In one of my previous posts I mentioned about Kevin Rudd handling a TV interview in Mandarin. Very interestingly I received comments from someone with the blog name of Goodtobewithyou, Rudd’s trademark greeting. Goodtobewithyou was kind enough to point out to me the link to the website of Phoenix TV network (a Hong Kong TV network partly owned by News Corp) where I could find a transcript of the interview, in Chinese of course, but he then asked if I could translate it for him! For someone supposedly to have an occasional contact with Mr Rudd, I thought he could get one more quickly from the man himself. We can only speculate who this mysterious and anonymous character really is – and if only we can get on his own well protected blog!
http://goodtobewithyou.blogspot.com
Being quite keen to read the full text, I looked for an English translation which I thought must surely exist. I had hoped for a quick perusal without the tedium of frequent references to my still brand new Chinese-English dictionary. The most obvious place was Rudd’s own office. Alas, my email went unanswered – either because they were too busy planning the takeover of Canberra or just plain rude! Undeterred, I ventured into an unofficial translation myself, while under my breath thanking my parents for encouraging me to build a basic foundation in Chinese during school. After some hours’ work, it was finished, all five pages of it. To post it in the normal way would take up too much web space on the opening page of my blog. Instead, I have posted them as comments, in two parts, below.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Interview of Kevin Rudd by Ruan Ci Shan of Phoenix Network 29 Jan 2005.
Ruan:
In today’s interview I like to introduce to you a very interesting person. He is the Australian Labor Party’s Foreign Affairs Minister (sic), Mr Luo Ke Wen.
Luo Ke Wen has a very nice sounding Chinese name. Actually, his real English name is Kevin Rudd. Not only has he got a nice sounding Chinese name, his has a long and deep link with China. That’s is why his Chinese is so good. It occurs to me, in today’s Beijing, Shanghai and other big cities in China, if you run into a foreigner, you should never use Mandarin to abuse the person, because it is quite likely that the foreigner speaks a better Mandarin than you and I ! Luo Ke Wen’s Mandarin is first rate, which is why today’s interview is being carried out in Chinese, in Mandarin.
Next, we need to explain to everyone the meaning of “shadow” cabinet. In countries where their system of government has a “cabinet” such as in Britain, Austria and Australia, in which the cabinet members are chosen from among the members of the parliament, the entire cabinet could be immediately replaced should the government falls suddenly. The opposition has to be able to take over the responsibility of government at short notice. Hence the opposition party needs to have a full complement of people able to assume full responsibilities. It needs to show to the electorate that it has such a group of people, who they are, their background and capabilities.
In terms of Australia, Kevin Rudd is the Labor Party Shadow Cabinet’s Foreign Affairs Minister. If one feels that the term Minister is too official, we can alternatively describe him as one of ALP’s foreign affairs specialists. Today we have invited Kevin Rudd to have a chat on many matters of foreign relations, such as the Australian – US relations, relations with Japan, China, and even the Australian view on the common perception that Australia is the American representative in the Asian region. We are inviting him to analyse the situation and with his fluent Mandarin, we can gain a greater understanding of the ALP’s views of John Howard’s government, of the world in general, and of China.
Let’s begin our conversation …..
Ruan: From your point of view on the opposition, over the past year, looking at John Howard’s policies towards China, in what ways had he done well or done badly?
Luo Ke Wen (Rudd): I believe the John Howard government, Coalition government, has a heavy national responsibility which is to use various policy directions to prepare Australia for its relations with Asia in the 21st century. I feel that this responsibility, this mission, irrespective of the party in power, Liberal, Labor or National, conservative or others, is an important one; it is a very clear, national mission. In the matter of preparedness, I believe the Howard government had not carried out this responsibility brought down from history and the historical trends.
Besides, I believe in his heart John Howard still has a feeling of total dependence on the US. He believes that in Australia’s foreign policies the most important partner is the US. Of course, our Labor Party’s relationship with the US is good, in fact very close. Since the 2nd world war, our relation with the US is very close, but the ALP refuses to be a puppet of another country.
Ruan: This is a question we frequently ask in the past of the Australian government – ever since Howard’s government (gained power), the impression he has given to Asian countries is that Australia is US’s spokesman and representative in the Asia Pacific region. From your many years of Labor Party political activities and services in foreign affairs, do you feel that Australia has really become the US’s spokesman in Asia, Asia Pacific region?
Rudd: We in the Labor Party look at it this way. We believe Australia can have very good and close relationship with the US, strategically, economically, politically. At the same time we can have very good and close relationship with Asia – strategically, economically and politically, with both sides.
