时代周刊:外界坐视不理 叙利亚为此付出了多大代价(2)（在线收听）

Other countries have focused on the fight against terrorism or on the humanitarian relief effort, while the war itself has bled ever more fiercely.

其他国家则将重点放在了打击恐怖主义，实施人道主义援助上，叙利亚战争本身则变得更为血腥了。

Laws prohibiting the killing of civilians, the bombing of hospitals and schools, or mass rape;

在叙利亚战争问题上，禁止杀害平民、禁止轰炸医院及学校，禁止大规模强奸的法律，

treaties banning the use of chemical attacks; the Responsibility to Protect pact, signed by U.N. member states;

禁止使用化学攻击的条约，联合国成员国签署的国家保护责任条约，

the Security Council’s powers to act to stop a conflict–the U.N. Charter itself–all lie broken, unused or misused in the Syrian conflict.

安理会采取行动，制止冲突的权力--也即联合国宪章本身--不是未被履行，未被利用，就是被滥用。

Since 2014, the U.N. has been unable to count the dead in Syria.

自2014年以来，联合国一直未能统计出叙利亚的死亡人数。

Some estimate that over half a million Syrians have died.

一些人估计这一人数多达50万以上。

Politicians often imply that we face a choice between open-ended military and diplomatic interventions of the kind we’ve seen in Iraq and Afghanistan,

政客们经常暗示，我们面前有两种选择，一种是采取伊拉克和阿富汗经历过的那种开放式的军事和外交干预，

and leaving other countries to fend for themselves,

一种是让其他国家自食其力，

sending whatever amount of humanitarian aid we’re willing to supply, and sealing ourselves off.

我们只负责管好我们自己，同时提供我们愿意提供的，任何规模的人道主义援助。

Syria is proof that a lack of leadership and diplomacy has consequences.

缺乏领导和外交会带来怎样的后果？叙利亚冲突便是一大明证。

It also raises fundamental questions for us as Americans:

这一冲突也引发了我们美国人对一些重大问题的思考：

When did we stop wanting to stand up for the underdog, for the innocent, for those fighting for their human rights?

我们何时才能放弃挺身而出，为失败者、无辜者以及那些为自己的人权斗争的人“打抱不平”的冲动？

And what kind of country would we be if we abandoned that principle?

放弃这一原则，我们又会成为一个怎样的国家？

There is a lot of focus in America today on self-preservation.

如今的美国，大家都非常关注自我保护。

But peace is almost always fought for hardest by those who really understand war.

然而，为争取和平付出的努力最为艰辛的几乎往往都是那些真正了解战争的人。

History shows that when we fought for the liberation of Europe in World War II, or contributed to building the postwar global order,

历史表明，二战期间我们所谓的为解放欧洲而战，战后所谓的为建立全球秩序添砖加瓦，

we did so for our own interests–and we reaped the benefits.

实则都是在为我们自己的利益奔走——好处我们可没少拿。

When America was attacked on 9/11,

美国遭遇9/11袭击时，

many countries made common cause with us because we had earned their friendship.

不少国家纷纷与我们同仇敌忾，因为我们赢得了他们的友谊。

We’re watching the brutal endgame of the war in Syria as if it has little to do with us.

到了叙利亚战争问题上，我们却选择了坐视叙利亚战争残酷收尾，好像这场战争与我们并没有什么关系。

But it does.

事实是，关系很大。

We should be using our diplomatic power to insist on a cease-fire

我们应该发挥我们的外交实力，坚持走停火，和平谈判的道路，

and a negotiated peace based on at least some measure of political participation, accountability and the conditions for the safe return of refugees.

至少要做一定的政治参与，问责，规定难民安全返回条件工作。

The alternative is that Syria stands as an infamous new reference point for the brutality

否则，叙利亚将成为一个国家

and destruction that it is possible to inflict with impunity upon a civilian population–

可能在不受惩罚的情况下对平民施加的暴行和破坏的新参照点，

and it will fall on the already loaded shoulders of the next generation to rebuild a shattered international system.

届时，重建已经支离破碎的国际秩序的重任便会落到下一代身上，尽管他们早已不堪重负。