【加拿大赫芬顿邮报】在中国南海展示力量不会让加拿大得到尊重 [加拿大媒体]

Show Of Force In South China Sea Won't Earn Canada 'Respect'

在中国南海展示力量不会让加拿大得到尊重



Canadian leaders' search for "gravitas" and "respect" from their U.S. counterparts is adding to friction in the Asia-Pacific. Amidst tension on the Korean Peninsula, the Canadian Navy has joined Washington's pivot towards Asia.

加拿大领导人在追求“庄严”和美国领导人“尊重”的同时，也加剧了亚太地区的摩擦。随着朝鲜半岛紧张局势加深，加拿大海军加入了华盛顿的亚洲战略。

Recently departed, HMCS Chicoutimi is expected to be in the Asia-Pacific until March. While they did not offer CBC News much detail, a military spokesperson said the first-ever Victoria-class submarine deployed to the region will "provide the government with defence and security options should a timely Canadian response be necessary."

今日出海的加拿大皇家海军“希库蒂米”号潜艇预计将在亚太地区停留至明年三月。虽然官方并没有给CBC新闻以详细内容，但一位军方发言人称，首次向该地区部署的维多利亚级潜艇将“保证政府的国防安全措施得以按时进行，这是必要的。”

Chicoutimi's deployment follows on the heels of a six-month tour of Asia by HMCS Ottawa and Winnipeg, which included "freedom of navigation" operations and exercises alongside U.S., Japanese, Australian and other countries' warships. When the two Canadian gunboats travelled through the South China Sea with their allies, Chinese vessels came within three nautical miles and "shadowed" them for 36 hours. On another occasion a Chinese intelligence vessel monitored HMCS Winnipeg and Ottawa while they exercised with a South Korean ship.

在“希库蒂米”潜艇的部署之前，加拿大皇家海军渥太华号和温尼伯号就已经进行了为期六个月的亚太之旅，其中还和美国、日本、澳大利亚及其他国家的军舰举行了“航行自由”演习与训练。当两艘加拿大炮艇与他们的盟友一起穿越南海时，中国舰艇在三海里外，尾随了他们36个小时。在另一个场合中，当渥太华号和温尼伯号护卫舰与韩国船只展开训练时，有一艘中国情报船对其展开监视。

After visiting HMCS Ottawa and Winnipeg in Singapore Chief of Defence Staff Jon Vance declared, "if one wants to have any respect or gravitas you have to be in that region."

在访问了渥太华号和温尼伯号护卫舰后，新加坡国防参谋长乔恩万斯说：“如果你想得到尊重和庄严，你就必须在那个地区。”

The Canadian Navy has supported Washington's aggressive posture.

加拿大海军支持华盛顿的侵略性姿态

During the past decade the U.S. and its principle Asian economic ally Japan have lost their economic hegemony over the region. With Chinese power growing and the Obama administration's pivot designed to contain it, Washington has sought to stoke longstanding territorial and maritime boundary disputes in the South China Sea between China and the Philippines, Malaysia, Vietnam and other nations. As part of efforts to rally regional opposition to China, the U.S. Navy engages in regular "freedom of navigation" operations, which see warships travel through or near disputed waters — kind of like the logic employed by street gangs defending "their" territory.

在过去的十年里，美国及其亚洲盟友日本已经失去了在该地区的经济霸权。随着中国实力的增强，和奥巴马政府的“亚太再平衡”战略，华盛顿一直试图在中国南海，这个位于中国与菲律宾、马来西亚、越南和其他国家之间的地区，挑起长期存在的领土（与海洋领土）争议。
作为团结该地区反对中国的努力的一部分，美国海军经常进行“航行自由”行动，穿越或者是接近那些有争议的水域。这种行动的内在逻辑，和街头帮派为保卫他们的“领土”所使用的手段几乎如出一辙。

The Canadian Navy has supported Washington's aggressive posture. They've increased participation in patrols and exercises in the region. In 2012 it came to light the military was seeking a small base or "hub" in southeast Asia — probably in Singapore — with a port facility.

加拿大海军支持华盛顿的侵略姿态。他们增加了在该地区的巡逻和演习。2012年，加拿大军方开始在东南亚寻找一个小型基地或“枢纽”——可能是在新加坡——拥有一个港口设施。

Unfortunately, exerting naval power in the region is nothing new for this country. For two decades the Canadian navy has made regular port visits to Asia. Since its 1971 inception, Canada has participated in every Rim of the Pacific Exercise, which is a massive U.S.-led maritime warfare training every two years.

