Jonas Gahr Støre: In defense of dialogue

譯者: Shin-Yuan Tzou 審譯者: Sean Chuang

Amongst all the troubling deficits we struggle with today --

在所有今日世人仍然必需去努力實現的種種令人憂心的缺點之中---

we think of financial and economic primarily --

我們認為金融和經濟是最根本主要的--

the ones that concern me most

但是我最關心的是

is the deficit of political dialogue --

是政治上對話的不足--

our ability to address modern conflicts

我們有能力應付現今的衝突

as they are,

實際上就是，

to go to the source of what they're all about

找到事情發生的原因

and to understand the key players

了解關鍵人物

and to deal with them.

再和他們打交道。

We who are diplomats,

這就是我們：這些外交官，

we are trained to deal with conflicts between states and issues between states.

我們受過訓練以應付國家之間的衝突及問題

And I can tell you, our agenda is full.

我可以告訴你們，我們的工作滿檔。

There is trade, there is disarmament,

工作內容有貿易，有裁減軍備，

there is cross-border relations.

有跨界關係。

But the picture is changing,

但是情勢一直在變，

and we are seeing that there are new key players

我們看見有新的關鍵人物

coming onto the scene.

一直跟著出現

We loosely call them "groups."

我們概括稱之為“集團”

They may represent social, religious,

他們可能是社會、宗教的代表

political, economic, military realities.

政治、經濟、軍事實相

And we struggle with how to deal with them.

我們為了如何應付他們而奮鬥

The rules of engagement:

交戰規則

how to talk, when to talk,

怎麼交談，什麼時候交談

and how to deal with them.

以及如何和他們打交道

Let me show you a slide here

容我在此放個幻燈片

which illustrates the character of conflicts

可以說明衝突的性質

since 1946 until today.

從1946年起一直到今天

You see the green

就是你看見的綠色部份

is a traditional interstate conflict,

是傳統的國家之間的衝突

the ones we used to read about.

也是我們習慣看到的

The red is modern conflict,

紅色部份是現今的衝突

conflicts within states.

國家內部的衝突

These are quite different,

兩者是完全不同的

and they are outside the grasp

連現今的外交

of modern diplomacy.

都無法掌握

And the core of these key actors

這些關鍵參與者的核心

are groups

就是集團

who represent different interests

他們代表著國家內部

inside countries.

不同的利益

And the way they deal with their conflicts rapidly spreads to other countries.

他們處理衝突的方式迅速蔓延到其他國家

So in a way, it is everybody's business.

所以，在某種程度上而言，這是攸關眾人之事

Another acknowledgment we've seen during these years,

另一件我們這幾年所見印證的事

recent years,

近幾年

is that very few

就是極少數的

of these domestic interstate, intrastate conflicts

國內的州際之間、州內的衝突

can be solved militarily.

可以用軍事來解決

They may have to be dealt with with military means,

他們處理時可能會涉及軍事

but they cannot be solved by military means.

但是不能用軍事手段來解決

They need political solutions.

他們需要用到政治解決方案

And we, therefore, have a problem,

而且我們，有個問題

because they escape traditional diplomacy.

因為他們脫離了傳統外交

And we have among states

所以許多國家

a reluctance in dealing with them.

都不願和他們打交道

Plus, during the last decade,

再加上，過去的10年間

we've been in the mode

我們一直處於這種模式

where dealing with groups

就是和集團打交道

was conceptually and politically dangerous.

在觀念上及政治上都極其危險

After 9/11,

911之後

either you were with us or against us.

非敵即友

It was black or white.

非黑即白

And groups are very often

小集團時而有之

immediately label terrorists.

很快地就被貼上恐怖份子的標籤

And who would talk to terrorists?

誰要和恐怖份子談話?

The West, as I would see it,

西方，就像我看到的

comes out of that decade weakened,

擺脫了虛弱的十年

because we didn't understand the group.

因為我們對集團不了解

So we've spent more time

所以我們花了更多的時間

on focusing on why we should not talk to others

在為什麼我們不應該和別人談話上

than finding out how we talk to others.

比找出我們如何和別人交談還多

Now I'm not naive.

現在我不是白癡

You cannot talk to everybody all the time.

你不能一直在和別人交談

And there are times you should walk.

有時候你該站起來走出去

And sometimes military intervention is necessary.

