希拉裏1月21日的演講（中英文對照）

美國國務卿希拉裏1月21日發表了一長篇演講，指名道姓地批評中國。 美國國務院還特意翻譯成了中文。 轉帖自美國國務院網站：www.state.gov. 不過，我是作為學習英文的閱讀材料來讀此文的。



U.S. Department of StateBlogVideoPhotosNewsShareContact UsSkip Navigation
Secretary Clinton Remarks Travel Photos Biography More... Media Center Daily Press Briefings Press Releases Remarks, Testimony by Senior Officials Op-Eds by Department Officials Foreign Press Center Ask the Department Video DipNote Blog Photo Gallery Email Subscriptions RSS News Feeds More... Travel Passports Visas Travel Information Emergency Services Foreign Per Diem Rates More... Careers Foreign Service Officer Civil Service Officer Foreign Service Specialist Student Programs International Organizations USAJobs: Working for America More... Business Business Support: Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Global Partnership Initiative Commercial and Business Affairs Office Key Officers of Foreign Service Posts Trade Policy and Programs Country Commercial Guides Defense Trade Controls Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization Guide To Doing Business Recovery and Reinvestment Act More... Youth and Education Student Website Diplomatic History Student Career Programs Virtual Student Foreign Service Youth Exchange Programs Fulbright Program Exchange Visitor Program U.S. Diplomacy Center More... About State Mission Statement Organization Chart Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton Senior Officials Special Envoys and Special Representatives Alphabetical List of Bureaus and Offices Biographies Budgets, Performance, Plans Citizens\' Report No FEAR Act Inspector General Hotline U.S. Embassies and Other Posts U.S. Mission to the United Nations More... Policy Issues 21st Century Statecraft Afghanistan Climate Change Counterterrorism Democracy and Human Rights Economic Issues Energy Security Food Security Haiti Earthquake Health Iran Iraq Landmines Narcotics Middle East Muslim Outreach Nonproliferation North Korea Pakistan Piracy Sudan Trafficking in Persons War Crimes Women\'s Issues Youth Countries and Regions A-Z List of Countries and Other Areas Africa (Sub-Sahara) East Asia and the Pacific Europe and Eurasia Near East (northern Africa, Middle East) South and Central Asia Western Hemisphere (Latin America, Canada) UN & Other International Organizations More... Economics and Energy Food Security Energy Climate Change Global Partnership Initiative Commerce and Business Trade Policy and Programs Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization Doing Business With the Department More... Arms Control and Security Nonproliferation Counterterrorism Narcotics & Law Enforcement Security Assistance Diplomatic Security Defense Trade Controls Political-Military Affairs More... Democracy and Global Affairs Human Rights Refugees Religious Freedom Women\'s Issues Climate Change Environment Oceans Science and Technology Trafficking in Persons More... Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs Daily Press Briefings Press Releases Public Affairs International Information Programs Education and Culture History of Foreign Relations More... Assistance and Development Director of U.S. Foreign Assistance U.S. Agency for International Development AIDS Relief
Search the SiteSearch
#speaker_ac
#country_ab
#topic_a
Browse by:Skip Navigation Topic Speaker Publication Country Date Viewing by TopicCloseABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
21st Century Statecraft
Abandoned Ordnance
Accountability Report
ACE Award
Addresses and Phone Numbers
Administration
Adoption
Advanced Conventional Weapons
Advisory Committee
African Growth and Opportunity Act
Agency for International Development
Agreements
Agriculture
Aid
AIDS
Air Safety
Air Services
Al-Qaida
Allowances
Ambassadors
American Service Members Protection Act
Announcements
Antarctic
Anti-Semitism
Anticorruption
Antiterrorism
APEC
Appointments
Arbitration
Archive
Arctic
Arms Control
Arms Trafficking
Art in Embassies Program
Article 98
ASEAN
Ask the State Department
Assistance
Asylum
Athletics
Atrocities
Audit
Authentications
Viewing by SpeakerCloseA-CD-KL-RS-Z Anthony, Tanya
Bagley, Elizabeth Frawley
Balton, David A.
Barton, Ambassador Rick
Benjamin, Daniel
Bennett, Ruth
Blake, Robert O., Jr.
Bloom, Evan
Bond, Michele T.
Bosworth, Stephen W.
Boucher, Richard A.
Brimmer, Esther
Buchwald, Todd
Burk, Ambassador Susan F.
Burns, William J.
Camp, Donald
Campbell, Kurt M.
Carbajal, David
Carson, Johnnie
Carter, Phillip III
CdeBaca, Luis
Chen, Eugene B.
Clinton, Hillary Rodham
Cousens, Elizabeth
Crowley, Philip J.
Viewing by PublicationClose Article
Background Notes
Biography
Communique
Daily Appointments Schedule
Daily Press Briefing
Fact Sheet
Funding Opportunity Announcement
Interview
Op-Ed
Press Release
Remarks
Report
Testimony
Viewing by CountryCloseA-BC-EF-KL-OP-ST-ZRegionsPlease choose a country or other area, or a Region.

Afghanistan
Albania
Algeria
Andorra
Angola
Antigua and Barbuda
Argentina
Armenia
Aruba
Australia
Austria
Azerbaijan
Bahamas, The
Bahrain
Bangladesh
Barbados
Belarus
Belgium
Belize
Benin
Bermuda
Bhutan
Bolivia
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Botswana
Brazil
Brunei
Bulgaria
Burkina Faso
Burma
Burundi
Viewing by DateCloseMost Recent
Past 7 days
Past 90 days
Quick LinksSelect a Quick LinkSelect a Quick LinkSecretary ClintonSecretary\'s RemarksSecretary\'s TravelSecretary\'s BiographyRecovery ActPassportsVisasTravel WarningsDaily Press BriefingsPer Diem RatesSubject IndexA-Z Country PagesMajor PublicationsCountry ProfilesSelect a Country or Other AreaSelect a Country or Other AreaAfghanistan Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas, The Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Brunei Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burma Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Colombia Comoros Congo, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Republic of the Costa Rica Cote d\'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Fiji Finland France Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Grenada Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Holy See Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Laos Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macau Macedonia Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Micronesia Moldova Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Morocco Mozambique Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands Netherlands Antilles New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria North Korea Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Qatar Romania Russia Rwanda Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Korea Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syria Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela Vietnam Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe

Stay Connected with State.gov
Subscribe to Updates

Home » Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton » Secretary\'s Comments » 2010 Secretary Clinton\'s Remarks » Remarks by Secretary Clinton: January 2010 » Remarks on Internet Freedom

Remarks on Internet Freedom


Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State
The Newseum

Washington, DC

January 21, 2010

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Transcripts: Arabic | Chinese | French | Persian | Russian | Spanish | Urdu

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you very much, Alberto, for not only that kind introduction but your and your colleagues’ leadership of this important institution. It’s a pleasure to be here at the Newseum. The Newseum is a monument to some of our most precious freedoms, and I’m grateful for this opportunity to discuss how those freedoms apply to the challenges of the 21st century.

Although I can’t see all of you because in settings like this, the lights are in my eyes and you are in the dark, I know that there are many friends and former colleagues. I wish to acknowledge Charles Overby, the CEO of Freedom Forum here at the Newseum; Senator Edward Kaufman and Senator Joe Lieberman, my former colleagues in the Senate, both of whom worked for passage of the Voice Act, which speaks to Congress’s and the American people’s commitment to internet freedom, a commitment that crosses party lines and branches of government.

Also, I’m told here as well are Senator Sam Brownback, Senator Ted Kaufman, Representative Loretta Sanchez, many representatives of the Diplomatic Corps, ambassadors, chargés, participants in our International Visitor Leadership Program on internet freedom from China, Colombia, Iran, and Lebanon, and Moldova. And I also want to acknowledge Walter Isaacson, president of the Aspen Institute, recently named to our Broadcasting Board of Governors and, of course, instrumental in supporting the work on internet freedom that the Aspen Institute has been doing.

This is an important speech on a very important subject. But before I begin, I want to just speak briefly about Haiti, because during the last eight days, the people of Haiti and the people of the world have joined together to deal with a tragedy of staggering proportions. Our hemisphere has seen its share of hardship, but there are few precedents for the situation we’re facing in Port-au-Prince. Communication networks have played a critical role in our response. They were, of course, decimated and in many places totally destroyed. And in the hours after the quake, we worked with partners in the private sector; first, to set up the text “HAITI” campaign so that mobile phone users in the United States could donate to relief efforts via text messages. That initiative has been a showcase for the generosity of the American people, and thus far, it’s raised over $25 million for recovery efforts.

Information networks have also played a critical role on the ground. When I was with President Preval in Port-au-Prince on Saturday, one of his top priorities was to try to get communication up and going. The government couldn’t talk to each other, what was left of it, and NGOs, our civilian leadership, our military leadership were severely impacted. The technology community has set up interactive maps to help us identify needs and target resources. And on Monday, a seven-year-old girl and two women were pulled from the rubble of a collapsed supermarket by an American search-and-rescue team after they sent a text message calling for help. Now, these examples are manifestations of a much broader phenomenon.

