这就是为什么朝鲜战争从未真正结束 [美国媒体]

This Is Why the Korean War Never Really Ended

这就是为什么朝鲜战争从未真正结束

  Ron Huisken

  罗恩 惠思肯

  July 17, 2017 

  2017年7月17日



The three countries that started the Korean War in June 1950—Russia (USSR), China and North Korea—are still maneuvering to secure a better outcome. When World War II ended in August 1945, American and Soviet troops had met more or less amicably at about the 38th parallel on the Korean peninsula. In 1949, both those powers withdrew their forces, leaving behind feeble local administrations in the north and the south that each aspired to lead the first government of the whole of Korea following the decades of Japanese colonial rule.

1950年6月这三个国家发动了朝鲜战争--俄罗斯(苏联)，中国 和 朝鲜 --他们仍然在继续试图获得更好的结果。当第二次世界大战在1945年8月结束时，美国和苏联军队在朝鲜半岛北纬38度线上差不多算友好的相遇。1949年 两个强权撤出了他们的武装部队，在南方和北方各自留下虚弱的地方政府，两个政府都渴望领导整个朝鲜半岛，成为几十年日本殖民统治之后的第一个政府。

Kim Il-sung, a northerner who had fought in the resistance against Japanese rule and was accepted by the occupying Soviet forces as the leader of the north, lobbied the Soviet leader to support using force to take over the south and bring the whole of the peninsula into the socialist camp. Stalin eventually agreed that that was an attractive and feasible objective. On the condition that Kim Il-sung also secure China’s support for the venture, Stalin undertook to provide equipment, training and planning but ruled out any direct involvement by Soviet forces.

金日成，北方领导人，日本统治时期就进行反日抵抗斗争并且是被占领时期苏联军队所接受的北方领导人，游说苏联领导人支持他使用武力接管南方，并且将整个半岛纳入共产主义阵营。斯大林最终同意这个有吸引力的可行目标。条件是金日成也要获得中国对这个冒险计划的支持。斯大林提供装备，培训和计划，但是排除苏联武装力量的直接参与。

China’s Mao Tse-tung approved the plan and North Korean forces launched the attack on 25 June 1950. The north overran the southern forces, who retreated to a small enclave around the southern port of Pusan before the American-led UN forces reversed those gains and routed the north’s forces only to encounter, in October 1950,  a large force of Chinese ‘volunteers’.

中国的毛泽东批准了这个计划并且朝鲜武装在1950年6月25日发起攻击。北方碾压了南方部队，南方部队撤退到南方港口釜山的一个环形区域，之后美国领导的联合国军反转了这一局势并打垮了北方军队，但这仅仅都发生在1950年10月遭遇到大规模中国的"志愿军"之前。

This US–China phase of the conflict lasted for two more years before a truce was negotiated that recognized the original informal dividing line—the 38th parallel—as the de facto border between the Republic of Korea in the south, allied to the US, and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea in the north, a socialist state closely tied to the USSR and China.

中美冲突持续了两年多，停战协定才签订，认可当初口头的分界线 -- 38线--作为事实上的分界线，区分两个国家 ，在南面是美国的盟友大韩民国，在北面是朝鲜民主主义人民共和国，一个与苏联和中国有着紧密联系的社会主义国家

That truce is still in place, which means that all the belligerents are still, in formal terms, at war with one another. And the peninsula did indeed evolve quickly into an arena of essentially permanent tension, provocation and imminent conflict. The USSR and China took care to ensure that Pyongyang lacked the capacity to contemplate renewed unilateral military adventurism. That remained the case even as the DPRK veered off towards becoming the most highly militarized and uniquely repressive authoritarian regime in the world.

停战协定依然在那里，意味着所有的交战方，在正式的条约上，依然与另一方是交战状态。这个半岛的的确确迅速演变为一个本质上永久紧张，挑衅和一触即发的冲突区域。苏联和中国将确保平壤无法单方面考虑新的军事冒险。并考虑了这种极端情况，即使是朝鲜转向高度军事化和作为世界上独特的独裁政权的情况。

The narrative that underpinned the DPRK’s political trajectory has been founded on the contention that the country had narrowly escaped naked American aggression in June 1950 and that the enemy, a superpower bristling with nuclear weapons, had since embedded itself in the south while it searched for another opportunity to invade.

按照朝鲜的叙事基础，朝鲜民主主义共和国的政治路线是基于这样一个论点，整个国家是顽强的在1950年赤裸裸的美国侵略之下坚持下来的，而这个敌人是布满核武器的超级大国，这个敌人就驻扎在南方，一直在寻找另一个机会再次入侵。

Russia and China have never had the courage to contest this narrative or, indeed, to seriously encourage the DPRK to take a different path. The US has for some 70 years  borne the lion’s share of the burden of deterrence and alliance management emanating from the machinations of the DPRK. Even when Pyongyang began, in the late 1980s, to explore the possibility of a nuclear option, Russia and China kept their distance. China, in particular, openly informed Washington at subsequent points of nuclear crisis—notably 1993–94 and 2002—that responsibility for the issue lay with the US and the DPRK.

