目前分類:各色評論/newspaper commentaries (347)

瀏覽方式: 標題列表 簡短摘要


 

探討蔡習會

兩岸要突破 專家:得靠密使

2017/10/29 大紀元 江禹嬋

https://www.epochtimes.com.tw/n230754/%E5%85%A9%E5%B2%B8%E8%A6%81%E7%AA%81%E7%A0%B4-%E5%B0%88%E5%AE%B6-%E5%BE%97%E9%9D%A0%E5%AF%86%E4%BD%BF.html
 

以下為2017.10.29 大紀元發表對在下有關蔡習會可能性的訪問。
題目或改為"兩岸要突破 高層管道有需要"

敬請賜教。

並請參閱:

●2017.10.12日聯合報報導 "川普請益季辛吉會後大談秘密外交"北韓軍武威脅增| 全球| 聯合新聞網

https://udn.com/news/plus/10172/2751912

美國總統川普下個月將訪問亞洲,他十日在白宮會晤美中關係重要推手、前國務卿季辛吉,利用機會向季辛吉請益。

新華澳報 2017.10.8 社論 "十九大兩岸模式,算盤能否打得響?

http://www.waou.com.mo/news_b/shownews.php?lang=cn&id=23938

林中斌 2017.10.29
 

林中斌 發表在 痞客邦 PIXNET 留言(0) 人氣()

 

王岐山十九大應會留任

聯合報, 20171013

https://udn.com/news/story/7340/2754144?from=udn-catelistnews_ch2

accessed October 13, 2017

●這篇探索王岐山十九大去留的名人堂文稿今日登出。七天前(10/6)已寄交聯合報。
●這篇王岐山十九大留任的觀點符合前日(10/11)路透社駐北京首席記者林洸
耀發表 的報導,但在下這次並未向獲獎多次的前路透社駐北京社長林洸耀
請益。
(Benjamin Kan Lim et al.,“China's Xi looks set to keep right-hand 
man on despite age” Reuters October 11, 2017 

https://www.reuters.com/…/us-china-congres…/chinas-xi-looks-
set-to-keep-right-hand-man-on-despite-age-idUSKBN1CG0JI)
●林洸耀的觀察是根據對16位不具名北京與官方有聯繫的內幕人士的訪問。
在下觀察的依據是公開資料和邏輯判斷。
●目前一般觀察家對王岐山去留看法仍然分歧。

林中斌 2017.10.13

●This monthly column of mine in the United Daily News entitled “Wang 
Qishan Will Remain in Power after the Chinese Communist Party19th 
Party Congress” is published today although my manuscript has been 
submitted since a week ago on October 6.
●My view of WQS to remain in power conforms with that of an October 11 
Reuters report by Benjamin Kan Lim et al.. However, this time I have not 
consulted with Benjamin Lim who was Reuter’s bureau chief in Beijing, 
and after having garnered several prestigious awards is the leading 
Reuters Beijing journalist.
●While Benjamin Lim’s analysis is based on interviews with 16 anonymous 
insiders with connections with Beijing leadership, mine is based on open 
sources and logic.
●Currently, observers of Beijing politics remain severely divided on whether 
WQS will or will not stay in power after next week.

Chong-Pin Lin October 13, 2017


王岐山十九大應會留任
林中斌
名人堂稿件
日期:20171006 本文字數1099 目標字數:1100


中共十九大將於十月十八日召開。各界關心的頭條是:習近平最依重的王岐山是否留任?日本和香港媒體說「不」,而英國媒體說「會」。北京雖然封鎖消息,但謠言滿天飛,令觀察家眼花撩亂,莫衷一是。
一年前,習近平大權在握但尚非全握。目前,他已徹底翻修了解放軍組織和人事,更接近大權全握。十九大王岐山去留,全看習近平。其他因素,如民意、官意、「派系平衡」皆非關鍵。但習面臨兩大考量,性質卻相反:
●不留王:在海外爆料王岐山貪腐,企圖令他失勢的富商郭文貴於是得逞。對北京來說,內外的後患無窮。國際上,支持保護郭文貴的西方政府於是找到北京的軟肋,以後會如法炮製。郭文貴二、郭文貴三…將陸續出現,隨時影響北京政局。國內,上千上萬受王岐山打貪而被懲的黨軍官員,將振振有辭的要求翻案重審,因為治罪他們的王岐山自己有罪。他們甚至可能策動遊行抗議不公。社會動盪,何日得了?
●留王:主打反貪的習近平,如何對外交代?郭文貴指控王岐山貪腐,北京至今沒有承認也沒有否認。如果郭文貴指控屬實,習近平以貪打貪,自失立場,人心不服,何以長久?
留王或不留王,都有顧忌,習如何拿捏?
在下淺見是:習會留王。並任命他主導將於一八年初成立的「國家監察委員會」(國監委)。理由如下:
●破除內外後遺症:不讓國外郭文貴倒王得逞,也不讓國內反王運動爆發。 中共黨的「中紀委」與政府的「國監委」是兩個機構但合署辦公。「國監委」與「國務院」是平級,執行「異體監督」。「國監委」領導與「國務院」總理也是平級。「國監委」領導在國外,可受總理的待遇。那是王岐山之前所任中紀委書記沒有的國際尊榮。
「國監委」為新設立的機構,其領導是否任政治局常委,無先例可循。如果十九大通過主席制,習為黨、軍、國家三合一的主席,王必為黨的副主席而無必要任政治局常委。
●十八大後收手不究:一六年六月廿二日新華社提到「一四年四月,王岐山說…在十八大以前…官員…把腐敗當成了一種正常現象…(其)行為可能是迫於壓力和環境不得已而為之,而黨的十八大以後…及時收手至少在對反腐的認識上與中央保持了一致。」
一五年一月四日「中國共產黨第十八屆中央紀律檢查委員會第五次全體會議公報」再提到「重點查處十八大後不收斂、不收手(的官員)」。換言之,王岐山家族在十八前收斂收手,就不在重點查處之列。甚至還能「坦白從寬」。
這是王岐山對國營企業揮舞紀委大刀前的伏筆。他應該在一四年四月前已和習近平交代他家族涉入國企的情況,並劃出這條時間線自保。(此項觀察及相關文獻為資深中共軍事及政治分析家亓樂義先生提供)
如此,強調打貪的習至少有個可向元老及黨內高層交代的說法。
何況,王岐山點子多、能力強,正是習近平今後五年改革不可或缺的助力。

作者為前華府喬治大學外交學院講座教授,曾任國防部副部長,甫發表新書《撥雲見日:破解台美中三方困局》

林中斌 發表在 痞客邦 PIXNET 留言(0) 人氣()

 

古典力與國力

http://news.ltn.com.tw/news/politics/paper/1139920

accessed October 3, 2017

 

自由時報(2017.10.1) 亞洲週刊 (2017.10.8號但於2017.10.2上架)幾乎同時登載要重視"古典力"的言論。兩份基本立場明顯不同的期刊呼籲相同的關切。是巧合?或突顯此議題的重要性已跨越了政治立場?

