当年美方的谈判立场之一是:“We are prepared to serve as the `mailman’ between Dr. Fang and the Chinese government in this regard without offering commitments on behalf of the US government.”(见talking points Nov.18, 1989, 全文将附于(B)中)。大使李洁明确曾说:“I’m only the mailman for Fang Lizhi (我只是方励之的传信人)”[3]。“only”一词不准确。但李洁明确实在谈判中扮演过传信人角色,他传来中国政府的口信和文件,也传去我们的回应。重要谈判前,李洁明往往将他的谈判要点(talking points)告诉我们。所以,我们知道1989.6-1990.6期间的中美外交谈判的部分细节,也保留有一些相关文件。
那天(6月5日)下午,我们在Perry Link (林培瑞)陪同下去大使馆,想在那里暂住几天,以渡过动荡不定的时局。薄瑞光接待了我们的。当时李洁明大使和夫人莎莉(Sally)刚到北京,尚未搬入大使官邸。大使馆事务由薄瑞光代办主持。薄同我们谈了两个多小时。看得出来,他不欢迎我们在大使馆暂住。所以,我们于下午4点多钟离开使馆,去建国饭店过夜,林培瑞则回了他自己的家。没想到,只过了几个小时,薄瑞光的态度居然大变,不但欢迎我们去住,而且说是作为总统的客人。
稍后,李洁明还送来一部1963年的美国好莱坞老电影“北京的55天”(55 days at Peking),描写1899年义和拳攻打使馆区时,美使馆里的海军陆战队员及平民坚守55个昼夜,未被“金钟罩铁布衫”义和拳民攻破,直等到援军(即八国联军)到达,获解救。美使馆人员大概都看了这部历史电影。义和拳事件时,就有中外教士教民在使馆区避难。(在小学,40年代初的北京,凡抡拳打架,不少同学都要大喊一句“我有金钟罩铁布衫!”,壮义和胆也。)
李洁明告,若有紧急情况,速接海军陆战队的值班电话。
以后,李洁明大体每十天来一次。政治一秘司徒文[ William (Bill)Stanton ]每两天来一次。此公为英文文学博士。当时还年轻,精干壮实,血气方刚。现为AIT台北办事处主任,等价于美国驻台大使。
By granting refuge to Fang Lizhi and his wife, the US Embassy has grossly interfered in China’s internal affairs and also violated international law. The Chinese government has on many occasions made representations to the American side about this matter. The Fang Lizhi case is a serious political issue which involves China’s sovereignty, law, national dignity and the norms of international law. We hope that the United States will act in accordance with the principle of respecting China’s law and following the norms of international law, extricate itself as early as possible from the quagmire of interfering in China’s internal affairs, and refrain from doing anything to further aggravate the Fang Lizhi issue. Otherwise, the American side shall bear the full responsibility for all the serious consequences arising therefore to the Sino-US relations.