所以有時候軍事干預是必要的

I happen to believe that Libya was necessary

我碰巧認為利比亞是必要的

and that military intervention in Afghanistan was also necessary.

在阿富汗的軍事干預也是必要的

And my country relies on its security

我的國家重視安全感

through military alliance, that's clear.

透過軍事聯盟，這很明顯

But still we have a large deficit

但是我們還是有一個很大的落差

in dealing with and understanding modern conflict.

在處理和了解現今的衝突上

Let us turn to Afghanistan.

讓我們再來談談阿富汗

10 years after that military intervention,

在軍事介入的10年之後

that country is far from secure.

那個國家已很不安全了

The situation, to be honest, is very serious.

這種情況，老實說，非常嚴重

Now again, the military is necessary,

所以現在再說一次，軍事是必要的

but the military is no problem-solver.

但是軍事不是用來解決問題的

When I first came to Afghanistan in 2005 as a foreign minister,

當我於2005年以外交部長的身份第一次到阿富汗時

I met the commander of ISAF,

我與駐阿富汗國際安全援助部隊的指揮官碰面

the international troops.

是個國際部隊

And he told me that, "This can be won militarily, minister.

他告訴我：這是一支勝算在握的軍隊，部長

We just have to persevere."

我們只需堅持不懈。”

Now four COM ISAF's later,

現在換了四位國際救援部隊指揮官之後

we hear a different message:

我們又聽到了不同的訊息

"This cannot be won militarily.

這不是穩操勝算的軍隊

We need military presence,

我們需要軍事存在

but we need to move to politics.

但是我們必需移向政治

We can only solve this through a political solution.

我們只能透過政治來解決

And it is not us who will solve it;

而且不是我們來解決

Afghans have to solve it."

必需阿富汗自己來解決

But then they need a different political process

但到那時候他們需要的是個不一樣的政治過程

than the one they were given in 2001, 2002.

而不是他們在2001年及2002年所得到的

They need an inclusive process

他們需要的是一種包容性的進程

where the real fabric of this very complicated society

在那裏，這個相當複雜社會的實際結構

can deal with their issues.

可以處理他們的問題

Everybody seems to agree with that.

每個人似乎都同意

It was very controversial to say three, four, five years ago.

3,4,5年前談起來還頗有爭議

Now everybody agrees.

現在大家都同意了

But now, as we prepare to talk,

但是現在，我們準備談談的是

we understand how little we know.

我們發現我們所知的不多

Because we didn't talk.

因為我們不跟人交談

We didn't grasp what was going on.

我們不了解到底是怎麼回事

The International Committee of the Red Cross, the ICRC,

國際紅十字會

is talking to everyone,

和每個人交談

and it is doing so because it is neutral.

是因為立場中立所以這樣做

And that's one reason why

這是其中一個原因為什麼

that organization probably

那個機構可能

is the best informed key player

是消息了解現今衝突

to understand modern conflict --

消息最靈通的關鍵人物--

because they talk.

因為他們與人交談

My point is that you don't have to be neutral to talk.

我的重點是你不是一定要立場中立才與人交談

And you don't have to agree

你也不必贊成對方的觀點

when you sit down with the other side.

當你和對方一起坐下來時。

And you can always walk.

你可以一直進行談話

But if you don't talk,

但是如果你不與人交談

you can't engage the other side.

你就不能加入對方

And the other side which you're going to engage

而你想加入的對方

is the one with whom you profoundly disagree.

是你極度唱反調的一方

Prime Minister Rabin said when he engaged the Oslo process,

拉賓總理說當他參與奧斯陸和平進程時，

"You don't make peace with your friends,

“你不是和你朋友和平相處，

you make peace with your enemies."

而是和敵人同床共枕

It's hard, but it is necessary.

很難，但是必要

Let me go one step further.

容我再進一步說

This is Tahrir Square.

這是塔里爾廣場

There's a revolution going on.

有場革命將發生

The Arab Spring is heading into fall

阿拉伯之春的熱火

and is moving into winter.

持續到秋天冬天

It will last for a long, long time.

會持續很長很長的一段時間

And who knows what it will be called in the end.

有誰知道它最終將被稱為什麼

That's not the point.

