ADM-201 dump PMP dumps pdf SSCP exam materials CBAP exam sample questions

为对话而辩 – 译学馆
未登陆,请登陆后再发表信息
最新评论 (0)
播放视频

为对话而辩

Jonas Gahr Støre: In defense of dialogue

当今我们与之斗争的所有不足中
Amongst all the troubling deficits we struggle with today —
大家认为经济和金融缺陷是最紧要的
we think of financial and economic primarily —
但最使我担忧的
the ones that concern me most
是政治对话的不足 –
is the deficit of political dialogue —
包括我们处理实际上的
our ability to address modern conflicts
现代冲突的能力,
as they are,
追溯到这些冲突问题本源的能力,
to go to the source of what they’re all about
以及理解关键人物,
and to understand the key players
并与他们沟通的能力。
and to deal with them.
作为外交家
We who are diplomats,
我们专门处理国家之间的冲突和争议。
we are trained to deal with conflicts between states and issues between states.
我可以告诉大家,我们的日程非常紧张
And I can tell you, our agenda is full.
包括贸易,武装解除,
There is trade, there is disarmament,
还有跨界关系。
there is cross-border relations.
但是情况在发生变化,
But the picture is changing,
我们看到新的关键人物们
and we are seeing that there are new key players
正在参与进来。
coming onto the scene.
我们广泛地称他们为“团体”,
We loosely call them “groups.”
他们可能代表着社会、宗教、
They may represent social, religious,
政治、经济、军事实体。
political, economic, military realities.
我们在苦苦奋斗着学习怎样和他们打交道。
And we struggle with how to deal with them.
交涉时特别要注意:
The rules of engagement:
怎样交谈,何时交谈
how to talk, when to talk,
和怎样应对他们。
and how to deal with them.
让我在这里展示一张幻灯片
Let me show you a slide here
它阐述了从1946年至今
which illustrates the character of conflicts
所发生的冲突的类型。
since 1946 until today.
你们看到的绿色部分
You see the green
是传统的国与国之间的冲突
is a traditional interstate conflict,
我们以前读到的那种。
the ones we used to read about.
红色部分是现代冲突,
The red is modern conflict,
属于国家内部的冲突。
conflicts within states.
它和传统的冲突有很大的不同
These are quite different,
而且并非现代外交手段
and they are outside the grasp
所能掌控。
of modern diplomacy.
其参与者中的核心
And the core of these key actors
是团体
are groups
这些团体代表着国内的
who represent different interests
不同利益。
inside countries.
而且他们处理冲突的不同方式,会迅速影响到其他国家。
And the way they deal with their conflicts rapidly spreads to other countries.
所以在某种程度上,这与每个人都息息相关。
So in a way, it is everybody’s business.
这些年来,我们所学到的另一个教训就是,
Another acknowledgment we’ve seen during these years,
近年来,
recent years,
很少有
is that very few
国家内部的冲突
of these domestic interstate, intrastate conflicts
能够通过军事解决。
can be solved militarily.
军事手段有时是必须的,
They may have to be dealt with with military means,
但却治标不治本。
but they cannot be solved by military means.
它们需要政治方案的介入。
They need political solutions.
所以这里我们有个难题,
And we, therefore, have a problem,
那就是这些团体脱离了传统外交的范畴。
because they escape traditional diplomacy.
而且各个国家
And we have among states
普遍不愿意和他们打交道。
a reluctance in dealing with them.
再加上,在过去的十年中,
Plus, during the last decade,
我们一直处于紧张状态
we’ve been in the mode
在和一些概念上和政治上
where dealing with groups
的恐怖团体打交道。
was conceptually and politically dangerous.
9·11后,
After 9/11,
非友即敌。
either you were with us or against us.
黑白分明。
It was black or white.
一些团体常常
And groups are very often
被武断地贴上恐怖分子的标签。
immediately label terrorists.
而谁愿意和恐怖分子谈?
And who would talk to terrorists?
如我所知,西方国家
The West, as I would see it,
在近十年大大衰弱,
comes out of that decade weakened,
有很大的原因是因为我们不了解这些团体。
because we didn’t understand the group.
我们花了大量时间
So we’ve spent more time
研究我们为什么不和他们对话
on focusing on why we should not talk to others
而不是怎样和他们对话。
than finding out how we talk to others.
当然,我也不天真。
Now I’m not naive.
在对话中你不能一直和人谈。
You cannot talk to everybody all the time.
有时你应该起身离开。
