The War in Ukraine Could Change Everything | Yuval Noah Harari | TED

譯者: Lilian Chiu 審譯者: Thomas Tam

Bruno Giussani: We are at the end of day six of the war in Ukraine

布魯諾‧朱薩尼：烏克蘭的戰爭 即將邁入第七天，

or, more correctly, of the Russian invasion of Ukraine,

或者，更正確的說法， 是俄羅斯侵略烏克蘭的戰爭，

launched on February 24 by President Vladimir Putin.

是在二月二十四日， 由俄羅斯總統普丁發起。

We are all shocked and saddened by the events

這些事件以及其帶給人類的苦難，

and by the human suffering they are causing.

讓我們大家都很震驚和難過。

And as we speak, really,

且，真的，就在此時，

a Russian military convoy is headed towards Kyiv,

一支俄軍車隊正在朝基輔前進，

other Ukrainian cities are being bombarded,

其他烏克蘭城市正受到轟炸，

half a million Ukrainians have already fled to neighboring countries

已經有五十萬烏克蘭人

逃到鄰國，且還不只如此。

and much more.

It's still early days,

現在還是初期，

and it's difficult to predict how the situation will evolve

還很難預測情勢會怎麼發展，

even just in the next few hours.

連接下來幾小時會如何都很難說。

But this is a war that should concern everyone, everywhere.

但這場戰爭和每個人、 每個地方都有關。

And so today, in this TED Membership conversation,

今天，在這場 TED 會員 談話節目中，

we want to try to give it a broader context with our guest,

我們希望能請我們的來賓 提供更廣泛的背景資訊：

historian and author, Yuval Noah Harari.

歷史學家及作家 尤瓦爾‧諾亞‧哈拉里。

Yuval, welcome.

尤瓦爾，歡迎。

Yuval Noah Harari: Hello.

尤：哈囉。謝謝邀請我來。

Thank you for inviting me.

BG: I want to start from Ukraine itself and its 42 million people

布：我希望能先談談烏克蘭本身 及其四千兩百萬人民，

and its particular place between the East and the West.

以及它在東、西方之間的特殊位置。

What do we need to know about Ukraine

如果想要了解這場戰爭 和相關的利害關係，

to understand this war and what's at stake?

我們需要知道烏克蘭的哪些資訊？

YNH: The most crucial thing to know is that Ukrainians are not Russians,

尤：最重要的是要知道， 烏克蘭人不是俄羅斯人，

and that Ukraine is an ancient, independent nation.

且烏克蘭是一個古老、獨立的國家。

Ukraine has a history of more than a thousand years.

烏克蘭的歷史有超過一千年。

Kyiv was a major metropolis and cultural center

在莫斯科都還沒成為村落之前， 基輔就已經是個

when Moscow was not even a village.

大都市及文化中心了。

For most of these thousand years Kyiv was not ruled by Moscow.

這一千年中大部分的時間，

基輔都不是由莫斯科統治。

They were not part of the same political entity.

它們不屬於同一個政治實體。

For centuries, Kyiv was looking westwards

數世紀以來，基輔都在向西看，

and was a part of a union with Lithuania and Poland

和立陶宛及波蘭有結盟關係，

until it was eventually conquered and absorbed by the Russian Empire,

直到最終被俄羅斯帝國、

沙皇的帝國所征服、兼併。

by the czarist empire.

But even after that,

但，就連在那之後，

Ukrainians remained a separate people to a large extent,

烏克蘭人仍然大致上維持 是一個分開的民族，

and it's important to know that

知道這點十分重要，

because this is really what is at stake in this war.

因為這和這場戰爭的利害息息相關。

The key issue of the war,

戰爭的關鍵問題，至少對普丁總統來說，

at least for President Putin,

is whether Ukraine is an independent nation,

在於烏克蘭是否是個獨立的國家，

whether it is a nation at all.

甚至，它是不是個國家。

He has this fantasy that Ukraine isn't a nation,

他的幻想是：

烏克蘭不是國家，

that Ukraine is just a part of Russia,

烏克蘭只是俄羅斯的一部分，

that Ukrainians are Russians.

烏克蘭人就是俄羅斯人。

In his fantasy,

在他的幻想中，

Ukrainians are Russians that want to be back in the fold of Mother Russia,

烏克蘭人是想要回到

母親俄羅斯懷抱的俄羅斯人；

and that the only ones preventing it is a very small gang at the top,

只是在高層有一小群人 在阻擾這件事，

which he portrays as Nazis,

他把這群人描述為納粹，

even if the president is Jewish; but OK, a Nazi Jew.

即使總統是猶太人，但， 沒關係，就是納粹猶太人。

And his belief was, at least,

而他相信，至少以前相信，

that he just needs to invade,

他只要入侵，

Zelenskyy will flee,

澤倫斯基就會逃亡，

the government will collapse,

政府會垮台，

the army would lay down its arms,

軍隊會棄械投降，

and the Ukrainian people would welcome the Russian liberators,

而烏克蘭人會歡迎

俄羅斯這個救星，把花朵丟向他們。

throwing flowers on them.

And this fantasy has been shattered already.

而這個幻想已經被粉碎了。

Zelenskyy hasn’t fled,

澤倫斯基還沒有逃走，

the Ukrainian army is fighting.

烏克蘭軍隊在抵抗。

And the Ukrainian people is not throwing flowers on the Russian tanks,

而烏克蘭人民 丟向俄羅斯坦克的

it's throwing Molotov cocktails.

不是花朵而是汽油彈。

BG: So let's unpack that

布：咱們來解析一下， 也許一部分一部分來談。

and maybe take the different pieces one way one.

所以，烏克蘭在歷史上 有很長一段時間被支配、佔據。

So Ukraine has a long history of being dominated and occupied.

You mentioned the czar, but also the Soviet Union,

你剛提到在沙皇，還有蘇聯、

Hitler's armies.

希特勒軍隊的時期。

It also has a long history of mistrust of authority and of resistance,

它在歷史上也有很長一段時間 不信任當權者，進行反抗，

which goes some way to explain the current strong resistance

這多少能解釋目前俄羅斯遇到的

that the Russians are encountering.

強烈抵抗。

Anne Applebaum, the journalist, even suggests that this mistrust,

記者安妮‧阿普爾鮑姆 甚至認為這種不信任，

this resistance to authority,

這種對當權者的抗拒，

is the very essence of Ukraine-ness, do you agree?

就是烏克蘭的本質，你認同嗎？

YNH: We did see in the last 30 years Ukrainians twice rising in revolt

尤：在過去三十年我們確實看到 烏克蘭人兩度起義，

when there was a danger

當時狀況都是因為

of an authoritarian regime being established --

有獨裁政權即將建立的危機發生了——

once in 2004, once in 2013.

一次在 2004 年，一次在 2013 年。

And when I was in Kyiv a few years ago,

幾年前，我在基輔時，

what really struck me was this very strong feeling

讓我很震驚的是我能非常強烈感受到

of the desire for independence and for democracy.

他們對於獨立和民主的渴望。

我還記得我去參訪了博物館，

And I remember walking around this museum

of the Revolution of 2013-2014

2013-2014 革命的博物館，

and seeing these images, like these two elderly women

看到許多圖片，包括兩名年長女子，

who were bringing sandwiches to the demonstrators,

帶著三明治

去給示威者，給鬥士。

to the fighters.

她們無法丟石頭，她們無法做別的，

They couldn’t throw stones and they couldn’t do anything else,

so they prepared sandwiches

所以她們就做三明治，

and brought this huge tray full of sandwiches

把裝滿三明治的大盤子

to the demonstrators.

帶給示威者。

And this, yes, this is the kind of spirit

是的，就是這種精神

that inspires not just the Ukrainians

鼓舞了烏克蘭人，

but everybody who is now watching what is happening there.

及所有在關注那裡發生什麼事的人。

BG: Help me understand the actual nature of the threat here

布：幫我說明一下， 俄羅斯進入烏克蘭

in terms of Russia moving into Ukraine.

所帶來的威脅有什麼本質。

So in your last book, when you write about Russia,

在你的上一本書中，當你寫到俄羅斯時，

you describe the Russian model as: “not a coherent political ideology,

你把俄羅斯模式描述成：

「並非一致性的政治意識形態，

but rather a sort of practice of monopolizing power and wealth

而是一種壟斷權力和財富的做法，

by a small group at the top."

由上層的一小群人實行。」

But then, in his actions against Ukraine,

但，在對烏克蘭所採取的行動當中，

Putin in the last few weeks seems to move very much by an ideology,

在過去幾週，普丁似乎非常受一種

意識形態、帝國的意識形態，

an ideology of empire, of denial of Ukraine's right to exist,

如你剛才所言， 否認烏克蘭存在的權利。

as you mention.

What has changed in the four years since you wrote that book?