The spread of information networks is forming a new nervous system for our planet. When something happens in Haiti or Hunan, the rest of us learn about it in real time – from real people. And we can respond in real time as well. Americans eager to help in the aftermath of a disaster and the girl trapped in the supermarket are connected in ways that were not even imagined a year ago, even a generation ago. That same principle applies to almost all of humanity today. As we sit here, any of you – or maybe more likely, any of our children – can take out the tools that many carry every day and transmit this discussion to billions across the world.

Now, in many respects, information has never been so free. There are more ways to spread more ideas to more people than at any moment in history. And even in authoritarian countries, information networks are helping people discover new facts and making governments more accountable.

During his visit to China in November, for example, President Obama held a town hall meeting with an online component to highlight the importance of the internet. In response to a question that was sent in over the internet, he defended the right of people to freely access information, and said that the more freely information flows, the stronger societies become. He spoke about how access to information helps citizens hold their own governments accountable, generates new ideas, encourages creativity and entrepreneurship. The United States belief in that ground truth is what brings me here today.

Because amid this unprecedented surge in connectivity, we must also recognize that these technologies are not an unmitigated blessing. These tools are also being exploited to undermine human progress and political rights. Just as steel can be used to build hospitals or machine guns, or nuclear power can either energize a city or destroy it, modern information networks and the technologies they support can be harnessed for good or for ill. The same networks that help organize movements for freedom also enable al-Qaida to spew hatred and incite violence against the innocent. And technologies with the potential to open up access to government and promote transparency can also be hijacked by governments to crush dissent and deny human rights.

In the last year, we’ve seen a spike in threats to the free flow of information. China, Tunisia, and Uzbekistan have stepped up their censorship of the internet. In Vietnam, access to popular social networking sites has suddenly disappeared. And last Friday in Egypt, 30 bloggers and activists were detained. One member of this group, Bassem Samir, who is thankfully no longer in prison, is with us today. So while it is clear that the spread of these technologies is transforming our world, it is still unclear how that transformation will affect the human rights and the human welfare of the world’s population.

On their own, new technologies do not take sides in the struggle for freedom and progress, but the United States does. We stand for a single internet where all of humanity has equal access to knowledge and ideas. And we recognize that the world’s information infrastructure will become what we and others make of it. Now, this challenge may be new, but our responsibility to help ensure the free exchange of ideas goes back to the birth of our republic. The words of the First Amendment to our Constitution are carved in 50 tons of Tennessee marble on the front of this building. And every generation of Americans has worked to protect the values etched in that stone.

Franklin Roosevelt built on these ideas when he delivered his Four Freedoms speech in 1941. Now, at the time, Americans faced a cavalcade of crises and a crisis of confidence. But the vision of a world in which all people enjoyed freedom of expression, freedom of worship, freedom from want, and freedom from fear transcended the troubles of his day. And years later, one of my heroes, Eleanor Roosevelt, worked to have these principles adopted as a cornerstone of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. They have provided a lodestar to every succeeding generation, guiding us, galvanizing us, and enabling us to move forward in the face of uncertainty.

So as technology hurtles forward, we must think back to that legacy. We need to synchronize our technological progress with our principles. In accepting the Nobel Prize, President Obama spoke about the need to build a world in which peace rests on the inherent rights and dignities of every individual. And in my speech on human rights at Georgetown a few days later, I talked about how we must find ways to make human rights a reality. Today, we find an urgent need to protect these freedoms on the digital frontiers of the 21st century.

There are many other networks in the world. Some aid in the movement of people or resources, and some facilitate exchanges between individuals with the same work or interests. But the internet is a network that magnifies the power and potential of all others. And that’s why we believe it’s critical that its users are assured certain basic freedoms. Freedom of expression is first among them. This freedom is no longer defined solely by whether citizens can go into the town square and criticize their government without fear of retribution. Blogs, emails, social networks, and text messages have opened up new forums for exchanging ideas, and created new targets for censorship.

As I speak to you today, government censors somewhere are working furiously to erase my words from the records of history. But history itself has already condemned these tactics. Two months ago, I was in Germany to celebrate the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall. The leaders gathered at that ceremony paid tribute to the courageous men and women on the far side of that barrier who made the case against oppression by circulating small pamphlets called samizdat. Now, these leaflets questioned the claims and intentions of dictatorships in the Eastern Bloc and many people paid dearly for distributing them. But their words helped pierce the concrete and concertina wire of the Iron Curtain.

The Berlin Wall symbolized a world divided and it defined an entire era. Today, remnants of that wall sit inside this museum where they belong, and the new iconic infrastructure of our age is the internet. Instead of division, it stands for connection. But even as networks spread to nations around the globe, virtual walls are cropping up in place of visible walls.

Some countries have erected electronic barriers that prevent their people from accessing portions of the world’s networks. They’ve expunged words, names, and phrases from search engine results. They have violated the privacy of citizens who engage in non-violent political speech. These actions contravene the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, which tells us that all people have the right “to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.” With the spread of these restrictive practices, a new information curtain is descending across much of the world. And beyond this partition, viral videos and blog posts are becoming the samizdat of our day.

As in the dictatorships of the past, governments are targeting independent thinkers who use these tools. In the demonstrations that followed Iran’s presidential elections, grainy cell phone footage of a young woman’s bloody murder provided a digital indictment of the government’s brutality. We’ve seen reports that when Iranians living overseas posted online criticism of their nation’s leaders, their family members in Iran were singled out for retribution. And despite an intense campaign of government intimidation, brave citizen journalists in Iran continue using technology to show the world and their fellow citizens what is happening inside their country. In speaking out on behalf of their own human rights, the Iranian people have inspired the world. And their courage is redefining how technology is used to spread truth and expose injustice.

Now, all societies recognize that free expression has its limits. We do not tolerate those who incite others to violence, such as the agents of al-Qaida who are, at this moment, using the internet to promote the mass murder of innocent people across the world. And hate speech that targets individuals on the basis of their race, religion, ethnicity, gender, or sexual orientation is reprehensible. It is an unfortunate fact that these issues are both growing challenges that the international community must confront together. And we must also grapple with the issue of anonymous speech. Those who use the internet to recruit terrorists or distribute stolen intellectual property cannot divorce their online actions from their real world identities. But these challenges must not become an excuse for governments to systematically violate the rights and privacy of those who use the internet for peaceful political purposes.

The freedom of expression may be the most obvious freedom to face challenges with the spread of new technologies, but it is not the only one. The freedom of worship usually involves the rights of individuals to commune or not commune with their Creator. And that’s one channel of communication that does not rely on technology. But the freedom of worship also speaks to the universal right to come together with those who share your values and vision for humanity. In our history, those gatherings often took place in churches, synagogues, mosques and temples. Today, they may also take place on line.

The internet can help bridge divides between people of different faiths. As the President said in Cairo, freedom of religion is central to the ability of people to live together. And as we look for ways to expand dialogue, the internet holds out such tremendous promise. We’ve already begun connecting students in the United States with young people in Muslim communities around the world to discuss global challenges. And we will continue using this tool to foster discussion between individuals from different religious communities.

Some nations, however, have co-opted the internet as a tool to target and silence people of faith. Last year, for example, in Saudi Arabia, a man spent months in prison for blogging about Christianity. And a Harvard study found that the Saudi Government blocked many web pages about Hinduism, Judaism, Christianity, and even Islam. Countries including Vietnam and China employed similar tactics to restrict access to religious information.

Now, just as these technologies must not be used to punish peaceful political speech, they must also not be used to persecute or silence religious minorities. Now, prayers will always travel on higher networks. But connection technologies like the internet and social networking sites should enhance individuals’ ability to worship as they see fit, come together with people of their own faith, and learn more about the beliefs of others. We must work to advance the freedom of worship online just as we do in other areas of life.

There are, of course, hundreds of millions of people living without the benefits of these technologies. In our world, as I’ve said many times, talent may be distributed universally, but opportunity is not. And we know from long experience that promoting social and economic development in countries where people lack access to knowledge, markets, capital, and opportunity can be frustrating and sometimes futile work. In this context, the internet can serve as a great equalizer. By providing people with access to knowledge and potential markets, networks can create opportunities where none exist.

Over the last year, I’ve seen this firsthand in Kenya, where farmers have seen their income grow by as much as 30 percent since they started using mobile banking technology; in Bangladesh, where more than 300,000 people have signed up to learn English on their mobile phones; and in Sub-Saharan Africa, where women entrepreneurs use the internet to get access to microcredit loans and connect themselves to global markets.

Now, these examples of progress can be replicated in the lives of the billion people at the bottom of the world’s economic ladder. In many cases, the internet, mobile phones, and other connection technologies can do for economic growth what the Green Revolution did for agriculture. You can now generate significant yields from very modest inputs. And one World Bank study found that in a typical developing country, a 10 percent increase in the penetration rate for mobile phones led to an almost 1 percent increase in per capita GDP. To just put this into context, for India, that would translate into almost $10 billion a year.

A connection to global information networks is like an on-ramp to modernity. In the early years of these technologies, many believed that they would divide the world between haves and have-nots. But that hasn’t happened. There are 4 billion cell phones in use today. Many of them are in the hands of market vendors, rickshaw drivers, and others who’ve historically lacked access to education and opportunity. Information networks have become a great leveler, and we should use them together to help lift people out of poverty and give them a freedom from want.

