美國政要第2課
The Role of Alliances and Future Operations
-- Interview with the Chairman of the National Defense Panel, Philip A. Odeen(April 10, 1998) 訪國防小組委員會主席菲利普•奧迪思
MR. CHEN BOJIANG: How do you view the role of alliances in international security and regional stability in the future? Will it be changed somewhat in content and form from today?
MR. ODEEN: I think alliances will continue to be very important in the future. I mean, our principal alliance is still active, and it is changing of course with admission of new countries, it’s gotten larger. Its military purposes are not as clear because you don’t have a Soviet threat any more.
The first time NATO1 had operated2 outside of its own area was when they went into Bosnia. That was quite a change. And so I believe you’ll see NATO wiling to operate outside of the European theaters more over time, but as the alliance gets larger and more and more countries are involved, it also makes it harder to get a consensus, to get agreement, and so it will be more difficult.
The United States has really dominated NATO for many, many years, but our position is not as powerful as it was, I think probably because the big threat is gone. The Soviet threat’s gone. So although the structure is still there, but I think the American influence is not quite as strong, and in 5 or 10 years it may be weaker yet.
In Asia, we don’t really have alliances like that. Japan, of course, is still a major ally. Korea is probably the most obvious ally, but they are really focused on the North Korea problem. If North Korea were to go away, if they ever did combine, that alliance would be of much less purpose at that point. There has been a strengthening of the U.S.-Japan relationship over the last 2 or 3 years, and I think Japan is much more essential, critical.
So I think it’s harder to forecast in Asia, because it depends very much on Japan to some extent. Will Japan’s economy recover? If America stays involved in Asia, I think there’s a good chance that Japan will remain as they are. If America begins to pull back, there will be a lot of pressure in Japan for them to build up their armaments.
So there’s a lot of dynamics3 going on in Asia between China, and Japan, and the United States that are very hard to forecast. You can’t forecast it. I don’t think it’s inevitable that we have to be hostile to one another. I think there are many opportunities for the relationship to get closer over time. And I hope that’s what will happen. And I think both China and the United States-perhaps maybe our most important foreign policy objective ought to be to maintain a good relationship with one another, because we’re both large and potentially hostile countries, and if we become hostile, it’s going to be bad for everybody. We’ll both have to spend more money in defense. There will be many problems.
So I think it’s very important that we continue to try to build good relations, good trade relations, investment. I think it’s very healthy to have Chinese students in the United States, more Americans going to China. We need to work on that, I think. It’s very important for both countries that we do that.
MR. CHEN: It is likely that urban operations4 will become more important in the future. What are your comments on the importance of urban operations?
MR. ODEEN: One of the things that’s happening in every country in the world, China and everywhere, is the cities are getting much, much larger, and people are leaving the country and moving to the cities, because of course there are job opportunity there. And that’s happening in Africa. It’s happening everywhere, and especially in areas like South America, Central America. But it’s happening in most parts of the world. And also the urban areas tend to be the areas where the discontent-that’s where radical elements may be. It’s easier to organize in large urban areas. So if there are terrorist groups that are opposing the government, and the government has to come in and help them, you’re going to have to operate in cities. And it’s something that’s very difficult for military forces to operate in cities. Nobody likes to fight in cities. The military are very vulnerable.
One of the things that the U.S. military has to do is to learn both better tactics5 and also develop better equipment. The Marine Corps6 is setting up a training area in California, out in the desert, an urban training facility to train in how to work in cities, what are the tactics you use, how do you operate effectively.
There’s also a good bit of money being spent on better technology. There are sensors that can detect a person behind a wall, because of very small temperature differences and using various kinds of radars, and infrared, and things like that. So there may be different ways to use technology to make it more effective to fight in those circumstances.
But this is something that generally the American military has avoided fighting into-they can just go around them, and leave them, and try to stay out of the cities. But that will not continue to work I don’t think.
MR. CHEN: What is your comment on the importance of U.S. power projection capability in the future? Does the U.S. attempt to strengthen its power projection capability mean a reduction in its forward presence in the future?
