On April 21, 2023, Ambassador Lu Shaye accepted a live interview with the French LCI television program “Grand Interview” and was interviewed by journalist Darius Rochebin on issues such as President Macron’s visit to China, the Taiwan issue, and the Ukrainian crisis. The transcript of the interview is as follows:
Question: In the context of the tense international situation, China has raised its voice. The Chinese Foreign Minister accused Western forces of attempting to “trample on China’s sovereignty,” and China will not make concessions on the Taiwan issue. The Taiwan Strait has become the second front of great power rivalry. Just a few days ago, the Chinese military held a highly noteworthy military exercise around Taiwan Island, which is one of the most important events recently. In this context, we have invited Ambassador Lu Shaye, a very influential Chinese diplomat and a leading figure in the new generation of Chinese diplomacy. Good evening, Ambassador.
Answer: Good evening.
Question: Thank you for accepting the interview invitation. After President Macron’s visit to China, we feel that China’s position has become more assertive. President Macron’s remarks have been widely commented on, let’s review them together, and then listen to your comments. President Macron seemed to be significantly approaching China’s position when interviewed by a reporter from Le Figaro. His original words were, “The worst thing is to think that we Europeans should (on the Taiwan issue) act as ‘followers,’ adapting to the rhythm of the United States and China’s overreaction. The contradiction is that we are following the policies of the United States because of a conditioned reflex of panic.”
Answer: What President Macron said is completely in line with the interests of France and Europe, and he is speaking the truth. Europe needs strategic autonomy, which China has always supported.
Question: Do you think that after the above statement, France and President Macron have a unique position on China in the Western world?
Answer: This reflects the consistency of France’s traditional position. President Macron is just reiterating France’s traditional position of strategic autonomy, which has been adhered to since the time of de Gaulle.
Question: We see that the above statement has caused public outrage. Many Westerners believe that this is excessive concession to “authoritarian China.” The micro-video released by President Macron after his return also largely proves this point. Have you heard these Westerners’ concerns about “excessive concessions”?
Answer: First of all, China is not an authoritarian country. President Macron wants to develop friendly relations with China, which is in the interests of our two countries and peoples. In the context of globalization, countries are interdependent and can promote common development. If Americans oppose the above views, it is understandable; but some Europeans also express opposition, which I cannot understand.
Question: There are many people (who think so). Borrowing some words used before: The European Commission says (China) is a systemic rival, and NATO says (China) is a systemic challenge. Westerners who are critical of China outnumber those who share France’s attitude towards China.
Answer: We have always opposed the triple positioning of China as “partner, competitor, and systemic rival.” We can understand it this way: if we are partners, we can cooperate; but if we are also systemic rivals, it means mutual attacks and mutual struggles. In this case, how can cooperation be discussed?
Question: How was President Macron’s interaction with President Xi Jinping during this visit? You also participated in part of the meeting, how long did the interaction last?
Answer: About 7 or 8 hours. In Beijing, the two heads of state jointly attended the welcome ceremony, talks, and dinner, which took about several hours. In Guangzhou, the two heads of state also had one-on-one exchanges for several hours.
Question: In your observation, how was the interaction?
Answer: I think the two heads of state talked about almost everything.
Question: Really talked about everything? Also talked about human rights? The Uyghur issue?
Answer: This is China’s internal affairs, and it is not the priority issue of President Macron’s visit.
Question: What made President Macron take this position? Do you feel that a special chemical reaction occurred during his days in Beijing?
Answer: Yes, I think the very in-depth communication between the two heads of state allowed President Macron to have a deeper and more detailed understanding of issues in different fields, especially the Taiwan issue and other international hot issues.
Question: You should understand the concerns of some Westerners. You mentioned Taiwan, and you should look at the aggressive military exercise footage you conducted around Taiwan. There is a very interesting animation, not made by reporters but by you, China. Let’s take a look together, and you can comment. We see that during the exercise – fortunately, this is just an exercise for now – China is completely bombing (Taiwan Island). You see, your bombs are falling on Taiwan’s territory. From the perspective of the Taiwanese people, (the exercise) has reached this point, which is an extremely shocking provocation.
