这真是媒体大混仗, 今天又有後续报导. http://tw.news.yahoo.com/060304/19/2wn77.html 不满「终止、废除」含混 美要求我确认未废统 寄给朋友 　 友善列印 【中时电子报 】 刘屏、林淑玲／华盛顿─台北连线报导针对台湾高层官员声称「终止与废除没有差别」， 美国国务院二日郑重要求台湾加以更正，并要求台湾，「毫不含糊的确认国统会没有废除 」。 我总统府(新闻)、国安会、外交部则口径一致强调，不论是总统府秘书长陈唐山(新闻)或 国安会秘书长邱义仁，都没有在二月廿七日总统府记者会上提到「终止与废除并无差别」 。 在美国国务院发表措词强硬声明後，政府高层立即进行危机处理。 危机处理 黄志芳：媒体误导 总统府、国安会指定外交部站到第一线，由外交部长黄志芳出面说明，强调这是媒体错误 报导。总统府、国安会昨天都没有针对此议题特别发表谈话。 总统府高层仍强调，陈总统二二七的七点保证，就是维持台海和平的最大诚意。 美国国务院在中国「人大」、「政协」两会开幕当天，对台湾有这麽大的动作，我高层官 员认为，美国务院副发言人艾瑞里在陈总统二二七召开国安高层会议的第二天，已召开记 者会，对陈总统终止国统会、国统纲领做法，有相当正面的评价，昨天的动作应是中国去 告状的结果。 美国务院是以副发言人艾瑞里的名义发布书面声明指出： 「我们看到报导指出，台湾的高级官员们说，有关国家统一委员会，「废除」与「终止运 作」其间并无差别；又说台湾本周稍早的动作，其效果是废除此一委员会。 我们被告知，此一报导是错误引述台湾官员的谈话。我们期待台湾当局公开更正此一纪录 ，并且毫不含糊的确认二月廿七日之宣布：没有废除国家统一委员会；没有改变现状；各 项承诺仍然有效。 我们从台湾当局获得的理解是：台湾在二月廿七日的动作是深思熟虑之举，以不改变现状 ，一如陈水扁(新闻)在七点声明里清楚表达的。 背弃一项承诺会改变现状，并且会违反上述的理解。 我们相信，台湾信守各项承诺对於维持现状至关重要。我们的坚定政策是不应片面改变现 状，诚如我们多次说过的。」 稍早在国务院的例行简报会上，艾瑞里表示，美国和台湾的理解不应有任何差距，「陈总 统的保证非常清楚，国统会并未废除。」「我们很有信心，也得到保证，陈总统的谈话反 映了他的政策和他所属政党的政策。」 避提头衔 直接称呼「陈水扁」 国务院网站的书面声明提到陈水扁时，并没有使用「总统」或「先生」等任何称谓，而是 直接称呼「陈水扁」。过去近一个月，美国官员曾避而不提扁的头衔及姓名，等到双方达 成共识後，美国官员恢复使用「陈水扁总统」字句。现在「总统」头衔又省去了。 根据艾瑞里在简报会的说法以及书面声明，台湾方面把责任推给媒体，说媒体「引述错误 ，报导不确」。可是书面声明期待的是台湾当局「毫不含糊」地更正「纪录」，而非期待 媒体更正「报导」，意谓着美国政府很清楚问题出在哪儿。 ====================================================== 以上所提的"美国务院副发言人艾瑞里的名义发布的书面声明", 我想原文在这里 http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2006/62488.htm Press Statement, Adam Ereli, Deputy Spokesman, Washington, DC, March 2, 2006 Taiwan – Senior Taiwan Officials’ Comments on National Unification Council We have seen reports that senior Taiwan officials have said, with respect to the National Unification Council, that there is no distinction between "abolish" and "ceasing activity" and that the effect of Taiwan’s action earlier this week was to abolish the Council. We have been informed, however, that the reports misquoted Taiwan officials. We expect the Taiwan authorities publicly to correct the record and unambiguously affirm that the February 27 announcement did not abolish the National Unification Council, did not change the status quo, and that the assurances remain in effect. Our understanding from the authorities in Taiwan was that the action Taiwan took on February 27 was deliberately designed not to change the status quo, as Chen Shui-bian made clear in his 7-point statement. Abrogating an assurance would be changing the status quo, and that would be contrary to that understanding. We believe the maintenance of Taiwan’s assurances is critical to preservation of the status quo. Our firm policy is that there should be no unilateral change in the status quo, as we have said many times. 