近来，随着美国大选形势的发展，特别是“超级星期二”参选人得票情况的公布，境内外专家学者广泛议论：希拉里和特朗普，谁当选下届总统对中美关系更好，“对中国更有利”？

当然，人们不喜欢“大嘴特朗普”可以理解。否则，共和党众多大佬不会联名反对他参选。但对希拉里的评价，一般都是“负面的”，几乎没人提及她“好的一面”，不少专家学者也认为她是“鹰”。我觉得，这似乎有点不公道，不够实事求是。其实，她既是“鹰”，也是“鸽”。

近几年来，美国领导人，从奥巴马、克里到希拉里，经常引用中国成语来描述中美关系，如“同舟共济”，“逢山开路，遇水搭桥”，“有福同享，有难同当”，以及“有朋自远方来不亦乐乎”，等等。

据我观察，在这方面，希拉里说得比较多，也比较早，比较到位。2009年，在奥巴马访华时，她就提出美中现在是“同舟共济”。后来，她又在一些场合重申这一观点。2011年，在中美战略与经济对话开幕式上，她说得更具体。她强调：“中美两国现在就像同一条船上的两个人，我们必须时刻向同一个方向行进。就如一句中国谚语所说，我们在遇到困难时应'逢山开路，遇水搭桥'；中美两国没有相互孤立，我们时刻位于穿越亚太乃至全世界的关系网之中。”同年，在中国领导人访美之前，她还公开驳斥了所谓“中国威胁论”与“中美零和论”，说中美今后应“同舟共济”，合作迎接挑战。如果未来（中美）无法“共济”，只会引发混乱和旋涡，不仅殃及两国人民，也殃及世界其他地区的人民。这些成语，都是中国家喻户晓、耳熟能详的。听起来很舒服，实际上也难能可贵。过去几十年，什么时候美国领导人引用这类成语来描述过中美关系？这至少在客观上反映了时代变迁、量变进程加速发展，以及国际力量对比发生了历史性的变化，反映了中美关系的重要性。

我们经常说，美国在对中国“两面下注”。希拉里这些话，应该说是属于“正面下注”，具有积极意义。至于她的话有多少诚意，有多少水分，当然需要经过实践检验。

中国人一般都比较实事求是，也比较冷静，并没有因为几句恭维话就飘飘然。我注意到，2010年，正是希拉里在新加坡公开宣称：“我们回来了”，开启了美国战略重心东移的序幕。她在访问柬埔寨时，奉劝柬埔寨“不要同中国走得太近”。2011年4月，也正是她，在中美战略与经济对话期间，歪曲事实，指责中国在人权问题上“正在试图阻止历史”，还说“这是一个愚蠢的做法”。她还在非洲大放厥词，“劝告”非洲国家必须当心中国的“新殖民主义”。显然，她十分自相矛盾。说得不好听一点，是在“自己打自己的耳光”，是不顾后果的恶意“负面下注”。

因此，人们不禁要问：她一会儿这样，一会儿那样，究竟哪一个希拉里才是真正的希拉里呢？我想，如果全面观察，把这“两个希拉里”加在一起除以二，就是一个“真正的希拉里”。这就好像美国对中国“两面下注”一样，我们必须全面客观，看清、看准、看透。我们希望“正面下注”不断增加，让不那么舒服的中美相互依存关系能比较舒服一点，更舒服一点，而且一直在为之努力，不断向美国释放善意。但这并不以我们的主观意志为转移。因此，必要的警惕和防范也是不可或缺的。

The political season of the US is in full swing. With two big winners having emerged from Super Tuesday, academia and other observers are weighing who will be a more China-friendly US president? Between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, who is more benign for China-US relations?

Understandably, many people were turned off by Trump because they see him as a windbag, which explains why so many Republican heavyweights stand up against him as a potential candidate for the GOP. But what about Hillary? She attracts negative comments galore, and good words about her are few and far between. Some experts see her as hawkish, and think of her as no angel herself. But this author begs to disagree. To be more fair, Hillary is neither hawkish nor dovish, but she shifts between the two stances as required by circumstances.

For a long time, US officials have been fond of quoting Chinese sayings when addressing Chinese audience. President Obama, Secretary of State Kerry and former Secretary Clinton are into this format, having quoted wordings such as “in the same boat”, “When confronted by mountains, one finds a way through. When blocked by a river, one finds a bridge to the other side”, “share weal and woe”, and of course the proverbial “Isn't it a pleasure to have friends coming from afar”.

Hillary is a pioneer in quoting Chinese concepts and sayings in her speeches, and proved quite an apt one as well. She used the phrase “in the same boat” first during President Obama's visit to China and repeated it later on other occasions.In her speech at the opening ceremony of the 2011 S&ED, Clinton made it more explicit, saying that China and the US are like two people in the same boat, and we should row in the same direction at all times. Also, she borrowed the famous “When confronted by mountains, one finds a way through. When blocked by a river, one finds a way to bridge to the other side”. She said that China and the US are not isolated from each other, but the two countries had established a web of connections that embraces the Asia Pacific and the whole world. In the same year, on the eve of the Chinese president's visit to the US, Clinton openly rebuffed the notion of a “China threat” and the “zero sum game theory” regarding China-US relations. Rather, she said, the two countries should jointly rise up against challenges as two people in the same boat.Otherwise, she warned, the two countries stand to lose, as it would lead to chaos that embroiled people in China and the US and beyond.For many years, it was not a common occurrence for US senior officials to go to such lengths to quote Chinese sayings that resonate with the average Chinese, and we should give credit to the US side for doing that. Also, it is satisfying for the Chinese to hear these quotes. But in essence, this is a telling signal of the evolving political landscape in progress, in particular the accelerated shift in the China-US balance of power.

It is often said that the US is “hedging” against China. But Hillary Clinton's rhetoric has been more on the positive side. Having said that, these narratives should be taken with a pinch of salt, until she practices what she preaches.

Chinese as a nation are practical and sober minded, and refused to be swooned by sweet talk. In 2010, Hillary proclaimed “we are back” during her visit to Singapore, which was a prologue to the “pivot to Asia” grand strategy. She admonished Cambodia against getting too close to China during her speech there. In April 2011, she made a misguided comment that China was trying to “stop history” regarding human rights issues, which was “stupid”. She even went so far as exhorting Hillary once even warned African countries to beware of “neocolonialism” pursued by China. She gave mixed signals in her remarks and she risked being hoisted on her own petard, due to her reckless indulgence in negative narratives.

People might be confused by the two faces that Hillary Clinton presents and ask, what does she really stand for? I believe that the two faces are like two sides to the same coin. Just like the US hedges against China, we must remain sober-minded and to get to the truth.Nevertheless, we do hope that the positive dynamics will prevail in China-US relations, and both can be comfortable with the interdependence they share. On the part of China, while a measure of discreet and caution is indispensable and sensible, it should never stop extending its good will to the US.