Answer: It is not us who are threatening others, but we who are being threatened. China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity have been threatened by “Taiwan independence” separatist forces and some Western countries that support these forces.
Question: But in the end, shouldn’t the Taiwanese people decide their own destiny? This is called the right to self-determination.
Answer: The entire Chinese people should decide the fate of Taiwan.
Question: Including the use of force?
Answer: Including all means. If we cannot achieve the reunification of the motherland in a peaceful way, we can only take other means.
Question: Don’t the Taiwanese people have the right to self-determination? Just like the Ukrainians.
Answer: Taiwan has been an inseparable part of China’s territory since ancient times, and both sides of the strait belong to one China. This is the history of Taiwan and the current situation of Taiwan. Taiwan’s return to China is a part of the post-World War II international order, which is written in black and white in the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation. Therefore, if someone pushes Taiwan towards independence, it is a destruction of the post-war order.
Question: Your Excellency, you have traced back to ancient times and the post-war period, but in the past few months, some polls, especially those from National Taiwan University, show that nearly 64% of Taiwanese respondents consider themselves Taiwanese, 30% of respondents consider themselves both Taiwanese and Chinese, and only 2.4% consider themselves Chinese first. Can’t the Taiwanese people have the right to decide their own destiny one day? In that case, the result will definitely be unfavorable to you.
Answer: Public opinion can be manipulated. This is easy. In the past ten years…
Question: Taiwan has freedom of the press, which is different from the situation in your country…
Answer: In the past ten years, the Democratic Progressive Party authorities in Taiwan, who seek “Taiwan independence,” have been implementing separatist education in Taiwan. In fact, as early as the mid-1990s, during the rule of Lee Teng-hui, the Taiwan authorities began separatist education with the goal of “Taiwan independence.” So perhaps this generation, the young people of Taiwan, may support Taiwan’s independence or autonomy in a referendum. But I believe that after China’s reunification and Taiwan’s substantive return, the public opinion in Taiwan will definitely change.
Question: If the Americans help the Taiwanese people to prevent you from seizing this territory, will it mean war? The Americans have this ability.
Answer: The US’s sale and supply of weapons to Taiwan violates international law. According to international law, countries cannot sell or provide weapons to non-state entities.
Question: Your arguments comparing Russia, Taiwan, and Ukraine are surprising. A major current topic is the discussion about Ukraine joining NATO. This issue has been raised again, and the Vilnius summit will also discuss it. From an international political perspective, do you think Ukraine’s accession to NATO is a problem?
Answer: I think whether Ukraine joins NATO should be jointly decided by European countries and Russia.
Question: Maybe it should be decided by the Ukrainians first?
Answer: Of course, Ukraine itself is a European country. But for Russia, the five rounds of NATO expansion, including the possible expansion to Ukraine, pose a threat to Russia’s security. Therefore, China has always believed that all parties involved should return to the negotiating table to negotiate and resolve their differences.
Question: Not long ago, Biden and Macron had a phone call and talked about the possibility of China playing a role in achieving peace talks. What is the situation now?
Answer: Although China has issued a call for peace and put forward a 12-point position on the political settlement of the Ukrainian crisis, I think it is important that all parties involved have the willingness to engage in dialogue and talks. Now we see that on the Russian side, the Russian leader has expressed the willingness to start negotiations, and the Ukrainian side has also expressed the willingness. But on the American side, it seems that they do not want to stop the war, and NATO member states are still continuing to provide weapons. Therefore, the conditions for peace talks are not yet in place.
Question: Currently, Russia is still continuing to bomb Ukraine.
Answer: Because both sides are still in a state of war and conflict.
Question: Where might the peace talks be held? Could it be in Beijing?
Answer: China has always advocated peace talks, and we always strive to achieve this goal.
