【英语国际】中情局重提在华失败往事

The Central Intelligence Agency went to new lengths Tuesday to clarify its role in a botched 1952 spying mission in China by allowing at least one reporter, from the Associated Press, access to the screening of the internal 'documentary,' which agency leaders hope will be used as a teaching tool for its next generation of operatives.

While the AP's report on the film did not immediately seem to stir significant discussion among Internet users in China, the film is an interesting reminder of a time when the U.S. actively worked to bring down the country's ruling party.

Directed by Paul Wimmer, the hourlong movie is a first-of-its-kind for the highly secretive agency, the AP reported. It focuses on the stories of young operatives John Downey and Richard Fecteau. The men, both fresh paramilitary recruits, were part of a larger mission known as the 'Third Force,' which supported antigovernment activists in China - unrelated to the Nationalist Kuomintang - in the early years of the Cold War. Americans hoped that politically destabilizing China would cause a draw-down in the numbers of Chinese troops fighting against them in Korea.

The film is not the first time the CIA has tried to clarify what happened to Downey and Fecteau. A 9,000-word entry on the agency's website from 2007, for example, details the failed mission from the agency's perspective. A number of books and magazine articles in the U.S. about the case have appeared over the years, but the CIA prefers its version of events, calling outside works 'short and generally flawed.'

Perhaps not coincidentally, the CIA's website also refers readers to Wikipedia entries on the men, while the Wikipedia entries refer readers to the CIA's website.

In November 1952, the operatives were on board a cargo plane with covert plans to help pick up an ethnic-Chinese spy, whom the CIA smuggled into the country months before. Downey and Fecteau, along with pilots Robert Snoddy and Norman Schwartz, weren't aware the Chinese had uncovered the American's mission. The Chinese shot down the plane: Both pilots were killed while Downey and Fecteau were captured and interrogated before being imprisoned for roughly the next twenty years.

After they were released in the 1970s, the pair said relatively little about the experience, true to the agency's demands of secrecy.

'Their commitment and dedication are a powerful source of inspiration,' CIA spokesman George Little told the AP. 'That should have been apparent to everyone.'

To be sure, the Chinese media have discussed the matter over the years, but surprisingly, recent reminders of the CIA's past efforts to destabilize the Party haven't seemed to stir the same anti-American backlash that other cases have.

The 2001 mid-air collision between a U.S. Navy plane and a Chinese fighter jet is one example. The Chinese pilot died in the incident while U.S. crewmembers were detained on southern China's Hainan Island. While subsequent tensions over the incident fizzled relatively quickly, the crash remains an active topic in the domestic press and on popular public message boards. As recently as April of this year, Chinese media were publishing magazine-length pieces to 'recall' the incident.

The 1999 U.S. bombing of China's embassy in Belgrade is another example. Tens of thousands of protesters took to the streets in Beijing in the aftermath, trapping the U.S. ambassador and his staff inside the embassy for several days. While Internet discussions of that issue appear comparatively tempered--likely a result of deliberate efforts by China's government to quell the anti-American sentiment, which it worried at the time could spiral out of control--news articles published on the incident appeared as recently as last week.

So, why don't reminders of the CIA's efforts with the 'Third Force' spark similar populist backlash? After all, unlike the Belgrade bombing or the 2001 mid-air collision where the U.S. has denied intentional harm, the 'Third Force' seems a case where many details of the CIA's operations are now easily accessed online.

One possible explanation: The Internet-using public's scope of history is relatively short.

Youths aged 10-19 are the single largest demographic of Internet users in China today, according to research by the Nanjing Marketing Group, a domestic research and marketing firm. Why would Internet 'patriots' in China today want to base their arguments for China's moral superiority in the context of the 1950s and '60s? After all, it's a period most Chinese citizens have come to regard as deeply troubling.

