装瞎吧你,三公报?来,看来你不光是脑残,还智障,来看看。三公报。
Joint Communique of the United States of America and the People's Republic of China 1972 (Shanghai Communiqué)上海公报
Joint Communique of the United States of America and the People's Republic of China
(on the Establishment of Diplomatic Relations) 1979 建交公报
U.S.–PRC Joint Communique, August 17, 1982 八一七公报
2758号决议还用我贴吗? 你自己说说你贴那个2014是个什么鸟玩意?傻逼。
我説的對三個公報的解釋在我提的文獻裏。
有那麽難理解嗎?
好,説到三個公報,下面是美國的官方態度:
When China attempted to change the Chinese text from the original acknowledge to recognize, Deputy Secretary of State Warren Christopher told a Senate hearing questioner, “[W]e regard the English text as being the binding text. We regard the word ‘acknowledge’ as being the word that is determinative for the U.S.
It has also "acknowledged the Chinese position that Taiwan is a part of China, but the United States has not itself agreed to this position.
tate Department Office of Republic of China Affairs Director Harvey Feldman: “In fact, officially, the U.S. has never ‘accepted’ the PRC view; we have only ‘acknowledged’ it.”"
中國方面自己查字典,篡改原意:
公报达成协议的当晚,部领导要我别回家,住在办公室里,万一有事找起来方便。那天半夜我巳睡着,突然被电话铃警醒,主管美大司的章文晋副部长要我到他的办公室去,原来他对“acknowledge”应怎么译还有疑虑。章部长的英语水平很高,工作极端负责。
我们一起查了许多字典,Webster’s Ninth Collegiate Dictionary关于acknowledge的条目既有“认识到”的意思,也有“承认”的解释,Longman Active Study Dictionary of English对此字的解释,第一条就是“to accept or recognize as”。“acknowledge”后直接跟宾语,与跟一子句似有不同。前者更直接,更有“承认”和“接受”的意思。取字典中“accept or recognize”的解释也更符合我们的立场,所以章部长最后亲自敲定译为“承认”。
by 施燕华
原來自己的翻譯自己拿字典敲定。
美國在國會作證説謊的話可是要入獄的。
Deputy Secretary of State Warren Christopher told a Senate hearing questioner, “[W]e regard the English text as being the binding text. We regard the word ‘acknowledge’ as being the word that is determinative for the U.S.
這個就是公開的定義。 你自己只看到中國方面的定義就説別人的是扭曲的,你會不會太被洗腦了?
你要是覺得我被洗腦了,請去看國際條約中關於領土割讓的定義。
又請去看. Frank Chiang. One-China Policy and Taiwan. Fordham International Law Journal (Fordham University School of Law).
法律不夠再看司法:
October 6, 1959 CHENG FU SHENG and Lin Fu Mei, Plaintiffs, v. William P. ROGERS, Attorney General of the United States, Defendant
法律司法都不夠的話再看美國行政:
S. Kan, Cong. Research Serv., China/Taiwan: Evolution of the “One China” Pol (Oct. 10, 2014).
中文英文都看,我也看到你所说的acknowledged,但是,根据公告第一段的全文,并不是了解中国方面对台湾的主权要求,而是两岸同属一中,且PRC是唯一合法政府。
来吧,您给翻译翻译。
1. In the Joint Communiqué on the Establishment of Diplomatic Relations on January 1, 1979, issued by the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the People's Republic of China, the United States of America recognized the Government of the People's Republic of China as the sole legal government of China, and it acknowledged the Chinese position that there is but one China and Taiwan is part of China. Within that context, the two sides agreed that the people of the United States would continue to maintain cultural, commercial, and other unofficial relations with the people of Taiwan. On this basis, relations between the United States and China were normalized.
