Re: [問題] 美國總統候選人

[cornflower (矢車)]

※ 引述《uniself (後知後覺王)》之銘言：
: ※ 引述《SweetSwede (我只是友善的過客...)》之銘言：
:  看看這位使用英語的強者吧
:  http://bent.tw/bent/2008/01/09/clinton-mccain-and-taiwan/
:  http://bent.tw/bent/2008/01/04/obama-huckabee-and-taiwan/

（因為推文而試著翻譯了第一篇，留原文對照留待修正指教:)）

　　民主黨再度顯示了他們讓人驚訝的才能—可以從唾手可得的勝利
中落敗。根據出口民調，相較於希拉蕊的35%，44%新罕布夏州的選民
說歐巴馬最有機會在十一月得到勝利。這現象是可以理解的，當看到
歐巴馬的競選主要是傳達希望和團結，而希拉蕊所傳達的卻只是與現
狀差不多（更不用說是共和黨人在十一月團結的唯一希望）。我不知
道為什麼他們會選擇了她，但我認為這是對民主黨的壞消息，也幾乎
可以確信這是對台灣的壞消息。

The Democrats stun again with their amazing ability to
grasp defeat from the jaws of victory. According to exit
polls, 44% of New Hampshire Democratic voters said Obama
had the best chance of winning in November, compared to
only 35% for Clinton. Which makes sense, seeing as how
Obama is campaigning on a message of hope and unity, while
Clinton is quite literally more of the same (not to mention
the only hope of Republican unity in November). Why they
picked her is beyond me, but in my opinion it’s bad news
for the Democrats, and most certainly bad news for Taiwan.

去年八月我第一次撰寫，關於希拉蕊和台灣：

I first wrote about Clinton and Taiwan last August:

希拉蕊柯林頓，這個可能的民主黨總統候選人，是不願支持台灣的
民主黨的一個完美縮影，像是the Cato@Liberty blog所提到的：

Hillary Clinton, the probably Democratic candidate for
president, is a perfect example [of reluctant Democratic
support for Taiwan], as this note from the Cato@Liberty
blog notes:

在這段出自外交政策雜誌的影片中，卡內基國際和平基金會的學者
Michael Swaine聊到他和希拉蕊曾有的一段談話。在那段談話中，
希拉蕊暗示了一些差不多是「要想『美國人會支持大陸對台灣開戰
』是很離譜的事。」

In this video from Foreign Policy magazine, Carnegie
Endowment for International Peace scholar Michael Swaine
talks about a conversation he had with Hillary Clinton. In
it, he said, Hillary had intimated something along the
lines of “it is absurd to think that the American people
would support a war with China over Taiwan.”

希拉蕊之後試圖要收回這段話（但是顯然受挫於前面提到的影片）
，但從金融時報上的文章裡，她對這段影片的回覆看來，這很難說
成她是支持台灣的：

Clinton later attempted to retract the statement (and had
it stricken from the aforementioned video), but as this
article from the Financial Times about her response to the
video notes, that hardly means she is pro-Taiwan:

現任的民主黨提名總統候選人希拉蕊柯林頓星期四說了，她支持美
國的政策繼續不明確表態是否要在台海衝突時保護台灣。

Hillary Clinton, the frontrunner for the Democratic
presidential nomination, on Thursday said she supported the
US policy of maintaining “ambiguity” over whether
Washington would defend Taiwan in a conflict with China.

共和黨的勝利者約翰馬侃早已回應過這件事，省了我力氣。2000年，
當問到「如果台灣要宣佈從中國獨立，你會試著阻止他們嗎？」時，
馬侃說：

John McCain, the Republican victor, already responded to
this meme, saving me the effort. From 2000, in response to
the question, “If Taiwan moves towards declaring
independence from China, would you try and stop them?”,
McCain said:

當然我會，政策上一直有著戰略考慮上的含糊處，但是當柯林頓去了
中國並稱中國人為戰略夥伴的時候，他破壞了這個政策。他破壞了含
糊中微妙的平衡，這導致了現在很多的問題。當然我會對台灣人說，
他們應該注意到訴求和平統一的一個中國政策。

Of course I would. There has been “strategic ambiguity,”
 but [Bill] Clinton destroyed that policy, when he went to
China and called the Chinese his strategic partner. He
destroyed the delicate balance of ambiguity, which is
causing many of these problems now. Of course I would tell
the Taiwanese that they should observe the one China policy
which calls for peaceful reunification.

然而，馬侃對一個「一個中國」的解釋是非常順應台灣的—他明確地
點出統一只能從台灣角度出發：

However, McCain’s interpretation of the “one China” is
very deferential to Taiwan - he makes clear reunification
will only happen on Taiwan’s terms:

我們堅定相信，台灣若要跟大陸統一，只能以和平的手段，同時台灣
的人民也想要統一才行。在那之前，我們會繼續保護他們。

We will continue our steadfast belief that Taiwan will only
be reunited to China if it’s done in a peaceful manner and
the people of Taiwan desire to do so. Until then, we will
protect them.

