冷戰時期的熱廚房
The Cold War’s Hot Kitchen
https://deepltranschinese.blogspot.com/2026/08/blog-post_832.html
華盛頓
整整半個世紀前，冷戰時期最激烈的對抗時刻之一吸引了全世界的目光：蘇聯的反資本主義領導人尼基塔·赫魯曉夫和以強硬反共著稱的美國副總統理查德·尼克鬆在1959年莫斯科索科爾尼基公園舉辦的美國展覽會上，在“典型的美國家庭”的樣板廚房裡展開了激烈的辯論。
我當時在那間廚房裡，並非因為我和展覽的官方主辦單位尼克森有什麼關係，而是因為我是建造這棟房子的美國公司的年輕新聞代理人。展覽旨在向蘇聯人展示，自由企業生產的產品能夠改善普通美國人的生活。然而，我客戶的房子並不在官方參觀路線上。
相反，這對被戲稱為「尼克和迪克」的對手被引導到RCA彩色電視機展廳，這在當時可是個消費奇蹟。這種技術優勢的展現想必激怒了蘇聯領導人，他注意到有人在錄影，便要求在美國以英語「完整翻譯」他的演講。尼克森身為一位和藹的東道主，欣然同意，並表示希望他的演講在蘇聯也能得到同樣的待遇。
赫魯雪夫隨即譴責美國最近宣布的「被奴役國家週」（旨在為「被蘇聯奴役的人民」祈禱），稱其是輕率的挑釁。 “你們自己攪渾了水，”他警告副總統，“是哪隻黑貓闖進了你們的路，讓你們糊塗了？”說著，他摟住附近一位俄羅斯工人，問道：“這個人看起來像奴隸勞工嗎？”
尼克森試圖扮演「好好先生」的角色，他指出俄羅斯和美國的工人在建造展覽會的過程中進行了合作，並補充道：「思想交流是必要的。畢竟，你不可能什麼都懂——」這時，赫魯雪夫厲聲說道：「如果我什麼都不懂，那你對共產主義就一無所知——除了對它的恐懼。
尼克森走出RCA錄音棚，被引導到不起眼的百事可樂攤位前，神情沮喪。面對咄咄逼人的辯論對手，他一味扮演和藹可親的東道主，犯了一個錯誤，而這個錯誤很快就會被世界各國領導人重蹈覆轍。他的軍事助理唐休斯少校正在四處尋找一個偏離原定路線的地點，以便副總統能夠在記者群面前重新調整狀態。
- 解鎖更多免費文章。
我朝休斯少校喊道：「這邊走，就是典型的美國房子！」他毫不猶豫地引導尼克森、赫魯雪夫和他們的隨行人員離開小路，走向我們稱之為「斯普利特尼克」的建築，因為它中間有一條通道，可以讓人群穿過內部。
問題：人群的湧動動能幾乎要把他們一路推到屋子外面，根本停不下來。多虧了展覽協調員吉爾伯特·羅賓遜（後來在雷根時代擔任國務院公共外交事務負責人），我安排讓一段圍欄消失，這樣另一側的人群就能湧進來，把官方代表團困在屋內。尼克森徑直走向通往廚房的欄桿。
尼克森：“我想帶你去看看這個廚房。它跟加州那些房子裡的廚房很像。看到那台嵌入式洗衣機了嗎？”
赫魯雪夫：“我們有這樣的東西。”
尼克森：“我們想做的就是讓家庭主婦的生活更輕鬆。”
赫魯雪夫：“我們對女性沒有資本主義的態度。”
下一個問題：在開場閒聊期間，我身處廚房，但校長們背對著記者，他們聽不到。 《泰晤士報》的哈里森·索爾茲伯里會說俄語，他正試圖擠過幾個身材魁梧的俄羅斯保安進入廚房；我向他們解釋說他是冰箱演示員。他們放哈里森進去了；他坐在地板上，為媒體記者做筆記。
由於俄國媒體嘲諷美國聲稱這棟房子工人買得起——稱之為“泰姬陵”——尼克森指出，這棟房子造價1.4萬美元，而且政府擔保的退伍軍人抵押貸款使得時薪3美元的鋼鐵工人每月只需支付100美元就能買下它。赫魯雪夫諷刺道：“我們也有農民能買得起1.4萬美元的房子。”
尼克森最終將競賽話題引向了武器。 “與其比拼火箭的威力，難道比拼洗衣機的相對優劣不是更好嗎？”
「是的，但是你們的將軍們說我們必須在火箭技術上與你們競爭，」蘇聯領導人回答。 “我們很強大，我們可以打敗你們。”
尼克森深知蘇聯當時的火箭推進能力領先於美國，於是巧妙地回應道：“在當今時代，爭論誰更強大完全不得要領。有了現代武器，爭論強弱毫無意義。如果戰爭爆發，我們雙方都會輸。”
赫魯雪夫剛要插話，尼克森就追問道：“我希望首相明白我剛才所說的話的全部含義……無論你讓任何一個強國處於不得不接受命令或反抗的境地，你都是在玩弄世界上最具破壞性的力量。”
赫魯雪夫沉默了，尼克森繼續說道：“我們坐下來開會時，不能只顧自己。一方不能對另一方下最後通牒。”
赫魯雪夫：“我國從來不奉行最後通牒……這聽起來像是一種威脅。”
尼克森：“誰在威脅我？”