這不是重點

The point is that we are probably seeing,

重點是我們可能看到

for the first time in the history of the Arab world,

阿拉伯世界歷史上的第一次

a revolution bottom-up --

一場自下而上的革命

people's revolution.

人民的革命

Social groups are taking to the streets.

社會集團走上街頭

And we find out in the West

我們發現在西方

that we know very little about what's happening.

我們對於發生的事所知甚少

Because we never talk to the people in these countries.

因為我們從不和這些國家的人民交談

Most governments followed

大部份政府遵守

the dictate of the authoritarian leaders

獨裁主義領導人的命令規定

to stay away from these different groups,

就是遠離這些各種不同的集團

because they were terrorists.

因為他們曾是恐怖份子

So now that they are emerging in the street

所以現在他們出現在街頭

and we salute the democratic revolution,

我們讚揚民主革命

we find out how little we know.

我們發現我們所知竟如此之少

Right now, the discussion goes,

就是現在，討論下去

"Should we talk to the Muslim Brotherhood?

我們是不是應該和穆斯林弟兄會交談?

Should we talk to Hamas?

我們是不是應該和哈瑪斯交談?

If we talk to them, we may legitimize them."

如果我們和他們交談，就是承認他們合法

I think that is wrong.

我覺得這是不對的

If you talk in the right way, you make it very clear

如果用正確的方式交談，你非常明白

that talking is not agreeing.

這樣的交談是不被同意的

And how can we tell the Muslim Brotherhood,

而且我們要怎樣才能告訴穆斯林弟兄會?

as we should,

就像我們應該告訴他們一樣

that they must respect minority rights,

他們必需尊重少數人的權利

if we don't accept majority rights?

如果我們不接受多數人的權利?

Because they may turn out to be a majority.

因為他們可能變成多數人

How can we escape [having] a double-standard,

我們怎能避免雙重標準?

if we at the same time preach democracy

如果我們同時宣揚民主

and at the same time

然而

don't want to deal with the groups that are representative?

又不想和具有代表性的集團打交道

How will we ever be interlocutors?

我們如何永遠做個談話對象?

Now my diplomats are instructed

所以現在教我的外交官被教導

to talk to all these groups.

要和所有這樣的集團交談

But talking can be done in different ways.

但是談話有各種不同的方式

We make a distinction between talking from a diplomatic level

我們從外交層面的談話

and talking at the political level.

以及政治層面的談話做個區分

Now talking can be accompanied with aid or not with aid.

現在談話分成有援助也有沒有援助的

Talking can be accompanied with inclusion or not inclusion.

也分成有內容的也有沒有內容的

There's a big array

有一大批

of the ways of dealing with this.

處理這些問題的方式

So if we refuse

所以如果我們拒絕

to talk to these new groups

與這些今後幾年將主導新聞

that are going to be dominating the news in years to come,

的新集團談話

we will further radicalization,

我們將更激進化

I believe.

我相信

We will make the road from violent activities into politics

我們將使這條路從暴力活動進入政治活動

harder to travel.

更難以行進

And if we cannot demonstrate to these groups

如果我們無法向這些集團證明

that if you move towards democracy,

如果你向民主妥協

if you move towards taking part

如果你走向參與

in civilized and normal standards among states,

國家之間的文明及正常標準

there are some rewards on the other side.

對方會有回報的

The paradox here

這裏有個自相矛盾的議論

is that the last decade probably was a lost decade

就是最後的這十年完全沒有進展

for making progress on this.

是個失去的十年

And the paradox is that the decade before the last decade was so promising --

而自相矛盾的議論就是十年前到二十年前中間這段時間相當有前景

and for one reason primarily.

主要的原因之一

And the reason is what happened in South Africa:

原因就是在南非發生的事

Nelson Mandela.

尼爾遜 曼德拉

When Mandela came out of prison

當曼德拉在27年的牢獄之災之後

after 27 years of captivity,

從牢裏被放出來的時候

if he had told his people,

如果他告訴國民

"It's time to take up the arms,

“拿起武器的時候到了，

it's time to fight,"

作戰的時候到了，”

he would have been followed.

就會有人聽他的話

And I think the international community

而且我想國際社會

would have said, "Fair enough.

會說，“很好。

It's their right to fight."

他們有權開戰

Now as you know, Mandela didn't do that.

