Your country is in big trouble.

你們的國家有大麻煩了

I know.

我知道

The prospect of Washington cutting all its support to Kiev has prompted European NATO members to step up, and it's forcing them to take a hard look at their own arsenals.

華盛頓削減對基輔所有支持的前景促使北約歐洲成員國挺身而出，並迫使它們認真審視自己的武器庫。

Could you take on Russia by yourselves?

你們能獨自對付俄羅斯嗎？

Well...

嗯...

U.S. capabilities are, for the most part, irreplaceable for Europe.

美國的能力在很大程度上是歐洲無法替代的。

Here's a breakdown of whether European NATO countries have the money, equipment and personnel to fill the gap.

以下是歐洲北約國家是否有資金、設備和人員來填補這一缺口的詳細情況。

When it comes to military spending, the U.S. is by far ahead of everyone else.

在軍費開支方面，美國遙遙領先於其他國家。

At $920 billion, Washington's annual defence budget is bigger than the next nine countries combined.

華盛頓的年度國防預算高達 9200 億美元，超過了其後九個國家的總和。

The U.S. has spent decades, since World War II, building up a military that is both massive and technologically far ahead of anybody else.

自第二次世界大戰以來，美國花了幾十年時間建立起一支規模龐大、技術遙遙領先的軍隊。

Because of that, and because European defence plans were built on the assumption the U.S. would be part of it, there are many of these areas Europe just hasn't invested in.

正因為如此，也因為歐洲防務計劃是建立在美國將參與其中的假設之上，所以歐洲在許多領域都沒有投資。

Following Moscow's 2014 annexation of Crimea, European countries started boosting their defence spending, which had been decreasing or stagnant for years.

2014 年莫斯科吞併克里米亞後，歐洲國家開始增加國防開支，而這些國家的國防開支多年來一直在減少或停滯不前。

And Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 provided an incentive to spend more on security.

而俄羅斯在 2022 年全面入侵烏克蘭，也為增加安全支出提供了動力。

In 2024, Europe's defence spending growth hit a record high.

2024 年，歐洲國防開支增長創下歷史新高。

Still, European NATO members accounted for less than one-third of the Alliance's defence spending last year.

儘管如此，北約歐洲成員國去年的國防開支仍不到北約的三分之一。

President Trump wants that to change.

特朗普總統希望改變這種狀況。

NATO had no money, because they hadn't paid for years, and I said, look, if you don't pay, we're not going to be a part of NATO, we're not going to protect, we're not going to do what we're supposed to do.

北約沒錢了，因為他們已經好幾年沒付錢了，我說，聽著，如果你們不付錢，我們就不加入北約，我們就不提供保護，我們就不做我們應該做的事。

To address this, the Alliance's secretary-general says it is crucial that all 32 members meet the target of spending at least 2% of GDP on defence.

為解決這一問題，聯盟祕書長表示，所有 32 個成員都必須實現國防開支至少佔國內生產總值 2% 的目標。

I tell them, if you do not react to my phone calls, you might get phone calls from a very nice man in Washington.

我告訴他們，如果你們對我的電話沒有反應，你們可能會接到華盛頓一個非常好的人打來的電話。

Poland has answered that call.

波蘭響應了這一號召。

The country, which borders Ukraine and Belarus, now spends more than 4% of its GDP on defence.

該國與烏克蘭和白俄羅斯接壤，目前國防開支佔國內生產總值的 4% 以上。

There is nothing to be irritated about when an American ally says, spend more, be stronger, be more resilient.

當美國的盟友說，花更多的錢，變得更強大，更有韌性時，沒有什麼可惱怒的。

These words are absolutely justified in the facts.

這些話完全符合事實。

Trump has also criticised European countries over the amount of direct support to Ukraine.

特朗普還責備了歐洲國家對烏克蘭的直接支持力度。

We've given them much more than Europe, and Europe should have given more than us, because as you know, that's right there, that's the border.

