演讲 | 奥斯卡影后 安吉丽娜·朱莉 联合国3个震撼演讲，优雅美式英语最佳范本
关注“北极光翻译”
学习英语，领悟翻译，沟通世界！
2019年翻译资格考试
倒计时
68 天
3月30日，联合国难民署高级专员特使安吉丽娜·朱莉（Angelina Jolie ）抵联合国总部参加会议。
她身穿白衬衫搭配黑色包臀裙，披着卡其色大衣气质迷人，红唇突显气场，与工作人员交流时亲和力十足，登台发言沉稳大气，简直女神下凡。
Keynote Address by UNHCR Special Envoy Ms. Angelina Jolie at the UN Defense Peacekeeping Ministerial 2019
29 March 2019
朱莉联合国维和部长级会议讲话
Hello.
Under-Secretary General, Foreign and Defence Ministers, Your Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen:
This is the third UN Defense Peacekeeping Ministerial I have attended, but the first on my home soil.
I am very proud to speak here as an American.
I am a patriot. I love my country and I want to see it thrive.
I also believe in an America that is part of an international community.
Countries working together on an equal footing is how we reduce the risk of conflict.
It is how we avoid the need to send men and women of our militaries to fight and sacrifice overseas.
The UN was set up for that purpose. As a way of resolving differences peacefully, supporting each other’s prosperity, and extending universal rights and freedoms.
It is in all our interests for the UN to be made effective, brought closer to the lives of citizens, and not ever misused.
At a deeper level, a country that believes that all men and women are born free and equal cannot be true to itself if it doesn’t defend those principles for all people, wherever they live, regardless their circumstances, and no matter how desperate their struggle.
In fact, our support should be strongest where rights are threatened the most.
We live at a time of blatant disregard for the laws of war that forbid attacks on civilians.
Whether it is missile strikes on schools or hospitals, families bombed in their homes, neighbourhoods gassed with chemical weapons, besieged areas deprived of aid, mass rape of women, children and men, we seem incapable of upholding minimum standards of humanity in many parts of the world.
That this comes at a time when humankind is richer, and more technologically advanced than ever before, is all the more painful.
Eighteen years ago, when I first began working with the UN Refugee Agency, there were just under 20 million displaced people worldwide, and the numbers were falling.
Today, there are over 65 million people displaced, and the numbers are rising.
More countries are experiencing some form of violent conflict today than any time in the last thirty years.
UN peacekeepers now comprise of the second largest group of forces deployed overseas, and are often required to serve where there is little or no peace to be kept.
Against this backdrop, it is easy to dismiss our institutions as flawed or ineffective.
My hope, instead, is that young people in particular will feel inspired to join the effort to improve them: to join the ‘men and women in the arena’, to paraphrase President Roosevelt, ‘who strive – are striving – to do deeds, and whose faces are marred by dust and sweat and blood’.
In that regard, I want to express my respect for men and women who serve as peacekeepers, and for those who have been killed and injured.
The protection of civilians is the primary responsibility of governments. When UN peacekeepers are deployed, it is usually where a government is unable or unwilling to protect civilian life.
Those United Nations missions often represent the last and only hope for millions of people facing daily threats to their safety and their basic rights.
The need for peacekeeping troops to have the best possible training and equipment and the highest standards of personal conduct becomes obvious when measured against that weighty responsibility.
That is why this meeting is so important, because it is in the hands of the governments you represent to enable peacekeeping to live up to its ideals and the needs of our time.
So, as you discuss how to strengthen UN peacekeepers and give peacekeepers the capabilities they need to operate in today’s dangerous environments, I ask you to take time to consider the question from the perspective of women.
Around the world, there are countless examples of women rising, taking leadership, taking their destiny into their own hands, inspiring us all.
But women and girls are still the majority of the victims of war. They are over half of all refugees, and the vast majority of the victims of rape and other sexual and gender-based violence.
Women are at the absolute epicenter of modern conflict, in the worst possible sense. But more often than not, they are still on the outside looking in when it comes to [political] politics and decisions about their futures.
If we went by the principle that those affected by a problem should be in charge of determining the solution, then the majority of the world’s peace negotiators, foreign ministers and diplomats would be women. We all know the reality.
In Afghanistan, thousands of women have recently come together in public, risking their lives, to ask that their rights and the rights of their children be guaranteed in peace negotiations that so far they have been allowed no part of. Their stand is inspiring, but it should not be necessary and the international community’s silent response is alarming to say the least. There can be no peace and stability in Afghanistan, or anywhere else in the world, that involves trading away the rights of women.
Worse still, we see impunity for crimes committed against women and girls during conflict, or when women human rights defenders are attacked, or killed, or imprisoned.
