新闻来源：The Wire China
作者：DAVID BARBOZA/ 大卫·巴波萨
因为班农先生现在已是华盛顿中共问题的绝对权威，《连线中国》（The Wire China）就中共国问题在5月12日和5月22日对班农先生进行的专访。专访主要围绕香港，中共新冠病毒和中美关系等问题展开。本文就是根据专访编辑而成。
Steve Bannon on Hong Kong, Covid-19, and the War with China Already Underway （Part3）
史蒂夫·班农(Steve Bannon)谈香港、新冠病毒和与中共国的战争 （三）
You make it sound like the U.S. and China are on the brink of war.
We’re not on the brink of war. We are at war! This is one of the things they outlined so brilliantly in the book Unrestricted Warfare, about how to engage in modern warfare. This is a book written by two PLA colonels about the Gulf War. It was really conceived of in the mid 1990s but published in the late ‘90s. We got bootleg copies of it from the institute in the Naval War College. But now, that book, which I argue is the most serious book on strategy since Clausewitz, is telling, in that they lay out war [strategy]. There are three different types of war. They say: there’s information war, which assumes cyber; there’s economic war; and then there’s kinetic war. And their point is, “We never really want to get into a kinetic war with the West. They have obviously shown over the last couple of millennia that they’re pretty good at kinetic war. So there’s no need to do that. But we have other means to do it.” And if you look at their playbook, they’ve done it very well. And honestly, they have been engaged in a cold economic and information war with us over, I think, the last six, seven or eight years. But it’s gone hot recently.
And let me be specific. The West should have understood in the spring of 2019 that a fundamental inflection point was hit. Three things happened. Number one, they had their first big meeting of the One Belt, One Road Initiative [in Beijing], which I think only 25 or 30 nations showed up for. But Russia went; Pakistan, the nations of Persia or Iran, Pakistan, North Korea and Turkey. Those partners who are trying to consolidate the Eurasian landmass, they all showed up. And this was a telling moment. They basically went to kowtow to Xi Jinping and the One Belt, One Road program. Number two, immediately thereafter they made the most important geopolitical decision I think has been made in the 21st century, which was identified by Ian Bremmer. And that was that we are going to decouple technologically from the West. They said, “We are going to have our own standards. You know, we’re not going to build the firewall. The future Tencent, and the future [of the Chinese companies] Weibo, Alibaba, Huawei and ZTE are not going to be based upon Western technology. These are going to be based on our technology. We are basically going to break into a different camp.” And number three. On the surface, they essentially failed to take the [U.S. Trade Representative Robert] Lighthizer deal, which had they signed and executed it like it was, given its transparency and given its accountability, would have fully integrated China into the western industrial democracy system. They saw One Belt, One Road was going to drive to Made in China 2025. They felt confident enough that they could break [away] from the West and really decouple technologically. And they decided then to stop what they were doing. If they signed this deal with Trump, that it’s essentially a port treaty of the 19th century. All we’re doing is kowtowing to the West. and So to me, it was in the spring of 2019 that then they ramped up and we went to basically the start of this hot economic war. And I think now they’re full on.
让我具体说一下。在2019年的春天，西方国家应该已经明白，一个根本性的拐点已经到来。发生了三件事情。第一，他们在北京举行了 "一带一路 "第一次大型会议，我认为只有25或30个国家参加了会议。但俄罗斯去了；巴基斯坦、波斯或伊朗、朝鲜和土耳其都去了。那些试图巩固欧亚大陆的合作伙伴，他们都出现了。而这是一个很有说服力的时刻。他们基本上是去给习近平和 "一带一路 "计划磕头了。第二，紧接着，他们做出了我认为21世纪最重要的地缘政治决定，这是由伊恩-布雷默（Ian Bremmer）确定的。那就是我们要在技术上与西方国家脱钩。他们说，"我们要有自己的标准。要知道，我们不会去建防火墙。未来的腾讯，以及未来的[中共国企业]微博、阿里巴巴、华为和中兴，都不会基于西方的技术。这些都是要基于我们的技术。我们基本上是要闯入不同的阵营。" 第三点是：从表面上看，他们基本上没有接受美国贸易代表罗伯特-莱特希泽的协议。如果他们签署并执行该协议，考虑到其透明度和问责制，将使中共国完全融入西方工业民主体系。他们看到 "一带一路 "将推动 "中国制造2025"。他们感到足够的自信，认为自己可以与西方国家决裂，在技术上真正实现脱钩。而他们当时就决定停止正在做的事情。如果他们与川普签署了这个协议，那基本上就是19世纪的港口条约。我们所做的一切都是在向西方国家磕头，所以对我来说，2019年的春天，他们就开始加码了，我们基本上开始了这场火热的经济战。而我认为现在他们已经全力以赴了。
And you know, the Saudi Arabian and Russian hit, the gangster hit on the American oil industry, to me is totally related to Saudi Arabia and Russia trying to be the primary supplier of oil and gas to the rising Chinese empire. In Russia, they just launched this. They just launched this gold-backed Yuan [Renminbi], and the cryptocurrency, because they were desperate to figure out how to get off the dollar as the prime reserve currency. So whether it’s on trade, manufacturing, currency, or in capital markets, you’re seeing a hot war right now.
You think this was all part of a plan to decouple that China initiated?
