Exclusive: Tucker Carlson Interviews Vladimir Putin
发布时间 2024-02-08 23:30:12 来源
摘要
Watch Tucker's immediate reaction to the interview here: https://bit.ly/3SxeZBY
Tucker interviews Vladimir Putin in Moscow, Russia. February 6th, 2024.
Follow Tucker on X: https://x.com/TuckerCarlson
Text “TUCKER” to 44055 for exclusive updates.
#TuckerCarlson #journalism #VladimirPutin #Russia #Ukraine #JoeBiden #VolodymyrZelenskyy #freespeech #interview #news #politics #USA #Moscow #war #globalnews
GPT-4正在为你翻译摘要中......
中英文字稿 
The following is an interview with the president of Russia Vladimir Putin shot February 6, 2024 at about 7pm in the building behind us, which is, of course, the Kremlin. The interview, as you will see if you watch it, is primarily about the war in progress, the war in Ukraine, how it started, what's happening, and most presently how it might end.
以下是与俄罗斯总统弗拉基米尔·普京的采访，拍摄于2024年2月6日晚上7点左右，背景是我们身后的建筑物，当然，这就是克里姆林宫。如果你观看这个采访，你会看到它主要是关于正在进行的战争，乌克兰战争，它是如何开始的，正在发生什么，以及最近它可能会如何结束。
One note before you watch. At the beginning of the interview, we asked the most obvious question, which is, why did you do this? Did you feel a threat, an imminent physical threat, and that's your justification? And the answer we got shocked us. Putin went on for a very long time, probably half an hour, about the history of Russia going back to the 8th century. And honestly, we thought this was a filibuster technique and founded anointing and interrupted him several times. And he responded, he was annoyed by the interruption. But we concluded in the end for what it's worth, that it was not a filibuster technique. There was no time limit on the interview. We ended it after more than two hours. Instead, what you're about to see seemed to us sincere, whether you agree with it or not.
在你观看前，有一点要说明。在采访开始时，我们问了一个最显而易见的问题，那就是，你为什么这样做？你感到威胁了吗？是面临着即将到来的身体威胁才是你的正当理由吗？而我们得到的答案让我们感到震惊。普京讲述了俄罗斯的历史，回溯到8世纪，持续了很长时间，可能有半个小时。老实说，我们以为这是一种拖延时间的技术，并多次打断他。他对打断感到恼怒。但最终我们得出结论，无论值不值得，这不是拖延时间的技巧。采访没有时间限制，我们在超过两个小时后结束了采访。接下来你将看到的，不管你是否同意，对我们来说似乎是真诚的。
Vladimir Putin believes that Russia has a historic claim to parts of Western Ukraine. So our opinion would be to view it in that light as a sincere expression of what he thinks. And with that, here it is.
弗拉基米尔·普京相信俄罗斯对乌克兰西部的部分地区有历史性的主张。因此，我们的观点是要以这种观点来看待它，作为他真实思想的真诚表达。就是这样。
Mr. President, thank you. On February 22, 2022, you addressed your country in a nationwide address when the conflict in Ukraine started. And you said that you were acting because you had come to the conclusion that the United States, through NATO, might initiate a, quote, surprise attack on our country. And to American ears, that sounds paranoid. Tell us why you believe the United States might strike Russia out of the blue. How did you conclude that?
总统先生，谢谢您。在2022年2月22日，当乌克兰冲突爆发时，您通过全国演讲向国家发表了讲话。您表示您的行动是因为您得出了这样的结论：美国可能通过北约对我们的国家发动突袭。对于美国人来说，这听起来有些偏执。请告诉我们您为什么相信美国可能会突然袭击俄罗斯。您是如何得出这个结论的？
It's not that America, the United States was going to launch a surprise strike in Russia. I didn't say that. Are we having a talk show or a serious conversation? Here's the quote. Thank you. It's a formidable serious. It's serious. Because your basic education is in history as far as I understand. So if you don't mind, I will take only 30 seconds or one minute to give you a short reference to history for giving you a little historical background. Let's look where our relationship with Ukraine started from. Where did Ukraine come from? Russian state started gathering itself as a centralized statehood. And it is considered to be the year of the establishment of the Russian state in 862.
