pbs高端访谈:做好大使馆安全保卫工作防患于未然

 　　JEFFREY BROWN:And, for more, I'm joined by two congressmen who were briefed by Ambassador Pickering and Admiral Mullen today.

　　Republican Congressman¹ Ed Royce of California, he's soon to take over as chair of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.

　　And Democratic Congressman Eliot Engel of New York, who will become that committee's ranking member in the next term.

　　Congressman Royce, let me start with you.

　　What's the key thing we learned from this report? Where do you see the main failure?

　　22.jpgREP. ED ROYCE,RCalif.: Well, I think the main failure when you read the report is in management at senior levels, because what you had on the ground wasn't only an ambassador, but other personnel, warning that al-Qaida camps were growing, explaining that they felt that they were at risk personally, asking for support, which wasn't forthcoming, and coming to the conclusion that Washington wasn't concerned about their security needs.

　　And so all of that comes out in the memos³. And I think what has to be addressed is why not only was the preparation not there, but somebody forgot to circle the calendar on 9/11. There was no attempt or no effective way, I guess, deployed⁴ should this happen that we could come in with a quick-reaction team and assist them if they come under attack.

　　Eight-hour firefight, no assistance throughout that period.

　　JEFFREY BROWN:All right, Eliot Engel, do you read it any differently? Systemic failure was the term. So, what in the end or who in the end is to blame?

　　REP. ELIOT ENGEL, D-N.Y.: Well, I think what's important is not really who is to blame. It's that something like what happened in Benghazi never, ever happens again.

　　And we have to really learn from the mistakes. And there were many mistakes that were made. The important thing for me is not to play gotcha politics, but to say what went wrong and how can we fix it in the future.

　　I agree with everything my colleague said. I think the system broke down. I think there was a lack of coordination⁵ between the people who are responsible for diplomatic security and with these specialists in the Middle East. There has to be—that was one of the recommendations of the report. There has to be much, much more coordination.

　　It's really outrageous⁶ that they were relying on local militias⁷ to protect the compound. We don't need local militias. We need our own troops and our own protections there. We want American protections. And I think that has to change in the future, and it will.

　　I think that Congress has a responsibility, too. We have to appropriate the monies to implement⁸ these changes. We have been cutting back and cutting back on diplomatic security.

　　And there had been some proposals floating around Congress to cut back even more. That is not what should happen. We need to spend more money to protect our people who are far away from home.

　　JEFFREY BROWN:Well, let me ask Congressman Royce about that, because the report did criticize Congress.

　　It said, "The solution requires a more serious and sustained commitment from Congress to support State Department needs."It suggested that budget constraints⁹ were behind some of these decisions, an emphasis on savings¹⁰ over security.

　　So, is Congress to blame as well?

　　ED ROYCE:Well, Eliot Engel and I will work together to make certain that we have the resources there.

　　I think it is important to note that on the particular account that addresses personnel for embassy security, those agents that we deployed, Congress actually increased the number of agents, the funding for those agents, over the administration request over prior years, regardless of whether it was Republican or Democrat². We increased that number.

　　What was decreased at one point was a program, computer program account. But in terms of the type of personnel we're talking about, which is the type that would be deployed in a situation to protect the embassy, that was actually increased. And I think, going forward, we have to make sure the security needs are met.

　　But during the hearing that we had last month, in testimony¹¹, senior State Department personnel said that that wasn't the problem. In this particular case, it was the decisions, the wrong decisions being made in management that created the problem.

　　JEFFREY BROWN:Eliot Engel, you said earlier you don't want to—you don't want to play a—talk about who's to blame, and yet today we had three officials resign.

　　The report doesn't cite individuals, but where do things go? A lot of attention has been on—well, for example, on Hillary Clinton. Are you satisfied with things as they are now?

　　ELIOT ENGEL:Well, I think that what Hillary Clinton has said is that she is going beyond what the report recommended by appointing a head of high-risk posts person.

　　And I think she said she accepts full responsibility. You know, the people who are supposed to be carrying out these things, you expect them, on a lower level, on the deputy secretary level, to carry them out in a responsible way. That's their job, to protect our diplomats¹².

