有人认为，美国在过去几十年未能改变中国，因此中美已经而且不应在同一条船上。我们都读过这样的文章，文章还出自曾深度参与制订美国对华政策的人士之手。但我认为，改变中国是一种幻觉。我不认为中美两国真的能够像有些人鼓吹的那样去改变对方。中国有自己的历史、文化、政治和经济体制。中国无论发生什么变化，都是由中国漫长的历史所决定的。任何国家都不可能真正改变中国。改变中国不应是包括美国政府在内的任何国家对华政策目标。我相信这也不是历任美国总统的对华政策目标。我和基辛格博士谈过这个问题，他告诉我改变中国从来不是当年他和尼克松总统打开中美关系大门的初衷。
Some of them believe that because the US has failed to change China over the past decades, we are no longer in the same boat, and should not be in the same boat. We've all read articles like this, written by people who actually took a large part in the formulation of the US policy towards China. But I think this is an illusion. I don't think that our two countries can really change each other as some have advocated. China has its own history, culture, and political and economic systems. Whatever has happened in China is an outcome of China's long history. I don't think that any country can really change China. And that shouldn't be the policy goal of any country, including the US. I don't think that was the goal of successive American Presidents over the past four decades. I talked with Dr. Henry Kissinger, and he said that was never his goal, or President Nixon' goal, when they started to reopen relations with China.
有人认为，中国是试图挑战国际规则的“修正主义”国家，因此中美已经而且不应在同一条船上。这种指责显然不符合事实。今年是中国改革开放40周年。明年我们将迎来中美建交40周年。回顾历史，中国加入的国际组织越来越多，签署的国际条约和公约越来越多，接受的国际规则也越来越多。有人指责中国履行入世承诺的表现。而实际上，中国为入世谈判了15年，认真学习、适应、遵守世贸组织规则，也付出了很高的代价。公平地说，中国履行入世承诺的记录是公开、透明的，忠实履行了入世承诺。
But there are people who believe that we are not in the same boat because China is a kind of "revisionist country", trying to challenge international rules. This is not based on facts either. This year marks the 40th anniversary of China's reform and opening up. Early next year will mark the 40th anniversary of diplomatic relations between China and the US. Look at the history of China over the past decades, and we can find that China has joined more and more international organizations, acceded to more and more international treaties and conventions, and accepted more and more international rules. For instance, some people are unhappy with China's performance in the WTO. Actually it took us 15 years to join the WTO. We learned about its rules, adapted to them, and abided by them. It is fair to say that China's record in the WTO is open, transparent, and faithful to our commitment to the organization.
与此同时，让我们看看美国的记录。坦率地讲，美国做了很多改变国际规则的事，这大概始于尼克松政府放弃金本位，冲击布雷顿森林体系。20多年前，美方又以“人权高于主权”为名侵犯别国主权。近来，美方相继退出气候变化巴黎协定、伊核全面协议、联合国教科文组织。一些人甚至提议美国应退出WTO。我不知道这是否会发生，美国究竟会走多远。回顾这些记录不难发现，“修正主义”这个头衔更适合美国而非中国。
有人认为，随着中国的发展，中国正试图挑战美国的国际地位和主导权，因此中美已经而且不应在同一条船上。我认为这是对中国发展意图的误解误判。中共十九大提出中国特色社会主义进入新时代。美国有人担心，中国的新时代是否意味着美国时代的终结？甚至一些非常严肃的学者也向我提出这个问题。我很尊重这些学者，其中包括哈佛大学的格雷厄姆﹒艾利森教授。我曾同他多次长谈。我认为他的书《注定一战：中美能否避免修昔底德陷阱？》很大程度上被误读了。他并非主张所谓的“修昔底德陷阱”，而是认为中美应当避免这个陷阱。
At the same time, maybe I am being very frank by saying that, if we take a look at the record of the US over these years, the US has taken a lot of initiatives to revise these rules, starting maybe with Nixon's abandonment of the gold standard, which was a shock to the Bretton Woods institutions. Then some 20 yeas ago, there was a kind of theory that a country can engage in humanitarian interventions in violation of the sovereignty of states. More recently, you see the US withdraw from the Paris Agreement, Iranian nuclear deal, and UNESCO. Some even propose that the US should withdraw from the WTO. I don't know whether this will happen and how far the US will go. If we look at all these historical records, maybe the name "revisionist country" is more suitable for the US than for China.
Some people believe that the US and China are not in the same boat and should not be in the same boat, because as China develops, it will try to challenge the position of the US and its dominance in the world. But I don't think this is a correct interpretation of China's intention. Some people are worried about what China is saying, such as China entering a new era of development. Some are scared by the term "new era". I have met with some very serious American scholars who asked me this question -- does China's new era mean the end of the American era? I have full respect to those serious scholars, including Graham Allison, with whom I had long conversations. I think his book to a large extent has been misinterpreted. He was not advocating for the so-called Thucydides Trap. He was saying that we could avoid this trap.
上一篇：驻冰岛大使金智健应约就中冰合作发表署名文章（中英对照）
下一篇：驻索马里大使覃俭在索中友协成立大会上的致辞（中英对照）
微信公众号搜索“译员”关注我们，每天为您推送翻译理论和技巧，外语学习及翻译招聘信息。