2010年12月11日 星期六

諾貝爾和平獎委員會主席亞格蘭演辭全文

2010年12月10日 挪威奧斯陸

國王和皇后陛下、閣下們、女士們、先生們,

「挪威諾貝爾和平獎委員會決定,授予劉曉波 2010年諾貝爾和平獎,以表彰他為爭取和維護中國基本人權所進行的長期的、非暴力的努力。挪威諾貝爾和平獎委員會一向的觀點是,人權與和平之間有着緊密的聯繫。人權是阿爾弗雷德.諾貝爾在其遺囑中所提出的『各國間友愛』的先決條件。」

我剛才所讀的,是今年 10月 8日挪威諾貝爾和平獎委員會頒獎公告的第一段。

我們深感遺憾的是,和平獎獲得者劉曉波正被隔離監禁在中國東北部的一個監獄裏,不能親自出席今天的儀式。他的妻子劉霞或其他親屬也不能前來。因此,今天我們不會頒發和平獎的獎章和證書。

這一事實本身就說明,授予劉曉波這項獎是必要的、應該的。我們對他榮獲本年度諾貝爾和平獎表示衷心祝賀。

歷史上,曾經有多位和平獎得主無法親自出席頒獎儀式。事實上,最有歷史意義和最具榮譽的幾項和平獎中,就有好幾項在頒發時都發生了這樣的情況。也有很多次,雖然獲獎者得以前來,卻遭到了本國政府的強烈譴責。

1935年委員會將和平獎授予卡爾.馮.奧西茨基時,就引起了軒然大波。希特勒(希特拉)暴跳如雷,禁止任何一個德國人前來接受任何一項諾貝爾獎。挪威的哈康國王沒有出席頒獎儀式。奧西茨基也未成行,並在一年多之後去世。

安德列.薩哈羅夫 1975年得獎時,也是激起了驚濤駭浪。他也沒有能夠親自前來領獎,而是由其夫人代為出席。 1983年和平獎得主列赫.瓦文薩(華里沙)也經歷了同樣的境遇。昂山素季(昂山素姬) 1991年獲獎令緬甸政府惱怒不堪,她也沒能親臨奧斯陸領獎。

2003年,希爾琳.艾芭迪(伊巴迪)在榮獲和平獎之後來到挪威。儘管伊朗政府做出了種種消極反應,伊朗駐挪威大使卻出席了頒獎儀式。

諾貝爾和平獎委員會曾向南非人士頒發過四項和平獎。所有四位得主都親臨奧斯陸。但 1960年亞伯特.盧圖利和 1984年圖圖(杜圖)主教的獲獎,都引起了南非種族隔離政權的強烈不滿,直到 1993年納爾遜.曼德拉和戴克拉克(德克勒克)榮獲和平獎,才終於博得了雷鳴般的掌聲。

頒發以上這幾項和平獎的目的,當然絕對不是為了侮辱任何人或任何國家。委員會的意圖是通過頒獎,來凸顯人權、民主與和平之間的關係。同樣重要的是,我們要提醒世人,當今世界大部份地區民眾所享有的權利,是有人不畏個人得失而奮鬥和努力的成果。

他們是為了民眾的利益而無畏奮鬥的,這就是為甚麼劉曉波值得我們的支持。

雖然本委員會的成員從來沒有與劉曉波見過面,我們卻感到很瞭解他。我們密切地關注和審視他已經有相當長的一段時間了。

劉曉波於 1955年 12月 28日出生在中國吉林省長春市。他在吉林大學獲得文學學士後,於北京師範大學獲碩士和博士學位,並留該校任教。他曾在奧斯陸大學、夏威夷大學和紐約的哥倫比亞大學擔任訪問學者。

1989 年,他回國參加正在興起的民主運動。 6月 2日,他和幾位朋友開始在天安門廣場絕食,抗議政府的戒嚴。他們發佈了由劉曉波起草的包含六點的民主宣言,反對獨裁、提倡民主。劉曉波不贊同學生與政府之間發生正面衝突,試圖用一種和平的方式,來解決雙方之間的緊張對峙局勢。早在那時,非暴力就成為他民主理念中的一個核心因素。 6月 4日,他和朋友們勸說學生撤退,以避免他們與軍隊的直接衝突。他沒有能夠完全扭轉局勢。很多人喪失了生命,大多數是在天安門廣場之外。