And there are times you should walk.
并有时军事干预是必要的。
And sometimes military intervention is necessary.
我认为对利比亚军事干预是必要的
I happen to believe that Libya was necessary
而且对阿富汗的军事干预也是必要的。
and that military intervention in Afghanistan was also necessary.
我的国家通过军事联盟
And my country relies on its security
保障了安全,这显而易见。
through military alliance, that’s clear.
但是我们在理解解决现代冲突方面
But still we have a large deficit
仍有很多不足。
in dealing with and understanding modern conflict.
让我们看看阿富汗。
Let us turn to Afghanistan.
那次军事干预的十年后,
10 years after that military intervention,
这个国家依旧动荡不安。
that country is far from secure.
说实话,那里的情况非常严峻,
The situation, to be honest, is very serious.
需要再一次的军事干预,
Now again, the military is necessary,
但是军事并不能解决问题。
but the military is no problem-solver.
2005年,当我以外交部长的身份去过阿富汗,
When I first came to Afghanistan in 2005 as a foreign minister,
我见到了ISAF(国际安全援助部队)
I met the commander of ISAF,
的总指挥。
the international troops.
他告诉我,”军事手段可以克敌制胜,部长。“
And he told me that, “This can be won militarily, minister.
“我们只不过需要坚持一下。”
We just have to persevere.”
现在,在更换了四位总指挥后,
Now four COM ISAF’s later,
我们听到了不同意见:
we hear a different message:
”单靠军事无法胜利。
“This cannot be won militarily.
我们需要军事干预,
We need military presence,
但也需求助于政治活动。
but we need to move to politics.
我们只有通过政治方案才能彻底解决问题。
We can only solve this through a political solution.
而且解铃还须系铃人;
And it is not us who will solve it;
阿富汗人必须自己解决。“
Afghans have to solve it.”
但是他们需要一个不同于2011,2002年
But then they need a different political process
的政治进程。
than the one they were given in 2001, 2002.
他们需要一个包容的进程
They need an inclusive process
一个能使这个复杂社会的基层群众
where the real fabric of this very complicated society
解决他们的问题的进程。
can deal with their issues.
每个人都好像同意这个观点。
Everybody seems to agree with that.
三、四、五年前,这个观点还非常有争议。
It was very controversial to say three, four, five years ago.
现在每个人都同意了。
Now everybody agrees.
但是现在,当我们准备对话时,
But now, as we prepare to talk,
我们发现自己所知甚少。
we understand how little we know.
因为我们太久不对话了。
Because we didn’t talk.
我们之前没有意识到它的重要性。
We didn’t grasp what was going on.
国际红十字会(ICRC)
The International Committee of the Red Cross, the ICRC,
与每个人都对话,
is talking to everyone,
它这样做是因为它是中立机构。
and it is doing so because it is neutral.
这也是为什么
And that’s one reason why
红十字会可能是
that organization probably
国际冲突中
is the best informed key player
最消息灵通的角色
to understand modern conflict —
因为他们敢于去对话。
because they talk.
我的观点是中立并非对话的必要条件。
My point is that you don’t have to be neutral to talk.
并且,当你坐下来对话时
And you don’t have to agree
你不必同意对方的观点。
when you sit down with the other side.
你随时可以走开。
And you can always walk.
但如果你不谈
But if you don’t talk,
你将无法与对方交流。
you can’t engage the other side.
而你准备与之交流的对方
And the other side which you’re going to engage
却恰恰有着你最不认同的观点。
is the one with whom you profoundly disagree.
以色利前总理拉宾在参与奥斯陆协议时,曾说过,
Prime Minister Rabin said when he engaged the Oslo process,
“你无法与朋友共创和平,
“You don’t make peace with your friends,
只能与敌人握手言和。“
you make peace with your enemies.”
这很艰难,但却非常必要。
It’s hard, but it is necessary.
让我们再进一步看。
Let me go one step further.
这是里尔广场。
This is Tahrir Square.
这里正在进行一场革命。
There’s a revolution going on.
阿拉伯之春进入秋季
The Arab Spring is heading into fall
并走向寒冬。
and is moving into winter.
这将持续很长很长一段时间。
It will last for a long, long time.
又有谁能预知结果。
And who knows what it will be called in the end.
这不是重点。
That’s not the point.
重点是我们可能在见证,
The point is that we are probably seeing,
阿拉伯世界在有史以来
