼吁热爱自由与和平的人们都应该充分警觉这种潜在的危险,切不可掉以轻心。民主世界应该保持警醒,解除将来中共可能的引爆。
    
    中国果真如中国的领导人对外声称的正在“崛起”吗?它的经济能力和巨大的市场正使得西方炫目,它的军力增强也令西方感到不安,它的政治制度继续反动,而且让人感到它是“一个负面的力量”。
    
    从历史上看,一个新的强权国家的出现,必定与现有的强权国家形成冲突。从亚太格局上看,最容易产生剧烈摩擦甚至战争的危险地带是台湾。中美之间军事冲突虽然不是即刻的,但是台湾领导人不断地挑战中国政府的底线,就会使这样危险成为可能。一旦这个局面产生了,美国卷入军事冲突了,澳洲怎么办?诚然澳洲目前能够游刃有余地一方面与中国发展更为密切的关系,另一方面与它长期的、亲密的盟友美国维持着良好关系。但这取决于美中关系的气候变化,随着台海局势的紧张会发生逆转而使澳洲陷于尴尬,澳洲与美国之间的长期的国家安全保障关系,澳洲与中国之间的商业利益关系-这一两面取巧、熊掌鱼刺兼而得之的外交策略将被迫有一个取舍。放眼看后若干时间,澳洲向中国出售铀矿实在是为了眼前的经济利益而做出“籍寇兵而赍盗粮者”的不明智行为。
    
    历史不断的重复,就是因为人类不断地遗忘历史。第二次世界大战的爆发,在很大程度上是英、法对纳粹德国的纵容。韩战的爆发,远因是二战结束前夕,罗斯福和丘吉尔犯了张伯伦的绥靖主义错误,一纸雅尔塔密约,使得斯大林在远东获得了不应有的战后地位,奠定了中共与战后余生的中华民国政府进行军事割据分庭抗礼的基础。近因是杜鲁门继续前任的错误,听任共产主义席卷中国,把在二战中艰苦抗战的国民党赶到了海岛台湾,进一步刺激金日成有恃无恐的发动统一朝鲜半岛的战争,形成了东西方对峙达四十年之久的冷战。
    
    今天,新的绥靖主义又在作用,面对着一个对世界和平不具有正面作用的集权专制的中国的崛起,西方民主世界的表现实在不敢令人恭维,中国的一个巨大的市场可以让西方的民主世界的领袖垂涎欲滴,而忘记了世界和平和人类共同进步的准则,听任十三亿中国人中的绝大多数遭受中共专制主义的蹂躏。面对中共的急剧发展,西方民主国家非得重蹈覆辙像对待希特勒一样,等到危害到自身的时候才恍然大悟吗。
    
    上个世纪70年代末始于中国的经济自由化政策,使中国进入了前所未有的经济增长时期。许多西方观察人士人为,中国的政治改革将随之而来。但是,中国的情况并不如此。西方对中国大量资金的注入无疑是中共政权的一剂强心针,中国迅速的经济增长帮助了共产党巩固其政权合法性,阻碍了中国进行民主变革。我不禁要问的是:西方国家在中国进行的投资和其他商业活动是否阻已经碍了中国进行迫切需要的政治改革?
    
    无论是作为一个国家还是一个普通公民,都有责任和义务坚决地支持中国的民主运动。
    
    对独裁者承让只能让他要求更多,如果在原则问题上坚持不让,独裁者就只能退却了。像澳洲这样的民主国家,应该在联合国和其他国际论坛上以及双边会谈中支持要求中国加速政治改革的步伐的呼声。
    