兩篇所根據的是4年前(2013)由天下雜誌出版的日本學者 齋藤孝所著"古典力"的中文譯本。

齋藤孝所著"古典力"呼應了 1998年美國歷史學者 Alf J. Mapp Jr. 所著 "Golden Ages" (黃金朝代)的主題之一。即治理國家,古典的智慧不能拋棄。

● "Golden Ages" (黃金時時代) 提到歷史三個輝煌的案例:
1. 文藝復興時代的翡冷翠/弗羅倫斯
2. 伊利沙白一世的英國
3. 開國時期的美國

這三個黃金朝代共同點是同時重視古文化和探索新領域。新事務與舊思想碰撞產生的火花創造出燦爛的成就,和強盛的國家。

十九世紀瑞士偉大的哲學家、教育家、藝術家博哈特說: "擺脫傳統的人,變得太弱太窮,而無法靠自己創造出偉大的成就。沒有過去的人只是個蠻人。" "man, divorces from tradition, is too weak and too poor a creature to create greatness out of himself..... Without his past man is a barbarian." (Jacob Christoph Burckhardt 1818-1897, Swiss philosopher)

歌德在1832年所寫的最後一封信裡說:"最好的天才 能吸收新事務,同時毫不減損他祖先傳下來的精華,反而把家傳的優點發揚光大。" "the best genius is that which absorbs the new, without this in the least impairing its inheritance, but rather enhancing it".

林中斌 2017.10,3

林中斌 發表在 痞客邦 PIXNET 留言(0) 人氣()

 

The Democrats’ Dilemma

accessed September 28, 2017

 

川普總統可能連任,如果民主黨無法自我整合。目前,民主黨是分裂的。時代雜誌2017.10.2 pp.28-33.
"
撥雲見日"出版前,我考慮再三,決定刪去"川普可能連任"的文字。

林中斌 2017.9.28

 

 

林中斌 發表在 痞客邦 PIXNET 留言(0) 人氣()

林中斌:台只論軍事將重蹈國共內戰失利覆轍

梁雅雯 中評社 2017年8月23日

http://hk.crntt.com/doc/1047/8/8/5/104788513.html?coluid=7&kindid=0&docid=104788513&mdate=0825164054

accessed August 23, 2017

 

  這篇可能是2017.8.23新書發表會最全面,較準確的報導。

林中斌 2017.8.25

 

 

中評社台北823日電(記者 梁雅雯)

國防部軍政副部長、前陸委會首席副主委林中斌23日下午在新書《撥雲見日:破解台美中三方困局》發表會上表示,大陸一向以超軍事手段和軍事手段並用,現階段對台政策就是超軍事手段,不得以才會攻打,因為買台灣比打台灣便宜。 
  林中斌強調,大陸一向以超軍事手段和軍事手段並用,國軍內戰失利部分原因就是忽略大陸超軍事手段和軍事手段合併運用,今天台灣如果再度就軍事論軍事,來處理對岸的威脅,勢必會重蹈覆轍。 
  林中斌和資深媒體人、國防部《國防報告書》諮詢委員會亓樂義合著新書《撥雲見日:破解台美中三方困局》今天發表。發表會在孫立人將軍官邸(陸軍聯誼社)舉行。 
  林中斌表示,世界局勢變化快速,美中台三方未來可望出現多贏局面,鬥而不破將成為主要國家處理矛盾的方式。大陸買台灣比打台灣便宜,不會武統台灣。 
  林中斌臚列大陸各種統戰台灣方式,主要分為文統武統兩類,在這兩類裡又各分為四策,分別是上上策心靈契合、上策不戰統台、下策點穴戰癱瘓戰,下下策是傳統戰殲滅戰 
  林中斌提到,大陸現階段使用的,就是上策不戰統台的超軍事手端,不得以才會攻打,現況處於超軍事手段階段,祭出優厚待遇吸收台灣青年,再搭配窮台政策。買臺灣比打台灣便宜。 
  林中斌表示,現在的戰爭都是小國的內戰,以及大國打小國的戰爭,大國之間的戰爭已不可能爆發,中美間不可能兵戎相見。而目前台、美、中三方可望創造多贏可能,19148月歐戰爆發的一次大戰不可能會重演有4個理由如下: 
  第一,大家都有核子武器,雙方即使擦槍走火可能升高為核武大戰,沒有贏家。第二,全球化、網路化經濟高度互相依存。第三,衝突現場視訊掌控,可隨時叫停。第四,曾出現於小國的瘋狂領袖,不可能在大國長期高居上位。 
  此外,林中斌也提到,美國總統特朗普當選的意涵,包括美國政治模範落漆、美國社會嚴重分裂、特朗普對美國盟友態度惡劣,讓他們紛紛傾向北京、美國自省再生,不再超強霸世、美國與中國在東亞合作將超過對抗、美國亂象非特朗普一人一時造成等。 
  該書提到蔡習會探索篇章中提到,日本記者觀察到習近平批台獨時,未點名蔡英文,在兩岸官方互動冷的時刻,態度耐人尋味。由2017年春向前展望,雖然表面看起來機會渺茫,但不能排除的是蔡習會苗頭已萌芽。 
  今天會中有記者追問蔡習會章節,林中斌未直接回答,僅表示,他對國內問題沒有深入研究,要大家參照書上內文。 
  林中斌,居留北美29年,未入外國籍、未加入任何政黨。曾任國防部軍政副部長、陸委會首席副主委、美國華府智庫美國企業研究院AEI)專任學者兼亞洲研究部副主任、美國華府喬治城大學外交學院講座教授、高雄中山大學政治研究所教授兼所長、淡江大學國際事務與戰略研究所教授。 

林中斌 發表在 痞客邦 PIXNET 留言(0) 人氣()

買台灣,比打台灣便宜得多

藍孝威 中國時報 2017年8月24日

http://www.chinatimes.com/newspapers/20170824000418-260108

accessed August 24, 2017

自去年520後,大陸鷹派常發出以武力統一台灣論調。不過,前國防部副部長林中斌認為,現在大陸不會發起戰爭,但會以強大軍事力量為後盾,綜合經濟、宗教、社會等各種「超軍事手段」對付台灣。

由林中斌和軍事評論員亓樂義合著的《撥雲見日:破解台美中三方困局》昨舉行新書發表會。對錯綜複雜的台、美、中三邊關係,大陸方面時而發出武統威脅聲浪,林中斌指出,大陸統一台灣的方式,戰爭是最下策,要付出的成本最大,「買台灣,比打台灣便宜得多。」

書中舉例,大陸經濟崛起後,手中能打的牌變多,「一帶一路」就是強大武器。今年514日,大陸國家主席習近平在北京舉行「一帶一路國際合作高峰論壇」開幕式上大撒銀彈,指亞投行已為「一帶一路」建設參與國的9個專案,提供17億美元貸款,「絲路基金」投資達40億美元,今後大陸還將向「絲路基金」新增資金1000億元人民幣,同時,鼓勵金融機構開展人民幣海外基金業務,規模約3000億人民幣。

林中斌說,大陸對菲律賓打的就是經濟牌。當初兩國為南海主權爭執不下,菲律賓甚至把大陸告上國際法庭,判決結果也對大陸不利,但大陸趁菲國大選,對朝野兩組候選人均承諾經濟援助,結果成功改變菲律賓對南海的強硬立場,轉而向大陸靠攏。

亓樂義認為,大陸是全球第二大經濟體,中產階級變多,「三億人信仰宗教,有錢人不想打仗」。他也斷言大陸不會發動戰爭,但小型衝突、緊張、對峙不可避免;他也提醒,結合經濟、文化、宗教等「超軍事手段」能做到「巧戰而屈人之兵」,各界須有所警惕。

 

林中斌 發表在 痞客邦 PIXNET 留言(0) 人氣()

面對共軍斬首戰 速做萬全準備

黃天麟 自由時報 2017年8月23日

http://talk.ltn.com.tw/article/paper/1129334

accessed August 23, 2017

     中國軍機繞台已成慣例,目的是實戰化演練,在朱日和的兵推亦常以台灣總統府為攻克目標。顯然共軍認為,以斬首戰二天三日解放台灣,是解決統一問題的最佳選擇。共軍的斬首戰會不會成功?很不幸,以當今情況推斷,答案是傾向肯定的。理由如下:

