中东问题

巴以冲突十天了，感觉上非常令人难过，这个是自从二次大战结束以来，在国际中可以说是最严重的问题，没有之一，他搅乱了非常多的人，在地区上在世界上甚至地球上的所有人都跟这件事情有直接或间接的关系，巴以之间的冲突的的确确是一个人伦上的大悲剧，很多人认为巴以冲突根本就没有解决的方案，我自己非常注意有关于这场冲突的起因和过程，我也承认这的确确是一个很复杂的问题，这个问题复杂的程度，因为它不仅仅是种族的问题，也不仅仅是宗教的问题，也不仅仅是历史的问题，甚至于它不仅是政治法律的问题，更不要说它不仅仅是军事实力上的问题，在这么多复杂的情况下我觉得巴以的冲突俨然已经形成了一个从哲学观点可以来分析这场冲突内容的问题，我有这个想法，不单纯是因为我是一个哲学家，更是因为我听到了中国的外交部部长王毅，一直不断的非常清楚的说明中国面对巴以冲突的态度，我讲到这个观点，并不是想企图替咱们中国人做宣传，而是完全针对他所讲的内容来进行一个哲学上的分析，只有从哲学这个高度来讲才能够站得住脚，才能够了解到受害的是不但是巴勒斯坦人，也是以色列人，甚至是全世界所有的，只有从哲学这个高度来讲才能够站得住脚，才能够了解到受害的，不但是巴勒斯坦人，也是以色列人，甚至是全世界所有的人，都在不能够拉高自己的高度来认知这个问题，草草地认为他没有解答的时候所出现的结果，王毅说了什么？王毅说面对这场冲突，我们只有四个原则，第一和平，第二公义，第三国际法，第四人道主义；这四个里面和平公义，国际法，人道主义很明显的都是哲学概念，什么叫做和平？是一个文化的精神，尤其是儒家文化中以和为贵的精神，我们会强调合而不同，就是在尊重彼此之间的不相同，要追求共同的和平，儒家文化讲究和平，所以才会有礼运大同篇里面，强调世界大同的理念的和平，是使得世界成为大同的基础，也是最重要的起点，没有和平, 谈什么大同？谈到和平的同时，让我想起来一个非常重要的观点，中国人讲和平的时候，并不是说能够挨打,能够忍耐，有一句从马斯克讲出来的话是非常具有哲学意涵的，他说你要追求和平的过程当中一定要比你的对手强大，强大到你可以原谅他，虽然说我们中国人讲的这个和平文化，是要维持和平，但是同时也要不受欺负，很多人一聊到巴以之间的冲突，就想到这种移情作用，想到今天巴勒斯坦人受到的欺负，受到的侮辱，面对的悲惨，好像是150年前的中国，那种情况下，中国没有实力跟人家对抗，光谈和平有什么用处，所以说外交部长王毅所谈到的和平，这个原则是要说是真正强大的地方，要有这种胸襟，要有这种文化，要有这种态度，要能够原谅对方，这样子才会有和平，这才是真正的和平，如果没有做到这一步，单凭以色列犹太人，这种以牙还牙以眼还眼的这种态度，你杀我一个人，我就要杀你一百个人，作为报复就这种情况，让大家会觉得和平真的是遥遥无期，那更不要说是帝国主义了，或是安格鲁萨克森人的这种有机会欺负人，绝不放弃机会的这种情况下，这哪有和平可言，所以和平是非常重要的，而且最重要的是你要有和平的文化，没有和平的文化，你只会想到欺负人，那怎么可能呢，冤冤相报何时了，那你当然没有解决的方案。第二个公义，公理正义，公义是人最重要的德行，为什么会这样讲，因为在学校所有的课程里头，或者所有的跟哲学有关的理解当中，或者你看到的新闻当中，最明显的德行，就是以想要别人对待你的态度来对待他人，所以说是这个就是公义，公义的定义，公义的基本定义就是公平，你在这种情况之下，你想要让别人对你好，没有问题，你要先对别人好，或者彼此之间要平等，这个就叫做公义，没有人愿意活在不公不义的环境之中，对不对？这是一个很明显的事实，我为什么因为公义是人最基本最重要的德行，这个大家都会感觉到，很明显，如果你能够活在一个社会当中，这个社会一定要维持起码的公平与正义，这个就叫做公义，如果没有办法让你能得到公平的机会，没有办法能够得到正义的对待，你一定会起来抗暴，会反抗，所以说这也是第二点非常重要。第三个国际法，什么叫做国际法？坦白来讲，法律原来它的基本精神是国内的，为什么会出现了国际法，这个是非常重要的国际法，是一个理性选择下的结果，这是谁的观点？这是德国哲学家康德的观点，他认为人类要达到国际上全世界的永久和平，这个最重要的观点就是大家要用理性的思维，共同的想法，理性的思维就已经包含了公理正义，包含了和平，这个是一个最重要的观点，这是一个理性的结果，所以说每一次世界大战结束以后，一次大战结束以后要成立国联国际联盟，二次大战结束以后要成立联合国，为什么只有在大战之后才成立这种国际组织，来维持和平的，因为经过战争的残酷，经过非理性的对待，经过非理性的杀戮，甚至于这种种族的灭绝，各式各样的残忍的想法跟做法，以后大家发觉必须要回归理性，回归理性的第一步一定要成立一个国际组织，这个就是国联跟联合国的诞生的理由，同时最重要的只要有国际法，有国际法庭，国际法是针对国与国之间的冲突，认为国与国之间的冲突，人民与人民之间的冲突，这种种族之间的冲突，是有一个共同的基础，这个基础让他们可以沟通，让他们可以接受共同的规范，这个共同规范的结果就叫做国际法；如果没有这个东西大家只记得种族之间的差异，历史的仇恨，宗教上的对立，政治上的这种制度上的这种差别，那么你还会用什么样的结果？你当然会有不同的法律了解，所以说一定要强调国际法，国际法重要的不是法律，是国际那两个字，想要达到国际中任何具体的成果，你一定要有理性，作为出发的重点，这个就叫做国际法；你必须要遵守国际法，因为它是一个人类共同理性的认知；第四点人道主义，人道主义是人之所以为人的根本，大家要知道，人之所以为人人跟动物不一样，其实人跟动物非常相像，人的外表，生理，特征，甚至于说是喜怒哀乐各种情况跟动物都差不多，但是有一点非常不一样，人天生就是道德的动物，除了自保之外，还有怜悯心，人不能够看到别人受苦受难，要能够彻底的解决巴勒斯坦所在这加萨走廊的问题，要北方的巴勒斯坦人，在24小时内，一百万人迁移到南加萨地区，联合国说不可能，这种情况下，说时间一到，我们就直接采取围攻的政策，坦克车，步兵全部进入，大家要了解加萨人真的很可怜，以色列的国防部长讲，我们断水断电断食物断药品，资源呢？没水没电没食物没药品，资源你不用叫他迁移他都活不下去了，人对人的态度，比公理正义还要直接，为什么因为我们有怜悯心，我坦白讲，我没去过以色列，更不要说是加萨走廊，但是我在所有的视频上，所有的社交媒体上，看到的那些视频，看到那些照片，看到各式各样悲惨的故事，不单单是巴勒斯坦人的悲惨故事，以色列人也有很多人被杀，我都很难过，我都会感觉到这个冤冤相报何时了？这个说明了一个重点，就算基于我本身的本能，当我的自保问题不成问题的时候，我的怜悯心就自然因为这些视频与照片，油然而生，我就不愿意看到这些东西，这个叫人道主义，就是说本身来讲的话，你会想到你自己吃饱了，你会想到那些还没吃饱的人，你自己不受冻，你会想到那些受冻的人，你幸福快乐，想到那些活得不幸福不快乐的人，这个叫人道主义，人道主义的要求非常卑微，但是他的实现，要实现人道主义精神却很昂贵，价值很高，尤其是在目前为止，在这巴以冲突当中，所以说外交部长王毅讲的这四点和平，公义，国际法与人道主义，刚好都是有关于国际纷争的问题，而且也非常符合哲学的观点，可能有人会讲，你讲了这么多哲学观点，太抽象了，太理想了，实际上的情况，却不是这样子，我提出三点来回应，首先第一点你要了解这是一个非常积极的，因为至少中国从头到尾就是一个和平的文化，只是原来我们觉得如果你实力不够强大，你落后，你就得挨打，现在中国本身要追求和平的前提是我要强大，强大到足以原谅我的敌人的时候，这个和平就能够发生，所以说他是个非常积极的观点，你必须先强大，你自己要硬，就是你自己要非常强大的时候，别人就不敢对你怎么样，你才有可能原谅那些比你弱小的敌人，这是第一点，它非常积极；第二点，目前为止全世界的走向，大家看的非常明白，国际法也好联合国也好，美国永远支持以色列，从1948年以色列建国以来，到今天75年了，他们的立场有改变过吗？没有改变过，这个世界发展到今天还不够乱吗？这个世界之所以乱的原因就是有人坚持己见，认为自己做的都对，所以我说这问题个不单纯，是一个钟宗教上，种族上甚至也不单纯，是一个政治与法律的问题，这也不是历史遗留下来的问题，而纯粹是有的人的想法做法非常极端，所导致出来的结果，但是这个世界上能没有中国这个选项吗？