雙語全文｜來了，中美女主播隔空對辨
點擊： 作者：記者 來源：友鄰優課 發布時間:2019-05-31 09:49:45
開始前，Regan先跟觀眾強調，Xin是黨員，并提醒觀眾Xin有立場，代表黨說話。
8點26分，開始。
Regan：
Xin welcome, it’s good to have you here.
劉欣你好，很高興你能來。
Xin：
It's a great opportunity for me unprecedended. I never dreamed that I would have this kind of opportunity to speak to you and to speak to audiences in the ordinary houses in the US.
I have to get it straight, I am not a member of CPC.
This is on the record, please don’t assume that I am a member. I don’t speak for the CPC and I’m here today I’m only speaking for myself as Liu Xin a journalist working for CGTN. So if anybody wants to quote me, please put my name there at least.
對我來說這是一個前所未有的好機會。我從未想過我能有這樣的機會和你交談，和美國普通家庭中的觀眾交談。
我必須澄清，我并不是中國共產黨黨員。
我把話說明白，請不要假定我是黨員。我并不為共產黨發言，今天在這里我是作為CGTN的記者代表我自己發言。所以，如果有人想引用我的話，至少請把我的名字放在這里。
（劉欣直接表明自己身份，強調自己是個人身份，回擊了對方對身份和立場攻擊）
Regan：
Ok appreciate it. Give your current assessement of where we are on these trade talks. Do you believe a deal is possible?
好的，謝謝你。以你目前對貿易談判的評估，告訴我們你對貿易談判進展的判斷吧。你相信會達成協議嗎？
（Regan開始提問，談貿易摩擦）
Xin：
It is true that the satellite connection is not very good, but I believe you are asking me where we are in terms of the trade negotiations. I don’t know. I don’t have any insider information. I knew that talks were not very successful last time when they were going on in the United States, and now I know both sides are considering what to go next. But I think the Chinese government has made its position very clear that unless the US treated the Chinese government, treated the Chinese negotiation team with respect and show the willingness to talk without using outside pressure, there is high possibility that there could be a productive trade deal; otherwise we might be facing a prolonged period of problems for both sides.
衛星信號的確不是很好哈。但是如果你問我，當前我們貿易談判的進程如何，我并不知道。我并沒有任何內部消息。我知道上一次在美國的談判不是很順利，現在我知道雙方都在考慮接下來怎么辦。但是我認為，中國政府已經擺出了明確的立場：除非美國尊重中國政府、中方談判團隊，展現出不施加外部壓力來交流的意愿，這樣我們就很有可能達成富有成效的貿易協議；否則，我們雙方可能都會面臨曠日持久的問題時期。
Regan:
I would stress that trade wars are never good. They are not good for anyone. So I wanna believe Xin I wanna believe that something can get done. And this is certainly a challenging time. I realize there are a lot of rhetorics out there. But let me term one of the issues. That’s IP rights…You fundamentally… I think we can all agree that it’s right to take something that’s not yours. And in going through some of these cases, cases of the independent WTO that China is a member of as well as the DOJ, the FBI cases, you can actually see some of them are on the screen right now. There is evidence that China has stolen an enormous amount of IP, hundreds of billions of dollars worth now, youn know that's a lot of money. But really, I guess we shouldn't really care hundreds of billions of dollars or just 50 cents. How do American businesses operate in China if there are risks of having their ideas or intellectual properties stolen?