Question: Macron, privately or publicly, has expressed his hope that China can put pressure on Russia, and many Western officials have also said so. Is this possible?
Answer: China’s diplomacy never advocates putting pressure on any country. This is not our way.
Question: Please clarify your position, because it seems to be wavering. First of all, in your opinion, does Crimea belong to Ukraine?
Answer: It depends on how you look at this issue. Historically, Crimea was originally Russian. During the Soviet era, Khrushchev gave Crimea to Ukraine.
Question: I’m sorry, from the perspective of international law, Crimea belongs to Ukraine. This issue can be discussed and disputed, but from the perspective of international law, Crimea belongs to Ukraine.
Answer: From the perspective of international law, it can even be said that those former Soviet countries do not have effective international legal status because there is no international agreement recognizing their status as sovereign states.
Question: You mean that the issue of the border order after the disintegration of the Soviet Union has not been resolved.
Answer: Now is not the time to get entangled in these issues, the most important thing now is to achieve a ceasefire.
Question: This is not about getting entangled in details. If we take away a part of China and then say, “Sorry, this is just a detail.” It’s not like that. In Ukraine’s view, this is obviously a very serious issue.
Answer: As I said before, we need to consider the context of the conflict and not simply generalize. We can discuss the problems together.
Question: Does China call for the establishment of a “new order”? China has mentioned “new order” in various ways. Nowadays, Putin also particularly emphasizes this point, and many things happening in the world and some signals show this trend. Let’s listen to a speech by Putin. (Putin’s voiceover: The trend of world multipolarity is inevitable and will only strengthen. Those who do not understand and do not adapt to this trend will be losers, which is as obvious and unchangeable as the rising sun. Those who try to stop this trend will only encounter more trouble, and they already have enough trouble. May God bless them. We are on the right path and are achieving good results, and our task is to walk this path.) Ambassador, do you agree with Putin’s view?
Answer: I agree with his view on a multi-polar world, which is also what China has always advocated. Because a multi-polar world is a democratic world, and a unipolar world is not democratic.
Question: Even a multi-polar world composed of authoritarian countries? Do you also call it “democratic”?
Answer: Who defines these two concepts? It is not up to the Western world to judge who is an authoritarian country and who is a democratic country.
Question: Do you think there are no objective standards?
Answer: There are standards. We consider ourselves a democratic country because China implements whole-process people’s democracy.
Question: Although the origin of China’s political system is Marx and Lenin, it has changed a lot over time.
Answer: China is China, not the former Soviet Union. You should not make such a comparison.
Question: How close will China and Russia get? The visit of the Chinese Defense Minister to Russia has attracted worldwide attention. He met with Putin and had in-depth discussions with the Russian Defense Minister for three full days. Three days is indeed a relatively long time. The meeting between the two defense ministers of China and Russia, isn’t this a manifestation of solidarity between the two countries, or even military solidarity?
Answer: The visit of the Chinese Defense Minister to Russia is aimed at implementing the consensus of the two heads of state. This is a normal exchange between two sovereign countries, and moreover, China and Russia are comprehensive strategic cooperative partners.
Question: The United States has warned China not to deliver weapons to Russia, saying that if China crosses this line, the consequences will be very serious.
Answer: This is hegemony. The United States provides weapons to a relevant party in the Ukrainian crisis, while China has not yet provided weapons to any relevant party.
Question: But China and Russia have conducted joint military exercises in the context of the Ukrainian war.
Answer: This was planned long ago.
Question: But in Moscow for three full days, the defense ministers of China and Russia were not talking about quantum physics. The level of military cooperation reflected in this has reached a level that worries the West.
Answer: This reflects the high quality of the China-Russia relationship.
Question: Is Russia China’s priority ally?
Answer: We are not allies.
Question: Then what is it?
Answer: It is a comprehensive strategic cooperative partnership.
Question: Then what is the West to China?
Answer: If the West is willing to develop friendly and cooperative relations with China, they are also our partners.