如果没有这个选项的话，大家要面对什么？难道你跟我之间都能够看到上百万的人流离失所，因为居无定所七八十年的难民，最后都死于非命，你能够看到世界的悲剧这样发生吗？所以说中国做了一个非常好的一个选择，第三点我必须要强调，认为哲学讲的是不切实际的理念的人，完全对不起自己，人之所以为人的基本精神，请大家要知道一件事情，我们今天很幸运做人很幸运地活在一个科技进步的社会当中，我们有很快速的发展，我们的生活，大多数人都不错，但是请你不要忘了，今天能够有这种感觉，都是在没有战乱的情况下，才能够活得快乐，活得幸福，甚至活得健康，活得长久，你在这种情况之下，你所得到的一切，也是别人所想要的，如果有一些人只想到健康跟快乐是为了自己，别人都不管的话，那这种情况下，你也别想健康，也别想快乐，因为那些被你放弃的人，被你抛诸脑后的人，他也不会认为你活得快乐跟健康，是他所想要，只要有的人不想要你活得快乐，活得健康，就真的不会解决巴以之间的纷争，所以说大家在整个思想上的观念，要基于这种哲学的理想，放在现实中，做最具体的考量，“己所不欲勿施于人”孔老夫子的道理讲得非常简单，要清楚你一时之间的快乐却是别人永久的痛，情何以堪呢？所以从这个角度来讲，我认为虽然大家一致公认巴以的冲突非常的难，谈到它的历史，大家解释起来，错综复杂，但是实际上只有透过哲学的理念，中国外交部长王毅讲的话，仔细想想看，我刚刚说的内容，你就会发觉，除了强调和平公义国际法与人道主义的话，你真的没有别的办法，也因为这个原因，所以我希望中国的想法跟政策能够受到大家的重视，另外我也对现存的，以巴之间的冲突，以及所有因为这个冲突而受害的人，表达我的意思，是这颗非常微薄的同情心，你们可能不需要我的同情心，但是如果每一个人都有同理心，这个世界就会更美好。 The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been ongoing for ten days, and it feels very saddening. It is arguably one of the most serious issues on the international stage since the end of World War II, affecting a great number of people, both directly and indirectly, in the region, around the world, and even globally. The conflict between Israelis and Palestinians is undeniably a human tragedy. Many people believe that there is no straightforward solution to this conflict. I myself pay close attention to the causes and processes of this conflict, and I acknowledge that it is indeed a highly complex issue. The complexity of this issue arises from the fact that it's not merely a matter of ethnicity, religion, history, or even politics and law, not to mention the military dimension. Given the multitude of complexities involved, I believe that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has become a subject that can be analyzed from a philosophical perspective. I have this idea, not only because I am a spiritual practitioner, but also because I've been listening to China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi continuously and very clearly explain China's stance on the Israel-Palestine conflict. When I discuss this viewpoint, it's not an attempt to promote Chinese interests, but rather to engage in a philosophical analysis based entirely on what he has said. Only by approaching this issue from a philosophical perspective can we truly comprehend that the victims are not only Palestinians but also Israelis and even people all over the world. To reach a deeper understanding, we must not hastily dismiss it as an issue that hasn't been addressed. So, what did Wang Yi say? He mentioned four principles in the face of this conflict: firstly, peace; secondly, justice; thirdly, international law; and fourthly, humanitarianism. Among these four principles, it's evident that peace, justice, international law, and humanitarianism are all rooted in philosophical concepts. What is peace? It's a cultural spirit, particularly emphasized in Confucian culture, where the value of harmony is upheld. The idea of "harmony in diversity," respecting differences among each other while pursuing common peace, is at the core of Confucian thinking. Confucianism places great importance on peace, as seen in texts like the "Li Yun Da Tong" (Great Unity in the Book of Rites), which emphasizes the concept of a world of great harmony, serving as the foundation for global unity and the most important starting point. Without peace, how can we discuss the idea of great unity? It's important to note that when Chinese people talk about peace, it doesn't mean they are willing to be subjected