Name: 關於烏克蘭的最重要視頻 | 約翰-米爾斯海默教授 (The most important video on Ukraine | Prof. John Mearsheimer)
Uploaded: 2024-08-09T15:21:46.000Z
Duration: 6 min 31 s

情態副詞

You've even gone so far as to say that, in a way, what Russia did when it decided to invade was actually rational.

你甚至還說，在某種程度上，俄羅斯決定入侵時的做法其實是合理的。

That doesn't mean that we like it or approve of it, but that it was rational.

這並不意味著我們喜歡或贊同它，而是說它是合理的。

Can you fill us in on your thinking about this?

你能向我們介紹一下你的想法嗎？

Because it goes to the heart of the issue I raised about whether or not those leaders after the Second World War would have been wiser in their approach to it. Maybe we've just become too smug and too slow to read real politic.

因為這涉及到我提出的問題的核心，即第二次世界大戰後的那些領導人是否會以更明智的方式對待戰爭。也許我們只是變得太自以為是、太遲鈍，讀不懂真正的政治。

I think that's exactly what happened here.

我認為這正是這裡發生的事情。

I think you have to go back to the 1990s to understand what's going on in Ukraine.

我認為，你必須回到上世紀 90 年代，才能瞭解烏克蘭發生了什麼。

There was a big debate in the Clinton administration about whether to move NATO eastward, whether there would be NATO expansion or not.

克林頓政府曾就北約是否東移、北約是否擴張展開過一場大辯論。

And inside the Clinton administration, there were a good number of people who were adamantly opposed to expanding NATO.

在克林頓政府內部，有很多人堅決反對擴大北約。

Because they thought in realist terms, they believed that the Russians would see this as a threat.

因為他們從現實主義的角度考慮問題，認為俄國人會將此視為威脅。

And as NATO got closer and closer to Russia's borders, it would all blow up in our face.

隨著北約越來越接近俄羅斯邊境，這一切都會在我們面前爆發。

And they fought tooth and nail to prevent it.

這其中包括喬治-肯南這樣的人。

It included Secretary of Defense Bill Perry, who has said he thought about resigning from the Clinton administration over this very issue. But these realists were opposed by a good number of liberals.

其中包括國防部長比爾-佩裡（Bill Perry），他曾說過他曾想過因為這個問題從克林頓政府辭職。但這些現實主義者遭到了不少自由派人士的反對。

And this included the president himself, Tony Lake, who was his national security adviser, Richard Holbrook and a number of others who believed that NATO expansion was a good thing.

這其中包括總統本人、他的國家安全顧問託尼-萊克、理查德-霍爾布魯克以及其他一些認為北約擴張是好事的人。

They had a more liberal mindset and thought that this would help promote democracy and economic prosperity in Eastern Europe.

他們的思想更加自由，認為這將有助於促進東歐的民主和經濟繁榮。

It would not be threatening to the Russians because they would see us as a benign hegemon and we would live happily ever after. But what happened is the realists lost, the liberals won, and we started to expand NATO.

這對俄羅斯人不會構成威脅，因為他們會把我們視為一個良善的霸主，我們會從此過上幸福的生活。但現實主義者輸了，自由派贏了，我們開始擴張北約。

We got away with a big tranche of expansion first in 1999.

1999 年，我們首先進行了大規模的擴建。

That's when Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic came in.

這時，波蘭、匈牙利和捷克共和國加入進來。

Then we got in way with another big tranche of expansion in 2004.

2004 年，我們又進行了一次大規模擴建。

This is when the Baltic states, Romania, Bulgaria, Slovenia, Slovakia all came in.

這時，波羅的海國家、羅馬尼亞、保加利亞、斯洛文尼亞、斯洛伐克都加入進來。

But then in 2008, the trouble started, because in April 2008, we thought in terms of a third big tranche.

但到了 2008 年，麻煩就來了，因為在 2008 年 4 月，我們想到了第三批大額資金。

And this time we said explicitly that NATO was going to bring Georgia and Ukraine into the alliance.

這次我們明確表示，北約將把格魯吉亞和烏克蘭納入聯盟。

The Russians made it unequivocally clear that this was not going to happen.