并不是说美国会对俄罗斯进行突然袭击。我并没有说过那样的话。我们是在进行脱口秀还是严肃对话？以下是引用的内容。谢谢。这是一个严肃的问题。很严肃。因为据我所知，你的基础教育是历史。所以如果你不介意，我将用30秒或一分钟的时间给你提供一个简短的历史参考，为你提供一些历史背景。让我们来看看我们与乌克兰的关系从哪里开始。乌克兰从哪里来？俄罗斯国家开始作为一个集中的国家聚合在一起。据认为，俄罗斯国家成立于862年。
When the dance people of Novgorod invited a Varangian prince, Rurik, from Scandinavia to rain. In 1862, Russia celebrated the 1,000 anniversary of its statehood. And in Novgorod there is a memorial dedicated to the 1,000 anniversary of the country.
在诺夫哥罗德的舞蹈人邀请了一个来自斯堪的纳维亚的瓦兰吉亚亲王鲁里克的时候，俄罗斯庆祝了其国家存在的1000周年。而在诺夫哥罗德有一座纪念国家1000周年的纪念物。
In 882, Rurik's successor, Prince Oleg, who was actually playing the role of Regent at Rurik's young son. Because Rurik had died by that time, came to Kiev. He ousted two brothers who apparently had once been members of Rurik's squad. So Russia began to develop with two centers of power, Kiev and Novgorod.
在882年，鲁里克的继任者奥列格亲王，实际上担任着鲁里克年幼儿子的摄政角色。由于鲁里克在那个时候已经去世，奥列格来到了基辅。他赶走了两个显然曾经是鲁里克小组成员的兄弟。因此，俄罗斯开始形成了两个权力中心，基辅和诺夫哥罗德。
The next very significant date in the history of Russia was 988. This was the baptism of Russia. When Prince Vladimir, the great grandson of Rurik, baptized Russia and adopted Orthodoxy, or Eastern Christianity. From this time, the centralized Russian state began to strengthen. Why? Because of the single territory, integrated economic ties, one in the same language and after the baptism of Russia, the same faith and rule of the prince. The centralized Russian state began to take shape.
俄罗斯历史上的下一个非常重要的日期是988年。这一年是俄罗斯的洗礼之年。当时，来自鲁里克的曾孙弗拉基米尔公爵洗礼了俄罗斯，并接受了东正教（或东方基督教）。从那时起，集权的俄罗斯国家开始变得更加强大。为什么呢？因为有了统一的领土，紧密的经济联系，统一的语言，洗礼后，相同的信仰和公爵的统治。集权的俄罗斯国家开始形成。
Back in the Middle Ages, Prince Yaroslav the Wise introduced the order of succession to a throne. But after he passed away, it became complicated for various reasons. The throne was passed not directly from father to eldest son, but from the prince, who had passed away to his brother, then to his sons in different lines. All this led to the fragmentation and the end of Rur's as a single state. There was nothing special about it. The same was happening then in Europe.
在中世纪，智者亚罗斯拉夫王子引入了王位继承制度。但在他去世后，由于各种原因，这个制度变得复杂起来。王位并非直接由父亲传给长子，而是从已故的王子传给他的兄弟，然后再传给他们的不同家系的儿子。所有这一切导致了鲁尔作为一个单一国家的分裂和终结。这没有什么特别之处。同样的情况也发生在欧洲。
But the fragmented Russian state became an easy prey to the empire, created earlier baking his Han. His successors, namely Batuhan, came to Rus, plunder than ruined nearly all the cities. The southern part, including Kiev, by the way, and some other cities simply lost independence. Well, northern cities preserved some of their sovereignty. They had to pay tribute to the Horde, but they managed to preserve some part of their sovereignty. And then a unified Russian state began to take shape with its center in Moscow.
然而，分裂的俄罗斯国家成为之前的汉帝国的容易猎物。他的继任者巴图汗率领着队伍前往俄罗斯，掠夺并摧毁了几乎所有的城市。包括基辅在内的南部城市失去了独立地位。然而，北部城市保留了一部分主权。他们不得不向蒙古人支付贡品，但成功地保留了一部分主权。然后一个以莫斯科为中心的统一的俄罗斯国家开始形成。
The southern part of Russian lands, including Kiev, began to gradually gravitate towards another magnet, the center that was emerging in Europe. This was the grand duchy of Lithuania. It was even called the Lithuanian Russian Duchy, because Russians were a significant part of this population. They spoke the old Russian language and were Orthodox.
俄罗斯南部的土地，包括基辅，开始逐渐向另一个磁铁倾斜，这个磁铁是欧洲正在崛起的中心。这个中心是立陶宛大公国。它甚至被称为立陶宛俄罗斯大公国，因为俄罗斯人占此地人口的重要部分。他们说的是古老的俄罗斯语，并信奉东正教。
But then there was a unification, the union of the grand duchy of Lithuania and the kingdom of Poland. A few years later, another union was signed, but this time already in the religious sphere. Some of the Orthodox priests became subordinate to the pope. Thus, these lands became part of the Polish-Lithuanian state.