我想強調，貿易戰絕不是好事兒，對任何人都不好。所以我愿意相信，我愿意相信能做成一些事情。這無疑是一個極具挑戰的時代。我意識到形形色色的話術。但是，讓我來聊其中一個問題吧。那就是知識產權……你基本上……我想我們都同意，拿不是你的東西是不對的。在瀏覽某些此類案件的過程中，來自中國也是成員國之一的WTO、DOJ和FBI的案件，你現在可以在屏幕上看到它們。有證據表明，中國盜竊了大量的IP，價值數萬億美元，你知道這可是一大筆錢。但認真的，我認為我們該關注的不是幾萬億美元還是50美分。如果有想法或知識產權遭到盜竊的風險，美國企業該怎么在中國經營下去呢？
Xin:
Well, I think Trish you should ask American businesses whether they want to come to China, whether they find coming to China and cooperating with Chinese businesses has been profitable or not. They will tell you their answers, as far as I understand, many American companies have been established in China very profitable. The great majority of them, I believe, plan to continue to invest in China and explore the Chinese market. Well now US president Donald Trump’s tariffs make it a little bit difficult, make the future a little bit uncertain. I don not deny that there are IP infringement or copyright issues or there are piracy or even theft of commercial secrets. I think this is something to be dealt with. I think the Chinese government, the Chinese people and me as an individual, I think there is a consensus because without the protection of IP right nobody, no country, no individual can be stronger, can develop itself. I think that is a very clear consensus among the Chinese society. And of course there are cases where individuals where companies just go and steal, and that’s a common practice probably in every part of the world. There are companies in the United States who sue each other all the time for infringement on IP rights. You can’t say simply because these cases are happening, America is stealing or China is stealing or the Chinese people are stealing. And basically that’s the reason why I wrote that rebuttal because I think this kind of blanket statement is really not helpful, really not helpful.
我認為你應該去問問美國公司，看看他們愿不愿意來中國，看看他們覺得到中國來、和中國公司合作是不是有利可圖。他們會給你答案的。就我所知，許多美國公司在中國發展得非常好，盈利非常可觀。我相信，他們中的絕大多數都打算繼續在中國投資，開發中國市場。好吧，現在美國總統特朗普的關稅把事情弄得有點兒麻煩了，把未來弄得有點兒不確定了。
我不否認的確存在知識產權侵犯問題、版權問題、隱私問題乃至商業機密盜竊問題。我認為這是有待于解決的事情。中國政府、中國人民以及我作為個體都有這樣一個共識，因為如果沒有IP保護，沒有國家或個人可以獨善其身。這在中國社會是一個顯而易見的共識。當然也有個體或公司進行偷竊的案例，這樣的情況或許在世界各地都很常見。許多美國的公司也一直在控訴彼此侵犯知識產權。你不能因為這樣的案例在發生，就說美國人就在盜竊，或者中國人在盜竊。基本上這就是我寫下那段反駁的原因，因為我認為，這種含糊片面的言論真的毫無益處，真的毫無益處。
Regan:
It’s not just a statement. It’s multiple reports including evident from the WTO. Let me ask you about Huawei. That’s in the headlines right now. (Sure. I don't deny those.) As I said, we can all agree, if you do business with someone, it has to be based on trust. and you don’t want anyone stealing your valuable information you spent decades working on. Anyway China passed a law in 2017 requiring tech companies to work with the military and the government. It’s not just individual companies right? They might be getting access to these technologies as the government itself, which is an interesting nuance. But I get that China is upset that Huawei has not been welcome to the US market totally. So let me just ask you this, it’s an interesting way to think about it. What if we said, you know, sure, Huawei, come on in, but here’s the deal you must share all the technological advances that you’ve been working on. You get to share with us. Would that be ok?
這不僅僅是一段言論。這是許多份報告，其中包括了來自WTO的證據。讓我問問你華為的事兒吧。畢竟這是現在的頭條熱點。（當然，我不否認。）如我所說，我們都同意，如果你要和一個人做生意，那一定是建立在信任之上的，你不希望別人來偷竊你花費了幾十年心血的寶貴信息。無論如何，2017年中國通過了一條法律，要求科技公司與軍方和政府合作。不僅僅是獨立的公司對吧？政府本身也可能接觸到這些技術，這是一個很有趣的細微差別。但我了解到，華為在美國市場完全不受歡迎，這事兒讓中方很沮喪。所以我想問問你，用這種方式來想很有意思。如果我們說，華為，進來吧，但條件是你們必須把正在研究的所有先進技術都拿來共享。你們必須和我們分享。這樣可以嗎？
Xin:
I think if it is through cooperation, if it is through mutual learning, if you pay for the use of this IP or high technology, absolutely fine. Why not? We all prosper because we learn from each other. I learn English because I had American teachers. I learn English because I had American friends. Still I’m learning journalism because I have American copy editors. I think that is fine as long as it is not illegal. Everybody should do that. That’s how we get better right?
