繼續搞中國、台灣不分，想要兩邊討好，結果就是兩頭落空。
美國政府於12月2日宣布了一系列新措施，以限制人工智慧（AI）相關的先進半導體和高性能半導體製造設備等產品對中國的供應。這些措施包括將140家中國半導體相關企業新增至事實上禁止交易的「實體清單」，並將部分先進產品的出口管制擴大至韓國、台灣、馬來西亞等地。
此舉目的防止AI技術被中國軍事化，尤其是削弱中國人民解放軍在AI領域的能力提升。
新措施的主要內容：
1.先進半導體製造設備的出口管制：規範範圍包括形成電路、蒸鍍、離子注入、檢測等24種設備，及開發這些設備所需的軟體，如可提升現有設備性能以製造先進半導體的相關軟體。
2.高頻寬記憶體（HBM）的出口管制：HBM是生成式AI數據中心的重要部件，這項限制將直接影響中國在生成式AI領域的開發能力。
3.實體清單的更新：在原本已受管制的華為等數十家企業基礎上，新增140家中國企業。對於列入實體清單的企業，供應半導體相關設備或產品實際上是被禁止的。
此外，即使是美國以外生產的相關產品，只要涉及美國技術或材料，向中國出口時也須遵守美國的「外國直接產品規則（FDPR）」。這意味著，韓國、台灣、馬來西亞、泰國、印尼等國的相關企業若違規，可能面臨巨額罰款。
美國商務部長雷蒙德在聲明中強調，此次措施是拜登政府為迫使中國放棄國內生產先進技術努力的「集大成」。此舉也被視為美中科技競爭進一步加劇的信號。
資料來源：日經新聞
Biden Targets China’s Chip Industry With Wider Trade Bans
New rules prohibit the sale of certain types of chips and equipment to China, in an effort to close loopholes and cement the Biden administration’s legacy in countering the U.S. rival.
Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo told reporters in a call on Sunday that the move represented “the strongest controls ever enacted by the U.S. to degrade the P.R.C.’s ability to make the most advanced chips that they’re using in their military modernization,” referring to the People’s Republic of China. She said the government had worked closely with experts, industry and allied countries to ensure that “our actions protect national security while minimizing unintended commercial consequences.”
美國商務部長吉娜·雷蒙多在周日的電話會議上對記者表示，此舉代表了“美國實施的最嚴厲的控制措施，目的是削弱中國製造用於軍事現代化的最先進芯片的能力” 。她表示，政府與專家、業界和盟國密切合作，以確保“我們的行動保護國家安全，同時最大限度地減少意外的商業後果。”Extraordinary Move Comes in Final Weeks of Presidency
- President Biden used the power of his office to wave aside years of his son Hunter Biden’s legal troubles, including a guilty plea for illegally buying a gun.
- Republicans, including the president’s successor, President-elect Trump, have spent years attacking Hunter Biden over his legal and personal issues.
See more updates ›
Read President Biden’s Statement About Pardoning Hunter Biden
2 min read
美國"憲法危機"
大西洋報
唐納德·川普試圖推翻選舉四年後，在紐約被判犯有州罪幾個月後，他在選舉團中贏得了壓倒性勝利，「在他背後是共和黨官員，他們將川普追隨者的忠誠視為他們最極端的意識形態計劃的工具，」亞當·塞爾維爾寫道。 https://theatln.tc/qCL9LUVB
儘管川普會聲稱他所做的一切都得到了民眾的授權，但「美國人不能投票讓自己進入獨裁政權，就像你個人不能把自己賣為奴隸一樣。憲法的限制保護美國人民免受任何可能控制政府的不法之徒的不擇手段的設計，這一點並不會僅僅因為川普認為他不需要尊重這些限製而改變。
瑟維爾寫道，川普“在本已極右的最高法院中有一個願意合作的伙伴，最高法院將更加大膽地利用虛構的歷史判例來證明他的歧視、驅逐和統治議程。” 「川普的隨行人員將帶著更詳細的獨裁治理計畫回歸；也許他們現在面臨的唯一障礙是他們重視忠誠而不是真正的專業知識。但願意對抗川普的人比上次少了。
「就像以前美國政治中威權主義壓力上升的時代一樣，總有一天，美國人將不得不面對這樣一個問題：為什麼民主對他們來說毫無意義，以至於他們選擇了一個試圖推翻政府的人來領導民主。他們必須決定，為什麼一個誹謗無可指責的移民是吃寵物的野蠻人，並發誓要因為他們努力工作和為社區做出貢獻而將他們驅逐出境……應該領導這個國家，」瑟維爾寫道。 “他們必須確定，為什麼一個以自由為理念的國家會將權力交給對婦女身體受國家控制負有最大責任的人。”
「但是自決的權利和義務沒有日落；民主國家沒有最終的勝利，」塞爾維爾繼續說道。 “美國人必須繼續確保他們生活在其中。”
🎨：大西洋。資料來源：Chip Somodevilla / Getty。
對於美國憲法，政治制度的信心
John Bolton on BBC HARDTalk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wi3CHznmwDI
// …特朗普要證明博爾頓嘅指控失實，最好嘅方法就係事實上對中共極為強硬，主動干涉香港、新彊、台灣問題，用人權、自由等原因制裁中共。呢條係特朗普喺十一月大選前唯一可以走嘅路，博爾頓嘅新書更加迫使特朗普再無退路… //
徐然
THESTANDNEWS.COM
博爾頓新書洩密，迫特朗普對華策略走上不歸路 | 徐然 | 立場新聞
1. 美國白宮前國安顧問博爾頓（John Bolton）出新書揭露當年特朗普嘅眾多內幕。雖然講...
