美海军将领评价中国军舰快速入列：弱不禁风 [美国媒体]

Two gray ships riding on the sea go by. They’ve got a bunch of flags flying and a bunch of sailors up on deck. One of them couldn’t fight their way out of a wet paper bag and the other one will rock anything that it comes up against.

两艘灰色的军舰在海上相遇，他们都旗帜飞扬，水兵们站在甲板上。然而其中的一艘弱不禁风，另一艘则能震撼所面对的任何东西。

Interview: Vice Adm. Tom Rowden, Commander, US Naval Forces

《防卫新闻》专访美国海军指挥官汤姆罗登中将



By: Christopher P. Cavas, January 8, 2017 (Photo Credit: SN Joshua Samoluk, US Navy)

From his perch in San Diego, COMSURFOR – the commander of US Naval Forces – oversees the preparation and training of all the US Navy’s surface warships – cruisers, destroyers, littoral combat ships, amphibious ships and mine warfare ships. Tom Rowden has had a major hand in the force’s development over the past five years, first as the director of the Surface Warfare Division N96 at the Pentagon, then as the service’s top surface warfare officer in San Diego. He’s championed the concept of distributed lethality and the reinvigoration of combat power in the surface forces. Now, in a new Surface Force Strategy released Jan. 9, he’s harkening back to another classic naval concept. 

坐镇圣地亚哥的基地，COMSURFOR——美国海军水面部队司令的简称——负责所有美国海军水面舰只的装备和训练，包括巡洋舰，驱逐舰，濒海战斗舰，两栖登陆舰和扫雷舰。汤姆罗登在过去五年为这支部队的发展做出了重要的贡献，先是在五角大楼担任水面作战部N96的总监，其后在圣地亚哥担任水面作战部队的最高指挥官。他一直支持分布式杀伤的概念，力主重新振兴水面作战力量。现在，通过1月9日发布的新水面作战战略，他重新提及了另一个经典海军概念。

You’ve succeeded in introducing the concept of distributed lethality into the Navy, and now you’re rolling into the larger concept of sea control – a term of art that was in vogue during the Cold War. Why now sea control? 

《防卫新闻》：之前你成功地给海军带来了分布式杀伤的概念，而现在你则升级到一个更大的范畴，制海权，一个带有冷战范的概念。为什么现在要提制海权？

In five years of focusing all my efforts on the surface warfare community and the surface ship contribution to the Naval team and the joint combined team, I put that against the backdrop of what’s happening globally with respect to nuclear competitors, non-government actors, some of the more destructive governments out there, I go back a conversation I had when I was a midshipman with then-Rear Adm. Hank Mustin. He pointed out that the reason the United States of America has a Navy is to control the sea. 

罗登：过去五年我把全部精力投入水面作战领域，以及水面舰只对海军和联合作战部队的贡献。这一切都是为了应对当下的世界形势，有核竞争对手，有非政府组织，有一些更加有破坏性的政府存在。我回想起当我还是一个海军学校学生时，与那时的海军少将Hank Mustin的一场对话。他指出，美国之所以有一支海军，目的就是要控制海洋。

Now in the 21 st century, this is a maritime century we’re driving in to, I see some of our nuclear competitors and their reactions to our complete dominance of the maritime domain. They seek to challenge that control of the sea that we’ve had. Surface ships play a significant role in sea control, and when we had complete and unfettered sea control we had the opportunity to, I guess, not concentrate as heavily on the contribution of surface ships. Well, the times have changed. 

现在是21世纪，我们进入的是一个海洋的世纪，我观察到我们有一些核竞争对手以及他们对我们的绝对制海权的反应。他们试图挑战我们对海洋的控制。水面舰只对于制海权来说扮演重要角色，当我们像曾经的那样拥有不受约束的完全的制海权时，我想我们有机会不那么依赖水面舰只的贡献。然而，时代已经不同了。

As we formulated the Surface Force Strategy I saw a lot of parallels from when we were challenged from the sea control perspective in the Cold War and some of the challenges we’re seeing now, and I concentrated on that conversation I had back with Mustin back in the ’81 timeframe where the Navy exists to control the sea for the prosperity of our country and to the benefit of our allied partners and friends. 

