The United Nations’ founders understood that decisions affecting war and peace should happen only by consensus, and with America’s consent the veto by Security Council permanent members was enshrined in the United Nations Charter. The profound wisdom of this has underpinned the stability of international relations for decades.
聯合國的創立者知道，關於戰爭與和平的決定隻應該在各國達成一致的情況下做出，而且美國也同意，安理會(Security Council)常任理事國的否決權是受到聯合國憲章(United Nations Charter)保護的。這種做法所蘊含的深刻智慧，數十年來為國際關係的穩定提供了保證。
No one wants the United Nations to suffer the fate of the League of Nations, which collapsed because it lacked real leverage. This is possible if influential countries bypass the United Nations and take military action without Security Council authorization.
沒人希望聯合國會步國際聯盟(League of Nations)的後塵。後者之所以會崩潰，就是因為缺乏真正的影響力。倘若較有影響力的國家不理會聯合國的態度，在未經安理會授權的情況下采取軍事行動，這種情況就有可能發生。
The potential strike by the United States against Syria, despite strong opposition from many countries and major political and religious leaders, including the pope, will result in more innocent victims and escalation, potentially spreading the conflict far beyond Syria’s borders. A strike would increase violence and unleash a new wave of terrorism. It could undermine multilateral efforts to resolve the Iranian nuclear problem and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and further destabilize the Middle East and North Africa. It could throw the entire system of international law and order out of balance.
美國提出打擊敘利亞之後，遭到了很多國家及主要政治和宗教領袖的強烈反對，其中還包括教皇。倘若發動襲擊，就將出現更多的無辜受害者，而且還會加劇局勢的緊張程度，很可能會使衝突遠遠超出敘利亞的範圍。襲擊將增加暴力衝突，催生新一輪的恐怖主義。它很可能會對致力於解決伊朗核問題以及巴以衝突的多邊行動構成危害，加劇中東和北非的動蕩，也可能會使國際法和國際秩序的整個體係失去平衡。
Syria is not witnessing a battle for democracy, but an armed conflict between government and opposition in a multireligious country. There are few champions of democracy in Syria. But there are more than enough Qaeda fighters and extremists of all stripes battling the government. The United States State Department has designated Al Nusra Front and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, fighting with the opposition, as terrorist organizations. This internal conflict, fueled by foreign weapons supplied to the opposition, is one of the bloodiest in the world.
敘利亞的戰爭不是為了民主，而是一個多宗教國家的政府和反對派之間的武裝衝突。在敘利亞，民主的倡導者少之又少。但是，那裏有很多基地組織(Qaeda)的武裝分子和各種各樣的極端主義者在與政府對抗。美國國務院(State Department)已經認定，與反對派一同作戰的努斯拉陣線(Al Nusra Front)和伊拉克與黎凡特伊斯蘭國(Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant)是恐怖組織。敘利亞的這場內部衝突，在外國為反對派提供武器的情況下，成了世界上最血腥的一場衝突。
Mercenaries from Arab countries fighting there, and hundreds of militants from Western countries and even Russia, are an issue of our deep concern. Might they not return to our countries with experience acquired in Syria? After all, after fighting in Libya, extremists moved on to Mali. This threatens us all.
在那裏作戰的有來自阿拉伯國家的雇傭兵，以及來自西方國家乃至俄羅斯的數百名武裝分子，這是我們極為擔憂的問題。他們會不會帶著從敘利亞獲得的經驗回到我們的國家呢？畢竟，那些在利比亞作戰的極端分子後來就轉戰到了馬裏。這對我們所有人造成了威脅。
From the outset, Russia has advocated peaceful dialogue enabling Syrians to develop a compromise plan for their own future. We are not protecting the Syrian government, but international law. We need to use the United Nations Security Council and believe that preserving law and order in today’s complex and turbulent world is one of the few ways to keep international relations from sliding into chaos. The law is still the law, and we must follow it whether we like it or not. Under current international law, force is permitted only in self-defense or by the decision of the Security Council. Anything else is unacceptable under the United Nations Charter and would constitute an act of aggression.
從一開始，俄羅斯就提倡通過和平對話，讓敘利亞人為本國的未來製定一個妥協計劃。我們並不是在保護敘利亞政府，而是在保護國際法。我們應該利用聯合國安理會，並且相信，在當今複雜而動蕩的世界中，為法律和秩序提供保護是為數不多的能防止國際關係陷入混亂的途徑之一。法律還是法律，不管喜不喜歡，我們都必須遵守它。根據現有的國際法，隻有在出於自衛或得到安理會授權的情況下，才能使用武力。根據聯合國憲章，其他任何情況都是無法接受的，而且還會構成侵略。
No one doubts that poison gas was used in Syria. But there is every reason to believe it was used not by the Syrian Army, but by opposition forces, to provoke intervention by their powerful foreign patrons, who would be siding with the fundamentalists. Reports that militants are preparing another attack — this time against Israel — cannot be ignored.