赫魯雪夫：“你們想間接威脅我們。我們也有強大的武器，如果你們想和我們競爭，我們的武器比你們的要好。”
尼克森：“無關緊要……我認為反覆強調你們比我們更強大無助於和平，因為這本身也是一種威脅。”
隨著尼克森在辯論中逐漸佔據上風，而他的對手則開始採取防禦姿態，瑪格南圖片社的埃利奧特·厄維特設法繞過了警衛，拍下了尼克森輕輕地用手指戳著一臉驚訝的赫魯曉夫胸口的畫面。
保安們最終識破了我的潛入伎倆。當我試圖讓美聯社攝影師漢斯·馮·諾爾德假扮成「垃圾處理器演示員」混進去時，卻發現通用電氣公司在那間簡陋的廚房裡根本沒有這種電器。情急之下，漢斯把相機從辯論家的頭頂扔到我手裡。我以為拍完了，就把相機丟了回去。 「你手指堵住了光圈，笨蛋！」漢斯喊道，然後把相機遞了回來，引來保全們的怒目而視。
這次我更加謹慎，構圖時讓尼克鬆手舞足蹈，赫魯雪夫在一旁聆聽（背景裡還有我老闆的妻子金克斯·法爾肯伯格）。一個身材魁梧的俄羅斯官員硬擠進了畫面，我沒辦法把他裁掉，否則右邊的洗衣機就沒了。我只好按下快門，把克里姆林宮的所有大佬和那個闖入者都拍了進去（他閉著眼睛，活該）。美聯社迅速將照片發佈到通訊社，趕在俄羅斯審查機構封鎖之前，讓他們的領導人顯得不那麼強勢，這張照片登上了世界各地報紙的頭版。
西方新聞報導將尼克森描繪成這場衝突的贏家，而薩利斯伯里最初稱之為「索科爾尼基峰會」。但在我的請求下，哈里森願意將這個標題改為同樣押韻的「廚房會議」（我的委託人是房屋建築商，而不是尼克森，當然也不是俄羅斯公園）。奇怪的是，幾天后，當RCA電視台播放這場衝突第一部分的錄像時——錄像中，友好的尼克松任由赫魯曉夫擺佈——相對較少的觀眾卻帶著媒體的固有觀念觀看，認為尼克松“挺身對抗了惡霸”。紙媒的報道已經深入人心，尤其是埃爾維特拍攝的尼克森用手指戳赫魯雪夫的照片更是強化了這種印象。
儘管那一天發生的許多插曲看似荒誕離奇，但它們都發生在緊張的背景下。蘇聯領導階層當時已經控制了歐洲大部分地區，並與中國結盟，決心主宰世界，傳播共產主義，削弱資本主義；這並非虛構，而西方最終戰勝獨裁統治的勝利，也遠沒有事後看來那麼確定無疑。
在這樣的時刻，領導階層對其主要對手抵抗意志──必要時甚至是戰鬥意志──的評估，就成為國家戰略中的重要因素。情報機構竭力確保此類高層個人評估的準確性。精明的赫魯雪夫在與尼克森的激烈交鋒後，確信這位資本主義倡導者不僅意志堅定，而且頭腦靈活；他後來表示，他竭盡全力促成尼克森在1960年總統競選中的失敗。
約翰·F·甘迺迪勝選後，這位新總統於1961年6月在維也納與赫魯雪夫舉行了峰會。會後，他沮喪地告訴《紐約時報》記者詹姆斯·雷斯頓：「他把我打得落花流水。」赫魯雪夫認為甘迺迪心軟，於是修建了柏林圍牆，並向古巴運送了蘇聯導彈；正是這場核對抗讓蘇聯人意識到，他對甘迺迪意志的個人判斷大錯特錯。
廚房會議結束後幾個小時，在大使官邸，我見到了尼克森。他評論道：「我們確實讓你的廚房名揚四海，不是嗎？」以此展現了他對資本主義優先事項的理解。 13 年後，在一次國宴上，我作為演講稿撰寫人陪同尼克森總統前往莫斯科，在那裡我認出了那位曾經擠進我廚房照片，並最終登上共產主義權力巔峰的官僚：列昂尼德·勃列日涅夫。
分享
打包下载 .zip
报告错误或滥用
請我喝杯咖啡Op-Ed Contributor
The Cold War’s Hot Kitchen
Washington
EXACTLY one-half century ago, one of the great confrontational moments of the cold war seized the world’s attention: Nikita Khrushchev, bombastic anti-capitalist leader of the Soviet Union, and Richard Nixon, vice president of the United States with the reputation of a hard-line anti-communist, came to rhetorical grips in the model kitchen of the “typical American house” at the 1959 American exhibition at Sokolniki Park in Moscow.
