外交文书

基辛格漫漫外交路上不乏一些小幽默。以下节选是他的回忆录最后一本Years of renewal里的。

福特看起来说话不像其他总统那样文邹邹,不太喜欢花哨文字。不过外交官发给总统这样的大白话外交记要,也是外交史上的笑谈。

By the time we reached Liberia, our nerves were rather frayed from the battering in Congress and the media. We were exhausted after a week of nonstop conferences. In this atmosphere, a cable from Scowcroft suggesting that we make our daily reports to the President more factual and less “florid” fed the mounting paranoia, especially that of Winston Lord, the principal drafter of the offending reports. Lord retaliated by adding an abbreviated summary to his typically voluminous and eloquent submission. I sent both to Scowcroft, suggesting that he pass on to the President whichever he felt best met his literary standards. The summary began with the sentence: “Today we are in Liberia. It is hot.” It went on to report the meeting with President William Tolbert, Jr., in the following sarcastic fashion:

He said Liberia would like more money. I said we would see what we can do, but he had to understand that OMB [Office of Management and Budget] had the final word and that we intended to lose the world in a fully coordinated way.

Reacting to Scowcroft’s stricture that we spare the President our descriptions of local color, Lord reported thus on a cultural event held in our honor:

Next we went to see a cultural performance. It was interesting; since this is a poor country, some of the girls only had half a costume, but I don’t want to bore you with color or tell you which half was missing since this would needlessly excite you.

Fortunately, Scowcroft, who had been right in the first place, has a good sense of humor and spiked the abbreviated version. 

发表在 历史, 图书 | 留下评论

基辛格Years of renewal最后一章

花了一个月零八天,终于在作者辞世之前,看完了基辛格最后一本回忆录Years of Renewal。他在回忆录里谈到国会、参议院时很少有正面言辞,里面充斥着党派政治、各种委员会,动不动就来一个法案,绑住作为行政者的政府的手脚,而且建制的各领袖言论也经常跟其在政府工作时大相径庭,基辛格非常反感,但其实这正是民主的精髓。民主不是为了效率而建立的,某种意义上说,这种体制目的是为了降低效率,让一个国家能更充分地考虑各方面的利益和角度,防止出现一言堂、大的失误。

最后一章中,基辛格对自己8年的政府生涯做了很好的总结,给福特做出了非常正面的评价,说虽然拙于言辞,但看的清大方向,明白轻重缓急,以国家利益而不以个人利益为重,而且有担当,不拿属下当替罪羊,领导力让人钦佩。他关于领导力的论述如下:

Ford achieved all this without histrionics and visible emotional strain largely because he was so unlike the political leaders now brought into prominence by our normal electoral processes. In perhaps no other period has the importance of leadership been more insistently proclaimed. Yet very rarely has it been so difficult to match aspiration with performance. The ultimate task of a leader is to take his society from where it is to where it has never been. But this requires a willingness to travel on the difficult road between a nation’s experience and its destiny. He is bound to be alone at least part of the way until his society’s experience catches up with its possibilities. A leader who travels too much of that journey entirely on his own loses touch with his people and the capacity to shape events—as happened to Woodrow Wilson. A leader unwilling to risk solitary acts will doom himself and his society to stagnation—witness the democratic leaders of Europe between the two world wars. This is why courage is probably the most important single attribute of a successful leader.

他这里说勇是领导人最重要的素质;根据上下文来看,应该还包括视野(站的高看的远);跟民众保持距离,能承受孤独但又不能太远离群众。

美国第56任国务卿也为自己的外交政策方向进行了极为精彩的辩护,间接驳斥了对自己的马基雅维利式政治指责。他可能被批评黑心政客,没有道德感,只是一味地进行实力计算(库尔德人、台湾恐怕不能同意更多),搞幕后交易。在他看来,宣扬美国价值观、传播美国的社会制度是道,维护美国短期的国家利益、维持国际政治均衡是术,两者要综合考虑,不能只顾一头。他认为,民主诞生是几百年的过程,不是一蹴而就的;首先基督教的土壤实现政教分离,让政府知道它是有局限的(“上帝的归上帝,凯撒的归凯撒”);之后的宗教改革让宗教内部多元化变得可能;启蒙运动导致了理性的主导;地理大发现拓展了人类智商的界限;资本主义带来了个人创业精神及极大拓展了中产阶级。伊斯兰和汉文化思想圈是没有这些基础的。伊斯兰政教分离是难以想象的事,古兰经恨不得取代任何宪法;受孔子影响的汉文化,除了主流政府外,没有任何宗教、社会组织被容许挑战政府的权威。

这一段原文如下,基辛格清晰的思路、优雅的文笔可见一斑:

In the West, democracy did not result from a single decision but rather from an evolution extending over centuries. The unique features of the Western pluralistic evolution began with the Catholic Church, which, while hardly democratic in its internal organization, did create the basis for it by insisting on its own distinct governance and by defining the moral order as having a claim superior to that of the state.

This separation of authority between God and Caesar amounted to the first step toward political pluralism and the limitation of state power. Centuries later, pluralism became institutionalized when the Reformation broke up the Universal Church by emphasizing the role of the individual conscience. These trends were accelerated by the Enlightenment, which stressed the dominance of reason; by the Age of Discovery, which stretched intellectual horizons; and by capitalism, which rewarded individual autonomy and initiative and enlarged the middle class.

No other culture has produced a similar evolution. In Islamic societies, the separation of mosque and state is complicated because, for the true believers, the words of the Koran must permeate every aspect even of secular life. Inevitably secularization leads to tensions with religion. In most Confucian societies, neither religion nor nongovernmental groups have had the organization, the autonomy, or the doctrine to encourage the emergence of an alternative center of political authority.