Well, they didn’t announce it. This all came out later, I think in the fall of 2019. But we realize that that decision had basically been made in April or May 2019. They made a fundamental decision to go to their own standards. And this was a basic decoupling from western technology. And to them, the future is technology. They were about to set up a system that you have to choose between the standards of the West or our [Chinese] standards. And that would lead to a massive geopolitical, and geoeconomic decoupling. Remember, their central focus geopolitically is the consolidation of the Eurasian landmass. And they’re doing this with their partners: North Korea, Pakistan, Persia [Iran], Turkey and Russia. I’ve been saying this for years. I went around Europe talking about it. This is why it’s 1938 that we are inexorably being pulled in, something that could slip into a kinetic war. And unless we confront China now in the information war and the economic war, we’re going to slide into a kinetic war.
Remember, go back and listen to what I said before the pandemic. I said, “We’re in a system with negative interest rates, like during the Great Depression.” At that time, by 1938, all the macroeconomic tools available had been used. And we slipped into the second part of the Great Depression. Unemployment started going up. And I said [pre-pandemic], “Hey, if you don’t figure out a financial and fiscal way to get out of this, we’re in trouble.” What they did in the ‘40s was they hit the reset button. Up until the pandemic, we were sliding into that anyway. And now this has exacerbated it. The pandemic is clearly a world historical event. It will be remembered as a world historical event. We have no idea how this is going to play out, but it’s already triggered an economic and financial crisis that is, quite frankly, deeper than the Great Depression.
记住，回去听我在大流行病之前说过的话。我说，"我们正处在一个负利率的系统中，就像大萧条时期一样。" 当时，到1938年，所有可用的宏观经济工具都已经用上了。我们陷入了大萧条的第二部。失业率开始上升。我说，"嘿，如果你不想出一个金融和财政的办法来解决这个问题， 我们就有麻烦了。" 他们在40年代所做的是按下了重启按钮。直到大流行病发生前，我们都是如此。而现在，这种情况更加严重了。这场大流行病显然是一个世界性的历史事件。它将作为一个世界性的历史事件而被人们所铭记。我们不知道事情会如何发展，但它已经引发了一场经济和金融危机，坦率地说，它比大萧条更深远。
How did we get here? And why is China your focus?
When I took over the campaign in August of 2016, Trump was down, I don’t know 8, 10, 12 points, depending on what poll you looked at. But I told him, “Those numbers don’t matter. I said there are only two things that matter: one is right track (one-third); and wrong track (two-thirds). People admire President Obama and his wife. They like them personally. But they still think the country’s on the wrong track.” By the way, those numbers still exist today. For years, Pat Caddell [the opinion poll analyst] has been doing his analyses of American decline, a managed decline. And for the first time, a majority of Americans felt the country was in decline; and that the elites were indifferent to that. That kind of falls into the “Thucydides Trap” argument that we are the declining power and China is a rising power, and that our elites are comfortable with that. And so as I said, “Look, what the data shows you is that Americans don’t want to be in decline. In fact, they will look for any leader who will reverse this and lead them back to their former greatness. They don’t want to be in decline.” And that’s what Trump represented. That’s why he said in the State of the Union [address] that the reason he is president is because of this; he says that fairly frequently. I continue to say all the time that it wasn’t immigration, although immigration is inextricably linked with this, and quite frankly very important. It was China and trade — that evisceration of our manufacturing base, and Wall Street actually having financed that and global corporations being uncomfortable with that. This is the decline in the United States, particularly in the great industrial heartland. It’s quite frankly, a little bit of why Brexit and Trump’s victory in 2016 are inextricably linked, because you saw the same thing happen in the industrial heartland of England. It’s been gutted out.
2016年8月我接手竞选的时候，川普的支持率很低，我不知道是8、10、12个百分点，这要看你看什么民调。但我告诉他，"这些数字不重要。我说，只有两件事重要：一是正确的轨道（1/3）；二是错误的轨道（2/3）。人们钦佩奥巴马总统和他的夫人。他们个人喜欢他们。但他们仍然认为这个国家走错了轨道。" 顺便说一下，这些数字今天仍然存在。多年来，帕特-卡德尔（Pat Caddell，民意调查分析家）一直在分析美国的衰落，一个有组织的衰落。第一次，大多数美国人觉得国家在衰落；而精英们对此无动于衷。这有点落入了 "修昔底德陷阱 "的论调，即我们是衰落的大国，中共国是崛起的大国，我们的精英们对此不以为然。所以，正如我说的那样，"你看，数据告诉你的是，美国人不希望衰落。事实上，他们会寻找任何一个能扭转这种局面，带领他们回到以前的伟大的领导人。他们不希望衰落。" 而这正是川普所代表的。这就是为什么他在国情咨文演说中说，他之所以当上总统，就是因为这一点；他相当频繁地这么说。我一直都在说，这不是移民问题，尽管移民与此密不可分，而且坦率地说非常重要。是中共国和贸易----对我们的制造业基础的打击，以及实际上华尔街为其提供了资金，全球企业对此感到不舒服。这就是美国的衰落，尤其是伟大的工业中心地带的衰落。很坦率地说，这就是为什么脱欧和川普在2016年的胜利有一点千丝万缕的联系，因为你看到英国的工业中心地带也发生了同样的事情。它已经被掏空了。
This is because the Chinese Communist Party’s business model is predicated upon state-owned industries. Their biggest export is overcapacity and deflation. Remember, up until we had the pandemic we had no pricing power; you had no ability to lift prices or wages. The reason you had so much excess capacity in every major industry is because of China. And this is before China created Made in China 2025, which is the convergence of advanced chip design, artificial intelligence, robotics and maybe biotechnology. The convergence of those would make China, with Huawei as the backbone of quantum computing, basically the advanced high-value-added manufacturing centerpiece of the world, for centuries to come. And everybody else would be a tributary state. Let’s be blunt. The United States would be a tributary state economically. We’d be Jamestown to their Great Britain. We’d produce pigs and oil and gas and timber.