沒人懷疑敘利亞發生了毒氣襲擊。但我們有很多理由相信，使用毒氣的不是敘利亞軍隊，而是反對派，他們這樣做是為了使他們力量強大的外國金主開始插手幹預，而金主們會去支持那些原教旨主義者。有消息稱，這些武裝分子正在準備另一場襲擊——這次是針對以色列的，對此我們不能掉以輕心。
It is alarming that military intervention in internal conflicts in foreign countries has become commonplace for the United States. Is it in America’s long-term interest? I doubt it. Millions around the world increasingly see America not as a model of democracy but as relying solely on brute force, cobbling coalitions together under the slogan “you’re either with us or against us.”
令人擔憂的是，對其他國家的內部衝突進行軍事幹預已經成為了美國的常態。這符合美國的長期利益嗎？我很懷疑。世界各地有很多人越來越覺得，美國不是一個民主的榜樣，而是隻知一味訴諸野蠻的武力，打著“非友即敵”的口號拉幫結派。
But force has proved ineffective and pointless. Afghanistan is reeling, and no one can say what will happen after international forces withdraw. Libya is divided into tribes and clans. In Iraq the civil war continues, with dozens killed each day. In the United States, many draw an analogy between Iraq and Syria, and ask why their government would want to repeat recent mistakes.
然而武力經證明是無效和無意義的。阿富汗舉步維艱，誰也不知道等多國部隊撤離後會發生什麽。利比亞已經分裂為許多部落和宗派。伊拉克的內戰還在持續，每天數十人喪生。在美國，很多人把伊拉克和敘利亞相提並論，他們問政府，為什麽要重複不久前剛犯下的錯誤。
No matter how targeted the strikes or how sophisticated the weapons, civilian casualties are inevitable, including the elderly and children, whom the strikes are meant to protect.
不管打擊目標多麽明確，武器多麽精良，平民傷亡是不可避免的，這其中包括老人和孩子，那些本想通過打擊行動來保護的人。
The world reacts by asking: if you cannot count on international law, then you must find other ways to ensure your security. Thus a growing number of countries seek to acquire weapons of mass destruction. This is logical: if you have the bomb, no one will touch you. We are left with talk of the need to strengthen nonproliferation, when in reality this is being eroded.
世界的反應是一個疑問：如果你不能指望國際法，那你隻能找別的途徑來確保自己的安全。這樣一來，越來越多的國家會去嚐試獲得大規模殺傷性武器。這很合理：你手上有原子彈，就沒人敢動你。我們一邊說著需要加強武器不擴散，卻又在現實中削弱相關努力。
We must stop using the language of force and return to the path of civilized diplomatic and political settlement.
我們一定不能再用武力說話，要回到文明的外交和政治和解途徑上來
A new opportunity to avoid military action has emerged in the past few days. The United States, Russia and all members of the international community must take advantage of the Syrian government’s willingness to place its chemical arsenal under international control for subsequent destruction. Judging by the statements of President Obama, the United States sees this as an alternative to military action.
在過去幾天裏出現了一個避免軍事行動的新機遇。敘利亞現在願意把自己的化學武器交給國際社會管理，並最終予以銷毀，美國、俄羅斯以及國際社會全體成員一定要充分利用這一點。從奧巴馬總統的聲明看，美國看到了軍事行動以外的途徑。
I welcome the president’s interest in continuing the dialogue with Russia on Syria. We must work together to keep this hope alive, as we agreed to at the Group of 8 meeting in Lough Erne in Northern Ireland in June, and steer the discussion back toward negotiations.
在過去幾天裏出現了一個避免軍事行動的新機遇。敘利亞現在願意把自己的化學武器交給國際社會管理，並最終予以銷毀，美國、俄羅斯以及國際社會全體成員一定要充分利用這一點。從奧巴馬總統的聲明看，美國看到了軍事行動以外的途徑。
If we can avoid force against Syria, this will improve the atmosphere in international affairs and strengthen mutual trust. It will be our shared success and open the door to cooperation on other critical issues.
如果我們能避免對敘利亞動武，國際事務的氛圍將得到改善，相互信任得到加強。那將是我們共同的勝利，為其他危急問題打開合作之門。
My working and personal relationship with President Obama is marked by growing trust. I appreciate this. I carefully studied his address to the nation on Tuesday. And I would rather disagree with a case he made on American exceptionalism, stating that the United States’ policy is “what makes America different. It’s what makes us exceptional.” It is extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional, whatever the motivation. There are big countries and small countries, rich and poor, those with long democratic traditions and those still finding their way to democracy. Their policies differ, too. We are all different, but when we ask for the Lord’s blessings, we must not forget that God created us equal.
我和奧巴馬總統在工作和私人往來中正在建立起信任。對此我是珍惜的。我仔細研讀了他在周二對國民發表的講話。我非常不同意他就美國卓異主義進行的闡述，聲稱是美國的政策“讓美國與眾不同，讓我們卓爾不群”。鼓勵國民把自己看作一個卓異的群體，無論動機為何都是極端危險的。這世上有大國有小國，有富國和窮國，有的擁有悠久的民主傳統，有的還在摸索通往民主的道路。它們的政策也是不同的。我們都是不同的，但是當我們祈求神的福佑時，我們一定不能忘記上帝創造了我們，所有人生而平等。
