遏制中国=能力x决心x信念

Deterring China = Capability xResolve x Belief

遏制中国=能力x决心x信念

（译者的话：根据昨天翻译素材的投票结果，这篇素材是网友们投票第二多的，所以今天本人就继续把这篇给翻译了出来，以飨网友，感谢网友们的积极投票，详见：http://www.ltaaa.com/bbs/thread-299289-1-1.html ）

This week is graduation week in Newport, and thatmeans it’s Current Strategy Forum week in Newport. Household names have converged on the NavalWar College. Yesterday, for instance, Robert Kaplan gave atourd’horizon of Eurasian security before turning to the South China Sea, thesubject of his latest book Asia’s Cauldron. The Naval Diplomat will have more to say about that tomorrow orFriday. Cyber whiz Peter Singer (Wired for War) addressed the gathering Wednesday morning, to equal acclaim.

本周是纽波特港的毕业周，这意味本周也是纽波特港的“现时战略论坛”周。各路名人已经聚集在海军战争学院里。比如，在昨天，罗伯特卡普兰在发表了有关亚欧安全的演讲后，又把话题转移到了南中国海——这是其新作《亚洲大汽锅》的主题——上。海军学院里的这些外交官就这个话题明天或者周五还有更多话要讲。网络奇才彼得辛格（《联网作战》作者）周三早上对观众发表了演讲，也获得了一阵喝彩。

Dominating stories coming out of the forum, though,was an exchange between Admiral Jonathan Greenert, the chief of navaloperations—a.k.a. America’s top uniformed naval officer—and a student from ourIntermediate Level Course. As USNI News‘s Sam LaGrone reports, the student asked how American naval professionals should discuss“tactics, techniques and procedures [on] how to counter Chinese ships andaircraft.” Should we do so in public? Admiral Greenert: “If you talk about itopenly, you cross the line and unnecessarily antagonize.” Why be circumspect?Because “how much we trade with that country, it’s astounding.” Better todebate such matters in classified settings, deny that forcible-accessstrategies are aimed at China, and so forth.

此次论坛中最受人关注的莫过于美国海军作战部长Jonathan Greenert——即美国最高级的海军军官——同一名学生的对话了。《美国海军学院新闻》的记者Sam LaGrone报道说，这名学生询问道：美国海军专业人士在对抗中国的舰船和军机时如何在战术、方法和程序上进行讨论，在这么做时应该公开出来吗？Jonathan Greenert回答道：“如果对这些问题进行公开的讨论的话，那就太过分了，而且会引起不必要的反抗。”为何要如此谨慎？因为“你知道我们与中国的贸易量有多大吗？非常惊人。”所以最好在私下里讨论应对的对策，并且否认强制的进入战略是为了对付中国，诸如此类。

Really? What we’re debating is the merits ofspeaking openly about challenges and, yes, threats — a threat being aprospective antagonist that combines capability with the resolve to use it inways inimical to our, or our friends’, interests. And in a larger sense we’redebating how best to deter such an antagonist. This is Diplomacy 101.

真的吗？我们现在所讨论的是是否应该以公开的方式来谈论挑战和威胁，这样做有何优缺点？是的，我们所面临的威胁在未来的某个时候有可能成为我们的敌人，这样的一个敌人有能力也有决心做出伤害我们以及我们盟友利益的行为。所以从更大的意义上来说，我们正在讨论的是如何以最有效的方式来遏制这样一个敌人。这可以说是最基本的外交知识。

For my money Henry Kissinger supplies the bestdefinition of deterrence, depicting it as a product of our capability, ourresolve, and — here’s Kissinger’s special ingredient – theopponent’s belief in our capability and our resolve to use it. That lastelement is the hub of the problem. If the opponent believes we can balk hisstrategy and will do so under certain circumstances, he’ll be deterred. ButKissinger goes to great lengths to stress that deterrence comes not from addingbut from multiplying capability, resolve, and belief. That is, if any onefactor is zero — if our capabilities are too few or ill-suited to thesituation, if we waffle or appear to do so, or if the opponent pooh-poohs ormisjudges our capabilities or determination — then deterrence is apt to fail.