1. 斬首戰之籌劃、動員比較隱密,不易被衛星、美軍發覺。大規模的海上登陸作戰會給台灣迎戰的準備時間,成功的機會反不如斬首計畫。

2. 共軍在飛彈及空軍已佔優勢,可立即取得制空權,有利於空降傘兵坦克直攻總統府。

3. 中國軍最近新增兩「空降師」,強化對台斬首能力。

4. 偏偏台北留有幾處空曠平地,可供傘兵空降。關渡平原是其一,松山機場及基隆河岸空地是其二,共軍傘兵落地至總統府時間都無須半個小時。

5. 馬英九八年及老藍男執政一年半期間,面對中國統戰,連一部「反統戰法」都尚付闕如,致三中一青、一代一線、入島入戶,有如白蟻蛀空,退將爭相親中友中、村里長自我矮化自稱中華台北、一個韓國小賊竟能把台灣當成自家客廳潛入民進黨總部、一個沉迷中國的死士竟能闖進總統府揮大刀砍傷憲兵,無不透露出整個國安已發生嚴重系統性問題。台灣內部極可能在共軍入侵時土崩瓦解。

斬首計畫與台灣挑釁不挑釁扯不上關係,只要共軍準備就緒,就會隨機執行,這絕非危言聳聽,亦非杞人之憂。事關國家存亡、人民安危,我們提醒蔡政府,幾天兵推、進駐圓山指揮所是不夠的,時猶未晚,立刻著手迎戰的準備,包括:

1. 速強化台北盆地防空網,在觀音山、關渡山區、大屯山區密集佈置可移動飛彈,數目越多越好。

2. 松山機場及其狹長空地因近國防要地,易於防備,宜常駐足夠兵力。關渡平原宜即挖掘壕溝或速開發,不宜再留空地,防阻傘兵坦克降落集結。

3. 速制定有效的「反統戰法」,加強國人信心與凝聚力。

4. 至於長程的國安計畫則應包括:

a﹑發展中長程飛彈。

b﹑發展反飛彈系統。

c﹑拚經濟。保持台灣在科技產業的矽盾(Silicon shield)地位。

「有備」是最佳兵法,有備必使敵人不敢輕舉妄動。時不我與,事在人為,決心而已。

(作者為國策顧問,曾任國家安全會議諮詢委員)

林中斌 發表在 痞客邦 PIXNET 留言(0) 人氣()

兩岸關係的「潛流」

accessed Augsut 7, 2017

 

 

● 8月 兩岸關係露曙光?

      September 3, 2017

      https://udn.com/news/story/7331/2679395?from=udn-catelistnews_ch2

 

自蔡政府去年五月執政以來,陸委會與大陸國台辦八月各自有迄今最高層級的官員互訪,我官員認為兩岸關係露出一線曙光。

國台辦交流局長黃文濤八月十九日以大陸世大運代表團「團長顧問」身分來台;黨政高層透露,陸委會經濟處專門委員石美瑜在八月十四日也隨經濟部參訪團登陸,是蔡總統就任以來,陸委會登陸層級最高的官員。

據悉,自去年五二○以來,陸委會登陸層級最高的官員僅及於科長,這次石美瑜赴大陸之前,陸委會曾知會國台辦,在未被拒絕的情況下,石美瑜隨經濟部官員赴成都、廣州探訪貿協駐當地辦事處及台商,於八月十八日返台。

黨政高層表示,陸委會專門委員登陸、國台辦局長來台,儘管官員層級不是很高,但已創蔡政府執政紀錄,而且石美瑜才剛返台,黃文濤隔天就來台,時間點相當巧。

陸方對海基會人員的管制更為嚴格,海基會科長層級自去年五二○後,已無法赴大陸。

不過海基會秘書長柯承亨日前在一場陸配團體負責人座談會上表示,兩岸關係目前雖然較為低迷,但樂觀看待中共十九大後,兩岸之間應該有機會改善。

至於原本傳出今年十月在昆明舉辦的二○一七中國國際旅遊交易會,我方恐被拒於門外的消息,黨政高層表示,陸方已經回覆歡迎我方組團參加。

對於陸方今年確定不來台參加台北國際旅展,高層坦言相當扼腕,原因除了大陸海旅會「考量太多」之外,台灣觀光協會在與陸方洽商的過程中遇到困難,太慢通報陸委會,當陸委會獲知欲協處時,已經來不及了,希望大家以後「不要再悶著頭做事」。

這位高層表示,去年七月發生遼寧陸客團在高速公路火燒車的不幸事件後,陸方仍有組團參加台北國際旅展,雖然今年陸方不克參加,但歡迎明年再來,兩岸應該相向而行。

至於日前來台遭阻的陸生,近日也陸續獲大陸官方批准來台唸書,顯示此事在峰迴路轉之下出現轉機,對此,高層也樂見陸方的態度有所改變。

 

陸涉台學者悄訪台 餐敘綠智庫

      August 23, 2017

     http://www.chinatimes.com/newspapers/20170823000679-260301

 

中共今秋召開19大,兩岸關係面臨拐點,大陸除罕見邀請綠營學者赴陸交流,大陸涉台學者、北京清華大學台灣研究院副院長巫永平、副教授鄭振清本月8日也來台考察10天,期間更與主責兩岸領域的國安外圍智庫亞太和平基金會董事長許信良、副董事長陳忠信等綠營學者餐敘,顯示民共智庫在檯面下以「私交」為名的接觸並沒有太大阻礙,且都有意在19大前增進了解、降低誤判機率。

據了解,巫永平此行除與藍綠營人士接觸外,也透過關係找了一群在各領域台灣青年進行「焦點會談」,對於綠營如何經營校園與政黨的關係以及課綱問題有較高興趣。此外,也赴台南與地方人士交流,聚焦南台灣基層民眾如何看待目前兩岸發展。

據悉,巫永平與綠營人士交流時表示,民進黨對於改善兩岸關係「可作為」地方在哪?而「不可作為」之處(如去中化)能否改變。他也表示,蔡政府基於政治現實目前無法作出妥協,但大陸出於自身壓力,也更是如此。

事實上,兩岸新情勢下民共如何交流,已有一套因地制宜的做法。就對象而言,大陸涉台人士表示,大陸對於與綠營智庫學者的交流原則有清楚的底線,其一大陸不會接待以遠景與亞太基金會等任何身分的學者,但若掛職其他學術機關的研究人員,則可放行;其二,綠營色彩太過鮮明的民進黨智庫,如由蔡總統兼任董事長的新境界文教基金會、小英基金會等,已被大陸完全打入拒絕往來的黑名單。

就形式來說,另位兩岸事務人士指出,目前大陸學者或官員來台,若不按照向我方陸委會當初申請時的規畫走,對雙方來說都是困擾;但若以「私下餐敘」為由,不但陸方人員可以接受,我方陸委會或政府智庫也可藉此製造與陸學者進行私人交流的機會。亞太基金會從董事長到顧問的全體高層11日與巫永平、鄭振清餐敘,即是鮮明的例子。

據悉,當天出席者除許信良、陳忠信之外,去年傳出赴北京被技術性阻檔的亞太基金會執行長林文程、基金會首席顧問趙春山和兩岸學者張五岳也在座。

 

 滬台論壇 陸邀綠學者對話

     August 23, 2017

    http://www.chinatimes.com/newspapers/20170823000371-260108

 

由上海台灣研究所主辦的「滬台青年論壇」本月16日至19日在上海舉行,較受矚目的是此行台灣方面有多位出席學者具綠營背景,包括被外界視為親民進黨的台灣世代智庫執行長洪耀南、前遠景基金會副執行長林廷輝,以及兩岸政策協會研究員張宇韶。

