资料图:丝绸之路上的甘肃永靖县炳灵寺石窟。中新社发 杨艳敏 摄
从“仰视”到“平视”,
是东方文化自信回归
中新社记者:我们以往经常说“崇洋”,但现在很多中国年轻人喜欢“国潮”“华流”,从东西文化吸引力的变化,能看出哪些历史逻辑?
邢广程:我年轻的时候,还能听到很多老年人将煤油叫“洋油”,火柴叫“洋火”。“洋”字代表了一种我们说不出的洋气感,其实就是文化吸引力。之前我们是仰视西方,现在不再仰视,而是平视,对西方的认识更客观,将西方文化作为一种和我们平等交流的文明载体来看待,东西文化吸引力不是单向的,而是双向、多向的。
这种心态的变化,最主要的支撑就是中国崛起。我们尝到了改革开放的甜头,尝到了全球化的甜头,尝到了文明互鉴的甜头,开放的大门会越开越大。同时,文化自信的程度越高,我们就越能感到有理由也有义务为人类文明做出更多中国贡献。
视频:【东西问·中外对话】专家:从“崇洋”到“国潮”折射东西文化吸引力变化来源:中国新闻网
中新社记者:伊朗年轻一代有没有对于本民族文化或者东方文化的“自信回归”?
纳思霖:我非常认同邢教授的观点,我们强调保护自己的文化、语言和文明,但这不意味着封闭,我们要与其他文明在互相尊重的前提下密切交往。
近十年,越来越多伊朗年轻人对东方文化感兴趣,大学有中文系,每年都有很多新生选择学中文。从现实看,中文是世界第二大语言,不少学生认为学中文未来可以找份好工作,有不错的收入。从更深层次看,他们是被中华文化吸引,学习汉语时,也会想接触中国的文化和艺术。
“自信回归”是个非常好的提法。其实,我们现在常说的美国文化,历史不是很长,只有几百年,甚至都无法称之为文化。东方有深厚的文明积淀,伊朗和中国作为因丝绸之路结缘的两大文明,如今应该有更好的文明交流示范。
美国为何对“一带一路”如此纠结?
中新社记者:近年来,中国与部分西方国家之间的人文交流受限,如何看待政治操作对文明交往交融的影响?
冀开运:中国经过40多年的改革开放融入全球化以来,西方的自利心态就凸显出来:你不能比我富裕,不能比我平等,全球化的好处只应属于我。因此,当中国成为国际秩序建设者、维护者时,这样的国际秩序他们宁可不要。
另外,欧美一些人对中华文化、东方文化始终有傲慢与偏见。他们固执地认为东方文化就是愚昧、落后、专制,在意识形态偏见下产生了文明上的傲慢,而这种傲慢又进一步加深偏见。
中新社记者:有观点认为,美国在欧亚地缘政治上的频繁动作只有一个目的,即阻碍欧亚大陆经济整合,如何解释?
邢广程:今年,美国在乌克兰危机背后下了很大功夫,客观上对丝绸之路经济带,对欧亚“五通”产生影响,因为已经打起仗来了。同时,他又在海上搞印太经济框架,在21世纪海上丝绸之路上再做堵点。美国不断在陆上和海上给亚欧制造新堵点,这种战略意图非常明显。
“一带一路”没有排斥美国,也希望美国参加,但是“你不当头就不参加,你要参加必须当头,必须听你的话”,这种帝国思维已不适合21世纪的发展。
资料图:2022年12月12日,中欧班列(齐鲁号)第1900列顺利开行。图为开行的“齐鲁号”班列。山东高速 供图中新社记者:如何让美国和西方理解超越意识形态的文明交流互鉴?
冀开运:全球化时代,中国离不开世界,世界也离不开中国。回顾古丝绸之路上的文明互鉴,有利于增进东西方在民族心理和文化信仰上的沟通理解。“脱钩”绝不符合世界人民的利益,也不符合中美两国利益。鼓噪“脱钩”言论,说明美国政客的狭隘和短见,事实上,也脱不了钩,不是中国人不想“脱钩”,美国的利益也要求无法“脱钩”。
邢广程:我们提出人类命运共同体理念,因为当今人类面临一大堆共同问题,包括气候、灾害、贫困等等,应对这些威胁只能团结协作、命运与共。上升到文明层面就要强调文明对话,强调文明是平等的,没有优劣之分。西方一定要消除“文明优越”的偏见,如果认定盎格鲁撒克逊民族天生高人一等,这就是对文明认识的扭曲。
中新网评:处理核污水绝不是日本自家私事****** 中新网北京1月19日电(蒋鲤)日本政府近日称,将于2023年春夏期间开始向海洋排放经过处理的福岛第一核电站核污水。日本罔顾国内民众及周边国家的屡屡反对,企图将核污水“一倒了之”,把一件关乎全球海洋生态环境和公众健康的事当成了自家私事。 资料图:日本福岛第一核电站。2011年,福岛核电站事故发生后,大量放射性物质泄漏到大气层和太平洋,对周围环境造成了难以逆转的伤害,数十万人被迫撤离该地区。时至今日,作为日本邻国之一的韩国仍未解除福岛海鲜禁令。 日本以核污水存储能力即将达到上限为由,在2021年4月13日,正式决定将福岛第一核电站核污水排入太平洋。过去一年多,日本政府和东京电力公司一直在持续推进核污水排海计划。 日本政府辩称,这些核污水经多核素处理系统(ALPS)处理后很安全,甚至“可以喝”,这样的表态无疑在愚弄大众。 事实上,经过处理的核污水仍含有多种放射性物质,核污水一旦排放入海就无法回收,长期来看,将会给海洋生态带来难以估量的潜在威胁,最终危害人类健康。 因此,核污水排海计划推出后,遭到日本民众强烈反对。日本《朝日新闻》2022年3月公布的问卷调查显示,福岛县、宫城县和岩手县受访的42个市町村长中,约六成反对东京电力公司福岛第一核电站核污水排放入海。日本全国渔业协会联合会也多次申明立场,反对该计划。 日本政府认为,核污水排海是最便宜、最省事的解决方案,但此举却将周边国家乃至全世界置于核污染风险中。太平洋非日本一家之海,核污水会随着洋流流动,其影响势必会跨越国界,危害周边国家乃至整个国际社会的公共福祉和利益。 《韩国经济新闻》发文称,相关研究认为,福岛核污水如果排放入海,约7个月后将到达济州等韩国海域,该国水产业和旅游业将遭受相当大的损失。 德国南极海洋机构也曾发出警告,若日本将所有核污水排入海中,不到半年,整个太平洋都将面临高度辐射威胁,包括远在大洋另一端的美国。太平洋地区人民更是对日本该计划持反对意见。 日本作为《联合国海洋法公约》缔约国,有义务保护海洋环境。然而,在核污水排海方案的正当性、核污水数据的可靠性、净化装置的有效性、环境影响的不确定性等问题上,日本未能作出科学、可信的说明。 国际原子能机构技术工作组虽已三次赴日实地考察评估,但尚未就日排海方案的安全性给出结论,并且对日本提出诸多澄清要求和整改意见。在此情况下,日本仍执意推进核污水排海工程建设,这是极不负责任的行为。 太平洋不是日本的下水道,日本必须正视各方合理关切,在与周边国家等相关利益方和国际原子能机构充分协商后,制定合理的核污水处理方案。日本也要着眼长远,若只顾眼前,执意将核污水排放入海,不仅其自身,周边国家乃至全世界都将为之买单,其后果必将会危害数代人。 Fukushima water disposal by no means Japan’s own business By John Lee (ECNS) -- Japan has announced it will release treated wastewater from the wrecked Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant into the Pacific Ocean this year. Although Fukushima wastewater disposal affects global marine ecological environment protection and public health, Japan has turned a deaf ear to domestic and international opposition to dumping the contaminated water into the sea, treating the "global" matter as its own business. The Fukushima accident in 2011 had sent large quantities of radiation into the atmosphere and the Pacific Ocean, causing irreversible damage to the surrounding environment, and hundreds of thousands of people were forced