美国评论员起底佩洛西：贪婪、好战、非常不受欢迎 ******
中新网1月3日电 据“今日俄罗斯”(RT)报道，美国政治评论员布拉德利·布兰肯希普日前在RT发表专栏文章称，随着美国新一届国会开幕，82岁的南希·佩洛西将卸任众议院议长一职，不过鉴于她多年来的所作所为“非常不受欢迎”，她卸任后应该“很少有人会想念她”。
资料图：佩洛西。
第118届美国国会将于当地时间3日开幕，共和党将控制众议院多数席位，届时众议院议长职位也会随之变动，长期担任民主党领袖的众院议长佩洛西将不得不把手中的木槌交给共和党接任者。
评论称，佩洛西是迄今为止第一位担任美国众议长的女性，但她创造的所谓“历史性纪录”并不是那么令人信服。
首先，佩洛西是臭名昭著的“自我交易者”。在美国商业内幕网站(Business Insider)为期5个月的腐败调查中，佩洛西是最引人注目的国会议员之一。据报道，她在特斯拉、迪士尼、Alphabet(谷歌母公司)和Meta(Facebook母公司)等公司拥有大量股份。更令人震惊的是，她自己还作为国会议员直接负责监管这些她“深度持股”的公司。
文章指出，“纵观佩洛西多年来的个人财富表，你会发现她的财富在担任众议长以来呈指数级增长。她在国会的权力直接转化为了她的个人财富积累——这就是腐败的定义。”
其次，除了贪婪外，佩洛西还是著名的好战鹰派。2007年，在共和党人小布什担任美国总统期间，佩洛西曾告诉记者：“无论是在对以色列、巴勒斯坦还是叙利亚的政策上，我们和小布什总统之间都没有分歧。”评论表示，小布什政府曾在中东实施种族灭绝计划，佩洛西的支持无疑是“为虎作伥”。
此外，在帮助美国政府规避多边组织和国际法方面，佩洛西也“发挥了重要作用”。在致时任总统小布什关于巴以问题的一封信中，佩洛西说国会“担心某些国家或团体如果在实地监测的进展中担任重要角色，可能将减少(巴以)在通往和平的现实道路上前进的机会。”根据她和同事的说法，“美国在巴以问题上与各方建立了一定程度的信任，这是其他国家无法比拟的。”实际上，美国国会被认为为小布什政府撑腰，以便不让联合国和欧盟等机构在监督巴以和平计划方面发挥作用。
民调机构YouGov统计的数据显示，佩洛西的支持率仅为40.1%。据美国民调分析网站FiveThirtyEight称，佩洛西的支持率甚至比拜登43.1%的历史最低支持率还要更低。
评论表示，人们希望这位82岁的议长能在任期结束后退出政治生活，但她的职业生涯很可能会在一片不满声中无休止地拖延下去。
中新网评：处理核污水绝不是日本自家私事****** 中新网北京1月19日电(蒋鲤)日本政府近日称，将于2023年春夏期间开始向海洋排放经过处理的福岛第一核电站核污水。日本罔顾国内民众及周边国家的屡屡反对，企图将核污水“一倒了之”，把一件关乎全球海洋生态环境和公众健康的事当成了自家私事。  资料图：日本福岛第一核电站。2011年，福岛核电站事故发生后，大量放射性物质泄漏到大气层和太平洋，对周围环境造成了难以逆转的伤害，数十万人被迫撤离该地区。时至今日，作为日本邻国之一的韩国仍未解除福岛海鲜禁令。 日本以核污水存储能力即将达到上限为由，在2021年4月13日，正式决定将福岛第一核电站核污水排入太平洋。过去一年多，日本政府和东京电力公司一直在持续推进核污水排海计划。 日本政府辩称，这些核污水经多核素处理系统(ALPS)处理后很安全，甚至“可以喝”，这样的表态无疑在愚弄大众。 事实上，经过处理的核污水仍含有多种放射性物质，核污水一旦排放入海就无法回收，长期来看，将会给海洋生态带来难以估量的潜在威胁，最终危害人类健康。 因此，核污水排海计划推出后，遭到日本民众强烈反对。日本《朝日新闻》2022年3月公布的问卷调查显示，福岛县、宫城县和岩手县受访的42个市町村长中，约六成反对东京电力公司福岛第一核电站核污水排放入海。日本全国渔业协会联合会也多次申明立场，反对该计划。 日本政府认为，核污水排海是最便宜、最省事的解决方案，但此举却将周边国家乃至全世界置于核污染风险中。太平洋非日本一家之海，核污水会随着洋流流动，其影响势必会跨越国界，危害周边国家乃至整个国际社会的公共福祉和利益。 《韩国经济新闻》发文称，相关研究认为，福岛核污水如果排放入海，约7个月后将到达济州等韩国海域，该国水产业和旅游业将遭受相当大的损失。 德国南极海洋机构也曾发出警告，若日本将所有核污水排入海中，不到半年，整个太平洋都将面临高度辐射威胁，包括远在大洋另一端的美国。太平洋地区人民更是对日本该计划持反对意见。 日本作为《联合国海洋法公约》缔约国，有义务保护海洋环境。然而，在核污水排海方案的正当性、核污水数据的可靠性、净化装置的有效性、环境影响的不确定性等问题上，日本未能作出科学、可信的说明。 国际原子能机构技术工作组虽已三次赴日实地考察评估，但尚未就日排海方案的安全性给出结论，并且对日本提出诸多澄清要求和整改意见。在此情况下，日本仍执意推进核污水排海工程建设，这是极不负责任的行为。 太平洋不是日本的下水道，日本必须正视各方合理关切，在与周边国家等相关利益方和国际原子能机构充分协商后，制定合理的核污水处理方案。日本也要着眼长远，若只顾眼前，执意将核污水排放入海，不仅其自身，周边国家乃至全世界都将为之买单，其后果必将会危害数代人。  Fukushima water disposal by no means Japan’s own business By John Lee (ECNS) -- Japan has announced it will release treated wastewater from the wrecked Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant into the Pacific Ocean this year. Although Fukushima wastewater disposal affects global marine ecological environment protection and public health, Japan has turned a deaf ear to domestic and international opposition to dumping the contaminated water into the sea, treating the "global" matter as its own business. The Fukushima accident in 2011 had sent large quantities of radiation into the atmosphere and the Pacific Ocean, causing irreversible damage to the surrounding environment, and hundreds of thousands of people were forced to evacuate the area. South Korea still maintains its import ban on Japanese seafood from areas affected by the Fukushima nuclear disaster. On April 13, 2021, Japan announced it had decided to discharge contaminated radioactive wastewater in Fukushima Prefecture into the sea due