2014年10月2日 华盛顿
美国最有影响的报纸之一——华盛顿邮报于中共建政65周年纪念日发表社论，支持香港学生和市民争取真普选的和平抗命运动，呼吁美国政府向北京当局表明更清晰和强硬的反对暴力镇压的态度。
总结一个星期以来的国际舆论，和平香港、反对武力镇压已经成为共同的声音，和平香港行动发起人之一的杨建利认为，“这样的声音已经形成了很强的舆论压力，使得北京动武的可能性降低，但是我们不能掉以轻心。我个人认为，我们的当务之急是在国际社会形成要求港府与学生和市民对话声音。”
为了增加香港学生和市民与国际社会的直接交流，宣导他们的理念和争取国际社会的支持，和平香港行动团队正在敦请他们派出代表，并帮助他们寻求在各种国际论坛发言的机会。据悉，和平香港行动团队已经争取到奥斯陆自由论坛的宴请函。奥斯陆自由论坛是规模很大的国际人权会议，每年举行一次，今年的论坛将于10月20日在奥斯陆召开。
============================================
附：
中译稿（顾卫国翻译）：
华盛顿日报社论
2014年10月1日
奋 起 反 对 镇 压
美国必须告诉中国，镇压香港的抗议民众将会让其付出代价。
看到香港市中心大批的力争民主的和平示威者的画面，很少人能无动于衷，他们的象征不是紧握的拳头，却是打开的雨伞。人们也很难忘记25年前挤满了北京天安门广场的类似的示威民众，也不会忘记他们的最后的结局。而目前中国国内外的悲观共识是，如果这样的抗议活动旷不停止的话，对政治异见者态度强硬的共产党的领导人习近平，很可能采取强行镇压的行动，香港的示威民众将会和天安门广场上的抗议者遭受一样的命运。
但是北京目前还没有采取行动；香港警方在周末使用了催泪弹，这使更多的人走上街头，在此后的周一和周二并警方的行动变得更温和。中国政府目前可能正在评估两种的风险，即让示威者继续占领街头，或是对其进行镇压。在这个时刻，很重要的是美国政府应向习近平先生发出明确的信息：即美国将反对中国政府的镇压行为，如这样做，中国与民主世界国家的关系也将受到损害。
不幸的是，奥巴马政府迄今为止所作出的胆怯的反应却令人气愤。白宫和国务院的发言人都谨慎地避免明确支持示威者的要求， 示威者的要求是，自由地选举香港特首，反对被操控的、只能在北京认可的候选人之间挑选他们的特首。示威者们被呼吁采取和平的方式，但目前已诉诸暴力的只有警方而已。
中英两国在1984年就香港回归达成了协议，美国对此协议表示支持。而中国政府现在分明违背了它对民主选举香港政府的承诺，美国政府理应有义务站出来说话。然而，美国驻香港领事馆竟然宣称，“对于香港政治局势的讨论，我们不选边站，我们也不支持任何参与这场讨论的个人或团体。”
更令人担心的是，美国对可能的出现的镇压表现出冷淡的态度。星期一当国务院发言人被问及中国的驻港部队是否有可能被用来对付示威者时，他说，“目前我还没有看到有这种可能。我和我的团队核实后，我才能决定我们是否需要为此担心。”
国务院更应该与中国的持不同政见者如杨建利、滕彪和胡佳进行核实，他们对中国政府的镇压能力太清楚不过了。周二的《华尔街日报》评论中，他们三人指出，中国官员“一再威胁说中国人民解放军的驻港部队将使用武力镇压和平示威者”，他们还指出，“这样的悲惨结局正在变得越来越可能。”
1989年天安门大屠杀后，乔治•布什总统和美国国会对中国实施了强硬的制裁，但布什很快就退缩了。从那时起，中国已成为一个更能抵抗外界压力的大国。如果习近平先生决定采取镇压，美国当然无力保护香港的民主，但它能够、而且应该支持香港人民对真正的民主的追求，并能够让中国明白，使用武力将会给美中关系带来后果。
=================================================
公民力量新闻组
Washington Post Editorial
October 1, 2014Standing against repression
The U.S. must tell China that a crackdown on the Hong Kong protesters would have costs.
IT’S HARD not to be inspired by the images of crowds in the center of Hong Kong peacefully demonstrating in favor of democracy, their unlikely symbol not a clenched fist but an open umbrella. But it’s also difficult not to remember the similar mass demonstrations that filled Beijing’s Tiananmen Square 25 years ago and how those ended. The pessimistic consensus in and outside China is that the Communist party leadership of Xi Jinping, which has adopted a hard line against political dissent, is likely to forcibly crush this protest movement if it persists, just as the last one was crushed.
Beijing, however, has not acted yet; police in Hong Kong backed off on Monday and Tuesday after their use of tear gas over the weekend brought more people to the streets. Chinese authorities probably are weighing the risks of allowing the street occupations to continue against those of initiating a crackdown. That makes this a crucial moment for the United States to send a clear message to Mr. Xi: that repression is unacceptable and will damage China’s relations with the democratic world.
Unfortunately, the Obama administration’s response so far has been gallingly timid. White House and State Department spokesmen have carefully avoided offering explicit support for the demonstrators’ demands for free elections for the city’s leader, rather than a managed choice among nominees approved by Beijing. They have urged the demonstrators to be peaceful, though only the police have resorted to violence.
As a supporter of the 1984 agreement under which Hong Kong was transferred from British to Chinese rule, the United States has an obligation to speak up when China violates the spirit of its promise to allow an elected government — as it clearly has. Yet the U.S. Consulate in Hong Kong went so far as to declare that “we do not take sides in the discussion of Hong Kong’s political development, nor do we support any particular individuals or groups involved in it.”
Even more concerning is U.S. nonchalance about a possible crackdown. Asked about speculation that Chinese military units stationed in Hong Kong could be used against the protesters, the State Department’s spokesman said Monday that “I have not seen that potential at this point in time. I can check with our team to see if that’s a concern we have.”
State would do well to check with Chinese dissidents such as Yang Jianli, Teng Biao and Hu Jia, who know the regime’s capacity for repression all too well. In an oped published by the Wall Street Journal on Tuesday, the three men pointed out that Chinese officials “have threatened repeatedly that Hong Kong-based units of China’s People’s Liberation Army will use force to suppress peaceful demonstrations,” adding, “this tragic outcome is becoming more likely.”
After the 1989 Tiananmen massacre, President George H.W. Bush and Congress imposed tough sanctions on China, though Mr. Bush soon backed down. Since then China has grown into a major power that is more resistant to outside pressure. The United States cannot protect Hong Kong’s democracy movement if Mr. Xi decides to crush it. But it can and should support its demand for genuine democracy and let China know that the use of force would have consequences for U.S.-Chinese relations.