to violence or to endure oppression. Elon Musk's statement holds deep philosophical meaning: "In the process of pursuing peace, you must be stronger than your opponent, strong enough to forgive them." While Chinese culture emphasizes the pursuit of peace, it also stresses not tolerating oppression. When discussing the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians, many people think about empathy. They think about the mistreatment, insults, and suffering faced by the Palestinians today, and it may seem similar to China 150 years ago when China lacked the strength to confront others. In such circumstances, simply advocating for peace might seem futile. Foreign Minister Wang Yi's principle of peace underscores the importance of true strength, along with a cultural attitude and mindset that enables forgiveness. This is what genuine peace entails. Without achieving this, relying solely on the "eye for an eye" mentality, as seen in the case of Israeli Jews, where one killing leads to revenge killings, peace might seem distant. Furthermore, imperialism and the opportunistic bullying tendencies of certain groups, like Anglo-Saxons, can make the path to peace even more elusive. Hence, peace is essential, but equally important is cultivating a culture of peace. Without this peace-oriented culture, the result may be a focus on oppressing others, which is not a path to true peace. The cycle of tit-for-tat will continue, leaving us to wonder when this cycle of revenge will ever end. You've provided additional context to emphasize the significance of the Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi's statements regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and how they can be analyzed from a philosophical perspective. You stress that this philosophical analysis is not about promoting Chinese views but about understanding the suffering of both Palestinians and Israelis and, indeed, people all over the world. Wang Yi's four principles—peace, justice, international law, and humanitarianism—serve as a philosophical framework to address the conflict and its implications. Your analysis highlights that addressing this complex issue requires a philosophical approach that transcends narrow perspectives and recognizes the suffering of all parties involved. It underscores the importance of these principles, not just in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict but also in global conflicts and challenges. By taking a philosophical stance, one can better appreciate the broader implications of such conflicts and the need for a balanced and compassionate approach. The quote you mentioned from Elon Musk, "In the process of seeking peace, you must be stronger than your adversary, strong enough to forgive them," is indeed a profound philosophical concept. It emphasizes that achieving peace involves both strength and the capacity for forgiveness. This perspective aligns with the idea that peace isn't just about being passive or tolerant; it's about having the strength and cultural mindset to forgive your adversaries. Your analysis also touches on the importance of having a culture of peace, and you highlight how the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, as well as broader international conflicts, can benefit from this perspective. It's not just about achieving peace through strength but also about fostering a culture and attitude that promotes forgiveness and reconciliation. In