劉曉波告訴自己的妻子,要把今年的和平獎獻給「六四亡靈」。我們完全遵從他的意願。

劉曉波曾經說:「非暴力反抗的偉大之處在於,當人類必須面對被強加的暴政及其苦難時,居然是受害者用愛面對恨,以寬容面對偏見,以謙卑面對傲慢,以尊嚴面對羞辱,以理性面對狂暴。」

天安門事件成了劉曉波生命的重大轉折時刻。

1996 年,劉曉波以「造謠、誹謗」為由被勞動教養三年。他在 2003年到 2007年間擔任獨立中文筆會會長,書寫了將近 800篇文章,其中 499篇寫於 2005年之後。他是《零八憲章》的起草人之一,而《零八憲章》是在 2008年 12月 10日發表的。正如憲章的引言所述, 2008年是「中國立憲百年,《世界人權宣言》公佈 60周年,「民主牆」誕生 30周年,中國政府簽署《公民權利和政治權利國際公約》 10周年」。《零八憲章》呼籲保護基本人權,發表後已經有幾千名國內外人士先後在上面簽名。

2009年 12月 25日,劉曉波因判決書中所稱的「煽動他人推翻國家政權和社會主義制度」而構成的「煽動顛覆國家政權罪」獲刑 11年,被剝奪政治權利兩年。劉曉波自始至終都堅稱,這項判決既違反了中國憲法,也與基本人權的原則相悖。

在中國有不少持政治異見者,他們對很多問題持有與政府不同的觀點。劉曉波所獲的嚴刑,使他不再僅僅是人權運動的一個重要代言人,幾乎一夜之間,他就成了中國人權運動的民族和國際象徵。

國王和皇后陛下、女士們、先生們,

在冷戰期間,人們對和平與人權之間的關係一直是眾說紛紜、爭執不休。冷戰結束後,和平研究者和政治學家們卻幾乎無一例外地強調了這種關係的緊密。這可能是至今為止他們所做出的最「經得起時間考驗」的發現之一。民主政權會向獨裁政權宣戰,並且確實發動過殖民戰爭,但歷史上恐怕找不出任何的一個民主政權向另一個民主政權發起戰爭的實例。

阿爾弗雷德.諾貝爾在其遺囑中所提出的更深層的「各國間兄弟般的友情」,即真正實現和平的先決條件,在沒有人權和民主的前提下是無法建立的。

世界歷史上,幾乎沒有任何其他大國,曾經像中國那樣,在如此長一段時間內取得了如此迅猛的發展。從 1978年起,中國連年保持着 10%甚至更高的增長速度。幾年前,中國的生產總值超過了德國,今年又超過了日本。由此,中國國內生產總值躍居世界第二。美國的國內生產總值仍然比中國高出三倍,但中國在繼續前進,而美國卻面臨着重重困難。

經濟發展的成果使幾億中國人擺脫了貧困。在促進減少世界貧困人口的努力中,中國的重要貢獻不可磨滅。
從某種程度上,我們可以說,有着 13億人口的中國肩負着人權的命運。如果中國能夠建立起一種徹底保障公民權利的社會主義市場經濟,就將會對世界產生深遠的積極影響。否則,就可能面臨社會和經濟危機四起的險惡局勢,從而產生危及整個世界的消極後果。

歷史經驗告訴我們,要繼續保持快速的經濟增長,就需要有研究自由、思想自由和辯論自由作為前提條件。此外,沒有言論自由,腐敗、官權驕縱和惡治就會滋長蔓延。任何一種官權體制都必須要通過民主監督、自由的媒體和公民的批評權來加以制衡。

在不同程度上實施獨裁體制的國家,可以在較長階段保持高速的經濟增長,但世界上幾乎所有最富庶的國家都是民主國家這一事實並非偶然。民主能夠調動更多的人力和技術資源。

在國際社會中的新地位,也意味着中國必須承擔更大的責任。中國必須做好準備接受批評,並將此視為一種積極的輸入,一種改進的機遇。所有權力大國和掌控大權者都必須抱有這樣的態度。我們對美國在各個時代的角色都持有自己的看法。友邦和盟國都曾經因為越南戰爭和黑人無法充份享有公民權利而批評過美國。 1964年馬丁.路德.金獲得諾貝爾和平獎時,很多美國人對此都頗有貶詞。但事後看來,正是由於非裔美國人群獲得了應有的公民權利,美國才變得更為強大。