你寫那本書之後的四年間 發生了什麼改變？

YNH: The imperial dream was always there,

尤：帝國夢一直都在，

but you know, empires are often the creation

但，要知道，帝國通常是最上層

of a very small gang of people at the top.

非常小的一群人所創造出來的。

I don’t think the Russian people [are] interested in this war.

我不認為俄羅斯人民想打這場戰爭。

I don't think that the Russian people want to conquer Ukraine

我不認為俄羅斯人民 想要征服烏克蘭這個國家，

or to slaughter the citizens of Kyiv.

或者屠殺基輔的市民。

It's all coming from the top.

這都是最上層的命令。

So there is no change there.

所以，這方面並沒有改變。

I mean, when you look at the Soviet Union,

我的意思是，當你去看蘇聯時，

you can say that there was this mass ideology,

你可以說有一種大眾的意識形態，

which was shared by a large proportion, or some proportion, of the population.

人民有很大一部分都相信， 或至少某一部分人。

You don't see this now.

現在沒有這種現象。

You know, Russia is a very rich country,

要知道，俄羅斯是個非常富有、

資源豐富的國家，

rich in resources,

but most people are very poor.

但大部分人民都很貧窮， 他們的生活水準非常低，

Their standard of living is very, very low

because all the wealth and power is kind of sucked

因為所有的財富和權力

可說是都被最上層的人吸走了，

by the people at the top,

and very little is left for everybody else.

沒留下多少給其他人民。

So I don't think it's a society

所以我不認為在這個社會裡

where the masses are part of this kind of ideological project.

大眾會參與這種意識形態計畫。

They're being ruled from the top.

他們是受最上層的統治。

And you have this classic imperial situation,

這是一種典型的帝國情勢，

when the emperor,

當皇帝

which controls the largest country in the world,

控制了世界上最大的國家，

feels that, "Hey, this is not enough.

且他覺得：「嘿，這樣還不夠，

I need more."

我需要更多。」

And sends his army to capture,

派出他的軍隊去佔領，去擴展帝國。

to extend the empire.

BG: I said at the beginning

布：我一開始說過，

that it's difficult, of course, to make predictions.

當然，要做預測還很難。

But yesterday, you published an article in "The Guardian"

但昨天你在《衛報》寫了 一篇文章，標題是：

titled: “Why Putin has already lost this war.”

「為什麼普丁已經輸了這場戰爭」。

Please explain.

請跟我們說明。

YNH: Well, one thing should be very clear.

尤：有一點是很清楚的。

I don't mean to say

我的意思並不是

that he's going to suffer an immediate military defeat.

他的軍隊馬上就會被打敗。

He definitely has the military power to conquer Kyiv

他的軍力絕對可以征服基輔， 甚至可能整個烏克蘭。

and perhaps the whole of Ukraine.

Unfortunately, we might see this.

不幸的是，這可能會發生。

但，他的長期目標， 這場戰爭的根本原因，

But his long-term goal,

the whole rationale of the war,

is to deny the existence of the Ukrainian nation

是要否定烏克蘭國家的存在，

and to absorb it into Russia.

並把它吸收到俄國裡。

And to do that, it's not enough to conquer Ukraine.

要做到這一點， 光是征服烏克蘭是不夠的。

You also need to hold it.

你還得掌控它。

And it's all based on this fantasy, on this gamble,

但這一切都建立在幻想和賭博上，

that most of the population in Ukraine would agree to this,

想像大部分烏克蘭人民會認同，

would even welcome this.

甚至會歡迎他的想法。

And we already know that it's not true.

我們已經知道實情並非如此。

That the Ukrainians are a very real nation;

烏克蘭人是個非常真實的民族，

they are fiercely independent;

他們極度獨立；

they don’t want to be part of Russia;

他們不想成為俄羅斯的一部分；

they will fight like hell.

他們會拼死抵抗。

And in the long-run, again, you can conquer a country,

長期來說，同樣的， 你能征服一個國家。

But as the Russians learned in Afghanistan,

但如同俄羅斯人在阿富汗學到的，

as the Americans learned also in Afghanistan, also in Iraq,

如美國人在阿富汗及伊拉克學到的，

要掌控一個國家的難度就更高了。

it's much harder to hold a country.

同樣的，在戰爭之前， 最大的問號一直都是這一點上。

And again, the big question mark before the war was always this.

Before the war started, many things were already known.

在戰爭開始之前， 許多事都是已知的。

Everybody knew that the Russian army is much stronger than the Ukrainian Army.

大家都知道俄羅斯軍隊 比烏克蘭軍隊強太多了。

Everybody knew that NATO will not send armed forces into Ukraine,

大家都知道北大西洋公約組織

不會派遣武裝部隊到烏克蘭。

troops into Ukraine.

Everybody knew that the West, the Europeans, would be hesitant

大家都知道西方，歐洲人，會猶豫

about imposing too strict a sanction regime

要不要採用太嚴厲的制裁，

for fear of being hurt by it themselves.

因為怕自己反而會受傷。

And this was the basis for Putin's war plan.

普丁戰爭計畫的基礎就是這些。

But there was one big unknown.

但有一個很大的未知數，

Nobody could say for sure how the Ukrainian people would react.

沒有人能肯定 烏克蘭人會有什麼反應。

And there was always the option

一定會有一個選項是

that maybe Putin's fantasy would come true.

也許普丁的幻想會成真。

Maybe the Russians will march in,

也許俄羅斯人會進入，

Zelenskyy would flee,

澤倫斯基會逃走，

maybe the Ukrainian army will just capitulate

也許烏克蘭軍隊投降，

and the population would not do much.

而人民不會做什麼。

This was always an option.

總會有這個選項。

And now we know this was just fantasy.

現在我們知道這只是個幻想。

Now we know that the Ukrainians are fighting, they will fight.

現在我們知道烏克蘭人 在抵抗，他們會一搏。

And this derails the whole rationale of Putin’s war.

這就讓普丁對這場戰爭的邏輯依據

整個被推翻了。

Because you can conquer the country, maybe,

因為你也許可以征服這個國家，

but you won't be able to absorb Ukraine back into Russia.

但你無法把烏克蘭吸入俄羅斯的國土。

The only thing he's accomplishing,

他唯一達成的一件事，

he is planting seeds of hatred

是種下仇恨的種子，

in the hearts of every Ukrainian.

種在每個烏克蘭人的心中。

Every Ukrainian being killed,

每一個烏克蘭人被殺害，

every day this war continues is more seeds of hatred

這場戰爭持續的每一天，

都是更多仇恨的種子，

that may last for generations.

可能會持續數個世代。

Ukrainians and Russians didn't hate each other before Putin.

在普丁之前，烏克蘭人 和俄羅斯人並不痛恨彼此。

They’re siblings.

他們是手足。

Now he's making them enemies.

現在，普丁讓他們成了敵人。

And if he continues, this will be his legacy.

如果他繼續做下去， 就會延續這個後遺症。

BG: We're going to talk a bit about that again later but, you know,

布：我們等下會再談到這部分，

但你要知道，同時， 普丁需要勝利，對吧？

at the same time, Putin needs a victory, right?

The cost, the human, economic, political cost of this war,

這場戰爭的人力、 經濟及政治上的成本，

not even a week in, is already astronomical.

還不到一週就已經是天文數字了。

So to justify it and also to remain, by the way,

所以，為了找正當理由，

a viable leader at the head of Russia,

維持自己在俄羅斯的領導地位，

Putin needs to win, and even win convincingly.

普丁得要贏，且甚至 要贏得令人信服。

So how do we square these things?

那麼我們可以如何協調這些想法呢？

YNH: I don't know.

尤：我不知道。

I mean, the fact that you need to win doesn't mean that you can win.

我是說，你需要贏，不表示你能贏。

Lots of political leaders need to win, and sometimes they lose.

許多政治領袖都需要贏， 而有時他們就是輸了。

He could stop the war, declare that he won,

他可以中止戰爭，宣佈他贏了，

and say that recognizing Luhansk and Donetsk by the Russians

聲稱……我不知道……

俄羅斯承認盧甘斯克和頓涅茨克

is what he really wanted all along, and he achieved this.

才是他一直想要的， 而他已經做到了。

Maybe they cobble this agreement, or I don’t know.

也許他們拼湊了 這樣的協議，我不知道，

This is the job of politicians, I'm not a politician.

這是政治人物的工作， 我不是政治人物。

But I can tell you that I hope, for the sake of everybody --

但我可以告訴各位，

我希望，為了大家好——

Ukrainians, Russians and the whole of humanity --

為了烏克蘭人、俄羅斯人， 以及全人類好——

that this war stops immediately.

這場戰爭能馬上結束。

Because if it doesn't,

因為如果不可以，

it's not only the Ukrainians and the Russians

受苦受難的不僅是 烏克蘭人和俄羅斯人，

that will suffer terribly.

Everybody will suffer terribly if this war continues.