内容是谴责美方对方李的庇护。其中说到方李的罪行是进行反革命宣传及鼓动反革命活动。
我曾建议大使在谈判时问中国当局,我们被指控犯罪的具体内容。以便真要写“认罪书”,也好知道要写那一条。后来,李洁明大使告诉我,这个问题他问了,中国外交部副部长刘华秋的答复是:“他们的罪行是显然的”(“it is obvious,…”)李洁明不接受这种答复。“认罪书”也不好写“显然”罪。李洁明坚持索要中国检察部门对方李的起诉书副本。既然中方照会提到方李一案涉及主权,是的严重政治问题,并有通缉令。按理,中方应有起诉书文本,列举方李的罪行。然而,刘华秋始终没有拿出书面的起诉书。
注1)刘华秋说,方励之“进行反革命宣传及鼓动反革命活动”的首条罪状是,方曾说“中共已经有三十年的不成功,如果改革再不成功,中共应当下台”。经查实,我确实说过此话,说话的时间是,1988年7月10日;地点是,南京大学中美文化中心;“反革命宣传”及“鼓动反革命活动”的对象是何柞庥教授。该年6月11日至7月12日,在南京大学举办“宇宙学及粒子物理”讲习会。A.Zee(徐一鸿,加州大学Santa Barbara 物理教授),于7月10日,邀中国科学院理论物理研究所何柞庥教授,北京天文台方励之到他房间,谈论时局。物证有,1.) 该讲习会的文集“Cosmology and Particle Physics”eds. Li-Zhi Fang & A. Zee (Gordon, 1988)[7];2.)当时的照片。
注2)第二条罪状是,1989年2月2日,方在 The New York Review of Books发表“China’s despair and China’s hope ”一文。后在境内流传。
注10)罪行十,与王丹接触。我的1989年4月20日日记中只有两个字:“clustering”, “Perry Link”。前者意为写“Biased clustering in a universe with hot dark matter and a cosmic string”一文。后发表于 Astr. & Astrophys. 233, (1990),1。第二个字意为林培瑞来。没有王丹。
We are deeply concerned over the recent announcement by the Robert F. Kennedy Memorial of the United States of its decision to bestow the 1989 Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Award on Fang Lizhi. I am instructed to make representations to the US government about this matter.
Fang Lizhi, who has broken the law by committing the crime of counterrevolutionary propaganda and incitement, is wanted criminal of China’s public security department. The Fang Lizhi case is a political issue rather than a human rights issue. The Robert F. Kennedy Memorial’s decision to offer Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Award to Fang Lizhi represents open support to Fang Lizhi’s anti-government activities, and constitutes a gross interference in China’s internal affairs and an act to further worsen Sino-US relations. We hereby express our deep regret and utmost indignation to the Robert F. Kennedy Memorial at its provocation against the Chinese people. The Chinese government demands that the United States Government take effective measures to stop it.
[1] 钱其琛,外交十记, (世界知识出版社, 2002)
[2] George Bush & Brent Scowcroft,A world transformed,(Knopf, 1998)
[3] James Mann, About Face , p. 237 (Knopf, 1999)
[4] James Lilly,China Hands (Public Affairs 2004)
[5] Henry Kissinger, On China (Penguin, 2011)
[6] Fang Lizhi, Bringing down the great wall, (Knopf, 1990)
[7] Li-Zhi Fang & A. Zee, Cosmology and Particle Physics, (Gordon, 1988)
Former president Nixon and former secretary of state Kissinger shared with us the thoughts recently expressed to them by Deng Xiaoping regarding a possible path to speedy resolution of the Fang Lizhi situation.
Mr. Deng suggested to president Nixon – that the best solution is a “simple” one. I would like now to restate our understanding of what Mr. Deng said in general terms:
A statement regarding his activities will be required of Fang Lizhi.
There should be agreement by Dr. Fang not to engage in political activities.
Dr. Fang and his family should be removed from China, preferably to the United States.
(此段取自talking point Nov. 18. 见附录[3])
路线图大意是,可以放走方励之全家,条件是: a.) 方励之应写个陈述,说明他的活动;b.) 应有保证,方不得从事政治活动;c.) 方全家应离开中国,最好去美国。基辛格建议,点c.) 改成“去第三国”。
路线图还有关键一句——“the best solution is a ‘simple’ one”。什麽是 ‘simple’ one ?尼克松及基辛格可能都没有在意,或邓有意没说清。
条件 a.)和c.) 不难办到。b.) 的含义要在谈判中澄清。美方的立场是:
There are limited to any U.S. government control over Dr. Fang and his family, now and in the future. The U.S. government cannot legally offer guarantees regarding what an individual in the United States might say or do. I believe that Dr. Fang and his family understand this point. (此段取自talking point Nov. 18. 见附录 [3])
We understand that Dr. Fang would offer full assurances to my Government that he would engage exclusively in scientific and scholarly research for a period of time following his departure from China.