去年520以來,大陸全面切斷與民進黨的官方交流與智庫1.5軌對話,但此次滬台論壇,大陸罕見邀請綠營學者登陸,透露大陸正嘗試從智庫管道著手探討與民進黨開啟對話的可行性。

主導者上海市台辦

據了解,該論壇主導者為上海市台辦,上海國際問題研究院、上海交通大學、上海公共政策研究院等涉台年輕學者也出席,主要針對中共今年19大以前兩岸情勢變化交換意見。由於綠營屬性敏感,陸方特別要求與會綠營人士回台保持低調。出席的綠營學者說,討論內容包括九二共識、川普上任後對兩岸影響等議題。

論壇出席者之一為民進黨秘書長洪耀福的胞弟洪耀南,與綠營關係密切不在話下;另以台灣國際法學會副秘書長身份出席的林廷輝,今年3月中旬已卸下國安外圍智庫遠景基金會副執行長一職,4月也曾赴南京參與涉台研討會,等於退下國安智庫職務後即密集赴陸交流。

促防兩岸網民爆衝

上海涉台人士表示,大陸學者在會議上總體仍對兩岸未來發展抱持負面態度,而台灣與會學者建議陸方不需過度悲觀,陸方應多講好話、減少負面表列用語,最重要的是防止兩岸網民爆衝的事件發生。

據了解,台灣學者主動談及四川九寨溝地震後,台灣府院黨第一時間表達關心,當時國台辦也有正面回應;但隔天,國台辦旗下「中國台灣網」卻刊出羅列13項蔡政府「去中國化」例證的文章,台學者認為「這會讓彼此心裡不是很開心」。

綠學者籲正視台灣

    與會台灣人士也向陸方涉台學者說明大陸目前作法其實是把蔡政府愈推愈遠。有學者以「一帶一路」為例,認為大陸的戰略藍圖並沒有定位台灣,「傾國家之力所擘畫的中國夢,不也應該牢牢地將台灣納入整體的大戰略中」。該綠營學者認為,大陸應該對自己有信心,正視台灣存在的優勢,「不要小家子氣」。

林中斌 發表在 痞客邦 PIXNET 留言(0) 人氣()

Chastised Greece Turns to China

International New York Times, August 28, 2017

http://iht.newspaperdirect.com/epaper/viewer.aspx

accessed August 28, 2017

 

  Some say that China’s “Belt Road Initiative is only notional”. Really?

   有人說北京的「一帶一路」只是紙上談兵。真的嗎?

 

  Beijing abhors to be perceived as a threat and has actively promoted the idea that the “Belt Road Initiative” is no more than just an “initiative” or a proposal, and definitely is not a strategy.

   北京極不願激起國際上的「中國威脅論」。北京「發改會」努力在國際上說明「一帶一路」只不過是個「倡議」,決不是個「戰略」。

 

Chong-Pin Lin Sept 4, 2017

林中斌 2017.9.4

 

        After years of struggling under austerity imposed by European partners and a chilly shoulder from the United States, Greece has embraced the advances of China, its most ardent and geopolitically ambitious suitor.

While Europe was busy squeezing Greece, the Chinese swooped in with bucket-loads of investments that have begun to pay off, not only economically but also by apparently giving China a political foothold in Greece, and by extension, in Europe.

Last summer, Greece helped stop the European Union from issuing a unified statement against Chinese aggression in the South China Sea. This June, Athens prevented the bloc from condemning China’s human rights record. Days later it opposed tougher screening of Chinese investments in Europe.

Greece’s diplomatic stance hardly went unnoticed by its European partners or by the United States, all of which had previously worried that the country’s economic vulnerability might make it a ripe target for Russia, always eager to divide the bloc.

Instead, it is the Chinese who have become an increasingly powerful foreign player in Greece after years of courtship and checkbook diplomacy.

Among those initiatives, China plans to make the Greek port of Piraeus the “dragon head” of its vast “One Belt, One Road” project, a new Silk Road into Europe.

When Germany treated Greece as the eurozone’s delinquent, China designated a recovery-hungry Greece its “most reliable friend” in Europe.

“While the Europeans are acting towards Greece like medieval leeches, the Chinese keep bringing money,” said Costas Douzinas, the head of the Greek Parliament’s foreign affairs and defense committee and a member of the governing party, Syriza.

China has already used its economic muscle to stamp a major geopolitical footprint in Africa and South America as it scours the globe for natural resources to fuel its economy. If China was initially welcomed as a deep-pocketed investor — and an alternative to the United States — it has faced growing criticism that it is less an economic partner than a 21st-century incarnation of a colonialist power.

If not looking for natural resources in Europe, China has for years invested heavily across the bloc, its largest trading partner. Yet concerns are rising that Beijing is using its economic clout for political leverage. Mr. Douzinas said China had never explicitly asked Greece for support on the human rights vote or on other sensitive issues, though he and other Greek officials acknowledge that explicit requests are not necessary.

“If you’re down, and someone slaps you, and someone else gives you an alm,” Mr. Douzinas said, “when you can do something in return, who will you help, the one who helped you or the one who slapped you?”

The Trump administration, recognizing it has a geopolitical and economic challenger, recently intervened to help lift an American deal over a Chinese competitor — and the Greeks seemed happy to play one power off the other.

European Union officials are concerned that China is buying silence on human rights issues and undermining the bloc’s ability to speak with one voice. Analysts say China targets smaller countries in need of cash, among them Spain, Portugal and others that suffered in the financial crisis. Hungary, where China is pledging to spend billions on a railway, also blocked the European Union statement on the South China Sea.

Many analysts have noted that Greece’s human rights veto came as Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras returned from a summit meeting in Beijing in May, where he signed billions of euros’ worth of new investment memorandums with Chinese companies.

Greek officials insisted that, despite all the Chinese investments, the country identified with, and was loyal to, the European Union and did not do China’s bidding. Some European officials are not so sure.

“The Greek government needs to choose where its alliances lie and realize the E.U. is not only a market, but first and foremost a community of values,” said Marietje Schaake, a prominent member of the European Parliament from the Netherlands.

Over the summer, Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany tightened rules to limit takeovers of German strategic assets, a move aimed at Chinese statebacked firms. As Ms. Merkel put it to a German newspaper after Greece’s vote blocking the condemnation of Chinese human rights violations, Europe “has to speak with China in one voice.”

She added that China’s economic might allowed it to pressure weaker European nations. “Seen from Beijing,” she added, “Europe is an Asian peninsula.”

A GATEWAY TO EUROPE

In January 2015, Greek voters shook Europe by electing the radical leftist party Syriza and its leader, Mr. Tsipras. He had campaigned to end the austerity measures of the European Union and halt privatizations like the port of Piraeus. Boisterous protesters spilled into Athens, waving Syriza flags and denouncing the European power centers, Brussels and Berlin.

But it was Beijing that became quietly nervous. China’s years of laborious and expensive spadework in Greece suddenly seemed imperiled, especially its investments in Piraeus.

Immediately after Mr. Tsipras took office, the Chinese ambassador, Zou Xiaoli, became the first foreign official to pay him a visit. Mr. Zou pressed Mr. Tsipras to honor the previous Greek government’s commitments to privatize Piraeus, according to several people with knowledge of the meeting.

Back in Beijing, Chinese officials expressed displeasure, and the state-run news media ran articles questioning Greece’s friendship with China. Less than a week later, the Chinese premier, Li Keqiang, telephoned Mr. Tsipras to make sure there were no more misunderstandings.

In response, Mr. Tsipras and his deputies announced an “upgrading of relations between Greece and China.” Within weeks, three Chinese frigates arrived in Piraeus. At a ceremony, Mr. Tsipras affirmed Greece’s intent to “serve as China’s gateway into Europe.”