俄罗斯和中国从未有勇气驳斥这种观点，或者说，去严肃的鼓励朝鲜去走一条不同的道路。美国在长达约70年的时间里一直承担着朝鲜阴谋所造成的威慑和盟友管理的重担。甚至在二十世纪80年代末平壤探索核武器选项的可能性，俄罗斯和中国依然保持距离，特别是中国，在随后的核危机问题上，尤其是1993年到1994年和2002年，公开向华盛顿通报了美国和朝鲜的责任。

The DPRK conducted its first nuclear test in 2006, and others followed in 2009, 2015 (two) and 2016. It then began to work more seriously on ballistic-missile-delivery vehicles and, over the period 2012–17, demonstrated developmental progress across a family of ballistic missiles that has astonished most experts. It is astonishing because the DPRK is small, very poor and the subject of rigorous sanctions to preclude the acquisition of critical nuclear and missile technologies. Some have drawn pointed attention to the fact that nearly all of North Korea’s trade comes through China.

朝鲜在2006年进行了它的第一次核试验，其他的核试验则在随后的2009年，2015年(二)和2016年。于是朝鲜开始更加认真的研究弹道导弹运载工具，在2012年至2017年期间，朝鲜所展示的开发进度，使得大多数专家感到震惊。这事让人震惊的原因是朝鲜是一个弱小，贫穷而且受到严格制裁，无法获得关键核技术和导弹技术的国家。一些人指出朝鲜所有对外贸易几乎都是通过中国。

For those reasons, it is more than a little rich for Russia and China to advocate, as they still do, that the solution must lie in the US agreeing to meet and negotiate with the DPRK unconditionally—that is, without even an understanding that the purpose of the negotiations is to reverse the DPRK’s nuclear and missile programs.

因为这些原因，对俄罗斯和中国来说，为朝鲜辩护就是小意思，正如以往他们所作的那样，坚持解决方案必须是美国同意和朝鲜会谈和协商--无条件的，就是这样，即使甚至没有达成谅解，也可以扭转朝鲜的核武器和导弹计划。

Moreover, China and Russia insist that even with the DPRK’s astonishing progress with ballistic missiles, the deployment by the US and South Korea of a more advanced THAAD (Terminal High Altitude Air Defense) system demonstrated an unacceptable disregard for their own strategic interests in an unimpeded capacity to target the US with ballistic missiles.

更有甚者，中国和俄罗斯坚持认为甚至在朝鲜弹道导弹运载工具突飞猛进的情况下，部署美国和韩国一点更先进的萨德系统(末端高空空间防御系统)被视为一个不能接受的蔑视行为，为了他们可以不受阻碍的以弹道导弹瞄准美国。

Finally, it matters that Vladamir Putin and Xi Jinping want to see the DPRK and the US set the stage for negotiations, by the former freezing its missile and nuclear tests and the latter cancelling its regular military exercises with South Korea, implying equal responsibility for the enduring impasse.

最后，很重要的一点，普京和中国希望朝鲜和美国登上谈判的舞台，由前者冻结核试验和导弹测试并且后者取消和韩国的定期军事演习，这意味着双方对目前僵局负有同等责任。

Each of these postures illustrates a cavalier denial of responsibility for the DPRK and all that has transpired on the peninsula since 1950. The fact is, however, that Russia and China bear deep and significant responsibility for the current state of affairs on the peninsula.

这些姿态的任何一个都表明他们对朝鲜责任的傲慢拒绝，和全部自1950年以来发生的一切事情的责任。然而，事实是，俄罗斯和中国对朝鲜半岛当前的事态发展负有深刻而重大的责任。

They may hope to prolong the crisis beyond the end of American pre-eminence so that the history sketched above can be recast. But we may also be approaching a defining point. There are no attractive military options, not even for a superpower, but if the US gets to the point where it harbors doubts about the stability of the DPRK leadership and suspects that any one of several missile types could be carrying a nuclear warhead, it may feel compelled to act.

他们可能希望把危机延续到美国卓越地位的终结，这样他们就可以重塑上面的历史。但是我们可能也要达成一个定义点。这里没有有吸引力的军事选项，即使是对一个超级大国来说，美国也会意识到这一点，只要对朝鲜的领导稳定性有疑虑，就会怀疑这些导弹中的任何一个带着核弹头飞来，这完全可能发生。

It’s only too clear that a negotiated outcome is beyond the reach of the three players most immediately involved—the US, South Korea and the DPRK. All the relevant players must bring their full influence to bear. That can’t happen if some won’t even acknowledge significant responsibility for the issue.

很明显，谈判达成的结果已经超出了直接参与的三名玩家 --美国 韩国和朝鲜，所有相关的玩家必须发挥他们的影响力。如果一些人甚至不承认对这个问题负有重大责任，那么这个谈判结果就不可能发生。