很多人可能會問,今日中國處處顯示出強大的實力,那麼,一個公民因為對國家治理表達了自己的觀點而被監禁 11年,這是否恰恰顯示出了中國的弱點所在。

這種弱點在劉曉波一案判決書中暴露無遺。判決書中強調說,影響尤其惡劣的是,他在互聯網上發佈自己的文章。但是,畏懼技術進步的人,最該畏懼的其實就是未來。資訊技術不會消亡,它只會進一步地開放社會。正如俄羅斯總統德米特裏.梅德韋傑夫在對杜馬的演講裏所說的那樣,「新的信息技術給了我們與世界相聯繫的可能。即使統治階級對此抱敵視態度,世界和社會也會變得越來越開放。」

梅德韋傑夫在說這席話時,針對的無疑是前蘇聯。強迫和管制民意,阻礙了這個國家參與上世紀七十和八十年代的技術革命。整個專制體系最終崩潰。如果能夠在早期就與安德烈.薩克羅夫這樣的人士開展對話,前蘇聯肯定會受益匪淺。

國王和皇后陛下、女士們、先生們,

今天,一個民族國家或民族國家中的多數人群體都不具有無限的權力。人權約束了民族國家及其多數人群體的行為。這項原則必須適用於所有加入了《世界人權宣言》的聯合國的成員國。中國簽署甚至批准了聯合國和國際勞工組織的多項主要國際人權公約。值得注意的是,中國還接受了 WTO的超國家爭端解決機制。

中國的憲法保障最基本的人權。《中國憲法》第三十五條規定:「中華人民共和國公民有言論、出版、集會、結社、遊行、示威的自由」。第四十一條的第一句就是:「中華人民共和國公民對於任何國家機關和國家工作人員,有提出批評和建議的權利」。

劉曉波正是踐行了他的公民權利。他的所做所為無錯、無罪,因此他必須獲得釋放!

近 100到 150年以來,人權與民主在世界上的地位日益鞏固,和平也隨之而來。對此,歐洲的近代史就提供了一個有力的佐證,因為歐洲曾經歷過多次戰爭的蹂躪,歐洲的殖民政府也曾經頻頻挑起過世界各地的戰爭。而今天,歐洲基本上可以稱為是「和平」之洲。二戰後非殖民化的進程,使一系列國家,首先是在亞洲,然後是在非洲,獲得了自治和尊重基本人權的可能性。以印度為首的很多國家掌控住了這個機遇。最近十年以來,我們還目睹了拉丁美洲、中歐和東歐民主化進程的推進。很多穆斯林國家,例如土耳其、印度尼西亞和馬來西亞,也在向着同樣的方向發展。很多其他國家也即將改變其政治體系封閉的現狀。

中國的人權活動家們所捍衞的是國際秩序和國際社會的主流。如此看來,他們不是甚麼異見分子,他們所代表的是今日世界的主要潮流。

劉曉波否認對中國共產黨的批評等同於對中國和中華民族的侮辱。他堅稱,共產黨「即便是執政黨,也不能等同於國家,更不能等同於民族及其文化。」中國的變革需要時間,漫長的時間,政治改革將會也應當以像劉曉波所描述的「漸進、和平、有序、可控」的方式進行。中國在歷史上做過太多次革命和改良的嘗試,結果造成的卻是混亂。但正如劉曉波所寫的:「社會已經發生了走向多元化的巨大變化,官權已經無法完全操控整個社會」。因此,他說:「無論政權及其制度的力量有多麼強大,每個個體也要……力爭過一種有尊嚴的誠實生活。」

中國政府對本年度和平獎頒獎結果的反應是,這是對中國的侮辱,還對劉曉波做出了極其消極的評價。

歷史上有過政治領袖試圖借助民族自豪感醜化持政治異見人士的諸多例子。這些異見分子轉身便成了外國間諜。有時,這種指控還打着民主和自由的旗號,但後果幾乎無一例外是可悲的。

這種非此即彼的推理方式,還在反恐怖主義鬥爭的言辭中有着異曲同工的體現:「你要麼是我的朋友,不然就是我的敵人。」酷刑和未經審判的監禁等非民主手段,也以自由的名義被加以濫用。這樣的說法和做法就更加劇了世界的兩極分化,並削弱了反恐鬥爭。