顺便把第四五条都给大家念念,看看你个脑残还装什么瞎
4. The Chinese government reiterates that the question of Taiwan is China's internal affair. The Message to the Compatriots in Taiwan issued by China on January 1, 1979, promulgated a fundamental policy of striving for Peaceful reunification of the Motherland. The Nine-Point Proposal put forward by China on September 30, 1981 represented a Further major effort under this fundamental policy to strive for a peaceful solution to the Taiwan question.
5. The United States Government attaches great importance to its relations with China, and reiterates that it has no intention of infringing on Chinese sovereignty and territorial integrity, or interfering in China's internal affairs, or pursuing a policy of "two Chinas" or "one China, one Taiwan." The United States Government understands and appreciates the Chinese policy of striving for a peaceful resolution of the Taiwan question as indicated in China's Message to Compatriots in Taiwan issued on January 1, 1979 and the Nine-Point Proposal put forward by China on September 30, 1981. The new situation which has emerged with regard to the Taiwan question also provides favorable conditions for the settlement of United States-China differences over the question of United States arms sales to Taiwan.
:
你給我翻譯沒用,我自己翻譯沒用,甚至中國政府自己的翻譯也沒用,準確的外交辭令是一字千里,必須字字珠璣。 請你看下面美國的官方態度:
Congressional Research Service: 4. 2013-01-04. The position of the United States, as clarified in the China/Taiwan: Evolution of the "One China" Policy report of the Congressional Research Service (date: July 9, 2007) is summed up in five points:
The United States did not explicitly state the sovereign status of Taiwan in the three US-PRC Joint Communiques of 1972, 1979, and 1982.
The United States "acknowledged" the "One China" position of both sides of the Taiwan Strait.
U.S. policy has not recognized the PRC's sovereignty over Taiwan;
U.S. policy has not recognized Taiwan as a sovereign country; and
U.S. policy has considered Taiwan's status as undetermined. U.S. policy has considered Taiwan's status as unsettled.
2007年,美国国会研究处在研究海峡两岸的‘一个中国政策’报告书中阐述美国的立场,并总结了五点:
美国没有明确说明在1972年、1979年和1982年三个美中联合公报中的台湾主权地位。
美国“认知”两岸“一个中国”的立场。
美国的政策并“没有承认”中国对台湾的主权。
美国的政策并“没有认可”台湾为主权国家。
美国的政策认为台湾地位未定。美国的政策是把台湾地位搁置。
這是國會下轄智庫得出的結論。
The Chinese government reiterates that the question of Taiwan is China's internal affair.
這句話説了中國政府認爲臺灣是内政問題,這裏美國沒有任何出現,簡而言之就是美國“acknowledge” 但是不置可否。
The United States Government attaches great importance to its relations with China, and reiterates that it has no intention of infringing on Chinese sovereignty and territorial integrity, or interfering in China's internal affairs, or pursuing a policy of "two Chinas" or "one China, one Taiwan."