在构想水面部队战略时，我看到过去我们在冷战时对制海权的观点所受到的挑战与我们现在面对的挑战有很多类似之处，于是我聚焦在81年的背景下我与Hank Mustin的对话里，海军存在就是为了国家的繁荣，为了使我们的盟友和朋友受益，而控制海洋的这段内容。

When people talk about sea control the discussion often leads straight to aircraft carriers and submarines. What do surface ships bring to the picture? 

《防卫新闻》：说道制海权，话题常常会谈到到航空母舰和潜艇。水面舰艇带来了什么？

One is quantity has a quality all its own. Surface forces bring big numbers or have the potential to bring big numbers -- 62 destroyers and 22 cruisers in commission today, and a growing number of littoral combat ships coming into the force. From the numbers perspective we comprise the bulk of the United States Navy. However, I think it’s important that we concentrate on a strategy not just on ships or numbers or specific weapons, but a complete package of talent, tactics, training, and tools needed to maximize the value of surface ships in the sea control fight. And it’s been said to me on numerous occasions that, from the historical perspective, when you get into a sea control fight the first thing you run out of is ships. 

罗登：首先是以量取胜（G19注：原文为数量带来质量）。水面部队拥有并且有潜力带来大量舰只——当下有62艘驱逐舰、22艘巡洋舰正在服役，并且正有数量不断增加濒海战斗舰加入行列。当然，我认为很重要的一点是我们的战略不光是仅仅专注于舰艇本身，或者数量的多少，或者特定的先进武器，而是一个包含才能，技巧，训练和所需工具组成的一个体系，能最大化水面舰只在制海权作战中的价值。我曾多次说过，以史为鉴，当进行制海权作战时你不能缺少军舰。

You mentioned Littoral Combat Ships. One LCS, the Coronado, is deployed and operating from Singapore, but you’re in the process of revamping the crewing and support structures and singling up on mission packages. What’s in the near future for LCS? Is that the only deployment scheduled for 2017? 

《防卫新闻》：你提到了濒海战斗舰。其中一艘，科罗纳多号部被署在了新加坡。但是你正在进行人员、支持体系以及任务方面的重组。濒海战斗舰的未来如何？这会是2017年唯一的一次部署吗？

That is correct. 

罗登：是的。

You don’t have another LCS deployment scheduled for 2017? 

《防卫新闻》：你2017年没有其他部署濒海战斗舰的计划？

No, I don’t think so. 

罗登：我认为没有。

You have eight LCSs in commission now, and another four should enter service in 2017. What are those ships doing for the balance of 2017 into 2018? 

《防卫新闻》：你已经有8艘已经服役的濒海战斗舰，2017年还有4艘将入役。这些舰艇都在做些什么来平衡2017和2018年？

We’re in the process of implementing the review, recommendations, forming the first division, and getting the crews squared away, and we’re building the processes and infrastructure necessary to make sure we get those ships out on deployment. I’d like to say, yeah, I could snap my fingers and make it all happen immediately, but the reality of it is there’s a lot of moving parts in getting those combat ships out. On top of it, we formed the first two divisions, anti-surface warfare divisions.  I am looking to deploy in earnest in ’18. Obviously, we’ve got work to do. But certainly for the first division, East and West Coast, that’s when we’re looking to start deploying those ships. 