I was in that kitchen, not because I then had anything to do with Nixon, the exhibition’s official host, but as a young press agent for the American company that built the house. The exhibit was designed to show Russians that free enterprise produced goods that made life better for average Americans. However, my client’s house was not on the official tour.
Instead, “Nik and Dick,” as the adversaries were promptly dubbed, were steered into the RCA color television exhibit, a consumer marvel at the time. This display of technical superiority must have irritated the Russian leader, who noticed the taping going on and demanded “a full translation” of his remarks be broadcast in English in the United States. Nixon, in his role as genial host, readily agreed, expressing a hope for similar treatment of his remarks in Russia.
Khrushchev then promptly denounced a recent proclamation by the United States of “Captive Nations Week” — dedicated to praying for “peoples enslaved by the Soviet Union” — as an example of thoughtless provocation. “You have churned the water yourselves,” he warned the vice president. “What black cat crossed your path and confused you?” Then he wrapped his arms around a nearby Russian workman: “Does this man look like a slave laborer?”
Nixon, trying to be Mr. Nice Guy, noted that Russian and American workers had cooperated in building the exhibition and added: “There must be an exchange of ideas. After all, you don’t know everything — ” At which point Khrushchev snapped, “If I don’t know everything, you don’t know anything about communism — except fear of it.” On the defensive, Nixon said, “The way you dominate the conversation ... if you were in the United States Senate you would be accused of filibustering.”
Coming out of the RCA studio and being led into the innocuous Pepsi exhibit, Nixon looked glum; by playing the gracious host in the face of an aggressive debater, he had made a mistake soon to be replayed by leaders around the world. His military aide, Maj. Don Hughes, was looking around for a venue — off the planned route — where the vice president could regroup in front of the crowd of reporters.
- Unlock more free articles.
I hollered at Major Hughes, “This way to the typical American house!” He didn’t hesitate, steering Nixon, Khrushchev and their entourages off the path and toward the structure we called “the Splitnik,” because it had a path cut through the middle to allow crowds to walk through the interior.
Problem: the momentum of the following crowd threatened to push the party all the way through the house without stopping. Thanks to Gilbert Robinson, a coordinator of the exhibition (and later head of State Department public diplomacy in the Reagan years), I arranged to make a certain section of fence disappear, allowing a crowd from the other side to spill in and trapping the official party inside the house. Nixon made a beeline to the railing that exposed the kitchen.
Nixon: “I want to show you this kitchen. It’s like those of houses in California. See that built-in washing machine?”
Khrushchev: “We have such things.”
Nixon: “What we want to do is make more easy the life of our housewives.”
Khrushchev: “We do not have the capitalist attitude toward women.”
Next problem: during this opening banter, I was in the kitchen, but the principals’ backs were to the reporters, who couldn’t hear. Harrison Salisbury of The Times, who spoke Russian, was trying to squeeze past burly Russian guards into the kitchen; I explained to them that he was the refrigerator demonstrator. They let Harrison in; he sat on the floor and took notes for the press pool.
Because the Russian press had derided the American claim that the house was affordable to workers — calling it “a Taj Mahal” — Nixon noted that this house cost $14,000, and a government-guaranteed veterans mortgage made it possible for a steelworker earning $3 an hour to buy it for $100 a month. Khrushchev was sarcastic: “We have peasants who also can afford to spend $14,000 for a house.”