　　You assume they're doing it. If they're not, they should resign. And if that is the case, I'm glad these people resigned.

　　But we in Congress have our responsibilities, too. You know, in this budget crunch¹³, it's very easy for us to try to cut back on foreign aid or cut back on diplomatic security or trying to do things on the cheap.

　　We have men and women all over the world in harm's way, doing the best jobs possible, many on a shoestring¹⁴. And I think Congress needs to take a little more responsibility and really put its money where its mouth is.

　　I was very pleased with Sec. Clinton's statements, because she accepted all the findings, every one of them, and said that things have to change. And I agree with her.

　　JEFFREY BROWN:Ed Royce, are you satisfied that no other official, up to Sec. Clinton, should now face any further sanction or punishment?

　　ED ROYCE:Well, I don't think we know the answer to that yet.

　　And, of course, Sec. Clinton will be testifying next year in January on this issue.

　　But one of the interesting aspects of this that has not been answered is the narrative¹⁵, the explanation given to the American people. And that explanation, of course, at the time and for two weeks was that this was in response to a video.

　　We know from the report that there was no evidence whatsoever¹⁶ that this was anything except what the report says it was, a terrorist attack, and, indeed, those encampments were not that far from our facility, al-Qaida camps.

　　And, so, the real question was why maintain that position for two weeks, in face of the evidence that it was clearly what those at the consulate¹⁷ thought it was, an attack on the consulate by this terrorist organization that had previously¹⁸ carried out attacks in that area, including one on the embassy—or the consulate?

　　JEFFREY BROWN:Well, Eliot Engel, just a brief last word here. It sounds as though the political football—that was your term—may still be flying.

　　ELIOT ENGEL:Well, President Obama, on the day after it happened, used the word terrorist attack.

　　And I think what's important is, again, not whether it was a terrorist attack or not. There seemed to have been a lot of confusion at the beginning. It was obviously now a terrorist attack. What's important is that a terrible tragedy happened. Four Americans, including our ambassador, were killed.

　　And, you know, some people during the campaign for president tried to use it for political purposes. I mean, I think that, in a time of national tragedy, we need to embrace each other and sort of rally around each other and kind of stick together and speak with one voice.

　　So, I'm not concerned about whether it's called a terrorist attack or not. Clearly, it was. I'm concerned that the people who are currently in harm's way are protected, so what happened in Benghazi will never happen anywhere again in the future.

　　JEFFREY BROWN:All right, Eliot Engel, Ed Royce, thank you both very much.

　　ED ROYCE:You're very welcome.

　　ELIOT ENGEL:Thank you.

　　JUDY WOODRUFF: Go online for a firsthand account from a Libyan journalist who happened to be near the scene of the Benghazi attack on September the 11th. We also have a link to the full State Department review.

1 Congressman   

n.（美）国会议员

参考例句：

• He related several anecdotes about his first years as a congressman.他讲述自己初任议员那几年的几则轶事。
• The congressman is meditating a reply to his critics.这位国会议员正在考虑给他的批评者一个答复。

2 democrat   

n.民主主义者，民主人士；民主党党员

参考例句：

• The Democrat and the Public criticized each other.民主党人和共和党人互相攻击。
• About two years later,he was defeated by Democrat Jimmy Carter.大约两年后，他被民主党人杰米卡特击败。

3 memos   

n.备忘录( memo的名词复数 )；（美）内部通知

参考例句：

• Big shots get their dander up and memos start flying. 大人物们怒火中烧，备忘录四下乱飞。 来自辞典例句
• There was a pile of mail, memos and telephone messages on his desk. 他的办公桌上堆满着信件、备忘录和电话通知。 来自辞典例句

4 deployed   

（尤指军事行动）使展开( deploy的过去式和过去分词 )； 施展； 部署； 有效地利用

参考例句：

• Tanks have been deployed all along the front line. 沿整个前线已部署了坦克。
• The artillery was deployed to bear on the fort. 火炮是对着那个碉堡部署的。