这是因为中共的商业模式是以国有企业为前提的。他们最大的出口就是产能过剩和通缩。记住，在我们发生大流行病之前，我们没有定价权；你没有能力抬高价格或者工资。你之所以在每个主要行业都有这么多的产能过剩，就是因为中共国的原因。而这是在中共国创造 "中国制造2025 "之前，这是先进的芯片设计、人工智能、机器人或许生物技术的融合。这些的融合，将使中共国以华为量子计算的骨干，在未来的几百年，基本上成为世界先进的高附加值制造中心。而其他人都将成为次要的国家。说白了就是。美国在经济上会是一个次要国家。我们会成为英国的詹姆斯敦（詹姆斯镇是英国在美洲建立的第一个永久性的殖民地，以当时的英国国王詹姆斯一世命名）我们将会生产猪、石油、天然气和木材。
This is the business model that the elites like. Wall Street, the capitalists, would always rather have slave labor than free labor, or labor that stands up for itself….You’ve had the slave labor of China, delivered by the Chinese Communist Party and financed by the City of London, Wall Street, and the global corporations.
This is one of the reasons the trade imbalance is so tough to close. This is the business model that the elites like. Wall Street, the capitalists, would always rather have slave labor than free labor, or labor that stands up for itself. And that’s what you’ve had. You’ve had the slave labor of China, delivered by the Chinese Communist Party and financed by the City of London, Wall Street, and the global corporations. They’ve basically made all their workers serfs, 19th century Russian serfs. And here’s the tragedy of the model, the Greek tragedy, the money that did that belongs to the workers. Remember, Wall Street is basically institutional cash. What does that mean? It’s the pension funds and the insurance money of doctors, teachers, nurses, the first responders, the labor unions; it’s money from the working class and middle class. That’s the great tragedy here and the part that’s never really explained. There’s a famous quote by Aeschylus, originally from a Libyan poem, “Once an eagle, struck by an arrow, said by my own hand, ‘I’m stricken.’ ” That’s where we are today. The United States was once an eagle, but we did this to ourselves. The Chinese Communist Party didn’t do this to us. Our elites did it. Chinese foreign policy for three or four millennia has been to get the elites of satellite nations, and basically bribe them and give them better rewards in order to make them a tributary state. That’s what is happening here.
Back in 2017, shortly after you left the White House, you visited Henry Kissinger, at his home, to talk about China. Can you say something about that meeting?
It’s quite evident and this gets back to Henry Kissinger. Let me go back in history. When I was a young naval officer, before I got off my ship and went to Georgetown and Harvard, I was taking courses at the Naval War colleges, correspondence courses, and the very first thing that you were taught was the Peloponnesian War. I said, “Gosh, I love history. I love Plutarch. I love Thucydides. And I love studying the Peloponnesian War. But why is the first thing we study the Peloponnesian War?” And they said, “Well, you have to because it’s about the declining power and the rising power.” And that was the concept of two guys, [former Dean of Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government and author, most recently, of Destined for War: Can America and China Escape Thucydides’s Trap?] Graham Allison and Henry Kissinger. Allison was the great nuclear strategist out of Harvard, and Kissinger had been National Security Advisor. And they believed in the concept that Russia had an economic model that worked. And Russia was essentially the rising power, and they were militarily stronger. They had a better command economy, and we had to have a detente and rapprochement and SALT treaties and all that, right? Well, Reagan comes in and he’s a simple guy. They do a real analysis. Andy (the late Andrew W.) Marshall at the [U.S. Defense Department’s] Net Assessment Group, and Bill Casey at the CIA, did a reassessment of the Soviet economy. And guess what? They find out that it’s only half the size that they thought it was; just kind of a big miss, right? Reagan goes, “Well, how big are they?” And they say, “It’s about the size of the California economy.” He goes, “Why, these guys are midgets. Well, I know they’ve got nuclear weapons everywhere. But they’re not really a competitor, because they’re tiny as an economy.” That was the beginning of the end of the “evil empire.” We win. They lose. And the economic war that was run against them — on the defense budget and Star Wars and the Saudis [referring to their full oil production] and all of that — led to their collapse eight years later.
