2006年2月27日，阿扁居然“废统”，玩弄文字游戏，把国统纲领给终止了。
自然，美国国务院的每日例行记者会上，记者不会放过这个问题的，
埃雷利答问的这段，其实一直在车轱辘话来回说，他的主要内容就是2点：
1 美国的原则是3个联合公报和与台湾关系法，坚持一个中国原则，不支持台独，不允许单方面改变现状。
2 陈水扁没有废除国统纲领，而是停止运作。美国的理解是“冻结”。
记者纠缠的问题主要是：
1 中文的“终止”和“废除”没有区别，根本不是冻结
2 美国到底界定的单方面改变现状是什么意思
全文太长了，居然有5页纸那么长，下面就把原文和翻译贴出来，纯粹是个翻译练习，和大家分享一下吧，请大家多多指正。
问：我的问题是，台湾领导人陈水扁在台北宣布，决定停止国家统一委员会的运作和国家统一纲领的适用。你对他的决定有何反应？（凤凰卫视）
（注：陈水扁用的中文原文是：同意：‘国家统一委员会’终止运作，不再编列预算，原负责业务人员归建；‘国家统一纲领’终止适用，并依程序送交‘行政院’查照。）
埃雷利：嗯，如果我告诉你我们的台海关系政策没有改变，你不会觉得吃惊吧。我们的一个中国政策基于3个中美联合公报和与台湾关系法。当然，我们反对任何一方单方面改变现状，我们也不支持台湾独立。
我注意到，今天，陈总统重申他将信守2000年就职演说上的承诺，不会改变台海现状，我们仍旧希望北京能够与台湾选举产生的领导人开展对话。
关于国统会的问题，我们的理解是，陈总统没有废除它，他重申台湾承诺维持现状。我们非常重视这项承诺。我们将密切关注他的动向。
是的。
问：你认为是（听不见）还是改变现状？或者……美国对于“改变现状”的定义是什么？（新华社）
埃雷利：我想陈总统已经承诺不会改变现状，也不会违背就职演说中的承诺。我们相信，我们非常重视这些承诺，我们也将密切关注后续发展。
问：好的。美国会如何密切关注呢？美国会采取那些措施……（听不见）？（新华社）
埃雷利：嗯，我们持续强调其重要性，就像我以前在关于北京与台湾关于台海问题展开对话的评论中提到的那样。我们相信，不单方面采取行动，靠对话解决问题很重要。我们鼓励双方这么做。
问：我只想确认一下。你认为这不算改变现状？
埃雷利：你知道，我不会进一步解释我已经说过的话了。它没有被废止，只是被冻结。陈水扁本人也说他将保持现状，并且遵守就职演说中提到的承诺。这是很重要的政策陈述。
问：你也将保持现状，没错吧？
埃雷利：我们还将继续一个中国政策。
问：嗯，但是那种状态是……
问：基于三个……
埃雷利：基于3个联合公报和？
问：（私语）
埃雷利：台湾关系法
问：你认为他们将讨论什么问题？
埃雷利：解决他们之间的分歧。
问：但是你相信只有一个中国。他们之间还有什么主要分歧吗？
埃雷利：巴里，让我们……
问：好的。不过，我的意思是，这已经是陈词滥调了。
埃雷利：是的。没错，这就是为什么……
问：这是个大事件，因此我想美国国务院也许能多……
埃雷利：我想……
问：一提到中国，国务院就不说话了。
埃雷利：先生。
问：是的。陈总统在他的声明中，说的是国家统一委员会终止运作（cease to function)。你说，他用的词语“终止运作”，并不是废除这个委员会。
埃雷利：我们的理解是……
问：我确定我不能同意你的说法，因为你知道，从语言学和语义学上来看，“终止”和“废除”含义是相同的。
埃雷利：先生，我所能说的所有的内容，就是陈总统说过，他将维持现状，他不会改变现状，他将遵守就职演说中的承诺。国统会——他也提到——仍旧存在，因此我们认为他遵守了承诺。
问：嗯，他过去这么说过无数次了。他重复以前说过的话，你仍旧对他有信心吗？
埃雷利：我想我们的观点——我已经尽可能说清楚了。
问：亚当，美国是否鼓励他采取这样的行动？
埃雷利：美国已经在不同场合，多次明确告知台湾领导人，我们反对单方面的行动，我们强烈敦促他遵守在2000年就职演说中做出的承诺，不要采取任何单方面的行动。我注意到他已经说过，他的行为不是单方面改变现状。
问：你认为这次的终止是单方面行动吗？move?