不幸的是，在亚太地区发挥海军力量对这个国家（加拿大）来说并不是什么新鲜事。二十年来，加拿大海军定期访问亚洲。自1971年环太平洋演习创立以来，加拿大一直参与该项行动，这是一个庞大的，由美国领导的海上作战演习，每两年举行一次。

Immediately after U.S. forces invaded Korea in 1950, Ottawa sent three gunboats to the region. Ultimately, eight Canadian warships with 3,600 soldiers were deployed to the country during the conflict (a total of 27,000 Canadians fought in the three-year war that left millions dead). Canadian ships transported troops and bombed the North.

1950年美国军队入侵朝鲜后，加拿大政府立即派出三艘炮艇前往该地区。最终，在这场战争中(总共有27000名加拿大人参加了这场历时3年的战争，导致数百万人死亡)，有8艘加拿大军舰被部署到该国。加拿大船只运送军队并轰炸朝鲜。

According to a Canadian War Museum exhibit, "During the war, Canadians became especially good at "train busting." This meant running in close to shore, usually at night, and risking damage from Chinese and North Korean artillery in order to destroy trains or tunnels on Korea's coastal railway. Of the 28 trains destroyed by United Nations warships in Korea, Canadian vessels claimed eight.

根据加拿大战争博物馆的展览，“在战争期间，加拿大人特别擅长于“炸火车”。“这意味着加拿大军舰，通常是在晚上，冒着中国和朝鲜炮击的危险，破坏韩国沿海铁路的火车或隧道。”在被联合国军舰摧毁的28列火车中，加拿大船只声称摧毁了其中的8列。

Like the smaller, weaker kid in a street gang, our "leaders" are trying to prove how tough we are.

就像街头帮派中弱小的孩子一样，我们的“领导人”正试图证明我们有多坚强。

Before the outbreak of the Korean War, the Canadian Navy sought to exert itself in the region. In a bizarre move, Ottawa sent a naval vessel to China in 1949 as the Communists were on the verge of victory. According to Canadian GunboatDiplomacy, the boat was sent too late to stop the Kuomintang's defeat by Mao's forces and was not needed to evacuate Canadians since British boats could remove them. The objective, it seems, was to demonstrate to the U.S. and U.K. "that Canada was a willing partner," particularly in light of the emerging north Atlantic alliance.

在朝鲜战争爆发之前，加拿大海军就已经试图在该地区发挥作用。在一次奇怪的举动中，加拿大政府于1949年向中国派遣了一艘军舰，当时共产党已经即将取得胜利。根据加拿大炮舰外交的说法，这艘船被派遣得太晚，无法阻止国民党的战败，而它也不需要撤离加拿大侨民，因为英国船只可以运送他们。看起来，加拿大政府的目标是向美国和英国展示“加拿大是一个愿意合作的伙伴，”尤其是在北约组织刚刚成立的背景之下。

And like the smaller, weaker kid in a street gang, our "leaders" are trying to prove how tough we are. Need someone to attack a house? Sure, we'll do it. Show them our firepower? We're in.

就像街头帮派中弱小的孩子一样，我们的“领导人”正试图证明我们有多强硬。需要人来攻击房子吗？当然,我们为你们这样做；需要向他们展示我们的实力吗？有我们在。（译注：这段话的大意即，加拿大政府想对英美展示，他是一个多么忠心耿耿的狗腿子）

Canadian military planners' search for "gravitas" is akin to gang logic. Let's hope our behaviour in Asia doesn't lead to where gang warfare has taken some North American cities.

加拿大军事规划者寻找“庄严”的方法类似于帮派逻辑。让我们希望我们在亚洲的行为不会导致一些北美城市的黑帮战争。



Wish they would send the armada to New England. We'd love to see the ships and all the restaurants would be happy. If given some notice we'd arrange parades and concerts. P town has a nice deep harbor for the a few or the larger ships and what kid wouldn't love to see a sub without traveling all the way to RI. Especially a Canadian one. I know all the pipe bands in the area would want to welcome them ashore. The first time I ever got to touch a helicopter was when a Canadian Ice breaker came to Boston in the 50's. I couldn't believe it.