Too often, whether or not we confront these human rights violations depends not on the law, on universal standards, but on how much our governments think that their business or political interests in that country might be affected.
This is as harmful to our long-term security and stability as it is unacceptable on a human and moral level.
And none of this is to discount the efforts of the many men, great husbands, fathers, brothers and sons, who have been with us in this fight.
It is simply the reality of the unequal power relations, abuse of power, gender bias, violence and lack of justice that keep so many women in a subordinate, and therefore vulnerable, position internationally.
Fearing abuse at the hands of a peacekeeper is not protection.
Living with the fear that your daughter might be raped by armed combatants is not safety.
Knowing that if your children are harmed, no one will be held accountable, is not a basis for peace and security.
Denying half a population representation in peace negotiations or in government is not the route to long-term stability.
As long as we continue to put almost every other issue ahead of women’s rights and participation, we will remain stuck in a cycle of violence and conflict. We will have learned nothing. And our institutions will count for less than they should.
From my experience, a growing number of men and women in uniform understand this. When we are at our best, doing what we are called to do, we all share the same goals, the same mandate: a safer, more stable world. We fight to defend our freedoms and rights and the freedoms and rights of others.
I recently met a male peacekeeper, who had just returned from deployment as a gender adviser in the Central African Republic. And he told me that when he started his career of service in Afghanistan, he considered women’s rights to be a “soft” issue and not what war was fought for. But his experiences had made him understand that that it is exactly what should be fought for, and exactly what stabilizes a country.
His ability to contribute to this goal became a source of pride for him. He had made that jump in his thinking. And while he had been doing a great service to his country already, he had now added that understanding and that sense of partnership with the women he served.
There is progress. The number of cases of alleged sexual exploitation and abuse are down, although even a single case is unacceptable. The number(s) of women peacekeepers is on the rise, with African nations in particular leading the way on this. There are more gender advisers on UN missions, although still not enough. And improving the training on the protection of civilians is starting to come into effect.
But there is still a long way to go to demonstrate that anyone who commits violations will not be tolerated and will be investigated and prosecuted without exception.
There is still much more to do to increase the number of women in the ranks of peacekeeping missions. And having met some formidable female peacekeepers this morning, I think that this change cannot come soon enough for the effectiveness and impact of peacekeeping missions.
And of course, we cannot call for more women to serve, without making it safe and viable for them to do so, including ensuring that they themselves are not vulnerable to sexual harassment or abuse.
New actions by your governments in all these areas can make a huge difference. But they, I believe, must be accompanied by commitments to ensure women’s representation in peace negotiations, to be consistent in the defense of women’s rights, in all places, and to address the deep-seated societal reasons for inequality and violence against women.
And above all, we need to understand that women themselves are protectors, as mothers, and peacekeepers, and human rights defenders.
Women are already contributing to peace in theatres of war across the world without recognition or glory, because it comes naturally to them. It’s important to them.
Think how much more we could achieve with women’s equal participation in all aspects of society: not at the expense of men, but alongside men. Because we are all partners in this life.
We humans are capable of horrors, and unspeakable cruelty. But we are also capable of building civilizations, improving laws, demanding justice. We are willing to fight for people we’ve never met and for their families
We fall. We fail. We lose our way, often when we are made to feel afraid.
But in our moments of strength and clarity, we know that all people are in fact equal. We know that while we can and should be proud of who we are individually, we are a part of a global world. And we know that we are supposed to come together in defense of something greater than ourselves.
Thank you very much.
3月15日，联合国难民署亲善大使安吉丽娜·朱莉在联合国难民署日内瓦总部发表演讲，谈及国际主义，缅怀Sergio Vieira de Mello。她说：“我们看到一些政客以忽略国际协定的策略当选，仿佛美国没有受益于合作，而是遭到了侵害。”批评美国总统对联合国和对难民的政策。
在优雅地演讲中，她表达了对于狭隘民族主义暗涌来袭的不安，她称：“我是一个自豪的美国人，也是一个国际主义者；一个强国应该像强人一样，帮助他人崛起独立”。
Good evening.
I’m truly honored to be here with you tonight. And thank you to the foundation for inviting me and thank you all for sharing in this moment.
We are here in the memory of Sergio Vieira de Mello and the 21 other men and women, most of them UN workers, who died with him in the bombing of the UN Headquarters in Baghdad, August 2003.
We remember all those who died, to acknowledge each valuable life cut short, and the families who share, even today, in their sacrifice.
We also remember them for the power of the example they set: brave individuals from 11 different countries, working to help the Iraqi people, at the direction of the United Nations Security Council, and on behalf of all of us.