明顯地，馬侃對於現下的台海情勢懂得不少。幾乎每一次當他講到中
國，他都會提到中國的飛彈，而且對於台灣的民主他也讚譽有佳。以
下是一段他去年的談話，節錄於他的競選網站：

McCain clearly knows a lot about the situation. He mentions
China’s missiles almost every time he talks about China,
and he is very complementary about Taiwan’s democracy.
From his campaign website is this speech excerpt from last
year:

我們看到台灣的成功，他們的人民已經不是生活在一黨獨大之下。對
於美國幫助台灣進入APEC和WTO的事，我感到很開心。看這樣生氣勃勃
的民主面對無數安全上的考驗也同樣給人啟發。我們必須要非常明確
地向中國領導者表態說，他們企圖要在國際上、或是用武力迫使孤立
台灣的想法是非常不明智的，必須不讓台灣政府陷於無謂的危機中。
近900枚飛彈對準台灣、通過法律以授權對台灣的動武、以及持續訓練
水陸搶灘這些事，若要說服全世界中國是和平崛起，這些並不是審慎
的手段。

We see such a success story in Taiwan, whose people no
longer comprise a one-party state. I am pleased that the
United States helped bring Taiwan into APEC and the World
Trade Organization, and it is inspiring to see this vibrant
democracy deal with its numerous security challenges. And
while the government of Taiwan must not needlessly
precipitate a crisis, we have to make clear to China’s
leaders that attempts to isolate Taiwan internationally or
militarily coerce it are unwise. Pointing nearly 900
missiles at Taiwan, passing laws authorize force against
the island, and continually practicing amphibious landings
are not prudent ways to convince the world of China’s
peaceful rise.

真好。我想對於台灣而言，在現在主要的競選人中，我不認為說他是
最佳人選會得到任何異議。

Awesome. I don’t think there’s any question that of all
the major candidates he would be the best for Taiwan.

如果就我個人看來，原先當我開始這個小小比較時，我就知道馬侃會
勝出了，但對於他的偏好，也有太多讓人印象深刻的證據了。他看起
來對於台灣和台灣的民主非常了解，對於中國的威脅他也一樣了解。

On a personal note, I already knew McCain would come out
the best in this little comparison when I started it, but
the volume of evidence in his favor is pretty impressive.
He seems very well informed about Taiwan and its democracy,
as well as the Chinese threat.

所以我很為難。當我看到共和黨如何背棄了小政府和人身自由的觀念
後，我已經對自己發誓了，這次選舉我不可能投給一個共和黨人。但
另一方面，無疑地台灣對我個人來說更是重要的論述（想到我是住在
這裡）

And so I’m torn. I had promised myself there was no way I
would vote for a Republican this election after seeing how
the party has betrayed the idea of small government and
personal liberty, but on the other hand, there’s no
question Taiwan is the biggest issue for me personally
(seeing as how I live here and all).

在這個論述上，馬侃完全是傲視群雄。更重要的是，在他堅定反對折
磨移民並且支持移民的這件事上，是對於共和黨的厭惡中的一個特例
。我仍然覺得我會先選擇歐巴馬—我覺得他給出的訊息對於美國是正
確的，雖然我並非同意他全部的政策—但馬侃絕對是我選擇的第二順
位。

On this issue, McCain simply blows away everyone else in
the field. Moreover, his steadfast opposition to torture
and support of immigration are heartening exceptions to
Republican hate. I still think I’d choose Obama first - I
think his message is the right one for America at his time,
even if I don’t agree with all of his policies - but
McCain is now definitely my second choice.

--

若這篇有侵權，請版主幫我D掉，或是通知我自d。thx!

--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 140.122.212.17
※ 編輯: cornflower      來自: 140.122.212.17       (03/12 08:13)
推 nplnt:辛苦了
推 swallow73:推貼心的翻譯,不過倒數第二句我覺得譯錯了,那句我想應該
→ swallow73:是即使我不見得同意他所有的政策
感謝，已訂正:)
→ swallow73:至於grasp defeat from the jaws of victory我goole了一
→ swallow73:下這個詞的用法,我覺得這意思不是指Obama意外輸掉NH
→ swallow73:意思是指即使Obama是能夠帶領民主黨贏的大選的人選,他們
→ swallow73:卻選擇了會導致敗選的Clinton女士
→ swallow73:至於倒鼠第二句我覺得譯錯的一個依據是這個人不投共和黨
→ swallow73:代表他反對保守派的政策,政治理念如此,作者反對Obama所
→ swallow73:有政策是不太可能的
推 swallow73:不過說HRC傳達的訊息跟現狀差不多，明明兩人政策相似度
→ swallow73:達75%，結果這位老兄認為一個是維持現狀，一個是希望，
→ swallow73:這不合理吧?
→ swallow73:要在這兩個人之間做選擇，與其說是政策路線的選擇
→ swallow73:倒不如說是不同個人特質間的選擇
※ 編輯: cornflower      來自: 140.122.212.17       (03/12 22:08)
推 McCain:我支持McCain果然是個正確的選擇