Question: (European Parliamentarian) Glucksmann said in a recent interview with us: “We are making the same mistake with China as we made with Russia: commercial bundling with a threatening country.”
Answer: I did not follow his interview, but I do not agree with his view. Because at least for China, we have always considered France and Europe as our partners and do not agree with the statement of “systemic rivals.”
Question: In addition to the military aspects just mentioned, we have also found that many countries that do not revolve around the West are expressing a demand, such as South Africa, and more broadly, the whole of Africa, South America, etc., especially when we see the statement of Brazilian President Lula. Does China want to establish a new international order?
Answer: Why don’t these non-Western countries want to follow the positions of the United States and the West anymore? You should think about it carefully. This shows that there is injustice in the international order, so we need to reform and improve the current international order to make it more balanced, just, and reasonable.
Question: Specifically, what about it? For example, President Lula recently proposed “de-dollarization,” that is, countries that are unwilling to rely on the US economy to create a new currency. Do you support this?
Answer: Nowadays, European countries have been saying that they want to reduce their dependence on external countries. President Lula’s proposal to reduce dependence on the dollar is completely reasonable, and it is normal.
Question: Are you ready to take this step no matter what?
Answer: This is not a question of taking a certain step, but a natural trend. Because more and more countries are having difficulties or finding it unworkable when using the dollar, they will naturally try to find alternatives.
Question: Ambassador, frankly speaking, do you feel a sense of “revenge”? I am not making this up, many Chinese leaders often mention that China was humiliated by the West during the Opium War or other periods. Is it now a “revenge moment” for you?
Answer: We have never thought about “revenge.” What we think about is how to better develop ourselves and achieve the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.
Question: But is it possible to develop oneself without harming others? From the history of empires, a country cannot develop in a vacuum, and there are countless examples in history. Whether it was the Roman Empire, the European colonial empires, or the US-Soviet hegemony, they all developed on the basis of harming the interests of others. They seized markets and land back then, so what about you? You have already started to plunder us.
Answer: Why do you always think that China’s development will inevitably harm the development of the West? The development of both sides is not mutually exclusive. China’s development does need the world, but it also provides opportunities for the world to develop.
Question: The West is very divided on this issue. We can briefly review history, and some arguments are wonderful. Alain Peyrefitte’s book “C’était de Gaulle” collected some of General de Gaulle’s statements about China. He said after China’s successful test of an atomic bomb in 1964, “Great! This will change the world balance, and for the first time in history, a non-white country has nuclear weapons, and many colored countries will be proud of this.” He also added, “US hegemony is a huge global danger, and we are (the Western world) the only country with the courage to deal with it.” At that time, many countries, especially those called the “Third World,” regarded de Gaulle as a spokesperson, and I guess his words should be very useful to you?
Answer: This shows that General de Gaulle also hated US hegemony, and he believed that the international order controlled by the United States was unjust and needed to be changed.
Question: His “pride” refers to having nuclear weapons, because we have known the importance of nuclear weapons since the beginning of the war. Is having nuclear weapons decisive for you?
Answer: Yes, especially in the 1960s, nuclear weapons meant strategic autonomy. Why could France be strategically autonomous at that time? It was under the leadership of General de Gaulle that France mastered nuclear weapons.
Question: Nowadays, is China’s status as a global leader in the eyes of African countries and its nuclear power status related?
Answer: Nowadays, there is a nuclear non-proliferation system in the world. Two years ago, to be precise, at the beginning of 2022, the five permanent members of the UN Security Council issued a joint statement, clearly stating that nuclear war cannot be fought and cannot be won.
Question: But at the same time, all countries are rearming, including in the nuclear field, including China, Russia, and the United States.
Answer: This is due to the current turbulent and dangerous situation, and many countries intend to strengthen their defense capabilities.
Question: When General de Gaulle praised China for having nuclear weapons, “Great,” and praised you, it was in 1964, when Mao Zedong was still alive. He was one of the greatest criminals in history. He caused millions of people to be exiled, abused, and killed. Do you understand the feelings of many Westerners? They think that General de Gaulle was wrong at the time, and at the same time, they worry that the West may also be wrong in dealing with China today?
