编者按：如何回应老外对疫情、俄乌与台海的误解，是中外交流近期难点。中国人民大学重阳金融研究院执行院长、中美人文交流研究中心执行主任王文结合其近期接受外媒专访等经验，在其《环球时报》英文版第92篇“变局.专栏”中讲述经验。该文中文版在新媒体上引起广泛关注，“重头说起”也录制了该篇相关内容。人大重阳君推荐文章、视频如下：

视频来源：5月13日重头说起栏目

因为职业的关系，我会接触到不少外国人。近期我在线参加了不少与美国、欧洲国家的智库对话，也与不少西方国家驻中国使馆的外交官交流。他们提出一些关于俄乌冲突、中国经济等敏感问题的观点，具有普遍性。这期我想与大家分享自己的回答，供大家参考。

问题一：一些西方国家的外交官通常会质疑说，上海疫情的经济冲击，怎么可能中国2022年一季度GDP增长有4.8%呢？一些外国外交官质疑中国GDP数据，其潜台词是认为中国政府公布数据缺少公信力。回应这个问题，其实不只是经济学的技术问题，更是一个政治学的立场问题。

其实，数据公布当天，我所在的智库就推出《4.8%，有些意外，却是情理之中》的长篇评论，其中讲述增长9.7%的投资、增长10.7%的进出口贸易来。我的回答通常是，中国很大，此处不亮，他处亮。要相信中国经济的韧性。

上海疫情的确引起的普遍情绪焦躁，这完全是应被理解的。但我始终相信，从长期主义的视角看中国，短期的问题总会被解决。试想，如果学欧美完全“放开”，有越来越多的老人因感染而死去，到时候的问题会不会更严重呢？我自己始终坚持，对中国长期的看法，这是对中国国情的理性，更是对中国发展的信仰。

问题二：一些西方国家的外交官通常会质疑，中国在俄乌冲突问题上的立场。俄罗斯对乌克兰动武，为什么中国不谴责？不称俄是“入侵”？这个逻辑，其实也对一些中国老百姓有影响。

我通常的解释是，大国有比中小国家更广的安全边界。正如美国无法容忍1962年苏联在古巴部署导弹，甚至用“洗衣粉”为由2003年对伊拉克所谓的“威胁”进行预防性战争。这西方国家怎么没说美国入侵呢？

我经常举一个例子，如果见到两人打架，首先做得是劝架，再是讨论为什么要打，然后再判定谁对谁错。西方现在逻辑是，先动手那一方，肯定是错的。要号召大家团结起来制裁先动手那一方，不跟着制裁的也是有责任的。我觉得，这个逻辑看上去盛气凌人，其实这样的逻辑不讲法理，也不符伦理，更没有道理。

全世界只有30多个西方国家制裁俄罗斯，连纽约时报近期都发文认为，西方被世界孤立了。这恰恰证明了当下中国立场的正确、西方逻辑的谬误。现在西方外交官、一些西方媒体聚焦在“中国为何不谴责俄罗斯入侵”，其实是转移话题，回避战争背后的复杂原因。

外国朋友更应把关注力放在谁是这场俄乌冲突的幕后黑手，而不是随着美国与西方媒体的指摘将话题转移到中国的立场。

中国立场是长期一贯与富有逻辑的。国家之间首先应相互尊重，再是协商解决。做不到这两点怎么办？中国认为，那也应保持和平。实在保持不着，爆发战争了呢？就应该按是非曲直来做判断。

战争，中国肯定应反对。制裁同样，中国也应反对。中国是过去40年最不愿意战争、最追求和平、最少制裁他国的大国。对战争谴责，不应偏袒任何一方，也不应是双重标准。从这个角度看，只有中国是最客观中立的。

问题三：一些西方国家的智库学者、外交官近期经常讨论台湾问题。他们甚至会说，中国在台湾问题太敏感。我们近期的前高官去台湾访问，他们并不代表我们政府立场。

这个逻辑，我也不赞同。你们退下的高官，没什么事去台湾做什么？发表台湾言论，也不考虑一个中国的感受？台湾是中华民族的红线。不要碰！不要碰！不要碰！重要的事情说三遍。但美国和西方国家一些政客总是抖机灵，以不代表政府身份为由访问台湾，为那些前高官开托，还怪中国不理解他们的体制。行吧，那就别怪中国政府制裁或者有对等反应。

近期，我经常提醒一些西方国家外交官，现在最担心的事情是，美国“以乌制俄”战略占到了小便宜，会让美国同样在台湾炮制一场战争，以此实现“以台制华”的目的，延缓中国崛起的速度。这真是一场赌局，美国又想做庄。如果那样，就别怕中国后发制人，那将是人类灾难，但后果都要你们负。