在我看来，亨利基辛格给“遏制”下了最好的定义，他认为遏制就是我们的能力加上我们的决心再加上——这是基辛格博士的特殊配方——对手对我们的能力以及有决心使用该能力的信念这三者结合起来的产物。最后那个要素才是问题的核心。如果对手认为我们有能力击垮他们的战略，而且也将会在某种情况下这么做的话，那么对手就算是被遏制了。但是基辛格博士进一步强调说遏制并非来源于这三者相加而是源于三者的相乘，也就是能力、决心和信念三者之间的相乘。也就是说，如果其中只要有一个因素是0的话——比如，如果我们的能力不足或者不适应现状，或者如果我们总是犹豫不决或者显现出犹豫不决的样子，又或者如果对手对我们表示出轻蔑或者误判了我们的能力和决心的话——那么就不存在遏制的效果了。

So the U.S. military’s mission in the WesternPacific, China seas, and greater Indian Ocean is to keep each element ofAmerican maritime might strong. Conveying power and purpose to China is thecrucial thing. How do we accomplish that? Let me strike a Solomonic pose onthis question, and seek the golden mean. Candor with potential adversaries iscritical, but it’s just as critical to avoid bluster. My hero Teddy Rooseveltsums it up with a pithy frontier maxim: don’t bluster, don’t flourish yourrevolver, and never draw unless you intend to shoot.In Kissinger’s terms,that’s a statement about communicating one’s intentions frankly but withoutneedlessly giving offense, about clearly outlining the conditions that warrantreaching for the gun, and about actually following through should the opponentdefy our terms. Capability, resolve, belief.

所以在西太平洋、中国海以及印度洋上，美国军队的任务就是让美国海军力量在各个方面都保持强大的状态。其中，至关重要的是要向中国传达美国的力量和意志。要如何完成这一任务？在这个问题上，我想谈谈自己的看法，然后我们再来选择个中庸之道。首先，向潜在的敌人展示自己的力量是非常重要的，但是，同样重要的我们不能通过恐吓的方式来对待潜在的敌人。我的偶像西奥多罗斯福以精辟的言语总结了这一原则：不要恐吓，不要挥舞你的手枪，除否你真的要开枪，否则不要掏出武器。也就是说，你可以坦白的向别人表明你的意志，但又不用给人以冒犯的感觉，向对方表明在什么样的情况下你将掏出武器，以及如果对方藐视我们的原则的话，那么我们肯定会掏出武器。这就是能力，决心和信念。

My go-to example of TR’s handling of deterrencecomes from 1902, when the president dispatched Admiral Dewey and most of theU.S. Navy to the Caribbean Sea. Dewey’s assignment: to deter a combinedEuropean fleet from seizing territory from Venezuela during a quarrel over debtrepayment. Roosevelt made it clear to European leaders that he was prepared touse force if they attempted a land grab contrary to the Monroe Doctrine. But hecommunicated his intentions in private, so as not to affront the prestige ofKaiser Wilhelm II and other statesmen. That reduced the chances of a showdownover a matter of honor. Here’s how effective TR was at keeping his deterrentefforts under wraps: historians squabbled about whether the U.S. navaldeployment ever happened for a century afterward.

西奥多罗斯福的遏制原则源于1902年的一次事件，当时担任美国总统的西奥多罗斯福派遣海军上将杜威和大部分的美国海军到加勒比海去。杜威此次的任务是：阻止欧洲联合舰队因债务偿还纠纷而试图侵占委内瑞拉的领土。罗斯福向欧洲领导人清楚的表明，如果他们执意要违反《门罗宣言》而侵占委内瑞拉领土的话，那么美国就准备使用武力对抗欧洲。但是他是以私底下的形式向欧洲领导人传达这个意志的，如此一来，也就不会伤害到德国皇帝威廉二世和欧洲其他政治家的威严。也就减少了因为荣耀问题而发生冲突的可能性。罗斯福的秘密外交遏制行动是如此的成功，以至于在随后的100年间，历史学家们都在争论美国到底有没有部署海军对抗欧洲。

Therein lies wisdom. Both Admiral Greenert and ourdoughty NWC student have it partly right. Let’s abjure giving offense, andputting Beijing in high dudgeon in the process. Chest-thumping is neithernecessary nor justified. American political and military representatives canconfer candidly with their Chinese counterparts behind the scenes. Indeed, onehopes such exchanges are already happening. But at the same time, striking adiffident attitude in public bespeaks irresolution. Defending allies, andfreedom of the seas and skies, is a permanent, nonnegotiable U.S. interest.That should be a constant refrain if Washington wants to instill belief inprospective opponents — or in allies and friends. So let’s be matter-of-factabout U.S. naval and air capability and the purposes that impel U.S. power.

