一路 BBS

 找回密码
 注册
搜索
查看: 76|回复: 1

拜登提名伯恩斯出任美驻华大使

[复制链接]
发表于 8-21-2021 11:28:36 | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式
Today's news first.

(1)
(a) 李奇, 美資深外交官獲提名出任駐華大使 分析指拜登對華政策或有變. RFA, Aug 21, 2021 (under 粤语, which is why the article is written in traditional characters, though one may switch it to simplified characters).
https://www.rfa.org/cantonese/ne ... 08212021081627.html
("白宮周五宣布,美國總統拜登已提名資深外交官伯恩斯(Nicholas Burns)出任駐華大使。分析認為,拜登政府這項決定,標誌著這個角色的轉變,過去十年,駐華大使的職位都是由前政客擔任,而非外交老手,顯示拜登政府可能希望藉著一位具備豐富經驗的職業外交官,處理目前仍處於低谷及愈來愈複雜的美、中關係。 * * * 伯恩斯精通法文,也懂阿拉伯語和希臘語,但不懂中文和普通話。 * * * 伯恩斯曾擔任拜登競選團隊的外交政策顧問,與拜登一些最獲信任的顧問,包括國務卿布林肯,曾經緊密共事多年。 * * * 前總統喬治布殊曾委任伯恩斯出任專責處理全球政治事務的副國務卿,是國務院內的第三把交椅。他於2008年離任。  65歲的伯恩斯,現時是哈佛大學甘迺迪學院外交和國際關係教授")

(b) 拜登提名伯恩斯出任美驻华大使 曾主张与盟友合作应对中国. RFA, Aug 21, 2021 (under 普通话)
https://www.rfa.org/mandarin/Xinwen/6-08212021122943.html  
("白宫同日宣布,拜登计划提名前白宫幕僚长、前芝加哥市长拉姆‧伊曼纽尔出任美国驻日本大使")

Note:
(i) There is no similar report in VOAChinese.com.
(ii) R Nicholas Burns
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._Nicholas_Burns  
(Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs (2005-2008; under Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice), US Ambassador to NATO (2001-2005); retired in 2008)
(iii) US Department has six Under Secretaries of State, top of whom is
Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Un ... r_Political_Affairs
("The Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs is a career Foreign Service officer. This makes the officeholder the highest ranking member of the United States Foreign Service. The under secretary serves as the day-to-day manager of overall regional and bilateral policy issues, and oversees the bureaus for Africa, East Asia and the Pacific, Europe and Eurasia, the Near East, South and Central Asia, the Western Hemisphere, and International Organizations. The Under Secretary is advised by Assistant Secretaries of the geographic bureaus")


回复

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 8-21-2021 11:29:07 | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 choi 于 8-21-2021 11:31 编辑

(2)
(a) Full Transcript of ABC News' George Stephanopoulos' Interview with President Joe Biden; Stephanopoulos spoke to Biden in an exclusive interview Wednesday [Aug 19]. ABC News, Aug 19, 2021.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/ ... t/story?id=79535643

consecutive paragraphs:

"STEPHANOPOULOS: You talked about our adversaries, China and Russia. You already see China telling Taiwan, 'See? You can't count on the Americans.' (LAUGH)

"BIDEN: Sh-- why wouldn't China say that? Look, George, the idea that w-- there's a fundamental difference between-- between Taiwan, South Korea, NATO. We are in a situation where they are in-- entities we've made agreements with based on not a civil war they're having on that island [Taiwan] or in South Korea, but on an agreement where they have a unity government that, in fact, is trying to keep bad guys from doin' bad things to them.

"We have made-- kept every commitment. We made a sacred commitment to Article Five that if in fact anyone were to invade or take action against our NATO allies, we would respond. Same with Japan, same with South Korea, same with-- Taiwan. It's not even comparable to talk about that.

"STEPHANOPOULOS: Yeah, but those--

"BIDEN: It's not comparable to t--

"STEPHANOPOULOS: --who say, 'Look, America cannot be trusted now, America does not keep its promises--'

"BIDEN: Who-- who's gonna say that? Look, before I made this decision, I met with all our allies, our NATO allies in Europe. They agreed. We should be getting out.

"STEPHANOPOULOS: Did they have a choice?

"BIDEN: Sure, they had a choice. Look, the one thing I promise you in private, NATO allies are not quiet. You remember from your old days. They're not gonna be quiet. And so-- and by the way, you know, what we're gonna be doing is we're gonna be putting together a group of the G-7, the folks that we work with the most-- to-- I was on the phone with-- with Angela Merkel today. I was on the phone with the British prime minister. I'm gonna be talking to Macron in France to make sure we have a coherent view of how we're gonna deal from this point on.

