单仁平：陈光诚需主动跳出筹码的尴尬位置

Editorial: Chen misread Washington politics
 

陈光诚在纽约大学一年的逗留期已满，纽大要求他在本月底离开。陈光诚公开声明表达不满，宣称纽大受到来自中国政府的“强大压力”，“中共当权者对美国学术界的统战远超出大家的想象”。纽约大学16日对陈光诚的说法表示“不解和遗憾”，称他所说的“不符合基本事实”。曾经帮助陈光诚赴美的纽约大学教授孔杰荣说陈光诚：“你不应该反咬给你食物的人”。

去年5月陈光诚前往美国，纽约大学给他“访问学者”的身份，这实为纽大向他提供的临时“政治救济”。陈光诚缺少起码的学术能力，语言关大概也过不了，纽约大学不可能长期收留他。陈光诚当前的尴尬是前些年中国“民运人士”在美国大多都经历过的，他们最终都需寻找谋生之道。

陈光诚一直受到西方舆论的特殊优待，他的盲人身份吸引了额外同情。从陈光诚的历次表态看，他未必真的理解了西方的政治游戏规则，他对自身政治价值的判断“有点高”，他提出的要求已不止一次让美方的具体操办者难堪。

美国社会是多元的，有喜欢事事高度政治化的国会议员，也有政治上随大溜，同时需要遵守现实规则、维护日常利益的务实派。中国有些“异见人士”以为去了美国就会被当成宝贝“供起来”，这是误解。

陈光诚对中国和对美国的认识主要来源于个人经历和感受，他对中美关系的认识就更难做到全面。他似乎希望中美之间的政治围着他个人利益转，但这是天真的。事实上，他是美国对华策略的一个棋子，而且美国希望它的所有棋子都是廉价的，陈光诚成不了一个“奢华的例外”。

中美不是敌人，中美合作的一面会让吃“中美对抗”这碗饭的人感到茫然。他们会觉得美国对华态度“不够坚决”，同中国斗着斗着又往回缩了。他们甚至会抱怨自己“被出卖”了：他们应美国的召唤同中国政府为敌，却被“扔在了半道上”。

他们其实没有被扔掉，是他们的期望值太高了。在中美这两个既竞争又合作的大国之间做筹码，命运本来就是飘忽不定的。

中国高速发展，吸引了全世界的人前来寻找发展机会。在这个时候背弃这个国家的主流发展进程，并且试图从这一背弃中开发个人的人生机遇，这样做从长远看注定是艰难的，不会有前途。

出走国外的“异见人士”会发现，他们周围的环境里同中国合作的元素和氛围都会越来越多，他们在被西方社会“一次性消费”后，可继续利用的价值不断降低，有时甚至会成为累赘。如果他们自己不做政治及谋生之道的“转型”，就将越来越被动。

陈光诚个人的一些特殊情况，使他把握政治大势变化的难度会更多些。他身边的人最好别坑他，别再把他往偏执的方向使劲推。▲（作者是环球时报评论员）

Chen Guangcheng, the blind Chinese activist, has been asked to leave New York University (NYU) by the end of this Month after staying for one year. 

Chen showed his dissatisfaction to the public, claiming that NYU is under "unrelenting pressure" from China, and "the work of the Chinese Communists within academic circles in the United States is far greater than what people imagine." 

NYU on the other hand, said that they felt "discouraged," and that Chen's statement was "false and contradicted by the well-established facts."

Jerome Cohen, the professor who had suggested Chen accept the offer to be a visiting fellow at NYU, was annoyed by Chen's remarks, saying that Chen "should not bite the hand that feeds you."

Chen went to the US in May last year as a visiting fellow at NYU, which was actually a provisional form of "political relief." Chen's lack of academic qualifications and language competence meant he could not stay long-term. His embarrassing situation mirrors the fate of many Chinese "pro-democratic activists" in the 1980s.

Chen has been in the spotlight of Western public opinion, with his blindness a special perk for this kind of treatment. But Chen's statements to the public gave himself away. His shallow understanding of the rules of Western politics and overestimation of his own value to the West are making his requirements more embarrassing to the US.

As a diversity-oriented society, the US embraces all kinds of political figures. So these Chinese dissidents mistakenly flatter themselves when they think they will be a "treasure" in Washington when they get to the US.

Chen's understanding of both China and the US stems from his own experiences and feelings, which gives him an incomplete image of Sino-US relations. In fact, as one of the chess pieces used in the US' China policy, he, like the others, is not given as much value as he expected. Chen was never going to be the "exception."

China and the US are not enemies. Cooperation between the two will ensure that those radicals who want to see a confrontation between China and the US will not get their wish. They will feel depressed by the US' "irresolute attitude" toward China, and feel "betrayed" because the US government "abandoned them halfway."

It is the fantasy about their own value that "abandoned" them. These dissidents who went overseas will realize that cooperation with China is what prevails. After being "consumed" in a one-off manner, they will turn out to be cumbersome assets of the West. Without a total transformation, they will face a dead end. And for the people around them, more guidance and less agitation will help them find the right path.