希望他们能把舰队派遣到新英格兰地区。我们很想看看这些船，所有的餐馆都会很高兴的。如果有人希望的话，我们会安排游行和音乐会。波士顿有一个很好的海港，有一些船穿梭其间。哪个孩子不喜欢看到潜水艇呢？尤其还是一个加拿大潜艇。
这个地区所有的管乐队都想要欢迎海军官兵们上岸。我第一次接触直升飞机就是在50年代，加拿大破冰船来到波士顿的时候。那次经历真是难以置信。

Catherine ValeLeader3 Nov
What a crock. We are not trying to gain favour with the US bully here. The bully is China. Why not a word about that?

多么虚弱的逻辑。我们不是在讨美国流氓的欢心。中国才是那个流氓。为什么你不说说这件事？

Elizabeth PalLeader3 Nov
America says  - jump . We ask - how high ?

我们对美国言听计从、俯首帖耳。

Philip SheldrakeLeader2 Nov
Show Of Farce you mean.

这不是展示力量，这纯粹是场闹剧。

Mike SchapanskyLeader31 Oct
No it won't but rather exert your energy on telling China not to build fake islands in order to 'militarize' the south China sea so Canada won't send their crap navy in the first place. Canada already lost respect on the world stage, no point in worsening it.

如果你用你的精力告诉中国不要建造假的岛屿，以“军事化”中国南海，这样加拿大就不会在第一时间派出他们的海军了。
至于加拿大，加拿大早已在世界舞台上失去了尊重，我们已经没有尊严可以丢失了。

Ralph GorleyLeader31 Oct
Avast, mateys! Shake out more canvas and get our fleet to the Far East. Sharpen those cutlasses and check the flints on the gunlocks.

且慢，伙计们！升起帆来，让我们的舰队驶向远东。让我们把弯刀磨快，让我们检查火枪上的燧石。（译注：讽刺加拿大海军武备落后）

Philip SheldrakeLeaderRalph Gorley2 Nov
Over estimating our resources aren't you.

你实在高估我们的实力了。

Steve BowierLeader31 Oct
Rest assured Yves, you will not be called upon for active duty because  of your heel spur. Go away coward. Either we're with our allies or we're not.

你大可放心，你是不会被征召入伍的，因为你的脚踝长了骨刺（译注：讽刺本文作者懦弱）。你这个懦夫滚开！我们要和我们的盟友在一起，否则我们就不是（他们的盟友）。

Dave ConstableLeader31 Oct
Brunei, China, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Taiwan, Vietnam Have claims in the South China Sea. Seems to me Japan does too.
USA and its posse claims they are protecting freedom of navigation, so having us in the mix keeps the nations in the region from working things out.
Interesting that we should chip in with USA on this, because if USA gets its way in the South China Sea, you can bet your Canadian dollars they will be eager to continue applying the precedent in our Northwest passage.

文莱、中国、印尼、马来西亚、菲律宾、台湾、越南都声称在南海拥有主权。在我看来，日本也是。
而美国和它的乌合之众则声称他们在保护航行自由，所以我们就参与进来，实际上使得该地区的国家无法解决南海问题。
有趣的是，我们（不）应该在这个问题上与美国合作，因为如果美国在南中国海问题上取得了成功，我敢保证，他们将继续把这种事在我们的西北航道上再干一遍。

（译注：西北航道是途经加拿大北部的一条航道，一旦能够进行商业通航，将产生显着的经济效益。）

Monty BurnsLeader31 Oct
First, we need a ship that is seaworthy.  

Our military needs funding.  How about stopping. Giving billions overseas, and build a proper navy?

首先，我们需要一艘能出航的船。

我们的军队需要资金。为什么不停止在海外浪费数十亿美元，节约资金建立一支好点的海军?

NORD STURMLeaderMonty Burns31 Oct
We have seaworthy ships. What we don't have currently is enough personnel and funding. 
If a military matching our GDP was in order and meant votes we would be second to none for our size. Instead we trail in the distance with Liberals BSing the population and promising social stuff that never happens.

我们有能出航的船。我们所缺少的是足够的人员和资金。
如果我们的军费和我们的GDP相匹配，那我们军队的规模将是首屈一指的。但我们和自由主义者走在一起。所以人口也不会增长，任何有前途的事都不会发生。

Mike SchapanskyLeaderNORD STURM31 Oct
So far. Submarines aren't sea worthy and never will be. No destroyers with actual military capable...wait, we got rid of our destroyers..nevermind. Frigates are 50 years old. Pea shooters won't stop a whale. Halifax shipyards supposedly building navy ships....won't be done in 50 years if ever. By then, technology will be by passed by Canadian ineptitude.

