四月青年社区

 找回密码
 注册会员

QQ登录

只需一步,快速开始

查看: 1275|回复: 7

[焦点关注] [原创翻译]奥巴马:对付伊朗和朝鲜要用核武器

[复制链接]
发表于 2010-4-6 17:02 | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式
Obama Limits When U.S. Would Use Nuclear Arms原文链接http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/06/world/06arms.html?pagewanted=2

内容提要:奥巴马宣布了美国使用核武器的条件。虽然使用条件更为严苛,但是他说,对于伊朗和朝鲜这样的国家还是要例外的。

WASHINGTON — President Obama said Monday that he was revamping American nuclear strategy to substantially narrow the conditions under which the United States would use nuclear weapons.

But the president said in an interview that he was carving out an exception for “outliers like Iran and North Korea” that have violated or renounced the main treaty to halt nuclear proliferation.

Discussing his approach to nuclear security the day before formally releasing his new strategy, Mr. Obama described his policy as part of a broader effort to edge the world toward making nuclear weapons obsolete, and to create incentives for countries to give up any nuclear ambitions. To set an example, the new strategy renounces the development of any new nuclear weapons, overruling the initial position of his own defense secretary.
在正式发布新战略的前一天,奥巴马探讨争取核安全的新途径时,他将这项政策描述为推动世界无核武器化的重大举措之一,为各国放弃核武器战略提供了激励。

Mr. Obama’s strategy is a sharp shift from those of his predecessors and seeks to revamp the nation’s nuclear posture for a new age in which rogue states and terrorist organizations are greater threats than traditional powers like Russia and China.

It eliminates much of the ambiguity that has deliberately existed in American nuclear policy since the opening days of the cold war. For the first time, the United States is explicitly committing not to use nuclear weapons against nonnuclear states that are in compliance with the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, even if they attacked the United States with biological or chemical weapons or launched a crippling cyberattack.
这项声明明确去掉了一些冷战后故意留下来的模糊条件,美国第一次明确表示遵守不扩散核武器的条约,不对无核国家使用核武器,即使美国遭遇生化武器袭击或者对严重网络攻击。

Those threats, Mr. Obama argued, could be deterred with “a series of graded options,” a combination of old and new conventional weapons. “I’m going to preserve all the tools that are necessary in order to make sure that the American people are safe and secure,” he said in the interview in the Oval Office.

White House officials said the new strategy would include the option of reconsidering the use of nuclear retaliation against a biological attack, if the development of such weapons reached a level that made the United States vulnerable to a devastating strike.

Mr. Obama’s new strategy is bound to be controversial, both among conservatives who have warned against diluting the United States’ most potent deterrent and among liberals who were hoping for a blanket statement that the country would never be the first to use nuclear weapons.

Mr. Obama argued for a slower course, saying, “We are going to want to make sure that we can continue to move towards less emphasis on nuclear weapons,” and, he added, to “make sure that our conventional weapons capability is an effective deterrent in all but the most extreme circumstances.”

The release of the new strategy, known as the Nuclear Posture Review, opens an intensive nine days of nuclear diplomacy geared toward reducing weapons. Mr. Obama plans to fly to Prague to sign a new arms-control agreement with Russia on Thursday and then next week will host 47 world leaders in Washington for a summit meeting on nuclear security.

The most immediate test of the new strategy is likely to be in dealing with Iran, which has defied the international community by developing a nuclear program that it insists is peaceful but that the United States and its allies say is a precursor to weapons. Asked about the escalating confrontation with Iran, Mr. Obama said he was now convinced that “the current course they’re on would provide them with nuclear weapons capabilities,” though he gave no timeline.
对于这一战略的最好验证很可能就是在解决伊朗问题上。因为伊朗违背国际社会的意愿进行核研究计划,虽然伊朗坚持声称这是和平的,但美国和其盟友却认为这是核武器的前提。

He dodged when asked whether he shared Israel’s view that a “nuclear capable” Iran was as dangerous as one that actually possessed weapons.

“I’m not going to parse that right now,” he said, sitting in his office as children played on the South Lawn of the White House at a daylong Easter egg roll. But he cited the example of North Korea, whose nuclear capabilities were unclear until it conducted a test in 2006, which it followed with a second shortly after Mr. Obama took office.

“I think it’s safe to say that there was a time when North Korea was said to be simply a nuclear-capable state until it kicked out the I.A.E.A. and become a self-professed nuclear state,” he said, referring to the International Atomic Energy Agency. “And so rather than splitting hairs on this, I think that the international community has a strong sense of what it means to pursue civilian nuclear energy for peaceful purposes versus a weaponizing capability.”

Mr. Obama said he wanted a new United Nations sanctions resolution against Iran “that has bite,” but he would not embrace the phrase “crippling sanctions” once used by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. And he acknowledged the limitations of United Nations action. “We’re not naïve that any single set of sanctions automatically is going to change Iranian behavior,” he said, adding “there’s no light switch in this process.”

In the year since Mr. Obama gave a speech in Prague declaring that he would shift the policy of the United States toward the elimination of nuclear weapons, his staff has been meeting — and arguing — over how to turn that commitment into a workable policy, without undermining the credibility of the country’s nuclear deterrent.