本书出版于1997年,他这个观点对吗?穆斯林我不熟。日本、韩国、台湾已经走在前头了? 

下载在这里

发表在 历史, 回忆, 图书 | 留下评论

我为什么说苹果在走下坡路

个人感觉苹果越来越商业化,失去了创新的灵魂,被敲骨吸髓、追求利润的华尔街完全了主导。

  • 发布的新品如手机、笔记本不再让人期待,纯粹是参数的升级。
  • 软件升级有为换硬件服务的嫌疑,丝毫没有大的让人惊喜的革新,升级到最新iOS后,手机系统占的空间越来越大,接近40G;
  • 手机不时跳出来提示输入icloud帐号和密码的提示框,以前从来没有,好烦;
  • 而且现在提示备份空间不够越来越频繁,有点逼迫开通iCloud空间服务的意味;
  • 手机连上Wifi好像时间也很长,以前从来没有这样的低级问题;
  • MacOS升级到最新系统后,合上笔记本仍在不停耗电,感觉电池比以前不耐用很多。 

这个清单貌似越来越长。照此下去,苹果公司还能活几年?

发表在 异想 | 留下评论

推荐两部国产纪录片

最近看了两部国产纪录片,感觉不错,推荐一下。

一部是《大三儿》,年前看的,讲的是一个残疾矮子,生活非常不容易,但坚持梦想,去西藏旅游的故事。片中他朋友讲到他的优点时让人难以忘怀,另外,主人公的一些认识也非常深刻。吃过生活苦头的人,对生活的认识往往不会肤浅。

另外一部是《四个春天》,昨天看的,讲的是导演自己家里的日常琐事、酸甜苦辣。有温馨,有父母无边无沿的爱,有悲伤。剪辑的非常好。

这两部片子,没有宏伟的视野,没有轰轰烈烈的故事,没有惊心动魄的特效,讲的都是我们这个社会很普通甚至卑微的人。如果说《大三儿》发人深省,让人体会到最卑微的生命也值得尊重的话,《四个春天》则让人感触到普通中国人家庭的力量。同时,这两部纪录片可以让我们看到,国产纪录片开始更多地关注普通个人生活,视角更加人文,不一定要跪舔市场,也许商业上不那么成功,但肯定更加打动人,而不是看完热闹完就忘了,从这点上来说,是一个可喜的方向。 

发表在 电影 | 留下评论

中美关系走向的战略思考

《注定一战:中美能避免修昔底德陷阱吗?》(Destined for war: can America and China escape Thucydides’ trap?),(美)Graham Allison著,陈定定、傅强译,上海人民出版社2019年1月版,380页。

本书作者是美国哈佛大学肯尼迪学院创始院长,和我同为哈佛校友(我脸皮是不是很厚!),所以书中多处引用哈佛名人的话(基辛格、汤因比、亨廷顿、费正清、尼尔 弗格森、保罗 肯尼迪、刘鹤等等)。也曾官至美国助理国防部长,并是历任美国国防部长的顾问,因此接近美国权力中心。

这本书分为4部分11章,核心主题是,历史上崛起的国家对现有的大国构成威胁,逐步强大的老二想要提出自己的游戏规则、有自己的发言权,现有的老大不允许,四分之三的案例中发生了战争,中美能避免这个宿命吗?首先回顾了中国的崛起与强大;其次解释了修昔底德陷阱典故的来源,并回顾了过去500年间的案例(作者的分析,二战中日本偷袭珍珠港,也是石油禁运后,一种崛起的力量对当时的老大的愤恨;这一点我以前没想到);第5章很有意思,揭露美国自己发家的底,还不是一次次通过侵略、占地,言下之意是如果中国学美国、走它的老路,当然要称霸亚洲;接着结合李光耀等人对中国领导人的观察,仔细分析了中国文化历史与中国崛起之后的可能走向,重拾亨廷顿的言论,指出中美冲突的最根本根源将是两国文明的冲突;然后回顾了新中国成立后发生的几次对外战争,对中美交战的可能性做了一个比较全面的分析,甚至对开战的导火索做了几个沙盘推演(南海、台湾、日本、朝鲜、网络战、贸易战。。。),最后给出了作者自己的和平锦囊:他给的药方是,1. 找个说话双方都尊重的老大(这个不适用中美了);2. 学二战后的德国,放弃发展军事(这个也不适用于中国)3. 美国后退(这个恐怕美国人不大会做);4、学苏联冷战(最后苏联被拖垮了,中国不会走这条路)、5. 多做生意(美国其实不再想帮中国了,哪怕冒着自己经济受损的影响)6. 两国多关注自己国内的事(的确,战争很多时候是转移内部矛盾的方法);美国要搞清楚自己究竟核心目标和利益是什么;中国尽量低调一些。附录详细回顾了历史上16个修昔底德陷阱的大国交战案例。

几个月前问一个已退休的军队高干,中美有没有可能打起来,他说大打可能性不大,小摩擦肯定会有。

我自己的看法是,美国很有可能把中国当成第二个苏联遏制,几十年冷战打下来,中国的发展要滞后很多了。怕的是擦枪走火,或有第三者恶意挑拨离间。中美两国的利益可以不同,但保持沟通,对彼此诉求高度透明很重要。

本书翻译的还可以,对当下时局提出了自己的一个分析,未必应验,但毕竟是他山之石,可做参考。

书中一些有意思的段落 

发表在 图书 | 留下评论