for the first time in the history of the Arab world,
第一次爆发由下而上的革命;
a revolution bottom-up —
人民的革命。
people’s revolution.
社会团体纷纷走上街头。
Social groups are taking to the streets.
然而西方国家却发现
And we find out in the West
我们对这些知之甚少。
that we know very little about what’s happening.
因为我们从不与这些国家的人民们对话。
Because we never talk to the people in these countries.
大多数西方政府服从
Most governments followed
权威领导的指示,
the dictate of the authoritarian leaders
把这些不同的团体当做恐怖分子,
to stay away from these different groups,
和他们保持距离。
because they were terrorists.
所以现在当他们走上街头时
So now that they are emerging in the street
我们除了向民主革命致敬外爱莫能助,
and we salute the democratic revolution,
因为我们所知甚少。
we find out how little we know.
现在,讨论变成了,
Right now, the discussion goes,
“我们真的应该与穆斯林兄弟会对话吗?
“Should we talk to the Muslim Brotherhood?
与哈马斯对话?
Should we talk to Hamas?
如果对话,我们可能使其合法化。“
If we talk to them, we may legitimize them.”
我认为这是错误观点
I think that is wrong.
如果你以正确的方式对话,你将明白
If you talk in the right way, you make it very clear
对话并不等同于赞成。
that talking is not agreeing.
穆斯林兄弟会可能是多数派
And how can we tell the Muslim Brotherhood,
如果我们不和他们谈判
as we should,
就是不尊重多数人的权利,
that they must respect minority rights,
那我们有义务,但又有什么脸面去告诉穆斯林兄弟会,
if we don’t accept majority rights?
他们必须尊重少数人的权利?
Because they may turn out to be a majority.
我们又怎能只许州官放火,不许百姓点灯,
How can we escape [having] a double-standard,
一边宣扬民主,
if we at the same time preach democracy
一边
and at the same time
不愿和有代表性的团体打交道?
don’t want to deal with the groups that are representative?
我们又怎能做好对话者?
How will we ever be interlocutors?
现在我的外交官们被指示
Now my diplomats are instructed
必须与这些团体对话。
to talk to all these groups.
但是对话可以采取不同的形式。
But talking can be done in different ways.
我们把对话区分为外交层面的
We make a distinction between talking from a diplomatic level
和政治层面的
and talking at the political level.
对话既可以伴随着援助,也可以无援助
Now talking can be accompanied with aid or not with aid.
对话可以达成协议,也可以不达成协议
Talking can be accompanied with inclusion or not inclusion.
处理对话
There’s a big array
有很多种方式。
of the ways of dealing with this.
但如果我们拒绝
So if we refuse
与即将登上舞台的新兴团体
to talk to these new groups
展开对话,
that are going to be dominating the news in years to come,
我们将日趋偏激,
we will further radicalization,
我认为如此。
I believe.
我们将使暴力运动一发不可收拾
We will make the road from violent activities into politics
政治公平更难践行
harder to travel.
我们将很难向这些团体展示
And if we cannot demonstrate to these groups
如果你们为民主而努力,
that if you move towards democracy,
共同参与
if you move towards taking part
建立文明的合理的国家制度,
in civilized and normal standards among states,
你们将另有收获。
there are some rewards on the other side.
然而
The paradox here
过去的十年,我们在这一方面
is that the last decade probably was a lost decade
做得十分失败
for making progress on this.
可是,这失败的十年之前的十年里,世界因为一个原因
And the paradox is that the decade before the last decade was so promising —
而充满了希望
and for one reason primarily.
这个原因发生于南非:
And the reason is what happened in South Africa:
纳尔逊·曼德拉身上。
Nelson Mandela.
当曼德拉在被关押27年后
When Mandela came out of prison
出狱时,
after 27 years of captivity,
如果他告诉人们,
if he had told his people,
“是时候拿起武器了,
“It’s time to take up the arms,
是时候起来反抗了。”
it’s time to fight,”
那将振臂一呼,应者云集。
he would have been followed.
我想国际社会也会说
And I think the international community
“很公平,
would have said, “Fair enough.
他们有反抗的权利。”
It’s their right to fight.”
如你所知,曼德拉并没有那么做。
Now as you know, Mandela didn’t do that.
在他的回忆录《漫漫自由路》里
In his memoirs, “Long Road to Freedom,”
他写道他之所以
he wrote that he survived