Even as Berlin and Brussels grow wary of Chinese investment, Greece may not care, after suffering under German-enforced austerity attached to the international bailouts that have kept the country afloat since the 2010 debt crisis.

In 2010, as creditors demanded the gutting of pensions and sharp tax increases, the Chinese offered to buy toxic Greek government bonds. In 2013, as Greece became increasingly subject to creditor budget restrictions, the Chinese spent freely on Greek assets.

In turn, Greece has sometimes been a voice in the room at the European Union for China on sensitive issues — although government officials insist Greece remains loyal to the bloc and to NATO, and is only seeking to strike a balance in a shifting world.

As for scuttling the European Union statement on China’s human rights violations — the first time in a decade the bloc was silenced — government officials said Greece viewed the Union’s approach as “unproductive.” After the vote, China’s Foreign Ministry applauded “the relevant E.U. country for sticking to the right position.”

‘A KIND OF NEOCOLONIALISM’

Along more than 20 miles of coastline outside Athens, a forest of cranes at the Piraeus port load and unload thousands of containers from China and around the world. An ultramodern floating dock is scheduled for arrival in November from China. A planned Chinese-financed passenger hub is also in the works.

China has transformed Piraeus into the Mediterranean’s busiest port, investing nearly half a billion euros through the state-backed shipping conglomerate Cosco.

Under the One Belt, One Road project, Chinese goods would travel along a new network of railways and roads radiating up through Central European nations, with the prized destination being Germany, where China invested $12 billion last year alone.

In the middle of the port, Chinese, Greek and European Union flags flutter in front of the headquarters of Cosco, which now controls the entire waterfront through its 67 percent stake in the port.

“It’s a kind of neocolonialism without the gunboats,” Mr. Douzinas said with a chuckle.

Cosco has brought around 1,000 jobs to the area, but it has outfitted cargo docks with cranes made in China, not in Greece, and expanded the docks with building materials from China. And as Greece struggles through record joblessness, the company has used subcontractors to hire around 1,500 workers mostly on short-term contracts at wages far below what unionized Greek dockworkers are paid.

Yet Greece needs any jobs, and leaders are counting on more Chinese investment. Fosun International Holdings, a Chinese conglomerate run by Guo Guangchang, often referred to as China’s Warren Buffett, is spending billions of euros through a consortium with Greek and Arab investors to convert an abandoned airport on the seaside outside Athens into a posh playground three times the size of Monaco for moneyed tourists.

The project, Hellenikon, is part of a bigger plan to bring over 1.5 million Chinese tourists to Greece during the next five years.

Mr. Tsipras has swept aside regulatory hurdles, clearing two large refugee camps installed in the former airport and quashing attempts by members of his own party to delay construction because of concerns the project might pave over ancient archaeological sites.

“That also has been unstuck,” said Dimitri B. Papadimitriou, the Greek economy minister.

CHINA VS. AMERICA

After World War II, the benefactor showering millions on Greece was the United States, courtesy of the Marshall Plan. America’s role in Greece wasn’t always popular — especially its support for the country’s military dictatorship during the Cold War — but the United States was regarded as the gold standard for economic opportunity. Not so much anymore.

When former President Obama visited Greece last November on his final foreign trip, some Syriza officials, bitter that his administration had not intervened more forcefully during the financial crisis, mocked his speech as a funeral oration for his own legacy, worthy of Pericles.

Privately, Mr. Obama’s advisers said the trip also served to demonstrate, somewhat belatedly, American engagement in Greece in the face of Russian meddling in the region.

But it was China that was most deeply entrenched. Eliot Engel, the ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, described a “free-for-all for rogue countries” in Greece.

“We see it with Russia, and we see it with China,” he said as he attended an Independence Day party on July 4 at the United States ambassador’s residence in Athens.

Mr. Tsipras is trying to play both sides. Having traveled twice in a year to Beijing to meet the Chinese president and attend One Belt, One Road forums to draw investment, he has recently welcomed American businessmen and promoted Greece’s recovery to American lawmakers.

In May, when Fosun and two other Chinese companies bid to take over a major Greek insurer, the United States commerce secretary, Wilbur L. Ross, intervened to help push the deal into the hands of Calamos Investments, a GreekAmerican consortium whose chief executive is a backer of President Trump. The Exin Group, a Dutch partnership with Calamos, eventually won the bid.

“He sent us a letter asking us to look at Calamos,” said Mr. Papadimitriou, the economy minister. Any deal, Mr. Ross implied in the letter, “could be the beginning of more investments in Greece,” Mr. Papadimitriou recalled.

Some Greek government officials cited Fosun’s defeat as evidence that Athens was not under China’s sway.

“We are sensitive to being viewed as someone else’s colony,” said Panagiotis Kouroumblis, Greece’s maritime minister. “Nothing can move forward without the agreement of the Greek state.”

 

林中斌 發表在 痞客邦 PIXNET 留言(0) 人氣()

“Columbus Statue in New York City May Be Removed”

International New York Times, August 28, 2017

accessed August 28, 2017

 

紐約市長考慮拆除紐約市哥倫布廣場上哥倫布雕像,因為他可能是"仇恨的象徵"(國際紐約時報 2017828日,頁6)

 Facetiously speaking, Taiwan may pride itself on being ahead of the current statute-removal fashion in the U.S. not long after year 2000. Chiang Kai Shek may pride himself on leading General Robert D. Lee as the focus of such campaigns.

 林中斌 2017.8.31

林中斌 發表在 痞客邦 PIXNET 留言(0) 人氣()

「環球時報 要這樣讀」

August 28, 2017

http://www.chinatimes.com/newspapers/20170828000410-260109

accessed Augsut 28, 2017

 

"如果認為《環球時報》足以代表大陸官方,就可能對官方立場產生誤判。”

林中斌 節錄 2017.8.28

 

   《環球時報》是大陸最有影響力的報紙之一,犀利的言論不但在大陸社會產生重大的影響力,也經常在台灣輿論場上熱烈發酵。《環球時報》在民進黨執政後,開始頻頻點評台灣事,台灣一般將該報視為大陸政策風向標。

根據習近平「黨和政府主辦的媒體是黨和政府的宣傳陣地,必須姓黨」的指示,作為中共中央機關報《人民日報》旗下媒體的《環球時報》毫無疑問姓黨。2013年年初轟動一時的《南方週末》新年獻詞風波中,《環球時報》的社評不但是黨媒當時唯一的聲音,而且第二天被各大媒體統一轉載,扮演了在官方輿論場上一錘定音的角色。不過如果認為《環球時報》足以代表大陸官方,就可能對官方立場產生誤判。

用總編輯胡錫進的話來說,「《環球時報》由黨報主辦,是中國市場化程度最高,也最成功的報紙之一。」既是黨媒又是市場化媒體的複合定位決定了《環球時報》的言論必然有別於正統的官媒。時任《人民日報》副總編輯米博華在給《環球時報》社評集作序時幾乎道破了「天機」,「時報是有影響力的報紙,但不是機關報;是解讀世界和中國對外行為的媒體,但不是外交機構。它是以民間聲音反映主流意識形態的一張報紙。這樣的定位贏得了《環時》遊走於官方和民間的廣闊空間,既可以穿西裝打領帶,也可以穿短褲藍白拖;既可以很外交,也可以免去客套。嬉笑怒罵,可以是聊備參酌的意見,又未必不是政策的宣示。」

至於如何判斷該報社評和評論員文章中哪些是「聊備參酌」的民間聲音、哪些是政策宣示?似乎沒有簡單的答案。這或許是《環球時報》及其主管部門的輿論操作空間,既可以遊走於官民之間,最大程度擴大言論空間,同時也方便有關部門閃轉騰挪。也就是說,《環球時報》的言論客觀上可以產生試探輿論的功能,如操作錯誤,官方也可以不必承擔後果。