然后，一次大一统发生了，就是立陶宛大公国和波兰王国的联合。几年后，又签署了另一项联盟，但这次是在宗教领域。一些东正教的牧师从属于教皇。因此，这些土地成为了波兰立陶宛联邦的一部分。
During decades, the Poles were engaged in colonization of this part of the population. They introduced a language there, tried to entrench the idea that this population was not exactly Russians, that because they lived on the fringe, they were Ukrainians. Originally, the word Ukrainian meant that the person was living on the outskirts of the state, along the fringes, or was engaged in a border patrol service. It didn't mean any particular ethnic group.
几十年来，波兰人一直在殖民这一地区的人口。他们引入了一种语言，在那里试图根深蒂固地认为这一人口并不完全是俄罗斯人，因为他们生活在边缘地带，所以他们是乌克兰人。起初，乌克兰这个词意味着一个人生活在国家的边界，沿边缘地带，或从事边境巡逻工作。它并不指代任何特定的民族。
So the Poles were trying to, in every possible way, to colonize this part of the Russian lands and actually treated it rather harshly, not to say cruelly. All that led to the fact that this part of the Russian lands began to struggle for their rights. They wrote letters to Warsaw demanding that their rights be observed, and people be commissioned here, including Tukiev.
因此，波兰人尝试以各种可能的方式殖民俄罗斯境内的这一地区，并对其采取相当残酷的对待。所有这些导致了这一俄罗斯地区开始为自己的权利而斗争。他们写信给华沙，要求保护他们的权利，并且派遣人员到这里，其中包括图基耶夫。
I beg your pardon, can you tell us what period I'm losing track of where in history we are? The Polish oppression of Ukraine. It was in the 13th century. Now I will tell you what happened later. And give the date so that there is no confusion. And in 1654, even a bit earlier, the people who were in control of the authority over that part of the Russian lands addressed Warsaw. I repeat, demanding that they send them to rulers of Russian origin and Orthodox faith. When Warsaw did not answer them and in fact rejected their demands, they turned to Moscow so that Moscow took them away. So that you don't think that I'm inventing things? I'll give you these documents.
请您原谅，您能告诉我们我现在正在失去对历史进程的追踪吗？波兰对乌克兰的压迫发生在13世纪。现在我会告诉您后来发生的事情。我会给出确切日期，以避免混淆。在1654年，甚至稍早的时候，掌控着俄罗斯土地一部分权力的人们向华沙表达了他们的要求。我再次重申，他们要求华沙派遣具有俄罗斯血统和东正教信仰的统治者。当华沙没有回应他们，实际上拒绝了他们的要求时，他们转向莫斯科，希望莫斯科接管他们。为了避免您认为我在编造事情，我会给您这些文件。
Well, it doesn't sound like you're inventing, I'm not sure why it's relevant to what happened two years ago. But still, these are documents from the archives, copies. Here are the letters from Bogdan Hmalnitski, the man who then controlled the power in this part of the Russian lands that is now called Ukraine. He wrote to Warsaw demanding that their rights be upheld, and after being refused, he began to write letters to Moscow. Asking to take them under the strong hand of the Moscow Tsar. There are copies of these documents. I will leave them for your good memory. There is a translation into Russian you can translate it into English later.
嗯，听起来你并没有在发明什么，我不确定为什么这与两年前发生的事情相关。但是这些是来自档案的文件副本。这里是波赫丹·赫马尔尼茨基的信件，他当时控制着现在被称为乌克兰的俄罗斯土地的权力。他致信华沙要求维护他们的权益，但遭到拒绝后，他开始给莫斯科写信，要求莫斯科沙皇以强硬手段接下这些地方。这些文件有副本，我会留给你好好记住。这里有俄文翻译，你以后可以把它翻译成英文。
Russia would not agree to admit them straight away, assuming that the war with Poland would start. Nevertheless, in 1654, the Russian assembly of Tsop clergy and landowners headed by the Tsar which was the representative body of the power of the old Russian state, decided to include a part of the old Russian lands into Moscow kingdom. As expected, the war with Poland began. It lasted 13 years and then in 1654, a truce was concluded. And 32 years later, I think, a peace treaty with Poland, which they called eternal peace, was signed. And these lands, the whole left bank of Nipur, including Kiev, went to Russia. And the whole right bank of Nipur remained in Poland.