MR. ODEEN: We are a long way away without having to take as much logistic7 support along. The Air Force has concepts for deploying aircraft squadrons8 with only very small amounts of support in relying on a resupply to send your replacement parts and black boxes from the United States, using airlift rather than putting big maintenance activities at air fields, finding ways to resupply more rapidly from the distance, rather than having it all there.
Even the use of smart weapons9 requires less weight, less tonnage. Fewer weapons will do the job, so you don’t have to have as much stuff. The old style iron bombs are very heavy and difficult to move.
So there’s a lot of new concepts, tactics and equipment that let us put forces a long ways to the United States, very quickly, and more easily because you don’t have to take as much stuff along.
One of the things when we were doing our study, when we traveled dither to Asia or to Europe, the question always was, are you going to keep 100,000 Americans-there was about 100,000 in Asia, about 100,000 in Europe. Are you going to keep them there for a long time? But it’s a political sign of American commitment, and if there are no forces there, people are not assured that we’ll bring them when they need them, so they see them as a sign of our commitment, sign of our guarentee. In Korea, for example, if there are Americans there, and the Americans are going to get involved, to get killed on day one if there’s an attack from the North Koreans, they know that the Americans will be involved. If they’re not there, then there may be questions, there may be doubts. So maybe having them there is a deterrent in a difficult situation like Korea.
And even though we’re better at deploying, it’s always easier if you’re closer, and especially if you have bases for ships to go in to refuel, and for maintenance10. Like we have in parts of Japan or Singapore, or Australia, Guam, places like that. Because the distances in Asia are so great, from the United States to Southeast Asia or Northeast Asia, it’s helpful to have them.
So I believe we’ll have forces fully deployed for a long time. I don’t know how long that is, but I don’t see-the fact that we can deploy them better, I don’t see that mattering, because I think much of why they’re there is political rather than military.
WORDS AND EXPRESSIONS 詞匯提示
1.NATO(North Atlantic Treaty Organization) 北約
2.operate [] v. 遂行軍事行動
3.dynamics [] n. 發(fā)展動力
4.urban operations 城市作戰(zhàn)
5.tactics [] n. 戰(zhàn)術
6.the Marine Corps 海軍陸戰(zhàn)隊
7.logistic [] n. 后勤
8.squadrons [] n. 空軍中隊
9.smart weapon 精確制導武器，智能武器
10.maintenance [] n. 維護，保養(yǎng)
QUESTIONS AFTER LISTENING 聽后答題:
1. How did MR. ODEEN think about the role of alliances in the future?
A.Alliances would quit the stage in the future.
B.Alliances would continue to be very important in the future.
C.Alliances would beless important in the future.
D.Alliances would be narrowed in scope in the future.
2. Why did MR. ODEEN think that their position in NATO now was not as powerful as it had been?
A.Because the U.S. is weaker than before.
B.Because European countries are stronger than before.
C.Because the neo-isolationism is stronger in the U.S..
D.Because the Soviet threats have gone.
3. Which of the mutual relationships is much more essential and critical for the U.S. in the Asia-Pacific region?
A.U.S. -Korea.
B.U.S. -Britain.
C.U.S. -Japan.
D.U.S. -Germany.
4. Why did MR. ODEEN think that the foreign policy objective in both China and the United States ought to be maintaining a good relationship with one another?
A.Because both are large and potentially hostile countries.
B.Because both are large and friendly countries.
C.Because both are developing countries in the world.
D.Because both are developing countries in the Asia-Pacific region.
5. What is happening in every country in the world according to Mr.ODEEN?
A.It is the cities are getting much, much larger.
B.It is the population is getting large and larger.
C.It is the weather is getting warmer and warmer.
D.It is the environment is getting worse and worse.
6. What does the U.S. military have to do in dealing with urban operations?
A,To develop nuclear weapons.
B.To learn better tactics and develop better equipment in how to operate in cities.
C.To expand its military forces.
D.To strengthen its Marine Corps.