----
悲欣人間 (72)：大辦公桌桌面上兩點麥克筆尖/筆跡。
https://hcnew.blogspot.com/2020/06/7224-100.htmlBOOKS OF THE TIMES
In ‘The Room Where It Happened,’ John Bolton Dumps His Notes and Smites His Enemies
John Bolton, then national security adviser to President Trump, looks on as Trump speaks to the press at the White House on April 9, 2018.Credit...Tom Brenner/The New York Times
BUY BOOK ▾
When you purchase an independently reviewed book through our site, we earn an affiliate commission.
By Jennifer Szalai
Published June 17, 2020Updated June 20, 2020, 11:13 a.m. ET
Listen to This ArticleAudio Recording by Audm
Listen 10:18
可惜，只是一個極小的時刻，約翰·博爾頓。
去年一月，他因即將出版的一本書而引起了公眾的極大關注，據報道，該書對川普總統彈劾審判中的烏克蘭醜聞進行了「爆炸性描述」。當時，國家安全委員會正在對這份手稿進行例行審查，以獲取機密資訊。這本書原定於三月中旬出版，但日期不斷推遲，最終有人討論這本書是否會出版。 （6 月16 日，川普政府提起訴訟，試圖再次推遲出版，或以其他方式阻止博爾頓從任何圖書銷售中獲利。）在過去的幾個月裡，就連彈劾程序的記憶也基本上被一場大流行取代以及全國性的抗議活動。這種諷刺幾乎是尖銳的：看來這位頑固的國際事務策劃者未能預見他自己的書所面臨的一系列威脅。
博爾頓拒絕在眾議院彈劾聽證會上作證，他可能是許多美國人現在最不希望聽到的人——他不會屈尊對讀者可能想要的做出任何讓步。 《事情發生的房間》講述了他擔任川普國家安全顧問17 個月的經歷，在寫作過程中，他對風格和敘事形式的關注如此之少，以至於他顯然認為讀者會留意他的每一個字。
Pity, for just an infinitesimal moment, John Bolton.
There he was last January, commanding an enormous share of the public’s attention with news of a forthcoming book that reportedly included an “explosive account” of the Ukraine scandal at the center of President Trump’s impeachment trial. At the time, the National Security Council was conducting a routine review of the manuscript for classified information. The book was set to publish in mid-March — but the date kept getting pushed back, and eventually there was chatter about whether it would get published at all. (On June 16, the Trump administration filed a lawsuit to try to delay publication again, or otherwise prevent Bolton from profiting on any book sales.) In the last few months, even the memory of the impeachment proceedings has been largely superseded by a pandemic and nationwide protests. The irony was almost poignant: It looked as if the hard-nosed mastermind of international affairs had failed to anticipate the constellation of threats to his own book.
Bolton, who refused to testify at the House impeachment hearings, may be the last person many Americans wish to hear from right now — not that he would ever deign to make any concessions to what a reader might want. “The Room Where It Happened,” an account of his 17 months as Trump’s national security adviser, has been written with so little discernible attention to style and narrative form that he apparently presumes an audience that is hanging on his every word.
Known as a fastidious note taker, Bolton has filled this book’s nearly 500 pages with minute and often extraneous details, including the time and length of routine meetings and even, at one point, a nap. Underneath it all courses a festering obsession with his enemies, both abroad (Iran, North Korea) and at home (the media, “the High-Minded,” the former defense secretary Jim Mattis). The book is bloated with self-importance, even though what it mostly recounts is Bolton not being able to accomplish very much. It toggles between two discordant registers: exceedingly tedious and slightly unhinged.
Still, it’s maybe a fitting combination for a lavishly bewhiskered figure whose wonkishness and warmongering can make him seem like an unlikely hybrid of Ned Flanders and Yosemite Sam. His one shrewd storytelling choice was to leave the chapter on Ukraine for the end, as incentive for exhausted readers to stay the course. Along the way, Bolton also mentions other disconcerting situations when Trump, he says, tried to ingratiate himself to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey and to Xi Jinping, China’s leader, by dangling the possibility of removing or easing pressure on the Turkish bank Halkbank and the Chinese telecom companies ZTE and Huawei.
Trump told Erdogan that Halkbank’s legal troubles for violating the administration’s sanctions on Iran would disappear once the “Obama people” who worked as prosecutors in the Southern District of New York were “replaced by his people,” Bolton writes, deeming it an ultimately empty promise. “It was as though Trump was trying to show he had as much arbitrary authority as Erdogan.”