    世界的政治领袖们不能给与中共适当的压力,世界人民为中国人民的民主和自由向北京中共当局施加政治压力就变得至关重要了。
    
    谢谢大家。
    
    I am pleased to be invited through referral of Professor Rees of Sydney University to address the Politics In the Pub tonight on the issue of selling uranium to China. It is a great honour to meet the co-speaker for the night, Richard Broinowski, Adjunct Professor Sydney Uni, former senior Australian diplomat and author of FACT OR FISSION. I am thankful to Ms Pat Toms who chair the forum tonight for giving me this opportunity for a say.
    Uranium is a very heavy metal which can be used as an abundant source of concentrated energy. Uranium is multi-uses, can be used to generate electricity and also develop nuclear weapons.
    Australian uranium should be sold only to countries which are signatories of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and which allow international inspection to verify that it is used only for peaceful purposes. According to the promises by the Chinese leaders, China seemingly qualifies both counts.
    Let’s first assume that China would abide by the agreement. As Australia is not the sole supplier of uranium to China, it is possible for China to use the Australian uranium only for the peaceful purposes while the uranium from other sources can be used for the development of nuclear weapons.
    If in World War II, Australia sold copper to Japan under the conditions that the Japanese should not use the Australian copper to make bullets to shoot Australian soldiers, however, what Japan did was to replace the copper for peaceful civil use with that imported from Australia, and to make the ammunition with the copper saved to fight with Australia in the battlefield. Would you say that the bullet shooting Australian soldiers had nothing to do with the Australian copper sold to Japan?
    Selling uranium to China might be in Australia's short-term economic interest, it is in my point of view not in Australia’s long-term national security interest.
    How, on the basis of this agreement, can Australia be sure China will use its uranium for peaceful rather than military means?
    Let me give two examples of how the Chinese Government has long been ignoring or invalidating its commitments and treaties in dealing with the international community.
    In 1998 China became signatory to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
    However, to this day, these two treaties have not been ratified and put into operation in China.
    Secondly, the Chinese Government has failed in its commitment to abide by the WTO by opening up and liberalizing its banking system and media organizations.
    Chinese Government is always good at cover-up. Let me give you an example of tactics usually used by the Chinese government.
    Outbreaks of SARS and then avian flu were initially denied and hidden. According to eyewitness accounts, when SARS broke out in China and the WHO brought in a team of disease experts for an inspection, SARS patients were packed into ambulances and driven around Beijing. They were only returned to the hospitals after the inspectors concluded Beijing was not under threat of SARS.
    What assurance does Australia have that such tactics will not be employed to avoid detection of misuse of its uranium? What sort of inspection regime is needed to ensure the use of Australian uranium is not mismanaged?
    Now I would like to show the recent political mentality of the Chinese Communist Party for your reference.
    
    Let me quote The Global Socialism Yellow Paper, issued by the Chinese Academy of Social Science on 11th May 2006: the global socialist movement hit all time low because of the substantial change of the former Soviet Union and Eastern European Bloc thus resulted in capitalism reaching its peak. However, the global socialist movement not only survived the tremendous blow of the radical change, but also revived and made progress to some extent.
    
    This was especially so for China, with one fifth of the world's population, which continued the road of socialism and reform with open door policies and achieved great success.
    
    The global socialist movement is now walking out of the low ebb to its resurrection. It went on to predict that the US led global capitalism will be eventually replaced by the Chinese Communist Party led global socialism.
    
    This is a signal not to be neglected. As the national power of China is increasing, the CCP has become more and more impatient with Deng Xiaoping’s foreign policy of stratagem of concealment. The policy of stratagem of concealment is essentially an accumulation of forces in hiding.
    
    The actual meaning of this rhetoric should be interpreted in this way: the so called upholding of socialism with Chinese characteristics is the continuance of CCP one Party rule, the so called Chinese Communist Party led global socialism is globalizing one party autocratic rule, the so called replacement of US led global capitalism by Chinese Communist Party led global socialism is in fact the global replacement of democracy by autocracy.
    
    It is noticeable that the stance against democracy by the CCP is tougher than ever. They reject western democracy while claiming that the CCP’s rule is democracy itself.
    