这很明显又回到了亨利-基辛格身上。让我回溯一下历史。当我还是一个年轻的海军军官时，在我下船去乔治城和哈佛之前，我在海军战争学院选修课程，函授课程，而学的第一件事就是伯罗奔尼撒战争。我说，"天哪，我喜欢历史。我喜欢普鲁塔克（Plutarch）。我喜欢修昔底德。我也喜欢研究伯罗奔尼撒战争。但为什么我们首先学习的是伯罗奔尼撒战争？" 他们说："好吧，你必须要这样做，因为这关系到国力的下降和国力的上升。" 这就是两个人的概念，[哈佛大学约翰-肯尼迪政府学院前院长、最近出版的《注定一战：中美能避免修昔底德陷阱吗？》] 格雷厄姆-埃里森和亨利-基辛格。艾利森是哈佛大学的伟大的核战略家，基辛格曾是国家安全顾问。他们相信俄罗斯的经济模式是可行的。而俄罗斯基本上是崛起的大国，他们在军事上更强大。他们有一个更好的计划经济， 我们必须要有一个和解和缓和，和限制战略武器谈判（SALT）条约等等。对吗？好吧，里根来了，他是个朴实的人。他们做了一个真正的分析。安迪(已故的安德鲁・W・）马歇尔在美国国防部的净评估小组和中情局的比尔・凯西(Bill Casey) 对苏联经济进行了重新评估。你猜怎么着？他们发现，它的规模只有他们认为的一半， 只是有些错误，对吗？里根说，"嗯，他们有多大？" 他们说，"大约为加州经济的规模。" 他说："为什么，这些家伙都是侏儒。嗯，我知道他们到处都有核武器。但他们不是真正的竞争对手，因为他们的经济规模很小。" 那是 "邪恶帝国 "灭亡的开始。" 我们赢了，他们输了。而针对他们的经济战争--国防预算、星球大战和沙特人[指的是他们的全部石油生产]以及所有这些--导致了他们八年后的崩溃。
Well, that same group came up with the same phony construct that everybody bought into about the “Thucydides Trap,” where we are the declining power and China is the rising power, but in order to avoid a kinetic war, we have to gently nudge them along until they become more like us. Right! And when I met with Dr. Kissinger [in 2017], he lays it out. And I lay out my side. And he said, “Hey, I agree with your analysis. Your analysis is 100 percent correct. But your solution is 100 percent wrong.” [laughs] I said, “Well what’s your solution?” And he said, “Well, over 30 or 40 years of diplomacy we could get them to…” And I said, “Are you kidding me? We don’t have 30 or 40 years. I’m not even sure we’ve got four. Have you noticed these guys are big on dates? It’s called ‘Made in China 2025’; it’s not ‘Made in China 2055.’ And there’s no turning back.” So it’s obvious. The elites of the world have bought into this comfortable narrative. You still see it today. Richard [N.] Haass [of the Council on Foreign Relations] came out on Saturday in a full, 2,000 word analysis that was taken, I think, from his new book [The World: A Brief Introduction, Penguin Press 2020]. He walks through why we don’t want to get into a Cold War with China, and I say, “Yes, we don’t want to get into a Cold War with China, because they’re in a hot war with us right now, economically. And if we stay in a Cold War mode, we’ll lose.” He’s the president of the Council on Foreign Relations. I think he still teaches at my alma mater, Georgetown, where he’s considered one of the premier voices. And Richard Haass is a very smart guy. But this to me shows you can be too smart. And that mentality will lead to the destruction of the United States. China is in a full on economic and information war with us. And they are planning, if need be, to go full kinetic. And we do not want to get into a kinetic war in the South China Sea, around Taiwan, or around other hot spots up in the northwest, up near the Sea of Japan around Korea. We don’t want that. And to avoid that, we have to understand that they’re at war with us and we have to engage in that war today.
好吧，这群人又想出了大家都买账的 "修昔底德陷阱 "的虚伪构造，我们是衰落的大国，中共国是崛起的大国，但为了避免动力战争，我们必须轻轻地推动他们，直到他们变得更像我们。对了，而当我和基辛格博士[2017年]见面时，他就把它摆出来了。而我则提出了我的立场。他说，"嘿，我同意你的分析。你的分析是百分之百正确的。但你的解决方案是百分之百错误的。" 我说："那你有什么办法？" 他说，"那么，经过三四十年的外交努力，我们可以让他们......" 我说："你在开玩笑吗？我们没有30年、40年的时间。我甚至不确定我们有4年。你有没有注意到这些人都很讲究日期？这叫 "中国制造2025"，不是 "中国制造2055"。也没有退路了。" 所以，这一点是显而易见的。世界上的精英们已经相信了这种舒适的叙事方式。今天，你仍然可以看到这一点。理查德·哈斯（Richard [N.]Haass）[外交关系委员会的]周六发表了一篇2000字的分析文章，我想，这篇分析文章摘自他的新书[《世界：简述》，企鹅出版社2020年版]。他讲述了为什么我们不想和中共国打冷战，我说："是的，我们不想和中共国打冷战，因为他们现在正在和我们打热战，在经济上。如果我们一直处于冷战模式，我们就会输。" 他是外交关系委员会的主席。我想他还在我的母校乔治城大学任教，在那里他被认为是最重要的发言人之一。而理查德·哈斯是个很聪明的人。但我认为这说明你太聪明了。而这种心态会导致美国的毁灭。中共国正在与我们进行全面的经济和信息战争。如果有必要的话，他们正计划着全力以赴。我们不希望在南海、台湾附近或西北地区的其他热点地区、朝鲜周边的日本海附近卷入动力战。我们不希望发生这种情况。而为了避免这种情况，我们必须明白，他们正在与我们开战，我们今天必须参与到这场战争中来。
Is it true that after you entered the White House in 2017, China was one of the first areas you worked on?
Well, Mike [former National Security Advisor Michael] Flynn was the very first person that was picked on Wednesday morning. In fact, we knew that President-elect Trump, Jared [Kushner] and Mike Flynn would go to Washington the next morning and start the transition with the national security advisors. And Mike and I sat down and we talked about three things that had to happen immediately. Number one, we want to de-operationalize the NSC [National Security Council] that they [the Obama administration] had. And he was going to go and do due diligence. But we wanted to go to our [former National Security Advisor Brent] Scowcroft model. Basically, Mike [Flynn] would be the one that would drive the policy out of the White House, but essentially we would help to curate the different agency or stakeholder alternatives to form a basis for decisions, and you would run the war because President Trump, you know, made a campaign pledge to destroy ISIS. We knew that was going to be a huge deal with whoever we selected to be Secretary of Defense, which turned out to be Jim Mattis. But that was number one.
