你怎样看待中国的外交政策？ [美国媒体]

What do you think of China's diplomacy?

中国外交政策如何，你怎么看？



A large amount of Chinese, mostly teenagers and less-educated people, believe that China’s diplomacy is too weak, and they ask the government to be tougher on China’s adversaries. How is China’s foreign policy perceived abroad?

大部分中国人，特别是青少年和文化教育程度较低的人，都认为中国外交政策太软弱，要求政府需态度强硬怼对手。那么海外的你们认为中国外交政策如何呢？


Paul Denlinger, Have lived in China, Taiwan and Hong Kong; fluent in Mandarin (written, spoken)

Paul Denlinger，住在中国大陆，台湾和香港;普通话流利（书面，口语）

It’s good, but it is too one-dimensional.
Chinese diplomacy is very clear about China’s goals and interests, especially when China was a developing economy. It was much easier when China was poor, but now that it is growing, the challenge is more complex.

还不错，但实在是呆板得很。
中国外交目的很清晰，都是基于中国的目标和利益，尤其中国是一个发展中的经济体。当中国还很穷时候，任何国际问题都可以轻易用贫困甩锅，但现在确实是越做越大，面临的挑战更加复杂。

Unfortunately, Chinese diplomacy is still stuck in a historical trap inherited from imperial times. When China was strong and the dominant cultural force in east Asia, the Chinese emperors were used to having their neighbors visit their capitol, and praising Chinese culture and its dominance in the region. This resulted in the still current belief that Chinese neighbors should recognize and support Chinese dominance in the region, and that China would never have to explain the rationale behind its worldview.
“When China is so superior, why should it have to explain anything?”

不幸的是，中国的外交政策还沉浸在帝制时代的辉煌里。以往的中国强大并且在是主导东亚的文化力量，中国皇帝们已经习惯了他们的邻国前往繁华京城面圣，习惯了藩国赞美中国文化，习惯了周边小国奉承他们强大的统治地位。这些导致中国人普遍潜意识认为，这地盘是我的，邻国们就该承认和支持中国的主导地位。中国永远不会思考这种认知对其他国家来说是否合理。
中国太理所当然：“我们就是如此优越，有必要明说吗？”

In modern times, it has meant that China did not have to seek accommodations with its neighbors, nor seek to persuade them of anything. As China grew stronger, they would all fall into line.
Major issues where China has exhibited intransigence are:
Taiwan;
Tibet and the Dalai Lama;
The ongoing dispute with Japan over WWII atrocities and Japanese nationalism;
Xinjiang;
Any separatists;
The current dispute with South Korea over the US deployment of THAAD.

在现代，中国没有向邻国租借地的需要，也没有试图说服其他国家的意愿。随着高贵冷艳傲慢的中国逐渐成长壮大，理所当然会被周边国家孤立排挤。
其中，中国表现出了不妥协的主要问题有：
  ●台湾;
  ●西藏和达赖喇嘛;
  ●与日本二战暴行纠纷和日本的民族主义;
  ●新疆;
  ●任何分裂;
  ●在韩国美国部署的萨德。

Moreover, the current Chinese government continues to appeal to nationalism among Chinese in order to support this worldview.
Now though, when nationalism is not unique to China, but has also come to the fore in the US and UK, this is potentially a dangerous diplomatic strategy.
This means that when dealing with its immediate neighbors, Beijing should think more about dealing with them as equals, not only be sending its foreign minister on state visits, but allowing more contact between the neighbors’ foreign ministers and diplomatic corps with Chinese citizens.

另外，目前中国政府迫切想让他们的世界观名正言顺得到支持，所以在国内展开爱国主义教育。
虽然，这种民族主义并非中国独有，在美国和英国的涌现趋势同样让人注目，这类外交战略其实潜在是很危险的。
也就是说，当和近邻打交道的时候，北京该多下功夫思考：如何和他们平等相待？不该仅仅派遣外长例行公事访问，而且要促成更多国外使团与民间的交流和释放多些善意。

Of course, Beijing does not like such a strategy because it would amount to surrendering a certain amount of control, which may in turn lead to unpleasant surprises.
But, it would certainly lead to China’s neighbors feeling less uneasy about China’s rise, which would lead to less likelihood of their thinking that a US military presence in the region is important for guaranteeing their security.