随你怎么说吧。潜水艇可不是适于航海的，永远也不会。我们没有真正具有军事能力的驱逐舰……我们自己干掉了我们的驱逐舰……我们的护卫舰已经服役50年了，这个豌豆射手连鲸鱼都打不沉。哈利法克斯造船厂据说要造军舰……如果不是永远也造不出来的话，至少也要造50年。到那时，（先进）的技术就要对无能的加拿大敬而远之。

Paul GrahamLeaderMonty Burns3 NovEdited
For what purpose?  With every last cent and every last life, Canada could no more invade or correct China than you could be eaten by a Blue Crab. Why go that route ? Armadas are a thing of the past. Spain built a proper one at one time though. Very impressive, like the Bismark. Canada should invest in high tech engineering encouraging research not  spending on building a war machine.

（建成了海军）又能用于什么目的?哪怕你花光最后一分钱，流尽最后一滴血，加拿大也不可能入侵中国，就像你不可能被一只蓝蟹吃掉一样。为什么要走那条路线呢？无敌舰队是过去的事了。、西班牙如今建造了一支规模合适的海军。那也非常令人印象深刻。加拿大应该投资于高科技工程，鼓励科学研究，而不是耗费精力建造战争机器。

Micheal KirkhamInfluencer31 Oct
Clearly the author has no idea of the ridiculousness of China's territorial claims in the South China Sea and it's wanton bullying of it's weaker neighbours in the region. It's important for the international community to stand up so that this is  not perceived as simply a U.S./China spat. Applying the same Chinese logic in the Canadian context would have us claiming a third of the North Atlantic. Ridiculous.

显然，作者不知道中国在南中国海的领土主张是多么荒谬，而且这是对该地区弱小邻国的肆意欺凌。对于国际社会来说，我们挺身而出是很重要的，这样整个事件就不会被认为是一个简单的美国/中国争吵。如果把中国对南海的逻辑应用于加拿大的背景下，我们就能获得北大西洋的三分之一。荒谬。

Vince SnettertonLeaderMicheal Kirkham31 Oct
You are quite correct about the Chinese territorial claims. My main issue with sending any of our assets there is that it so trivial. One sub, or a sub and destroyer, are nothing when compared to the firepower the Japanese, South Koreans, Chinese, and the U.S. have floating around there. If a shooting war actually broke out, Canada would be ordered to gets it assets out there, because they are more likely to be accidentally identified as an enemy target than actually do some good. 
Canada has to get serious about our Navy. We are a sea-faring nation, with more coastline that anyone else. We need a dozen excellent surface combatants (the Danish frigate is a good model) capable of anti-air and anti-sub warfare. Anti-ship warfare is not as important. We also need a massive upgrade in our sub fleet. Think about 8 patrol subs along the likes of the German 212's for patrolling the Atlantic and Pacific, and 6 nuclear attack subs purposed to protect our Arctic Ocean interests. Remember, for every 3 naval vessels, usually only one is available for duty. The others are in repair/upgrade/training.
But a commitment like that is enormous. No government we have had, have today, or will have tomorrow, will do it. And by the time the americans and chinese decide our water territory belongs to them, it will be too late to build that navy.

你对中国的领土主张的观点是完全正确的。
我说的的主要问题是，我们的舰队是如此的微不足道。与日本、韩国、中国和美国的火力相比，一艘潜艇或和一条驱逐舰都不算什么。如果一场冲突真的爆发了，加拿大将会被命令把它的舰队放在那里，如此说来，我们的军舰更有可能被意外地认定为敌人的目标，而不是做些好事。
加拿大必须认真对待我们的海军。我们是一个海洋国家，拥有漫长的海岸线。我们需要十几个优秀的水面战斗舰艇(丹麦护卫舰是一个很好的模型)，能够进行防空和反潜艇战。反舰战则没有那么重要。
我们的潜艇舰队也需要进行大规模的升级。我们需要8条德国212级潜艇在大西洋和太平洋巡逻，以及6个核攻击潜艇旨在保护我们的北冰洋利益。记住，每3艘海军舰艇通常只有一艘可供执行任务。其他的正在修理/升级/培训。
但这样的计划是规模巨大的。我们的任何政府，今天或将来都不会有（这样的计划）。当美国人和中国人未来决定，我们的水域属于他们的时候，建造海军就太迟了。