Answer: Every time you interview me, you always make trouble with some nonsense from the past. This is dishonest.
Question: Ambassador, do you call it “nonsense”?
Answer: This is nonsense.
Question: Is it “nonsense” that Mao Zedong caused millions of deaths?
Answer: That’s neither fair nor accurate. Have you done any research?
Question: Where is it inaccurate?
Answer: Stop right there! I’m here today to discuss international issues and current affairs with you, not to discuss these absurdities.
Question: Mr. Ambassador, Germany has paid a moral, economic, and legal price for its crimes. Admittedly, there are still some war crimes that have not been prosecuted, especially those of France or Algeria, and some colonial crimes. But now we are talking about China, and you are the representative of China.
Answer: Then I ask you to demand that Japan pay for the crimes they committed in the war against China.
Question: Can you understand the weight of this history? President Xi Jinping comes from the family of the highest leaders, but his family also suffered persecution, didn’t they?
Answer: I reiterate: I am not here to discuss these absurdities with you! We can continue if you want to talk about the international situation. It’s absolutely ridiculous! Don’t talk to me about so-called human rights. There are many more human rights issues in your country and other Western countries.
Question: What issues?
Answer: Recently, China has released eight reports on the human rights situation in the United States. If you are interested, I can give you these reports, and you can see how serious the human rights issues are in the United States and other Western countries.
Question: Mr. Ambassador, please allow me to emphasize this, because you used the word “absurdity”, just as the memory of the victims of the Gulag and the Chinese “concentration camps” is very important, the word “absurdity” is a serious offense to their memory. Can you understand?
Answer: This is completely different. Maybe it’s like that in other countries you mentioned, but I’m sure that (the allegations) involving China are absurd.
Question: Mr. Ambassador, we understand that you don’t want to hear the Western expression of some historical truths. Please watch this video, which is very illustrative.
Answer: I don’t think we need to waste more time on this inconclusive debate.
Question: Please take a look at what’s happening with the balance of power between China and the West today. This is exactly what you said, “Don’t interfere in our affairs”, which is very impressive. This is the meeting between Prime Minister Trudeau and President Xi Jinping. President Xi Jinping clearly told him “Don’t interfere in our affairs”. This scene is very rare. Obviously, Trudeau represents Western progressives, while President Xi Jinping says “Don’t meddle in our affairs”.
Answer: The Chinese people will not allow any other country to interfere in our internal affairs under any circumstances. This is our consistent position.
Question: Do you know that France has a great tradition of helping the “oppressed”? Whether they are in Russia, Africa, or China.
Answer: When it comes to China, we firmly oppose any country interfering in our internal affairs.
Question: Is China using “imperial means”? Here is a set of data from 2021, which is the most recent data I can find, and perhaps it is still increasing recently. China is the world’s largest creditor. Many countries, especially low-income countries such as African countries, and even European countries, do not understand that China has $843 billion in debt. You are the world’s largest creditor, isn’t that de facto “imperial behavior”?
Answer: First of all, I don’t know the source of the data. But China does provide loans to many countries, including developing countries, to help them develop and build infrastructure. In the past 20 years, China has helped African countries build 100 seaports, 1,000 cross-river bridges, 10,000 kilometers of railways, and 100,000 kilometers of highways. This is a good thing.
Question: What you just said is like when France talked about the Algerian issue, it was to promote “development” and cited the number of railways built. What they said makes some sense, but it is obviously a gradual erosion of the territory and economy of other countries. All imperialist countries do this.
Answer: You used to control other countries through lending, but China doesn’t do that. China is not like you, China is China.
Question: Are you really that different? You are the number one…
Answer: At least in this respect. China helps developing countries not to control them, but to promote common development.
Question: This is simply a miracle. I’m sorry, but I don’t think Chinese people are any worse than people from other countries, nor are they any better. We are all the same.