5 coordination   

n.协调，协作

参考例句：

• Gymnastics is a sport that requires a considerable level of coordination.体操是一项需要高协调性的运动。
• The perfect coordination of the dancers and singers added a rhythmic charm to the performance.舞蹈演员和歌手们配合得很好，使演出更具魅力。

6 outrageous   

adj.无理的，令人不能容忍的

参考例句：

• Her outrageous behaviour at the party offended everyone.她在聚会上的无礼行为触怒了每一个人。
• Charges for local telephone calls are particularly outrageous.本地电话资费贵得出奇。

7 militias   

n.民兵组织，民兵( militia的名词复数 )

参考例句：

• The troops will not attempt to disarm the warring militias. 部队并不打算解除战斗中的民兵武装。 来自辞典例句
• The neighborhood was a battleground for Shiite and Sunni militias. 那里曾是什叶派和逊尼派武装分子的战场。 来自互联网

8 implement   

n.(pl.)工具，器具；vt.实行，实施，执行

参考例句：

• Don't undertake a project unless you can implement it.不要承担一项计划，除非你能完成这项计划。
• The best implement for digging a garden is a spade.在花园里挖土的最好工具是铁锹。

9 constraints   

强制( constraint的名词复数 )； 限制； 约束

参考例句：

• Data and constraints can easily be changed to test theories. 信息库中的数据和限制条件可以轻易地改变以检验假设。 来自英汉非文学 - 科学史
• What are the constraints that each of these imply for any design? 这每种产品的要求和约束对于设计意味着什么？ 来自About Face 3交互设计精髓

10 savings   

n.存款，储蓄

参考例句：

• I can't afford the vacation,for it would eat up my savings.我度不起假，那样会把我的积蓄用光的。
• By this time he had used up all his savings.到这时，他的存款已全部用完。

11 testimony   

n.证词；见证，证明

参考例句：

• The testimony given by him is dubious.他所作的证据是可疑的。
• He was called in to bear testimony to what the police officer said.他被传入为警官所说的话作证。

12 diplomats   

n.外交官( diplomat的名词复数 )；有手腕的人，善于交际的人

参考例句：

• These events led to the expulsion of senior diplomats from the country. 这些事件导致一些高级外交官被驱逐出境。
• The court has no jurisdiction over foreign diplomats living in this country. 法院对驻本国的外交官无裁判权。 来自《简明英汉词典》

13 crunch   

n.关键时刻；艰难局面；v.发出碎裂声

参考例句：

• If it comes to the crunch they'll support us.关键时刻他们是会支持我们的。
• People who crunch nuts at the movies can be very annoying.看电影时嘎吱作声地嚼干果的人会使人十分讨厌。

14 shoestring   

n.小额资本；adj.小本经营的

参考例句：

• In the early years,the business was run on a shoestring.早年，这家店铺曾是小本经营。
• How can I take the best possible digital pictures on a shoestring budget?怎样用很小投资拍摄最好的数码照片？

15 narrative   

n.叙述，故事；adj.叙事的，故事体的

参考例句：

• He was a writer of great narrative power.他是一位颇有记述能力的作家。
• Neither author was very strong on narrative.两个作者都不是很善于讲故事。

16 whatsoever   

adv.（用于否定句中以加强语气）任何；pron.无论什么

参考例句：

• There's no reason whatsoever to turn down this suggestion.没有任何理由拒绝这个建议。
• All things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you,do ye even so to them.你想别人对你怎样，你就怎样对人。

17 consulate   

n.领事馆

参考例句：

• The Spanish consulate is the large white building opposite the bank.西班牙领事馆是银行对面的那栋高大的白色建筑物。
• The American consulate was a magnificent edifice in the centre of Bordeaux.美国领事馆是位于波尔多市中心的一座宏伟的大厦。

18 previously   

adv.以前，先前（地）

参考例句：

• The bicycle tyre blew out at a previously damaged point.自行车胎在以前损坏过的地方又爆开了。
• Let me digress for a moment and explain what had happened previously.让我岔开一会儿，解释原先发生了什么。