嗯，迈克[前国家安全顾问迈克尔]弗林是周三早上被选中的第一个人。事实上，我们知道当选总统川普、贾里德[库什纳]和迈克-弗林第二天早上就会去华盛顿，和国家安全顾问们一起开始过渡。迈克和我坐下来，我们谈了三件事情，必须立即发生。第一，我们想解除他们[奥巴马政府]的国家安全委员会。而他要去做尽职调查。但我们想采用前国家安全顾问布伦特·斯考克罗夫特（Brent Scowcroft）模式，基本上，迈克-弗林将是白宫的政策的推动者， 但本质上，我们将帮助策划不同的机构或利益相关者的选择，以形成决策的基础，而你将运行的战争，因为川普总统，你知道，竞选承诺摧毁ISIS。我们知道这将是一个巨大的交易，无论我们选择了谁来担任国防部长，结果是吉姆-马蒂斯（Jim Mattis）。但那是第一件事
Number two was to find out who all the Obama detailees were and basically get rid of them; and get our people in there. Mike was going to do that. Number three was to begin getting all the documentation on President Obama’s “Pivot to Asia.” It was pretty evident to me that President Obama got it; that we were too CENTCOM [United States Central Command] oriented. We were too tied into the Middle East. And although obviously that’s important, it pales in comparison [to China]. In fact, it’s just a theater of the great existential war with the Chinese Communist Party.
第二，是找出所有奥巴马政府雇员是谁，并基本上开除他们，并让我们的人在那里。迈克是要做到这一点。第三是开获得奥巴马总统的 "亚洲支点"所有的文件。这对我来说是非常明显是奥巴马总统获得了；我们太过于以美国中央司令部为导向。我们绑在中东太紧了。虽然很明显这很重要， 对比中共国，却相形见绌。事实上，它只是与中国共产党大战的一个剧院。
We had to see, why did he [President Obama] think that? And what was done? I think we had forward-deployed a marine brigade in Brisbane, Australia. And in fact, I think it was in September of 2014 or 2015, Xi [Jinping] came for a formal visit that [then Vice President] Biden had been the negotiator on, and they signed a document that was supposed to stop cyber intrusions into businesses and to stop the militarization in the South China Sea, both of which were key points. But the Chinese did it at an even more accelerated level afterwards. So we had to get all the documentation first for the “Pivot to Asia,” and to make sure that building the China team was his top priority. And General Flynn was 100 percent [in agreement] with that. He and I talked about it during the [2016 presidential] campaign. He fully agreed. And this is the beginning of the selection of superstars, like [now deputy National Security Advisor] Matt Pottinger, Michael Pillsbury [a former government official who President Trump has called an authority on China] and Peter Navarro. And others came into the administration, like General [Robert] Spalding. That all started with those early meetings with General Flynn.
我们必须看看，他[奥巴马总统]为什么会这样想？又做了什么呢？我认为我们在澳大利亚布里斯班部署了一个海军陆战旅。而事实上，我认为是在2014年或2015年9月，习近平来了一次正式访问，[时任副总统]拜登曾担任谈判代表，他们签署了一份文件，应该是为了阻止企业网络入侵和停止南海军事化，这两点都是关键点。但是中共国在之后步伐更快了。所以，我们必须先把 "支点亚洲 "的所有文件都弄好，把建设中共国团队作为重中之重。而弗林将军百分之百同意这一点。他和我在[2016年总统]竞选期间就谈过这个问题。他完全同意。而这是挑选超级明星的开始，比如[现在的副国家安全顾问]马特-博明（Matt Pottinger）、迈克尔-皮尔斯伯里（Michael Pillsbury）[川普总统称其为中国问题权威的前政府官员]和彼得-纳瓦罗（Peter Navarro）。还有其他人进入政府，比如罗伯特-斯伯丁（Robert Spalding）将军。这一切都始于与弗林将军的早期会面。
So the “Pivot to Asia” by the Obama administration was right, but they weren’t getting any traction? They weren’t doing enough?
所以奥巴马政府的 "亚洲支点 "是对的，但他们没有得到任何牵引？他们做得还不够？
Look, President Obama got it. I’m not saying he was in for the confrontation, but he understood it. And he even understood this when he was a senator. I would argue that Obama and Trump are presidents with some similarities. Obama ran as an antiwar populist. Trump ran not as an isolationist but “America First.” There’s not that much difference. President Trump is not aggressive when it comes to military power. He is not quick on the trigger. Remember that Hillary Clinton, the reason we positioned her is that she is quick on the trigger. Obama’s not like that and Trump’s not like that. Although, when Trump says, “I’m taking down ISIS,” you know ISIS is going to get taken down. But Obama understood that we’re too tied up in the Middle East, and maybe not for all the best reasons. We’ve got to really think through what we’re doing there and get the combat troops out. We saw what Obama was trying to do, to pivot. His whole concept was a “Pivot to Asia.” Now, what we found out is that in reality it became more of a marketing ploy, not a reset or a “whole-of-government” approach to confronting China as a major power.