雖然面臨着多年的囹圄生活,劉曉波仍然是一個樂觀主義者。在 2009年 12月 23日法庭上所做的最後陳述中,他說:「我對未來自由中國的降臨充滿樂觀的期待,因為任何力量也無法阻攔心向自由的人性欲求,中國終將變成人權至上的法治國。」

艾薩克.牛頓曾經說過:「如果說我能看得更遠一些,那是因為我站在巨人的肩膀上。」當我們在今天能夠看得更遠一些,那是因為我們站在了古往今來的眾多先人的肩膀上,是他們無私無畏地堅持着自己的信仰,從而為我們爭得了自由。

因此,在當今社會不少人忙於數點鈔票,很多國家只顧及眼前的本國民族利益或對劉曉波的倡議和努力置若罔聞時,挪威諾貝爾和平獎委員會再一次決定,通過和平獎的頒發,來支援為全人類利益而奮鬥的人們。

我們向劉曉波榮獲 2010年諾貝爾和平獎表示由衷的祝賀。他的觀點最終會使中國變得更為強大。我們祝福他、祝福中國未來一切順利。

Your Majesties, Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,

"The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided to award the Nobel Peace Prize for 2010 to Liu Xiaobo for his long and non-violent struggle for fundamental human rights in China. The Norwegian Nobel Committee has long believed that there is a close connection between human rights and peace. Such rights are a prerequisite for the "fraternity between nations" of which Alfred Nobel wrote in his will."This was the first paragraph of the Norwegian Nobel Committee's announcement on the 8th of October of the award of this year's Peace Prize.

We regret that the Laureate is not present here today. He is in isolation in a prison in north-east China. Nor can the Laureate's wife Liu Xia or his closest relatives be here with us. No medal or diploma will therefore be presented here today.

This fact alone shows that the award was necessary and appropriate. We congratulate Liu Xiaobo on this year's Peace Prize.

There have been a number of previous occasions when the Laureate has been prevented from attending. This has in fact been the case with several awards which have proved in the light of history to have been most significant and honourable. Even when the Laureate has come, he or she has several times been severely condemned by the authorities of his or her own country.
There was a great deal of trouble in 1935, when the Committee gave the award to Carl von Ossietzky. Hitler was furious, and prohibited all Germans from accepting any Nobel Prize. King Haakon did not attend the ceremony. Ossietzky did not come to Oslo, and died a little over a year later. There was considerable outrage in Moscow when Andrej Sakharov received his Prize in 1975. He, too, was prevented from receiving the award in person. He sent his wife. The same thing happened to Lech Walesa in 1983. The Burmese authorities were furious when Aung San Suu Kyi received the Peace Prize in 1991. Once again, the Laureate could not come to Oslo.
In 2003, Shirin Ebadi received the Nobel Peace Prize. She came. Much could be said of the reaction of the Iranian authorities, but the Iranian Ambassador did in fact attend the ceremony. The Norwegian Nobel Committee has given four Prizes to South Africa. All the Laureates came to Oslo, but the awards to Albert Lutuli in 1960 and to Desmond Tutu in 1984 provoked great outrage in the apartheid regime in South Africa, before the applause broke out thanks to the awards to Nelson Mandela and F.W. de Klerk in 1993.

The point of these awards has of course never been to offend anyone. The Nobel Committee's intention has been to say something about the relationship between human rights, democracy and peace. And it has been important to remind the world that the rights so widely enjoyed today were fought for and won by persons who took great risks.

They did so for others. That is why Liu Xiaobo deserves our support. Although none of the Committee's members have ever met Liu, we feel that we know him. We have studied him closely over a long period of time. Liu was born on the 28th of December 1955 in Changchun in China's Jilin province. He took a Bachelor's degree in literature at Jilin University, and a Master's degree and a PhD at Beijing Normal University, where he also taught. Stays abroad included visits to Oslo, Hawaii, and Columbia University, New York.