當環時發表「刺激」台灣的言論,如能對「反台獨、促統一」產生積極作用,大陸官方樂觀其成。萬一產生了副作用,有關部門也可以輕易迴旋。2014年3月太陽花學運期間,《環球時報》發表〈大陸決不能與台灣重啟服貿談判〉,強硬的立場引起台灣輿論的爭議,但國台辦發言人只輕描淡寫「大陸輿論也是多元化的」,否定了《環時》的觀點,但事後而論,《環球時報》似乎又是先見之明。

作為「多元化輿論」一分子的《環球時報》,在發出「民間聲音」時,難免會遭遇批評。去年4月很多媒體報導了大陸資深外交官吳建民抨擊《環球時報》言論極端, 「搞不清楚狀況」。更有甚者,《環時》還會跟其他黨媒「打架」。最典型就是去年1月突發的周子瑜事件,《環時》認為大陸網友討伐周子瑜是愛國主義表現,《人民日報》海外版旗下微信號「俠客島」卻對大陸民粹主義痛心疾首。一家是黨報最成功的子報,一家是黨報最活躍的新媒體,誰更權威?

台灣要理解大陸,當然應該閱讀《環球時報》,但對兩岸關係最核心問題的判斷,可能還是要關注《人民日報》說了什麼、沒說什麼,畢竟它才是大陸輿論場的定盤星。(作者為大陸自由作家、大學教授)

林中斌 發表在 痞客邦 PIXNET 留言(0) 人氣()

西方何以越反越恐

August 27, 2017

http://opinion.chinatimes.com/20170827000409-262114

accessed Augsut 27, 2017

"...西方在內部犯下第二錯誤是為提高出生率而實行的家庭補助福利政策。對西方女性無作用,但對穆斯林家庭女性(本來就難就業)充滿吸引力。結果穆斯林人口幾何級成長。英國30年穆斯林人口從8.2萬增加到250萬。..."

林中斌 節錄 2017.8.27

 

 

     近日法國、西班牙、芬蘭連續發生恐怖襲擊,令全球不由得質疑,何以強大的西方越反越恐?

「911」的發生,令西方站在道德高地,收穫世界的同情與支持。但以美國為首的西方接連犯錯,先後發動阿富汗戰爭,發動造成西方大分裂、軟硬實力嚴重受損的伊拉克戰爭。後來又沒有吸取教訓,在阿拉伯之春到來之時,竟然動武推翻了已經臣服於自己的利比亞卡扎菲政權,同時還把矛頭指向俄羅斯的盟友敘利亞阿薩德政權。

西方的錯誤導致相關國家無政府狀態,為極端恐怖主義如伊斯蘭國製造了崛起和興盛的土壤。

其次是西方內部類似的低級錯誤屢屢不斷。最典型的就是丹麥和法國以及蔓延至整個西方的漫畫事件。雖然西方辯護是新聞自由,但後果卻是冒犯了整個伊斯蘭社會,把大量溫和派穆斯林推向極端勢力一邊,變成他們的同情者、支持者甚至是參與者。尤其是當溫和派穆斯林組織寄望通過法律,在這個法治國家找一個說法時,卻一再敗訴。從而給激進派以口實和機會。

西方在內部犯下的第二個嚴重錯誤是為了提高出生率而實行的家庭補助福利政策。這些政策對本土法國人並無多大作用。因為這些福利遠遠比不上一個女性就業所帶給家庭的收入,更重要的是強調個人主義的西方,民眾的理念發生了變化。但意外的是,這些政策對那些女性很難就業、家庭穩定、喜歡生育的穆斯林家庭充滿吸引力。結果多生育竟然成為養家餬口的生存方式之一。可以說穆斯林每一代都將是幾何級增長。其後果則是迅速改變了西方的人口結構。比如英國30年間穆斯林人口從8.2萬增加到250萬。今天的馬賽已經基本伊斯蘭化了,幾乎看不到法國文化的痕跡。

西方在內部犯的第三個錯誤是文化多元主義。過去美國以民族的大融爐自豪,現在也搞起了文化多元主義,並成為新的政治正確。在美國南部許多城市,無人說英語,生活方式完全非美國化。英國也曾嘗試過文化多元主義,但卡梅倫當首相時,就不得不公開承認文化多元主義失敗了。文化多元主義不但不能解決不同種族和文化之間的衝突與對立,實現多民族的融合,相反更強化了各自的民族和文化認同。這就是為什麼,一些恐怖分子就是出生在西方,在西方成長。

最為重要的一個原因在伊斯蘭社會至今沒有找到一個成功的發展模式。除了中東石油國家外,普遍貧困。這成為極端勢力滋生和發展最重要土壤。如果以西方為參照,究其原因應該是沒有進行宗教改革,實現政教分離,以適應現代化的需要。因此即使這些穆斯林進入到西方,也鮮有經濟成功者。

今天的西方,對外客觀上為極端恐怖主義提供了發展條件和空間,對內用自己的國民財富培養壯大一個對自己文明和價值觀都不認同的文明。同時伊斯蘭文明仍然處於探索實現現代化的困境中。在這種情況下,西方如何打得贏反恐戰爭呢?(作者為旅法學者、復旦中國研究院研究員)

林中斌 發表在 痞客邦 PIXNET 留言(0) 人氣()

「世界冠軍國歌!?」

August 27, 2017

http://news.ltn.com.tw/news/culture/paper/1130318

accessed Augsut 27, 2017

 

1936年柏林奧運也有音樂競技,其中有作曲比賽。台灣人江文也代表日本出賽,得管弦樂組獎牌。

柏林奧會另加"世界國歌評比"。孫文訓詞、程懋筠作曲的 《中華民國國歌》得到最佳國歌獎。

林中斌節錄 2017.8.27

台灣參加奧運,不能用自己的國名,得金牌亦不能升自己的國旗、唱自己的國歌,都是台灣人心中的痛。如果有人告訴你,中華民國國歌曾經在奧運賽會上,拿過世界國歌競賽冠軍?你相信嗎?

時光得回溯到一九三六年柏林奧運。熱愛華格納歌劇的希特勒掌權後,不但興建超大體育場,更舉辦首次聖火接力,銅鑄巨鐘及七十米高的鐘塔,每天以廿八種語言進行全世界賽事的實況廣播轉播,如此用心良苦,仍被譏諷為納粹奧運。

古希臘的奧林匹克純粹是「體育競技」,一九一二年斯德哥爾摩奧運首度納入「藝術競技」。柏林奧運則將藝術競技分成「建築」、「繪畫」、「雕刻」、「文學」、「音樂」五大類。音樂類分獨唱或獨奏、室內樂與管弦樂三組作曲比賽,台灣人江文也代表日本出賽,得到管弦樂組獎牌。

此外,柏林奧運另加了「世界國歌評比」活動,孫文訓詞、程懋筠作曲的《中華民國國歌》得到「最佳國歌」獎。網路上盛傳這個獎與蔣緯國赴德國進修,三次晉見希特勒有關,但他是一九三六年冬天初抵德國,國歌得冠軍是那年夏天。

柏林奧運曾有「中華民國國旗」進場飄揚。不過中華民國當時派出六十九人參加七項體育競賽,只有撐竿跳一人進入決賽,卻無人參加藝文競賽。「冠軍國歌」的競比細節究竟如何?尚待查訪。

網路上亦有人說該獎項係由《國旗歌》代打,恐係訛傳。因程懋筠這首曲子,早於一九二九年公告為「黨歌」,但在黨國不分的年代中,已有國歌之實,只因輿論有「勿用黨歌、應另製國歌」之議,教育部遂於一九三六年公開徵選國歌,結果戴傳賢作詞、黃自作曲之歌勝出,卻因黨之大老不捨「孫中山遺訓」,一九三七年裁定黃自之曲做不成國歌,只能當《國旗歌》了。

(台北音樂教育學會秘書長)

林中斌 發表在 痞客邦 PIXNET 留言(0) 人氣()

“Deep and Dark”

Morten Stroksnes, The Economist, August 19, 2017

accessed August 31, 2017

 

"每年全世界被鯊魚殺死的人有 10-20位。而每年人類殺死的鯊魚有73,000隻。然而我們認為鯊魚是危險的獵食動物。"

"Sharks kill just 10-20 people world-wide a year while humans kill around 73m sharks -- and yet we consider the sharks to be the dangerous predator."