如果這場戰爭持續下去， 人人都會受苦受難。

BG: Explain why.

布：請解釋為什麼。

YNH: Because of the shock waves destabilizing the whole world.

尤：因為這個衝擊浪潮 會讓全世界都變得不穩定。

Let’s start with the bottom line:

咱們從基本層面談起：

budgets.

預算。

We have been living in an amazing era of peace in the last few decades.

過去數十年間，我們一直生活在 很不可思議的和平時代。

And it wasn't some kind of hippie fantasy.

且那不是某種嬉皮的幻想。

You saw it in the bottom line.

我們可以從經濟看到。 也可從預算中就可以看到。

You saw it in the budgets.

In Europe, in the European Union,

在歐洲、歐盟，

the average defense budget of EU members

歐盟成員國的平均國防預算

was around three percent of government budget.

大約是政府預算的 3%。

And that's a historical miracle, almost.

那幾乎可以說是歷史上的奇蹟。

For most of history,

在歷史上大部分的時期，

the budget of kings and emperors and sultans, like 50 percent,

國王、皇帝，和蘇丹王的預算 像是 50%、80%，

80 percent goes to war, goes to the army.

這些錢都用在戰爭、軍隊上。

In Europe, it’s just three percent.

在歐洲，只有 3%，

In the whole world, the average is about six percent, I think,

但在世界其他地區，平均大約 6%，

fact-check me on this, but this is the figure that I know,

我記得的是，建議查證一下， 但我知道的數字是 6%。

six percent.

What we saw already within a few days,

我們已經看到，在幾天內，

Germany doubles its military budget in a day.

德國一天內就把軍事預算加倍了。

And I'm not against it.

我不反對。

Given what they are facing, it's reasonable.

以他們面臨的狀況來說， 這樣做是合理的，

For the Germans, for the Poles,

德國、波蘭、整個歐洲 想把預算加倍是合理的。

for all of Europe to double their budgets.

And you see other countries around the world doing the same thing.

可以看到世界上的其他國家 也在做同樣的事。

But this is, you know, a race to the bottom.

但這是一種向下競爭。

When they double their budgets,

當他們把預算加倍，

other countries look and feel insecure and double their budgets,

其他國家看到了，

感到不安全，因此 也跟著把預算加倍，

so they have to double them again and triple them.

所以它們又得把預算再加倍、變三倍。

And the money that should go to health care,

這些錢本來應該用在健康照護，

that should go to education,

應該用在教育，

that should go to fight climate change,

應該用在對抗氣候變遷，

this money will now go to tanks, to missiles, to fighting wars.

現在，這些錢卻用在坦克、

飛彈、打仗上。

So there is less health care for everybody,

因此，大家的健康照護就變少了，

and there is maybe no solution to climate change

也許氣候變遷就無法解決，

because the money goes to tanks.

因為錢用到坦克上了。

And in this way, even if you live in Australia,

這麼一來，即使你住在澳洲，

even if you live in Brazil,

即使你住在巴西，

you will feel the repercussions of this war in less health care,

你也會感受到這場戰爭的惡果，

包括健康照護縮減、

in a deteriorating ecological crisis,

生態危機更加惡化、

in many other things.

以及多方面的改變。

Again, another very central question is technology.

另一個非常核心的問題是科技。

We are on the verge, we are already in the middle, actually,

我們即將進入、其實已經進入，

of new technological arms races in fields like artificial intelligence.

新科技軍備競賽，

涉及領域包括人工智慧等。

And we need global agreement about how to regulate AI

關於如何管理人工智慧， 我們需要全球一致的協議，

and to prevent the worst scenarios.

並預防最糟糕的狀況發生。

How can we get a global agreement on AI

如果有新的冷戰、 新的熱戰，

when you have a new cold war, a new hot war?

全球怎麼可能達成 對人工智慧的共識協議？

So in this field, to all hopes

所以，在這個領域，所有的希望，

of stopping the AI arms race will go up in smoke if this war continues.

期望能阻止人工智慧 軍備競賽的希望，

如果這場戰爭繼續下去， 都會化為烏有。

So again, everybody around the world will feel the consequences in many ways.

所以，全世界的每個人都會 在許多方面感受到後果。

This is much, much bigger than just another regional conflict.

這遠不只是另一場地區性的衝突。

BG: If one of Putin's goals here is to divide Europe,

布：如果普丁的目標之一是

讓歐洲分裂，削弱跨大西洋聯盟

to weaken the transatlantic alliance

and the global liberal order,

以及全球自由主義的秩序，

he seems to kind of accidentally have revitalized all of them in a way.

他似乎反而無意間

振興了它們。

US-EU relations have never been so close in many years.

這些年來，美國和歐盟的關係 從來沒有這麼密切過。

And so how do you read that?

這方面你有什麼見解？

YNH: Well, again, in this sense, he also lost the war.

尤：同樣的，就這個意義上來說 他也輸了戰爭。

If his aim was to divide Europe, to divide NATO,

如果他的目標是要分裂歐洲， 分裂北大西洋公約組織，

he's achieved exactly the opposite.

他達到的結果恰恰相反。

I mean, I was amazed by how quick,

我的意思是，我很驚訝

會看到這麼快速、

how strong and how unanimous the European reaction was.

這麼強烈、這麼一致的歐洲反應。

I think the Europeans surprised themselves.

我想，歐洲人自己都很驚訝。

You even see countries like Finland and Sweden sending arms to Ukraine

你甚至會看到芬蘭、瑞典等國

送軍備到烏克蘭， 並關閉它們的領空。

and closing their airspace.

They didn't even do it in the Cold War.

連在冷戰時它們都沒有這麼做。

It's really amazing to see it.

這種狀況真的很不可思議。

I think another very important thing is what has been dividing the West

我認為還有一點十分重要：

這幾年來一直在分裂西方的，

over the several years now,

it’s what people term the “culture war”.

是大家所謂的「文化戰爭」。

The culture war between left and right, between conservatives and liberals.

左派和右派之間，保守派 和自由派之間的文化戰爭。

And I think this war can be an opportunity

我認為這場戰爭有機會可以

to end the culture war within the West,

終結西方的文化戰爭，

to make peace in the culture war.

讓文化戰爭和平收場。

First of all, because you suddenly realize we are all in this together.

首先，因為突然間，我們發現 我們全都在同一條船上。

There are much bigger things in the world

世界上有更大的事情，

than these arguments between left and right

比西方民主國家左派、右派之間的爭吵

within the Western democracies.

更重要許多。

And it's a reminder that we need to stand united

這件事提醒我們，

要團結一致來守護

to protect Western liberal democracies.

西方的自由民主。

But it's deeper than that.

但，還有更深的層面，

Much of the argument between left and right

左派和右派之間的爭論

seemed to be in terms of a contradiction

多半似乎都涉及自由主義

between liberalism and nationalism.

和民族主義之間的抵觸。

Like, you need to choose.

好像，你得選邊站。

And the right goes with nationalism,

而右派選擇民族主義， 左派則偏向自由主義。

and the left goes more liberalism.

And Ukraine is a reminder that no, the two actually go together.

而烏克蘭提醒我們，

不，這兩者其實是可以共存的。

Historically, nationalism and liberalism are not opposites.

在歷史上，民族主義 和自由主義並非對立的。

They are not enemies.

它們不是敵人， 它們是朋友，能夠共存。

They are friends, they go together.

They meet around the central value of freedom, of liberty.

它們在自由的核心價值上有所交集。

And to see a nation fighting for its survival,

看到一個國家

為了它的生存、它的自由而戰，

fighting for its freedom,

you see it on Fox News or you see it in CNN.

你在福斯新聞頻道 或 CNN 上看到這些事。

And yes, they tell the story a little differently,

是的，這些媒體說的 故事有一點不同，

but they suddenly see the same reality.

但，突然間，它們都 看到了同樣的現實。

And they find common ground.

它們找到了共同點。

And the common ground is to understand

這個共同點就是了解到

that nationalism is not about hating minorities or hating foreigners,

民族主義的重點 不是去仇恨少數人或外國人，

而是去愛你的同胞，

it's about loving your compatriots,

and reaching a peaceful agreement

以及達成和平的協議，

about how we want to run our country together.

找到大家能一起經營國家的方式。

And I hope that seeing what is happening

我希望，看到現在發生的事，

would help to end the culture war in the West.

能協助終止西方的文化戰爭。

And if this happens, we don't need to worry about anything.

如果如此，我們就不需要擔心什麼。

You know, when you look at the real power balance,

要知道，如果去看真正的權力平衡，

if the Europeans stick together,

如果歐洲人團結一致，

if the Americans and the Europeans stick together

如果美國人和歐洲人團結一致，

and stop this culture war and stop tearing themselves apart,

停止文化戰爭，

停止把它們自己拆得四分五裂，

they have absolutely nothing to fear -- the Russians or anybody else.