这就是智慧所在。海军作战部长JonathanGreenert和海军战争学院的这名学生某种程度上是对的。让我们放弃挑衅吧，不要去激怒中国。鞭挞中国既没必要也不合乎情理。美国的政治和军事精英可以秘密的同中国对手进行坦诚的协商。确实如此，人们期望这样的交流协商已经开始展开。但是，与此同时，如果美国在公开场合的表现缺乏自信的话，那么就会给人一种优柔寡断和犹豫不决的印象。保卫盟友以及公海和公空的自由是美国永久以及不可转让的国家利益。如果美国想向自己未来的对手或者盟友或者朋友灌输这种意识的话，那么美国所要做的就是通过各种方式不断的强调这一点。因此，美国应该以实事求是的态度向他国展示出自己的海军实力、空军实力、以及推动美国前进的那么一种意志，这是美国需要展示出来的。

Our Chinese friends are adults. Let’s not insultthem by pretending that U.S. strategy-making is geared to some mythicalopponent.

我们的中国朋友也都是成年人。所以美国最好不要假装自己的战略决策是为了针对某个虚构的对手，否则这就是对我们中国朋友的侮辱了。

以下是美国网友评论：

Bankotsu • 6 days ago "So the U.S. military’s mission in the WesternPacific, China seas, and greater Indian Ocean is to keep each element ofAmerican maritime might strong." Seems to me that India and China are natural alliesagainst U.S. naval power. Hope that Modi can see where indian interests lies. "Our Chinese friends are adults. Let’s notinsult them by pretending that U.S. strategy-making is geared to some mythicalopponent." We don't feel insulted, we just take it as typicalU.S. BS., like "Iraq had weapons of mass destruction".

“所以在西太平洋、中国海以及印度洋上，美国军队的任务就是让美国海军力量在各个方面都保持强大的状态。” 在我看来，印度和中国才是对抗美国海军的天然盟友。希望莫迪能够意识到印度的国家利益是什么。 “我们的中国朋友也都是成年人。所以美国最好不要假装自己的战略决策是为了针对某个虚构的对手，否则这就是对我们中国朋友的侮辱了。” 我们没有觉得被侮辱了，我们认为这是美国典型的胡说八道，比如“伊拉克拥有大规模杀伤性武器”。

Snapnut Bankotsu • 6 days ago I have always advocated an amiable and friendlyrelationship between China and India and geography has provided ampleopportunities to both these countries to co-operate and exist peacefully. Morepeople to people interaction is required for this to happen.

我一直倡导中印之间建立友好的关系，而且两国的地理位置也为二者的合作和和平共存提供了足够多的机会，为了建立良好的关系，中印之间应该进行更多的人对人的交流。

ben lu Snapnut • 6 days ago I have high hope for this. Even though India andChina has border dispute, the relatively peaceful relationship over a fewthousand years between the giant neighbours is remarkable if not exceptionallyoutstanding, considering the number of wars Europeans had had amongstthemselves over the last 50 years, including two WW that caused tens ofmillions of deaths The US had many more wars of aggression with many countriesfar away from its borders over the last since WW2.

我对中印关系充满希望。虽然中印之间存在边界争议，但是数千年来，两个国家之间的关系还是大抵和平友好的，想象一下过去50年来，欧洲人之间发生了多少次的战争，包括导致大量人员死亡的二战。而美国二战以来的这么多年里也因侵略他国而发生了更多的战争。

RealityHurtsBadly ben lu • 5 days ago Exactly. Don't forget how US treated India not solong ago. It will be a matter of time before China "officially"declares herself surpassing US and India will be the no 2 and leaving US as theno 3. There is no way US is going to be happy with India surpasses it and thereis no way that US will be humble enough towards India.

说得对，不要忘记美国不久前是如何对待印度的。中国将“正式”宣布自己已经超越美国，这只是时间问题，到时候印度排在第二，美国掉入第三。印度超越美国，美国肯定是不开心的，美国也不可能对印度保持谦逊。

ashleyhk ben lu • 5 days ago There was no border between India and China untilChina occupied Tibet.

在中国占领XZ之前，中印之间不存在边界争端。

ben lu ashleyhk • 5 days ago What is the story of India occupying South Tibet?

是印度侵占了藏南啦。

RealityHurtsBadly ashleyhk • 5 days ago LoL. Tibet has been a part of China since the Qingdynasty era. You do not even bother to read about real historical fact huh ?

哈哈，XZ自清朝以来就是中国的领土了。你甚至都不愿去了解一下真正的历史事实？

Sashimi Boy RealityHurtsBadly • 4 days ago Because they were taken by force. Hold a referendumand see what the Tibetans really want.

那是中国通过武力夺取的，举行全民公投，看看XZ人怎么选择。

ben lu • 6 days ago "Deterring China = Capability x Resolve xBelief" More true is this one "Deterring US subversionof China's security= Capability x Resolve x Belief"

“遏制中国=能力x决心x信念” 更加正确的是以下这个公式：遏制美国对中国国家安全的破坏=能力x决心x信念