大意是,方励之向美国政府作了充分保证,他离开中国后,在一段时间里,将专心致志于科学研究。技巧是“在一段时间里”(for a period of time)。到底是多长?一天?一个月?一年?十年?没说。所以,并无定量约束,整句话等于是不可检验的废话。但废话能使各方都有脸,这就是废话的功效。
“May I propose a toast to the People’s Republic of China
--- to the health of President Yang(杨尚昆)
--- to the great Chinese People
--- and to U.S. – Chinese friendship”
电脑原属一位在大使馆工作的外交官,他有数学Ph.D. 学位。该外交官于1989年7月奉调回国,将电脑送给我。该机的性能,不如我家里的计算机,后者被抄家的警察抄走了。虽然不够理想,但还是能用来研究宇宙学。
1989年12月22日,我的日记写道:“改定‘Periodicity of redshift distribution in a T-3 universe’”。这是用大使馆苹果机算出的第一篇论文。此文后来发表于Astronomy & Astrophysics, 239, (1990), 24。发表时,我们还没有离开大使馆。这篇论文在1990年一月曾作为美国费米实验室(Fermi National Acceleration Laboratory)的预印本发至世界各地的物理系,物理研究所,包括中国。其重要作用是使许多朋友知道我在哪里,如何通讯可以不通过中国邮政的检查。
有了图2上公布的地址,我陆续收到大量同行寄来的文章、书籍,天体物理的主要期刊。我们收到的印刷品的数量之多,使负责转送外交邮件的信使都有“怨言”。 有一天,邮件实在太多了,他对大使说:“给方的邮件占用的外交邮包太多了,应当让物理学界专门向国务院交钱”。
恰好,一位在石溪 (University of New York at Stony Brook)理论物理研究所(现称杨振宁研究所)任职的朋友 Perry McCoy教授和夫人汤敦序(民主党骨干,不喜欢布什共和党当局)来信也说到交钱:
“今年我们将很高兴交税, 因为你在大使馆住,说明今年美国政府总算还做了一点好事”。
附录
[1] James Lilly,China Hands (Public Affairs 2004)
[2] Henry Kissinger, On China (2011)
[3]. 1989年11月18日,谈判要点。
Talking Points: Meeting with VFM Liu Huaqiu, MFA
Saturday, November 18, 1989
I have asked for this appointment on a Saturday afternoon to begin discussion with you of the Fang Lizhi matter. I am authorized to do so by my government.
Former president Nixon and former secretary of state Kissinger shared with us the thoughts recently expressed to them by Deng Xiaoping regarding a possible path to speedy resolution of the Fang Lizhi situation. We understand that Mr. Deng made similar remarks to a visiting Japanese delegation a few days ago.
We share a desire to resolve this situation; we are prepared to proceed expeditiously to resolve the case; and we believe – as Mr. Deng suggested to president Nixon – that the best solution is a “simple” one.
I would like now to restate our understanding of what Mr. Deng said in general terms:
A statement regarding his activities will be required of Fang Lizhi.
There should be agreement by Dr. Fang not to engage in political activities.
Dr. Fang and his family should be removed from China, preferably to the United States.
My government believes that this general framework can serve as the basis for a resolution of the Fang case.
Our requirements with respect to the Fang Lizhi situation can also be stated simply:
We seek assurances that your government is prepared to guarantee and facilitate departure from China by Fang and his family to a destination overseas.
** If asked: by “family” I refer to Fang Lizhi, Li Shuxian and their son Fang Zhe.
Dr. Fang and his family, once overseas, should be free of harassment or the fear of arrest and free to pursue research and study as they wish.
We assume that the Chinese side would share our wish that agreement on departure of the Fang family would occasion a minimum of commentary by either side, and that such official comment would lay emphasis on the positive implications for development of our bilateral relationship.