Answer: Because China has a traditional culture and the spirit of building a community with a shared future for mankind.
Question: Is China still a communist country? Doesn’t the number of Chinese Communist Party members exceed the population of France?
Answer: Yes, we have more than 96 million members.
Question: Are you a member?
Answer: Of course.
Question: What does it mean to be a Communist Party member? Please forgive my naive wording, I have no sarcasm. China has billionaires, so much wealth, so many capitalists. What does it mean to be a Communist Party member in 2023?
Answer: I tell you, to be a Communist Party member is to be an altruistic “ascetic”, to sacrifice one’s own interests to serve the Chinese people, to serve the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.
Question: Is this a form of nationalism?
Answer: Do you think this is nationalism? I think this is communism, not nationalism. The name of our party is the Communist Party of China.
Question: Don’t you retain the “police state” aspect of a communist country?
Answer: That’s your interpretation.
Question: Give a specific example. Leaving China requires a good social credit record, which means the CCP has to give you a good evaluation. Is this true?
Answer: This is similar to the bank credit in Western countries, don’t distort or tamper with our credit system. This is a better social governance system, and you can see why China is governed better than most countries in the world, including Western countries.
Question: Do you think China’s social governance is better than France’s?
Answer: You need to think about that yourself, I won’t comment. You can make a comparison.
Question: Compare what with what? You live in Paris and speak fluent French. You worked in the African Department (of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs) for 25 years. What do you think?
Answer: I am not in a position to comment, otherwise I might be suspected of interfering in French internal affairs. But you can think and make comparisons. You can look at what Chinese society is like now and the security environment in China.
Question: In the eyes of Westerners, this is achieved at the cost of human rights violations. Now the United Nations is a bit “afraid” of China, so it is also generally more inclined to China. Do you realize that this “new China” makes many people feel afraid?
Answer: Who is afraid?
Question: Let me give you an example. Recently, I interviewed some leaders from France, Germany, and even Ukraine, and they all told me privately, “Don’t ask me about China, I don’t want to get involved with China”. As we have just seen, you are the creditors of so many countries, and China’s weight on the international stage is so heavy, far exceeding Russia’s.
Answer: China does not make the Chinese people feel afraid. China is making the lives of the Chinese people richer and more comfortable. That’s enough.
Question: Rich but without freedom, is that it?
Answer: Affluence, freedom, and human rights are developing in coordination. The Chinese-style modernization we are pursuing means the coordinated development of material civilization and spiritual civilization.
Question: But the Uyghurs are still in the “re-education camps”. This is also particularly confirmed by your government, the United Nations, or some of the UN Human Rights Office. The report issued by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights mentions serious human rights violations, which are comparable to international crimes against humanity. The report points out that arbitrary detention of Uyghurs and other ethnic residents constitutes an international crime, especially a crime against humanity.
Answer: So, you like these “nonsense”, and you like to believe these lies fabricated by these Western “lame” scholars.
Question: These are not ordinary scholars, but the UN Human Rights Office, and they are generally on your side.
Answer: The experts of these human rights committees do not have the power to issue this report. They are not authorized. There are no “re-education camps” for Uyghurs in Xinjiang at all. Now, the Uyghur people…
Question: A very detailed investigation by Le Monde on this issue also points out that there are human rights violations against Uyghurs, even more so than in the era of Mao Zedong and Stalin.
Answer: Now, tens of thousands of foreigners from all walks of life visit China, and why hasn’t anyone mentioned the situation in these reports fabricated by these anti-China experts? Why do you only look at the reports fabricated by these anti-China experts?
Question: 1989 was a special year for both China and Russia. At that time, the Soviet Union was in the Gorbachev era, and it experienced the fall of the Berlin Wall and then disintegrated. The Tiananmen Square incident occurred in China, and (in the video footage) we see a person standing alone in front of the tanks. Did China and Russia start to diverge from here? Many Chinese leaders say that they must not let what Gorbachev did in Russia be repeated in China, is that right?
