Ambassador Zhang Ming:Digital Iron Curtain Makes No Sense in 5G Era
2019年2月26日,驻欧盟使团团长张明大使在《欧洲动态》等欧盟媒体发表署名文章《让合作成为5G时代的关键词》,中文译文如下:
最近很多欧洲朋友在讨论5G技术,特别是其安全问题,很多内容涉及对中国华为公司的质疑。华为是一家高度国际化、专业化的民营企业。近期,华为负责人已多次就有关问题表达了看法与关切。作为中国驻欧盟大使,我愿从更宏观的角度与大家分享中方的看法。
On 26 February 2019, The Euractive and some other EU watching media published an article by H.E. Ambassador Zhang Ming, Head of the Chinese Mission to the EU, entitled Digital Iron Curtain Makes No Sense in 5G Era, the full text is following:
Recently, 5G technology and its security have been on everyone's lips in Europe. Quite often, a Chinese company was mentioned. As Chinese Ambassador to the EU, I do not intend to speak for a company. I prefer to share my views from a broader perspective.
5G技术是国际社会开放合作的产物,是惠及整个世界的高科技创新成果。5G技术的全球产业链、供应链、价值链高度融合,已形成“你中有我、我中有你”的利益共同体。如果人为割裂或制造“铁幕”,受影响的不是一家或几家中国企业,恐怕还有包括欧美在内的很多国家企业及其员工的未来。这会破坏多边经济科技合作体系,破坏自由贸易与公平竞争原则,干扰正常市场秩序,最终损害的是各国消费者的利益。
5G technology is a product of global innovation and cooperation. Its industrial, supply and value chains are so widely spread and interlinked that almost everyone has a stake in it. Drawing an iron curtain would therefore have an impact on all, Chinese, Europeans, Americans, and others alike. Such an attempt would upset global economic and scientific cooperation, undermine the principles of free trade and fair competition, disrupt market order, and eventually, hurt the interests of every consumer.
5G技术将开创“万物互联”时代,与人类未来生活的方方面面息息相关,其安全性受到广泛关注很正常,没有哪一个负责任的国家会在此问题上“天真”。对于任何一家从事相关技术和设备研发的企业而言,坚持安全高标准是赢得客户信任、实现可持续发展的前提条件,没有哪一家企业愿意在此问题上自毁长城。归根到底,这是个技术问题,应根据事实做出科学的分析判断,而不是根据地缘政治考量去“扣帽子”、“打板子”,制造恐慌心理,甚至施压胁迫。
It is perfectly understandable to see unease about the potential vulnerability of 5G, as it is indeed opening a brand new horizon in our daily life. No country can afford to be naïve on this. For each and every 5G company, meeting high security standards holds the key to customer trust and sustainable development. I could not think of any company which would like to ruin itself by being slack on security issues. Whether there are security risks or not requires a well-informed and facts-based technical judgment, not politically motivated bashing or fear-mongering, still less pressuring and coercion.