Now, we have every reason to be hopeful about what people can accomplish when they leverage communication networks and connection technologies to achieve progress. But make no mistake – some are and will continue to use global information networks for darker purposes. Violent extremists, criminal cartels, sexual predators, and authoritarian governments all seek to exploit these global networks. Just as terrorists have taken advantage of the openness of our societies to carry out their plots, violent extremists use the internet to radicalize and intimidate. As we work to advance freedoms, we must also work against those who use communication networks as tools of disruption and fear.

Governments and citizens must have confidence that the networks at the core of their national security and economic prosperity are safe and resilient. Now this is about more than petty hackers who deface websites. Our ability to bank online, use electronic commerce, and safeguard billions of dollars in intellectual property are all at stake if we cannot rely on the security of our information networks.

Disruptions in these systems demand a coordinated response by all governments, the private sector, and the international community. We need more tools to help law enforcement agencies cooperate across jurisdictions when criminal hackers and organized crime syndicates attack networks for financial gain. The same is true when social ills such as child pornography and the exploitation of trafficked women and girls online is there for the world to see and for those who exploit these people to make a profit. We applaud efforts such as the Council on Europe’s Convention on Cybercrime that facilitate international cooperation in prosecuting such offenses. And we wish to redouble our efforts.

We have taken steps as a government, and as a Department, to find diplomatic solutions to strengthen global cyber security. We have a lot of people in the State Department working on this. They’ve joined together, and we created two years ago an office to coordinate foreign policy in cyberspace. We’ve worked to address this challenge at the UN and in other multilateral forums and to put cyber security on the world’s agenda. And President Obama has just appointed a new national cyberspace policy coordinator who will help us work even more closely to ensure that everyone’s networks stay free, secure, and reliable.

States, terrorists, and those who would act as their proxies must know that the United States will protect our networks. Those who disrupt the free flow of information in our society or any other pose a threat to our economy, our government, and our civil society. Countries or individuals that engage in cyber attacks should face consequences and international condemnation. In an internet-connected world, an attack on one nation’s networks can be an attack on all. And by reinforcing that message, we can create norms of behavior among states and encourage respect for the global networked commons.

The final freedom, one that was probably inherent in what both President and Mrs. Roosevelt thought about and wrote about all those years ago, is one that flows from the four I’ve already mentioned: the freedom to connect – the idea that governments should not prevent people from connecting to the internet, to websites, or to each other. The freedom to connect is like the freedom of assembly, only in cyberspace. It allows individuals to get online, come together, and hopefully cooperate. Once you’re on the internet, you don’t need to be a tycoon or a rock star to have a huge impact on society.

The largest public response to the terrorist attacks in Mumbai was launched by a 13-year-old boy. He used social networks to organize blood drives and a massive interfaith book of condolence. In Colombia, an unemployed engineer brought together more than 12 million people in 190 cities around the world to demonstrate against the FARC terrorist movement. The protests were the largest antiterrorist demonstrations in history. And in the weeks that followed, the FARC saw more demobilizations and desertions than it had during a decade of military action. And in Mexico, a single email from a private citizen who was fed up with drug-related violence snowballed into huge demonstrations in all of the country’s 32 states. In Mexico City alone, 150,000 people took to the streets in protest. So the internet can help humanity push back against those who promote violence and crime and extremism.
In Iran and Moldova and other countries, online organizing has been a critical tool for advancing democracy and enabling citizens to protest suspicious election results. And even in established democracies like the United States, we’ve seen the power of these tools to change history. Some of you may still remember the 2008 presidential election here. (Laughter.)

The freedom to connect to these technologies can help transform societies, but it is also critically important to individuals. I was recently moved by the story of a doctor – and I won’t tell you what country he was from – who was desperately trying to diagnose his daughter’s rare medical condition. He consulted with two dozen specialists, but he still didn’t have an answer. But he finally identified the condition, and found a cure, by using an internet search engine. That’s one of the reasons why unfettered access to search engine technology is so important in individuals’ lives.

Now, the principles I’ve outlined today will guide our approach in addressing the issue of internet freedom and the use of these technologies. And I want to speak about how we apply them in practice. The United States is committed to devoting the diplomatic, economic, and technological resources necessary to advance these freedoms. We are a nation made up of immigrants from every country and every interest that spans the globe. Our foreign policy is premised on the idea that no country more than America stands to benefit when there is cooperation among peoples and states. And no country shoulders a heavier burden when conflict and misunderstanding drive nations apart. So we are well placed to seize the opportunities that come with interconnectivity. And as the birthplace for so many of these technologies, including the internet itself, we have a responsibility to see them used for good. To do that, we need to develop our capacity for what we call, at the State Department, 21st century statecraft.

Realigning our policies and our priorities will not be easy. But adjusting to new technology rarely is. When the telegraph was introduced, it was a source of great anxiety for many in the diplomatic community, where the prospect of receiving daily instructions from capitals was not entirely welcome. But just as our diplomats eventually mastered the telegraph, they are doing the same to harness the potential of these new tools as well.

And I’m proud that the State Department is already working in more than 40 countries to help individuals silenced by oppressive governments. We are making this issue a priority at the United Nations as well, and we’re including internet freedom as a component in the first resolution we introduced after returning to the United Nations Human Rights Council.

We are also supporting the development of new tools that enable citizens to exercise their rights of free expression by circumventing politically motivated censorship. We are providing funds to groups around the world to make sure that those tools get to the people who need them in local languages, and with the training they need to access the internet safely. The United States has been assisting in these efforts for some time, with a focus on implementing these programs as efficiently and effectively as possible. Both the American people and nations that censor the internet should understand that our government is committed to helping promote internet freedom.

We want to put these tools in the hands of people who will use them to advance democracy and human rights, to fight climate change and epidemics, to build global support for President Obama’s goal of a world without nuclear weapons, to encourage sustainable economic development that lifts the people at the bottom up.

That’s why today I’m announcing that over the next year, we will work with partners in industry, academia, and nongovernmental organizations to establish a standing effort that will harness the power of connection technologies and apply them to our diplomatic goals. By relying on mobile phones, mapping applications, and other new tools, we can empower citizens and leverage our traditional diplomacy. We can address deficiencies in the current market for innovation.

Let me give you one example. Let’s say I want to create a mobile phone application that would allow people to rate government ministries, including ours, on their responsiveness and efficiency and also to ferret out and report corruption. The hardware required to make this idea work is already in the hands of billions of potential users. And the software involved would be relatively inexpensive to develop and deploy.

If people took advantage of this tool, it would help us target our foreign assistance spending, improve lives, and encourage foreign investment in countries with responsible governments. However, right now, mobile application developers have no financial assistance to pursue that project on their own, and the State Department currently lacks a mechanism to make it happen. But this initiative should help resolve that problem and provide long-term dividends from modest investments in innovation. We’re going to work with experts to find the best structure for this venture, and we’ll need the talent and resources of technology companies and nonprofits in order to get the best results most quickly. So for those of you in the room who have this kind of talent, expertise, please consider yourselves invited to help us.

In the meantime, there are companies, individuals, and institutions working on ideas and applications that could already advance our diplomatic and development objectives. And the State Department will be launching an innovation competition to give this work an immediate boost. We’ll be asking Americans to send us their best ideas for applications and technologies that help break down language barriers, overcome illiteracy, connect people to the services and information they need. Microsoft, for example, has already developed a prototype for a digital doctor that could help provide medical care in isolated rural communities. We want to see more ideas like that. And we’ll work with the winners of the competition and provide grants to help build their ideas to scale.

Now, these new initiatives will supplement a great deal of important work we’ve already done over this past year. In the service of our diplomatic and diplomacy objectives, I assembled a talented and experienced team to lead our 21st century statecraft efforts. This team has traveled the world helping governments and groups leverage the benefits of connection technologies. They have stood up a Civil Society 2.0 Initiative to help grassroots organizations enter the digital age. They are putting in place a program in Mexico to help combat drug-related violence by allowing people to make untracked reports to reliable sources to avoid having retribution visited against them. They brought mobile banking to Afghanistan and are now pursuing the same effort in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. In Pakistan, they created the first-ever social mobile network, called Our Voice, that has already produced tens of millions of messages and connected young Pakistanis who want to stand up to violent extremism.

In a short span, we have taken significant strides to translate the promise of these technologies into results that make a difference. But there is still so much more to be done. And as we work together with the private sector and foreign governments to deploy the tools of 21st century statecraft, we have to remember our shared responsibility to safeguard the freedoms that I’ve talked about today. We feel strongly that principles like information freedom aren’t just good policy, not just somehow connected to our national values, but they are universal and they’re also good for business.

To use market terminology, a publicly listed company in Tunisia or Vietnam that operates in an environment of censorship will always trade at a discount relative to an identical firm in a free society. If corporate decision makers don’t have access to global sources of news and information, investors will have less confidence in their decisions over the long term. Countries that censor news and information must recognize that from an economic standpoint, there is no distinction between censoring political speech and commercial speech. If businesses in your nations are denied access to either type of information, it will inevitably impact on growth.

Increasingly, U.S. companies are making the issue of internet and information freedom a greater consideration in their business decisions. I hope that their competitors and foreign governments will pay close attention to this trend. The most recent situation involving Google has attracted a great deal of interest. And we look to the Chinese authorities to conduct a thorough review of the cyber intrusions that led Google to make its announcement. And we also look for that investigation and its results to be transparent.