当然，北京不喜欢寻求这样的外交策略，因为它无异于放弃一些控制权，而且可能导致某些不愉快的意外。
如若不多加沟通，邻国们肯定会对中国的强大崛起感到心神不宁啦。
上诉方法可让中国的邻居们弱化一些想法，例如美军很重要，能够东亚能保卫他们不受中国侵略等等。

（译者注：就算本来这些国家没有中国会侵略他们的想法，我们也不能保证美会不会到各个国家阴谋游说他的生意：中国很危险，花点钱，或者放开一些领土主权，强大的美军可以是你们的保镖，多威风啊！）

——————————————————————————————————————————

Robin Daverman, World traveler（环球旅行家）
This. That’s why China’s foreign policy is set by Zhongnanhai and not by your average teenagers. “Cause teenagers are universally stupid as f*ck and don’t know it themselves.

哦，这就是为什么制定中国的对外政策是“中南海”（国家政务办事处），而非你们这些普通青少年。“因为青少年普遍的他妈的愚蠢和不知所谓”

What these teenagers want is naked imperialism. Imperialism is slow poison even for superpowers like the United States. For a developing country like China, well, you’d die quicker than just gulp down a litre of rat poison with dinner. Why should other country’s interest be any less important than your own? The Chinese government has a longstanding policy stance of supporting EU, supporting Russia, supporting Mercosur, ASEAN, and African Union. Xi even gave an interview back in 2015 urging greater integration of the EU. Martin Schulz: "Wenn wir das schaffen, wird Europa eine Weltmacht"
This is not only a moral choice, but a strategic choice. If China wants to keep growing, it must bring up the other regional powers together, i.e., the “Weltregion”. Why? Go read the Wolfowitz Doctrine released back in 1992.

这些无脑的青少年满脸赤裸裸地写着要帝国统治和侵略。帝国主义就算对像美一样的超级大国来说，都是慢性毒药，更何况就一个发展中国家而言，例如中国，好了，你会死得更快些，好比晚餐吞了一公升老鼠药。其他小国家的利益比起你自身的利益，就活该靠边站吗? 中国政府有一个长期政策立场：支持欧盟，支持俄罗斯，支持南共市，支持东盟和非洲联盟。习近平甚至特地在2015年做了个访谈敦促欧盟更加一体化，马丁舒尔茨说了：如果我们真的成功了，那么欧洲将是世界强国。
这不仅仅合乎正道，而且是一个战略性选择。如果中国想保持增长，就必须在其他地区造就强大力量出来抗衡，即是上面所说的超级大国。为什么？看看1992年解禁的并且臭名昭着的“沃尔福威茨理论”吧：

Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival, either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere, that poses a threat on the order of that posed formerly by the Soviet Union. This is a dominant consideration underlying the new regional defense strategy and requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power.

我们首要目标是防止出现新竞争对手，无论是前苏联的领土范围还是其他地方酝酿出来的，对以往秩序构成威胁的可能潜在竞争者。
基于新的区域性防卫战略的主要考虑，要求我们竭力防止任何敌对势力主导一个地区，在资源整合下形成新的世界性力量。

The U.S. must show the leadership necessary to establish and protect a new order that holds the promise of convincing potential competitors that they need not aspire to a greater role or pursue a more aggressive posture to protect their legitimate interests. In nondefense areas, we must account sufficiently for the interests of the advanced industrial nations to discourage them from challenging our leadership or seeking to overturn the established political and economic order. We must maintain the mechanism for deterring potential competitors from even aspiring to a larger regional or global role.