Trump’s conversation with Xi, in Bolton’s telling, was even more nakedly transactional. In the midst of talks about trade, Trump “turned the conversation to the coming U.S. presidential election, alluding to China’s economic capability to affect the ongoing campaigns, pleading with Xi to ensure he’d win,” Bolton writes. “I would print Trump’s exact words, but the government’s prepublication review process has decided otherwise.”
Image
Credit....
In another book by another writer, such anecdotes might land with a stunning force, but Bolton fails to present them that way, leaving them to swim in a stew of superfluous detail. Besides, the moment he cites as the real “turning point” for him in the administration had to do with an attack on Iran that, to Bolton’s abject disappointment, didn’t happen.
Editors’ Picks
The Scientist, the Air and the Virus
‘One Friday Night, I Pulled Into the Tollbooth at the Henry Hudson Bridge’
The Dress Codes of the Uprising
Continue reading the main story
In June 2019, Iran had shot down an unmanned American drone, and Bolton, who has always championed what he proudly calls “disproportionate response,” pushed Trump to approve a series of military strikes in retaliation. You can sense Bolton’s excitement when he describes going home “at about 5:30” for a change of clothes because he expected to be at the White House “all night.” It’s therefore an awful shock when Trump decided to call off the strikes at the very last minute, after learning they would kill as many as 150 people. “Too many body bags,” Trump told him. “Not proportionate.”
Bolton still seems incensed at this unexpected display of caution and humanity on the part of Trump, deeming it “the most irrational thing I ever witnessed any President do.” In the book, Bolton is vague about the targets themselves, though it was later reported that he wanted one of them to be the Iranian commander Qassim Suleimani, killed on Jan. 3 by American airstrikes, four months after Bolton left the administration. On Jan. 6, Bolton finally agreed to testify at the impeachment trial if the Republican-controlled Senate subpoenaed him — which, as predicted, it never did.
As for what Bolton might have said at the trial, his chapter on Ukraine is weird, circuitous and generally confounding. It’s full of his usual small-bore detail, but on the bigger, more pointed questions, the sentences get windy and conspicuously opaque. He confirms what Fiona Hill, a White House aide, recalled him saying to her when she testified at the House impeachment hearings (including his memorable comparison of Rudolph Giuliani, Trump’s personal lawyer, to a “hand grenade”). But Bolton declines to offer anything comparatively vivid in his own book, taking cover in what he depicts as his own bewilderment.
He recalls a meeting in the Oval Office during which Trump said he wanted Giuliani to meet with Ukraine’s then President-elect Volodymyr Zelensky “to discuss his country’s investigation of either Hillary Clinton’s efforts to influence the 2016 campaign or something having to do with Hunter Biden and the 2020 election, or maybe both.” Yet Bolton — known for what a 2019 profile in The New Yorker called his “tremendous powers of recall” — said it was too much for him to fully understand. “In the various commentaries I heard on these subjects, they always seemed intermingled and confused, one reason I did not pay them much heed.” He resorts to making noises of concern about what he refers to as “the Giuliani theories.”
In an epilogue, Bolton tries to have it multiple ways, saying that while he may have found Trump’s conduct “deeply disturbing,” it was the Democratic-controlled House that was guilty of “impeachment malpractice.” Instead of a “comprehensive investigation,” he sniffs, “they seemed governed more by their own political imperatives to move swiftly to vote on articles of impeachment.” He says they should have broadened their inquiry to include Halkbank and ZTE, but then neglects to mention that nothing was stopping him from saying as much, or from testifying if he was so terribly concerned.
“Had I testified,” Bolton intones, “I am convinced, given the environment then existing because of the House’s impeachment malpractice, that it would have made no significant difference in the Senate outcome.” It’s a self-righteous and self-serving sort of fatalism that sounds remarkably similar to the explanation he gave years ago for preemptively signing up for the National Guard in 1970 and thereby avoiding service in Vietnam. “Dying for your country was one thing,” he wrote in his 2007 book “Surrender Is Not an Option, “but dying to gain territory that antiwar forces in Congress would simply return to the enemy seemed ludicrous to me.”
When it comes to Bolton’s comments on impeachment, the clotted prose, the garbled argument and the sanctimonious defensiveness would seem to indicate some sort of ambivalence on his part — a feeling that he doesn’t seem to have very often. Or maybe it merely reflects an uncomfortable realization that he’s stuck between two incompatible impulses: the desire to appear as courageous as those civil servants who bravely risked their careers to testify before the House; and the desire to appease his fellow Republicans, on whom his own fastidiously managed career most certainly depends. It’s a strange experience reading a book that begins with repeated salvos about “the intellectually lazy” by an author who refuses to think through anything very hard himself.
Follow Jennifer Szalai on Twitter: @jenszalai.
The Room Where It Happened
A White House Memoir
By John Bolton
Illustrated. 577 pages. Simon & Schuster. $32.50.
----
沒有留言:
張貼留言