We are prepared, as I have said, to work together with you to solve this problem expeditiously. It should not be unduly complicated to resolve, and we see no reason why we should not reach an understanding with you in very short order.
I wish at this time to offer some observations concerning our relationship with Dr. Fang and his family:
I understand that Dr. Fang is preparing a personal statement of this political beliefs which also addresses his role and thinking vis-a-vis the student movement.
There are limited to any U.S. government control over Dr. Fang and his family, now and in the future. The U.S. government cannot legally offer guarantees regarding what an individual in the United States might say or do. I believe that Dr. Fang and his family understand this point.
I understand that Dr. Fang would contemplate offering full assurance to my government that he would engage exclusively in scientific and scholarly research for a period of time following his departure from China.
But I must reiterate that any promises regarding Dr. Fang’s future behavior after he departs the Embassy must be between Dr. Fang his self and the Chinese government.
We are prepared to serve as the “mailman” between Dr. Fang and the Chinese in this regard without offering commitments on behalf of the U.S. government.
Of course, we will want to urge the Chinese government to accept Dr. Fang’s solemn commitments, but as I have said we will not be in apposition to enforce any agreement after Fang has departed.
As you are aware, I depart Monday for three weeks in the United States. I will return on December 13. In my absence, Lynn Pascoe will be charged affaires.
Mr. Pascoe will be prepared to work with you during the time I am away.
In conclusion, may I state once more that it is our common hope that we may now proceed to place our bilateral relationship back on a constructive footing.
I would like to hear the Vice Foreign Minister’s reactions.
Draft: POL: D W Keyser (incorporating new material from State 369399)
Cleared: DCM: B.L. Pascoe
[4], 1989年11月24日,谈判要点。
Talking Points: Dr. Fang Lizhi’s Statements on Past, Future
Friday, November 24, 1989
I have brought with me a statement which Dr. Fang Lizhi has asked that we convey to the Chinese Government. His statement is in two parts: the first deals with his past activities, the second with his intentions and wishes concerning the future. This is the statement which Ambassador Lilly indicated to you on November 18 that Dr. Fang was drafting.
We said previously that we knew of no reason that our two sides might not work to resolve this matter swiftly in our common interest. It is important for us to do so. We believe that Dr. Fang’s decision to draft a statement is significant, and will permit us to move ahead to the early resolution that we both desire.
I wish to reiterate points Ambassador Lilly earlier made to you concerning the role of the U.S. Government.
Dr. Fang’s statement is his alone. We are willing to facilitate communication between him and the Chinese Government – as we are doing today – but we are not in a position to offer commitments on behalf of the U.S. Government.
There are limits to any U.S. Government control over Dr. Fang and his family, both now and in the future. The U.S. Government cannot legally offer guarantees regarding what an individual in the United States, or in a third country, might say or do.
Any promises regarding Dr. Fang’s future behavior after he departs the Embassy must be between Dr. Fang himself and the Chinese Government. We understand that Dr. Fang would offer full assurances to my Government that he would engage exclusively in scientific and scholarly research for a period of time following his departure from China.
We continue to see considerable merit in a solution which involves initial quiet departure by Dr. Fang and his family to some third country.
Dr. Fang has received more than a dozen offers from various institutions to conduct scientific and scholarly research following his departure from China. These offers have been made by institutions in the United States and in such European countries as France, Italy and the Vatican.
If Dr. Fang and his family were to depart for one of these third countries, we anticipate that it would be easier to avoid the glare of media attention.
I would like to hear the Vice Foreign Minister’s reactions.
[5] George Bush & Brent Scowcroft,A World Transformed,(Knopf, 1998)
[6] 斯考克罗夫特的祝酒词,1989/12/9, 北京
Mr. Foreign Minister, Distinguished Guests, Ladies and Gentleman:
My colleagues and I have come here today as friends, to resume our important dialogue on international questions of vital interest to both our nations. This is a dialogue which we believe has contributed to the historic, peace, stability, and prosperity of Asia and the world.