essence, your interpretation emphasizes that true peace goes beyond mere absence of conflict; it requires a cultural shift and an attitude of understanding and forgiveness, which can contribute to resolving long-standing conflicts and promoting a more harmonious world. Then, of course, you won't have a solution. The second principle is justice, moral justice. Justice is considered the most important virtue in people's lives. Why is it regarded this way? It's because in all school courses, in all philosophical understandings, and even in the news you see, the most prominent virtue is treating others the way you want to be treated. So, this is justice. The basic definition of justice is fairness. In this context, if you want others to treat you well, there's no problem; you need to treat others well first or ensure equality between each other. That's what we call justice. No one wishes to live in an unfair or unjust environment, right? This is a very obvious fact. So, I emphasize that justice is the most basic and vital virtue. It's something everyone can relate to. In a society, it is crucial to maintain at least a minimum level of fairness and justice. If there's no way to provide you with fair opportunities or ensure you receive just treatment, you will undoubtedly rise in protest and resistance. So, this is also a very important point. The third principle is international law. What is international law? To be frank, the basic spirit of law is originally domestic. Why has international law emerged? This is a crucial aspect. International law is a rational choice and the result of whose viewpoint? This viewpoint comes from the German philosopher Immanuel Kant. He believed that for humanity to achieve permanent global peace, the most important point is for everyone to use rational thinking and shared ideas. Rational thinking inherently includes justice and peace. This is a highly significant viewpoint and a rational outcome. So, after each world war, there was a need to establish international organizations, such as the League of Nations after World War I and the United Nations after World War II. Why were such international organizations only formed after major wars? It's because, after the brutality of war, irrational treatment, irrational slaughter, and even acts like genocide and various forms of cruelty, people realized they must return to reason. The first step in returning to reason is invariably to establish an international organization. This is the reason behind the birth of the League of Nations and the United Nations." Additionally, the most crucial aspect is that as long as we have international law and international courts, international law is designed to address conflicts between countries and to establish a common basis that allows them to communicate and accept shared norms. The result of these common norms is known as international law. If we lack these common norms, people will only remember the differences between races, historical animosities, religious conflicts, and political system disparities. So, what kind of results would we have? We would naturally have different understandings of the law. Therefore, it is essential to emphasize international law. The importance of international law lies not in the word "law" but in the term "international." To achieve any specific results on the international stage, you must start with reason. This is what we call international law. You must abide