"Deep and Dark" Economist August 19, 2017 p.68.

 

林中斌 摘譯 2017.8.31

Chong-Pin Lin August 31, 2017

undefined

 

林中斌 發表在 痞客邦 PIXNET 留言(0) 人氣()


無神論大國 宗教興起

2017/07/21 聯合報 名人堂 林中斌

https://udn.com/news/story/7340/2595879  

accessed July 21, 2017

林中斌 發表在 痞客邦 PIXNET 留言(0) 人氣()

 

領帶的「酒窩」

2009年到2017

2017/07/08

2009/10/30

 

林中斌 發表在 痞客邦 PIXNET 留言(0) 人氣()

唵嘛呢叭咪吽的涵義

The Meaning of Om Mani Padme Hum

April 28, 2013

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywwJr8A9IRM

accessed June 4, 2017

● 這是達賴喇嘛用英文對某信徒的回答:
唸咒很好,但光唸咒不夠。要運用我們的智力把我們從痛苦中拔而進入永恆的快樂。
“唵”唸“
A,U,M ”。組成的三個音指"身、口、意"。三者中若有不淨,就是我們痛苦的來源。(不淨應指五毒:貪、嗔、癡、驕慢、嫉妒)
“嘛呢”
(mani)是“利他”或“慈悲”。
“叭咪”(
peme padme)是“智慧”。
“吽”
(haum)是以上兩者之結合而達到淨化。

林中斌 2017.6.4

 

林中斌 發表在 痞客邦 PIXNET 留言(1) 人氣()

Why 'Dress for Success' Still Matters (Perhaps More Than Ever)

Ari Zoldan, Inc.com, May 30, 2017

https://www.inc.com/ari-zoldan/why-dress-for-success-still-matters-perhaps-more-than-ever.html

accessed June 6, 2017

● 鬆懈隨便的衣著,如果養成習慣,最後導至鬆懈隨便的言行舉止,鬆懈隨便的道德操守,和鬆懈隨便的生產力。"Continually relaxed dress ultimately leads to relaxed manners, relaxed morals and relaxed productivity."

林中斌 2017.6.6

馬習會外一章:政治衣裝
林中斌
1. 名人堂稿件
20151112文稿 本文字數: 1200 目標字數:1200

習近平的西裝「沉穩大氣,服貼不動」。
馬習會後,長久關注形象穿著的台大外文系教授張小虹在評「馬英九的西裝」文中如此描寫。引發網路上熱烈的討論。可說:無對比,不注意。並肩站,眾評議。
習近平西裝講究在那裡?中共領導人穿著如何演進?為何領導人要重視穿著?穿西裝應注意什麼?理由為何?
 
依拙見,這次會面,與馬對比,習西裝明顯的講究有三:
一、出芽。西裝袖內白襯衫袖口適度外露。二、酒窩。領帶上方近領結處凹下小坑。三、服貼。他舉手時西裝後領未翹離白襯衫後領。
改革開放之初,鄧小平接見外賓的圖象傳為全世界笑柄:除了在茶几前置放令人聯想起東亞病夫的痰盂之外,鄧穿黑皮鞋居然配如中學生般的白線襪(西方外交禮儀要求黑鞋黑襪)
 
進入廿一世紀,中共領袖正式穿著已大有改進。胡錦濤注意到袖口「出芽」。
習近平之前在東南沿海任職時,被國際媒體描寫為「鄉巴佬」
(bumpkin)。曾幾何時,由於習的好學加上夫人彭麗媛的調教,今非昔比。他與英國女王晚宴時,穿著看來單調的深藍中山裝。但中排扣遮邊有同色的渦旋花紋(paisley),左胸配有同色的「袋巾」(pocket square)。莊重而細緻,極有創意。
一位在英國攻讀國際法博士的年輕朋友,最近對我致謝。我曾教他的西裝衣著要點,派上用場了。階級意識深厚的英國教授對他穿著當面讚賞。刮目相待之餘,破格提拔,屢賜良機,如任教、出國開會等。
注意西裝衣著可以為一位留學青年打開機會之門,何況在國際上為國打拼的政治領袖?在外交戰場上,西裝就是盔甲。在心理戰場上,衣著就是軍容。豈能等閒視之?
根據許多隱藏相機的調查,同一個人,衣著隨便或用心,別人的反應可大不同。如果出世修行,另當別論。既然要入世打拼,衣著技巧不得不注意。
這套觀念已經過時了嗎?現在科技新貴的時尚不都是T恤、牛仔褲、跑鞋嗎?誠然,但是一旦他們登上國際舞台,還不都西服革履?臉書的祖克伯、微軟的蓋茲、阿里巴巴的馬雲不都是嗎?何況肩負國家命運的官員?
一九七五年,美國人
John T. Molloy 根據訪談和調查出版暢銷書Dress for Success(成功穿衣術)至今已售一百萬本。兩年後再為女士們出版Women’s Dress for Success Book。兩本書於是塑造了power dressing(強勢衣著)的觀念。基本衣著原則可參閱此二書。
衣著有品味不等於衣服昂貴。有眼光的窮學生,依然可以檢二手貨搭配出體面的衣著。權貴穿了名牌絲質西裝,但袖子有如馬褂般淹過襯衫袖口,領帶長過腰帶。他若銜命進出國際場合,別人無言中已扣他分數。在關鍵時刻,他會得不到對方來自內心尊重的助力。
翻閱民初至遷台間的歷史照片,會發現當年領袖、學者著西裝的講究。國父便是典型。可惜,數十年來,台灣與國際禮儀脫節,影響如今大多數人正式服裝的穿著。
以下為野人獻曝的數點建議,敬請卓參:
▉西裝袖口和領口的出芽。依美學對比原則,令人眼睛一亮,看來有精神。▉領帶的酒窩,有如希臘神殿石柱上的凹槽,打破圓柱的呆版。▉西裝服貼於襯衫上,呈現內外配合的一體感。▉在座談的場合,黑襪長度應上達至脛,以免露出腿肉。▉在演講或晚宴場合,配袋巾以突出形象。

請光臨部落格相簿 查看圖片
http://chongpinlin.pixnet.net/album/set/1157737

林中斌 2017.6.6

林中斌 發表在 痞客邦 PIXNET 留言(0) 人氣()

Princesses of the Blood: Sex, Royalty and War

Economist, June 3, 2017

http://www.economist.com/news/europe/21722877-european-history-answer-queens-especially-married-ones-who-gets-more-wars-kings

accessed June 3, 2017

● 歷史學家發現---從1480年到1913年歐洲國家統治者中皇后發動戰爭的次數比國王高27%

林中斌2017.6.3

  WOMEN were less likely than men to support the Vietnam war, the Gulf war, or the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. They commit far fewer murders. They are less likely to favour drone strikes. For scholars such as Steven Pinker, a psychologist, and Francis Fukuyama, a political scientist, these are grounds for thinking that a world run by women would be more peaceful.