能够在多年监禁中存活下来
during those years of captivity
是因为他一直把他的压迫者也看作
because he always decided to look upon his oppressor
同是人类的一份子。
as also being a human being,
同是人类的一份子。
also being a human being.
然后他促成了政治对话
So he engaged a political process of dialogue,
这并非软弱
not as a strategy of the weak,
而是另一种勇敢
but as a strategy of the strong.
他进行了深刻的对话
And he engaged talking profoundly
通过与参与者
by settling some of the most tricky issues
真诚而和谐的对话
through a truth and reconciliation process
解决了最棘手的问题
where people came and talked.
南非朋友们应该知道
Now South African friends will know
这有多么艰难
that was very painful.
那么,我们可以从中学到什么?
So what can we learn from all of this?
对话并不简单
Dialogue is not easy —
个体之间,团体之间,政府之间的对话都很难
not between individuals, not between groups, not between governments —
但却十分必要
but it is very necessary.
如果我们想通过政治手段解决冲突,
If we’re going to deal with political conflict-solving of conflicts,
如果我们想了解这些新团体
if we’re going to understand these new groups
这些自下而上的团体,
which are coming from bottom-up,
拜科技所赐,这并非难事,
supported by technology, which is available to all,
我们外交家不能流连于高级宴会中
we diplomats cannot be sitting back in the banquets
自欺欺人地以为自己在处理国际关系。
believing that we are doing interstate relations.
我们必须接触
We have to connect
这些深刻的变化。
with these profound changes.
对话的本质究竟是什么?
And what is dialogue really about?
当我进行对话时,
When I enter into dialogue,
我由衷希望对方
I really hope that the other side
能够认同我的观点,
would pick up my points of view,
我要用自己的观点和价值观
that I would impress upon them
打动他们
my opinions and my values.
除非我对对方的观点表现出
I cannot do that
倾听的态度
unless I send the signals that I will be open
否则,我将无法达成目的。
to listen to the other side’s signals.
我们需要大量的训练和实践
We need a lot more training on how to do that
来学习怎样达成上述目标
and a lot more practice
和怎样促成问题的解决。
on how that can take problem-solving forward.
从个人经历出发
We know from our personal experiences
我们知道谈判中
that it’s easy sometimes
有时需要起身离开,
just to walk,
有时需要据理力争。
and sometimes you may need to fight.
我不会一概地否定这些策略。
And I wouldn’t say that is the wrong thing in all circumstances.
有时你必须如此。
Sometimes you have to.
但这些策略帮助不大。
But that strategy seldom takes you very far.
真正有用的策略是
The alternative is a strategy
使对话更加有原则有保障。
of engagement and principled dialogue.
我认为在现代外交中
And I believe we need to strengthen this approach
要加强这一方面,
in modern diplomacy,
无论是国家之间,
not only between states,
还是在国家内部。
but also within states.
我们看到了许多新的迹象。
We are seeing some new signs.
如果文明社会
We could never have done
不采取新的外交手段
the convention against anti-personnel landmines
我们永远都
and the convention that is banning cluster munitions
无法看到反地雷运动
unless we had done diplomacy differently,
无法达成《集束弹药公约》
by engaging with civil society.
突然之间,
All of a sudden,
非政府组织不再仅仅站在街头,高呼口号,
NGOs were not only standing in the streets, crying their slogans,
而是投入到沟通交流中,
but they were taking [them] into the negotiations,
因为他们代表了这些武器的受害者。
partly because they represented the victims of these weapons.
而且他们利用了自己的知识。
And they brought their knowledge.
在外交和底层力量之间
And there was an interaction
有一个互动。
between diplomacy and the power coming bottom-up.
这也许是变革发生的
This is perhaps a first element
第一要素。
of a change.
我认为,在未来
In the future, I believe,
我们将从这些例子中学到更多,
we should draw examples from these different illustrations,
拥有不再脱离人民和社会的
not to have diplomacy
崭新外交。
which is disconnected from people and civil society.
在面对当今时代
And we have to go also
人类生死攸关的议题
beyond traditional diplomacy
——气候变化时,
to the survival issue of our times,