美国必须表现出建立和保护新秩序所必需的强大领导地位，
保证能够说服潜在的竞争对手，他们没必要追求更强大的存在，或没必要采取更积极的态度来保护他们的合法利益。
在非防卫领域，我们必须充分考虑到先进工业国家的利益，阻止他们挑战我们的领导地位，或者试图推翻既定的政治和经济秩序。
我们必须保持抑制潜在竞争对手的机制，让他们甚至没有更大的发展区域或没有成为世界性大国的可能。

Wolfowitz Doctrine
Sounds familiar to Mr. Trump’s “America First”, right? Because the US, as the sole superpower, has not changed since the collapse of USSR. It’s been dominant for so long that equality feels like defeat, and the prospect of equality is intolerable. It’s not that the US politicians are necessarily worse than others. If anybody happens to land in that superpower position, that guy may not behave any better either. Say, if the Superpower is the UK, or France, would it necessarily behave any better? If you look at their exploits in Africa, Southeast Asia, and all over the world, no, not necessarily. Everybody can be just as easily corrupted by the absolute power over other nations. So if China positions herself as the new regional strongman, she will immediately become the next target. The main boogeyman. That’s a given. It’s not just the US political establishment saying so. Popular sentiment in the US demands this as well.

沃尔福威茨理论
听起来很像特朗普先生说的“美国优先”，对吧？ 因为美自苏联解体以来，就是唯一的超级大国，没有改变过。 长此以往，当美国一想到和其他国家可能平起平坐，就会感觉是被击败了。平等的前景是不能被容忍的。 并不是说美国政客一定比其他国家政客更糟糕。 如果有人碰巧在这个超级大国的位置，那个家伙也可能没有什么更好的表现。 假设现在的超级大国是英国或者法国，它会有更好的表现？ 你看看英法在非洲，东南亚和世界各地的开拓新大陆的成绩，不，真的不一定。 一个国家只要有绝对性超越其他国家的权力，就极容易腐败掉。 所以如果中国把自己定位为新的区域性强国，那么它直接就是下个目标。 对于黑暗眼冒绿光的狼来说，这无疑是送上门的羔羊。并不是单纯美国政治制度如此， 在他们民众中，这个理论备受推崇。

China has always recognized this feature of the US foreign policy since its foundation, thus its foreign policy, since Deng’s time, has always been to encourage the development of regional consolidation and cooperation. The goal is to keep a pack of regional powers moving together. So that you don’t see a clear No. 2. You see a mushrooming of No. 2, 3, 4, 5, … all at the same time. So you are not sure which one is No. 2, but you know if you target one of them, both of you will lose, and you’ll only make the rest of the pack greater. For example, if the US and China fight, it’ll only make Russia or EU great again. This would not be a rational choice. As long as everybody can be persuaded by reason, there won’t be a war, because whoever is involved in a shooting war loses. This is how you can transition from one superpower to a constellation of regional powers peacefully.

中国自成立以来，一直很清楚美国外交政策的这一特点，因此自邓小平之后的外交政策一直是鼓励区域合作与发展。 目的是促成分散的区域性力量的一体化。 现今世界，除了美国第一，再也看不到明确被划为第二大的力量。你只能看到在同一时间内迅速发展的的第二，第三，第四，第五。 美国分不清楚哪一个是第二，但他们知道一旦只瞄准其中的一个，会得不偿失，剩下的那些力量会因此迅速壮大。举个栗子，如果美中战斗，只会使俄罗斯或欧盟坐大。 这不是一个理性的选择。 只要每个人都还拥有理性，就不会有战争，因为参与进狩猎战的国家意味着失败。 这就是安全地在一个超级大国虎视眈眈下，过渡成为一个区域性力量中璀璨的明星的方法。

And this is why the Chinese diplomacy, by Western standard, appears to be weak. Because it’s not in the business of picking fights with other countries. On the strategic level, the more independent a country or a cooperative region is, the better off China will be. It won’t threaten other countries with force, and it won’t shield its citizens from laws of other countries if they have committed wrongdoing, because its foreign policy is to support all legitimate governments and support regional cooperation. China’s stance is lowkey, unassuming, bore-you-to tears, but it has a strong advantage: all other countries just need to act out of selfinterest, without being too greedy or ambitious, then things will naturally shape up along China’s preferred path.