The internet has already been a source of tremendous progress in China, and it is fabulous. There are so many people in China now online. But countries that restrict free access to information or violate the basic rights of internet users risk walling themselves off from the progress of the next century. Now, the United States and China have different views on this issue, and we intend to address those differences candidly and consistently in the context of our positive, cooperative, and comprehensive relationship.

Now, ultimately, this issue isn’t just about information freedom; it is about what kind of world we want and what kind of world we will inhabit. It’s about whether we live on a planet with one internet, one global community, and a common body of knowledge that benefits and unites us all, or a fragmented planet in which access to information and opportunity is dependent on where you live and the whims of censors.

Information freedom supports the peace and security that provides a foundation for global progress. Historically, asymmetrical access to information is one of the leading causes of interstate conflict. When we face serious disputes or dangerous incidents, it’s critical that people on both sides of the problem have access to the same set of facts and opinions.

As it stands, Americans can consider information presented by foreign governments. We do not block your attempts to communicate with the people in the United States. But citizens in societies that practice censorship lack exposure to outside views. In North Korea, for example, the government has tried to completely isolate its citizens from outside opinions. This lopsided access to information increases both the likelihood of conflict and the probability that small disagreements could escalate. So I hope that responsible governments with an interest in global stability will work with us to address such imbalances.

For companies, this issue is about more than claiming the moral high ground. It really comes down to the trust between firms and their customers. Consumers everywhere want to have confidence that the internet companies they rely on will provide comprehensive search results and act as responsible stewards of their own personal information. Firms that earn that confidence of those countries and basically provide that kind of service will prosper in the global marketplace. I really believe that those who lose that confidence of their customers will eventually lose customers. No matter where you live, people want to believe that what they put into the internet is not going to be used against them.

And censorship should not be in any way accepted by any company from anywhere. And in America, American companies need to make a principled stand. This needs to be part of our national brand. I’m confident that consumers worldwide will reward companies that follow those principles.

Now, we are reinvigorating the Global Internet Freedom Task Force as a forum for addressing threats to internet freedom around the world, and we are urging U.S. media companies to take a proactive role in challenging foreign governments’ demands for censorship and surveillance. The private sector has a shared responsibility to help safeguard free expression. And when their business dealings threaten to undermine this freedom, they need to consider what’s right, not simply what’s a quick profit.

We’re also encouraged by the work that’s being done through the Global Network Initiative, a voluntary effort by technology companies who are working with nongovernmental organizations, academic experts, and social investment funds to respond to government requests for censorship. The initiative goes beyond mere statements of principles and establishes mechanisms to promote real accountability and transparency. As part of our commitment to support responsible private sector engagement on information freedom, the State Department will be convening a high-level meeting next month co-chaired by Under Secretaries Robert Hormats and Maria Otero to bring together firms that provide network services for talks about internet freedom, because we want to have a partnership in addressing this 21st century challenge.

Now, pursuing the freedoms I’ve talked about today is, I believe, the right thing to do. But I also believe it’s the smart thing to do. By advancing this agenda, we align our principles, our economic goals, and our strategic priorities. We need to work toward a world in which access to networks and information brings people closer together and expands the definition of the global community. Given the magnitude of the challenges we’re facing, we need people around the world to pool their knowledge and creativity to help rebuild the global economy, to protect our environment, to defeat violent extremism, and build a future in which every human being can live up to and realize his or her God-given potential.

So let me close by asking you to remember the little girl who was pulled from the rubble on Monday in Port-au-Prince. She’s alive, she was reunited with her family, she will have the chance to grow up because these networks took a voice that was buried and spread it to the world. No nation, no group, no individual should stay buried in the rubble of oppression. We cannot stand by while people are separated from the human family by walls of censorship. And we cannot be silent about these issues simply because we cannot hear the cries.

So let us recommit ourselves to this cause. Let us make these technologies a force for real progress the world over. And let us go forward together to champion these freedoms for our time, for our young people who deserve every opportunity we can give them.

Thank you all very much. (Applause.)

MODERATOR: Thank you. Thank you, Madame Secretary. The Secretary has agreed to answer some questions. So if you would, there are going to be three microphones in the audience. If you would make your questions short, we’d appreciate it. And identify yourselves, please.


Yes. Could you wait for the microphone?


QUESTION: Madame Secretary, you talked about anonymity on line and how that’s something – oh, I’m sorry. I’m Robert (inaudible). I’m with Northern Virginia Community College. I’m sorry.


STAFF: Could you hold the microphone up, please?


QUESTION: Sorry.


STAFF: Thank you.


QUESTION: You talked about anonymity on line and how we have to prevent that. But you also talk about censorship by governments. And I’m struck by – having a veil of anonymity in certain situations is actually quite beneficial. So are you looking to strike a balance between that and this emphasis on censorship?


SECRETARY CLINTON: Absolutely. I mean, this is one of the challenges we face. On the one hand, anonymity protects the exploitation of children. And on the other hand, anonymity protects the free expression of opposition to repressive governments. Anonymity allows the theft of intellectual property, but anonymity also permits people to come together in settings that gives them some basis for free expression without identifying themselves.


None of this will be easy. I think that’s a fair statement. I think, as I said, we all have varying needs and rights and responsibilities. But I think these overriding principles should be our guiding light. We should err on the side of openness and do everything possible to create that, recognizing, as with any rule or any statement of principle, there are going to be exceptions.

So how we go after this, I think, is now what we’re requesting many of you who are experts in this area to lend your help to us in doing. We need the guidance of technology experts. In my experience, most of them are younger than 40, but not all are younger than 40. And we need the companies that do this, and we need the dissident voices who have actually lived on the front lines so that we can try to work through the best way to make that balance you referred to.



MODERATOR: Forty may be (inaudible).


SECRETARY CLINTON: (Laughter.)


MODERATOR: Right over here. Yes.


QUESTION: Hi, my name is Courtney Radsch. I’m the Global Freedom of Expression officer at Freedom House. And I wanted to ask you – you spoke about business and relying on them to do the moral, right thing and not put profits first. But the goal of business is to make a profit. So what kind of teeth are going to be put into this? What role does the World Trade Organization play? And how are you going to encourage them to do the right thing?


SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, again, I think this is one of the issues that we want to have a very vigorous discussion about. I know that asking business, which is in business to make a profit, to do the right thing is not always easily translated into practical practice. On the other hand, I think there is a broader context here. It’s – companies that don’t follow the sanitary and hygiene procedures of a prior generation pay a price for it. And government and business have to constantly be working together to make sure that the food and other products that end up on the shelves of consumers around the world are safe, because individual consumers in a global interconnected economy can’t possibly exercise that vigilance on their own.


Similarly, when it comes to censorship, we believe that having an international effort to establish some rules over internet connectivity and trying to protect the basic freedoms I discussed is in the long-term interest of business, and frankly, I would argue, governments. I used the example from the fall of the Berlin Wall. It is very hard to keep information out. It was hard to keep it out at a prior age; it is even harder now. And trying to adjust to that, work with that, and learn from that about what could be done better is going to challenge every single government in the world.


So I think business, as such a driver of economic growth globally, has to have that in mind, both when they go into countries and when they confront the kind of censorship that we’re hearing about around the world. It’s particularly acute for the technology companies, the media companies obviously, but it’s not in any way limited to them. Other companies are facing censorship as well. So this is an issue that we have to surface and we have to talk about and we have to try to find as much common ground and then keep claiming more common ground as we go forward.


MODERATOR: We have a question way over here on the left.


QUESTION: Thank you. My name is Aly Abuzaakouk. I’m the director of Libya Forum website, promoting democracy and human rights and civil society in Libya.


We have been attacked and hacked many times. I would like Madame Secretary to tell me how can you help those voices which do not have, you know, the technology or the money to protect themselves, protect them against the hackers which are the silencers of voices from outside the countries which lacks freedom and freedom of expression.


SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, this is one of the issues that we are debating and we’re looking for ideas as to how we can answer it in a positive way. We would invite your participation. After I take the last question, Anne-Marie Slaughter, the Director of my Policy Planning unit inside the State Department and someone – the former dean of the Woodrow Wilson School who has written a lot about interconnectivity and how we have to begin to look at the world as the networked reality that it is, will be leading a discussion. And I hope some of you with ideas, suggestions, cautions, worries will stay and really get into an in-depth discussion about that.


MODERATOR: Thank you. And right here in the mezzanine, right next to the microphone.


QUESTION: Dr. Nguyen Dinh Thang with BPSOS. We serve Vietnamese Americans and work with Vietnamese in Vietnam. While your initiative will take some time to take effect, just recently, in recent months, the Vietnamese Government sentenced several bloggers to five years all the way to 16 years in prison. So what does your office plan to do, and how the U.S. Government can confront such an emergency situation in Vietnam?


SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, we have publicly spoken out against the detention, conviction, and imprisonment of not only the bloggers in Vietnam, but some of the Buddhist monks and nuns and others who have been subjected to harassment.