埃雷利：请再说一遍？
问：他这次的行动，美国是否认为是单方面行动？
埃雷利：我想我只能说，陈总统说的话和他所做的，不是单方面行动。
问：尽管台湾和美国有过交流，陈水扁仍旧坚持他的决定。美国方面就没有采取任何措施？
埃雷利：我想我们仍旧——像我刚才说的，我们仍旧要求陈总统信守2000年就职演说中的承诺，不采取单方面的行。
问：我可以问点别的吗？
问：你是否认为这个事件现在已经告一段落？
埃雷利：对我们来说，或者说当台湾——海峡两岸解决双方分歧的时候，这个事件或者说是问题才会结束。这就是我们持续督促双方这么做的原因：对话，就像我们今天这样，解决过去的问题。
是的。
问：亚当，最初美国试图劝说陈水扁放弃废统。什么使你软化的观点，你知道，原来是劝阻他那么做，而现在是默许了，只是改变了措辞。在中文里，他的用词就是“终止”（terminate），甚至不是“停止”(cease to apply）。你知道“终止”就是终止。我不知道“终止”和“废除”有什么区别。
埃雷利：我不说中文，所以我不知道。我能告诉你的事，我们的理解，国统会没有被废除，而是被冻结，这是第一点。第二，陈总统说，这没有改变现状，而且，第二点，他也说了，不会采取单方面的行动，不会改变现状，这几点都是我们强烈支持，并且再三确认过的。
问：亚当，我们没有亲耳听到他说过他将确保自己就职演说中的承诺。你在哪里听到的？我们真的没有听说。
另一个问题，亚当。你真的认为美国的政策起作用了吗？我的意思是，你知道，当你提到废除或者终止国统会和国统纲领的时候，你看到了，也知道，这是改变，单方面现状的改变，你一周前这样说过。可是现在，你说，陈总统没有改变现状。我对此无法理解，你们的政策起作用了吗？
还有，你希望中国和陈总统对话。你这是出于什么目的，你知道中国不会这么做的。如果中国昨天不同意和他对话，你今天希望中国对话的目的是什么？
埃雷利：我不能代表中国说什么，我只能代表美国，实际上，我们已经说得很明白了，我们的一贯政策是，防止任何一方单方面改变现现状。针对这个个案，最新的个案，2000年已经承诺过，我们认为尊重承诺很重要。陈总统今天重申，我们的理解，他的行为并没有改变现状，并且它重申了2000年的承诺。
这很重要，因为——你不能——像你在问题中所建议的，如果双方不信任对方没有采取单方面的行为，你无法促使对话。因此，我们今天听到的陈水扁的公告很重要，给予这个公告，给予台湾领导人说的不改变现状，如果你超出了今天这条新闻的内容，去讨论现实问题，会有问题的。
问：再问个问题？
埃雷利：好的。
问：我们知道美国的政策没有改变，仍旧那么强硬，非常强硬，但是在这个政策中，有没有什么隐藏的含义？你知道，显然，当决策者今天进入这栋大楼的时候，这是新的一天，和昨天是不一样的。
埃雷利：是的，我同意。（笑）虽然每天都和明天不一样，我们的政策是持续性的，何时为什么我们会有这段冗长的讨论。我们对俄政策仍旧是基于……
问：“一个中国”（笑）
埃雷利：基于三个联合公报和与台湾关系法。
问：有没有变化?
埃雷利：好的，我猜……
问：我能再试着问问吗？
埃雷利：好的。
问：好的。我想知道，像你说的，美方是不是有某种谅解，允许陈总统决定停止国统会运作，而不是废除——你的原话。是不是台湾将不会挑战你在台上所讲的，尤其是，你说的，不是废除——实际上，你知道，刚才我的同行指出——中文“终止”，就是终止(terminating)的意思，和废除差不多。因此，我想知道，美国是不是和双方达成了某种谅解或者协议，用这种方式解释，说废除不是废除？
埃雷利：我，先生，我只是—
问：台湾所说的，就是废除……
埃雷利：让我——我建议你看看陈总统的公告，和他关于并未改变现状的声明。这是台湾方面的政策，是很重要的再次声明，我们当然希望他们履行承诺。
问：他会为此付出代价吗？
埃雷利：我不知道，你知道，我不知道你的话什么意思。
问：(听不见)付出代价？
埃雷利：美国正在促进台海分歧的解决，我们将继续关注。
问：我能问点别的吗？
问：中华人民共和国目前有何反应？我们知道杨洁篪先生来访。……
埃雷利：我目前没有什么可以提供的消息。
QUESTION: My question is Taiwan leader Chen Shui-bian announced in Taipei a decision to stop the operation of the National Unification Council and the application of National Unification guidelines. What's your response to his decision?