This is sometimes forgotten: that in serving under the UN flag, they died in our names, as our representatives.
And at their head, Sergio, was a man of extraordinary grace and ability, as so many who knew him would testify.
A man who gave 30 years to the United Nations, rising from a field officer to High Commissioner for Human Rights and Special Representative to Iraq.
From Bangladesh and Bosnia to South Sudan to East Timor, he spent the majority of his career in the field, working alongside people forced from their homes by war, and assisting them with his skill as a diplomat and a negotiator.
Perhaps the greatest testament to his contribution is how much his advice would be valued today.
As the Syrian conflict enters its seventh year, as we live through the gravest refugee crisis since the founding of the United Nations, as 20 million people are on the brink of death from starvation in Yemen, Somalia, South Sudan and southeast Nigeria, I cannot imagine that there is anyone in the leadership of the United Nations who would not welcome the opportunity to consult Sergio, or to send him into the field once more. He is truly missed.
It is humbling for me to speak tonight in the presence of members of Sergio’s family and his former colleagues.
I never knew Sergio, but I have stood before the plaque in the place where he died.
I felt profound sadness at the fact that the conflict in Iraq – the source of so much Iraqi suffering to this day – had claimed the lives of men and women whose only intention was to try to improve a desperate situation.
But I also saw clearly the value and nobility of a life spent in service to others.
Sergio was a man who never turned down an assignment, no matter how difficult and dangerous – or as others have put it, who “handled one impossible task after another”.
He was a man, to borrow the words of Thomas Paine, whose country was the world, whose religion was to do good.
He will always remain a hero and inspiration to all who follow in his footsteps.
The UN’s work did not end there in the rubble of Canal House 14 years ago.
Hundreds of UN staff have served, and continue to, serve in Iraq, as they do from Afghanistan to Somalia, because the task of building peace and security can never be abandoned, no matter how bleak the situation.
My thoughts on Sergio’s life and legacy derive from my 16 years with UNHCR, the Agency he spent so much of his career serving and representing.
But I also speak as a citizen for my country – the United States.
I believe all of us who work with the UN preserve this duality. The United Nations is not a country, it is a place where we come together as nations and people to try to resolve our differences and to unite in common action.
As a citizen, I find myself looking out on a global environment that seems more troubling and uncertain than at any time in my lifetime. And I imagine many of you feel the same.
We are grappling with a level of conflict and insecurity that seems to exceed our will and capabilities: with more refugees than ever before, with new wars erupting on top of existing conflicts, some already lasting decades.
We see a rising tide of nationalism, masquerading as patriotism, and the re-emergence of policies encouraging fear and hatred of others.
We see some politicians elected partly on the basis of dismissing international institutions and agreements, as if our countries have not benefited from cooperation, but actually been harmed by it.
We hear some leaders talking as if some of our proudest achievements are in fact our biggest liabilities – whether it is the tradition of successfully integrating refugees into our societies, or the institutions and treaties we have built rooted in law and human rights.
We see nations that played a role – a proud role in the founding of the International Criminal Court withdrawing from it, on the one hand; and on the other, we see arrest warrants for alleged war crimes issued but not implemented, and other crimes ignored altogether.
We see a country like South Sudan ushered by the international community into independence, and then largely abandoned – not by the UN agencies and NGOs – but effectively abandoned, without the massive support they need to make a success of sovereignty.
And we see resolutions and laws on the protection of civilians and the use of chemical weapons, for instance, flouted repeatedly, and in some cases, under the cover of Security Council vetoes, as in Syria.
Many of these things are not new – but taken together – and in the absence of strong international leadership, they are deeply worrying.
When we consider this, all of this and more, as citizens, what is our answer?
Do we, as some would encourage us to think, turn our backs on the world, and hope that the storm would pass?
Or do we strengthen our commitment to diplomacy, and to the United Nations?
I strongly believe there is only one choice, demanded by reason as well as by conscience, which is the hard work of diplomacy and negotiation and reform of the UN.
This is not to say that in any way this is an easy road. And there are reasons for people to feel insecure today.
The level of conflict and lack of solutions combined with the fear of terrorism; the reality that globalization has bought vast benefits to some and worsened the lot for others; the sense of disconnect between citizens and governments, or in some countries, the lack of governance; the overall feeling that for all our gains in technology and connectedness, the less we are in control of forces shaping our lives – all these factors and more have contributed to a sense of a world out of balance, and there are no easy answers.
And despite the millions of people who have lifted themselves out of poverty in our lifetime, the difference between the lives of those of us born in wealthy, democratic societies and those born into the slums and refugee camps in the world is a profound injustice. We see it and we know it’s wrong, at a simple human level, that inequality is contributing to instability, conflict and migration as well as to the sense that the international system serves the few at the expense of the many.