这就是为什么中国外交,以西方标准来说似乎很软弱。 它根本和打战无关， 而是在战略层面上，若有一个国家或一个合作区域越独立，中国就越好。
不会有武力震慑其他国家；
如公民有不法行为，其他国家的法律不会去包庇他们；
因为中国外交政策是支持所有合法政府，支持区域合作。 中国的立场是低调，不出风头，呆板让你无聊到死，但它具有强大的优势：所有其他国家只需要为自己的利益而动，只要不太贪婪或有野心，那么事情将自然而然地顺着中国意愿走下去。

Thus in China, you basically have a leftwing government telling its citizens to respect all the people, the culture, the local laws, when they go abroad, even passing out handbooks on it before they board the plane, and you have a bit of a right wing rebellious youth thingy spilling this kind of imperialistic nonsense. Xi must be fuming inside, “Of all the good stuff from other countries, you don’t learn those, and you have to learn this kind of stupid garbage! You need some more homework!”

因此，在中国，基本上有一个左翼政府，告诉公民尊重世界所有的人民，文化，当地的法律，甚至在出国的时候，登机前发行的手册提醒。你也许年轻，有一点点叛逆右翼倾向，洋溢着帝国主义的气息胡说八道。 你们习大大听了估计要七窍生烟：“其他国家那么多优秀的东西，你不学，竟学这种愚蠢的垃圾！ 滚回家再受教育吧你！“

The Chinese diplomacy is not set by populism, for sure. And the Chinese probably never in a thousand years imagined somebody like Mr. Trump becoming the President of the US, and immediately started shooting everybody, i.e., EU. NATO, Germany, Sweden, China, Mexico, Japan, even little Cambodia, etc., all at once! Fury in Cambodia as US asks to be paid back hundreds of millions in war debts

当然，中国的外交不是民粹主义。 而中国人可能一千年之内都无法想象出现像特朗普先生这样的一个人，在成为美国总统之后，机关枪扫射了所有的人，包括欧盟， 北约，德国，瑞典，中国，墨西哥，日本等等，真的是一下子得罪了所有国家！甚至还有柬埔寨！
看新闻：柬埔寨暴走！因美国要求偿还数亿元的战争债务

——————————————————————————————————————————

Frederic Ulric, lives in China (1970-present)
Frederic Ulric 自1970年开始在中国居住。
I think China’s diplomacy is pretty great.
Avoided major wars for 30–40 years, both trade and otherwise.
Became the biggest trading nation on Earth. (Most trade partners).
Managed to buy and/or influence many foreign companies in every sector.
Managed to get many countries join RCEP, AIIB and other organs.
Managed to cement/improve relations through infrastructure building.、

我认为中国外交很不错。
在30-40年内避免了重大战争，贸易战和其他。
成为地球上最大的贸易国家。 （是大多数国家的贸易伙伴）。
设法购买或影响了每个行业许多外国公司。
设法跟许多国家成为了区域全面经济伙伴关系，加入了亚投行和其他组织。
设法通过基础设施建设巩固/改善了与其他国家关系。

Asia:
I think in Asia China is deemed to be something of an X factor, regardless of its policies/diplomacy. There’s clear historical precedents, where China asserted its dominance and others had to submit. But only submit in a way where they pay tribute to Chinese culture and the Emperor. Known as the Tributary system. It’s not colonial. Some countries like the Philippines decide to go with the flow and are rewarded. While others like Japan are more cautious. The whole SCS issue doesn’t help for sure, but perhaps when more people realise that China brings a mostly economic dimension to things, they’ll relax. It’s just China often seems very intimidating due to its size and strength in every manner.

亚洲：
我认为在亚洲，中国被认为是未知因素，不管其政策/外交方面。历史有明确的先例：中国主张其主导地位，而其他国家则必须服从，而且只能是膜拜中国文化和对皇帝进贡表达敬意。 这些国家就是所谓支流系统，而不是被殖民。一些国家例如菲律宾这样的是墙头草，只向着好处倒。 而其他国家例如日本这样的更加谨慎。 整个亚洲结构系统的稳定性并不确定，但也许当更多的人意识到中国带来了大多数是属于经济层面的好处时候，邻国们就会放松下来。 只因为中国无论是规模和实力在各方面上，经常看起来很吓人。

The West:
While I think in the West China is viewed with huge suspicion, for those who follow the news a little. This is in no doubt strongly influenced by the constant allegations and reports of everything from pollution to human-rights abuse. Then there’s still many who simply don’t know anything about it and find the whole deal about China quite murky and confusing. Some still can’t distinguish it from Japan for example. Many people in turn find it really stupid and pathetic when they hear the Chinese government getting angry about something they think is a small issue; which isn’t good for China’s image.