MR. ERELI: Well, it won't surprise you to learn that our policy on Cross-Strait relations has not changed. Our one China policy is based on the three communiqués and the Taiwan Relations Act. We are, of course, opposed to any unilateral change to the status quo by either side and we do not support Taiwan independence.
I would note today that President Chen reaffirmed his continuing commitment to the pledges he made in his 2000 inaugural address not to change the status of the status quo across the Straits and we continue to stress the need for Beijing to open a dialogue with the elected leadership in Taiwan.
On the question of the National Unification Council, it's our understanding that President Chen did not abolish it and he reaffirmed Taiwan's commitment to the status quo. We attach great importance to that commitment and we'll be following his follow-through carefully.
Yes.
QUESTION: Do you think (inaudible) either change to the status quo? Is it -- and what's the U.S. definition of the changes to the status quo?
MR. ERELI: I think President Chen has said that he is committed to the status quo and that he is committed to his -- the pledges in his inaugural speech. We believe that the -- we attach great importance to those commitments and we will be following events closely.
QUESTION: Okay. What steps U.S. is following closely and what steps will the U.S. take to curb -- to (inaudible)?
MR. ERELI: Well, we continue to stress the importance, as I did in my comments earlier, of dialogue between Beijing and Taiwan on Cross-Strait issues. It is important, we believe, that resolution of this issue avoid unilateral steps and focus on dialogue and that's the tact that we encourage both sides to take.
QUESTION: I just want to get this right. So, you don't consider this as a change of status quo?
MR. ERELI: You know, I'm not going to define it further than I already have. It has not been abolished; it's been frozen. He himself has said that he is committed to the status quo and that he is committed to his inaugural pledges and that is an important statement of policy.
QUESTION: And you are committed to the status quo, too, aren't you?
MR. ERELI: And we are committed to a one China policy.
QUESTION: Well, but that's pretty status --
QUESTION: Based on the three --
MR. ERELI: Based on the three communiqués –and -- class?
QUESTION: (Cross-talk)
MR. ERELI: The Taiwan Relations Act.
QUESTION: What do you think they're going to be talking about?
MR. ERELI: Resolving their differences.
QUESTION: But you believe there's only one China. Is there any other major difference?
MR. ERELI: Come on, Barry. Let's --
QUESTION: Okay, but I mean -- it's gotten to be sort of boilerplate.
MR. ERELI: Yes. Exactly. That's why --
QUESTION: And this is a big event, so I thought maybe there's something a little more that the State Department could --
MR. ERELI: I think --
QUESTION: When it comes to China, State Department gets very quiet.
MR. ERELI: Sir.
QUESTION: Yes. President Chen, of course, in his announcement, used the expression that the Unification Council ceases to function and also the guideline ceases to apply. You're saying, by using the phrase, you know, "cease to function," he's not actually abolishing the Council.
MR. ERELI: Our understanding --
QUESTION: I'm not sure I would agree with you because, you know, linguistically and semantically, "cease" is the same thing as abolishing.
MR. ERELI: Sir, all I can say is that President Chen has said he is committed to the status quo, he is not changing the status quo and he is committed to his inaugural pledges. The NUC -- he also -- the NUC exists and so we're going to hold him to those pledges.
QUESTION: Well, he has said this countless times in the past and do you still have confidence in him when he says something that he had said before, though?
MR. ERELI: I think our views -- I've stated them as clearly as I can.
QUESTION: Adam, did the United States encourage him not to take the step?
MR. ERELI: I think the United States has made it clear to the Taiwanese leadership on any number of occasions that we are opposed to unilateral moves and we urge strongly that he remain consistent with his commitments in the inaugural pledge of 2000 and that he not take any unilateral moves. I would note that he has said that this action is not a unilateral move.
QUESTION: Would you agree a cessation is a unilateral move?
MR. ERELI: Pardon?
QUESTION: Is his action, from the U.S. view, a unilateral move?
MR. ERELI: I think that I would just leave it at what President Chen said and hold him at that, which is it is not a unilateral move.
QUESTION: And in spite of all the communication between the U.S. and Taiwan, Chen stick to his decision. So is there any actions the U.S. side is going to take?
MR. ERELI: I think we will continue to -- as I said earlier, we will continue to hold President Chen by his commitments not to take unilateral moves and to remain committed to his inaugural pledges of 2000.
QUESTION: Can I ask you something else?
QUESTION: Do you consider this episode closed for now?