你看，奥巴马总统得到了它。我不是说他是在对抗， 但他明白这一点。他当参议员的时候就明白这一点了。 我认为奥巴马和川普总统有一些相似之处。奥巴马是以反战民粹主义者的身份参选的。川普不是作为一个孤立主义者，而是 "美国第一"。没有那么大的区别。川普总统在军事实力方面并不激进。他不善于快速扣动扳机。记住，希拉里-克林顿，我们给她定位的原因是，她的扳机上手很快。奥巴马不是这样，川普也不是这样。虽然，当川普说 "我要打倒ISIS "时，你知道ISIS会被打倒。但奥巴马明白，我们在中东被绑得太紧了，也许不是最好的原因。我们必须真正考虑一下我们在那里做什么，并让军队离开。我们看到了奥巴马想做的事情，支点。他的整个概念是一个 "亚洲支点。" 现在，我们发现的是，实际上这更多的是成为了一种营销手段，而不是重启，也不是以 "全政府 "的方式来对抗中共国这个大国。
Remember, Trump’s first national security documents put the war on terror as a secondary thing and the great power struggle with China as a strategic competitor. That was all in the first year of the Trump administration. That was a huge fight because [H.R.] McMaster and these guys were still tied to this CENTCOM mentality. If you look at the Gulf War, even before then, everybody’s been promoted; everybody’s gotten to know each other. It’s all around CENTCOM and the Middle East. That’s why these guys all know each other. It’s a mindset. Besides the Navy and some Air Force, there’s not a deep knowledge of Asia. I mean, McMaster didn’t know anything about Asia. He didn’t understand economic war at all. They understand that we’ve got combat troops on the Korean peninsula. The Marine Corps is not that involved. Admiral Harry [B.] Harris was the guy I reached out to as the best strategist when he was at CINCPAC [United States Indo-Pacific Command]. Unlike at the end of World War II, when obviously we were a dominant power. We’ve let that atrophy. One thing for your readers that I want to press is this: Forget the sophistication of Washington, D.C., and New York City. These are very provincial cities with very provincial mindsets. What they are focused on is what goes on in the Beltway; what goes on in midtown Manhattan; what goes on in the Hamptons. Their lack of understanding of the world is shocking. And this is why, if you look at the leadership that we’ve seen in this whole process with confrontation with China, it’s come from the working class in the country. I can go out to Michigan and Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, and places like that, and have a conversation with workers. And you don’t have to get into a lot of fancy analysis. They understand that the factories went to China, and they understand that the opioids came in. They get it. So this is the kind of fundamental understanding that the elites have lost.
记得，川普的第一份国家安全文件把反恐战争作为次要的事情，把与中共国的大国之争作为战略竞争对手。这都是在川普政府上台后的第一年。这是一场巨大的斗争，因为麦克马斯特（[H.R.] McMaster）和这些家伙仍然被捆绑在这个美国中央司令部（CENTCOM）心态上。如果你看看海湾战争，即使在那之前，每个人都被提升了，每个人都得到了彼此的了解。这一切都围绕着中央司令部和中东地区。这就是为什么这些人都认识对方的原因。这是一种心态。除了海军和一些空军，对亚洲的了解并不深。我的意思是，麦克马斯特对亚洲一无所知。他根本不懂经济战争。他们明白，我们在朝鲜半岛有作战部队。海军陆战队并没有参与其中。哈里-哈里斯上将是我在美国印太司令部（CINCPAC）的时候，他是最佳战略家。与二战结束时不同，当时我们显然是一个主导力量。我们已经让这一点萎缩了。我想向各位读者强调的一件事是： 忘了华盛顿特区和纽约市的复杂程度吧。这些都是非常外省的城市，有着非常外省的心态。他们所关注的是 "环城公路 "上发生的事情；曼哈顿中城发生的事情；汉普顿区发生的事情。他们对这个世界缺乏了解令人震惊。这就是为什么，如果你看看我们在与中共国对抗的整个过程中所看到的领导层，都是来自于国内的工人阶级。我可以去密歇根州、威斯康星州和宾夕法尼亚州等地，和工人进行对话。而且，你不需要花哨的分析。他们知道工厂去了中共国， 他们知道阿片类药物进入了中国。所以这就是精英们所失去的那种基本的理解。
When Trump looks at the world, with “America First,” you look at Western Europe; you look at the Persian Gulf; you look at the South China Sea, and you look up in the northwest in the area around Japan and Korea — those four areas. When you look at the international rules based order, those four areas, a combination of capital markets, commercial relationships, trade deals and an American security guarantee, right? The bottom line is American security. That’s why we have troops in Europe; and that we have a massive amount of troops and weapons deployed to the Middle East. That’s why we have the [United States] Seventh Fleet on patrol in the South China Sea. And that’s why we’ve got army divisions at the 38th parallel in Korea, and forward deployed bases in Guam and in Japan. That is an American security guarantee.
