Now, before I seem too eager to tear down President Nixon’s legacy, I want to be clear that he did what he believed was best for the American people at the time, and he may well have been right.
在我好像急于要破坏尼克松总统的遗产之前，我希望明确表示，他做的是他当时相信对美国人民最为有利的事情，而且他可能是对的。

He was a brilliant student of China, a fierce cold warrior, and a tremendous admirer of the Chinese people, just as I think we all are.
他是一位出色的中国研究者、强悍的冷战勇士，而且是中国人民的仰慕者——我想我们大家都是。

He deserves enormous credit for realizing that China was too important to be ignored, even when the nation was weakened because of its own self-inflicted communist brutality.
必须要充分肯定的是，他认识到中国实在太重要了，不能被忽视，即使当时的中国因为自我施加的共产暴政而处在被削弱的状态。

In 1967, in a very famous Foreign Affairs article, Nixon explained his future strategy. Here’s what he said:

He said, “Taking the long view, we simply cannot afford to leave China forever outside of the family of nations…The world cannot be safe until China changes. Thus, our aim – to the extent we can, we must influence events. Our goal should be to induce change.”
1967年，尼克松在《外交事务》杂志上发表的一篇非常著名的文章中解释了他的未来战略。这是他说的话，他说：“长远来看，我们根本无法承受永远让中国留在国际大家庭之外……除非中国改变，世界不会安全。因此，在我们对事件所能影响的范围内，我们的目标应为引导改变。”

And I think that’s the key phrase from the entire article: “to induce change.”
我认为这是整篇文章的关键词：“引导改变”。

So, with that historic trip to Beijing, President Nixon kicked off our engagement strategy. He nobly sought a freer and safer world, and he hoped that the Chinese Communist Party would return that commitment.
因此，尼克松总统历史性的北京之行，开启了我们的接触战略。他崇高地寻求一个更为自由、更为安全的世界。他希望中国共产党会对那个承诺做出回报。

As time went on, American policymakers increasingly presumed that as China became more prosperous, it would open up, it would become freer at home, and indeed present less of a threat abroad, it’d be friendlier. It all seemed, I am sure, so inevitable.
随着时间的推移，美国决策者日益假定，随着中国变得更为繁荣，它会开放，对内会变得更为自由，而且对外不那么具有威胁性，更为友好。我敢肯定，一切似乎都显得如此的势在难免。

But that age of inevitability is over. The kind of engagement we have been pursuing has not brought the kind of change inside of China that President Nixon had hoped to induce.
然而，势在难免的时代结束了。我们一直在追寻的那种接触政策没有在中国境内带来尼克松总统所希望引导的那种改变。

The truth is that our policies – and those of other free nations – resurrected China’s failing economy, only to see Beijing bite the international hands that were feeding it.
事实是，我们的政策，还有其它自由国家的政策，重振了中国失败的经济，看到的却是北京反咬喂食给它的国际之手。

We opened our arms to Chinese citizens, only to see the Chinese Communist Party exploit our free and open society. China sent propagandists into our press conferences, our research centers, our high-schools, our colleges, and even into our PTA meetings
我们向中国公民张开了双臂，换来的却是中共利用我们自由与开放的社会。中国派出宣传手进入我们的记者会、我们的研究中心、我们的高中和大学，甚至进入我们家长教师协会的会议。


We marginalized our friends in Taiwan, which later blossomed into a vigorous democracy.
我们把我们在台湾的朋友边缘化，台湾后来成长为一个生机勃勃的民主（楷模）。

We gave the Chinese Communist Party and the regime itself special economic treatment, only to see the CCP insist on silence over its human rights abuses as the price of admission for Western companies entering China.
我们给予中国共产党及其政权本身特殊的经济待遇，看到的却是中共坚持要求在其践踏人权的问题上保持沉默，把这作为允许西方公司进入中国的代价。

Ambassador O’Brien ticked off a few examples just the other day: Marriott, American Airlines, Delta, United all removed references to Taiwan from their corporate websites, so as not to anger Beijing.
就在前些天，奥布莱恩大使提出了几个例子：万豪、美国航空、达美和美联航都从它们的公司网站上删除了提到台湾的地方，以免触怒北京。

In Hollywood, not too far from here – the epicenter of American creative freedom, and self-appointed arbiters of social justice – self-censors even the most mildly unfavorable reference to China.
离此不远的好莱坞——这个美国创意自由的中心和自封的社会公正的仲裁者，对哪怕是中国稍微不利的说法都实行自我审查。

Before Next