現在如你所知，曼德拉並未如此做

In his memoirs, "Long Road to Freedom,"

在他的回憶錄“漫漫自由路”中

he wrote that he survived

他寫道他活在

during those years of captivity

牢獄之中的這些年

because he always decided to look upon his oppressor

因為他總是決定將壓迫他的人

as also being a human being,

也看做是個人

also being a human being.

也視為一個人

So he engaged a political process of dialogue,

所以他參與了一個政治對話進程

not as a strategy of the weak,

不是弱者的戰略

but as a strategy of the strong.

而是強者的戰略

And he engaged talking profoundly

而且他從事深入交談

by settling some of the most tricky issues

透過解決一些最棘手的問題

through a truth and reconciliation process

憑藉著真相及和解的進程

where people came and talked.

人們來到這裏而且交談著

Now South African friends will know

現在南非的朋友會知道

that was very painful.

那很痛苦

So what can we learn from all of this?

所以我們從這一切中學到了什麼?

Dialogue is not easy --

對話並不簡單

not between individuals, not between groups, not between governments --

不管於人與人之間，集團與集團之間，政府與政府之間

but it is very necessary.

它都是非常必要的

If we're going to deal with political conflict-solving of conflicts,

如果我們要解決政治上的衝突

if we're going to understand these new groups

如果我們要了解這些新團體

which are coming from bottom-up,

這些事都是從下至上、從細節到總體、從個別到全貌而來的

supported by technology, which is available to all,

有科技資助，每個人都會知道

we diplomats cannot be sitting back in the banquets

我們做外交官的總不能在宴會時坐在後方

believing that we are doing interstate relations.

然後就相信我們正在做國際關係

We have to connect

我們必需拉攏

with these profound changes.

這些深刻改變的關係

And what is dialogue really about?

而對話的真意為何?

When I enter into dialogue,

當我和他人交談時

I really hope that the other side

我真誠的希望對方

would pick up my points of view,

能抓到我的觀點

that I would impress upon them

我就會讓他們留下深刻的印象

my opinions and my values.

我的意見和我的價值觀

I cannot do that

但是我不能做這樣的事

unless I send the signals that I will be open

除非我示意我會公開地表示

to listen to the other side's signals.

我一直都會注意你的暗示

We need a lot more training on how to do that

我們需要更多如何做到這一點的訓練

and a lot more practice

以及更多的練習

on how that can take problem-solving forward.

在如何將解決問題推展開來

We know from our personal experiences

我們從自己體驗中知道

that it's easy sometimes

它有時候很容易

just to walk,

就只是走出去

and sometimes you may need to fight.

有時候卻需要開戰

And I wouldn't say that is the wrong thing in all circumstances.

我不會說在所有情況下那都是件錯事

Sometimes you have to.

因為有時候你必需這樣做

But that strategy seldom takes you very far.

但那策略不會花你太多時間

The alternative is a strategy

換個方式也是

of engagement and principled dialogue.

作戰和有原則對話的策略

And I believe we need to strengthen this approach

而且我相信我們必需鞏固這個方法

in modern diplomacy,

在現今的外交上

not only between states,

不只是國與國之間

but also within states.

也是國家內部間

We are seeing some new signs.

我們看見一些新的跡象

We could never have done

我們永遠無法完成

the convention against anti-personnel landmines

反對殺傷性地雷的協定

and the convention that is banning cluster munitions

以及禁止大規模軍火彈藥的協定

unless we had done diplomacy differently,

除非我們完成了不同的外交

by engaging with civil society.

透過與民間社會銜接

All of a sudden,

忽然間

NGOs were not only standing in the streets, crying their slogans,

非政府組織不是只站在街頭，為他們的口號哭泣，

but they were taking [them] into the negotiations,

而且還將它們帶入協商中

partly because they represented the victims of these weapons.

部份因為他們是這些武器犧牲者的代表

And they brought their knowledge.

而且還帶來了他們的知識

And there was an interaction

在外交和從下而上的力量之間

between diplomacy and the power coming bottom-up.

互相影響

This is perhaps a first element

這可能是改變的

of a change.

第一個因素

In the future, I believe,

未來，我相信

we should draw examples from these different illustrations,

我們應該從這些不同的實例中找出範例

not to have diplomacy

但不包括外交

which is disconnected from people and civil society.