Ruan: In a parallel and equal footing?
Rudd: Correct. It is. I believe there is a feeling within the Australian conservative government – with Asia we can do economics, with Europe and US, politics. It means that they believe the foremost countries we can rely on, in terms of guarantees of security and with security agreements are Europe and the US. Of course from the viewpoint of the Labor Party those agreements are very important and have been our policy for the past 60 odd years. But we believe, we are in Asia and must advance our relationships with countries in Asia, with China, Japan, South East Asian countries, and build the foundations for regional cooperation.
Ruan: From your point of view, from now in the beginning of the 21st century, taking an overview, where is the main security concern of Asia?
Rudd: I think the most urgent question is in the Korean peninsula. The policies of North Korea, honestly speaking, lacks consistency. With regard to nuclear capability question, I think in terms of the long term security of our region, it must be resolved. The second area of concern is still the Taiwan issue.
Ruan: The previous American Secretary of State Powell commented in our program as to why the Americans would not deal with the North Koreans face to face – he said that the Korean issue was a regional issue requiring the participation of all six countries affected. It was not an American issue but our regional issue. Do you agree?
Rudd: On the whole I agree with this view. The basic logic is that, if you study the strategic implications of North Korean behaviour, the countries obviously affected are – of course South Korea and Japan; we are very clear about that from recent history. And, of course China. While for the US - they still have troops in South Korea - these four countries are of national significance to them. Hence I believe this six-way discussion is the ideal method to resolve the problem. I believe the six-way discussion that the Chinese government initiated is very good, very positive. If the Chinese government were not to participate in the six-way discussions, I’m afraid we would now not have any avenue to handle this problem. If we have no discussions, I’m afraid there will be a crisis.
Ruan: Recently the Taiwan question has become a perplexing question for the US. The US previously adopted a vague attitude towards the Taiwan question. Now Chien Shui Bian’s many actions have made them feel that they could not continue to be vague which could force those people (Taiwanese?) across the “red line” (of safety).
Rudd: Where is the red line?
Ruan; Presently the Chinese side apparently wants to tell Taiwan where the red line is. So they recently drafted a law against separation, preparing to tell you and I where the red line is. In this, how do you feel from Australian viewpoint about China’s wish to set this kind of law?
Rudd: On the whole, in relation to the Taiwan question, I think the first principle is obviously the One China Principle. Speaking from the Australian viewpoint, whichever party, Liberal or Labor, for the past 32 years, we have steadfastly accepted the One China Principle, which is the most basic principle for the Taiwan Strait. Besides, I believe, the recent view adopted by Chien Shui Bian has a problem. His demand for a long term or perpetual status for Taiwan is not totally ideal. As a result, I personally and our Foreign Minister have publicly criticized his recent policy. I believe Taiwan’s international friends have a responsibility which is to tell our friends in Taiwan this kind of Taiwan independence movement brings a fairly negative impact. This not only relates to the security of Taiwan but also the needs for stability of the entire region.
Interview of Kevin Rudd by Ruan Ci Shan of Phoenix Network 29 Jan 2005. Part 2
Ruan: Welcome back. In the first half we had Mr Kevin Rudd explaining his views on China, on the China-Taiwan issue and world issues. In relation to the Taiwan issue, because the (Australian) government in power is more “independence” oriented, there had been many official links with Taiwan. However, with the current Chien Shui Bian government Mr Rudd apparently does not think that is right. He said, I’m a friend of Taiwan but the current Chien Shui Bian government has gone too far. We in Australia, like the US, wish that Taiwan and the mainland can resolve the issues between them peacefully with discussions. However, the pre-condition is that Taiwan cannot be independent. He believes, in the past, Taiwan had misread the terms used in statements in the establishment of communications between the US and China. The US said they “acknowledge” the principle of One China, but Mr Rudd said the Australian stand is that there is little difference in meaning between “acknowledge” and “recognise”. There has always been one China, hence we hope that the Chien Shui Bian government, in its second term will adopt new ways and discuss the issue of Taiwan Straits peacefully and in the principle of One China.
Now let us continue with the interview of Kevin Rudd.
Ruan: The Americans said that in the interest of developing relationship, they use terms which are deliberately vague. They know there is only one China and Taiwan is part of China. They use the term “acknowledge” they don’t use the term “recognise”. Australia use the term “recognise”; is that the same as “acknowledge”?
Rudd: Probably a difference in theory only. In practice, there is little difference between “acknowledge” and “recognise”.