西方：
而我认为在西方国家那些只要稍微看过一些新闻的人，都会对中国怀有很大的疑虑。 这无疑受到新闻媒体的强烈影响：不断指控和报道，从污染到侵犯人权所有一切。 还有很多人根本就不了解中国，就对中国形象形成了相当模糊和混乱的概念。 例如有些甚至无法区别中国和日本。 反之，这些不了解情况的西方民众，听到中国政府对他们认为只是小问题的事情生气时，常常觉得很可笑可悲。 这对中国的形象十分不利。

In Africa & Middle East:
I think there’s generally a positive view towards Chinese policy, as China usually tends to go for win-win situations. It buys Iranian oil and then doesn’t say anything about how things are run in Iran. Likewise it builds railways in various African countries and although there’s been problems with things like not employing Africans and sometimes not finishing projects, people still find that manner of development preferable to the more Western “set it and forget it” approach I think. Which typically comes with terms: believe this thing, change that system, don’t do this, etc.
A good example of Chinese character when it comes to diplomacy, is clearly shown in the following video, wherein a US journalist seems to be constantly trying to get the interviewee to say something bad. Judge for yourself:
Lu Kang kept calm throughout the interview.
Lu Kang didn’t say anything unnecessary.
Lu Kang didn’t urge anyone to change or fight.
Lu Kang constantly highlighted China’s respect for the US.
Lu Kang still avoided critique of Trump. Despite the interviewer.
Lu Kang constantly advocated cooperation & a balanced approach.
Lu Kang didn’t let him put words into his mouth. Like at 7:45-8 minutes.

非洲和中东地区：
我认为那里对待中国的政策一般都是积极的态度，因为中国往往会走向双赢的局面。它买了伊朗的石油，却不会去说伊朗的坏话，它在各个非洲国家建立了铁路，虽然有些问题，如不雇用非洲人，有时候还没能完成项目，但是人们仍然发现中国更可取，而西方国家的“光说不练”-我只想形容得贴切一些，这是一个谚语，意思是：相信这个东西，想要去改变那个系统，却不去做，等等。
中文是外交手腕的一个很好的例子，在下面的视频中清楚地显示出来，其中美国记者似乎在不断尝试让被访者说出一些不好的事情。大家自己判断：
地址：http://news.sina.com.cn/voice/all/voice-ifxzyxmt1345133.shtml (这是特地找了个双语的国内连接陆康接受NBC采访， 大家可以看看，youtube评论那边很多人很欣赏陆康)
陆康在采访中保持冷静。
陆康没有说什么不必要的。
陆康没有敦促任何一方改变或发动战争。
陆康不断强调中国对美国的尊重。
陆康仍然避免对特朗普的批评，无视访问者的诱导。
陆康不断倡导合作平衡的做法。
记者想把他的观点强加于陆康，并没有成功。喜欢在视频7：45-8分钟的时候。

And so forth. Many in the Youtube comment section thus feel that the interviewer is a traitor to the US, as he’s trying to create an enemy. To which I agree really, due to the type of questions and the way he spoke.
That’s an excellent example of Chinese diplomacy and if continued, it’s something to be very proud of. Imagine if every country did this? There wouldn’t be any more calls for other countries to change their internal policies. There wouldn’t be any rude remarks just because you dislike someone or their actions.