Nixon eventually steered the topic of competition to weapons. “Would it not be better to compete in the relative merit of washing machines than in the strength of rockets?”
“Yes, but your generals say we must compete in rockets,” responded the Soviet leader. “We are strong and we can beat you.”
Nixon, aware that the Soviets then led the United States in rocket thrust, finessed that: “In this day and age to argue who is stronger completely misses the point. With modern weapons it just does not make sense. If war comes we both lose.”
Khrushchev started to interrupt, but Nixon pressed: “I hope the prime minister understands all the implications of what I just said ... Whether you place either one of the powerful nations in a position so that they have no choice but to accept dictation or fight, then you are playing with the most destructive power in the world.”
Khrushchev fell silent, and Nixon continued: “When we sit down at a conference table it cannot be all one way. One side cannot put an ultimatum to another.”
Khrushchev: “Our country has never been guided by ultimatums ... It sounds like a threat.”
Nixon: “Who is threatening?”
Khrushchev: “You want to threaten us indirectly. We have powerful weapons, too, and ours are better than yours if you want to compete.”
Nixon: “Immaterial ... I don’t think peace is helped by reiterating that you have more strength than us, because that is a threat, too.”
As Nixon gained strength in the debate and his opponent grew defensive, Elliott Erwitt of Magnum Photos talked his way past the guards and captured Nixon gently jabbing his finger into the surprised Khrushchev’s chest.
The guards eventually caught on to my entry trick, and when I tried to get the Associated Press photographer Hans Von Nolde in as “garbage disposal unit demonstrator,” it turned out that General Electric did not have such an appliance in that low-cost kitchen. In desperation, Hans lobbed his camera over the heads of the debaters into my arms. When I thought the shot was taken, I tossed the camera back. “You had your finger over the aperture, idiot!” shouted Hans, and passed it back, drawing glares from the guards.
More careful this time, I composed a shot with Nixon gesticulating and Khrushchev listening (and including my boss’s wife, Jinx Falkenburg, in the background). A beefy Russian bureaucrat elbowed his way into the picture and I couldn’t crop him out without losing the washing machine on the right. I clicked the shutter, including all the Kremlin big shots and the interloper (catching him with his eyes closed; served him right). The Associated Press quickly put it on its wire service before Russian censors could clamp down on transmissions, making their leader look less than dominant, and it made front pages around the world.
WESTERN news coverage made Nixon the winner of what Salisbury had originally slugged “the Sokolniki summit” but Harrison was willing to change that slug-line to the equally alliterative “kitchen conference” at my plea (my client was the house builder, not Nixon and certainly not the Russian park). Curiously, when the RCA television tape of the first part of the confrontation was telecast days later — in which a friendly Nixon had let Khrushchev push him around — the relatively small audience watched it with the mindset from the press that Nixon had “stood up to the bully.” The print message had already penetrated, especially when reinforced by the Erwitt photo of Nixon’s finger jab.
As madcap as many of the sidelights of that day were, they took place against a tense backdrop. The Soviet leadership, already master of much of Europe and then allied with China, was determined to dominate the world, to spread communism and undermine capitalism; that was no myth, and the ultimate victory of the West over that spread of dictatorship was by no means as certain as it seems in hindsight.
At such a moment, the leadership’s assessment of its main opponent’s will to resist — if necessary, to fight — becomes a major factor in national strategy. Intelligence agencies strain to get such top-level personal assessments right. The shrewd Khrushchev came away from his personal duel of words with Nixon persuaded that the advocate of capitalism was not just tough-minded but strong-willed; he later said that he did all he could to bring about Nixon’s defeat in his 1960 presidential campaign.
After John F. Kennedy won, the new president had a June 1961 summit meeting in Vienna with Khrushchev, and gloomily told the Times reporter James Reston afterward that “he just beat the hell out of me.” Assessing Kennedy as a soft touch, Khrushchev put up the Berlin Wall and then shipped Soviet missiles to Cuba; it took that nuclear confrontation to show the Russian that his personal assessment of Kennedy’s will was quite mistaken.
A few hours after the kitchen conference, at our ambassador’s residence, I was introduced to Nixon, who showed his grasp of capitalism’s priorities by commenting, “We really put your kitchen on the map, didn’t we?” At a state dinner 13 years later, accompanying President Nixon to Moscow as a speechwriter, I recognized the bureaucrat who had pushed his way into my kitchen picture and ultimately to the top of the Communist heap: Leonid Brezhnev.
William Safire, a former Times Op-Ed columnist, writes the “On Language” column in The Times Magazine.
留言
張貼留言