In 1989 he returned home to take part in the dawning democracy movement. On the 2nd of June he and some friends started a hunger strike on Tiananmen Square to protest against thestate of emergency that had been declared. They issued a six-point democratic manifesto,written by Liu, opposing dictatorship and in favour of democracy. Liu was opposed to anyphysical struggle against the authorities on the part of the students; he tried to find a peacefulsolution to the tension between the students and the government. Non-violence was alreadyfiguring prominently in his message. On the 4th of June he and his friends tried to prevent aclash between the army and the students. He was only partially successful. Many lives were lost, most of them outside Tiananmen Square.Liu has told his wife that he would like this year's Peace Prize to be dedicated to "the lost souls from the 4th of June." It is a pleasure for us to fulfil his wish.Liu has said that "The greatness of non-violent resistance is that even as man is faced with forceful tyranny and the resulting suffering, the victim responds to hate with love, to prejudice with tolerance, to arrogance with humility, to humiliation with dignity, and to violence with reason."

Tiananmen became a turning-point in Liu's life.

In 1996, Liu was sentenced to three years in a labour camp for "rumour-mongering and slander." He was president of the independent Chinese PEN-centre from 2003 to 2007. Liu has written nearly 800 essays, 499 of them since 2005. He was one of the chief architects behind Charter 08, which was made known on the 10th of December 2008, which was, in the words of the document's Preamble, on the occasion of "the one hundredth anniversary of China's first Constitution, the 60th anniversary of the promulgation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the 30th anniversary of the birth of the Democracy Wall, and the 10th anniversary of the Chinese government's signature of the International Covenant on Civil And Political Rights." Charter 08 defends fundamental human rights and has in due course been signed by several thousand persons both in China itself and abroad.

On the 25th of December 2009, Liu was sentenced to 11 years' imprisonment and two years' loss of political rights for, in the words of the sentence, "incitement to the overthrow of the state power and socialist system and the people's democratic dictatorship." Liu has consistently claimed that the sentence violates both China's own constitution and fundamental human rights.

There are many dissidents in China, and their opinions differ on many points. The severe punishment imposed on Liu made him more than a central spokesman for human rights. Practically overnight, he became the very symbol, both in China and internationally, of the struggle for such rights in China.

Your Majesties, ladies and gentlemen, During the cold war, the connections between peace and human rights were disputed.

Since the end of the cold war, however, peace researchers and political scientists have almost without exception underlined how close those connections are. This is, allegedly, one of the most "robust" findings they have arrived at. Democracies may go to war against dictatorships, and have certainly waged colonial wars, but there is, apparently, not a single example of a democracy having gone to war against another democracy.

The deeper "fraternity between nations" which Alfred Nobel mentions in his will, and which is a prerequisite for real peace, can hardly be created without human rights and democracy. There are scarcely any examples in world history of a great power achieving such rapid growth over such a long period of time as China. Since 1978, year by year, decade after decade, the country's growth rate has stood at 10 percent or more. A few years ago the country's output was greater than Germany's; this year it exceeded Japan's. China has thus achieved the world's second largest gross national product. The USA's national product is still three times greater than China's, but while China is continuing its advance, the USA is in serious difficulties.
Economic success has lifted several hundred million Chinese out of poverty. For the reduction in the number of poor people in the world, China must be given the main credit.

We can to a certain degree say that China with its 1.3 billion people is carrying mankind's fate on its shoulders. If the country proves capable of developing a social market economy with full civil rights, this will have a huge favourable impact on the world. If not, there is a danger of social and economic crises arising in the country, with negative consequences for us all.

Historical experience gives us reason to believe that continuing rapid economic growth presupposes opportunities for free research, thinking and debate. And moreover: without freedom of expression, corruption, the abuse of power, and misrule will develop. Every power system must be counterbalanced by popularly elected control, free media, and the right of individual citizens to criticise. More or less authoritarian states may have long periods of rapid economic growth, but it is no coincidence that nearly all the richest countries in the world are democratic. Democracy mobilises new human and technological resources. China's new status entails increased responsibility. China must be prepared for criticism and regard it as positive – as an opportunity for improvement. This must be the case wherever there is great power. We have all formed opinions on the role of the USA through the years. Friends and allies criticised the country both for the Vietnam War and for the lack of civil rights for the coloured people. Many Americans were opposed to the award of the Nobel Peace Prize to Martin Luther King in 1964. Looking back, we can see that the USA grew stronger when the African-American people obtained their rights.

Many will ask whether China's weakness – for all the strength the country is currently showing – is not manifested in the need to imprison a man for eleven years merely for expressing his opinions on how his country should be governed.