But again, what, what is our answer, as citizens?
Do we withdraw from the world where before we felt a responsibility to be part of the solutions?
I am a proud American, and I am an internationalist.
I believe anyone committed to human rights is.
It means seeing the world with a sense of fairness and humility, and recognizing our own humanity in the struggles of others.
It stems from a love of one’s country, but not at the expense of others – from patriotism, but not from narrow nationalism.
It includes the view that success isn’t being greater than others, but finding your place in a world where others succeed, too.
And that a strong nation, like a strong person, helps others to rise up and be independent.
It is the spirit that made possible the creation of the UN, out of the rubble and ruin and 60 million dead of World War Two; so that even before the task of defeating Nazism was complete, that generation of wartime leaders was forging the UN.
If governments and leaders are not keeping the flame of internationalism alive than its citizens, we must.
The challenge is how to restore that sense of balance and hopefulness in our countries, while not sacrificing all we have learnt about the value and necessity of internationalism.
Because a world in which we turn our back on our global responsibilities will be a world that produces greater insecurity, violence and danger for us and for our children.
This is not a clash between idealism and realism.
It is the recognition that there is no shortcut to peace and security, no substitute for the long, painstaking effort to end conflicts, expand human rights and strengthen the rule of law.
We have to challenge the idea that the strongest leaders are those willing to dismiss human rights on the grounds of national interests. The strongest leaders are those who are capable of doing both.
Having strong values and the will to act upon them doesn’t weaken our borders or our militaries – it is their essential foundation.
And none of this is to say that the UN is perfect. Because of course, we know it is not.
I have never met a field officer who has not railed against the shortcomings, as I imagine Sergio did in his darkest moments.
And he, like all of us, wanted a UN that was more decisive, less bureaucratic, and that lived up to its standards. But he never said it was pointless. And he never threw in the towel.
The UN is an imperfect organization because we are imperfect. It is not separate from us.
Our decisions, particularly those made by the Security Council, have played a part in creating the landscape that we are dealing with today.
We should always remember why the UN was formed, and what it is for, and take that responsibility very seriously.
We have to recognize the damage we do when we undermine the UN or use it selectively – or not at all – or when we rely on aid to do the job of diplomacy, or give the UN impossible tasks and then underfund it.
For example, today, there is not a single humanitarian appeal anywhere in the world that is funded even by half of what is required. In fact, worse than that. Appeals for countries on the brink of famine today are 17%, 7%, and 5% funded, for example.
And of course, emergency aid is not the long-term answer.
No one prefers that kind of aid. Not citizens of donor countries. Not governments. Not refugees. They do not want to be dependent.
It would be far better to be able to invest all of our funds in infrastructure and schools and trade and enterprises.
But let’s be clear, emergency aid has to continue because many states cannot or will not protect the rights of citizens around the world.
It is what we spend in countries where we have no diplomacy or our diplomacy is not working.
And until we do better at preventing and reducing conflict, we are doomed to be in a cycle of having to help feed or shelter people when societies collapse.
As another legendary UN leader, who was also killed in the line of duty, Dag Hammerskold, said “Everything will be all right – you know when? When people, just people, stop thinking of the United Nations as a weird Picasso abstraction and see it as a drawing they made themselves”.
The UN can only change if governments change their policies. And if we as citizens ask governments to do that.
It is moving, if you think about it: We are the future generations envisioned in the UN Charter.
When our grandparents resolved to “spare future generations the scourge of war”, as written, they were thinking of us.
But as well as dreaming for our safety, they also left us a responsibility.
President Roosevelt, addressing the US Congress in January, 1945, six months before the end of Second World War, said this: “In the field of foreign policy, we promise to stand together with the United Nations not for the war alone, but for the victory for which the war was fought”.
And he went on: “The firm foundation can be built and will be built. But the continuance and assurance of a living peace, in the long run, must be the work of the people themselves.”
So today, we have to ask ourselves if we are living up to that mission.
They gave us the start. What have we done with it?
It is clear to me that we have made huge strides. But our agreements and institutions are only as strong as our will to uphold them.
If we do not, for whatever reason, we bequeath a darker, more unstable world to all of those who come after us. It is not for this that previous generations shed blood and worked so hard on behalf of all of us.
The memory of those who came before us holds us true to our ideals.
Resting unchanged in time, they remind us [of] who we are and what we stand for.
They give us hope to stay in the fight, as Sergio did, until his last breath.
Fourteen years since his death, there is a stronger need than ever before for us to stay true to the ideals and purposes of the United Nations.
