-
(单词翻译:双击或拖选)
NOEL KING, HOST:
After 18 years of war, peace in Afghanistan still seems a long way off. There are some signs of hope. There was a presidential election over the weekend. But voters were intimidated1 and attacked, and voter turnout was really low. And last month, talks between the U.S. and the Taliban collapsed2. The Afghan central government wasn't even involved in those talks. So Afghanistan's national security adviser3, Hamdullah Mohib, is in the U.S. this week to deliver a message to the international community.
HAMDULLAH MOHIB: It's time to make peace in Afghanistan. And that peace must be Afghan-led and Afghan-owned.
KING: He talked to Rachel about why the Afghan government supports President Trump's decision to end talks with the Taliban.
MOHIB: What I can say is it was a good decision. The Taliban were becoming considerably4 more arrogant5 than they previously6 were. They were preparing their victory speeches and thought that they were going to take over Afghanistan. So I think it was a blessing7. Now is an opportunity for us to take this issue and follow the lead of Afghan government, a partner that the United States has worked with and invested in, a country where we have made a tremendous amount of sacrifices together to build the institutions and the democratic institutions that we currently have.
RACHEL MARTIN, BYLINE8: How would you describe the Taliban in 2019? Is it the same organization as it was when the U.S. ousted9 them in 2001?
MOHIB: The Taliban are a discredited10 organization now, heavily divided over power-sharing in - among themself. Some are fighting for financial gains through the narcotics11 trades. Others are engaged in the illegal mining and logging in our country. Some are fighting because other countries are paying them to do so. Their narrative12 is no longer valid13 in Afghanistan. They said that they were fighting a foreign invader14. That is not the case. They are fighting the Afghan people now. The only thing they have now is intimidation15. They have been targeting places of worship, weddings, roads, anywhere indiscriminately and killing16 Afghan civilians17.
MARTIN: Do you consider the Taliban a terrorist organization?
MOHIB: Their activities are definitely that of terrorist organizations.
MARTIN: You mentioned that they are a divided organization now. How can you trust that any peace that the Afghan government would be able to negotiate with the Taliban will actually have any legitimacy18, that it would actually hold if you're only negotiating with perhaps one faction19?
MOHIB: We must negotiate with those Talibans that are inside the country. There has to be a bottom-up approach. The Taliban rank and file are extremely tired of fighting. And they do want to make peace happen, but their leadership sitting in Pakistan want to have their political gains achieved. So I think one of the ways we can achieve peace in our country is by negotiating directly with commanders on the ground and bringing them into the fold of a peace agreement.
MARTIN: You have in the past been very critical of Zalmay Khalilzad, the former U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan leading the U.S. negotiations20 with the Taliban. You accused the U.S. of wanting to install a, quote, "caretaker government," that Khalilzad would govern, that he would become a, quote, "viceroy" - that's your word. Do you still believe that to be true?
MOHIB: First of all, my criticism was not personal, but rather of a policy that we thought was not going to result in peace in Afghanistan. And even when I spoke21 at the time, it was a matter of perception because the Afghan government was not fully22 briefed at the time - or at least we perceived that we were not fully briefed at the time - that those perceptions were taking shape and replacing the facts. We have improved our relationship since then. Information has become better before the talks failed. Of course, that's - even though we...
MARTIN: You believe Ambassador Khalilzad to be an honest broker23?
MOHIB: Look, what we are focused on this point here is peace in Afghanistan. And it's not about individuals. And we know that the American people, from my own experience here, care deeply about what happens in Afghanistan.
MARTIN: You mentioned, when we talked about the divided nature of the Taliban, your own Afghan central government, though, has been divided. Ashraf Ghani didn't win an outright24 majority in the last election. And there was no outright winner in this weekend's national elections. Considering that ambiguity25 and the fact that we won't know who comes out on top for, perhaps, several months, that there might need to be a runoff election, does that dilute26 the power of the Afghan government in potential negotiations with the Taliban?
MOHIB: Democracy is not perfect anywhere in the world, right? And Afghanistan is no exception. I think the American people would sympathize with that. But our competition or disagreements are on ballots27, not in bullets. I think the difference here is the Taliban are killing the Afghan people. The disagreements between the Afghan politicians is a political discourse28 that is on Afghan TVs and in media.
They are not fighting each other literally29. And as a result of them, Afghans are not dying. If the elections are messy, I think you could plug any other country that is democratically run, and the situation would be no different. I think it's an unfair comparison to the Taliban, who are violently terrorizing the Afghan people and are not delivering services to our people. The places they control are completely intimidation.
MARTIN: In light of all those differences, though, are you truly optimistic that an Afghan-led peace deal can actually happen?
MOHIB: Absolutely. And for that peace to be achieved, there must be a consensus30. If a peace is achieved that integrates one part of the society but alienates31 another, the war will continue. So what we are working on is an inclusive peace, which will include all of Afghans.
MARTIN: Hamdullah Mohib, national security adviser to Afghanistan's president, Ashraf Ghani, speaking to us on the line from New York. Thank you so much for your time.
(SOUNDBITE OF FAZER'S "HARLESDEN")
MOHIB: Thank you for having us.
1 intimidated | |
v.恐吓;威胁adj.害怕的;受到威胁的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
2 collapsed | |
adj.倒塌的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
3 adviser | |
n.劝告者,顾问 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
4 considerably | |
adv.极大地;相当大地;在很大程度上 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
5 arrogant | |
adj.傲慢的,自大的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
6 previously | |
adv.以前,先前(地) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
7 blessing | |
n.祈神赐福;祷告;祝福,祝愿 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
8 byline | |
n.署名;v.署名 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
9 ousted | |
驱逐( oust的过去式和过去分词 ); 革职; 罢黜; 剥夺 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
10 discredited | |
不足信的,不名誉的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
11 narcotics | |
n.麻醉药( narcotic的名词复数 );毒品;毒 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
12 narrative | |
n.叙述,故事;adj.叙事的,故事体的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
13 valid | |
adj.有确实根据的;有效的;正当的,合法的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
14 invader | |
n.侵略者,侵犯者,入侵者 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
15 intimidation | |
n.恐吓,威胁 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
16 killing | |
n.巨额利润;突然赚大钱,发大财 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
17 civilians | |
平民,百姓( civilian的名词复数 ); 老百姓 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
18 legitimacy | |
n.合法,正当 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
19 faction | |
n.宗派,小集团;派别;派系斗争 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
20 negotiations | |
协商( negotiation的名词复数 ); 谈判; 完成(难事); 通过 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
21 spoke | |
n.(车轮的)辐条;轮辐;破坏某人的计划;阻挠某人的行动 v.讲,谈(speak的过去式);说;演说;从某种观点来说 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
22 fully | |
adv.完全地,全部地,彻底地;充分地 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
23 broker | |
n.中间人,经纪人;v.作为中间人来安排 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
24 outright | |
adv.坦率地;彻底地;立即;adj.无疑的;彻底的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
25 ambiguity | |
n.模棱两可;意义不明确 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
26 dilute | |
vt.稀释,冲淡;adj.稀释的,冲淡的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
27 ballots | |
n.投票表决( ballot的名词复数 );选举;选票;投票总数v.(使)投票表决( ballot的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
28 discourse | |
n.论文,演说;谈话;话语;vi.讲述,著述 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
29 literally | |
adv.照字面意义,逐字地;确实 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
30 consensus | |
n.(意见等的)一致,一致同意,共识 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
31 alienates | |
v.使疏远( alienate的第三人称单数 );使不友好;转让;让渡(财产等) | |
参考例句: |
|
|