MR. ERELI: For us, the episode is closed or the issue is closed when Taiwan -- when parties on both sides of the Straits resolve their differences. And that's what we continue to urge both sides to do: engage in a dialogue so that issues and discussions like we're having today are a thing of the past.
Yes.
QUESTION: Adam, at first the United States actually has tried to persuade President Chen to give up his plan to abolish the Council and the guidelines. What made you soften your stand, you know, moving from urging him not to do it to actually working out the specific wording? In Chinese, it is actually "terminate." It's not even "cease to apply." You know "zhongzhi" is terminate. I don't understand the difference between termination and abolishment.
MR. ERELI: Not being a Chinese speaker, I don't know either. What I can tell you is our understanding is that the NUC has not been abolished; it has been frozen, number one. Number two, that President Chen has stated that this does not alter the status quo and; number two, he has said he is committed to not take unilateral actions which would alter the status quo, all of which are positions that we have very strongly advocated and which have been reaffirmed.
QUESTION: Adam, we didn't hear him actually reaffirm his pledges or assurance to adhere to his inaugural address commitment. Did you hear it somewhere else? Because we didn't really hear it.
One other question, Adam. Do you really think the U.S. policy is working? I mean, you know, when you say to abolish or to terminate the Council and the guidelines may seem, you know, to be steps to change -- unilaterally change the status quo, and then a week later, you know, you're saying, hey, President Chen actually is not changing the status quo. I don't understand that. You know, is your policy working?
And also, you are calling for China to talk to President Chen. What was the incentive that you think China would get out of this? If China did not agree to talk to him yesterday, what is the incentive that will make China talk to him today?
MR. ERELI: I can't speak for China. What I can speak for is the United States and the fact that we've got, I think, a very clear and consistent policy that is focused on preventing either side from taking unilateral actions that affect the status quo. In this case, in this latest case, there were pledges made in 2000 that we thought were important to respect. President Chen has reaffirmed today, our understanding, the fact that the steps that he has taken do not constitute a change in the status quo and he reaffirmed his commitment to those 2000 pledges.
That is important, because what -- you can't -- as you suggested in your question, you can't promote dialogue if there isn't the confidence between both sides that the other one isn't taking unilateral steps. So, it's very important, the public statements that we've heard from Chen today, and it's very important that based on those public statements and based on what the leadership of Taiwan has said is a commitment not to change the status quo, that you move beyond the news of the day and talk about the real issues that are causing problems.
QUESTION: One more?
MR. ERELI: One more.
QUESTION: We understand the U.S. policy remains the same and remains firm, very firm, but are there any policy implications because of this – for U.S. policy? You know, obviously, when the decision-makers in this building come to the building today, it's a different day. It's different from yesterday.
MR. ERELI: Yes, I will agree with that. (Laughter.) And that I think the focus of our policy, even though one day is different than the next, is continuity and that's why I began this long discussion by reminding you that our policy remains consistent based on --
QUESTION: "One China." (Laughter).
MR. ERELI: Based on the three communiqués and the Taiwan Relations Act.
QUESTION: Has it changed?
MR. ERELI: Okay, I guess --
QUESTION: Can I make one more try?
MR. ERELI: One more try.
QUESTION: One more try, okay. I would like to know if there's some kind of understanding that the U.S. side has been given permission to construe President Chen's decision to let the council to cease to function as not abolishing -- your word. Is there some kind of -- and Taiwan will not challenge whatever you say at this podium about, particularly, your language, not abolishing -- actually, you know, my colleague back there just pointed out the word -- the expression -- in Chinese "zhongzhi" simply means terminating, which is like abolishing. So, that's why I want to know, is there some kind of an understanding, agreement between the two sides that the U.S. can interpret this in the way as abolishing -- not abolishing?
MR. ERELI: I would -- sir, I just --
QUESTION: Whereas Taiwan is saying, you know, it's abolishing --
MR. ERELI: Let me just -- I'd refer you to President Chen's public comments and his reaffirmation that this is not a unilateral step to change the status quo and that's a statement of Taiwanese policy and that's an important reaffirmation of Taiwanese policy and we certainly look forward to them fulfilling those commitments.
QUESTION: Will he pay a price for this?
MR. ERELI: I don't -- you know, I don't know what that means.
QUESTION: (Inaudible) pay a price for this?
MR. ERELI: The United States is working to promote resolution of Cross-Strait differences and that's the objective that we're going to continue to focus on.
QUESTION: Could I turn to something else?
QUESTION: What is the PRC’s reaction so far? We know Mr. Yang Jiechi’s visit here, he raised Taiwan questions. So far, did you get other --
MR. ERELI: I've got nothing new to report for you on that.
没有评论:
发表评论