    The Democracy White Paper by the CCP came out in March 2006. It declared that democracy in China is democracy under the leadership of the CCP. It complained that the Western media has a prejudice against democracy in China because they apply Western standards. China has kept a high rate of over 9 percent of economic growth for the past 20 odd years, this high economic growth is really unimaginable under an autocracy without democracy.
    Unique, universal and absolute democracy is non existent. Real democracy is not just the model, but its application in accordance with the condition of a country and the way it conforms to the requirements of the development of the country.
    I think we may have a fresh recollection of the joint press conference of Bush and Hu Jintao in last April. When asked if China needs to take democracy into operation, Hu Jintao replied: "I don’t understand the concept of democratic country raised, but we do insist that there is no modernization without democracy".
    
    Many commentators misinterpreted the real meaning of what Hu said and believed that Hu will push forward with democratic political reforms. Many have high expectations of this.
    
    As a matter of fact, Hu’s implication was on the contrary. The genuine meaning of Hu's statement is that the West has Western democracy, while China has China’s democracy. Since China has achieved tremendous success in its modernization, that demonstrates the conformity of the current political system to China's situation and how it embodies the interests of the whole people, so it is democracy with Chinese characteristics.
    
    It is obvious that Hu's real meaning does not value and endorse democracy, but actually negates it.
    
    Now what I want to say is, if this is the case, my concern is the fate of the free world. A big country like China under the control of CCP, has no similarity to Cuba and North Korea. It is potentially a menace to the world as it becomes another super power under the guise of peaceful rise. At that time, China will have a showdown with democracies.
    
    I call on all democracy and peace loving people around the world to be fully aware of the potential danger, and to always remain on guard. World democracies should be vigilant to defuse the future possible bombshell of the monstrous CCP.
    Is China on the road to a "peaceful rise", as CCP leaders tell us? Its growing economy and huge domestic market dazzle the West, while its military build-up and reactionary political stance has prompted worries and fears of its potential as a negative force.
    Historically, a newly emerging power often clashes with existing powers. In the Asia-Pacific region, the most likely zone of conflict is Taiwan, with its pro-independence leader repeatedly challenging the territorial integrity of the communist People's Republic.
    Though not imminent, should such a conflict materialise and draw in the US, what would Australia do? Australia's long-standing security relationship with the US will be in conflict with its benign business relationship with China and Australia will be put to the test by both. By selling uranium to China, Australia is possibly backing the foe of an ally.
    History repeats itself if people keep forgetting it. World War II was to a great extent caused by the appeasement of Nazi Germany by Britain and France.
    At the end of World War II, repeating Chamberlain's mistake, US president Franklin Roosevelt and British prime minister Winston Churchill signed the Yalta treaty with Stalin, in which the Soviet Union obtained an undeserved post-war position in East Asia.
    With the continuation of this policy by the Truman administration, communist-led troops were given a free hand to sweep over mainland China. The US looked on without going to rescue its former wartime ally. This incited Kim Il-sung's adventure in the Korean War for the unification of the whole peninsula. Thus took shape the Cold War of East-West confrontation, lasting 40-odd years.
    Today, a neo-appeasement is taking effect. In confronting the rise of China, the policies and performances of Western democracies are less than laudable. Western leaders, Australia among them, seek access to China's huge market and play down the significance of democratic principles and human rights, overlooking the suffering of the 1.3 billion people under Chinese totalitarianism. Facing China’s rapid development as a “rising power”, should Western democracies commit the same error as they did with Hitler?
    
    The liberalising economic policy since the end of the 1970s has pushed China forward into an unprecedented period of high growth. Most Western observers believed political reform would inevitably follow.
    Unfortunately, the present outlook for China is not positive. The injection of enormous amounts of capital has rescued the regime of the CCP; the high rate of economic growth has helped legitimise it and keep it in power. I cannot help myself asking this question: Have investments and other commercial activities in China impeded more urgent political reform?
    It is in our interests, both as a nation and as private citizens, to more vigorously support the democracy movement in China.
    