  But European history suggests otherwise, according to a working paper by political scientists Oeindrila Dube, of the University of Chicago, and S. P. Harish, of McGill University. They studied how often European rulers went to war between 1480 and 1913. Over 193 reigns, they found that states ruled by queens were 27% more likely to wage war than those ruled by kings.

  This was not all the queens’ fault: men, seeing them as soft targets, tended to attack them. After Mary Tudor became queen of England in 1553, the Protestant reformer John Knox declared “the Monstrous Regiment of Women” unfit to rule: “nature...doth paint them forth to be weak, frail, impatient, feeble, and foolish.” Echoing that sentiment, Frederick the Great of Prussia declared: “No woman should ever be allowed to govern anything.” Within months of reaching the throne in 1740, he fell upon the newly crowned Archduchess of Austria, Maria Theresa, and seized Silesia, her empire’s richest province. Despite years of war, she never recovered it. Indeed, unmarried queens were attacked more often than any other monarchs. Think of Elizabeth I, the historical figure with whom Theresa May most identifies, fending off the Spanish Armada.

  But perceived weakness is not the whole story. Queens, the researchers found, were more likely to gain new territory. After overthrowing her husband, Catherine the Great (pictured) expanded her empire by some 200,000 square miles (518,000 sq km), which is a lot of territory, even for Russia. (She was the first, though not the last, Russian ruler to annex Crimea.) And married queens were more aggressive than single queens or kings, whether single or married.

  The authors suggest several reasons for this. First, married queens may have been able to forge more military alliances, emboldening them to pick fights. While female martial leadership remained taboo, male spouses had often served in the army before they married, and were well placed to cement military ties between their homelands and their wives’ states.

  Second, unlike most kings, queens often gave their spouses a lot of power, sometimes putting them in charge of foreign policy or the economy. Ferdinand II, who ruled Aragon and Castile with Isabella I between 1479 and 1504, led the expulsion of the Moors from Granada. During the 1740s Maria Theresa’s husband, Francis I, overhauled the Austrian economy and raised money for the armed forces while his wife ruled much of central Europe. Prince Albert was Queen Victoria’s most trusted adviser, shaping her foreign policy until his death in 1861. This division of labour, the authors suggest, freed up time for queens to pursue more aggressive policies.

  In the democratic era, too, female leaders have fought their share of wars: think of Indira Gandhi and Pakistan, Golda Meir and the Yom Kippur war, or Margaret Thatcher and the Falklands. The number of countries led by women has more than doubled since 2000, but there is plenty of room for improvement: the current level of 15 represents less than 10% of the total. A world in which more women wielded power might be more egalitarian. Whether it would be more peaceful is a different question.

林中斌 發表在 痞客邦 PIXNET 留言(0) 人氣()

What the Russian Revolution Can Teach Us About Trump: a lot more than you think

Ivan Krastev, New York Time, May 31, 2017

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/05/31/opinion/russian-revolution-1917-donald-trump.html

accessed June 5, 2017

"The point that Americans risk missing is that the current revolution in Washington cannot be simply explained by Russia's meddling. It was first and foremost homemade." Ivan Krastev, a scholar in Vienna 
● 一位維也那學者說:今日華府的川普革命,不能用俄國介入來解釋。那最主要是美國國內自己製造的。

林中斌 2017.6.5

Our reading diet these days is filled with anniversaries and scandals. This year, bookstores are being invaded by an army of new books related to the centenary of the Russian Revolution. And on the scandal front, not a day seems to pass without a new disturbing, inflammatory indignity besmirching the Trump administration.

Could the newly published books on the Bolshevik Revolution help us make sense of President Trump’s Russia-centered scandals? You might be surprised.

Many contemporary writings see the 1917 revolution as little more than a German plot. This view is particularly popular now in Russia itself, where “revolution” is considered a dirty word. People are rarely content to explain revolutions by using commonplace political logic. History’s changing events are interpreted as either something inevitable like the work of God or the intervention of a foreign power. And with Communism kaput, many of the popular histories of the Russian Revolution have now focused their attention from the rise of the masses toward espionage narratives that show how the Germans, as Winston Churchill put it, “transported Lenin in a sealed truck like a plague bacillus from Switzerland to Russia.”

Now, as many people see Mr. Trump’s election victory as little more than the effect of a Russian plot, if we understand why the Germans helped the Bolsheviks in 1917 and what happened after, we could get a better grasp on why Moscow might have been tempted to help the Trump campaign in 2016 and what we can expect next.

The 1917 analogy suggests that Russia intervened in American politics because of a Hillary Clinton they loathed rather than a Donald Trump they liked. For sure, the kaiser’s Germany had no sympathy for Vladimir Lenin’s revolutionary dreams. If the maverick Bolshevik had been German, the authorities would have tossed him in jail. But Lenin was Russian, and the German high command saw Russia’s revolution as helpful to Germany in the war. Likewise, it seems that Moscow’s main goal in 2016 was major disruption over all else. To unduly stress ideological or other links between the Kremlin and the American president would be misleading.

Russia’s history also teaches us that for a revolution-minded politician like Lenin, the real enemy is internal. In the way Germany saw the Bolsheviks as instruments for achieving German war aims, Lenin saw Germany as an instrument for achieving his revolution. Something similar is probably true for Mr. Trump. And although it’s unlikely that the president personally conspired with the Russians, he would probably not have objected to others exploiting Russia’s support to win. Mr. Trump’s only other priority aside from “America first” is “electoral victory first.”

This makes me believe that contrary to the fears of many of Mr. Trump’s critics, even if the president and his campaign knowingly or unwittingly collaborated with Moscow during the election, this in no way means the new administration will be friendly to Russia or controlled by it. Among other things, for the Russians to control Mr. Trump, the president would have to have his own degree of self-control — which he doesn’t. Paradoxically, Russia’s alleged interference in the American election in favor of Mr. Trump makes United States-Russia cooperation less likely. The White House’s fear of being perceived as soft on Moscow trumps its willingness to work with Russia. This may indeed become the hallmark of the administration’s foreign policy.

Democrats should especially learn another lesson from 1917 and give up on their impeachment dreams: Exposing Mr. Trump’s alleged Russian connection will not automatically delegitimize the president. The story of Lenin’s path to power via a sealed boxcar was well known to the Russian public — the provisional government even issued an arrest warrant for the leader of the Bolsheviks — but it was not enough to diminish him or the revolution in the eyes of his supporters. In an atmosphere of radical political polarization, leaders are trusted not for who they are but for who their enemies are. And in the eyes of many Republicans, President Trump may have the wrong character but he has the right enemies.

The story of 1917 may be instructive for President Vladimir Putin’s Kremlin as well. Germany’s strategy of helping the revolutionary forces in Russia to achieve German geopolitical goals happened to have an unhappy ending: Revolution in Russia removed the country from World War I, but it spread revolutionary fever all over Europe — and even brought civil war to Germany. Mr. Putin’s Russia faces a similar risk. A recent report by a Kremlin-friendly think tank devoted to the rise of technological populism suggests that the populist wave in vogue throughout Western democracies could soon reach Russia — and become a serious threat to the country’s political order during the next electoral cycle.

The irony of the current situation is that a century after the Bolshevik Revolution, Moscow risks repeating the same mistake Germany made in 1917: believing that revolutions can be a reliable ally in achieving geopolitical results. The point that Americans risk missing is that the current revolution in Washington cannot be simply explained by Russia’s meddling. It was first and foremost homemade.

林中斌 發表在 痞客邦 PIXNET 留言(0) 人氣()

找更多相關文章與討論