我認為如果是通過合作，如果是通過互相學習，如果你愿意花錢來使用我們的知識產權或高新技術，絕對可以的。為什么不呢？我們都會繁榮發展，因為我們互相學習。我學英語，因為我有美國老師。我學英語，因為我有美國朋友。不僅如此，我學新聞，因為我有美國的文案編輯。我覺得那是可以的，只要不違反法律。每個人都應該那樣做。我們就是那樣變得更好的，不是嗎？
Regan：
But you mention something very important, which is that you should pay for the acquisition of that. You know, look, I think that the liberalized economic world in which we live and have valued intellectual property and it’s governed by a set of laws, and so you need kind of to play by the rules and play by those laws for going to have that kind of trust between each other. But I think you bring up some good points. Let me turn to China right now, which is now…wow…the second largest economy. At what point will China abandon its developing nation status or stop borrowing from the World Bank.
但你提到了一件非常重要的事情，那就是：你應該花錢來買知識產權。你知道的，聽著，我認為我們生活在一個自由化的經濟世界之中，當今世界很重視知識產權，這個問題受到一系列法律的管束，所以你必須按照規則和法律來玩這場游戲，才能建立起彼此之間的信任。但我認為，你提到了一些很好的觀點。讓我聊回中國，中國現在……哇哦，第二大經濟體。到什么時候，中國才會放棄發展中國家的身份，停止向世界銀行借錢呢？
Xin：
Well I think discussion is going on and I have heard a very live discussion about it. Indeed, there are people talking about China already big, why don’t you just grow up? I think we want to grow up, we don’t wanna be dwarf and underdeveloped all the time. But it depends on how you define developing country, right?
If you look at the overall size of the Chinese economy, yes we are very big. But don't forget we have 1.4 billion people, that is over three times population of the United States. But when it comes down to per capita GDP, we are less than 1/6 of that of the United States and even less than some other more developed countries in Europe. So you tell me, where should we put ourselves.
It’s a very complicated issue, because as I said it’s very small, but overall it’s very big.
We can do a lot of big things, and people are looking upon us to do a lot more around the world.
So I think we are doing that, we’re contributing to the United Nations, we’re the world’s biggest contributor to the UN peace keeping commissions, we’re giving out donations and humanitarian aids. Because we know we have to grow up and Trish, thank you for the reminder.
好的，我認為討論正在進行中，我已經聽到了關于這個話題的非常生動的討論。事實上，有很多人說中國已經很大了，你們為什么就不能成長起來呢？我認為我們也想要成長，我們也不想一直低人一等、不夠發達。但是這要取決于你如何定義發展中國家，對嗎？
從如果你觀察中國經濟的整體規模，那么沒錯，我們體量很大。但不要忘了，我們還有14億人民，是美國人口的三倍。但是，由人均GDP來看，我們還不到美國的1/6，跟其他更發達的國家比起來就更少了。所以不如你來告訴我，我們應該把自己置于何處。
這是一個非常復雜的問題，因為我說了中國的人均GDP很低，但總體經濟規模非常大。
我們可以做成很多偉大的事情，人民期待我們在世界各地做更多的事情。
所以我認為我們正在這要做，我們正在為聯合國做貢獻，我們是世界上為聯合國維和任務貢獻最多的國家，我們積極捐款，參與人道主義援助。因為我們知道我們必須“長大”，也謝謝你的提醒。
Regan:
Let’s get to the tariffs, I’ve seen some of your commentaries too, and Xin I appreciated it you think China could lower some of it’s tariffs. I watch to see that and I totally agree with you. In 2016, the average tariff charged on the American goods in China was 9.9%, and that was nearly three times what the US was charging, so what do you say about this?