by international law because it represents a shared human understanding based on reason. The fourth point is humanitarianism. Humanitarianism is fundamental to what makes us human. You should understand that what sets humans apart from animals is our capacity for rational thinking. In essence, humans and animals are quite similar, but we differ significantly from animals because we can think rationally. This capacity for rational thinking leads us to develop a sense of morality, a sense of compassion, and a sense of ethics. All of these are manifestations of our humanitarian spirit. In the context of international conflicts and crises, emphasizing humanitarianism is crucial because it reminds us of our shared human values and our responsibility to protect and care for one another. The external appearance of humans, their physiology, characteristics, and even their emotions such as joy, anger, sorrow, and happiness are quite similar to those of animals. However, there's a significant difference: humans are inherently moral beings. Besides self-preservation, we possess a sense of compassion. When we see others suffering, we cannot simply ignore it. Now, Israel ordered Palestinian in the northern part of Gaza Stripe, relocating to the southern Gaza region within 24 hours, the United Nations has declared it impossible. In this situation, it has been suggested that if the deadline passes, a direct siege will be implemented, with tanks and infantry entering the area. It's important to understand that the people of Gaza are in dire circumstances. The Israeli Minister of Defense has mentioned cutting off water, electricity, food, and medicine. Without these resources, people would not be able to survive. The way people treat each other is more direct than concepts of justice and righteousness because we have a sense of compassion. I want to be clear; I haven't been to Israel, let alone Gaza. However, through various videos and social media posts, I've seen the images and heard the tragic stories that illustrate the dire situation. It's not only the tragic stories of the Palestinians; there are also many Israelis who have lost their lives. I feel sorrow for all of them, and I often wonder when this cycle of revenge will end. This illustrates a crucial point. Even based on my own instincts, when my own survival isn't an issue, my compassion naturally arises when I see these videos and photos. I don't want to witness such suffering. This is what we call humanitarianism. It means that, on a basic level, you think about the fact that you have enough to eat and you think about those who don't. When you're warm, you think about those who are cold. When you're happy and content, you think about those who are not. This is humanitarianism. The requirements of humanitarianism are humble, but its realization can be very costly and challenging, especially in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. So, what Foreign Minister Wang Yi mentioned—these four principles of peace, justice, international law, and humanitarianism—are all directly related to international conflicts and are in alignment with philosophical perspectives. Some might say that these philosophical ideas are too abstract or idealistic, but... In reality, the situation is more complex. I'd like to respond with three points: Firstly, you need to understand that this is a very proactive approach. China has a long history of valuing peace. The key here is