它們就真的什麼都不用怕——

不論是俄羅斯人或任何其他人。

BG: I'm going to ask you a question later about the stories the West tells itself,

布：我等下要問你一個問題， 是關於西方告訴自己的故事，

but let me zoom out for a second and get a larger perspective.

但容我先拉到大局的層面來談一下。

You wrote another essay last week in “The Economist”,

你上週在《經濟學人》 寫了另一篇文章，

and you argue that what's at stake in Ukraine is, and I quote you,

引述你的文章，你主張 在烏克蘭面臨危急關頭的是：

"the direction of human history"

「人類歷史的方向」，

because it puts at risk what you call

因為這場戰爭危害到的是

你所謂現代文明最偉大的 政治及道德成就，

the greatest political and moral achievement of modern civilization,

which is the decline of war.

也就是戰爭減少。

So now we are back in a war and potentially afterwards

所以現在我們又有戰爭了， 且之後有可能會發展出

into a new form of cold war or hot war,

冷戰或熱戰的新形式，

但我們希望不會發生。

but hopefully not.

Elaborate about that essay you wrote.

請細說你寫的那篇文章。

YNH: Yeah, I mean, some people think

尤：好的，有些人認為，

that all this talk about the decline of war

所有這些關於戰爭減少的說法 一直都只是幻想。

was always just a fantasy.

But ...

但……

Again, you look at the statistics.

同樣的，若去看統計數字。

Since 1945,

自從 1945 年，

there has not been a single clash between superpowers,

就沒有超級大國之間的衝突發生了，

whereas previously in history,

而在這之前的歷史上，

this was, you know, the basic stuff of history.

這類衝突是歷史的基本元素。

Since 1945,

自從 1945 年，

not a single internationally recognized country

沒有任何一個國際承認的國家

was wiped off the map by external invasion.

被外來勢力入侵而從地圖上消失。

This was the common thing in history.

這種事以前在歷史上很常見。

Until then and then it stopped.

到那時之後，就停止了。

This is an amazing achievement,

這是很不可思議的成就，

which is the basis for everything we have,

我們現在擁有的一切 都立基在此成就上，

for our medical services,

包括我們的醫療服務、教育體制，

for education system,

and this is all now in jeopardy.

這些現在都受到危害了。

Because this era of peace,

因為這個和平的時代，

it wasn't the result of some miracle.

它不是由某種奇蹟造成的，

It wasn't the result of a change in the laws of nature.

也不是自然法則改變所造成的。

It was humans making better decisions and building better institutions,

是因為人類做出更好的決策、

建立更好的制度，

which means also

這也意味著，

that there is no guarantee for the future.

無法對未來有任何保證。

If humans, some humans, start making bad decisions

如果人類，某些人， 開始做出糟糕的決策，

and start destroying the institutions that kept the peace,

開始摧毀維護和平的制度，

then we will be back in the era of war

我們又會回到戰爭的時代，

with budgets, military budgets going to 20, 30, 40 percent.

軍事預算又會提升到 20%、30%、40%。

It can happen.

這有可能發生，

It's in our hands.

操之在我們手中。

And I'll just say one more thing,

讓我再說一件事。

When, not just me, but other scholars like Steven Pinker and others,

當，不只是我，還有其他 如史帝芬‧平克等學者，

talked about the era of peace,

談到和平時代時，

some people understood it as kind of encouraging complacency.

有些人把它理解為讓人振奮的滿足。

That, oh, we don't need to worry about anything.

他們會想：喔，我們什麼都不用擔心。

No, I mean, the message was really the opposite.

不，要傳遞的訊息其實恰恰相反。

It was a message of responsibility.

訊息應該是責任。

If you think that there is no era of peace in history,

如果你認為，

在歷史上沒有和平的時代，

it's always war, it's always the jungle,

一直都有戰爭，一直都有生存競爭，

there is a constant level of violence in nature,

在大自然中就會有 一定程度的暴力存在，

then this basically means

那麼，基本上，這就意味著

that there is no point struggling for peace

為了和平而努力是沒意義的，

and there is no responsibility on leaders like Putin

像普丁這樣的領導者也不用扛責任，

because you can't blame Putin for the war.

因為你不能把戰爭怪在普丁頭上。

It's just a law of nature that there are wars.

大自然的法則就是會有戰爭。

When you realize, no, humans are able to decrease the level of violence,

當你發現，不，人類有能力

可以減少暴力，

then it should make us much more responsible.

那就應該會讓我們更為負責。

And it should also make us understand

也應該讓我們了解，

that the war in Ukraine now, it’s not a natural disaster.

現在在烏克蘭的戰爭 並不是天然災害。

It’s a man-made disaster, and a single man.

它是人造的災害，是一個人造成的。

It's not the Russian people who want this war.

並不是俄羅斯人想要打這場仗。

There's really just a single person

就真的只是一個人，

who, by his decisions,

這個人的決策

created this tragedy.

造成了這場悲劇。

BG: So one of the things that has come back

布：在過去幾週、幾個月又再出現的

in the last weeks and months is the nuclear threat.

其中一樣就是核武威脅。

It's moved back into the center of political and strategic considerations.

它又回到了政治 及策略考量的中心位置。

Putin has talked about it several times,

普丁已經數次談到它，先前，

the other day he ordered Russia's nuclear forces on a higher alert status.

他下令要俄羅斯的核武部隊 進入高度警戒狀態。

President Zelenskyy himself at the Munich Security Conference

在慕尼黑安全會議上，澤倫斯基總統

essentially said that Ukraine had made a mistake

提到烏克蘭犯了錯，不該放棄

abandoning the nuclear weapons it had inherited from the Soviet Union.

從蘇聯繼承獲得的核武器。

That's a statement that I suspect many countries are pondering.

我想許多國家可能 都在反思這段聲明。

What's your thinking about the return of the nuclear threat?

你對於核武威脅再次出現， 有什麼看法？

YNH: It's extremely frightening.

尤：非常嚇人。

You know, it's like it's almost Freudian,

這幾乎就是佛洛伊德學說

it's the return of the repressed.

「壓抑的重返」。

We thought that, oh, nuclear weapons, yes,

我們心想，喔，核武，是的， 1960 年代有過相關的事，

there was something about that in the 1960s

with the Cuban Missile Crisis and Dr. Strangelove.

有古巴飛彈危機和《奇愛博士》。

But no, it's here.

但，不，危機就在此間。

And, you know, it took just a few days

只需要幾天

of difficulties on the battlefield

在戰場上不順利，

for suddenly --

突然間——

I mean, I'm watching television, like, the news

我的意思是，我在看電視新聞，

and you have these experts explaining to people

會有專家向大家解釋

what different nuclear weapons will do to this city or to this country.

不同的核武對這個城市 或這個國家會造成什麼傷害。

It rushed back in.

核武馬上就回來了。

So, you know, nuclear weapons are --

你知道，核武——

in a way they also, until now, preserved the peace of the world.

在某種層面上，

它們也維護著世界和平，直到現在。

I belong to the school of thought that if it was not for nuclear weapons,

我所屬的學派認為，若沒有核武，

we would have had the Third World War

我們就會有第三次世界大戰，

between the Soviet Union and the United States and NATO

由蘇聯對抗美國 和北大西洋公約組織，

sometime in the 1950s or '60s.

會發生在 1950 年代 或 1960 年代。

That nuclear weapons actually, until today, served a good function.

在今天之前， 核武都發揮了好的功能。

It's because of nuclear weapons

因為有核武，

that we did not have any more direct clashes between superpowers

超強大國之間才沒有再發生 任何直接衝突，

because it was obvious that this would be collective suicide.

因為，很明顯，那會是集體自殺。

But the danger is still there, it's always there.

但，危險還在，它一直都在。

If there is miscalculation,

如果發生錯誤判斷，

then the results could, of course,

接著，當然，結果可能是

be existential, catastrophic.

與人類存亡有關的大災難。

BG: And at the same time, you know, in the '70s after Cuba and Berlin,

布：同時，1970 年代，接續古巴和柏林，

在 1960 年代也有， 但在 1970 年代我們開始建立

and so in the '60s, but in the '70s,

we started building a sort of international institutional architecture

一種國際制度架構，

that helped reduce the risk of military confrontation of nuclear weapons,

來協助降低我們使用核武 製造軍事衝突的風險，

we used, you know, anything from arms control agreements

內容無所不包，從軍備控制協定，

to measures designed to build trust or to communicate directly and so on.

到為了建立信任或直接溝通 所設計的措施等等。

And then in the last decade or so,

接著，在過去十年左右， 這些都漸漸被捨棄了，

that has been progressively kind of scrapped,

所以我們處境的危險程度，

so we are even in a more dangerous situation

就更高於上個世紀末了。

than we were let's say, at the end of the last century.