    Appeased dictators only demand more, but if you stand up to dictators on matters of principle, they retreat. It is perfectly possible for Western countries have a “two track” policy with China, incorporating with both a healthy economic relationship and a frank political dialogue. Democracies such as Australia should support calls for accelerated progress toward political reform in China.
    
    In the absence of proper pressure from the world’s political leaders on Beijing, it is vital that the world’s people raise the pressure on Beijing for democracy and freedom in China.
    
    The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.
    
    Thank you for your time. _(博讯自由发稿区发稿) (博讯 boxun.com)
(本文只代表作者或者发稿团体的观点、立场)

博讯相关报道(最近20条,更多请利用搜索功能):
  • 周晋:“入土为安”与福荫子孙
  • 成为联合国人权理事会成员国,岂可更加肆无忌惮地侵犯人权?/陈树庆
  • 刘晓波:无视私有产权的五四传统—以胡适为例
  • 黑龙江省黑河孙吴县80余名下岗职工联名举报厂长!
  • 孔子思想大本大源考(上)/庞忠甲
  • 孔子思想大本大源考(中)/庞忠甲
  • 孔子思想大本大源考(下)/庞忠甲
  • 世界初现多极化,核武扩散将加速/张建
  • 传统文化与不肖子孙-与李土生商榷之一/郭知熠
  • 从四川的旅游常态来看赵昕被打的事件/邓永亮
  • 我为什么会在沧州公安局的电视塔上摔落/郭起真
  • 加宋:中国的腐败根源
  • 赵达功:从艾晓明教授等遭遇看中共加速黑社会化
  • 杨天水:谁加速了诗人的病故
  • 杨天水:从松无赖与雅虎无耻
  • 为富不税 谁开了中国富豪“逃税”的方便之门?(图)
  • 三大原因导致美国飓风“雪上加霜”(图)
  • 林彪为什么选择出逃苏联?/LISA
  • 从水果免税看中国的善意和敌意/凌锋
  • 中国南非将合作开发铀矿石
  • 秦耕: 合法避税还是非法逃税?—评“王子鞋城偷税大案”
  • 四川将耗资4.3亿元拆迁峨眉山金顶电视塔
  • 二炮部队司令员:全力推进军事斗争准备
  • 中国将出台文件从四方面狙击外资炒房
  • 周金伙出逃美国,贾庆林雪上加霜(图)
  • 周正毅捐款给黄菊妻子所属基金会
  • 黄河塌岸宁夏灾民多次求助政府无回应转求河神(图)
  • 湖北一感染禽流感病毒的男子死亡(图)
  • 温家宝说中国准备签署铀保护协定
  • 政协委员建议人民币增加孙中山、邓小平头像
  • 政协委员建议人民币增加孙中山和邓小平头像
  • 一男从中央电视塔238米处跳下身亡
  • 研究预测未来一百年黄河水越来越少
  • 两会前瞻(五):贫富分化加速 体制改革才有出路
  • 中国人口老龄化加速 计划生育政策不会改变
  • 中共党政机关发行图书逃税6亿
  • 陕西工厂泄漏污染河水迟迟不报告
  • 伊朗提议中国代炼浓缩铀
  • 果农年关卖果难 雪上加霜 市容借机榨钱财(图)
  • 少妇赤身裸体沉河死亡 数十人冷漠围观无一施救
  • 我的父母快70了还要交苛捐杂税 (评:我的辛酸故事 )
  • 淮河水:质问“拖案”


    点击这里对此新闻发表看法
  •    
    联系我们


    All rights reserved
    博讯是畅所欲言的场所、所有文章均不一定代表博讯立场
    声明:博讯由编辑、义务留学生、学者维护,如有版权问题,请联系我们。另外,欢迎其他媒体 转载博讯文章,为尊重作者的辛勤劳动以及所承担风险,尊重博讯广大义务人士的奉献,请转载时注明来源和作者。