当川普以 "美国优先 "放眼世界，你看西欧，你看波斯湾，你看南海，你看西北的日韩周边地区--这四个地区。当你看国际规则为基础的秩序到时候，这四个地区，综合了资本市场、商业关系、贸易交易和美国的安全保障，对吧？底线是美国人的安全保障。这就是为什么我们在欧洲有军队；这就是为什么我们有大量的军队和武器部署到中东。这也是为什么我们有[美国]第七舰队在南中国海巡逻的原因。这就是为什么我们在朝鲜的三八线有陆军师，在关岛和日本的前方部署基地。这就是美国的安全保障。
And here’s what the deplorables know. It’s their tax dollars that underwrite this essentially $1 trillion dollar [U.S.] defense budget, because of our commitments. And more importantly, it’s their kids. It’s their kids at the 38th parallel. It’s their kids on the ships in the South China Sea. It’s their kids in the Hindu Kush [the mountainous range that stretches through Afghanistan, Pakistan and other regions], and it’s their kids in Eastern Europe. The question is: what is the program here? What are we really accomplishing? And are our allies really shouldering their burden? And I think that is what this is; “America First” was not “America Isolationist.” Look, I was in the Pacific Fleet in the 1970s, and eventually deployed from the South China Sea and the East China Sea to the Persian Gulf. I’ve never seen a president more engaged in activities in the Pacific and in Asia as Donald Trump. You could take all the other presidents since Ronald Reagan or Jimmy Carter, ex-Vietnam. Take it from Nixon or the 1970s. You add all their activity about Asia combined, and quite frankly, Trump is more engaged than anybody: in North Korea, Japan and China. So you can’t fault him. You can’t say he’s isolationist. He’s been more engaged than anyone. And the American people are now waking up to this.
这就是那些可恶的人知道的。因为我们的承诺，他们的税款支撑着这基本上是1万亿美元的国防预算。更重要的是，这是他们的孩子们。这是他们在三八线的孩子们。是在南海的战舰上孩子们。是在兴都库什地区（Hindu Kush，阿富汗、巴基斯坦和其他地区的山区），也是他们在东欧的孩子们。问题是：计划是什么？我们真正的目的是什么？我们的盟友是否真的承担了他们的负担？我认为，这才是真正的意义所在；"美国优先 "不是 "美国孤立主义"。你看，我在1970年代曾在太平洋舰队工作，最终从南海和东海部署到波斯湾。我从未见过一个总统像唐纳德-川普这样在太平洋和亚洲的活动中参与得如此之多。你可以把自罗纳德-里根（Ronald Reagan）或前越南的吉米-卡特（Jimmy Carter）以来的所有其他总统都拿出来。就拿尼克松或上世纪70年代以来的总统来说吧。你把他们所有关于亚洲的活动加起来，坦率地说，川普比任何人都要参与得多：在朝鲜、日本和中国。所以，你不能责怪他。你不能说他是孤立主义者。他比任何人都要参与得多。而美国人民现在已经醒悟过来了。
So I want to go back to the beginning. The pandemic, it’s the difference between the signal and the noise. It’s been a lot of noise. The damage has been the signal. The pandemic has really been the providential wake up call. It’s changing world history. It’s horrific. It has gotten everybody to see exactly what the Chinese Communist Party is, and what they’re doing. Pew Research just had this amazing poll a couple of weeks ago that said that 91 percent of the American people understand that a world run by the Chinese Communist Party would be a much different and worse place than one with the United States as the dominant power. Listen, 91 percent of the American people don’t even agree that the sun’s gonna come up in the east tomorrow! These numbers are shocking. And by the way, this is Democrats and Republicans. The country’s coming together. It’s unified around [growing concerns about] the Chinese Communist Party. What we have to do and our leaders have to do, and must do, is understand that this is not about the Chinese people. They are among the most decent, hard working people on earth. And they have been abused and been a victim of this totalitarian dictatorship. And to me, that’s what is so offensive about Wall Street, the City of London and the global corporatists. The “Party of Davos” has basically been in business with them. It makes me sick to my stomach. And I think it’s outrageous. The biggest victims here have been the innocent people of China. And you know, hopefully, in this confrontation, when the Chinese Communist Party comes down, the Chinese people will finally have freedom.
所以，我想回到最开始。这场大流行，就是信号和噪音的区别。它一直都有很多噪音。损害的是信号。这场大流行，真的是天意的警醒。它改变了世界历史。它是可怕的。它让所有人都看清了中共到底是什么，以及他们在做什么。皮尤研究（Pew Research）几周前做了一个惊人的民意调查，91%的美国人明白，一个由中共统治的世界将会是一个比美国占主导地位的世界更糟糕的地方。听着，91%的美国人甚至不同意明天太阳会在东方升起！这些数字令人震惊。顺便说一下，这是民主党人和共和党人。这个国家人正在走到一起。它团结在一起，围绕着[对中共日益增长的担忧]。我们要做的，我们的领导人要做的，也是必须做的，就是要明白这与中国人民无关。他们是地球上最正派、最勤劳的人。而他们一直被虐待，成为这个极权独裁的受害者。在我看来，这就是华尔街、伦敦城和全球公司主义者的反感。"达沃斯之党 "基本上都是和他们在一起做生意。这让我感到恶心。而且，我认为这太离谱了。这里最大的受害者是无辜的中国人民。要知道，希望在这场对峙中，当中共倒台后，中国人民最终获得自由。
Are you saying the idea of integrating China into the global economy, getting them to respect intellectual-property rights and become part of a rules-based international order is over?
Let me go back to the third week of January of 2017. There were two major speeches given. On Wednesday in Davos, President Xi went and gave his seminal speech to the World Economic Forum. That was the cover of The Financial Times. And he basically laid out the benefits of globalization, and laid it out really as China as the leader. Talk about a network effect. And the “Party of Davos” and “Davos Man” gave it a standing ovation. He was hailed as the visionary leader of the 21st century. Two days later, Trump, in the [United Nations] speech essentially gave a defense of the Westphalian system. He gave a defense of the nation state as the basic unit that we build upon. It is the highest unit that one can have, you know, that free men or free women can control and reach their fulfillment. Those two speeches are diametrically opposed to each other. And the fact is that Xi went out of his way to blame the problems of the world on the rise of populism and nationalism. OK, now that is the railhead. That’s where you start and you see the efforts. This is the decoupling.