俄罗斯不同意立即接纳他们，假设与波兰的战争将会开始。然而，1654年，由沙皇领导的俄罗斯的聚会，包括神职人员和地主，这是代表旧俄罗斯国家权力的机构，决定将一部分旧俄罗斯的土地纳入莫斯科王国。如预料，与波兰的战争开始了。这场战争持续了13年，然后在1654年达成了停战协议。大约32年后，和波兰签署了一份被称为“永久和平”的和约。整个涅普尔的左岸，包括基辅，成为了俄罗斯的一部分。而整个涅普尔的右岸则留在波兰。
Under the rule of Katharina the Great, Russia reclaimed all of its historical lands, including in the south and west. This all lasted until the revolution. Before World War I, Austrian general staff relied on the ideas of Ukrainianization and started actively promoting the ideas of Ukraine and the Ukrainianization. Their motive was obvious. Just before World War I, they wanted to weaken the potential enemy and secure themselves favorable conditions in the border area. So the idea which had emerged in Poland that people residing in that territory were allegedly not really Russians, but rather belonged to a special ethnic group. Ukrainians started being propagated by the Austrian general staff.
在叶卡捷琳娜大帝统治下，俄罗斯重新夺回了南部和西部等所有历史领土。但这一切都在革命爆发之前结束了。在一战爆发前，奥地利的总参谋部依赖于乌克兰化的理念，并积极推广乌克兰和乌克兰化的思想。他们的动机是显而易见的。就在一战爆发前，他们想要削弱潜在的敌人，并在边境地区获得有利条件。因此，在波兰提出的一个观点被传播开来，即居住在该地区的人并不真正是俄罗斯人，而是属于一特别的民族群体。乌克兰人的概念由奥地利的总参谋部开始宣传。
As far back as the 19th century, theorists calling for Ukrainian independence appeared. All those, however, claimed that Ukraine should have a very good relationship with Russia. They insisted on that. After the 1917 revolution. The Bolsheviks sought to restore the statehood and the civil war began, including the hostilities with Poland.
早在19世纪，一些主张乌克兰独立的理论家就已经出现。然而，所有这些人都主张乌克兰应与俄罗斯保持良好关系，他们坚持这一点。在1917年的革命之后，布尔什维克追求恢复国家地位，引发了内战，其中也包括与波兰的敌对行动。
In 1921, peace with Poland was proclaimed and under that treaty, the right bank of Nippur River once again was given back to Poland. In 1939, after Poland cooperated with Hitler, he did collaborate with Hitler, you know. Hitler offered Poland peace and a treaty of friendship. And alliance demanding in return that Poland give back to Germany, the so-called Danzig Corridor, which connected the bulk of Germany with East Russia and Königsberg.
1921年，与波兰宣布和平，并根据该条约，恢复了尼普尔河的右岸归还给波兰。1939年，在波兰合作希特勒之后，他确实与希特勒合作了，你知道的。希特勒向波兰提供了和平和友谊条约的机会。但作为回报，要求波兰将德国所谓的但泽走廊归还给他们，该走廊连接德国的大部分领土与东俄罗斯和孔尼斯堡。
After World War I, this territory was transferred to Poland, and instead of Danzig, a city of Danzig emerged. Hitler asked them to give it amicably, but they refused. Still, they collaborated with Hitler and engaged together in the partitioning of Czechoslovakia. But may I ask you, you're making the case that the Ukraine, certainly parts of the Ukrainian Union, and Ukraine is in effect Russia has been for hundreds of years. Why wouldn't you just take it when you became president 24 years ago? You have nuclear weapons, they don't. If it's actually your land, why did you wait so long?
第一次世界大战后，这片领土被转让给了波兰，而代替但泽的是诞生了一个叫但泽的城市。希特勒曾友好地请求他们归还这片土地，但遭到了拒绝。尽管如此，他们依然与希特勒合作，并一起参与了对捷克斯洛伐克的分割。但我想问一下，您认为乌克兰，特别是乌克兰联盟的部分，实际上就是俄罗斯的领土，已经有数百年的历史了。为什么您在24年前成为总统的时候不直接接管乌克兰呢？您拥有核武器，而他们却没有。如果这确实是您的土地，为什么您要等这么久呢？
Sure. I'll tell you. I'm coming to that. This briefing is coming to an end. It might be boring, but it explains many things. You just don't know how it's relevant. Good. Good. I'm so gratified that you appreciate that. Thank you.
好的。我会告诉你的。我马上就说到了。这个简报快要结束了。它可能有点无聊，但解释了很多事情。你只是不知道它与相关性如何。很好。很好。我很高兴你能欣赏到这一点。谢谢你。
So, before World War II, Poland collaborated with Hitler, and although it did not yield to Hitler's demands, it still participated in the partitioning of Czechoslovakia together with Hitler, as the Poles had not given the Danzig corridor to Germany, and went too far, pushing Hitler to start World War II by attacking them. Why was it Poland against whom the war started on 1 September 1939? Poland turned out to be uncompromising, and Hitler had nothing to do but start implementing his plans with Poland.