to evacuate the area. South Korea still maintains its import ban on Japanese seafood from areas affected by the Fukushima nuclear disaster. On April 13, 2021, Japan announced it had decided to discharge contaminated radioactive wastewater in Fukushima Prefecture into the sea due to dwindling storage space, with the Japanese government and plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings Inc. promoting the release plan over the past year. The Japanese government argues that the water treated by an advanced liquid processing system, or ALPS, is safe and drinkable, which is undoubtedly fooling the public. In fact, the treated wastewater still includes a variety of radioactive substances and can’t be recycled once discharged into the sea, which will pose a great threat to marine ecology and ultimately endanger human health in the long run. Therefore, the discharge plan has been strongly opposed in Japan. According to a questionnaire conducted by The Asahi Shimbun, nearly 60 percent of mayors of 42 municipalities in Iwate, Miyagi and Fukushima prefectures oppose the discharge plan. The National Fisheries Cooperative Federation of Japan has also repeatedly stated its opposition in public. The Japanese government believes that dumping Fukushima wastewater into the sea is the cheapest and most convenient solution, but neighboring countries and even the whole world will be at risk of nuclear pollution. The Pacific Ocean doesn’t belong to Japan and the wastewater flow along oceanic currents will surely break boundaries and endanger public welfare and the interests of neighboring countries and even the international community. The Korea Economic Daily reported that related research concluded that if contaminated water from Fukushima is released into the ocean, it would only take seven months for the contaminated water to reach the shores of Jeju Island, with the country's aquaculture and tourism suffering considerable losses. According to the calculation of a German marine scientific research institute, radioactive materials will spread to most of the Pacific Ocean within half a year from the date of discharge, and the U.S. and Canada will be affected by nuclear pollution. People in the Pacific region also oppose the discharge plan. As a participant of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Japan has the obligation of protecting the marine environment. However, it hasn’t offered a full and convincing explanation on issues like the legitimacy of the discharge plan, the reliability of data on the nuclear-contaminated water, the efficacy of the treatment system or the uncertainty of environmental impact. Though the IAEA has yet to complete a comprehensive review after three investigations in Japan, the Japanese side has been pushing through the approval process for its discharge plan and even started building facilities for the discharge. It is rather irresponsible for Japan to act against public opinion at home and concerns abroad. The Pacific Ocean is not a private Japanese sewer. The country must seriously heed the voices of the international community and make a reasonable plan for the Fukushima wastewater disposal after full consultation with stakeholders and international agencies. If it only seeks instant interest and insists on discharging the contaminated water into the sea, not only itself, but also its neighboring countries and the entire world will pay for the decision and several generations will be forced to bear the consequence.
|