In my opinion, the basic question is the One China policy. When we recognised Beijing in 1972, which was also a decision of the then Labor government. From then till now, we have always recognised the one China. The capital of the China is Beijing, Taiwan is part of China. Of course following this principle, the logic is entirely clear. But Beijing-Taipei, Howard’s friends have a responsibility, which is to use every means to encourage both sides to use various links and peaceful methods to resolve this problem carried down from history. I think we should grab an opportunity in 2005 using the friends of both sides, work out a new path and encourage everyone to start talking. In the past 25 years, there had been many changes in Taiwan. The urgent question is which method will definitely bring results, which is why I recently criticize Chien Shui Bian, in part with regard to his policy of Taiwan independence.
Ruan: The new Bush administration has to quickly facilitate the completion of Iraqi elections, then withdraw. Of course it is easy for him to withdraw immediately, but mustn’t he be careful that the fledging Iraqi government has support, that the government can establish itself before withdrawing troops? Also, surely because of US internal pressures, mustn’t he be cautious about a rapid withdrawal? What do you think are the choices and challenges that he is facing?
Rudd: Really we are facing a new situation. The Iraqi War has ended; so called ended but we are now facing a major challenge. The challenge is how to fix the Iraqi internal security and economy. The policy of our party, as an opposition party of course, is to meet with the new Republican government (US?), the Iraqi government, the United Nations. My personal plan is to go, in a month or two, to New York, Washington, and perhaps Iraq, to discuss their future needs; say what their future directions are in regard to their security and economy.
Ruan: Recently Bush publicly admitted that the Iraqi troops are ineffectual. From your viewpoint will the Iraqi situation stablise in the short term? Will the popularly elected government and their parliament rapidly return to some stability and cease to be so violent?
Rudd; Really, Iraq faces a very serious challenge in national security. When war broke out, many terrorists raced into Iraq. No matter how we feel about the previous government, there was hardly any terrorism in that country then. After the war, with the fall of Saddam Hussein, the terrorists had gone in. How many of them are there now we don’t know but they are continuing their activities.
How to counter this is our difficult problem. If we want to solve this regional problem we need to approach it from two directions. Firstly, regarding the security of the infrastructure, we need to combat terrorism. Secondly, the economy; if the area is not economically viable, with no social security, no jobs, then of course the terrorists will have increased support among the populace. Hence I feel that we need to implement a total strategy. The two directions are basically logical and they must be implemented at the same time…
Ruan: …. if the Labor Party can win government soon ?
Rudd: God willing …
Ruan: In your opinion, in terms of the foreign relations between China and Australia, what are urgently needed?
Rudd: Most urgently? It’s like this. In the 20th century we developed a very close and important relationship with Japan. What were the logical reasons for such a relationship? Australia’s natural gas, raw materials etc. We became a reliable supplier to the Japanese industrial development. I believe in the 21st century, Australia and China will face with the same opportunities with benefits on both sides. Regarding China’s long term needs for energy and supplies of raw materials, if China needs a long term and reliable supplier, then Australia can be very useful to China that way. The Australian government must carry out negotiations with a high standard of integrity. What I have described is a long term, perhaps 25 years economic cooperation.
Ruan: Today we are grateful to have Mr Rudd come here and offer some very valuable opinions; we have had a very enjoyable discussion. Thank you!
I have just had Australia’s Labor Foreign Affairs Minister - Shadow Foreign Affairs Minister in the Shadow Cabinet – Kevin Rudd for an interview and discussion. From the discussion, we can see that with regard to the Taiwan issue, or the China-US relations, or Japan-Australia relations, or China-Australia relations Kevin Rudd holds a very fair and pragmatic stand. Firstly he believes the US should not direct Australia’s foreign policies; secondly, he believes the future relationship between Australia and China would be very close because of China’s need for sources of energy. Australia, rich in energy resources and in raw materials will be able to cooperate with China. Of course in terms of economic benefits, say in terms of Australian exports, of energy, of technology, China is a huge and stable market. Hence Kevin Rudd believes, The Australia-China relation will replace the previous Australian policy of using Japan in its association with Asia or for close trade partnerships. We are very happy that viewers could join with us in enjoying the company of this Australian friend. He had very clearly expressed his personal views on the international situation, in regard to specific points in the China-Australia relation, and even in regard to whether the US is using Australia as a spokesperson or as a representation
We thank you for your viewing, till we meet again the next time !
I have just found that the translation for Kevin Rudd's name was incorrect. I don't know the reason for the error, it could be a misreading of the original Chinese text from the web page. It should in fact be "Lu Ke Wen" ! My apologies !
Post a Comment