讓我們來聊聊關稅。我也看過了一些你的評論，我很感謝你認為中國應該降低關稅。我拭目以待，而且完全同意你的觀點。2016年，中國對美國商品征收的平均關稅是9.9%，差不多是美國所征收的三倍。你怎么看待這個問題？
Xin:
I think that would be a wonderful idea, I mean don’t you think? I mean for American consumers, products from China will be even cheaper, and for consumers in China, products from US will be so much cheaper too. I think that will be wonderful idea.
You talked about rule-based order, this is the thing, if you want to change the rules, it has to be done in mutual consensus, basically, if you talk about tariffs, it is not only about China and US, I understand, if you lower tariffs just between China and the Unites States, the Europeans will come, the Japanese will come, the Venezuelans will probably come and say, hey, we want the same tariff. But you can’t discriminate between countries, so it’s a very complicated settlement to reach.
When the world agreed on the tariff reduction China should commit to……was exactly the result of years of difficult negotiations of the United States saw in its interests and decided to what degree they can agree, or to what degree they can lower their tariff, and China agreed to, although in some difficulties, lower our tariff considerably, it is all the decisions of countries according to their own self interests, now things are different.
20 years later, what are we going to do? Maybe these old rules need to be changed. Let’s talk about it, let’s do it according to the rules. If you don’t like the rules, let’s change the rules, but again, it must be a multilateral decision.
我認為這是個很好的主意，你不覺得嗎？我的意思是，對于美國消費者而言，來自中國的商品會更便宜了，而對于中國的消費者而言，來自美國的商品也會便宜得多。我認為這會是個很棒的主意。
你談到了基于規則的系統，基于規則的秩序，這就是問題所在。如果你想要改變規則，那必須是建立在雙向共識之上。從基本上說，如果你要談關稅，那就不僅僅是中國和美國之間的問題。我明白，如果你只降低中美之間的關稅，那么歐洲國家會跑過來，日本會跑過來，委內瑞拉或許也會跑過來，然后說：喂，我們也想要一樣的關稅。你不能區別對待不同的國家，所以這是一個非常復雜、難以解決的問題。
全球各國也是經過了多年的艱難協商，才確定了關稅降低的幅度。期間美國也是根據自己的利益，決定在多大程度上同意，或者在多大程度上可以做些什么。盡管中國面臨一些困難，但依然同意大幅降低關稅，這本來就是各國根據自己的利益所做的決定。現在，事情不一樣了。
20年后，我們應該怎么做？或許舊有的規則需要改變。讓我們坐下來溝通、根據規則行事。如果你不喜歡現在的規則，那讓我們來改變規則。但我需要再重申一遍，這必須是一個多邊的決定。
Regan:
You go back the trade view of 1974 Section 301, I wonder. There was a rule that enable U.S to use tariffs to try and influence behavior of China should have been taken in stealing our intellectual property. And I think in some ways that is part of what come in for human’s sense of trust. I hear you on the forced technology transfer. And I think that some of the American companies perhaps admit it is a mistake in terms of being willing to overlook what they might have to give up in the near term. But this is an issue where the country as a whole needs to step in and we’re seeing the United States do that perhaps in a way that hasn’t happened. I mean it’s been in a background. Don’t get me wrong. I think previous administration have Identify the challenges but have really been a little bit unwilling to take on. We’re living in this very different times. How do you define state capitalism? No, forced technology transfer is part of it…. Hang on one second, Xin, I wanna say that I think your economic system is very interesting because you know you’ve had a capitalist system but it’s state-run. So, talk us about that. How do you define?