诸如此类。 因此，Youtube评论部分中的许多人觉得该记者是美国的叛徒，因为他正试图给美国树立一个敌人出来。 从他提问的问题和讲话的方式和他说话的方式来看，我十分同意大家的看法。
这是中国外交的一个很好的例子，再发展下去，这是相当值得中国人自豪的。 想像一下，如果每个国家都像中国这么做？ 不再会有要求其他国家改变他们自己的内部政策，不再会有粗鲁的言论只因为你不喜欢某人或他们的行为。

——————————————————————————————————————————

Joseph Boyle
For decades Zhou Enlai led the reputation of Chinese diplomacy as wise, farsighted, and patient.
I think China’s foreign policy is reasonable except on the island disputes which are driven by popular politics, against real national interests. Chinese diplomats have avoided saying much about the island disputes.

几十年来，周恩来领导中国外交的声誉是聪明，有远见卓识的。
我认为中国的外交政策是合理的，除了现在政治话题炒得正热的岛屿争端事件，损害了真正的国家利益。 中国外交官们正避免多说岛屿争端。

David King
Here’s my opinion.
China’s diplomacy is developing with the global trend and the current situation. It’s not like some other’s words that using the same trait over and over again.
What most teenagers and netizen see is only a tiny fraction of the foreign affairs. When something happens, they urge the government to take the immediate action to show some strength rather to think about the question in a big background.
In fact, in times of challenge and new world, China do have good ways to dealing with the world by coordinating its diplomacy with its ultimate goal: rejuveniting the country.

这是我的想法
中国的外交正在随着全球趋势发展和现状而改变。 这不像一些其他人说的，同一招用了一遍又一遍。
大多数青少年和网友看到的只是外交的一小部分。 当事情发生时，他们敦促政府立即采取行动表现出一些强硬，而不是在大背景下考虑这个问题。
事实上，在面临挑战和新世界的时代，中国确实有很好的办法来应对世界，通过协调外交和他们最终目标：振兴国家。

——————————————————————————————————————————

Kayine Qiao
“A large amount of Chinese, mostly teenagers and less-educated people, believe that China’s diplomacy is too weak, and they ask the government to be tougher on China’s adversaries.”
First of all,how did you get the idea of “ mostly teenagers and less-educated people, believe that China’s diplomacy is too weak”
Is there any data to support that?
I used to be a teenager,and my friends and I have never thought like that.
If there are many teenagers and less-educated people believe that China’s diplomacy is too weak.

That won’t be a problem.大部分中国人，特别是青少年和文化教育较低的人，都认为中国外交政策太软弱，要求政府需态度强硬怼对手。那么海外的你们认为中国外交政策如何呢？
首先，你是怎么得出“大部分中国人，特别是青少年和只受过低等教育的人，都认为中国外交政策太软弱”这个结论的？
你有任何数据支持吗？
我也曾经是青少年，我和我朋友从来没这么想过。
如果真有人这么想，那么也不是个问题。

Because firstly,teenagers are too young to understand politics, or they don't think it wholly.
And secondly, “weak”and “tough”are relative concepts,compared to Russia or USA,China would rather make announcements than send army or missiles.
What I think about China’s diplomacy is it’s reasonable and carefully considered.
Countries with big power would think twice before act while countries which have nothing to lose would declare wars without consideration.
In short：a beggar can never be bankrupt.

因为首先，青少年太年轻，不了解政治，或者他们的认识并不是完全。
其次，“软弱”和“强硬”是相对概念，与俄罗斯或美国相比，中国宁愿发布通告而非派遣军队或发射导弹。
我认为中国的外交是合理和慎重的。
具有强大力量的国家在行动之前会考虑两次，而已经没有什么可以失去的国家则会在没有考虑的情况下宣布战争。
简而言之：破罐子破摔。

The government of China announced officially that the foreign policy is:
1.China has always adhered to the path of peaceful development, and pursues an independent foreign policy of peace;
2.To safeguard world peace and promote common development is the purpose of China's foreign policy;
3.The five principles of peaceful coexistence are the basic principles of China's foreign policy;
4.Independence is the basic standpoint of China's diplomacy;
5.Safeguarding China's sovereignty, security and development interests, and promoting world peace and development are the basic objectives of China's diplomacy.
6.Strengthening solidarity and cooperation with the third world countries is the basic standpoint of China's foreign policy;
7.It is our basic national policy to support the opening up and strengthen international exchanges.

