那我們萊豬不是白吞了嗎？？？
拜登开始么说历史上当中国无法稳固的统一时就会因为外部世界而成为受害者，所以习近平的核心政策就是强化中国的统一。（相当于给中国找个理由）
拜登说他和习近平说了美国的总统一定反应美国的价值观，习近平也知道这点。
现在他的处理方法就不打算在香港，新疆，台湾问题上大声地反对他们的行为。
还提了下在他还是副总统，习近平还是副主席时谈到过中国的独生子女政策，说中国不接受移民，等现在的人都老退休了经济如何增长？
我个人感觉拜登的意思是，他知道中国在强化统一上是核心政策，而习近平也知道美国总统一定会遵守美国价值这些，所以大声地去反对中国的一些行为他不打算去做了（当然这是说口头上不去干涉了，实质上不做是不可能的）。后面提了下独生子女政策，考虑到习近平上台后开放二胎，潜在的话里说自己当时对习近平的话还是有用的。
MR. COOPER: What about the Uyghurs? What about the human rights abuses in China?
THE PRESIDENT: We must speak up for human rights. It’s who we are. We can’t — my comment to him was — and I know him well, and he knows me well. We’re — a two-hour conversation.
MR. COOPER: You talked about this to him?
THE PRESIDENT: I talked about this, too. And that’s not so much refugee, but I talked about — I said — look, you know, Chinese leaders — if you know anything about Chinese history, it has always been — the time when China has been victimized by the outer world is when they haven’t been unified at home. So the central — to vastly overstate it — the central principle of Xi Jinping is that there must be a united, tightly controlled China. And he uses his rationale for the things he does based on that.
I point out to him: No American President can be sustained as a President if he doesn’t reflect the values of the United States. And so the idea I’m not going to speak out against what he’s doing in Hong Kong, what he’s doing with the Uyghurs in western mountains of China and Taiwan, trying to end the One China policy by making it forceful — I said — and by the — he said he — he gets it. Culturally, there are different norms that each country and they — their leaders — are expected to follow.
But my point was that when I came back from meeting with him and traveling 17,000 miles with him when I was vice president and he was the vice president — that’s how I got to know him so well, at the request of President Hu — not a joke — his predecessor, President Hu — and President Obama wanted us to get to know one another because he was going to be the president.
And I came back and said they’re going to end their One China — their one child policy, because they’re so xenophobic, they won’t let anybody else in, and more people are retired than working. How can they sustain economic growth when more people are retired?
MR. COOPER: When you talk to him, though, about human rights abuses, is that just — is that as far as it goes in terms of the U.S.? Or is there any actual repercussions for China?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, there will be repercussions for China, and he knows that. What I’m doing is making clear that we, in fact, are going to continue to reassert our role as spokespersons for human rights at the U.N. and other — other agencies that have an impact on their attitude.
China is trying very hard to become the world leader and to get that moniker. And to be able to do that, they have to gain the confidence of other countries. And as long as they’re engaged in activity that is contrary to basic human rights, it’s going to be hard for them to do that.
But it’s much more complicated than that. I’m — I shouldn’t have tried to talk China policy in 10 minutes on television here.
就這篇逐字稿內容來看，
確實有語意模糊之處，
拜登年紀大了，話講一講會離題，
白宮之後應該會進一步「釐清」、「微調」或「收爛攤」吧。
不過，
拜登還是有三個比較明確的論點：
第一，
他想對習近平表達，
他能從中國歷史去理解習為什麼會這麼堅持統一的、嚴控的中國，
每個國家及其領導人都有自己的文化約束要去遵守。
第二，
但拜登也同樣表達，
美國總統也有美國自己的文化約束要去遵守，
美國必須大聲為人權發言，
這是美國之所以為美國，
（We must speak up for human rights. It’s who we are.）
所以美國還是會繼續扮演人權代言人，
（we, in fact, are going to continue to reassert our role as spokespersons for human rights）
透過聯合國等機構去影響中國的態度。
第三，
拜登也試圖從國際政治的現實面來說服習近平：
中國很想成為世界領導人，
但中國必須先得到其他國家信任，
而如果中國做了違反基本人權的事，
這一點就很難辦到了。
所以，
從這三點來看，
中間那段關於香港、維吾爾和台灣的部分，
如果拜登的意思是他不會為這三地發言，
除非他界定這三地的狀況無關人權，
否則就與他聲稱的「大聲為人權發言」、「人權代言人」相違背。
但顯然拜登界定這是人權問題，
至少主持人一開始提到維吾爾問題，
拜登馬上就表明 We must speak up for human rights. It’s who we are.
內文搜尋
從 APP 打開
X