to dwindling storage space, with the Japanese government and plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings Inc. promoting the release plan over the past year. The Japanese government argues that the water treated by an advanced liquid processing system, or ALPS, is safe and drinkable, which is undoubtedly fooling the public. In fact, the treated wastewater still includes a variety of radioactive substances and can’t be recycled once discharged into the sea, which will pose a great threat to marine ecology and ultimately endanger human health in the long run. Therefore, the discharge plan has been strongly opposed in Japan. According to a questionnaire conducted by The Asahi Shimbun, nearly 60 percent of mayors of 42 municipalities in Iwate, Miyagi and Fukushima prefectures oppose the discharge plan. The National Fisheries Cooperative Federation of Japan has also repeatedly stated its opposition in public. The Japanese government believes that dumping Fukushima wastewater into the sea is the cheapest and most convenient solution, but neighboring countries and even the whole world will be at risk of nuclear pollution. The Pacific Ocean doesn’t belong to Japan and the wastewater flow along oceanic currents will surely break boundaries and endanger public welfare and the interests of neighboring countries and even the international community. The Korea Economic Daily reported that related research concluded that if contaminated water from Fukushima is released into the ocean, it would only take seven months for the contaminated water to reach the shores of Jeju Island, with the country's aquaculture and tourism suffering considerable losses. According to the calculation of a German marine scientific research institute, radioactive materials will spread to most of the Pacific Ocean within half a year from the date of discharge, and the U.S. and Canada will be affected by nuclear pollution. People in the Pacific region also oppose the discharge plan. As a participant of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Japan has the obligation of protecting the marine environment. However, it hasn’t offered a full and convincing explanation on issues like the legitimacy of the discharge plan, the reliability of data on the nuclear-contaminated water, the efficacy of the treatment system or the uncertainty of environmental impact. Though the IAEA has yet to complete a comprehensive review after three investigations in Japan, the Japanese side has been pushing through the approval process for its discharge plan and even started building facilities for the discharge. It is rather irresponsible for Japan to act against public opinion at home and concerns abroad. The Pacific Ocean is not a private Japanese sewer. The country must seriously heed the voices of the international community and make a reasonable plan for the Fukushima wastewater disposal after full consultation with stakeholders and international agencies. If it only seeks instant interest and insists on discharging the contaminated water into the sea, not only itself, but also its neighboring countries and the entire world will pay for the decision and several generations will be forced to bear the consequence. 
|