YNH: Completely, I mean,

尤：完全正確，

我們現在嚐到的就是忽視的報應，

we are now reaping the bad fruits of neglect

that's been going on for several years,

忽視的狀況已經有好幾年，

not just about nuclear weapons, but in general,

不只是針對核武，而是整體來說，

about international institutions and global cooperation.

對於國際制度

和全球合作的忽視。

We’ve built, in the late 20th century,

在二十世紀末，我們建造了

a house for humanity

一所人類的房屋，

based on cooperation,

立基於協力

based on collaboration,

和合作上，

based on the understanding

立基於了解

that our future depends on being able to cooperate,

我們的未來

要仰賴大家同心協力，

otherwise we will become extinct as a species.

要不然，這個物種就會滅絕。

And we all live in this house.

我們都住在這間房屋裡。

But in the last few years we stopped --

但在過去幾年，我們不再——

we neglected it, we stopped repairing it.

我們忽視了它，不再去維修它。

We allow it to deteriorate more and more.

我們讓它不斷變糟。

And, you know, eventually it will --

你是知道的，

最終它將會——現在就正在崩壞了。

It is collapsing now.

So I hope that people will realize before it's too late

所以我希望在太遲之前， 大家能夠了解到

that we need not just to stop this terrible war,

我們需要的不僅是 阻止這場可怕的戰爭，

we need to rebuild the institutions,

我們還得重建制度

we need to repair the global house in which we all live together.

我們還得修復我們大家 共同居住的這間全球房屋。

If it falls down, we all die.

如果它垮了，我們全都會死。

BG: So we have, among the audience listening,

布：我們線上的觀眾 蘿拉，她來自——

Rola from --

I don't know where she's from, she grew up in Lebanon --

我不知道她來自哪裡， 她在黎巴嫩長大——

and she said, "I lived the war, I slept on the ground, I breathed fear.

她說：「我經歷過戰爭，

我睡在地上，我呼吸的是恐懼。

All the reasons were explained to me that the only remaining learning came

我聽過所有解釋的理由，

唯一剩下能學到的， 就是戰爭很荒唐。

the war is absurd.

We talk about strategy, power, budgets, opportunities, technologies.

我們會談論策略、權力、 預算、機會及科技。

What about human suffering and psychological trauma?"

那麼，人類苦難呢？心理創傷呢？」

Especially, I assume what she's asking is what about, what's going to remain,

我猜，她特別想問的是，

in terms of the human suffering

除了人類苦難和未來的心理創傷外， 還會剩下什麼？

and the psychological trauma going forward?

YNH: Yeah, I mean, these are the seeds of hatred

尤：好的，這些是種子，

仇恨、恐懼，和不幸的種子，

and fear and misery

that are being planted right now in the minds and the bodies

現在正在播種，

在數千萬、

of tens of millions, hundreds of millions of people, really.

其實是數億人的大腦和身體裡。

Because it's not just the people in Ukraine,

因為不只是烏克蘭人， 還有周圍國家、全世界的人。

it's also in the countries around, all over the world.

And these seeds will give a terrible harvest,

這些種子

將來的收成會很可怕；

terrible fruits in years, in decades to come.

在接下來的數年、數十年 會長成可怕的果實。

This is why it's so crucial to stop the war immediately.

這就是為什麼立即阻止 這場戰爭是非常重要。

Every day this continues, plants more and more of these seeds.

戰爭每多持續一天，

就會種下更多這些種子。

And, you know, like this war now,

就像現在這場戰爭，

its seeds were, to a large extent,

它的種子有很大一部分是在數十年、 甚至數百年前就種下了。

planted decades and even centuries ago.

That part of the Russian fears that are motivating Putin

普丁和他身邊的人背後的動機

包括俄羅斯的恐懼， 而這恐懼

and motivating people around him

is memories of past invasions of Russia,

有一部分是記憶，

對俄羅斯過去被侵略的記憶， 當然，特別是二次大戰的事。

especially, of course, in Second World War.

And of course, it's a terrible mistake

那當然是大錯特錯，

what they are doing with it.

他們現在的做法是不對的。

They are recreating again the same things that they should learn to avoid.

他們在重現他們應該 學到要避免的事情。

But yes, these are still the terrible fruits

但，是的，這些仍然是可怕的果實，

of the seeds being planted in the 1940s.

其種子在 1940 年代就已經種下了。

BG: It's what in same article you call

布：在同一篇文章中，你說

the fact that nations are ultimately built on stories.

最終，國家是立基在故事上的。

So these seeds are the stories we are starting to create now.

所以這些種子是我們現在 開始創造的故事。

The war in Ukraine is starting to create the stories

烏克蘭的戰爭開始創造故事，

這些故事在未來會產生影響， 這是你的意思嗎？

that are going to have an impact in the future, that's what you're saying.

YNH: Some of the seeds of this war were planted in the siege of Leningrad.

尤：這場戰爭的一些種子

是在列寧格勒圍城戰時所種下的。

And now it gives fruit in the siege of Kyiv,

產生的果實就是現在基輔被圍攻，

which may give fruit in 40 or 50 years in more terrible ...

而基輔被圍攻的種子會在四、 五十年後產生更可怕的……

We need to cut this, we need to stop this.

我們得阻止這個現象。

You know, as a historian,

身為歷史學家，

I feel sometimes ashamed or responsible, I don't know what,

有時我會覺得羞恥 或有責任，我也說不上，

about what history, the knowledge of history is doing to people.

覺得要為歷史、歷史的知識 對人的影響負責。

In recent weeks, I have been watching all the world leaders talking with Putin,

在最近幾週，

我都在看世界領導人與普丁談話，

and very often he gave them lectures on history.

通常，他都會用歷史教訓他們。

I think that Macron had a discussion with him for five hours,

我想，馬克宏和他討論了五個小時，

and afterwards, said, “Most of the time he was lecturing me about history.”

事後，他說：「大部分的時間 他都在用歷史教訓我。」

And as a historian, I feel ashamed

身為歷史學家，我感到羞恥，

that this is what my profession in some way is doing.

因為某種層面上

這是我的職業在做的事。

I know it for my own country.

我知道我的祖國是如此。

在以色列，我們也受到 太多歷史所苦。

In Israel, we also suffer from too much history.

I think people should be liberated from the past,

我認為人應該不要被過去束縛，

not constantly repeating it again and again.

而不是不斷重覆過去。

You know, everybody should kind of free themselves

大家都應該要讓自己

from the memories of the Second World War.

從二次大戰的記憶走出來。

It's true of the Russians,

俄羅斯人應該如此。

it's also true of the Germans.

德國人也應該如此。

You know, I look at Germany now,

現在我看著德國，

and what I really want to say, if there are Germans watching us,

我真心想說，如果這裡 有來自德國的觀眾，

what I really want to say to the Germans:

我真心想對德國人說：

guys, we know you are not Nazis.

各位，

我們知道你們不是納粹。

You don't need to keep proving it again and again.

你們不用一再證明這一點。

What we need from Germany now is to stand up and be a leader,

現在我們需要德國做的是挺身而出，

成為領導者，

to be at the forefront of the struggle for freedom.

帶頭為自由奮鬥。

And sometimes Germans are afraid that if they speak forcefully

有時，德國人擔心如果他們發言強硬

or pick up a gun,

或拿起槍來，

everybody will say, "Hey, you're Nazis again."

大家就會說：「嘿， 你們又成了納粹。」

No, we won't think that.

不，我們不會那樣想。

BG: That's happening right now.

布：這是現在發生的狀況。

I mean, lots of things that were inconceivable just 10 days ago

許多十年前都還無法想像的事情 都在過去幾週發生了。

have happened in the last few weeks.

無論如何，讓我 最震驚的其中一件事是

And one of the most striking, to me in any case,

is Germany's reaction and transformation.

德國的反應和轉變。

I mean, the new chancellor, Olaf Scholz, the other day announced

新的總理奧拉夫‧蕭茲之前宣佈 德國會送軍備到烏克蘭，

that Germany will send arms to Ukraine,

and will spend an extra 100 billion dollars in building up its army.

還會再額外花十億美金 來建造它的軍隊。

That reverses completely the principles

這個做法完全反轉了數十年來

that have guided Germany's foreign policy

引導德國外交及安全政策的原則。

and security politics for decades.

So that shift is happening exactly at this moment and very, very fast.

所以，

此時此刻，這個轉變正在快速發生。

YNH: Yeah.

尤：是的。我認為這是好事。

And I think it's a good thing.

We need the Germans to ...

我們需要德國人去……

I mean, they are now the leaders of Europe,

他們現在是歐洲的領導者，

certainly after Britain left in Brexit.

在英國脫歐之後更是如此。

And we need them to, in a way,

我們需要他們

let go of the past and be in the present.

以某種方式，放下過去，

活在現在。

If there is really one country in the world

如果說世界上有一個國家，

that, as a Jew, as an Israeli, as a historian,

就我這個猶太人、以色列人、歷史學家

that I trust it not to repeat the horrors of Nazism,

都能相信不會重蹈 納粹主義的覆轍的，

that's Germany.