因為外交脫離了人民及民間社會

And we have to go also

我們也必需

beyond traditional diplomacy

超越傳統外交

to the survival issue of our times,

來到我們這個時代的生存問題

climate change.

趨勢的改變

How are we going to solve climate change through negotiations,

我們如何透過談判來解決趨勢的改變?

unless we are able to make civil society and people,

除非我們能使民間社會及人民

not part of the problem, but part of the solution?

不是問題的一部份，而是解決方案的一部份。

It is going to demand an inclusive process of diplomacy

這就是要求一個外交的包括性的進程

very different from the one we are practicing today

與今日實行的大不相同

as we are heading to new rounds of difficult climate negotiations,

因為我們正朝著困難趨勢談判的新一輪邁進

but when we move toward something

但是當我們接近某件事情的時候

which has to be much more

它就應該更加

along a broad mobilization.

順著廣泛的調動

It's crucial to understand, I believe,

了解這一點很重要，我相信

because of technology and because of globalization,

因為科技也因為全球化

societies from bottom-up.

從下而上的社會

We as diplomats

我們身為外交家

need to know the social capital

需要了解共同社會的

of communities.

社會資本

What is it that makes people trust each other,

是什麼使得人們互相信任彼此

not only between states,

不只是國與國之間

but also within states?

也是國家內部

What is the legitimacy of diplomacy,

什麼是外交的合法性?

of the the solution we devise as diplomats

什麼是我們身為外交官所制定的解決方案的合法性?

if they cannot be reflected and understood

如果合法性不能也透過社會上更廣泛的力量

by also these broader forces of societies

來反省及了解

that we now very loosely call groups?

我們現在又如何能概括的稱之為團體?

The good thing is that we are not powerless.

好事是我們並非無能為力

We have never had

而是我們從來沒有

as many means of communication,

許多溝通的方法

means of being connected, means of reaching out,

連結的方法，求助的方法

means of including.

包括各種方法

The diplomatic toolbox

外交工具箱

is actually full of different tools we can use

實際上有很多我們可以使用的各種不同的工具

to strengthen our communication.

來強化我們彼此間的溝通

But the problem is that we are coming out of a decade

但問題是未來的十年裏

where we had a fear of touching it.

很怕用到它

Now, I hope, in the coming years,

現在，我希望，在來年

that we are able to demonstrate through some concrete examples

我們能夠透過一些具體的範例來證明

that fear is receding

恐懼消退

and that we can take courage

我們可以

from that alliance

從聯盟中

with civil society

和不同國家中的

in different countries

公民社會拿出勇氣

to support their problem-solving,

去支持他們解決

among the Afghans,

阿富汗人之間

inside the Palestinian population,

巴勒斯坦人口之內

between the peoples of Palestine and Israel.

在巴勒斯坦和以色列人民之間的問題

And as we try to understand this broad movement

而隨著我們試著了解這廣泛的調動時

across the Arab world,

只要跨越阿拉伯世界

we are not powerless.

我們就不是毫無力量

We need to improve the necessary skills,

我們必需改進必要的技能

and we need the courage to use them.

我們需要勇氣來使用他們

In my country,

在我的國家裏

I have seen how the council of Islamist groups

我看到伊斯蘭集團的協調會

and Christian groups

及基督教集團

came together, not as a government initiative,

是怎麼一起來的，不是政府提倡的

but they came together on their own initiative

而是出於自願的一起來

to establish contact and dialogue

來建立接觸及對話

in times where things were pretty low-key tension.

在事情低調、不緊繃的時機下

And when tension increased,

當張力增加

they already had that dialogue,

他們已經交談過了

and that was a strength to deal with different issues.

那是一種處理不同問題的力量

Our modern Western societies

我們現今西方社會

are more complex than before,

比以前更複雜

in this time of migration.

在這個遷移的時代

How are we going to settle and build a bigger "We"

我們如何解決且建立一個更大的“我們”

to deal with our issues

來處理我們的問題

if we don't improve our skills of communication?

如果不改善我們的溝通技巧?

So there are many reasons,

所以有許多原因

and for all of these reasons,

而且為了這些原因

this is time and this is why we must talk.

是我們為何一定要交談的時機到了 ，也是理由

Thank you for your attention.

謝謝來參加

(Applause)

鼓掌