我们也要超越传统外交。
climate change.
如果我们相互推
How are we going to solve climate change through negotiations,
而不承担自己应尽的义务,
unless we are able to make civil society and people,
又怎能通过交流解决气候问题?
not part of the problem, but part of the solution?
在进行新的,更艰难的气候谈判时
It is going to demand an inclusive process of diplomacy
我们需要不同于现在践行的
very different from the one we are practicing today
更加包容的外交程序
as we are heading to new rounds of difficult climate negotiations,
此时我们需要动员
but when we move toward something
更广泛的力量
which has to be much more
去达成某个目标。
along a broad mobilization.
我认为,理解至关重要。
It’s crucial to understand, I believe,
因为科技,因为全球化
because of technology and because of globalization,
和由下而上的社会团体的力量。
societies from bottom-up.
作为外交家
We as diplomats
我们需要了解社会团体
need to know the social capital
的社会资本。
of communities.
究竟是什么让国与国之间,
What is it that makes people trust each other,
以及国内的人们之间,
not only between states,
彼此信任?
but also within states?
如果外交家设计的解决方案
What is the legitimacy of diplomacy,
不能被更广泛的社会力量
of the the solution we devise as diplomats
也就是我们泛称的”组织“
if they cannot be reflected and understood
所理解和认同,
by also these broader forces of societies
我们又怎能使外交更加合理?
that we now very loosely call groups?
好在我们并非无能为力。
The good thing is that we are not powerless.
我们有着前所未有的
We have never had
交流方式、
as many means of communication,
联系手段、沟通途径、
means of being connected, means of reaching out,
和包容方式。
means of including.
“外交工具箱”中
The diplomatic toolbox
放满了可用的工具
is actually full of different tools we can use
来加强我们的交流。
to strengthen our communication.
但问题在于,9·11后近十年来
But the problem is that we are coming out of a decade
我们对沟通充满恐惧
where we had a fear of touching it.
现在,我希望接下来的日子里
Now, I hope, in the coming years,
我们能通过实际行动显示
that we are able to demonstrate through some concrete examples
恐惧已离我们而去
that fear is receding
而我们能够从各个国家
and that we can take courage
从文明社会
from that alliance
的联盟中
with civil society
汲取勇气
in different countries
来支持各国解决冲突
to support their problem-solving,
让阿富汗人内部,
among the Afghans,
巴勒斯坦人内部,
inside the Palestinian population,
和以色列与巴勒斯坦之间,都能化干戈为玉帛。
between the peoples of Palestine and Israel.
当我们试图理解阿拉伯世界
And as we try to understand this broad movement
的大变迁时,
across the Arab world,
我们并非无能为力。
we are not powerless.
我们需要改善交流技巧,
We need to improve the necessary skills,
更需要对话的勇气。
and we need the courage to use them.
在我的国家,
In my country,
我曾见过伊斯兰教团体
I have seen how the council of Islamist groups
和基督教团体
and Christian groups
走到一起,并非政府促成,
came together, not as a government initiative,
而是出于自发行为,
but they came together on their own initiative
在稍有摩擦时,
to establish contact and dialogue
他们就主动通过对话达成一致。
in times where things were pretty low-key tension.
当冲突升级时,
And when tension increased,
他们已有之前的对话,
they already had that dialogue,
这成为了重要的协调力量。
and that was a strength to deal with different issues.
我们现代的西方社会
Our modern Western societies
因为移民热潮
are more complex than before,
而变得更加复杂多元
in this time of migration.
如果不改善交流技巧我们又怎能
How are we going to settle and build a bigger “We”
建立一个和谐包容的“大家庭”
to deal with our issues
去解决争议?
if we don’t improve our skills of communication?
以上是我们进行对话的原因
So there are many reasons,
也正是这些原因
and for all of these reasons,
使对话毋庸置疑,刻不容缓。
this is time and this is why we must talk.
谢谢大家的关注
Thank you for your attention.
掌声
(Applause)

发表评论

译制信息
视频概述
听录译者

收集自网络

翻译译者

收集自网络

审核员

自动通过审核

视频来源

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3lxyi_3CGrk

相关推荐