那就是德國了。

BG: Yuval, I want to touch quickly on three things

布：尤瓦爾，我想快速談談三點，

that have to do with the fact that this feels like

因為這在很多方面感覺

the first truly interconnected war in many ways.

就像是第一次真正相互關聯在戰爭上。

The first, of course, is the basics,

第一點，當然基礎也就是......

which is, on one side, you have a very ancient war --

一方面，這個非常古老的戰爭—— 有坦克、戰壕、對建築的轟炸——

we have tanks and we have trenches and we have bombed buildings --

and on the other, we have real-time visibility of everything

另一方面，一切都有即時的可見性，

透過手機、推特、抖音等等呈現。

through cell phones and Twitter and TikTok and so on.

And you have written a lot about this tension

而你寫過不少關於老式方法 和新技術之間的緊張狀況。

between old ways and new tech.

What's the impact here?

在此會有哪些影響？

YNH: First of all, we don't know everything that is happening.

尤：首先，我們不知道 正在發生的一切。

很讓人意外，有了抖音、 手機等等這一切，

I mean, surprisingly, with all this TikTok and phones and everything,

還是有好多未知。

so much is not known.

So the fog of war is still there, and yes,

所以，戰爭迷霧仍然存在，

且，是的，資訊變得相當多， 但資訊不是真相。

there is much more information, but information isn’t truth.

Lots of information is disinformation and fake news and so forth.

很多資訊都是錯誤資訊 和假新聞等等。

And yes, it’s always like this;

且，是的，一直都是如此， 新舊都是並行的。

the new and the old, they come together.

You know, with all the talk about interconnectedness

談了這麼多相互關聯性

and living in cyberspace and all that,

以及生活在網路空間等等，

one of the most important technologies not just of this war,

不只是在這場戰爭期間， 還有過去一、二十年間，

but of the last decade or two have been stone walls.

最重要的技術之一，就是石牆。

It's Neolithic.

是新石器時代的技術。

Everybody is now building stone walls

現在大家都在建造石牆，

in the era of Facebook and Google and all that.

在臉書、Google 等的 時代中建造石牆。

So the old and the new, they go together.

所以，新舊是並行的。

And it's ...

且，它是……

It is a new kind of war.

它是一種新式的戰爭。

People are sitting at home in California or Australia,

有人坐在加州或澳洲的家中，

and they actively participate in the war,

他們也主動參與戰爭，

not just by writing tweets,

不只是在推特寫推文，

but by attacking websites or defending websites.

還有攻擊網站或防禦網站。

You know, in Spain, in the Civil War,

在西班牙內戰，

if you wanted to help fight fascism,

如果你想協助對抗法西斯主義，

then you had to go to Spain and join the international brigade.

你得親自到西班牙，加入國際縱隊。

Now the international brigade is sitting at home in San Francisco

現在的國際縱隊 就坐在舊金山的家裡，

and is still in some way part of the war.

仍然能以某種方式參戰。

So this is definitely new.

這絕對是新的。

BG: So indeed, just two days ago, Ukraine's deputy prime minister, I think,

布：的確，不過兩天前，我記得 是烏克蘭的副總理費奧多羅夫，

Fedorov, announced via Telegram

透過電報宣佈他想要創造一支

that he wanted to create a sort of volunteer cyber army.

網路自願軍。

He invited software developers and hackers

他邀請軟體開發者、駭客， 以及其他有資訊科技技能的人

and other people with IT skills

以某種方式協助烏克蘭 在網路的前線打仗。

to somehow help Ukraine fight on the cyber front.

And according to “Wired” magazine, in less than two days,

根據《連線》雜誌報導，

175,000 people signed up.

不到兩天，有十七萬五千人報名。

So here is a defending nation that can kind of recruit almost overnight,

所以，防禦方的國家， 可以幾乎在一夕之間

招募到十七萬五千名自願者

175,000 volunteers to go to battle on his behalf.

代表他去打仗。

It's a very different kind of war.

這是很不一樣的戰爭。

YNH: Yeah.

尤：是的。

You know, every war brings it surprises.

每場戰爭都有它讓人意想不到之處。

Sometimes it's how everything is new,

有時，是因為一切都是新的，

but sometimes it's also how everything is old.

有時，也是因為一切都是舊的。

BG: So a few people in the chat and in the Q and A, have mentioned China,

布：在聊天室和問答區 有幾個人提到中國，

which of course, is an important actor here,

這次它當然也是個重要的角色，

although for now is mostly an observer.

雖然目前它多半都在旁觀。

But China has a stated policy of opposing any act

但中國有條既定政策，就是反對任何

that violates territorial integrity.

違反領土完整性的行為。

So moving into Ukraine, of course, violates territorial integrity.

所以，當然，進入烏克蘭

是違反領土完整性的。

全球經濟和全球體制 也會影響到中國的利益。

And it also has a huge interest in a stable global economy

and global system.

But then it needs to square this with the recent closeness with Russia.

但中國也得考量 它近期和俄羅斯的緊密關係。

Xi Jinping and Putin met in Beijing before the Olympics, for example,

比如，奧運之前， 習近平和普丁在北京會面，

and kind of had this message of friendship that went out to the world.

可說是向世界傳達出 他們之間關係友好的訊息。

How do you read China's position in this conflict?

你怎麼看中國在此衝突中的位置？

YNH: I don't know,

尤：我不知道，我不是中國專家，

I mean, I'm not an expert on China,

and I certainly can't just ...

我肯定不能只是……

You know, just reading the news won't get you into the mindset,

光是看新聞無法讓你

了解中國領導階層的心態、

into the real opinions and positions of the Chinese leadership.

真正的意見和定位。

I hope that they take a responsible position.

我希望他們能做出負責的選擇。

And act --

並行動——

because they are close to Russia,

因為他們和俄羅斯很近，

they are also close to Ukraine,

他們也和烏克蘭很近，

but especially because they are close to Russia,

但特別是因為他們和俄羅斯很近， 他們對俄羅斯有不少影響。

they have a lot of influence on Russia,

I hope that they will be the responsible adults

我希望他們能扮演負責的成人，

that will put down the flames of this war.

能澆熄這場戰火。

They have a lot to lose

如果全球秩序崩壞，

from a breakdown of the global order.

他們會有很大的損失。

And I think they have a lot to win from the return of peace,

我認為，如果重返和平， 他們會有很大的益處，

including in terms of the gratitude of the international community.

包括得到國際社會的感激。

Now, whether they do it or not, this is with them.

不論他們會不會這麼做，

都要看他們，我無法預測， 我只能希望如此。

I can't predict, but I hope so.

BG: You have mentioned before the several European and Western leaders

布：你之前提到，

在侵略發生前幾週，有好幾位

that have gone to Moscow in the weeks before the invasion.

歐洲和西方的領導人前往莫斯科。

Varun in the chat, asks,

聊天室中的瓦魯想問：

"Is the Ukraine war a failure of diplomacy?"

「烏克蘭戰爭 是否是外交上的失敗？」

Could have ...

可能是……

Something different happened?

發生了不一樣的事情？

YNH: Oh, you can understand it in two questions.

尤：可以從兩個問題來了解。

Did diplomacy fail to stop the war?

外交是否沒能阻止戰爭？ 當然，這大家都知道。

Absolutely, everybody knows that.

But is it a failure in the sense that a different diplomatic approach,

但它是否是種失敗？意即， 採用不同的外交手段，

some kind of other proposition, would have stopped the war?

不同的提議，有可能阻止這場戰爭？

I don't know, but it doesn't seem like it.

我不知道，但似乎不是如此。

I mean, looking at the events of the last few weeks,

看看過去幾週的事件，

it doesn't seem that Putin was really interested

普丁看來對外交解決方案

in a diplomatic solution.

並不感興趣。

It seemed that he was really interested in the war,

他似乎對開戰很有興趣，

and I think, again, it goes back to this basic fantasy

我想，這又要回到這個根本的幻想，

that if he really was concerned about the security situation of Russia,

如果他真的關心俄羅斯的安全情勢，

then there was no need to immediately invade Ukraine.

那麼就不需要馬上入侵烏克蘭。

There was no immediate threat to Russia.

對俄羅斯沒有立即性的威脅。

There was no discussion of right now, Ukraine joining NATO.

現在沒有烏克蘭加入 北大西洋公約組織的討論。

There was no invasion army assembling in the Baltic states or in Poland.

沒有入侵軍隊集結在

波羅的海國家或波蘭；都沒有。

Nothing.

是普丁選擇在此刻展開這場危機。

Putin chose the moment to start this crisis.

So this is why it doesn't seem

這就是為什麼重點似乎 並不是安全方面的考量。

that it's really about the security concerns.