7.What’s the meaning of the sentence “we are a long way away without having to take as much logistic support along.”
A.We have a long way to go to set up an urban training facility.
B.We have a long way to go to deploy new military forces in the Mideast Asia.
C.We can deploy a new force far from the bases without heavy logistic support.
D.We have to take much logistic support all the way from the bases.
8.What’s the purpose of the U.S. military presence in the Asia-Pacific region in ODEEN’s words?
A.It is to avoid a war.
B.It is to take a commitment.
C.It is to keep stability.
D.It is to deter a threat like North Korea.
9.In what places are there U.S. military bases for ship refueling and maintenance according to Mr. ODEEN?
A.Japan, Australia and Taiwan.
B.Korea, Japan and Singapore.
C.Thailand, Japan and Guam.
D.Japan, Singapore, Australia and Guam.
10.What’s the meaning of the sentence “I don’t see that mattering.”
A.I don’t understand the matter.
B.I don’t find out the matter.
C.I don’t think the matter is vital.
D.I don’t know the matter.
【參考譯文】
聯盟的作用與未來作戰(zhàn)
陳伯江：您怎樣看待聯盟在未來國際安全和地區(qū)穩(wěn)定中的作用？在聯盟的內容和形式上，將會出現哪些與今天有所不同的變化？
奧迪恩：我認為聯盟在今后仍將非常重要。我的意思是，我們的主要聯盟體系仍將不變，但要隨著新國家的加盟有所變化。聯盟變得更大了。由于蘇聯的威脅不復存在，聯盟的軍事目的不夠明確。
北大西洋公約組織首次在它以外的地區(qū)作戰(zhàn)就是進入波斯尼亞，這是一個相當大的變化。我認為隨著時間推移，你將會看到北大西洋公約組織愿意更多地在歐洲以外地區(qū)作戰(zhàn)。但是由于該組織的擴大，涉及的國家越來越多，這也將使它更難達成一致，因而其行動將會更加困難。
美國在北大西洋公約組織中起主導作用已經有許多年了，但我們的領導地位不再像以往那樣有力。我認為這大概是蘇聯的威脅已不存在的緣故。所以盡管該組織結構依舊，我認為美國的影響已今不如昔，在今后５或１０年也許會更弱。
在亞洲，我們沒有像北大西洋公約組織那樣的聯盟。當然，日本仍是主要的盟國。韓國大概也是最明顯的盟國。但韓國的重點在北朝鮮問題上。如果北朝鮮不再存在，如果他們能統(tǒng)一起來，在這種情況下，聯盟的意義將會大大削弱。過去２、３年中，美日關系已得到加強，我認為日本更加重要和關鍵。
我認為亞洲未來的預測更加困難因為害某種程度上與日本有非常密切的關系。日本的經濟能否會繼續(xù)保持現狀；如果美國開始撤軍，日本將面臨發(fā)展自己的武裝力量的巨大壓力。