罗登：我们正在进行检验，建议，组建第一支部队，让舰员准备就绪；并且我们正在建立所必需的工作流程和架构，来确保舰只能够外出执行任务。我想说，是的，我可以打个响指就让这一切马上就发生，但是现实是，让这些战舰真正出海，有很多变量。最重要的是，我们第一次组建了两支部队，对海作战部队。我预计18年将大规模部署。很显然，我们有工作要做。但是可以肯定的一点是，第一支作战部队，东海岸和西海岸，我们预计将在18年开始部署。

In 2016 the Chinese Navy commissioned a 4,000-ton frigate in late February and sent it on a 7-month deployment six weeks later. It often takes a year or more for the US Navy to deploy a new destroyer. What are the Chinese doing that the US Navy does not? What does the US Navy do that the Chinese don’t?

《防卫新闻》：2016年，中国海军在2月晚些时候入列了一艘四千吨的护卫舰，六周后就被派出执行了7个月的任务。美国海军一般需要一年或者更多时间来部署一艘新的驱逐舰。有哪些是中国人能做到的而美国海军做不到的？有哪些是美国海军能做到的而中国人做不到的？

Two gray ships riding on the sea go by. They’ve got a bunch of flags flying and a bunch of sailors up on deck. One of them couldn’t fight their way out of a wet paper bag and the other one will rock anything that it comes up against. Could we commission a guided-missile destroyer and steam it out of the harbor and take it on a world cruise? Yeah, I could. But in that situation I would not be taking care of what I refer to as the center of the universe. I want those men and women on that ship to be 100 percent confident in the ship and confident in the execution of any mission leadership may give them. So what are the Chinese thinking? I don’t know anything about it. I would tell you that I find it kind of interesting they feel they have to do that. To what end? I don’t know. 

罗登：两艘灰色的军舰在海上相遇，他们都旗帜飞扬，水兵们待在甲板上。然而其中的一艘弱不禁风（G19注：原文为钻不出一个湿纸袋），另一艘则能震撼所面对的任何东西。我们能否入列一艘导弹驱逐舰，然后马上就驶离港口开始巡游世界？是的，我可以。但是在这种情况下，我不会有处在世界中心的感觉。我需要舰上的官兵能百分之百对自己的战舰有信心，对执行领导给他们的任何任务有信心。而中国人在想什么呢？我不知道。他们觉得不得不这样做，说老实话我觉得很有趣。会导致什么？我不知道。

As commander of Surface Forces you prepare your ships to go out and meet operational demands, focusing on enhanced combat power, tactics, talent, tools, and training. Do you have the resources now to effectively carry out all those requirements or do you need more and where do you need more? 

《防卫新闻》：作为水面部队司令，你要使你的战舰能够满足外出执行军事行动的需要，致力于提升战斗力，技巧，才华，工具，和训练。你觉得你现在有没有足够的资源来有效达到这些要求？还是说你需要更多资源，以及需要哪些方面的资源？

In the strategy I specifically didn’t say, “Hey, these are the resources that we need,” because, I mean, it’s not only discussions within the United States Navy, but obviously within the larger, broader DoD and the government. Are there timelines associated with what we’d like to do with the surface force? Yes. Are there resources required associated with what we’d like to do with the surface force? Yes. The requirement for the United States Navy is to go ahead and execute sea control. We can accelerate when resources are added. 

罗登：在我的战略里我没有具体说：“嘿，这些是我们需要的资源”，因为，我的意思是，这不光是局限在美国海军内部的讨论，而是显然在更大更宽广的范围内如国防部甚至政府层面讨论的事。对于我们水面部队将要做的事情有没有具体时间线？有。有没有相应的资源配套？有。对于美国海军的要求是大踏步前进，实施制海权。更多的资源能让我们的步子更快。

Absolutely, we could use more resources, but I think that it also provides us a framework for the resources that lays out priorities and starts to drive those in the direction that allows maximum utilization and maximum benefit of whatever the resources are. 

当然，我们可以使用更多资源，但是我想我们需要为资源制定一个框架，设定优先顺序，在那些可以最大化利用和最大化收益的方向上开始推进。