因此，在第二次世界大战之前，波兰与希特勒合作，尽管他们没有屈服于希特勒的要求，但他们还是与希特勒一起参与了对捷克斯洛伐克的分割，因为波兰没有将但泽走廊割让给德国，这激怒了希特勒，迫使他对波兰发动战争。为什么战争于1939年9月1日开始时是波兰成为了敌人？波兰表现得非妥协，而希特勒别无选择，只能开始实施他的计划对付波兰。
By the way, the USSR, I have read some archived documents, behaved very honestly. It asked Poland's permission to transit its troops through the Polish territory to help Czechoslovakia. But the then Polish foreign minister said that if the Soviet plans flew over Poland, they would be downed over the territory of Poland. But that doesn't matter. What matters is that the war began, and Poland fell prey to the policies it had pursued against Czechoslovakia, is under the well-known Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. Part of the territory, including Western Ukraine, was to be given to Russia. Thus, Russia, which was then named as USSR, regained its historical lands.
顺便说一下，苏联在我阅读了一些档案文件后表现得非常诚实。它征得了波兰的许可，通过波兰领土转运军队帮助捷克斯洛伐克。但当时的波兰外交部长表示，如果苏联的飞机飞越波兰领土，将在波兰领土上被击落。但这并不重要。重要的是战争开始了，波兰成为了其对捷克斯洛伐克所实施政策的牺牲品，这其中包括著名的莫洛托夫-里宾特洛普协定。一部分领土，包括西乌克兰，将归属俄罗斯。因此，当时被称为苏联的俄罗斯重新获得了其历史领土。
After the victory in the Great Patriotic War, as we call World War II, although territories were ultimately enshrined as belonging to Russia, to the USSR. As for Poland, it received, apparently, in compensation the lands which had originally been German. The eastern parts of Germany, these are now Western lands of Poland. Of course, Poland regained access to the Baltic Sea and Danzig, which was once again given its Polish name. So this was how this situation developed.
在我们称之为第二次世界大战的伟大卫国战争取得胜利之后，尽管领土最终被划定为属于俄罗斯，属于苏联。至于波兰，显然，它得到了来自最初属于德国的土地作为补偿。德国的东部地区现在是波兰的西部土地。当然，波兰恢复了对波罗的海和但泽的使用权，后者再次被赋予它的波兰名字。所以这就是这种情况是如何发展起来的。
In 1922, when the USSR was being established, the Polish have started building the USSR and established the Soviet Ukraine, which had never existed before. Stalin insisted that those republics be included in the USSR as autonomous entities. For some inexplicable reason, Lenin, the founder of the Soviet state, insisted that they be entitled to withdraw from the USSR. And again, for some unknown reasons, he transferred to that newly established the Soviet Republic of Ukraine, some of the lands together with people living there, even though those lands had never been called Ukraine. And yet, they were made part of that Soviet Republic of Ukraine. Those lands included the Black Sea region, which was received under Katharina the Great, and which had no historical connection with Ukraine whatsoever. Even if we go as far back as 1654, when these lands returned to Russian Empire, that territory was the size of three to four regions of modern Ukraine, with no Black Sea region. That was completely out of the question. In 1654.
1922年，苏联正在建立之时，波兰人开始建设苏联，并建立了苏联乌克兰，这是以前从未存在过的。斯大林坚持将这些共和国作为自治实体纳入苏联。出于莫名其妙的原因，苏联建国者列宁坚持认为他们有权退出苏联。而且出于某种未知的原因，他将该新建立的乌克兰苏维埃共和国的一些领土和居民转给了乌克兰，即便这些土地从未被称为乌克兰。然而，这些土地被划归乌克兰苏维埃共和国。其中包括了黑海地区，这片土地既不历史上与乌克兰有联系。即使我们追溯到1654年，当时这些土地归还给了俄罗斯帝国，那个时候的领土大小只相当于现代乌克兰的三到四个地区，根本谈不上有黑海地区。这完全不可能。
Exactly. You obviously have encyclopedic knowledge of this region, but why didn't you make this case for the first 22 years as president that Ukraine wasn't a real country? The Soviet Union was given a great deal of territory that had never belonged to it, including the Black Sea region. At some point, when Russia received them as an outcome of the Russo-Turkish wars, they were called New Russia or Novaricea. But that does not matter. What matters is that Lenin, the founder of the Soviet state, established Ukraine that way.