Vietnam has made so much progress, and it’s just moving with great alacrity into the future, raising the standard of living of their people. And we don’t believe they should be afraid of commentary that is internal. In fact, I would like to see more governments, if you disagree with what a blogger or a website is saying, get in and argue with them. Explain what it is you’re doing. Put out contrary information. Point out what the pitfalls are of the position that a blogger might be taking.


So I hope that Vietnam will move more in that direction, because I think it goes hand in hand with the progress that we’ve seen in the last few years there.


MODERATOR: Thank you. Up in the back.


QUESTION: Nora von Ingersleben with the Association for Competitive Technology. Madame Secretary, you mentioned that U.S. companies have to do the right thing, not just what is good for their profits. But what if I am a U.S. company and I have a subsidiary in China and the Chinese Government is coming after my guys for information and, you know, we have resisted but now my guys have been taken to jail, my equipment is being hauled away. In that situation, what can the State Department do? Or what will the State Department do?


SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, we obviously speak out on those individual cases. And we are, as I said, hoping to engage in a very candid and constructive conversation with the Chinese Government. We have had a positive year of very open discussions with our Chinese counterparts. I think we have established a foundation of understanding. We disagree on important issues with them. They disagree on important issues with us. They have our perspective; we have our perspective. But obviously, we want to encourage and support increasing openness in China because we believe it will further add to the dynamic growth and the democratization on the local level that we see occurring in China.


So on individual cases, we continue to speak out. But on the broader set of issues, we hope to really have the kind of discussion that might lead to a better understanding and changes in the approach that is currently being taken.


MODERATOR: Thank you.


Up in the very back in the center, if you could come to the aisle so we can get a microphone to you, and then we’ll come back down here. Thank you.


QUESTION: Imam Mohamed Magid from ADAMS Center in Virginia. My question for you, Madame Secretary: When you talk about social networking, we’re trying to address the issue of youth in the West, Muslim youth. Would you be open to the youth forum to speak about foreign policy? Because one of the reason that youth be radicalized, they don’t have a way to express themselves when they disagree with the United States Government or their own government overseas. Would you be open to those ideas?


SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes, we would. In fact, we – in the wake of the President’s speech in Cairo, we have been expanding dramatically our outreach, particularly to Muslim youth. I agree with you completely, sir, that not only young people in the Muslim world, but young people across the world are increasingly disconnected from authority, from government, from all kinds of institutions that have been historically the foundations of society, because they are so interconnected through the internet, something that my generation can’t really understand.


In America, the average young person spends eight hours a day with media. The internet, cell phones, television – I mean, you think about that. Eight hours a day. That’s more time than they spend in school, that’s more time than they spend with their families. It’s often more time than they spend asleep.


So when you think about the power of this information connection to young people, I don’t think it should cause panic in people my age. I don’t think we should begin trying to stop it and prevent it. We ought to figure out how better to utilize it. You go back to the millennia; how were values passed around? Sitting around a fire, how were values communicated? In the homes by parents and grandparents. Now, values are being communicated by the internet, and we cannot stop it.


So let’s figure out how better to use it, participate in it, and particularly to focus on the needs of young people. They’re often looking for information. They’re looking for answers. At least until now, in most cultures that I’m aware of, despite all of the time that young people spend with technology, when they’re asked who do they look to for guidance about values, they still say their families. But if families increasingly feel disconnected from their highly connected young people and don’t know what their young people are doing online, then we see the problems that can result.


And there are so many manipulators online right now, not just stoking the anxieties and the fears of Muslim youth, but youth everywhere, defined by all kinds of characteristics.
So we have our own work to do, not just through our government but through our families, through our education systems, and every other institution to make sure we understand the power of this technology and to engage with young people through it and about it.


MODERATOR: I see a lot of hands going up as you speak. Let’s try over here on the far right.
Yes, the young lady there.


QUESTION: Thank you very much, Madame Secretary. Bahgi Gilamichael with the Sullivan Foundation. And also, thank you for inviting us to apply for grants. Now I’m interested in knowing what are the procedures, what is the agency we need to deal with, and if you have someone in the room we can follow up with on that? Thank you so much.


SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you. Well, in addition to our panel, we have a lot of the members of our team who are working on these initiatives, and we can certainly connect up. If we invited you, we know how to find you. So we will make sure you get information about all of these programs, the ones that already exist and the ones that we’re rolling out.


MODERATOR: There’s no anonymity in this room. (Laughter.)


We have actually time for one more question, but I really would encourage you to stay for the panel that Anne-Marie Slaughter will chair on connection technologies and diplomacy immediately following. And I’m sure some of the questions will get answered.


So let’s do one last question over here on the far left, down below here. Can we get a mike? Thank you.


QUESTION: Hello. Thank you so much. I appreciated your wonderful program speech. I’m Mary Perkins from Howard University, and at Howard University, we – very much interested in particular aspects of the internet with respect to the digital divide. Or – in your story about the young girl being pulled out of the rubble because of the text message she was able to send brings to mind – the question in my mind, how many others could have been saved had they had that technology?


SECRETARY CLINTON: Absolutely.


QUESTION: And so we’re very interested in knowing, in terms of access, the – not only internet freedom but free internet for all, the universal service aspect, and what can be done, particularly right now for Haiti, with this.


SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, as – thank you for that. As you know, that is a continuing issue for us and for many countries around the world. We’re at 4 billion cell phones. And certainly, the cell phone is becoming the principal tool of communication, both through the applications that are on it, through the texting that it enables. And there are a lot of groups, NGOs, and even businesses that are passing out and providing cell phones at very low cost.

We just have to keep incentivizing and encouraging the technology to be as low cost as possible so it can be as ubiquitous as possible.

But I think we’ve made enormous progress. Ten years ago, we talked a lot about the digital divide even in our own country. We are overcoming it, but there are still questions of access, still questions of cost. Now, obviously, we have to recognize that a lot of the search engines are run by for-profit companies. They’re not – it’s not going to be free. But there are lots of ways of trying to encourage more universal access. And that’s part of the Obama Administration’s overall policy on technology, not just the diplomatic and development aspects of it.

Thank you, Professor.


MODERATOR: Thank you, Madame Secretary. Thank you very much.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you, Alberto. Thank you very much. Thank you. (Applause)