That is what I hope his memory holds for us to today.
We can’t all be Sergios. But I hope all of us can determine that we shall be a generation that renews its commitment to “unite our strength to maintain international peace and security”, and “to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom.”
But in the final analysis, even we do not, even if that level of vision eludes us and we continue to simply manage rather than overcome our generation’s challenges, we just have to keep working determinedly, patiently.
And you can be certain, that as you do, that you follow the example of one of the UN’s finest sons: and that to do even a little of his good, to apply ourselves to the work he left unfinished, in whatever way we can, is a worthy task for all of us.
Thank you.
安吉丽娜·朱莉难民危机主题演讲
在非洲每122人中有一个就是难民，现在的难民潮比70年代更剧烈。究竟难民危机带来了多大的影响呢？难民危机是全球性的问题，需要大家通力合作，今天英语演讲带你看看奥斯卡影后安吉丽娜朱莉是怎样看待这一问题的?
#中英对照#
Thank You.I’m very very honor to be here.
谢谢，我非常非常荣幸来到这里。
Over 60 million people are displaced today. More than at any time in the last 70 years. That is one in every 122 people. This tell us something deeply worrying about the peace and security of our world. It said that for all other advances this type of human insecurity is growing faster than our ability to prevent or reverse it. can be given basic food, shelter, education as a temporary measure untilthey are able to returnto theirhomes. During thistime, the exceptional cases of the most vulnerable people can be identified for asylum in a third country and thmeonved. That is how sytshteem hasworked andhow it shouwlodrk. Today we are seeing it break down. Not because the model is flawed or because refugees are behaving differently, but because the number of conflicts and scale of displacement have grown so large.In the past 6 years, 15 conflicts have erupted or reignited.
国际人道主义制度运行的基础是难民们在难民营中受到充分保护，在那里难民们有最基本的食物、庇护所和教育作为临时保障，直至他们返回自己的家乡。在这期间，可以认定特 别困难的人群在第三国寻求庇护并且定居。这就是国际人道主义制度的运作方式，并且应该 这样运作。现在我们看到制度没有起作用，不是因为制度本身有缺陷或者难民们的行为异样， 而是因为冲突的数量和难民的规模已经增长得太快了。在过去 6 年中，爆发了 15 起大规模的冲突。
The average time a person will be displaced is now 20 years, 20 years and excel. The number of refugees returning to their homes is the lowest it is bend in 3 decades. Africa has more people displace than ever before, and millions of refugees live without sufficient food or proper shelter let alone education because UN appeals are drastically underfunded. The UNHCR appeal forthe Central AfricanRepublic forexample is less than 3% funded.With this then tetheof sttaoday’s world is it any surprised that some of thisdesperate people who are running out alloptions and who seeing no hope of returning home would make push to Europe as a last resort even at risk of death.
现在人们远离故乡的时间平均为 20 年，甚至高于 20 年，难民们返回故乡的时间最少 也要 30 年。因为联合国的需求极度缺乏资金支持，非洲被迫离乡的难民数量比以往都要高， 数百万的难民没有充足的食物、合适的住所，更不用说教育了。例如，联合国难民署对中非 共和国的资助只得到了不到 3% 的资金支持。就现在的形势，那些走投无路的人们看不到回 家的希望，只能抓住欧洲这最后的希望，哪怕冒着生命危险。
The question is how are we respond as democracies and as an international community to this major test of our values and our resolve. The spotlight has been firmly on Europe,but the crisis in Europe is only a fraction of the global refugee problem and there for the solutions been discussed for Europe are only a fraction of the overall answer. We in the west areneither at the center of the refugee crisis nor for the most parts the one’s making the greatest sacrifice. The majority of the world’s refugees live in country such as Turkey, Pakistan, Lebanon, Iran, Ethiopia and Jordan. So my argument is that unless we address the root causes of the crisis.We willnot seen itslowing of the number of refugees crossing borders and in fact quite the opposite. Countries around the world will be ask to do more and more. European nations are current negotiating to resettle 10% of refugees from just one conflict: Syria. Well, other countries are bursting at the scenes with millions of refugees from multiple conflicts. So what we must do first and foremost as citizens is to demand our government show the leadershipnecessary to address the fundamental courses of the refugee crisis at a global level. This is the wilder picture that I would like to dress today.