It seems more about this very deep fantasy

似乎比較在於普丁深沉的幻想 ，

of re-establishing the Russian Empire

想要重建俄羅斯的帝國，

and of denying the very existence of the Ukrainian nation.

以及否認烏克蘭這個國家的存在。

BG: So you live in the Middle East.

布：你住在中東，聊天室有人想問：

Someone else in the chat asks,

"What makes the situation so unique

「是什麼讓這個局面

比世界上許多此刻 正在進行中的其他戰爭更獨特？」

compared to many other wars that are going on right now in the world?"

I would say, aside from the nuclear threat from Russia, but what else?

除了俄羅斯造成的 核武威脅，還有別的嗎？

YNH: Several things.

尤：有好幾點。

First of all,

第一點也是我們在 1945 年之後 就沒有見過的，

we have here, again, something we haven't seen since 1945,

which is a dominant power

也就是霸權國，

trying to basically obliterate from the map

基本上，試圖將一個 獨立國家從地圖上抹除。

an independent country.

You know, when the US invaded Afghanistan

當美國入侵阿富汗或伊拉克時，

or when the US invaded Iraq,

you can say a lot of things about it

有很多可以拿出來說的， 也可以從許多面向批評。

and criticize it in many ways.

There was no question of the US annexing Iraq

無疑的，

美國是在強佔伊拉克，

or turning Iraq into the 51st state of the United States.

或者將伊拉克變成 美國的第五十一州。

This is what is happening in Ukraine

這正是在烏克蘭發生的狀況，

under this pretext or this disguise,

在這個藉口或偽裝之下，

this is what's at stake.

就是關鍵。

The real aim is to annex Ukraine.

真正的目標是要強佔烏克蘭。

If this succeeds,

如果成功了，

again, it brings us back to the era of war.

就會讓我們再次回到戰爭時代。

I was struck by what the Kenyan representative

當這件事爆發時，肯亞代表

to the UN Security Council said when this erupted.

在聯合國安理會上 說的話讓我很震驚。

The Kenyan representative spoke in the name of Kenya

肯亞代表是以肯亞 及其他非洲國家之名發言。

and other African countries.

And he told the Russians:

他告訴俄羅斯人：

Look, we also are the product of a post-imperial order.

聽著，我們也是後帝制秩序的產物。

The same way the Soviet empire collapsed into different independent nations,

就像蘇聯解體 成為不同的獨立國家一樣，

also, African nations came out of the collapse of European empires.

非洲國家也是來自歐洲帝國的解體。

And the basic principle of African politics ever since then

從那之後，非洲政治的基本原則

was that no matter what your objections

就是不論你有多麼反對

to the borders you have inherited,

你所承襲的國界，

keep the borders.

都要遵守那些國界。

The borders are sacred

國界是神聖的，

because if we start invading neighboring countries because,

因為，如果我們開始入侵其他國家，

"Hey, this is part of our countries,

因為「嘿，這是我們國家的一部分，

這些人是我們國民的一部分。」

these people are part of our nation,"

there will not be an end to it.

那就會沒完沒了了。

And if this now happens in Ukraine,

如果這個狀況現在在烏克蘭發生，

it will be a blueprint for copycats all over the world.

它就會成為全世界仿效者的藍圖。

The other thing which is different is that we are talking about superpowers.

還有一個差別是，

我們在談的是超級強國。

This is not a war between Israel and Hezbollah.

這不是以色列和真主黨之間的戰爭。

This is potentially a war between Russia and NATO.

這很可能是俄羅斯和北大西洋 公約組織之間的戰爭。

And even leaving aside nuclear weapons,

就算不談核武，

this completely destabilizes the peace of the entire world.

這件事也會完全顛覆

全世界的和平。

And again, I go back again and again to the budgets.

我又要再次談到預算。

That if Germany doubles its defense budget,

如果德國將國防預算加倍，

if Poland doubles its defense budget,

如果波蘭將國防預算加倍，

this will spread to every country in the world,

這個現象會散播到 全世界的每個國家。

and this is terrible news.

而這是很糟糕的信息。

BG: So Yuval, I'm jumping from topic to topic

布：尤瓦爾，我一直換主題， 是因為我想利用最後幾分鐘

because I want to use the last few minutes

轉達觀眾的問題。

to ask a few questions from the audience.

A few people are asking about the link to the climate crisis,

有幾個人都問到

和氣候危機的關聯，

particularly when it relates to the energy flows.

特別是在能量流這方面，

Like, Europe is very dependent,

因為，歐洲、部分歐洲非常依賴

part of Europe, is very dependent on Russian oil and gas,

俄羅斯的石油和天然氣，

which is, as far as we know, still flowing until today.

就我們所知，至今都還是如此。

But could this crisis, in a sort of paradoxical way,

但，這場危機，有沒有可能 像疫情一樣很矛盾地

a bit like the pandemic, accelerate climate action,

反而加速了氣候行動， 加速了可再生能源等等？

accelerate renewables and and so on?

YNH: This is the hope.

尤：希望如此。

That Europe now realizes the danger

希望歐洲現在了解了危險之處，

and starts a green Manhattan Project

而展開綠色曼哈頓計畫，

that kind of accelerates what already has been happening,

這種加速、是加速了 已經發生了的事情；

but accelerates it,

the development of better energy sources,

發展更好的能源，

better energy infrastructure,

更好的能源基礎建設，

which would release it from its dependence on oil and gas.

就能讓歐洲不要依賴石油和天然氣。

And it will actually undercut the dependence of the whole world

這其實也會

削減全世界對石油及天然氣的依賴。

on oil and gas.

And this would be the best way to undermine the Putin regime

這會是最佳的方式，

可以破壞

普丁政權及普丁戰爭機器。

and the Putin war machine,

because this is what Russia has,

因為這就是俄羅斯手上的 籌碼：石油和天然氣。

oil and gas.

That's it.

就這樣。

When was the last time you bought anything made in Russia?

你上次買俄羅斯製的 東西是什麼時候？

They have oil and gas,

他們有石油和天然氣，

and we know, you know, the curse of oil.

而所謂石油的詛咒，

That oil is a source of riches,

石油是財富的來源，

but it’s also very often a support for dictatorships.

但通常也是獨裁的支柱，

Because to enjoy the benefits of oil,

因為，要享受石油帶來的益處，

you don't need to share it with your citizens.

你不需要把它和你的人民分享，

You don't need an open society,

你不需要開放的社會，

you don't need education, you just need to drill.

你不需要教育，你只需要鑽油。

So we see in many places

我們在許多地方都看到石油 和天然氣其實是獨裁的基礎。

that oil and gas are actually the basis for dictatorships.

If oil and gas, if the price drops,

如果石油和天然氣

價格下降， 它們變得不重要，

if they become irrelevant,

it will not only undercut the finance,

就不只會削弱財政

俄羅斯軍事機器的資金和權力，

the power of the Russian military machine,

it will also force Russia,

也會迫使俄羅斯，

force Putin or the Russians to change their regime.

迫使普丁或俄羅斯人 改變他們的政權。

BG: OK, let me bring up a character

布：我想提一個人物，

that everybody here in the chat seems to find quite heroic,

在聊天室的每個人 似乎都覺得他很英勇，

and that's the Ukrainian president.

就是烏克蘭的總統。

So Ukraine kind of finds itself

烏克蘭的狀況是，

with a comedian who turned almost accidental president,

這名喜劇演員意外地成為了總統，

who turned now war president.

現在又成為了戰爭總統。

But he has shown an impressive conduct in the last few weeks,

但在過去幾週，他展現了 讓人印象深刻的領導力，

especially in the last few days,

特別是在過去幾天，

which can be summarized in that response he gave to the US

可以總結為當美國提議協助他撤離

when they offered to kind of exfiltrate him

以領導一個流亡政府時， 他給予美國的回應：

so he could lead a government in exile,

he said, "I need ammunition. I don't need a ride."

「我需要的是軍火，不是搭便車。」

How would you look at President Zelenskyy?

你怎麼看澤倫斯基總統？

YNH: His conduct has indeed been admirable,

尤：他的領導的確讓人欽佩，

and he gives courage and inspiration not just to the Ukrainian people,

他不僅給了烏克蘭人民勇氣和鼓舞，

but I think to everybody around the world.

我想，全世界的人都感受到了。

I think to a large extent

我想，在很大的程度上，

the swift and united reaction of Europe

歐洲快速且團結的反應，

with the sanctions and sending arms and so forth,

包括制裁，運送軍備等等，

to a large extent, this is also to the credit of Zelenskyy.

在很大的程度上， 也是澤倫斯基的功勞。

That, you know,

你知道的，政治人物也是人。

when politicians are also human beings.

And his direct appeal to them,

他直接向他們求助，

and you know, they met him many times in person

他們和他本人見過很多次面，

and to see where he is now

而看到他現在的處境，

and the threat that not only him, but his family is also in.