克林頓國務卿關於互聯網自由的講話
希拉裏·克林頓（Hillary Rodham Clinton）國務卿
華盛頓哥倫比亞特區新聞博物館（Newseum）
2009 年1 月21 日（星期四）
非常感謝，艾伯托（Alberto）。不僅要感謝你的讚譽和介紹，而且要感謝你和你的
同事們在這個重要機構中發揮的領導作用。很高興來到新聞博物館。這個博物館是
一座紀念碑，見證了我們最珍視的一些自由。我十分感謝能有此機會談談如何運用
這些自由應對二十一世紀的各項挑戰。
雖然我並不能看到你們所有的人——因為在這樣的場合燈光照射我的眼睛，而你們
都在背光處——但我知道在座的有很多朋友和老同事。我要感謝自由論壇
（Freedom Forum）的首席執行官查爾斯·奧弗比（Charles Overby）光臨新聞博物
館，以及我在參議院時的老同事理查德·盧格（Richard Lugar）和喬·利伯曼(Joe
Lieberman)兩位參議員，他們兩位都為《表達法》（Voice Act）的通過作出了努
力。這項立法表明，美國國會和美國人民不分黨派，不分政府部門，堅定地支持互
聯網自由。
我聽說在場的還有參議員薩姆·布朗巴克（Sam Brownback）、參議員特德·考夫曼
（Ted Kaufman）、眾議員洛雷塔·桑切斯（Loretta Sanchez）、許多大使、臨時代辦
和外交使團的其他代表、以及從中國、哥倫比亞、伊朗、黎巴嫩和摩爾多瓦等國前
來參加我們關於互聯網自由的“國際訪問者領袖計劃”（International Visitor
Leadership Program）的人士。我還要提到最近被任命為廣播理事會（Broadcasting
Board of Govenors）理事的阿斯彭研究所（Aspen Institute）所長沃爾特·艾薩克森
（ Walter Isaacson）。毫無疑問，他在阿斯彭研究所從事的支持互聯網自由的工作
中發揮了重要作用。
這是關於一個非常重要的議題的一個重要講話。但在開始談這個議題前，我想簡要
介紹一下海地的情況。過去八天來，海地人民和世界人民攜手應對一場巨大的災
難。我們這個半球曾曆經磨難，但我們目前在太子港麵臨的困境鮮有先例。通訊網
絡在我們抗擊這場災難的過程中發揮了極其重要的作用。不用說，當地的通訊網絡
遭受了重創，在很多地方被徹底摧毀。地震發生後僅幾個小時，我們就與民營部門
的夥伴發起“海地”（HAITI）短信捐款活動，使美國的移動電話使用者能通過發
短信向救災工作捐款。這項活動充分展示了美國人民的慷慨。迄今，該活動已為海
地的抗震救災籌集了2500 多萬美元。
信息網絡在救災現場也發揮了極其重要的作用。星期六，我在太子港會見普雷瓦爾
（Preval）總統時，他的重點目標之一是要努力恢複通訊。幸存的通訊設施不足以
幫助當地政府官員相互聯絡，非政府組織以及我們的文職部門和軍隊的領導人的運
作能力都受到嚴重影響。高科技公司設立了互動地圖，幫助確定救災需要和目標資
源。就在星期一，一名年僅七歲的小女孩和兩名婦女通過發短信呼救被一個美國搜
救隊從坍塌的超市的殘磚碎瓦下救了出來。這些事例隻是一個普遍現象的縮影。
信息網絡的擴展正在為我們的星球建立一個新的神經係統。在海地或湖南發生什麽
情況時，我們其餘的人都能從當事者那裏實時得知。我們還可以實時作出反應。災
後迫切希望提供幫助的美國人和被困在超市瓦礫下的小姑娘以一年以前乃至一代人
以前還想象不到的方式被聯係在一起。今天，同樣的原則適用於幾乎整個人類。我
們今天坐在這裏，你們中間任何人——或更有可能的是我們孩子中的任何人——都
可以拿出很多人每天隨身攜帶的通訊工具，將這次討論的內容發送給全世界數十億
人。
在很多方麵，信息從未像今天這麽自由。與過去任何時候相比，今天都有更多的方
式把更多的想法傳播給更多的人。即使在集權國家，信息網絡也在幫助人們發現新
的事實，向政府更多地問責。
例如，奧巴馬總統11 月訪華期間與當地大學生的直接對話包含了網上提問，突顯
了互聯網的重要性。在回答一個網上提問時，他強調人民有權自由獲取信息。他
說，信息流通越自由，社會就越強健。他談到獲取信息的權力如何有助於公民向自
己的政府問責，激發新的想法，鼓勵創造性和創業精神。我今天來這裏發表講話正
是出於美國對這一經過實踐檢驗的真理的信念。
由於人們的相互聯係空前密切，我們也必須認識到這些新技術並非無條件地造福人
類。這些工具也正被用於阻礙人類進步和剝奪政治權利。正如鋼可被用於建造醫院
也可用於製造機槍。核能可為城市提供動力也可摧毀城市。現代信息網絡及其支持
的技術既可被用於行善也可被用於作惡。有助於組織自由運動的網絡也能使“基
地”組織得以煽動仇恨，挑起針對無辜者的暴力。具有開放政府信息和促進透明化
潛力的技術也可被政府劫持，用於鎮壓異見，剝奪公民權利。
過去一年來，我們看到對信息自由流通的威脅激增。中國、突尼斯和烏茲別克斯坦
加強了對互聯網的審查。在越南，使用廣受歡迎的社交網站的權利突然消失。上個
星期五在埃及，30 名博客作者和維權人士被拘留。這批博客作者中的一位是巴塞
姆·薩米爾（Bassem Samir）。他有幸獲釋，今天也在這裏，同我們在一起。因此，
一方麵，這些技術的推廣明顯地正在改變我們的世界，另一方麵，尚無法預知這樣
的改變將對世界人民的人權和幸福產生何種影響。
這些新技術本身不會在爭取自由與進步的鬥爭中選擇立場。但是，美國要做到立場
鮮明。我們支持一個允許全人類平等享有知識和思想的互聯網。而且我們認識到，
在世界上建立何種信息基礎設施將取決於我們和其他人為之確定的性質。雖然這是
一個全新的挑戰，但我們確保思想自由交流的責任可追溯至和眾國誕生之初。《憲
法》第一修正案的內容字字鐫刻在這座大樓前那塊50 噸重的田納西大理石上。世
世代代的美國人都為捍衛刻在那塊石頭上的價值觀付出了努力。
富蘭克林•羅斯福（Franklin Roosevelt）在1941 年發表“四項自由”演講時發揚了
這些思想。當時，美國人麵臨著一係列的危機，此外還有信心危機。但是，對一個
人人都享有言論表達自由、信仰自由、沒有貧困、沒有恐懼的世界的憧憬衝破了他
那個時代的重重困難。多年之後，我的楷模之一艾琳娜•羅斯福（Eleanor
Roosevelt）努力使這些原則成為《世界人權宣言》的奠基原則。這些原則成為繼往
開來每一代人的北鬥，引導我們、鞭策我們、促使我們在險惡的環境中勇於向前。
在科學技術飛躍發展的時候，我們必須反思這個傳統。我們需要確保科學技術的進
步與我們的原則同步。在接受諾貝爾獎時，奧巴馬總統講到需要建設這樣一個世
界，讓和平建立在每一個人固有的權利和尊嚴之上。幾天後在喬治敦大學關於人權
的演講中，我表示我們必須探索途徑，把人權變成現實。今天，我們迫切需要在二
十一世紀的電子世界中保護這些自由。
世界上有許多其他的網絡，有些幫助人員或資源的流動，有些輔助誌同道合的個人
之間的交流。但互聯網是增強所有其他網絡的能力和潛力的一個網絡，因此，我們
認為確保其使用者享有某些基本自由至關重要。其中最重要的是言論表達自由。這
種自由的定義不再僅僅是公民前往市政廳前的廣場批評他們的政府，而不擔心遭受
報複。博客、電子郵件、社交網絡和手機短信開啟了交流思想的新途徑，也為信息
審查帶來了新目標。
甚至就在我今天向你們講演的此刻，某些地方的政府審查人員正在竭力將我的話語
從曆史的記錄中刪除。但曆史早已作出裁決：這些手法注定失敗。兩個月前，我在
德國參加了推倒柏林牆20 周年紀念活動。參加這次活動的各國領導人向這個屏障
對麵那些英勇的男女誌士表示敬意，他們曾經通過散發被稱為“地下刊物”
（Samizdat）的小冊子來闡明反對壓迫的道理。這些傳單對“東方集團”專製政權
的宣傳和用心提出了質疑。許多人因散發傳單受到殘酷迫害，但他們的聲音幫助穿
透了“鐵幕”的鋼筋水泥和帶刺的鐵絲網。
柏林牆象征著一個分隔的世界，代表一個時代。今天，這堵牆的一些碎片就陳列在
這座它們理應歸屬的博物館裏。在我們這個時代，具有代表性的基礎設施就是互聯
網。它取代了分隔，象征著聯係。但是，就在網絡擴展到世界各國的同時，我們發
現許多地方以虛擬的牆壁代替了有形的牆壁。
有些國家豎起了電子屏障，阻止本國人民分享世界上的一部分網絡。他們從搜索引
擎提供的結果中刪除字詞、名稱和短語。他們侵犯了那些發表非暴力政治言論的人
的隱私權。這些做法違反了《世界人權宣言》，因為《宣言》告訴我們，人人都有
權通過“各種媒體不受疆界限製地尋求、接收和傳播信息和思想”。由於這些限製
手段的蔓延，一個新的信息帷幕正在世界上許多地方降臨。為穿越這種阻隔，個人
視頻和博客文章正成為當今時代的“地下刊物”。
正如過去的專製政權一樣，有些政府正在打擊那些利用這些工具的獨立思考者。在
伊朗總統大選後的遊行示威期間，用手機拍攝的一位年輕女子遭血腥屠殺的斑駁畫
麵成為通過數字技術對該政府暴行提出的控訴。我們已看到有報道說，當生活在海
外的伊朗人在網上張貼對他們國家領導人的批評時，他們在伊朗的家人便成為報複