现在的问题是我们作为民主国家，作为国际社会应该如何回应对我们的价值和决心的巨 大考验。公众的注意力一直聚在欧洲，但是欧洲的危机只是全球难民问题的一部分。我们讨 论的关于解决欧洲问题的方法只是解决全部问题的一种。我们西方国家既不是难民危机的中 心，也未做出最大的牺牲。全球的难民主要分布在土耳其、巴基斯坦、黎巴嫩、伊朗、埃塞 俄比亚和约旦。所以我认为，除非我们能从根源上解决问题，否则我们不会看到穿越边境的 难民数量会减少，事实上还会增加，世界各国的压力会越来越大。欧洲国家现在在商讨重新 安置 10% 的难民，只是从叙利亚一个冲突地区。然而，其他国家面临众多冲突导致数百万 的难民已人满为患。所以我们作为民众首要任务是：要求政府从国际层面展现出对难民危机 必要的解决基本问题的领导力，这是我今天从宏观层面想表达的观点。
I know that no one can speak for 60 million displace people, and I know that it is the democratic right of the citizens of each country to reach their own conclusions about the right way forward. I there prefer put my thoughts before you with humility and respect seeking to understand all points of view. On one hand, the refugee crisis has produce great acts of generosity and solidarity with refugees here in Europe and other parts of the world. And on the other hand, fear of uncontrolled migration has eroded public confidence and the ability of governments and international institutions to control the situation. It has given space to a false air of legitimacy to those who promote politics of fear and separation. It has created the risk of a race to the bottom with country’s competing to be the toughest in the hope of protecting themselves whatever it cost or challenge their neighbors and despite their international responsibilities. But since no country can sail itself out from the impact of the refugee crisis such a free for all would lead to an even greater site of problems. It would mount to the worst of both worlds failing to tackle the issue and undermining international law and our values in the process.
我知道没有人可以代替六千万无家可归的人说话，我知道这是每个国家公民的民主权利来通过正确的方法做出自己的决定。我秉持谦逊和尊敬之意，在此阐述自己的观点，也希望了解各方观点。一方面，难民危机唤起了众多在欧洲和世界其他地方对难民的团结慷慨之举，另一方面，对无管制移民的恐惧削弱了民众的信心，以及政府和国际组织掌控局势的能力。这给那些推动政治恐惧和分裂的人提供了错误的合法空间，这恐怕将发展成为一场逐底竞争，各国竞相采取严酷手段，为求自保而不顾一切代价，不顾邻国安危，甚至置国际责任于不顾。但是既然没有国家能免受难民危机的影响，这种混乱会引发更大的问题，给双方都带来最坏的结果。无法解决问题，破坏国际法律和我们的价值观。
And there is another factor, at the moment when we need strong collective action, we are questioning our ability to cope with international crisis. I am sure that many people listening feel this. We have watched the events of the last few decades, wanting to see progress, probably feeling that we’re doing our part to make that happen. But after so many years of failed attempts by governments and leaders to do the right thing, we feel angry, we feel cheated, we feel confused. We’re starting to think that maybe it is simply not possible to make a lasting difference. But the worst possible choice we would make is to decide to step back from the world.
另一个事实是，在我们需要团结一致的行动时，我们却质疑自己应对国际危机的能力，我相信很多在座的听众皆有同感。我们见证了过去几十年的事件，渴望看到进步，可能也在为取得进步而尽一己之力，但是经过这么多年政府和领导人失败的努力之后。我们感到愤怒，感到受到了欺骗，感到迷茫，我们甚至开始感觉到也许根本不可能做出永久的改变。但是我们做出的最坏的选择是对这个世界不闻不问。
The last time there was this number of refugees was after World War Ⅱ, when nations came together to forge the United Nations, the UN Charter and Universal Declaration of Human Rights. I believe this is again that once in a generation moment when nations have to pull together. How we respond will determine whether we create a more stable world or face decades of far greater instability. At extremes, the debate about refugees in western nations has been polarized, with on one hand some people calling for open borders, and on the other hand for the complete exclusion of all refugees, or worse, for certain groups of refugees. But policies should not be driven by emotion, by what might be termed as “naïve humanitarianism” placing the perceived needs of refugees above all other considerations, or by our rational fear and unacceptable prejudice. Instead, we need to find a rational center, rebuilding public confidence and ensuring democratic consent for the long-term approach that will be needed.
上一次世界上有这么多的难民是在二战以后，那时各国联合起来成立了联合国，颁布了《联合国宪章》和《世界人权宣言》，我相信这又是一个百年一遇的时刻，各国应齐心协力。我们的反应将决定我们是能够创造一个更稳定的世界，还是将面临几十年更大的混乱。在这种极端的情况下，关于西方国家的难民讨论也走向极端。一方面有人呼吁开放边境，另一方面，有人要求排斥所有难民或者更恶劣的情况：排斥部分特定的难民。但政策的制定不应被这些因素左右，例如感情，将难民的需要置于一切其他考虑之上的所谓的“简单人道主义”或者合理的恐惧和不应有的偏见。相反，我们需要建立一个理性的中心重建民众信心并保证对所需的长久之计达成民主共识。
I believe each government should make a new compact with its people, setting out what their country can contribute based on an objective assessment of the needs, of the available resources and capacity of local communities to absorb certain numbers of refugees where that is appropriate. It calls for policies which balance the needs of local communities with the needs of refugees. We shall properly fund it, communicate it and implement it consistently over time. The point is every country must do its fair share and no country can abdicate its responsibility. I suggest this should be based on four principles.