以及他和他家人所面臨的威脅，

And you know, they talk with him,

他們和他談，

and he says, and they know, that this may be the last time they speak.

他說，他們也知道， 這可能是他們最後一次談話。

He may be dead, murdered or bombed in an hour or in a day.

一小時或一天內他可能就 不在了、被謀殺了、被炸死了。

It really changes something.

這真的會造成改變。

So in this sense, I think he made a huge personal contribution,

在這個意義上，我認為 他個人的貢獻很大，

to not just the reaction in Ukraine, but around the world.

不只影響烏克蘭的反應， 還有全世界的反應。

BG: So Sam, who’s listening, asked this question:

布：聽眾山姆想要問：

"Can you provide some historical context

「你能否從一些歷史情境來說明，

for the force and the meaning of economic and trade sanctions

他們目前所做的經濟及貿易制裁

at the level where they are currently imposed.

有什麼力量和意涵？

How have previous would-be empires, would-be aggressors, or aggressors,

過去想要成為帝國、 成為侵略者和現在的侵略國，

been constrained by such isolations and such sanctions?"

如何受到這類孤立和制裁的束縛？」

YNH: You know, what we need, again, to realize about Putin's Russia

尤：同樣的，對於普丁的俄羅斯，

我們需要知道的是，它不是蘇聯。

is that it's not the Soviet Union.

It's a much smaller and weaker country.

它是個更小、更弱的國家。

It's not like in the 1960s,

不像 1960 年代，

that in addition to the Soviet Union,

除了蘇聯之外， 還有它周圍的整個聯盟。

you had the entire Soviet bloc around it.

So it's easier in this sense to isolate it.

就這方面來說，要孤立它比較容易。

It's much more vulnerable.

它脆弱許多。

Again, does it mean that sanctions would work like a miracle

這是否表示制裁會帶來奇蹟， 並阻止坦克？不。

and stop the tanks? No.

It takes time.

要花時間。

But I think that the West is in a position

但我認為，

西方所處的位置

to impact Russia

足以影響俄羅斯，

with these kinds of sanctions and isolation much more

用這類制裁和孤立， 能產生的影響遠高於

than, let's say, with the Soviet Union.

能對蘇聯造成的影響。

And also the Russian people are different.

此外，俄羅斯人也不一樣。

The Russian people don't really want this war,

俄羅斯人並不想打這場仗，

even the people in the immediate circle around Putin.

甚至連普丁 身邊的人也不想。

You know, again,

同樣的，

I don't know them personally, from what it seems,

我不認識他們本人，看起來是，

it's that these people, they like life.

這些人，他們喜歡生活。

They have their yachts and they have their private airplanes

他們擁有遊艇和私人飛機，

and they have their house in London

他們在倫敦有房子， 同時在法國也有別墅。

and they have their chateau in France.

And they like the good life,

他們喜歡美好的生活，

and they want to keep enjoying it.

亦想繼續享受這樣的生活。

So I think that the sanctions can be really effective.

所以我認為

制裁有可能會很有效。

What's the timetable?

那時間表呢？

That's ultimately in the hands of Putin.

最終是操在普丁手上。

BG: So Gabriella asks: “I remember the war in former Yugoslavia

布：加布瑞拉想問：

「我記得前南斯拉夫的戰爭， 以及在那裡的暴行。

and the atrocities there.

Is there any possibility that this war would escalate into such a situation?"

有沒有可能這場戰爭 會擴大成為那樣的局面？」

I think an extension to that is:

我想，這個問題可以延伸為：

這場戰爭是否會煽動潛伏的衝突，

Is this war kind of stirring dormant conflicts

like in the Balkans, for example,

比如巴爾幹半島的衝突， 或先前的中亞共和政體一樣？

or in the former Central Asian republic?

YNH: Unfortunately, it can get to that level and even worse.

尤：不幸的是，是有可能 到那種程度甚至更糟。

If you want an analogy, go to Syria.

如果想找類似的例子，去看敘利亞。

You look at what happened in Homs.

看看荷姆斯發生的狀況，

At what happened in Aleppo.

看看阿勒坡發生的狀況。

And this was done by Putin and his airplanes

幹下這些事的，

就是普丁和他的飛機

以及他在敘利亞的爪牙。

and his minions in Syria.

It's the same person behind it.

幕後首腦是同一個人。

And to think that, "No, no, no, this happened in the Middle East.

如果認為「不，那是中東， 不可能發生在歐洲，

It can't happen in Europe."

No.

不。

We could see Kyiv in the same situation as Homs,

我們可以看到基輔

處於和荷姆斯、阿勒坡一樣的處境，

as the same situation as Aleppo,

which would be catastrophic,

那會是場大災難，

and, again, would plant terrible seeds of hatred

同樣的，也會種下仇恨的可怕種子，

for years and decades.

延續數年、數十年。

So far, we've seen hundreds of people being killed,

目前，我們已看到數以百計的人民被殺害，

Ukrainian citizens being killed.

烏克蘭公民被殺害。

It could reach tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands.

人數有可能會達到數萬、數十萬。

So in this sense, it's extremely painful to contemplate.

所以，考慮到這些就極之痛苦。

And this is why we need again and again

這就是為什麼我們需要 一而再，再而三地催促

to urge the leaders to stop this war,

領導人出手阻止這場戰爭，

and especially, again and again,

特別是要一次又一次地

tell Putin,

告訴普丁：

"You will not be able to absorb Ukraine into Russia.

「俄羅斯無法合并烏克蘭。

They don't want it, they don't want you.

烏克蘭人不想要，他們也不想要你。

If you continue,

如果你繼續，

the only thing you will achieve is to create terrible hatred

唯一會達成的，就是創造出

可怕的仇恨，

between Ukrainians and Russians for generations.

給數世代的烏克蘭人和俄羅斯人。 實在不必這樣。」

It doesn't have to be like that."

布：尤瓦爾，讓我用個 和你國家有關的問題作結吧。

BG: Yuval, let me finish with one question about your county.

You are in Israel.

你在以色列。

Israel has close ties with both Russia and Ukraine.

以色列和俄羅斯及烏克蘭 有密切的關係。

It's actually home of many Russian-born and many Ukrainian-born Jews.

許多在俄羅斯、烏克蘭出生的猶太人 都以以色列為家。

How is the country reacting to this conflict,

以色列對這場衝突的反應是什麼？ 我指的是政府以及人民的反應。

I'm talking about the government, but also about the population?

尤：其實我不是最適合 回答這個問題的人。

YNH: Actually, I'm not the best person to ask.

I've been so, kind of, following what's happening around the world,

我一直在追蹤全世界發生的事，

I didn't pay so much attention to what is happening right here.

反而沒有很關注這裡的狀況。

And even though I live here,

雖然我住在這裡，我也不是 以色列社會或政治的專家。

I'm not an expert on Israeli society or Israeli politics.

Definitely, the sentiment in the street, in the social media is with Ukraine.

街頭上和社群媒體上的意見 肯定是支持烏克蘭的。

You see Ukrainian flags,

會看到烏克蘭國旗，看到烏克蘭……

you see on social media people putting Ukrainian flags

在社群媒體上，會看到 大家的帳號掛上烏克蘭國旗。

on their accounts.

And another thing, so many people in Israel,

還有一點，以色列有很多人

they came from the former Soviet Union.

是來自前蘇聯。

And until now,

在這之前，

everybody was simply known as Russians.

就只知道大家都是俄羅斯人。

You know, even if you came from Azerbaijan or you came from Bukhara,

即使你來自亞塞拜然

或來自布哈拉，

you were a Russian.

你就是俄羅斯人。

And suddenly, "No, no, no, no, no.

突然間：「不，不，我不是俄羅斯人。

I'm not Russian.

I'm Ukrainian."

我是烏克蘭人。」

And again, these seeds of hatred that Putin is planting,

同樣的，普丁種下的這些仇恨種子，

it's reaching also here.

也到這裡來了。

That suddenly people are saying no, Russian, Ukrainian,

突然間，大家會分 俄羅斯人和烏克蘭人，

until a very short time ago, it's the same thing.

不久之前，兩者還是一樣的呢。 不，現在它們是不一樣的。

No, it's not the same thing.

So the shock waves are spreading.

所以，衝擊的波濤正在擴散開來。

布：尤瓦爾，謝謝你今天花時間 來跟我們分享你的知識

BG: Yuval, thank you for taking the time and being with us today

and sharing your knowledge and your views on the situation.

以及你對情勢的看法。非常謝謝你。

Thank you very much.

尤：謝謝，希望和平很快到來。

YNH: Thank you and I hope for peace quickly.

BG: We all do. Thank you.

布：我們都希望。謝謝。

[Get access to thought-provoking events you won't want to miss.]

〔你不會想錯過 這些發人深省的活動。〕

[Become a TED Member at ted.com/membership]

〔成為 TED 會員： ted.com/membership〕