Last weekend, in another corner of the world, presidents Bush and Gorbachev held talks on the great issues of our day. Afterwards, President Bush instructed me to come to China and inform our Chinese hosts about the talks in Malta. There is nothing between the United States and the Soviet Union that needs to be hidden from the government of China. The peace and stability of the world are enhanced by this dialogue.
We also come today to bring new impetus and vigor into our bilateral relationship and seek new areas of agreement – economic, political, and strategic.
And we come to reduce the negative influence of irritants in the relationship.
We believe it is important that we not exhaust ourselves in the placing blame for problems that exist. Rather, by working together – within the values of our different social systems – we should seek to solve common problems and remove irritants.
It is the President’s strong desire to see these talks make progress and lay the groundwork for the solutions we seek.
Speaking as a friend, I would not be honest if I did not acknowledge that we have profound areas of disagreement – on the events at Tiananmen, on the sweeping changes in Eastern Europe. We see your complaints about us in the pages of People’s Daily.
But I recall that when we have found ways to work together, the world has been changed for the better; and when we have been at odds, needless tension and suffering were the result. In both our societies there are voices of those who seek to redirect or frustrate our cooperation. We both must take bold measures to overcome these negative forces.
In these meetings we seek to outline broad areas where agreement is possible, and to isolate for another time those areas of disagreement. The sooner we set about this task, the better. The path ahead will not be smooth and it will not be short.
But we have accomplished much when we have worked together in the past. I can cite scientific and technological exchanges, the departure of Soviet combat forces from Afghanistan, limits on missile proliferation, peace on the Korean peninsula, the withdrawal of Vietnam’s combat forces from Cambodia, mutually beneficial trade and investment, technology transfers, scholarly exchanges, and more. We – both side – must persevere. Now more than ever.
We are not China’s prime enemy or threat, as some would claim. But, like you, we are true to our own values, our heritage and traditions. We can be no other way. We extend our hand in friendship, and hope you will do the same.
May I propose a toast to the People’s Republic of China
--- to the health of President Yang
--- to the great Chinese People
--- and to U.S. – Chinese friendship
Leniency一词曾是罗马教会忏悔(confession)的常用语,诸如“请求博大全能仁慈的……宽恕”云云。他们告诉我,在强权威胁之下写一句“我认罪” (I confess) 没有关系。上帝会原谅这时说的假话。伽利略写过认罪书:“我的最显赫辉煌,最令人敬畏,最高贵无比的枢机主教……”[2]。性急的朋友干脆寄来他们代我起草的“认罪陈述”。我一共收到过三份代写的认罪草稿。我想他们不是自己写的,而是从忏悔手册(manuals of confession)中抄来的,也许只是段落的排列组合略有不同而已。
这时期,我倒是写了一篇“半宗教”的文章,题为 “Note on the interface between science and religion”。该文被收在梵蒂冈教廷出版的有关教皇保罗二世的一个文集中,书名是“John Paul II on Science and Religion: Reflection on the New View from Rome” [3]。其中保罗二世的罗马新观点之一,就是否定了1616和1630年教廷对伽利略的判决。
1. I oppose the Four Cardinal Principles contained in the Preamble to the Chinese Constitution, because their purpose is to uphold a political system of “class struggle.” I take note that the Chinese Government holds that the above political stand is opposed to the Constitution.
2. In order to conduct scientific exchange with some 20 universities in North America and Western Europe, and also to visit relatives and friends abroad and to obtain necessary medical treatment, I apply to leave the country and travel abroad. I hope that the Chinese Government will give this humanitarian consideration.
3. The purpose in abroad in focused on scholarly exchange and research. I will appreciate and welcome all activities which accord with the progressive interests of Chinese society, and I will not participate in any activities having the motive of opposing China’s progressive interests.