当然。你显然对该地区有广博的知识，但为什么你在担任22年总统期间没有提出乌克兰不是一个真正的国家的观点？苏联获得了许多从未属于它的领土，包括黑海地区。在一定时期内，当俄罗斯在俄土战争中获得了这些领土时，它们被称为新俄罗斯或诺瓦鲁西亚。但这并不重要。重要的是，苏联创始人列宁就是以这种方式确立了乌克兰。
For decades, the Ukrainian Soviet Republic developed as part of the USSR. And for unknown reasons again, the Bolsheviks were engaged in Ukrainianization. It was not merely because the Soviet leadership was composed to a great extent of those originating from Ukraine. Rather, it was explained by the general policy of indigenization pursued by the Soviet Union. Same things were done in other Soviet republics. This involved promoting national languages and national cultures, which is not about in principle. That is how the Soviet Ukraine was created.
数十年来，乌克兰苏维埃共和国作为苏联的一部分得到了发展。出于不明原因，布尔什维克们再次开始进行乌克兰化。这并不仅仅是因为苏联领导层中有很多来自乌克兰的人。相反，这是苏联推行的一般本土化政策的结果。其他苏联共和国也采取了相同的做法。这包括促进民族语言和民族文化的发展，原则上并没有什么问题。这就是苏联乌克兰的形成方式。
After the World War II, Ukraine received, in addition to the lands that had belonged to Poland before the war, part of the lands that had previously belonged to Hungary and Romania. So Romania and Hungary had some of their lands taken away and given to the Soviet Ukraine, and they still remain part of Ukraine. So in this sense, we have every reason to affirm that Ukraine is an artificial state that was shaped at Stalin's will.
在第二次世界大战之后，乌克兰除了得到战前属于波兰的土地外，还得到了一部分曾属于匈牙利和罗马尼亚的土地。因此，罗马尼亚和匈牙利失去了一部分土地，这些土地被赋予了苏联乌克兰，并至今仍然是乌克兰的一部分。因此从这个意义上说，我们完全有理由称乌克兰是一个在斯大林的意愿下形成的人工国家。
Do you believe Hungary has a right to take its land back from Ukraine and that other nations have a right to go back to their 1654 borders? I'm not sure whether they should go back to the 1654 borders. But given Stalin's time, so-called Stalin's regime, which as many claim, saw numerous violations of human rights and violations of the rights of other states, one may say that they could claim back those lands of theirs while having no right to do that. It is at least understandable.
你认为匈牙利有权从乌克兰收回自己的土地，并且其他国家有权回到他们1654年的边界吗？我不确定他们是否应该回到1654年的边界。但考虑到斯大林时代，所谓的斯大林制度，据称存在着许多侵犯人权和侵犯其他国家权利的行为，可以说他们可以为了自己的土地主张权利，尽管没有权力这样做也可以得到理解。
Have you told Viktor Orban that he can have part of Ukraine? Never. I have never told him not a single time. We have not even had any conversation on that, but I actually know for sure that Hungarians who live there wanted to get back to their historical land. I would like to share a very interesting story with you. I digress. It's a personal one. Somewhere in the early 80s, I went on a road trip in a car from then a landing road across the Soviet Union through Kiev, made a stop in Kiev, and then went to western Ukraine. I went to the town of Beregovoye, and all the names of towns and villages there were in Russian, and in the language I didn't understand, in Hungarian, in Russian, and in Hungarian. Nothing Ukrainian, in Russian, and in Hungarian. I was driving through some kind of village, and there were men sitting next to the houses, and they were wearing black 3P suits and black cylinder hats. I asked, are they some kind of entertainers? I was told no, they were not entertainers, they're Hungarians. I said, what are they doing here? What do you mean? This is their land, they live here. This was during the Soviet time in the 1980s. They preserved the Hungarian language, Hungarian names, and all their national costumes. They are Hungarians, and they feel themselves to be Hungarians.