Answer: Again, this video (referring to the “Tank Man” video widely circulated in Western media). It’s so ridiculous! Isn’t it? You should watch it from beginning to end.
Question: What happened to the person who stood in front of the tank?
Answer: I don’t know. This is an ordinary person. You can see the tank avoiding…
Question: If I may say so, I think this person is braver than ordinary people.
Answer: You think this is brave? Then how do you view the Chinese soldiers? They are kind, aren’t they?
Question: Suppressing the demonstrators is not kind.
Answer: We can continue to watch the video.
Question: So how many people died in total? The resistance was brutally suppressed. This is an objective fact.
Answer: This is not the topic we are discussing today. I guess you will also list some sensational numbers, but none of this is true.
Question: From a historical perspective, do you think we are in a phase of Western decline? After listening to your answers on human rights issues, I feel that you think the West no longer needs to give China lessons.
Answer: Whether the West is declining depends on you, not on what the Chinese people think.
Question: Do you think the West is in decline?
Answer: You can see for yourself what is happening in the Western world, especially in the United States. At least it is not in an upward state, is it?
Question: You’re happy, aren’t you?
Answer: I am calm.
Question: There is competition between China and the United States. The two major economies will eventually be divided, and the United States is currently leading. Perhaps tomorrow or the day after tomorrow, China will lead.
Answer: I hope that all countries in the world, including China and the United States, can compete in a peaceful manner.
Question: Have you ever simulated the hypothesis of a war? You just said, “I hope”. But we all know that in history, the competition between two major empires usually ends in a single battle.
Answer: At least China does not want war.
Question: One last question about history, Mr. Ambassador, today is April 21st. I don’t know what today means to the Chinese, but for Westerners, today is the day Rome was founded. I remember what I learned in Latin class, that Rome was founded in the 8th century BC, and there is almost nothing older than the founding of Rome. But for you, Chinese history can be traced back to 5,000 years ago, which is older than Western history?
Answer: Yes, China has a 5,000-year history of civilization.
Question: Many Westerners believe that Western civilization is greater, while you believe that Chinese civilization is older. This comparison of strength that you believe…
Answer: This shows that Chinese people are accustomed to looking at changes in the situation from a long-term perspective.
Question: We invite Ms. Hélène Carrère d’Encausse (Permanent Secretary of the French Academy) to join the discussion. Please stay, Mr. Ambassador. She will discuss with you, and the “interrogation” is not over (everyone laughs). Ms. d’Encausse, you have in-depth research on Russian history, and you also have wonderful discussions on Sino-Russian relations. What are your thoughts when you hear China asserting its status as a world power in this way?
d’Encausse: I think this is a normal process of historical development. There were some periods in history, such as the 19th and 20th centuries, when China had an unpleasant experience, and China was not recognized by us at that time. Now is China’s era, which is completely logical. This is history. A great civilization is returning to the forefront of the world, and I must say that this is natural. Historians are always interested in the cyclical nature of history. At the same time, I would like to pay tribute to the Ambassador’s admirable French language skills.
Question: One last question before we end the interview with you. We have already learned your views on Macron’s remarks, and we would also like to hear what you (d’Encausse) think? Macron’s remarks on his way back from his visit to China have attracted much attention, especially his criticism of the United States. For some Westerners, this is a serious mistake. Others cite de Gaulle’s ideas, believing that this is the case and that they cannot completely follow the United States. What do you think?
d’Encausse: I think some people didn’t pay much attention to what President Macron actually said, or they were eager to interpret the President’s remarks. In fact, the ideas reflected in these remarks are very normal. His ideas are completely consistent with the views expounded by Ambassador Gu Shan in his masterpiece, “Others Don’t Think Like Us”. The ideas of others shock us. China is telling us not to impose our own ideas on others, and this is dialogue. For me, normal international relations are equal dialogue.
Question: Ambassador Lu Shaye, thank you for being invited to the program.
Discover more from 自由档案馆
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.