我想，你說的是1974年貿易法案的301條款。有這樣一條規則讓美國運用關稅來試圖影響中國的行為，在中國盜竊我們的知識產權時本應該運用這樣的規則。我認為在某些方面，這是由人類的信任感而來。我聽到了你關于強制技術轉移的言論。 我認為，有的美國公司可能會承認，忽略他們可能要在短期內放棄的東西是一個錯誤。
但這是一個需要國家整體介入的問題，通過已經發生的事情，我們看到美國就在這樣做。我的意思是，這是有大的背景的。不要誤解我的意思。我認為前一屆政府已經確認了挑戰所在，但又不是很愿意接受挑戰。我們生活在這樣一個不一樣的時代里。你如何定義國家資本主義？不，強制技術轉移是一部分......等一下，欣，我想說 我覺得貴國的經濟體系非常有趣，因為你知道你們有資本主義體系，但又是國家主導的。所以，和我們聊聊這個吧。你如何定義？
Xin：
Well, we’d like to define the socialism with Chinese characteristics where the market forces are expected to play the dominating or the deciding role in the allocation of resources. Basically, we wanna be a market economy, but there are some Chinese characteristics. For instance, some state-owned enterprises which are playing an important but increasingly smaller role in the economy, and everybody thinks that china’s economy is state-owned.
Maybe in the economy and everybody thinks that china’s economy is state-owned. Everything is state-controlled everything is state state state. But I let me tell you it is not the true picture if you look at the statistics for instance 80% of Chinese employees were employed by private enterprise. 80% of Chinese exports were done by private companies, were produced by private companies. About 65% of technological innovation were achieved were carried out by private enterprises.the largest, some of the largest companies that affect our life for instance some internet companies some 5G technology companies, they are private companies, so we are yes socialist economy with Chinese characteristics but it’s you know that not everything state controlled, state-run it’s not like that. We are actually quite mixed and dynamic and actually very very open as well.
好的，我們愿意將其定義為有中國特色的社會主義，在資源配置方面由市場力量起主導性或決定性的作用。基本上，我們想成為市場經濟，但還要有一些中國特色。比如說，有的國有企業正發揮著非常重要但與日俱減的作用，而所有人都認為，中國的經濟是國家主導的，所有的東西都是國家控制的，所有的事情都是國家、國家、國家。
但是我要告訴你，真實情況不是這樣的。你不妨看看數據，80%的中國上班族在私企上班，80%的出口都是來自私企，這些商品也是由私企生產的。將近65%的科技創新都是由私企來實現、來完成的。許多影響著我們生活的頂級公司，比如互聯網公司、5G技術公司，它們都是私企。所以沒錯，我們是有中國特色的社會主義經濟，但是你得知道，并不是一切都是由國家控制、國家經營的，情況不是那樣的。我們其實非常多元，非常有活力，也非常非常開放。
Regan：
Well I think you need to probably keep being open and that you know as a free trade person as myself. I think that’s the direction to pursue. And ultimately that leads to greater economic prosperity for you and better economic prosperity for us. And so let me get a win-win.
作為一個支持自由貿易的人，我認為你或許應該保持這種開放的心態，這是值得努力的方向。如此一來，不管是中國還是美國的經濟都將蓬勃發展，所以讓我們互惠雙贏吧。
Xin：
Absolutely.
沒問題。
Regan：
This was interesting. I appreciate you’ve been here. Thank you.
很有意思，感謝你來。謝謝。
Xin：
Thank you so much. If you wanna have a discussion in the future we can do that. If you wanna come to China…
非常謝謝。如果你想來中國來討論
Regan：
I’d love it
我很愿意
Xin:
You are welcome. And I’ll take you around
我會帶你到處轉轉
Regan：
Thank you.
謝謝
責任編輯：向太陽
特別申明：
1、本文只代表作者個人觀點，不代表本站觀點，僅供大家學習參考；
2、本站屬于非營利性網站，如涉及版權和名譽問題，請及時與本站聯系，我們將及時做相應處理；
3、歡迎各位網友光臨閱覽，文明上網，依法守規，IP可查。
作者 相關信息
內容 相關信息
? 昆侖專題 ?
? 十九大報告深度談 ?
? 新征程 新任務 新前景 ?
? 習近平治國理政 理論與實踐 ?
? 我為中國夢獻一策 ?
? 國資國企改革 ?
? 雄安新區建設 ?
? 黨要管黨 從嚴治黨 ?
圖片新聞