Note: About the question. US makes no commitment to Taiwan.


(b) Department Press Briefing – August 19, 2021. US Department of State (held by "Ned Price, Department spokesperson"/ starting at "2:13 pm EDT").
https://www.state.gov/briefings/ ... ing-august-19-2021/

Quote:

(i) "QUESTION: Ned, thank you very much. See you – nice to see you again. I come back again.

"I have a quick question on the Afghanistan and other issue too, and on the ally – our allies' concerns about the US security credibility, how do you think the Afghanistan crisis impacted the credibility of United States security commitment to its allies?

"Secondly, secondly, last time as President Biden mentioned about that the United States military would be sacrificed without the national interest, what if there is no interest in the United States and the countries that have made a security commitment with the countries such as Korea, Japan, and Taiwan? Do you have any comment on that?

"MR PRICE: Could you repeat the first part of that second question?

"QUESTION: First part of the second question?

"MR PRICE: Yes.

"QUESTION: What if there is no interest in the United States and the countries that have made a security commitment with countries such as Korea, Japan, Taiwan, such things?

"MR PRICE: Great. So let me take your first question first. It is safe to say that this administration has prioritized our system of alliances and partnerships in profound ways, and we’ve done that because we recognize them as a profound source of strength. In the context of Afghanistan – and I spoke to this a bit yesterday – it is precisely why Secretary Blinken on one of his – I believe it was his second trip overseas – went to Brussels and went to consult with NATO Allies together with Secretary of Defense Austin. It’s precisely why we returned to Brussels just a couple weeks later, because there’s always been the mantra, the NATO mantra when it comes to Afghanistan: in together, adjust together, out together. That’s always been the understanding. We have – we did all of this and have continued to do all of this in close coordination with our NATO allies. Just today, Secretary Blinken met with the G7. This was a topic of discussion at the leader’s level as well when President Biden was in Europe meeting with the G7, with the EU, with NATO as well.

"I think the other – the other point is that our strategic competitors would love nothing more than to see the United States bogged down in a conflict for another two years, four years, twenty years, a conflict that has come at tremendous opportunity cost for the United States.

"What we are doing is focusing on the threats and the opportunities that matter most to the American people, to our safety, to our security, to our prosperity. It's part of the reason why you've seen such a focus of this administration on those partners and alliances around the world but also in the Indo-Pacific. And the commitment we have made to our system of alliances in that region, the first countries that Secretary Blinken visited were the Republic of Korea and Japan. We have invested deeply in ASEAN. Ambassador Sherman was in the region recently. We have met with ASEAN as a bloc, also individually with member states.

"So what I can tell you is that this administration values our alliances and partnerships for what they are but also for what they represent. They represent a source of strength for us. As I said yesterday, they’re a source of envy for our adversaries. We recognize that. It's precisely why we've invested such in them.

(ii) "QUESTION: I want to follow up on US credibility overseas. Because of event in Afghanistan, some of your allies have been questioning whether Washington will actually come to their defense in the event of a crisis. And apparently, Chinese state media have been using this to sow doubts in the minds of Taiwanese people. I know both you and National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan have reiterated your commitment to allies, including Taiwan. But my question is: Is the U.S. prepared to go the extra mile and offer greater clarity on your commitment to Taiwan, that is, getting rid of the decades-long strategic ambiguity policy?

"And relating to that, if I may, would you consider sending a senior official to visit Taipei soon just to offer some sort of assurances to Taiwanese people? Thank you.

"MR PRICE: Well, we will continue to support a peaceful resolution of cross-strait relations consistent with the wishes and best interests of the Taiwan people. We urge Beijing, as we have before, to cease its military, diplomatic, economic pressure against Taiwan, and instead to engage in meaningful dialogue. We do have an abiding interest in peace and security across the Taiwan Strait. We consider this central to the security and stability of the broader region, of the broader Indo-Pacific. Events elsewhere in the world, whether that’s in Afghanistan or any other region, are not going to change that.

"When it comes to our engagement with the people on Taiwan, we’ve spoken to this before. We believe in deepening those connections consistent with our 'one China' policy, with the Taiwan Relations Act, with the Six Assurances and the Three Communiques. That remains our policy. And you have seen within the past couple months we issued revised contact guidance that allows us to deepen those relationships between the American people and the people on Taiwan. And that is what we will continue to do. Thank you all very much.

回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 注册

本版积分规则

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表