当然，这三个问题肯定不能穷尽西方对中国的话语与意识形态的陷阱。我先举个别例子呢，是想真诚与一些朋友分享，当我这么回答时，一些西方外交官是接受的。

现在中国与西方话语与意识形态的冲突很严重。根子是在，西方还完全不能接受与适应中国崛起以后的对外交往方式。

说实在的，所有人必须适应与跟进中国作为全球大国的样子，包括我自己。人人都要有大国国民的样子。学者也要做大国学者。比如，十年前，作为智库学者，我无须那么频繁地对外发声；而现在，对外讲好中国故事，发表英文文章，变成我的重要工作之一。

另一方面，我也要说，一定要加强与外国人的交流。任何时候，交流都是重要的。应该想办法，拆除那些阻碍沟通与交流的围墙。现在，西方国家对中国的误解、抹黑很深，要交流、倾听，对的则倾听，错的则反驳。

中国要成为谦逊的大国，也要成为真诚的大国，当然，如果别人欺侮、故意抹黑咱们，咱们也要据理力争。这就是我的一些对外交往的真实感受。

以下为《环球时报》英文版内容

Talk is vital for mutual understanding, but China won’t hesitate to fight back West’s smear

By Wang Wen

Illustration: Liu Rui/GT

Because of my occupation, I often come into contact with many foreigners. Recently, I participated in many webinars with think tanks from the US and Europe, and also communicated with diplomats from a number of Western embassies in China. They put forward some common views on sensitive issues such as the Russia-Ukraine conflict and China's economy. I'd like to share my views.

The first question most have is how could China's GDP growth of the first quarter be 4.8 percent given the serious impact of the epidemic in Shanghai. This question underlines doubts about the credibility of China's official statistics.

The answer to this question is not only an economic one, but a political one. We should trust the resilience of the Chinese economy. The anxiety caused by the epidemic in Shanghai is completely understandable. But I always believe when we look at China from a long-term perspective, short-term problems will be solved. Just imagine, if we follow the US and Europe to completely "open" our society, more and more elderly people would die, and wouldn't the problem be more serious then? A long-term view of China requires a rational view of China's national conditions and belief in China's development.

The second question is: why didn't China condemn Russia's military action in Ukraine and why not call it an "invasion"? I would argue that big countries have wider security borders than smaller ones - just as the US could not bear the Soviet Union's deployment of missiles in Cuba in 1962. Similarly, it used "washing powder" as an excuse to conduct a preemptive war against Iraq in 2003. Why didn't Western countries blame US invasion?

I often cite an example. If you see two people fighting, you should first try to persuade them, then discuss why they fight, and then decide who is right and who is wrong. The current logic of the West is that the one who makes the first move is definitely wrong, therefore it calls on everyone to unite and punish the one who makes the first move and those who do not follow the sanctions are also responsible. This logic looks domineering, but in fact it is not legal, ethical or justified.

Even an article in The New York Times recently said that the West is isolated by the world. It just proves the correctness of China's current position and the fallacy of Western logic. Now some Western diplomats and media's focus on "why China didn't condemn Russia's invasion" is actually diverting the topic and avoiding the complicated reasons behind the war. Foreigners should attach more importance to who is the real initiator behind the scene.

China's position is consistent and logical. Countries should first respect each other, and then resolve through consultation. What if they can't do these two things? China believes that they should remain peaceful all the same. What if peace can't be maintained and a war breaks out? Then the case should be judged on the basis of right and wrong.

China should oppose war as well as sanctions. In the past 40 years, China has been the major country least willing to go to war, pursues peace the most, and imposes the least sanctions on other countries. The condemnation of war should not be biased toward any side, nor should it be a double standard. From this perspective, China is the most objective and neutral nation.

The third question concerns Taiwan island. Think tank scholars and diplomats from Western countries often talk about the Taiwan question and claim that China is too sensitive toward it. They assert that the visit to Taiwan by their former officials did not represent the position of their governments.

I don't agree with it. The Taiwan question is the red line of the Chinese nation and should not be crossed. Some politicians from the US and Western countries play the tricks and send former government officials to Taiwan, and blame China for not understanding their system. They could only expect sanctions or countermeasures from the Chinese government.

I have often reminded diplomats of some Western countries that what they should be most worried about now is that the US strategy of "containing Russia by making use of Ukraine" has gained certain advantage - and this may prompt the US to initiate a war in the Taiwan Straits as well so as to realize the goal of "containing China by making use of Taiwan and slowing down the speed of China's rise.'' This is a gamble. In that case, one should expect China's countermoves. It will be a disaster for mankind, but the West will pay for the consequences.

Now the conflict in discourse and ideology between China and the West is serious. The root cause is that the West has not been able to accept and adapt to the way of engaging with China after the rise of China. Western countries have deep misunderstandings of China. We should communicate with and listen to them, and we should pay heed to what is right and refute what is wrong.

(欢迎关注人大重阳新浪微博：@人大重阳 ；微信公众号：rdcy2013)