This weakness finds clear expression in the sentence on Liu, where it is underlined as especially serious that he spread his opinions on the Internet. But those who fear
technological advances have every reason to fear the future. Information technology cannot be abolished. It will continue to open societies. As Russia's President Dmitrij Medvedev put it in an address to the Duma: "The new information technology gives us an opportunity to become connected with the world. The world and society are growing more open even if the ruling class does not like it."

No doubt Medvedev had the fate of the Soviet Union in mind. Compulsory uniformity and control of thought prevented the country from participating in the technological revolution which took place in the 1970s and 80s. The system broke down. The country would have stood to gain a great deal more from entering into a dialogue at an early stage with people like Andrej Sakharov.

Your Majesties, ladies and gentlemen,

Today neither the nation-state nor a majority within the nation-state has unlimited authority. Human rights limit what the nation-state and the majority in a nation-state can do. This must apply to all states that are members of the United Nations and who have acceded to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. China has signed and even ratified several of the UN's and the ILO's major international conventions on human rights. It is interesting that
China has accepted the supranational conflict-resolving mechanism of the WTO. China's own constitution upholds fundamental human rights. Article 35 of the country's constitution thus lays down that "Citizens of the People's Republic of China enjoy freedom of speech, of the press, of assembly, of association, of procession and of demonstration." Article 41 begins by stating that citizens "…have the right to criticise and make suggestions regarding any state organ or functionary."

Liu has exercised his civil rights. He has done nothing wrong. He must therefore be released!
In the past 100 to 150 years, human rights and democracy have gained an ever-stronger position in the world. And with them, peace. This can be clearly seen in Europe, where so many wars were fought, and whose colonial powers started so many wars around the world.

Europe today is on the whole a continent of "peace". Decolonization after the Second World War gave a number of countries, first in Asia and then in Africa, the chance to govern themselves with respect for basic human rights. With India in the lead, many of them seized the opportunity. Over the latest decades, we have seen how democracy has consolidated its position in Latin America and in Central and Eastern Europe. Many countries in the Muslim part of the world are treading the same path: Turkey, Indonesia, Malaysia. Several other countries are in the process of opening up their political systems. The human rights activists in China are defenders of the international order and the main trends in the global community. Viewed in that light, they are thus not dissidents, but representatives of the main lines of development in today's world.

Liu denies that criticism of the Communist Party is the same as offending China and the Chinese people. He argues that "Even if the Communist Party is the ruling party, it cannot be equated with the country, let alone with the nation and its culture." Changes in China can take time, a very long time: political reforms should, as Liu says, " be gradual, peaceful, orderly and controlled." China has had enough of attempts at revolutionary change. They only lead to chaos. But as Liu also writes, "An enormous transformation towards pluralism in society has already taken place, and official authority is no longer able to fully control the whole society."
However strong the power of the regime may appear to be, every single individual must do his best to live, in his words, "an honest life with dignity."

The answer from the Chinese authorities is to claim that this year's Peace Prize humiliates China, and to give very derogatory descriptions of Liu.

History shows many examples of political leaders playing on nationalist feelings and attempting to demonize holders of contrary opinions. They soon become foreign agents. This has sometimes happened in the name of democracy and freedom, but almost always with a tragic outcome.
We recognise this in the rhetoric of the struggle against terrorism: "You are either for me or against me." Such undemocratic methods as torture and imprisonment without sentence have been used in the name of freedom. This has led to more polarisation of the world and harmed the fight against terrorism.

Liu Xiaobo is an optimist, despite his many years in prison. In his closing appeal to the court on the 23rd of December 2009, he said: "I, filled with optimism, look forward to the advent of a future free China. For there is no force that can put an end to the human quest for freedom, and China will in the end become a nation ruled by law, where human rights reign supreme."
Isaac Newton once said, "If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants." When we are able to look ahead today, it is because we are standing on the shoulders of the many men and women who over the years – often at great risk – have stood up for what they believed in and thus made our freedom possible.

Therefore: while others at this time are counting their money, focussing exclusively on their short-term national interests, or remaining indifferent, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has once again chosen to support those who fight – for us all.

We congratulate Liu Xiaobo on the Nobel Peace Prize for 2010. His views will in the long run strengthen China. We extend to him and to China our very best wishes for the years ahead.

沒有留言:

張貼留言