俄羅斯人明確表示這是不可能的。

And Putin made it unequivocally clear at the time that it was a move that would lead to the destruction of Ukraine. Now, very importantly, John, at the NATO summit in Bucharest in April 2008, where this policy decision was made, Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy, the leaders respectively of Germany and France, were unequivocally opposed to bringing Ukraine into NATO.

普京當時明確表示，此舉將導致烏克蘭的毀滅。現在，非常重要的是，約翰，2008 年 4 月在布加勒斯特舉行的北約峰會上，德國和法國的領導人安吉拉-默克爾和尼古拉-薩科齊都明確反對將烏克蘭納入北約。

And Angela Merkel has said that the reason that she was opposed was because she thought that Putin would view it as a declaration of war. So if you think about it here, you have all these policymakers and prominent individuals like Kennedy in the 90s.

默克爾曾說，她之所以反對，是因為她認為普京會將此視為宣戰。是以，如果你仔細想想，你會發現所有這些政策制定者和知名人士，比如 90 年代的肯尼迪。

And then you have Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy were saying this is not a smart thing to do.

安吉拉-默克爾和尼古拉-薩科齊都說這樣做不明智。

And Bill Burns, who's now the head of the CIA and in April 2008 was the U.S. ambassador to Moscow, wrote a memo to Condoleezza Rice, then the secretary of state, basically telling her that this is the brightest of red lines and it's going to lead to unending trouble if we continue to pursue bringing Ukraine into NATO.

比爾-伯恩斯（Bill Burns）現任美國中央情報局局長，2008年4月曾任美國駐莫斯科大使，他給當時的國務卿康多莉扎-賴斯（Condoleezza Rice）寫了一份備忘錄，基本上是在告訴她，這是一條最明顯的紅線，如果我們繼續尋求將烏克蘭納入北約，將會導致無休止的麻煩。

So there were a lot of people who were opposed, and I joined that bandwagon in effect, right, because I wrote this famous article in 2014 after the crisis in Ukraine broke out saying that it was the West's fault, in effect, for expanding NATO eastward. But what happened here is that we doubled down at every turn.

所以有很多人反對，而我實際上也加入了這一行列，對吧，因為我在2014年烏克蘭危機爆發後寫了這篇著名的文章，說實際上是西方的錯，因為他們把北約東擴了。但現在的情況是，我們每一次都在加倍努力。

After the crisis broke out in February of 2014, instead of backing off, re-evaluating the situation, we doubled down, and we have done that at every turn since then.

2014 年 2 月危機爆發後，我們非但沒有後退，重新評估形勢，反而加倍努力，此後我們每次都是如此。

And the end result is that we're now in this horrendous war that turns one's stomach when you think of what is happening to Ukraine. And my bottom line here is that this decision to expand NATO into Ukraine was irresponsible in the extreme because of the consequences for the Ukrainian people, for the consequences that flowed from this decision for Ukraine as a functioning society.

最終的結果是，我們現在陷入了這場可怕的戰爭，當你想到烏克蘭正在發生的事情時，你會感到反胃。我在這裡的底線是，北約向烏克蘭擴張的決定是極端不負責任的，因為這個決定給烏克蘭人民帶來了後果，給烏克蘭這個正常運轉的社會帶來了後果。

I believe this could have been avoided had we not expanded NATO or tried to expand NATO into Ukraine, had we backed off.

我相信，如果我們沒有擴大北約或試圖將北約擴大到烏克蘭，如果我們退縮了，這本來是可以避免的。

Actually, to be clear, it's the Ukrainians who are really paying the price.

其實，說白了，真正付出代價的是烏克蘭人。

And this is what makes this such a terrible situation. Now, your point is that don't you think that if we had had the leaders who were in charge in the late 1940s and early 1950s, that they would have been more sagacious and that they would have avoided this disaster.

這就是造成這種可怕局面的原因。現在，你的觀點是，難道你不認為如果我們有 20 世紀 40 年代末和 50 年代初的領導人，他們就會更加明智，就會避免這場災難嗎？

I think a good case could be made that that's true.

我認為有充分的理由證明這是事實。

Again, you don't want to underestimate how many people have been opposed to this policy of bringing more and more countries, including Ukraine, into NATO from the get-go.

同樣，你不要低估有多少人從一開始就反對將包括烏克蘭在內的越來越多的國家納入北約的政策。

 It's just that the other side has won at every turn.