The strategy to be released on Tuesday is months late, partly because Mr. Obama had to adjudicate among advisers who feared he was not changing American policy significantly enough, and those who feared that anything too precipitous could embolden potential adversaries. One senior official said that the new strategy was the product of 150 meetings, including 30 convened by the White House National Security Council, and that even then Mr. Obama had to step in to order rewrites.

He ended up with a document that differed considerably from the one President George W. Bush published in early 2002, just three months after the Sept. 11 attacks. Mr. Bush, too, argued for a post-cold-war rethinking of nuclear deterrence, reducing American reliance on those weapons.

But Mr. Bush’s document also reserved the right to use nuclear weapons “to deter a wide range of threats,” including banned chemical and biological weapons and large-scale conventional attacks. Mr. Obama’s strategy abandons that option — except if the attack is by a nuclear state, or a nonsignatory or violator of the nonproliferation treaty.

The document to be released Tuesday after months of study led by the Defense Department will declare that “the fundamental role” of nuclear weapons is to deter nuclear attacks on the United States, allies or partners, a narrower presumption than the past. But Mr. Obama rejected the formulation sought by arms control advocates to declare that the “sole role” of nuclear weapons is to deter a nuclear attack.
There are five declared nuclear states — the United States, Britain, France, Russia and China. Three states with nuclear weapons have refused to sign — India, Pakistan and Israel — and North Korea renounced the treaty in 2003. Iran remains a signatory, but the United Nations Security Council has repeatedly found it in violation of its obligations, because it has hidden nuclear plants and refused to answer questions about evidence it was working on a warhead.

In shifting the nuclear deterrent toward combating proliferation and the sale or transfer of nuclear material to terrorists or nonnuclear states, Mr. Obama seized on language developed in the last years of the Bush administration. It had warned North Korea that it would be held “fully accountable” for any transfer of weapons or technology. But the next year, North Korea was caught aiding Syria in building a nuclear reactor but suffered no specific consequence.

Mr. Obama was asked whether the American failure to make North Korea pay a heavy price for the aid to Syria undercut Washington’s credibility.
有人问及奥巴马,美国没能使朝鲜为援助叙利亚事件付出惨重代价是否会削弱美国的公信力。

“I don’t think countries around the world are interested in testing our credibility when it comes to these issues,” he said. He said such activity would leave a country vulnerable to a nuclear strike, and added, “We take that very seriously because we think that set of threats present the most serious security challenge to the United States.”
他说,“我认为,不是所有的国家都对通过这个事件检验美国的公信力感兴趣“。他说,这样的行为能够使一个国家对核打击束手无策。”美国对此非常严肃认真,因为我们认为这种威胁对美国的安全有巨大的挑战。“

He indicated that he hoped to use this week’s treaty signing with Russia as a stepping stone toward more ambitious reductions in nuclear arsenals down the road, but suggested that would have to extend beyond the old paradigm of Russian-American relations.

“We are going to pursue opportunities for further reductions in our nuclear posture, working in tandem with Russia but also working in tandem with NATO as a whole,” he said.

An obvious such issue would be the estimated 200 tactical nuclear weapons the United States still has stationed in Western Europe. Russia has called for their removal, and there is growing interest among European nations in such a move as well. But Mr. Obama said he wanted to consult with NATO allies before making such a commitment.

The summit meeting that opens next week in Washington will bring together nearly four dozen world leaders, the largest such gathering by an American president since the founding of the United Nations 65 years ago. Mr. Obama said he hoped to use the session to lay down tangible commitments by individual countries toward his goal of securing the world’s nuclear material so it does not fall into the hands of terrorists or dangerous states.

“Our expectation is not that there’s just some vague, gauzy statement about us not wanting to see loose nuclear materials,” he said. “We anticipate a communiqué that spells out very clearly, here’s how we’re going to achieve locking down all the nuclear materials over the next four years.”

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

有时一点不吐不快的大情结,有时一点悲天悯人的小伤感。

西儿与您共享。

评分

1

查看全部评分

发表于 2010-4-6 17:18 | 显示全部楼层
这是不是透露出某种讯息额..
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-4-6 17:25 | 显示全部楼层
这是不是透露出某种讯息额..
北小沫 发表于 2010-4-6 17:18

这个意思就是说,美国不再认为天赋人权,某些邪恶的人是没有人权的。虽然美国一直是这么做的。
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-4-6 17:45 | 显示全部楼层
美国真正的面目表露出来了!
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-4-6 18:59 | 显示全部楼层
这还诺贝尔和平奖得主呢
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-4-6 19:02 | 显示全部楼层
美国这是要销毁核武器了?
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-4-6 21:05 | 显示全部楼层
内容提要:奥巴马宣布了美国使用核武器的条件。虽然使用条件更为严苛,但是他说,对于伊朗和朝鲜这样的国家还是要例外的。
------------------------
所以,伊朗和朝鲜制造核武器以求自保也是应该的。
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

发表于 2010-4-8 14:39 | 显示全部楼层
说明美国总统一贯是说谎骗人的.
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 注册会员

本版积分规则

小黑屋|手机版|免责声明|四月网论坛 ( AC四月青年社区 京ICP备08009205号 备案号110108000634 )

GMT+8, 2024-5-24 01:42 , Processed in 0.049633 second(s), 27 queries , Gzip On.

Powered by Discuz! X3.4

© 2001-2023 Discuz! Team.

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表