的目標。盡管政府普遍采取嚴厲的恐嚇手段，但伊朗英勇的公民記者們繼續利用技
術向全世界及其同胞報道他們國內發生的事件。伊朗人民為自身的人權呐喊，同時
也鼓舞了全世界，他們的勇氣正在重新詮釋如何通過技術傳播真理和揭露非正義現
象。
所有的社會都承認言論自由有其限度。我們不能容忍煽動他人從事暴力的人，例如
此刻正利用互聯網在全世界宣揚大規模屠殺無辜百姓的“基地”組織成員。那些以
種族、宗教、族裔、性別或性取向為由攻擊他人的仇恨言論也應受到嚴厲斥責。遺
憾的是，這些問題均構成日益嚴重的挑戰，國際社會必須共同進行抗擊。我們還必
須解決匿名發表言論的問題。對於那些利用互聯網招收恐怖主義分子或傳播被盜竊
的知識產權的人，不能讓他們將其網絡行為與其真實身份脫鉤。然而，對於那些為
了和平的政治目的利用互聯網的人士，這些並不能成為政府有計劃地侵犯他們的權
利和隱私的托辭。
隨著新技術的傳播，言論自由可能是最明顯會遇到各種挑戰的一項自由權利，但並
非僅此而已。信仰自由通常涉及個人與造物主對話或不對話的權利。這是一種不需
依賴技術的交流方式。然而，信仰自由還體現了與擁有共同價值觀和人生觀的人一
起集會的普遍權利。在我們的曆史中，這類集會常見於教堂、猶太會堂、清真寺和
寺廟。今天，這類集會也可能在網上進行。
互聯網有助於不同信仰的人消除相互間的分歧。正如總統在開羅所說，宗教自由對
於人們能否共同生活至關重要。在我們尋求擴大對話之際，互聯網蘊涵著巨大的希
望。我們已開始使美國學生與全世界穆斯林社會的年青人為討論全球性挑戰相互聯
絡。我們將繼續利用這個工具，支持不同宗教社群的個人相互討論。
然而，某些國家則利用互聯網打擊和壓製宗教人士。例如，去年在沙特阿拉伯，一
名男子因在博客上刊登介紹基督教的文章，被捕入獄達數月之久。哈佛大學一項調
查表明，沙特政府封鎖了許多介紹印度教、猶太教、基督教乃至伊斯蘭教的網頁。
包括越南和中國在內的一些國家也利用類似手段限製獲得宗教信息的途徑。
這些技術不得用於懲罰和平的政治言論，同樣也不可用於迫害或壓製宗教少數派。
祈禱往往在更高層次的網絡進行。然而，互聯網和社交網站等通訊技術應該有助於
提高人們根據自己的需要進行祈禱的能力，以及與擁有共同信仰的人集會和更多地
了解其他人信仰的能力。正如我們促進其他生活領域的自由一樣，我們也必須努力
促進在網絡上祈禱的自由。
當然，還有無數人的生活並沒享受到這些技術帶來的益處。在我們的世界裏，正如
我多次指出的，才智有可能普及眾人，但機會並非如此。從長期獲得的經驗來看，
我們知道，在人民缺乏途徑獲得知識、市場、資本和機會的國家，要促進社會和經
濟發展會十分艱難，有時則徒勞無功。在這種情況下，互聯網可發揮調節器的作
用。通過向人們提供獲得知識和潛在市場的途徑，各種網絡可為那些缺乏機會的地
區創造機會。
在過去一年中，我在肯尼亞親眼目睹了這種情況。那裏的農牧民在開始使用移動銀
行技術後，收入提高了多達30%。在孟加拉，30 多萬人報名通過手機學習英語。
在非洲撒哈拉沙漠以南地區，婦女企業家使用互聯網獲得小型貸款並與全球市場接
軌。
世界上經濟地位最低的億萬人民有可能在生活中效仿上述取得進步的實例。在很多
情況下，互聯網、手機和其他通訊技術能對經濟發展起到綠色革命（Green
Revolution）對農業所起的同等作用。現在，小小的投入便能產生巨大效益。世界
銀行的一項研究顯示，在一個典型的發展中國家，手機普及率每增加10%，人均
國內生產總值便能增長將近1%。具體而言，如果以印度為例，那將相當於每年近
100 億美元。
與全球信息網絡連通就好比踏上了通往現代化的階梯。在這些技術問世的最初幾
年，許多人以為它們將在世界上的富人和窮人之間劃出鴻溝，但那種情況並沒有發
生。今天共有40 億隻手機在使用。手機使用者中有很多是小販、人力車夫和其他
曆來缺乏受教育及其他機會的人。信息網絡是實現平等的有力手段，我們應共同使
用這些技術幫助人們擺脫貧困，不再有匱乏之虞。
我們完全有理由滿懷希望：當人們充分利用信息網絡和通訊技術時，他們將能取得
巨大進步。但毫無疑問，也有些人正在利用全球信息網絡實現其陰暗目的，而且將
繼續這樣做。暴力極端主義分子、犯罪集團、性犯罪者和獨裁政府都妄圖對全球網
絡加以利用。正如恐怖主義分子利用我們社會的開放性趁機實施陰謀，暴力極端主
義分子也要利用互聯網進行煽動和恐嚇。當我們努力增進這些自由時，我們也必須
打擊妄圖利用通訊網絡進行破壞並製造恐懼的人。
各國政府和公民必須保持信心，作為國家安全和經濟繁榮核心環節的網絡是安全且
有韌性的。這不僅僅是幾個小黑客汙損幾個網站的問題，如果我們的信息網絡安全
得不到保障，我們的網上銀行業務、電子商務活動以及保護億萬美元知識產權的能
力就全都岌岌可危。
麵對破壞這些係統的活動，各國政府、民營部門和國際社會必須協調一致地采取行
動。當黑客犯罪分子和有組織犯罪集團為非法牟利攻擊網絡時，我們需要更多的工
具幫助執法機構進行跨轄區的合作。兒童色情以及遭到販運的婦女和女童所受的剝
削通過互聯網為整個世界所見並為剝削者借以牟利，對這種社會弊病也應采取同樣
的應對措施。歐洲理事會在網絡犯罪公約（Convention on Cybercrime ）方麵的努
力及其他方的類似努力促成了對此類犯罪起訴的國際協作，我們對此表示讚賞。我
們還希望為此加倍努力。
我國政府及國務院已經采取措施尋求通過外交方式來加強全球網絡安全。國務院有
大批人員從事這項工作。有關人員一直在協同努力。我們還在兩年前設立了一個專
門協調有關網絡的對外政策的辦公室。我們致力於在聯合國和其他多邊論壇應對這
一挑戰，並把網絡安全問題列入世界性議題。奧巴馬總統剛剛任命了一位新的國家
網絡政策協調員，來幫助我們更緊密地協調工作，以確保每個人的網絡都是自由、
安全和可靠的。
某些國家、恐怖主義分子以及他們的代理人必須明白，美國將保護我們的網絡係
統。那些在我們國家或任何其他國家破壞信息自由流通的人對我們的經濟、我們的
政府和我們的公民社會構成了威脅。從事網絡攻擊的國家和個人將承擔後果並受到
國際社會的譴責。在一個靠互聯網連通的世界裏，對一個國家的網絡的攻擊就是對
所有人的攻擊。通過強調這一點，我們可以在國家間建立行為準則，並鼓勵尊重全
球網民。
最後一項自由或許是羅斯福總統與夫人多年前所思考和論述的自由的必然內含，它
源於我前麵已提到的四項自由，這就是連接自由：政府不應阻止人民與互聯網、與
網站或與彼此連接。連接自由如同集會自由一樣，隻不過它是在網絡空間。這一自
由允許個人上網，聚集，希望還有合作。一旦上網，你不必是大亨或搖滾樂明星便
能對社會產生巨大影響。
對孟買恐怖主義襲擊的最大規模的公眾反應是由一位13 歲少年發起的。他使用社
交網絡組織了獻血運動，並建立了一個大型跨宗教信仰的吊唁簿。在哥倫比亞，一
位失業的工程師召集起全世界190 個城市的1200 萬人，向哥倫比亞革命武裝力量
（FARC）的恐怖活動發出抗議。這些抗議是曆史上規模最大的反恐怖主義示威活
動。在隨後幾個星期中，哥倫比亞革命武裝力量經曆了十年軍事行動中人數最多的
棄甲和脫隊事件。在墨西哥，一位對毒品暴力行徑忍無可忍的公民發出的一份電子
郵件像滾雪球一般發展成遍及該國所有32 個省的大型示威活動。僅在墨西哥城就
有15 萬人上街抗議。因此，互聯網能有助於人道社會抵製鼓吹暴力、犯罪和極端
主義的人。
在伊朗、摩爾多瓦以及其他國家，網上的組織動員已成為促進民主、使公民對可疑
的選舉結果表達抗議的重要工具。甚至在美國等已建立民主製度的國家，我們也看
到這些工具具有改變曆史的力量。你們當中有些人可能還記得這裏2008 年的總統
選舉。（笑聲）
與這些技術相連接的自由可以幫助轉變社會，但同時也對個人極其重要。我最近被
一位醫生的故事所感動——我不想說出他是哪個國家的人。他千方百計要為女兒的
罕見疾病作出診斷。他征詢了20 多位專家的意見，但仍然沒有答案。最後，他是
靠互聯網搜索引擎得到了確切的診斷並找到了治療方法 。這就是不受限製地使用
搜索引擎技術之所以對個人生活如此重要的原因之一。
我今天概述的這些原則將成為我們對待互聯網自由及其技術使用問題的指導方針。
我要談談我們在實踐中是如何應用這些原則的。美國致力於為促進這些自由投入必
要的外交、經濟和技術資源。美國是一個由來自各個國家、反映全球各種利益的移
民組成的國家。我們的外交政策基於這樣一種理念：當人民之間和國家之間合作
時，美國比任何其他國家都受益。當衝突與誤解造成國家間的不合時，美國肩負著
比任何國家都更沉重的負擔。因此，我們處於有利位置，可以抓住這些隨相互連接
而來的機遇。我們作為如此眾多技術的誕生地，有責任確保它們從善使用。為此，
我們需要建立能力，以推行我們在國務院稱之為21 世紀外交方略的規劃。
重新調整我們的政策和我們的工作重點並非易事，而適應新技術也鮮有捷徑。當電
報技術開始使用時，它給外交界許多人帶來嚴重焦慮，因為天天收到發自華盛頓的
指示不是一個百分之百令人歡迎的前景。但正如我們的外交人員最終還是掌握了電