我认为，各国政府与其人民达成新的一致找到他们可以出力的地方，客观评估难民需要、可利用的资源以及当地的承受能力，在合适的地区接纳一定数量的难民，这需要能够平衡当地居民需求和难民需求的政策。我们要对其长久合理地投入资金、交流沟通、贯彻执行。关键在于，每个国家都要公平承担责任，任何国家都不能逃避。我建议如下四点原则：
First, It is not wrong for citizens in any country faced with the sudden surge of people seeking refugee within their borders to want to know that there are strong processes in place to prevent law and order, to preserve and to protect their security. No one should be crossing a border and not registering and going through asylum process.
第一，任何国家的居民面对突然大批涌入自己国家寻求庇护的难民，都有权知道，有强大的法律和秩序来保护他们的安全。任何人都不应在未登记注册的情况下跨越边境或进入庇护程序。
Second, it is important to maintain the distinction between refugees and economic migrants. An economic migrant chooses to move in order to improve their lives or livelihoods. Refugees have to move if they’re deceived their lives and preserved their freedoms. However difficult the situations migrants are seeking to escape, however understandable their motivation, there is no blanket human right to resettle in another country. And there is no answer to global poverty and insecurity that involves the mass transfer of people. To put it in another way, all human beings deserve equal human rights. But all people seeking asylum do not have equal grounds for asylum. Everyone must respect the laws and asylum procedures. That said, we must bear in mind that the distinction is complex and must never be used as a way of dismissing migrants who have valid claim for asylum.
第二，明确难民和经济移民的区别十分重要。经济移民选择移居是为了提高生活水平或为了生计，而难民是在生命受到威胁、自由受到限制时，不得不移居。无论经济移民试图逃离的环境多么恶劣，不管他们的动机多么合理，在另一个国家重新定居都没有完整的人权。面对涉及大规模人口迁移的全球贫困和安全问题，我们却无确切答案。换句话说，所有人都应享有平等的人权，但是寻求庇护的人们却没有得到平等的庇护。每个人都必须尊重法律和庇护申请程序，这就是说，我们必须牢记，区别是很复杂的，但这绝不是拒绝合法申请庇护的移民的理由。
I will add that we would fail the basic test of humanity if we discriminate between refugees on the basis of religion, race or ethnicity. When I meet a refugee I do not see a Muslin refugee or a Christian refugee or a Yazidi, I see a mother, or a father, a son or a daughter, a person within equal right to stand in dignity on this planet. Populations uprooted are the future of their countries. These are decent families registering and waiting peacefully for a chance to return home. And the majority of them are women and children. We should never make them feel like beggars, or worse, like a commodity to be traded between countries, a burden or ever a threat, or that their children are not considered equal to others. Nobody wants to be a refugee. Nobody deserves to be a refugee. And for as long as war, it’s part of the human condition. None of us are immune to becoming refugees. So all refugees merit equal, respect and compassion.
另外，如果我们根据难民的宗教信仰或种族来对听他们加以区分，我们将失掉最基本的人性。当我看到一个难民的时候，我看到的不是穆斯林或基督教徒或雅兹迪教徒，我看见的是一位母亲、父亲、儿子或女儿，一个与其他人享有平等权利、有尊严地活着的人。这些被赶出家园的人是他们国家的未来。这些礼貌的人们申请登记、平静地等待着重返家园的机会。他们中的大部分人是妇女和儿童，我们永远不能让他们感觉自己是乞丐，或更恶劣的国家之间进行交易的商品、负担甚至是威胁，或他们的孩子低人一等。没人想成为难民，没有人应该成为难民。只要战争存在，这就是人类现状，我们每个人都有可能成为难民的可能，因此，所有的难民都应受到平等对待、尊重和同情。
Third, it would be naïve to think that we can protect ourselves selectively alone from challenges in the globalized world by pulling away from other countries or peoples. As with any global problem in the 21st century uncoordinated national responses are not the answer and unstable world is an unsafe world for all. And there is no barrier high enough to protect from such disorder and desperation. If your neighbor’s house is on fire, you are not safe if you lock your doors. Isolationism is not strength. Fragmentation is not the answer. Strength lies in being unafraid in working with others and living up to our highest ideals. We must not change who we are because we face a crisis.
