送交者: 啊撒 于 2005-12-28, 05:05:12:
回答: 关于老方的信，最后的最后一稿，欢迎讨论 由 xj 于 2005-12-28, 00:09:41:
Sir:
I view the New York Times very high in terms of journalism standards and Ｉ have been a loyal reader of the journal since I came to this country in 1990. However, a recent report, appeared on December 26, 2005, titled "Rule by Law: Seeking a Public Voice on China's 'Angry River'" was very shocking for the conceivable bias and inaccurate statements.
Mr. Yardley and I had an email interview on [date]. It seems that he has paid little attention to the email in which I answered his questions on December 7, 2005 (see the enclosure). Unfortunately, the report have been filled with many inaccurate statements and partial facts. It sounds as if Mr. Yardley was writing without interviewing me, an opponent of the so-called "environmentalists", and trying to disseminate rumors and assumptions. In my opinion, that report is only a one-side story from the "environmentalists."
I feel obliged to correct the mistakes in Mr. Yardley's report, to the best of my knowledge.
First of all, as one of a group of scholars who "made a tour to the Nu and attracted wide public attention by attacking the environmentalists," I would like to make it clear that the trip was not "sponsored by dam developers" as Mr. Yardley asserted, but by the General Institute of National Hydropower and Water Resources Planning and Design. This institute was in charge of the environmental assessment report on the Nu River Project. The same institute has sponsored several "environmentalists" as well to visit the Nu River before our visit.
In contrast to Mr. Yardley's assertion, the Nu River is NOT "one of the only two free flowing rivers in China." There are two dams already built in the mainstream of the River: Biru Dam (completed in 1990) and Chalong Dam (completed in 1995). Since the controversial new dam is not be located in the World Heritage Site area, it will have little impact on the biodiversity of the Nu River region(I have a question about the cause-effect of this sentence). In fact, the ecological environment of the Nu River in the area that is planned for the dam has already been widely destroyed by over-exploitation deforestation, primitive farming, road construction etc. by the local residents in the past few decades. However,the dam-construction project may provide significant improvement to the protection and restoration of the ecological environment by keeping the local residents away from burning the trees for farming, and by providing more fund to protect the local ecological environment.
Secondly, Mr. Yardley reported: "Domestic media coverage has been banned in recent months."
That is not true. There are many reports on this debate published in national newspapers and magazines in mainland China during the past months. Many of them are in support of the "environmentalists." Here are a few examples:
Hydropower or Environment Protection? This Is a Question, by International Herald (Guoji Xianqu Daobao), Nov. 21, 2005
Controversies over the Nu River Reflect the Pain of Social Progress, by Science Times (Kexue Shibao), Nov. 7, 2005
"The Battle of Protecting the Nu River," Has It Backfired? by Chinese Business Weekly (Shangwu Zhoukan), Oct. 21, 2005
In addition, Mr. Yardley reported: "But the Ministry of Water Resources, noting that government reports about international rivers were considered proprietary information, declared a small section of the assessment to be a state secret and forbade its release."
This is not true, either. The Ministry of Water Resources was not involved in this project or the debate, neither did it make such a statement. The environmental assessment report on the Nu River Project as a whole was classified as confidential right after its completion, which was even before the controversy was started. In fact, I will be glad to see it to be accessible to the public because I believe that it will help to clarify many misunderstandings and rumors about the dam construction project.
It is reasonable to suspect that the "environmentalists" know such a legal restriction very well because some of them (for example, Professor Jiang Gaoming) have participated in the assessment process. Therefore, their appeal may complicate the issue or mislead the public if they continue to distort the facts.
I agree that the debate on the environmental, legal, and economical issues raised by the new dam construction project on the Nu River is a test-field (what does it mean?)for the Chinese government. However, a biased and inaccurate report such as the one by Mr. Yardley offers no help to the protection of the environment but intoxicates the atmosphere of debate.
Thank you very much for your attention!