纳伦德拉·莫迪-唐纳德·特朗普会面：为什么我们如此容易对甜言蜜语高兴？ [印度媒体]

Narendra Modi-Donald Trump meet: Why are we so easily pleased with sweet nothings?

纳伦德拉·莫迪-唐纳德·特朗普会面：为什么我们如此容易对甜言蜜语高兴？

【日期】2017年6月27日

Nothing that was said at the meeting between President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Narendra Modi came with a timeline. Labels like ‘expeditiously’ or ‘shoulder to shoulder’ with reference to fighting terror or bringing perpetrators to justice are scarcely going to make the assorted nasties quake in their shoes.

总统唐纳德·特朗普和总理纳伦德拉·莫迪按时间安排进行了会面，但并未涉及实质性的内容。从他们的角度来看，有关打击恐怖分子或将肇事者绳之以法的一些像是“迅速”或“肩并肩”之类的外交辞令几乎不会造成各方面重大的地震级的影响。

The severe warning to Pakistan about ‘adhering to principles’ when it comes to the rule of law without a specific mention of Kulbhushan Jadhav is a dud bullet and one cannot see either Pakistan army chief General Qamar Bajwa or Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif getting too anxious about this 'pressure'.

在关于“坚持法治原则”方面针对巴基斯坦的严厉警告，也并没有具体提及库尔布山贾达夫，仅仅是一颗无用的子弹，而且也没人看到巴基斯坦军队总参谋长卡马尔·巴哈瓦或纳瓦兹·谢里夫总理表现得很担心这方面的'压力'。

Also, the warning to those promoting cross-border terrorism had no spunk in it, almost a mild ‘naughty boy’ admonishment that wouldn’t scare off a third grader, let alone a nation that has allowed 600 camps to operate on the Line of Control (LoC).

此外，在这个声明中，对于那些支持跨境恐怖主义的国家的警告的语气也很轻，这几乎就像是一个温和的“淘气男孩”的警告，根本吓不倒三年级的学生，更不用说对于这样一个在控制线上允许600个营地驻扎的国家。



Prime Minister Narendra Modi hugs US president Donald Trump. AP

美国总理纳伦德拉·莫迪拥抱美国总统唐纳德·特朗普。美联社

All this has been said before and none of it called for a high-profile trip such as this. These were all penny ante bromides and could have been skyped and dealt with. In fact, media on both sides was hard-placed to dredge for a peg to hang the story on and finally had to settle for cheerful and largely flaccid verbs and adjectives centred on the cordial and historical ties and other such fluff.

所有这一切早已是陈腔滥调，而且其中没有一项议题需要如此高调的国事访问。这些都是一些无关紧要的小事情，本可以通过网络通话来解决。事实上，双方的媒体都很难挖掘出一个与之挂钩的报道，于是最终不得不添加那些令人愉快的、基本上缺乏感情的动词和形容词，而这些动词和形容词都集中在亲密的历史关系和其他的细小的事情上。

So, what was it all about? There had to be something more than all this meaningless rhetoric, which makes one suspect the end-of-the-trip statement of intent was a smoke and mirror deflection.

那么，到底是怎么回事呢？一定有比这些毫无意义的修辞更能使人怀疑此行意图是另有蹊跷的事情。

Now, if there was an off-the-record reason or reasons that we are not privy to and they referred to either major military hardware or the strategic positioning of a combined force in the Asian-Pacific region to balance out the Chinese blue water presence, we are getting somewhere.

现在，这其中是否存在我们不了解的书面之下的原因或理由？再看他们提到了亚太地区的联合部队主要的军事装备和战略定位，而这个联合部队的存在是为了平衡中国远洋力量。我们似乎抓住了什么。

Beijing’s expansion of influence in Africa with the added common concern over North Korea’s plots and plans are a serious and urgent matter. Modi is a canny card player and he seldom shows his hand, using sleight in that limb to divert the eyes of the masses while he manoeuvres his chess pieces. You don’t travel all the way to the US to play chums or tell an Indian-born business congregation that your government hasn’t had one ‘dhubba’ (stain) of corruption in its three years.

北京对非洲的影响力的扩大，以及（全球）对北韩阴谋和计划的不断增强的共同关注也是一件严重而迫切的事情。莫迪是一个精明的牌手，不会轻易暴露他的动作。当他操纵棋子时，会运用手法去转移大众的视线。你一路到美国访问绝不仅仅是为了交个朋友，或者告诉在印度出生的商人们，你们的政府在这三年内没有一个腐败的“dhubba”（污点）那么简单。

The reason why there has to be more muscle in the discussion on these two issues is that India and the US actually do have the same anxiety over Chinese aggression. If you notice, China has objected to India’s move to create an air corridor to Afghanistan sans Pakistan, labelling it an example of ‘stubborn geopolitical thinking.’

在这两个问题中必须投入更多的力量的原因是，印度和美国对中国的侵犯实际上有着同样的焦虑。如果你留意的话，中国反对印度建立一个通往阿富汗巴基斯坦的空中走廊，而把它标榜为“固执的地缘政治思想”的例子。

The unilateral expression of hostility could well be interpreted as China’s unhappiness over the Indo-US conviviality.

单方面表达敌意可以更恰当的解释为中国对印度 - 美国友好关系的不开心。

If that be so and the two largest democracies are getting on the same page to create a new power equation, that makes sense.

如果是这样，那么两个最大的民主国家正在同一页面上创建一个新的权力方程，这就说的通了。

Diego Garcia, that contentious island in the Chagos Archipelago in the Indian Ocean, could well be at the epicentre of this fresh friendship. Britain had leased the island to the US to create a military base for fifty years in 1966 by expelling all the residents who lived there. That lease expired and was renewed recently till 2036. Mauritius claims the 60-island-cluster as its own and just two weeks ago, both Britain and the US wanted India to step in and mediate a calming of the waters with Port Louis.

迭戈加西亚，那个位于印度洋查戈斯群岛的有争议的岛屿，可能处在这个崭新的友好关系的中心位置。英国在1966年将这个岛屿租给了美国，美国建立了五十年的军事基地，并驱逐了所有居住在那里的居民。而这一租约已经到期了，最近才延续到2036年。毛里求斯声称60岛群是自己的。就在两个星期前，英国和美国都希望印度能够进驻并对路易斯港水域进行调停。

Britain’s flag over the islands is tenuous at best (even less than its hold on the Falklands) and continues more out a casual tolerance by India who could simply link up with Mauritius and take it over in a day and then renegotiate with the US for a combined naval presence smack right dab in the middle of the Indian Ocean. This is not a new concept and has been on the back burner for some time.

英国在这些岛屿上的力量是微不足道的（甚至比不上对福克兰群岛的控制），而印度对此保持一种淡定的态度。印度可以轻易地与毛里求斯建立好关系，并在一天之内对这个岛屿进行接管，然后对在印度洋中部的成立一个联合海军的合作问题上与美国展开重新谈判。这已经不是一个新的概念，已经讨论了有一段时间了。

Time will soon tell if this meet in Washington was to generate a fresh wind for our navy and allow it to rule its waves or simply waffle that has no carry forward to Hamburg when the American president and the Indian prime minister attend the G20 in less than ten days' time.

时间很快就会证明，这场在华盛顿进行，距离美国总统和印度总理参加G20峰会只有不到十天时间的会面究竟是为我们的海军创造了新风，并允许它统治它的海洋，还是说仅仅只是一块华夫饼，而后面并没有汉堡。