你有告诉维克托·奥尔班他可以拥有乌克兰的一部分吗？从来没有。我从来没有告诉过他一次。我们甚至没有过任何关于这个问题的对话，但我确信居住在那里的匈牙利人想要回到他们的历史土地。我想和你分享一个非常有趣的故事。我岔开了话题，这是个私人的故事。在80年代初，我曾经开车沿着当时的一条着陆道穿越苏联，经过基辅，在基辅停留了一下，然后去了乌克兰西部。我去了贝列戈沃伊镇，那里的所有城镇和村庄的名字都是用俄语和我不懂的匈牙利语写的。没有乌克兰语，只有俄语和匈牙利语。我在一个村庄里开车，旁边有些房子，有人坐在那里，他们穿着黑色的3P套装和黑色圆筒帽。我问道，他们是些什么表演者吗？我被告知不是，他们是匈牙利人。我说，他们在这里做什么？什么意思？这是他们的土地，他们在这里生活。这是在80年代苏联时期。他们保留着匈牙利语、匈牙利名字和所有的民族服饰。他们是匈牙利人，他们认为自己是匈牙利人。
And of course, when now there is an infringement, and there is a lot of that, though. I think many nations are upset about Transylvania as well, but many nations feel frustrated by the redrawn borders of the wars of the 20th century, and wars going back 1,000 years, the ones that you mentioned. But the fact is that you didn't make this case in public until two years ago, February, and in the case that you made, which I read today, you explain at great length that you felt a physical threat from the west in NATO, including potentially a nuclear threat. And that's what got you to move. Is that a fair characterization of what you said?
当然，现在有很多侵犯，尽管如此，我认为许多国家对特兰西瓦尼亚也感到不满，但许多国家对20世纪的战争重新划定边界感到沮丧，还有一千年以来的战争，你提到的那些战争。但事实是，直到两年前的二月份，你才公开提出这个问题，在我今天看到的那个你提出的案例中，你详细解释了你感到来自北约的西方的一种身体的威胁，可能包括核威胁。这是对你所说的一个公正的描述吗？
I understand that my long speech is probably fall outside of the genre of the interview. That is why I asked you at the beginning, are we going to have a serious talk or a show? You said a serious talk, so they are with me, please. We are coming to the point where the Soviet Ukraine was established. Then in 1991, the Soviet Union collapsed, and everything that Russia had generously bestowed on Ukraine was dragged away by the latter.
我明白我的冗长演讲可能超出了采访的范畴。这就是为什么我一开始问你，我们是要进行认真的对话还是表演呢？你说是认真的对话，所以请让我继续。我们要说的是苏联乌克兰建立的时刻，然后在1991年，苏联解体，俄罗斯慷慨地赋予乌克兰的一切被后者拿走了。
I'm coming to a very important point of today's agenda. After all, the collapse of the Soviet Union was effectively initiated by the Russian leadership. I do not understand what the Russian leadership was guided by at the time, but I suspect there were several reasons to think everything would be fine. First, I think that then Russian leadership believed that the fundamentals of the relationship between Russia and Ukraine were, in fact, a common language, more than 90 percent of the population. They spoke Russian. Family ties, every third person there had some kind of family or friendship ties, common culture, common history. Finally, common faith coexistence with a single state for centuries and deeply interconnected economies. All of these were so fundamental. All these elements together make our good relationships inevitable.
我正在谈到今天议程中非常重要的一点。毕竟，苏联的崩溃实际上是由俄罗斯领导层发起的。我不明白当时俄罗斯领导层的指导思想是什么，但我怀疑他们当时有几个理由认为一切都会好起来。首先，我认为当时的俄罗斯领导层相信俄罗斯和乌克兰之间的基本关系实际上是共同的语言，超过90％的人口使用俄语。他们说俄语。家庭纽带，那里的每三个人中就有一个具有某种家庭或友谊纽带，共同的文化，共同的历史。最后，共同信仰几世纪以来与一个国家的共存以及深度相互关联的经济。所有这些都是如此根本。所有这些元素的结合让我们之间的良好关系变得不可避免。
The second point is a very important one. A one-chew is an American citizen and your viewers to hear about this as well. The former Russian leadership assumed that the Soviet Union had ceased to exist, and therefore there were no longer any ideological dividing lines. Russia even agreed voluntarily and proactively to the collapse of the Soviet Union, and believed that this would be understood by the so-called civilized West as an invitation for cooperation and association. That is what Russia was expecting, both from the United States and the so-called collective West as a whole.
第二点是非常重要的。一个“一口咬定”是一个美国公民，你的观众也应该知道这一点。前苏联的领导层认为苏联已经不存在了，因此不再存在意识形态分歧。俄罗斯甚至自愿主动地同意了苏联的崩溃，并相信这将被所谓的文明西方理解为合作和联结的邀请。这就是俄罗斯对美国和所谓的西方集体的期望。
There were smart people, including in Germany, Egon Barr, a major politician of the Social Democratic Party, who insisted in his personal conversations with the Soviet leadership on the brink of the collapse of the Soviet Union that a new security system should be established in Europe. Help should be given to unified Germany, but a new system should be also established to include the United States, Canada, Russia, and other central European countries. But NATO needs not to expand. That's what he said. If NATO expands, everything would be just the same as during the Cold War, only closer to Russia's borders. That's all. He was a wise old man, but no one listened to him. In fact, he got angry once. If he said, you don't listen to me, I'm never setting my foot in Moscow once again. No, Jim, you mean everything happened just as he had said. Well, of course, it did come true. And you've mentioned this many times. I think it's a fair point.