報一樣，他們也在為掌握這些新工具的潛力而努力。
我引以為豪的是，國務院已經在40 多個國家展開努力，幫助那些聲音被壓製性政
府扼殺的人。我們也在努力使這個問題成為聯合國的工作重點。我們正在將互聯網
自由納入我國重新進入聯合國人權理事會（United Nations Human Rights Council）
後提出的第一項決議案中。
我們還支持開發新工具，使公民能夠避開政治審查而行使其自由表達的權利。我們
正在為世界各地的團體和組織提供資金，確保將這些新工具以當地語言版本提供給
需要的人，並為他們提供安全上網所需的培訓。美國支持開展這些努力已有一段時
間，側重於盡可能切實有效地實施這些項目。美國人民應當知道，對互聯網進行審
查的國家也應當明白，我國政府致力於促進互聯網自由。
我們希望讓人們掌握這些工具，用以增進民主和人權，應對氣候變化和流行病，為
實現奧巴馬總統提出的一個沒有核武器的世界的目標爭取全球支持，鼓勵可持續的
經濟發展，幫助改善底層人民的生活。
因此，我今天宣布，未來一年中，我們將與實業界、學術界和非政府組織的合作夥
伴一道，確立發揮聯網技術威力的長期努力，利用這些技術推進我們的外交目標。
我們可以依靠手機、測繪應用軟件和其他新工具來增進公民權能，輔助我們的傳統
外交。我們能夠解決目前創新市場存在的缺陷。
請讓我舉一個例子。假設我想設計一種手機應用軟件，讓人們能夠對包括我國政府
在內的各政府部門的責任心和工作效率打分，並能夠發現和報告腐敗行為，實現這
一設想所需的硬件已在幾十億潛在用戶的手中，而且所需軟件的開發和應用成本較
低。
如果人們利用這項技術，就可以幫助我們有的放矢地使用對外援助經費、改善人民
的生活並鼓勵外國投資方對負責任的政府投資。但目前的情況是，移動應用技術開
發商尚無資金援助來自行開發這項技術，而國務院現在還缺乏使之成為可能的機
製。不過，這項行動應當有助於解決這一問題，並且使小筆創新投資能夠帶來長期
回報。我們將與專家共同努力，為這種風險投資項目確定最佳框架。我們還將需要
科技公司和非營利機構的人才和資源，才能盡快取得最佳效果。因此，在座各位如
有此類才幹和專長，我謹在此邀請你們鼎力相助。
與此同時，有些公司、個人和機構正在設計和開發各種已經能夠推進我們的外交和
發展目標的創意和應用技術，而國務院將展開一項創新競賽活動，讓這項工作立刻
得到推進。我們將邀請美國人提交應用軟件和有關技術的最佳創意，它們應能有助
於消除語言障礙、克服文盲局限、將人們與他們所需要的服務和信息連通。例如，
微軟公司已經開發出網絡醫生軟件的原型，以便為偏遠地區提供醫療服務。我們希
望看到更多這樣的創意。我們將與競賽獲獎者合作，為幫助他們進一步發展創意提
供資金。
這些新的計劃將大大充實我們過去一年來的重要工作。為了促進我們的外事和外交
目標，我召集了一個有才幹而且經驗豐富的團隊，領導我們就21 世紀外交方略展
開的努力。這個團隊前往世界各地，協助各國政府和團體善用連接技術的益處。他
們發起“公民社會2.0 行動”（Civil Society 2.0 Initiative），協助基層組織進入數字
時代。他們在墨西哥製定了一個協助打擊毒品暴力的方案，讓民眾向可靠的來源作
出不露痕跡的檢舉，以免遭受報複。他們也將移動銀行帶進阿富汗，現在正在剛果
民主共和國進行同樣的工作。在巴基斯坦，他們建立了一個首創的移動社交網絡，
稱為“我們的聲音”（Our Voice）。這個網絡已經產生了數千萬條訊息，並將希望
抵製暴力極端主義的巴基斯坦年輕人聯係在一起。
在短短時間內，我們已經取得了長足的進展，將這些技術的承諾轉變成深富影響力
的結果。可是仍有許多方麵尚待努力。在我們和民營部門及外國政府聯手推廣21
世紀外交方略的工具時，我們必須謹記彼此都有責任捍衛我在今天所談的自由。我
們堅信，信息自由這樣的原則不僅是良好的政策，也不僅和我們的國家價值觀相
連，它還具有普世性，並能產生經濟效益。
用市場語言來說，一家在突尼斯或越南的審查環境中運營的上市公司，其交易價格
總是低於在自由社會運營的同類公司。如果企業的決策者沒有全球性的新聞和信息
來源，投資者對其決策的信心終將下降。實施新聞和信息審查的國家必須認識到，
從經濟角度而言，審查政治言論和商業言論是沒有區別的。如果貴國的企業無法獲
取其中一類信息，其增長必將受到影響。
在製定商業決策時，美國公司日益將網絡和信息自由視為更重要的考量因素。我希
望他們的競爭對手和外國政府會密切關注這一趨勢。最近有關穀歌（Google）的情
況引起了廣泛的注意。我們希望中國當局對導致穀歌作出日前宣布的網絡攻擊事件
進行徹查。我們也希望調查及結果透明。
互聯網已經成為中國取得巨大進步的源泉之一，令人驚歎。中國現在有如此多的人
都在上網。但是，限製自由獲取信息或侵犯互聯網用戶基本權利的國家麵臨著使自
己與下一個世紀的進步隔絕的風險。美中兩國對於這個議題的看法不同，我們希望
在兩國積極、合作、全麵的關係之下坦誠和持續地處理這些差異。
這個議題不僅關係到信息自由，最終還關係到我們希望有一個什麽樣的世界以及我
們將會生活於一個什麽樣的世界。它關係到我們生活的地球是有一個互聯網、一個
全球社會以及一個造福並聯係全人類的共同知識體，還是支離破碎、獲取信息和機
遇要取決於居住地點和審查者的心血來潮。
信息自由有助於維護作為全球進步基礎的和平與安全。從曆史上看，不對稱的信息
獲取能力是國家間衝突的主要原因之一。在我們麵對嚴重糾紛或危險事件時，當事
雙方能夠了解相同的事實和觀點是至關重要的。
目前的情況是，美國人民可以思考外國政府提供的信息——對於這些政府向美國國
內傳送信息，我們不設置障礙。但是，在實行信息檢查的社會中生活的公民卻無從
得知外界的看法。例如在北韓，政府極力使其公民與外部意見完全隔絕。這種信息
流通的不對稱不但增加了發生衝突的可能性，也容易使微小的分歧升級。因此，我
期待那些希望看到全球穩定的負責政府能和我們攜手合作，改變這種不對稱的情
況。
對公司而言，這個問題所關係的不僅是道德威望，而且涉及公司與用戶之間的信
任。世界各地的用戶都希望自己所依賴的互聯網公司會提供全麵的搜索結果，並且
以負責任的態度守護他們的個人信息。獲得這種信賴並且基本上提供這種服務的公
司將在全球市場蓬勃發展。我確實相信，那些失去用戶信賴的公司，最終將失去用
戶。住在任何地方的人都希望知道，他們放在網上的東西不會被用來加害於自己。
審查不應被世界任何地方的任何公司以任何形式接受。在美國，美國公司需要采取
有原則的立場。這應該成為我們國家品牌的組成部分。我相信全世界的用戶都會回
報尊重這些原則的公司。
我們正在重振“全球互聯網自由小組”（Global Internet Freedom Task Force），作為
應對全球網絡自由所受威脅的論壇。我們敦促美國媒體公司主動采取措施，質疑外
國政府對於審查和監視的要求。民營部門也有責任協助保護言論表達自由。當他們
的業務交易有可能破壞這種自由時，他們需要考慮什麽是正確的，而不隻是尋求短
視的利潤。
我們對於目前通過“全球網絡倡議”（Global Network Initiative）所做的工作倍感鼓
舞。“全球網絡倡議”是一項由高科技公司與非政府組織、學術專家和社會投資基
金共同合作，回應政府審查要求而做出的自願努力。這項倡議不僅僅是申明原則，
更是建立旨在宣揚真正責任感和透明度的機製。我們承諾支持負責任的民營部門參
與護衛信息自由，作為我們承諾的組成部分，國務院將在下月召集一次高層會議，
由羅伯特•霍馬茨（Robert Hormats）和瑪麗亞•奧特羅（Maria Otero）兩位副國務
卿共同主持。會議將召集提供網絡服務的公司，共同討論互聯網自由問題，因為我
們希望與合作夥伴共同應對這個二十一世紀的挑戰。
我相信，追求我今天所說的自由是正確之舉，但它也是智慧之舉。通過推進這個議
程，我們將使我們的原則、我們的經濟目標以及我們的戰略重點一致起來。我們需
要努力創建這樣一個世界：在這個世界中，網絡和信息使人民之間的關係更加密
切，也使我們的全球社區概念得到擴展。鑒於我們麵臨的諸多巨大挑戰，我們需要
世界各地的人民匯合他們的知識和創造力，幫助重建全球經濟，保護我們的環境，
戰勝暴力極端主義，建設每一個人都能充分發揮和實現其天賦潛力的未來。
在結束今天的講話時，我要請你們記住星期一在太子港的廢墟中獲救的那個小女
孩。她還活著，已經與她的家人團聚，並將有機會長大成人，因為網絡把一個被埋
得很深的聲音傳播到全世界。我們不能容許任何國家、群體或個人繼續被埋在壓製
的廢墟之下。當層層審查牆把一些人與人類大家庭隔離開來的時候，我們不能袖手
旁觀。我們不能因為聽不到那些人的呼喊就對這些問題保持沉默。
因此，讓我們重新作出承諾，為這一事業而努力。讓我們把這些高科技化作推動全
世界取得切實進步的力量。讓我們並肩前進，倡導這些自由——為了我們這個時
代，也為了應當得到我們所能給予的每一個機會的年輕人。
非常感謝你們。（掌聲）