我們給他們的比歐洲多得多，而歐洲應該給我們更多，因為你們知道，那裡就是邊界。

The US has been Kiev's single largest donor since Russia's full-scale invasion.

自俄羅斯全面入侵以來，美國一直是基輔最大的單一捐助國。

But the amount of direct support received from European countries, collectively, surpasses Washington's, according to research group the Kiel Institute for the World Economy.

但根據基爾世界經濟研究所（Kiel Institute for the World Economy）的研究，歐洲國家提供的直接支持總額超過了華盛頓。

But money isn't the only thing.

但錢並不是唯一的東西。

Capabilities, especially for Ukraine, are vital, and there are certain capabilities that the US brings that Europe cannot replace.

能力，尤其是對烏克蘭而言，至關重要，而美國帶來的某些能力是歐洲無法替代的。

Europe simply doesn't make enough, or in some cases any, of the air defence systems or long-range rocket artillery that Washington provides.

歐洲根本製造不出華盛頓提供的足夠的防空系統或遠程火箭炮，在某些情況下甚至沒有。

Currently, only the US produces Patriot air defence systems, which can shoot down Russian ballistic missiles, and US-made ATAKMS have been especially effective at striking Russian supply lines.

目前，只有美國生產可以擊落俄羅斯彈道導彈的 "愛國者 "防空系統，而美國製造的 ATAKMS 在打擊俄羅斯補給線方面尤為有效。

If those US systems do not continue flowing to Ukraine, it will lose the ability to defend itself against what Russia is doing on the battlefield.

如果美國的這些系統不能繼續流向烏克蘭，烏克蘭將失去抵禦俄羅斯在戰場上所作所為的能力。

Since Russia's 2022 invasion, many European governments have pledged to ramp up weapons production in their own countries.

自 2022 年俄羅斯入侵以來，許多歐洲國家的政府都承諾要加強本國的武器生產。

But even with larger defence budgets, turning those words into action has been a challenge.

但是，即使國防預算增加了，將這些言辭轉化為行動仍是一項挑戰。

Remember most of these components and systems essentially went out of production after the Cold War.

請記住，冷戰結束後，這些部件和系統中的大部分基本上都停產了。

So Europe is trying to rebuild an industry that hasn't been in place in 30-something years.

是以，歐洲正試圖重建一個 30 多年未曾出現過的行業。

When Russia launched its large-scale invasion of Ukraine, Europe restarted from almost a standing start its defence industry.

當俄羅斯大規模入侵烏克蘭時，歐洲的國防工業幾乎從零起步。

One of the biggest assets in Ukraine's arsenal has been self-propelled artillery, including howitzers.

烏克蘭武庫中最大的資產之一是自行火炮，包括榴彈炮。

European countries have allocated more than 400 of these systems to Ukraine since 2022.

自 2022 年以來，歐洲國家已向烏克蘭分配了 400 多套此類系統。

These militaries used to have hundreds in their arsenals, but after post-Cold War downsizing and deliveries to Ukraine, some of their stocks have fallen to double digits.

這些國家軍隊的武器庫中曾經有數百件武器，但經過冷戰後的縮編和向烏克蘭的交付，其中一些武器的庫存量已降至兩位數。

Russia has more than 1,700, and even though Moscow has lost more than 4,000 main battle tanks since 2022, its current stock of around 2,700 is far more than what these individual European militaries maintain, after having thousands in their arsenals 30 years prior.

俄羅斯擁有 1700 多輛主戰坦克，儘管莫斯科自 2022 年以來損失了 4000 多輛主戰坦克，但其目前的庫存量約為 2700 輛，遠遠超過這些歐洲國家軍隊的庫存量，而在 30 年前，它們的武庫中就擁有數千輛主戰坦克。

It's only when you combine all of Europe's stocks of self-propelled artillery and main battle tanks that they have an edge over Moscow.