因此，在亞洲，在日和中美之間存在著大量難以預測的發(fā)展動向。你不可能預測。我認為隨著時間的推移，有許多的機會使我們的關系越來越密切。并且我希望將會是這樣。也許我們最重要的外交政策目標，應當是保持我們之間的良好關系，加為我們都是大國并是潛在的對手。如果我們變?yōu)閿橙?，將對誰都不好。我們都不得不在國防上花更多鐵錢，這將會帶來許多問題。
所以我認為中美兩國繼續(xù)努力發(fā)展良好的外交關系、貿易關系以及投資是非常重要的。讓中國學生到美國，讓更多的美國人去中國也是非常有益的。我們需要為此而努力，對我們兩國來說，這樣做都很重要。
陳：在今后，城市作戰(zhàn)將變得更加重要。您對城市作戰(zhàn)的重要性有何評論？
奧迪恩：世界上每個國家（包括中國和其它地方）正在發(fā)生的諸多變化之一，就是城市越來越大，人們正在離開農村到城里去，因為那里有更多的工作機會。這種情況發(fā)生在非洲，發(fā)生在世界上大多數地區(qū)，尤其是南美和中美地區(qū)。
與此同時，城市也正在成為滋生不滿，即可能出現激進因素的區(qū)域。在大城市更容易發(fā)展組織。因此，如果出現反政府的恐怖組織，政府就必須進行干預，軍隊將不得不在城市作戰(zhàn)。軍隊在城市作戰(zhàn)非常困難，沒有人愿意在城里打仗，軍隊將非常脆弱。
為了適應城市作戰(zhàn)，美國軍隊需做許多事情。其中之一是既要掌握更好的戰(zhàn)術又要發(fā)展更好的裝備。海軍陸戰(zhàn)隊現正在加利福尼亞州的沙漠地帶建設一個訓練區(qū)，該訓練區(qū)利用訓練城市作戰(zhàn)的設施，訓練如何在城市作戰(zhàn)，采用何種戰(zhàn)術，以及怎樣有效地進行作戰(zhàn)。
為研制用于城市作戰(zhàn)的更先進的技術，也花了不少錢?，F已有多種傳感器能探測躲在墻后的人，因為人與墻有微小的溫差，可利用雷達、紅外線以及諸如此類的傳感器進行探測。運用技術使軍隊更有效地在城區(qū)環(huán)境下作戰(zhàn)的方式可以是多種多樣的。
然而，一般說來，美軍以往總是避免進行城區(qū)作戰(zhàn)。他們盡可能繞開城市，離開城市，并設法滯留城外。但我認為今后不能再這樣繼續(xù)下去了。
陳：您對未來美國力量投送能力的重要性有何看法？美國試圖在今后加強其力量投送能力是否意味著將減少其前沿存在？
奧迪恩：我們能夠遠距高部署部隊，而不需要攜帶太多的后勤保障物品?？哲姴渴痫w行中隊的做法是只隨機攜帶很少的補給品，而依靠從美國本土運送各種備件和電子設備組件的再補給。利用空運，可以不在機場進行大修活動。我們設法更快地從遠處進行再補給，而不是在當地完成所有補給。
由于智能武器的運用，所需要的重量和噸位更少。只需少量武器就可完成任務，因而你不必運送很多物品。老式的炸彈非常笨重，搬運困難。
因此，有許多新的概念、戰(zhàn)術和裝備，使我們能在遠離本土的地方非?？焖俨⒏菀椎夭渴鸩筷?。因為你不需要自身攜帶太多的物品。
在我們進行這一問題的研究時，無論我們到亞洲還是到歐洲，我們總會遇到這樣的問題：你們將繼續(xù)保持１０萬美軍-即大約１０萬美軍在亞洲，１０萬美軍在歐洲嗎？你們會長期保留這些駐軍嗎？海外駐軍是美國承擔義務的政治標志。如果我們不在那里駐軍，人們無法確定當他們南要的時候，我們是否會派軍隊去。因此他們把美國駐軍看作是承擔義務的標志、守信的標志。
例如，在朝鮮，如果有美軍有那里，而且美國準備在北朝鮮發(fā)動進攻的第一天就會有傷亡，他們就會知道美國不會袖手旁觀。如果美軍不在那里，那么就可能會出現問題和疑惑。所以在像朝鮮那樣困難的情況下，美軍留在那里就可能是一種威懾因素。
雖然我們有很強的部署能力，如果部署距離更近就會更容易，特別是如果你有能讓船只開進去加油和維護的基地，就會更方便一些。就像我們在日本，或新加坡，或澳大利亞、關島擁有的基地那樣。因為從美國到東南亞或東北亞的距離太遙遠，有這些基地就很有幫助。
所以，我認為我們將會在海外長期部署足夠的部隊。我不知道會有多長，而且我不認為我們有了更強的部署能力與這有多大的關系。因為我認為他們所以要留在那里的主要原因是政治上的，而非軍事上的。
KEYS TO THE QUESTIONS 參考答案：
1. b 2. d 3. c 4. a 5. a 6. b 7.c 8. c 9.d 10.c
