直说｜中美：和解需要双方努力

Editor's note: While there are mounting appeals for strengthening benign interaction between China and the U.S., the two countries are still locked in some frictions. What are the root causes for the frictions? David Ferguson, senior translation editor at Foreign Languages Press, shares his insights with us. The views expressed in the video are his own and not necessarily those of CGTN.

编者按：尽管有关加强中美之间良性互动的呼声越来越高，但两国仍存在一些摩擦。两国之间摩擦产生的根本原因是什么？外文出版社高级翻译编辑大卫·弗格森与我们分享了他的见解。本视频仅代表专家观点，不代表CGTN观点。

CGTN: There is a growing concern that China and the U.S. are being locked in a technology war to "win the 21st century." The U.S. has adopted a chip strategy to contain China. What’s your take on the bilateral competition in science and technology? Do you think the Huawei case will happen again, and why?

CGTN：近日，有关中美两国为“赢得21世纪”陷入超级大国科技战的言论愈演愈烈。甚至有报道称，美国将采取“以芯制华”的战略。您如何看待中美科技领域的竞争？您觉得华为这样的案例是否会再度出现？为什么？

David Ferguson: Well, there's only going to be one winner in the technological battle, and that, from my perspective, is very clearly China. China's education system is growing and becoming stronger. China's power in STEM subjects is growing and becoming stronger. And Western countries, not just the U.S., but Western countries in general, are losing their preeminence in that particular field. So, as the century moves forward, I don’t have any doubt that China is going to win the technological battle from a technological perspective.

大卫·弗格森：在这场科技战中只会有一个赢家，在我看来，赢家显而易见会是中国。中国的教育体系正在蓬勃发展，科学、技术、工程、数学等专业也在不断发展，实力不断增强。反观西方国家，不仅仅是美国，西方世界整体正在逐渐失去这方面的优势。照这样发展下去，我毫不怀疑，单纯从科技层面来看，中国会赢得这场科技战。

But there is also a political element to the battle and that is where the Western countries and the U.S. are much stronger. I sometimes put it this way: Whoever controls the megaphone controls the message. And at the moment, it is the West, and particularly the U.S., who control the megaphone and therefore who control the message. 

但这场科技战中也有政治因素的影响。在这方面，美国等西方国家要强得多。我有时会这样说，“扩音器在谁手里，谁就掌握信息主动权。”现在的“扩音器”仍然在西方世界，尤其是美国手里，因此它们就掌握了信息主动权。

And if you take an example like Huawei, Huawei’s position and Huawei’s whole history have been significantly misrepresented to the Western public [and] to the U.S. public. They've been turned into a threat. Huawei grew in China when China had no telecommunications industry at all. Telecommunications in China belonged to Western countries and Huawei achieved preeminence by doing things that they were interested in doing, by traveling to not remote parts of China, but traveling outside of the main centers of population and working there and building their strength there. And Huawei became a telecommunications giant by sheer hard work; the kind of hard work that typifies China as a country and China as a people. But I would expect incidents like Huawei to recur simply because that's the tool that the U.S. has. When you've only got a hammer, everything looks like a nail, and Huawei looks like a nail to the U.S.

以华为为例，华为的定位和整体发展史已被西方严重曲解。在西方民众、美国民众的心目中，华为成了一种威胁。华为是在中国根本没有本土电信业的时候发展起来的。那时西方国家主导着中国的电信行业，而华为通过做自己感兴趣的事情取得了卓越成就，不是去偏远地区，而是去人口相对不那么密集的地方努力钻研，积累实力。华为成了电信巨头，这完全是通过华为自身的努力。这种努力和勤奋是中国的品格，也是中华民族的品格。

CGTN: It’s said that the current frictions between China and the U.S. are mainly due to the latter’s fear that China is developing while the U.S. is losing its leading position, and it’s said that the lack of efficient bilateral communication also intensifies this kind of fear. What can China and the U.S. do to enhance effective communication?

CGTN：有人说中美现今的摩擦主要来源于美国政客对中国不断发展而美国即将失去领先地位的恐惧。而中美之间缺乏高效的信息沟通更是加剧了这一恐惧。对此，您如何评价？中美之间如何才能加强有效的沟通？

Ferguson: Well, it takes two to tango. It takes two people to make peace. One person can make war. I would put it this way: China is a “win-win” country. China's attitude to its relationships with other countries is “If you win, we win.” And that is a sane and sound attitude. America is much more of a “win-lose” country, both at an individual level and at a national level. They can't appreciate victory unless they can see a beaten foe. It’s gonna be: “I win, you lose.” And that is very much reflected on an individual level in a lot of violence, a lot of anger in the U.S. turned against itself. And that's what it comes down to fundamentally: It’s win-lose and win-win. 

弗格森：跳探戈需要两个人，和解需要双方的努力，但一个人就能发动战争。我这样说吧，中国的理念是双赢。中国对与其他国家的关系的态度是你受益、我们双方都受益。这是一种安全有效的态度。但美国奉行的是我赢你输的理念，不论是在个体层面还是国际层面。美国必须看到对手惨败才会觉得尝到了胜利的滋味。结局必须是我赢你输。这种理念在美国人身上也有充分的体现，体现在使得整个国家充斥着暴力和愤怒，也体现在美国最终反对美国自己。这一问题根本上可以归结为我赢你输和双赢这两种理念的不同。

America has been a top dog for not a very, very long time in historical terms, but a long time in individual terms. People living in America today are living as the third or fourth generation of Americans who were the top dog and they see themselves as being the top dog. And America has a real problem with not being first. From their perspective, No. 1 is their rightful position and they find it very, very difficult to relate to anybody that threatens that predominance.

从历史角度来看，美国处于领先地位的时间并不是很久，但这个时间在个体看来已经是很长时间了。今天的美国人是美国成为世界第一后的第三或第四代人，他们理所当然地觉得自己仍然是世界老大。美国人对当老大这件事有很深的执念。在他们看来，“第一”这个位置理所应当属于他们，所以他们很难与任何威胁到自身地位的人相处。

推荐阅读：