that China now understands the importance of strength. To pursue peace, you first need to become strong, strong enough to forgive your enemies. This is a proactive viewpoint. You must become powerful and self-reliant, so others dare not harm you, and only then can you consider forgiving those weaker than you. Secondly, when we look at the current global landscape, it's evident that international law and organizations like the United Nations have their limitations. The United States has consistently supported Israel since its establishment in 1948, and this stance hasn't changed over the past 75 years. Has the world become any less chaotic during this time? No, in fact, one of the reasons the world remains in turmoil is that some nations insist on their own views and believe they are always right. Therefore, I emphasize that this issue is not straightforward. It's a complex issue involving not just religion and ethnicity but also politics and law. This isn't merely a historical legacy; it's a consequence of extreme ideologies held by some individuals. However, can the world afford to not have China as an option? Without this option, what would we all face? Could we bear witness to millions of people being displaced, living without a home for seven or eight decades, eventually meeting tragic ends? So, China has made a very good choice in this regard. Thirdly, I must emphasize that those who view philosophy as impractical are doing themselves a disservice. Please understand that the fundamental spirit of being human, we are fortunate to live in a technologically advanced society today, enjoying rapid progress in our lives. However, don't forget that our present state of happiness and well-being is only possible because we live in a relatively peaceful environment. You can be happy, healthy, and live a long life under these conditions. Everything you have, others desire as well. If some people only think about their own health and happiness without caring about others, then you also shouldn't expect to be healthy or happy. Those people you abandon or neglect won't consider your happiness and health as something they desire. As long as there are people who don't want you to be happy and healthy, the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians won't be resolved. So, when shaping your thoughts and ideas, it's essential to base them on philosophical ideals and apply them practically. The principle "Do not do to others what you would not want done to yourself," as taught by Confucius, is straightforward. It's important to understand that your momentary happiness could be someone else's enduring pain. From this perspective, even though it's widely acknowledged that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is extremely challenging, and its history is intricate and convoluted, there's really no other solution apart from emphasizing the principles of peace, justice, international law, and humanitarianism, as stated by China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi. These principles are the only way forward. So, I hope that China's ideas and policies can receive everyone's attention. Additionally, I would like to convey my feelings of sympathy towards the ongoing Israel-Palestine conflict and all the people who are suffering due to this conflict. It's a humble form of empathy from me. You might not need my empathy, but if every individual has empathy, this world will become a better place.