這裏講的就是美國的態度: 美國不侵犯中國主權完整,不干涉中國内政,
更重要的 1: “不會承認臺灣是主權國家” 2. “不會承認世界上有兩個中國”
但是臺灣是不是中國内政,臺灣是不是中國領土,完全沒有提到。
這跟臺灣領土歸屬權沒有任何關係。
我的説法完全符合美國國會的意見。
终于,台湾大选尘埃落定,蔡英文以超过810万的历史性高票,战胜国民党候选人韩国瑜,成功连任台湾总统。对于这个结果,有人意外,亦有人不甚意外。因为选举而掀起的“内战”,这些对立、这些伤痕,在选后如何平复──这是蔡英文的第一项作业。但不论伤痕再深,选举结束了,对于蔡英文而言,高兴的时间也不会太长,很快地一项项挑战将接踵而至。
迈入民主化二十年的台湾,当前不光是因为中国大陆崛起、国际空间大幅度压缩,经济民生、产业政策等各方面亦日趋弱化,放眼未来四年,台湾内忧外患、局势由不得连任成功的蔡政府犹豫不决。对内如何解决低薪、使民众重拾对台湾未来经济期望,对外如何平稳两岸关系、化解断交危机,将是蔡政府的任务的重中之重。
蔡英文以台湾选举史上最高票成功连任。(袁恺勋/多维新闻)
于内,蔡英文有“平分配不均、振产业经济”之难。
虽然成功连任,但2018年年底时“基层的反弹危机”仍殷鉴不远。民进党过去四年执政,在解决经济困顿和青年低薪等议题中并没有发挥出重要作用,所以曾一度民意低迷,在各主要政治人物中排名垫底,最后不得已只能以“亡国感”作为竞选主轴,靠吃香港反修例危机的“豆腐”咸鱼翻身。但香港反修例危机的高潮已经过去,大选过后,台湾社会对“主权牌”的兴趣会逐渐减下,激情不在,民进党的实质治理会再度被人放在台面上细细审视。
过去三年多,蔡英文在经济上的发言有“民主可以当饭吃”、“经济增长亚洲四小龙之首”等话语,被认为与社会认知有落差,也因此受到批评。在下一个任期中,此次饱受青年期待的蔡英文政府,恐怕无法再沉浸于GDP数字,而必须确切地提出改善景气、化解青年低薪的方法,才能满足人民的高期望。
再者,要化解低薪、实现公平正义,重振产业政策是重中之重,这一块亦是蔡英文政府过去四年未让台湾社会太有感的领域。台湾曾在全球科技版图中占有重要地位,如今除了过去奠立的“老本”如硬件代工这一块,在当今互联网时代下,新兴产业不足、旧有产业转型缓慢,俨然停留在二十年前。产业转型,这四个大字也仍压在蔡英文的肩上。
自然,除了最现实的产业、经济政策这一块,此次大选所遗留下来的社会撕裂,也有待民进党化解──特别是在选前饱受争议的《反渗透法》风波。台湾政治人物虽可因意识形态而胜利,但台湾所面对的残酷局势,很难因意识形态而得到化解。台湾内部的经济民生、产业振兴,若要能落实,两岸关系是难以切断的现实联系。
于外,蔡英文有“化两岸僵局、解断交危机”之困。
蔡英文在外部现实上第一个需要面对的问题,就是即将到期的两岸经贸协议(ECFA)是否续签,这涉及台湾经济民生、更是蔡英文政府未来如何因应两岸关系的第一个指标问题。
ECFA的续签与否为何重要?因为当前其他国际经贸协议如跨太平洋伙伴关系协定(CPTPP)、区域全面经济伙伴关系协定(RCEP)台湾仍不得其门而入,而台湾的传统竞争对手如韩国都已在这些经贸整合中“参一脚”,若再错失ECFA,台湾传统产业如石化、钢铁、纺织、农渔业,竞争力将大为丧失。这个现实蔡英文在5月20日开启第二任任期后就要面对。
去除现实的经贸利益之外,能否平息断交潮亦是人们日后关注蔡英文第二任期之重点。蔡英文执政任内第一任期,迄今为止已经丢掉了七个邦交国,现在台湾邦交国已掉至十五国,若台湾与中国大陆始终无法展开沟通,邦交国掉至个位数亦是在不久的将来可能发生的现实,到时台湾如何自处于国际、如何告诉人民台湾在国际中的位置,对执政者而言会是一个挑战。
归根结柢,台湾社会,一面说着“经济不是全部”、一面又不断因为低薪离开台湾,去寻找更多机会;一面呼唤着“世界看见民主台湾”,在面对对岸崛起和断交潮时却又显得无奈无力。台湾面对中国大陆心态复杂,但国际现实又难以让台湾犹豫太久。
大选已了,激情也会逐渐平复,国际局势、内部隐忧,蔡英文虽然以历史性高票成功竞选连任,但她在第二任期的挑战并不轻松。