2006/241 Released on March 2, 2006 ============================================= 然後, 中央社有另外一篇报导 http://tw.news.yahoo.com/060304/43/2wnq9.html 终统案　艾瑞里指美方已注意到台湾的声明 寄给朋友 　 友善列印 【中央社 】 （中央社记者林文集华盛顿三日专电）对於终止国统会一案，美国国务院副发言人艾瑞里 今天表示，美方已经注意到台湾方面的回应声明，美方的立场在昨天的声明里已经说得很 清楚，没有什麽要补充的地方。 美国国务院昨天发表书面声明，要求台湾公开确认并没有废除国统会，并未改变现状，且 确认相关保证仍然有效。国务院也指出，如果废止一项保证，就是改变现状。 对此，台湾外交部长黄志芳三日召开记者会指出，所有问题的根源是一篇错误的报导，针 对美方的疑问，他已与美国在台协会官员澄清，经过沟通後，台美间的立场并无差距或歧 见。 黄志芳强调，「终止运作（cease to function）」与「终止适用（cease to apply）」 的字样，是考量整体各种因素，并参酌法律专家意见後定案，「这是我们认为最适切的用 法」，希望外界勿作不必要的解读或延伸。 黄志芳也表示，至於美方要求台湾公开确认并未改变现状的部分，这个说法已在总统陈水 扁(新闻)在二月二十七日的「七点声明」中清楚陈述，「台湾无意改变现状」，也反对任 何一方以非和平的方式改变台海现状。 今天在国务院例行记者会上，有人问到美方对台湾所做回应的看法。艾瑞里表示，「我们 注意到台湾今天发出的声明。我想我们对这件事的立场已经在我们的声明里说明的很清楚 ，对於我们的那项声明，我没有要补充的地方。很重要的是台湾要毫不含糊地澄清其立场 。」 对於台湾方面的说法美方是否觉得可以的问题，艾瑞里表示，美方要讲的昨天已经在声明 里讲得很清楚了，至於台湾方面说了什麽或是没有说什麽，应该要去问台湾。950303 ========================================== 我想, 原文应该是出自这里: (三月二号, 国务院网站daily press) http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2006/62487.htm QUESTION: Sorry. I have one question about Taiwan. After the U.S. expressed a certain level of relief or a satisfaction about Taiwan's authority, not abolishing the Unification Council. Some officials in Taiwan stated that there's no difference between abolish and cease to function. The reality is the Council is terminated and President Chen hardly made any compromise. He still did what he said he would do. So is there any gap between the U.S. understanding and Taiwanese understanding about the wording in the final outcome? MR. ERELI: No. There's no -- there shouldn't be any gap or difference of opinion here. President Chen's assurances were quite clear that the NUC had not been abolished. We've seen the reports of comments attributed to other party officials. We've been informed by the Taiwanese that these officials have been misquoted and the reports are not accurate. And it is our understanding from the authorities in Taiwan that the action they took on February 27th was deliberately designed not to change the status quo, and that was made clear in a statement by President Chen and that -- We have every confidence and assurance that President Chen -- the statements made by President Chen are reflective of his policy and his party's policy. QUESTION: And have you reached out then to express your displeasure about his cabinet members or officials to have a statement like that? MR. ERELI: We think that the statements and assurances of the president are -- as I said, reflect the policy and position of the government and those in the president's party. ※ 编辑: abc0 来自: 143.48.8.154 (03/04 10:27)