让我回到2017年1月的第三周。有两个重要的演讲。周三在达沃斯，习主席去了，在世界经济论坛上发表了开创性的演讲。那是《金融时报》的封面。而他基本上阐述了全球化的好处，并作为中国的领袖来阐述。谈到网络效应。而 "达沃斯党 "和 "达沃斯人 "起立鼓掌。他被誉为21世纪具有远见卓识的领袖。两天后，川普在联合国的演讲中，基本上对西法体系进行了辩护。他对民族国家作为我们建立的基本单元进行了辩护。这是一个人可以拥有的最高单元，要知道，自由的男人或自由的女人可以控制和达到他们的成就。这两个讲话是截然相反的。而事实是，习近平出面把世界上的问题都归咎于民粹主义和民族主义的兴起。好了，现在这才是铁杆司令。这就是起点，你看努力。这就是脱钩。
The reason we can’t have what you just talked about, the integration, IP, everything like that, is that they knew what they were doing all along. In fact, “One Belt, One Road” is really just the British East India Company run in reverse. It’s the same exact business model, of predatory capitalism coupled with Made in China 2025, coupled with the global rollout of Huawei. And the decoupling in the spring of 2019, with the rejection of [Trade Rep.] Lighthizer’s seven vectors [U.S. trade] deal. They would not integrate and they were not prepared to integrate economically. They certainly weren’t going to integrate technologically. That is part of their long term plan. They’re a group of gangsters, but incredibly intelligent; very smart. And they have a purpose. Remember, the leadership of the West believes in the “Thucydides Trap.” Western leaders have lost confidence in their system. They think we’re the declining power in Western Europe and in the United States. And here’s the thing that I have a problem with: If you go back to Davos and the World Economic Forum, the elite of the elite bit. Every group that was there — the lawyers, the accountants, the communication specialist, the marketing specialist, the industry types — they’re all in the same business; and that’s the information business. Every one of those people knew about the Uighurs. They knew about the concentration camps. They know about the Muslims. They knew about what happened to Tibet and the Dalai Lama, the Tibetan Buddhists. They knew what happened to the house Christians. They knew what happened to the underground Catholic Church and Cardinal [Joseph] Zen. They knew about live organ harvesting. They knew about the police state. They knew about all the stuff with increasing the [internet] firewall that blocked the Chinese people off. They knew about the slave labor. They knew about all of it, and they did not care. To a person, they hailed Xi [Jinping] as the visionary leader of the 21st century. The Chinese model was going to be the model. OK, the CCP model. If you cut to three years later, we’re going to have this exactly again.
我们之所以不能像你刚才讲的那样，谈论一体化、IP之类的东西，就是因为他们一直都知道自己在做什么。事实上，"一带一路 "就是反向跑的英国东印度公司。这也是一模一样的商业模式，掠夺性资本主义加上中共国制造2025，再加上华为全球布局。而2019年春天的脱钩，随着[贸易代表]莱特希泽的七大载体[美国贸易]协议被拒绝。他们不会融入，不准备在经济上融入。他们当然也不会在技术上进行融入。那是他们长期计划的一部分。他们是一群流氓，但非常聪明，非常精明。而且他们是有目的的。记住，西方国家的领导层相信 "修昔底德陷阱"。西方国家领导人对自己的体制失去了信心。他们认为我们是西欧和美国的衰落势力。而这里就有一个问题。如果你回到达沃斯和世界经济论坛上，精英们的精英位。在场的每一个群体--律师、会计师、通讯专家、营销专家、行业类型的人--他们都是从事同样的业务；那就是信息业务。每一个人都知道维吾尔人的事。他们知道集中营的事。他们知道穆斯林的事。他们知道西藏和达赖喇嘛，藏传佛教徒的事。他们知道家庭基督徒的遭遇。他们知道地下天主教堂和红衣主教[约瑟夫]禅宗的遭遇。他们知道活摘器官的事。他们知道以警治国的事。他们知道所有增加互联网防火墙的事情，把中国人挡在了外面。他们知道奴隶制劳力的事。他们知道这一切，但他们并不关心。对一个人来说，他们把习[习近平]誉为21世纪有远见的领导人。中国模式要成为典范。好的，中共的模式。如果切到三年后，我们又会有这样的一模一样场景。
Today, as we give this interview, the Chinese Communist Party has announced there’s been another secondary outbreak in Wuhan. And 10 days from today, they will have tested all 11 million people in Wuhan. They’re gonna sit there in 10 days, on the 22 of May, and they’re gonna sit there and go: “You got the model of Donald Trump. And you’ve got the model of us, right? We have tested. You talked about mass testing. We’ve given 11 million tests in ten days. What has the United States done? What has the West done? It’s not a 21st century system. Ours is!” So they are far from backing down. In fact, they’re going from having started this pandemic, and having concealed this pandemic, and having quite frankly exacerbated this pandemic for their own purposes; they’re gonna sit there and second guess our model. “We were able to shut this thing down and stop it. Our model works. Your model can’t work” [they will say]. And so if people think the information war [coming out of China] has started, they haven’t seen anything yet.