只有把歐洲所有的自行火炮和主戰坦克的庫存加在一起，他們才能比莫斯科更有優勢。

During an emergency European Union meeting on Ukraine, leaders pledged to strengthen their country's defences and stressed the need to boost arms further to maintain that edge.

在歐盟關於烏克蘭問題的緊急會議上，各國領導人承諾加強本國的防禦力量，並強調有必要進一步加強軍備以保持這一優勢。

Europe must take up this challenge, this arms race, and must win it.

歐洲必須接受這一挑戰，這場軍備競賽，而且必須贏得勝利。

I am convinced that Russia will lose this arms race.

我堅信，俄羅斯將輸掉這場軍備競賽。

Germany's taken a leading role and has broken ground on the first Patriot missile production facility in Europe.

德國發揮了帶頭作用，歐洲首個 "愛國者 "飛彈生產設施已破土動工。

The factory is expected to produce up to 1,000 Patriot missiles for NATO allies, but they aren't scheduled to be delivered until 2027.

該工廠預計將為北約盟國生產多達 1000 枚 "愛國者 "飛彈，但計劃要到 2027 年才能交付。

It's not improving as fast as the Ukrainians, as many Europeans want, and now with the added pressure from Washington, Europe needs to move even faster, and it just is not in shape to do that.

現在，在華盛頓施加的更大壓力下，歐洲需要更快地行動起來，而它現在的狀況根本無法做到這一點。

In addition to sending weapons, France and the UK have proposed putting their country's troops in Ukraine if a ceasefire or peace deal is struck, but British Prime Minister Kiyos Tama says there must be some form of US backstop to deter Russian attacks.

除了派遣武器外，法國和英國還提議，如果達成停火或和平協議，就向烏克蘭派駐軍隊，但英國首相基約斯-塔馬說，必須有某種形式的美國後盾來阻止俄羅斯的進攻。

Trump has been non-committal.

特朗普一直未置可否。

If the British people are in Ukraine and they get attacked, you know, I've always found about the British, they don't need much help.

如果英國人在烏克蘭遭到襲擊，你知道，我一直覺得英國人不需要太多幫助。

They can take care of themselves very well.

他們可以很好地照顧自己。

The proposal comes as the major European militaries have roughly half the number of troops they had in the 90s.

提出這項建議時，歐洲主要國家軍隊的兵力大約只有上世紀 90 年代的一半。

The UK currently has about 140,000 active military personnel.

英國目前約有 140,000 名現役軍人。

Compare that to the US's 1.3 million and Russia's 1.1 million.

相比之下，美國和俄羅斯分別為 130 萬和 110 萬。

As the US scales back its support for Ukraine, and possibly its military role on the continent, European NATO countries will need to decide how to balance support for Kiev while strengthening their own defences.

隨著美國縮減對烏克蘭的支持，甚至可能縮減其在歐洲大陸的軍事角色，歐洲北約國家將需要決定如何在加強自身防禦的同時平衡對基輔的支持。

If in the unlikely event that Europe were to face a war with Russia tomorrow without US support, which is extraordinarily unlikely, Europe probably would be able to hold its own.

如果明天歐洲在沒有美國支持的情況下與俄羅斯開戰（這種可能性極小），歐洲或許能夠堅持自己的立場。

The question is in five years, in a few years, if, let's say, there's some kind of peace reached in Ukraine and Russia is no longer using its military equipment to attack Ukraine and is able to rebuild, and Europe doesn't tackle the hard issues that it needs to tackle, what would it look like in a few years in a fight between Europe and Russia?

問題是，五年後，或者說幾年後，如果烏克蘭實現了某種和平，俄羅斯不再使用其軍事裝備攻擊烏克蘭，並且能夠重建，而歐洲卻沒有解決它需要解決的棘手問題，那麼幾年後歐洲和俄羅斯之間的鬥爭會是什麼樣子？

And that is really what has Europeans nervous.

這才是讓歐洲人緊張的真正原因。