美国中央情报局(Central Intelligence Agency，简称CIA)允许至少一名（来自美联社的）记者观看其内部“记录片”，以进一步澄清其在1952年失败的对华间谍任务中所承担的角色。CIA的负责人希望用这部记录片作为其下一代特工的教学片。

Associated Press一名中国护士给费克托称体重，量身高。照片拍摄于1955年。虽然美联社关于这部记录片的报道似乎并未立即激起中国网民的热烈讨论，但这部片子却让人回忆起有一段时期美国曾积极努力地想把中国的执政党赶下台。

美联社报道说，这部片子片长一小时，由温默(Paul Wimmer)执导，是一贯高度保密的CIA推出的第一部此类影片，主要讲述了年轻特工唐尼(John Downey)和费克托(Richard Fecteau)的故事。在冷战初期，二人均为新招募的半军事化人员，参与了一个名为“第三力量”的大型任务。这个任务向与国民党无关的中国反政府分子提供支持。美国希望能够破坏中国的政治稳定以减少参加朝鲜战争的中国军队的数量。

这部片子不是CIA第一次试图澄清唐尼和费克托的故事。例如，2007年CIA网站上的一篇9,000字的文章从CIA的视角阐述了这次失败的任务。多年来，美国出现了大量的与此事有关的书籍和报刊文章，但CIA更喜欢自己的版本，称外界的版本“篇幅过短且常有缺陷。”

或许并非巧合，CIA的网站还提供了维基百科(Wikipedia)上有关这两人的词条链接，而维基百科也提供了CIA网站的相关链接。

1952年11月，美国特工人员搭乘运输机秘密前往中国帮助撤离一名数月前由CIA偷偷送进中国的华裔特工。唐尼和费克托以及飞行员斯诺迪(Robert Snoddy)和施瓦茨(Norman Schwartz)并不知道中国已获悉了他们的此次任务。中国击落了这架飞机：两名飞行员身亡，唐尼和费克托被捕并遭到审讯，之后又在铁窗中渡过了约20年的时光。

Associated Press被中国政府释放后的唐尼，照片拍摄于1973年。上世纪70年代获释后，二人对这段经历提及相对甚少，坚守了CIA的保密要求。

CIA发言人利特尔(George Little)对美联社说，他们的忠诚与奉献是激励我们的力量源泉，这对每一个人而言都是显而易见之事。

多年来，中国媒体当然也曾讨论过此事。出人意料的是，CIA过去曾试图破坏中国政治稳定的这些事近期被再度提起，但似乎却未像其它事件那样激起中国人的反美热情。

例如，2001年美国海军飞机与中国战斗机在空中相撞，导致中国飞行员死亡，美国机组人员被拘禁在中国南部的海南岛上。尽管由此事造成的中美紧张关系相对迅速地冰消雪融，但在中国国内媒体及流行的公共论坛上，撞机事件仍是热点话题。就在今年4月，中国媒体还发表了长篇文章“回忆”此事。

1999年美国轰炸中国驻贝尔格莱德大使馆是另一个例子。当时，数万名示威者涌上北京街头，致使美国驻华大使及其随从在使馆中被困了数天。尽管网上对此事的讨论显然相对温和（很可能是中国政府试图刻意平息民众反美情绪的结果，因为中国政府当时担心这种反美情绪有可能失控），但上周中国媒体还发表了有关此事的文章。

那么，为什么CIA再次提起“第三力量”的举动未能引发类似的民粹主义反应呢？毕竟，美国在轰炸中国使馆事件以及2001年的空中撞机事件中均否认自己是有意为之，与之不同，公众似乎现在能够轻易地从网上了解CIA在“第三力量”行动中的许多细节。

一个可能解释：网民的历史观念相对较短。

据中国研究与市场营销公司──南京国际营销集团研究表明，如今10-19岁的年轻人是中国最大的网民群体。现在的中国网络“爱国者”为什么要基于上世纪五、六十年代发生的事来证明中国的道德高尚性？毕竟，大多数中国人认为那是一段令人不安的时期。