中国政府正式对人宣布政策是：
1.中国一直坚持和平发展的道路，奉行独立自主的和平外交政策，
2.维护世界和平，促进共同发展是中国对外政策的宗旨。
3.和平共处五项原则是中国外交政策的基本原则。
4.独立是中国外交的基本立场。
5.保卫中国的主权，安全和发展利益，促进世界的和平与发展是中国外交的基本目标。
6.加强与第三世界国家的团结合作是中国对外政策的基本立场。
7.支持开放和加强国际交流的基本国策。

It’s been 68 years since China was founded，and China has only been involved in 7 wars in total,while USA has been involed in 39 wars since 1945;Approximately speaking, it declares wars to other countries in every presidency.
Is it tough to start wars?
Is it tough to take resources away from other counties?Or to reject to admit the atrocity in ww2?
Is China cowardly that it doesn't “dare” to treat other countries with force?
I don’t think so.
It’s more difficult to maintain peace than start a war.
That’s the reason why China prefer to make statement ,which might look like some “cowardly act”,but it’s actually efficient and powerful.

中国成立68年来，总共只参与了七次战争，而自1945年以来，美国已经参与了39次战争，大致说来每任总统都对其他国家宣战过。
开始战争难吗？
是把资源从其他国家手里拿走很难？还只是为了拒绝再次面临第二次世界大战的暴行？
是中国只会懦弱地强调，不敢强硬对待其他国家吗？
我不这么认为。
维护和平比开战难得多了。。。
这就是为什么中国喜欢发表声明的原因，这可能看起来像是“懦弱的行为”，但它实际上是有效和强大的。

Recently, THAAD(Terminal High Altitude Area Defense - Wikipedia)become the headline of news,and LOTTE has been reported every where in China.
How would THAAD affect China?
It would expose 2/3 cities of China to Korea including Beijing ,Shanghai ,Hongkong ,Taipei .
Imagine ,one of your neighbours got a rifle ,and he /she can see though the walls with that.Whatever you do in your house would be your neighbour’s entertainment ,and the reason why he /she got that rifle is to deal with some crazy dogs near his/her back door.
Since the government clarify how THAAD will affect China and what LOTTE did to suppor THAAD,many companies end their cooperation relationship with LOTTE immediately ,which made LOTTE lost billions of dollars .
It’s really not a good move to infringe the interests of China,because China is now the largest trading partner for Korea.
Supermarkets took all products of LOTTE away from shelves,and its website was broken；In the same time,many airlines and shipping routes to Korea has been cancelled. An economic research institute of Korea revealed that if China upgrades “retaliatory” measures,it will cause Korea losses of about $15 billion.(it’s people’s volunteering action to resist Korean products actually:D)
We can’t be sure of how will this go,but this kind of foreign policy to react is wise, and it minimizes the lose(from the standpoint of the Chinese people).
At least, this time there is no bloodshed .

最近，萨德（终端高空地区防御 - 维基百科）成为每天的新闻的头条，乐天已经在中国各地都被报道了。
萨德如何影响中国的？
它将把中国的2/3城市暴露给韩国，包括北京，上海，香港，台北在内。
想象一下，你的邻居拿着阻击枪，他/她可以透过它穿过墙壁看到你家。无论你在家里做什么，都会是你邻居的饭后娱乐，而他/她得到这支枪的理由，只是为了处理掉一只徘徊在他/她的后门附近的疯狗。
自从我们政府普及萨德将如何影响中国和乐天对萨德部署的支持后，许多公司立即结束与乐天的合作关系，使乐天损失了数十亿美元。
中国现在是韩国最大的贸易伙伴，所以侵害中国的利益真的不是一个好主意。
超市将乐天的所有产品下架，乐天网站瘫痪，同时，许多航空公司飞韩国的航线已经取消。韩国的经济研究机构透露，如果中国升级“报复性”措施，韩国的损失将达到150亿美元左右（实际上是人民抵抗韩货是志愿行动）
我们无法确定事态最终会怎么发展，但这种外交政策对抗是明智的，最大限度地减少了损失（从中国人的角度来看）。
至少，这次没有流血事件。