第三，如果我们认为疏远其他国家和人民就能逃避全球化世界的挑战，从而有选择地保护自己，那将是非常幼稚的。21世纪的任何全球性问题都需要国家之间协调解决。对于任何人来说，不稳定的世界就是不安全的世界。没有任何屏障足以抵挡如此混乱和绝望，辅车相依，唇齿相连（城门失火，殃及池鱼）。孤独主义不是力量，分裂破碎不是答案。不畏与他国合作实现最高理想才是力量所在，我们不能因为危机而改变自己。
And finally, none of these will be enough unless we address the underlying causes of refugee crisis. Shouldn’t we been asking how to make the world more stable rather than asking how to stabilize a mass of displace people. What are the failures and flows of our international system that are causing the number of refugees grow larger everyday. We need to recognize the decades of broken promises, double standers and partial justice are fundamental part of how we got today’s situation. If we look back and see this many people displaced, and this much conflict and so little accountability then we have to question the source of the problem.
最后，除非我们从根源解决难民危机，否则我们所做的一切都还不够。我们应该让世界更稳定，而不是稳定大量的难民。到底是国际体系中哪些不足造成难民数量日益剧增。我们必须意识到数十年来的违背诺言、双重标准、部分正义导致我们走到今天这种情况。如果我们回头看，有这么多人流离失所，有这么多冲突，责任义务却少之又少，那么我们不得不质疑问题的根源。
When the Security Council member uses its veto when civilians are being killed by their own government or we turn away too soon from a conflict situation or cases refer to the international criminal court and then we don’t give it sufficient support. When we don’t help nations treat fairly in the world so that they can stand on their own. We partially meet UN aid appeal and think that we have achieve something. In all these cases, the consequence is deeper conflict and wilder instability which leads to the type of mass displacement we are dealing with today. If these things continue to happen there will be further displacement and more people on the borders of Europe and elsewhere. The long term answer involves founding our world on laws and accountability. However distant that ideal and genuinely working towards the common interests achieving this will be the work of generations but it underscores why we cannot step back from the effort to build a more stable world beyond our borders and a better future for our children.
当安理会成员使其否决权，当公民被政府杀害或是我们不去面对冲突局面，或是对于涉及国际刑事法院的案子，我们不给予足够的支持，我们不帮助一些国家受到公平待遇让他们站稳脚跟，我们只是回应了一部分联合国援助呼吁而且认为自己已经有所成就。在所有这些情况下，将导致更深的矛盾和更大范围的不稳定，从而造成我们今天所面临的大规模移民的情况，如果这些持续发生，欧洲边界和其他地方将会有更大数量的难民。长远的解决方法是建立法律和责任的世界，无论这个理想有多遥远，都真诚地朝着共同利益前进。实现这个理想需要几代人的努力，但它强调了我们为什么必须努力建立一个超越边界的更稳定的世界，为我们的后代建立一个更美好的未来。
Yes, it is a difficult time in history where there are people bent on violence with no thought for the lives that are ruined by their actions but we have been through tough times and we have faced the worst in humanity on the global scale with people intent on destroying our democracies and we have fought back from that. We have more awareness and we have matched bigger enemies. And if we learn anything from the past, this is what should rally us together, not withdrawing but deciding to come together and show leadership. This is the duty that falls on all of us to the next UN Secretary General, to all governments, to civil society, to every one of us. And whether we succeed we’ll help define this century. The alternative is chaos and further displacement. A world without order and law, and institutions built by our predecessors buckling under the stream of human catastrophe that we could have prevented.
是的，现在是一段艰难的时间，因为有人倾向于暴力，毫不关心被他们毁掉的生命。但是我们曾经历苦难，我们曾面对世界上最惨无人道的事，我们曾面对有人刻意破坏民主，我们都进行了反击。我们有了更多的认识，也有了更大的敌人。如果说我们从过去学到了什么，那就是我们应该团结起来，绝不退缩，齐心协力，起表率作用。这是我们所有人肩上的责任，是下一任联合国秘书长的责任，是各国政府的责任，是民间社会的责任，是我们每一个人的责任。无论成功与否，我们都会明白混乱和更多难民没有法律和秩序的世界，我们前辈建立的机构屈服于人类灾难，这些本都是我们可以阻止的。
Thank you very much!
非常感谢！
CATTI 备考营
QQ群
185927601
推荐阅读
篇篇有干货，天天有惊喜
点赞是鼓励，分享增知识！
长按以下二维码
欢迎关注“北极光翻译”
长按以下二维码@小编