有一些聪明的人，包括德国的埃贡·巴尔（Egon Barr）这样一位社会民主党主要政治家，他在与苏联领导层的私人对话中坚持认为，在苏联解体的边缘上，应该在欧洲建立一个新的安全体系。应该帮助统一德国，但也应该建立一个新的体系，包括美国、加拿大、俄罗斯和其他中欧国家。但是，北约不需要扩大。这就是他所说的。如果北约扩大了，一切将只是类似于冷战时期，只是更接近俄罗斯的边界。这就是全部。他是一位睿智的老人，但没有人听他的。事实上，他曾经很生气。如果他说了，你们不听我的话，我再也不会踏足莫斯科。不，吉姆，你的意思是一切就像他所说的那样发生了。嗯，当然，它确实变成了现实。你提到这个已经很多次了。我认为这是一个公正的观点。
And many in America thought that relations between Russia and the United States would be fine with the collapse of the Soviet Union in the end of the Cold War, that the opposite happened. But you've never explained why you think that happened, except to say that the West fears a strong Russia, but we have a strong China. The West does not seem very afraid of. What about Russia? Do you think convinced policymakers they had to take it down?
许多美国人认为，随着苏联解体和冷战结束，俄罗斯与美国之间的关系会好转，但事实上恰恰相反。然而，您并未解释为什么会出现这种情况，除了说西方担心一个强大的俄罗斯，而我们有一个强大的中国。西方似乎并不害怕中国，那么俄罗斯呢？您认为是什么原因让决策者们决定削弱俄罗斯？
The West is afraid of strong China more than it fears a strong Russia. Because Russia has 150 million people and China has 1.5 billion population, and its economy is growing by leaps and bounds, or 5% a year. It used to be even more. But that's enough for China, as Bismarck once put it, potentials are the most important. China's potential is enormous. It is the biggest economy in the world today in terms of purchasing power parity and the size of the economy. It has already overtaking the United States quite a long time ago, and it is growing at a rapid clip.
西方比起对一个强大的俄罗斯的担心，更害怕中国的崛起。因为俄罗斯人口1.5亿，而中国人口达到了15亿，其经济也以飞跃的速度增长，年增长率达到5%。曾经中国甚至更加强大。但对中国来说，正如俾斯麦曾经所说，潜力才是最重要的。中国的潜力是巨大的。以购买力平价和经济规模来衡量，中国已经是世界上最大的经济体。中国已经在很久之前就超过了美国，并且其增长速度还在迅猛扩大。
Let's not talk about who is afraid of whom, let's not reason in such terms. Let's get into the fact that after 1991, when Russia expected that it would be welcomed into the brotherly family of civilized nations, nothing like this happened. You tricked us. I don't mean you personally when I say you. Of course, I'm talking about the United States. The promise was that NATO would not expand eastward, but it happened five times. There were five waves of expansion. We tolerated all that. We were trying to persuade them. We were saying, please don't. We are as bourgeois now as you are. We are market economy and there is no communist party power. Let's negotiate.
让我们不再谈论谁害怕谁，也不要用这样的方式推敲。我们来谈谈1991年后的事实，当时俄罗斯希望被兄弟般的文明国家欢迎，但什么都没发生。你们欺骗了我们，当然，我说的你并不指你个人，而是指美国。当时的承诺是北约不会向东扩张，但实际上发生了五次扩张浪潮。我们容忍了所有这些，试图说服他们，告诉他们，拜托，我们现在和你们一样是资本主义市场经济，没有共产党的权力。让我们来谈判吧。
Moreover, I have also said this publicly before. There was a moment when a certain rift started growing between us. Before that, Yeltsin came to the United States. Remember, he spoke in Congress and said the good words, God bless America. Everything he said were signals. Let us in. Remember the developments in Yugoslavia before that Yeltsin was lavished with praise? As soon as the developments in Yugoslavia started, he raised his voice in support of Serbs, and we couldn't but raise our voices for Serbs in their defense.
此外，我之前在公开场合也说过这个。有一段时间我们之间出现了一些分歧。在那之前，叶利钦来到了美国。记得他在国会发表演讲时说了许多赞美美国的话，他所说的一切都是信号，表明让我们加入进去。还记得在那之前南斯拉夫发生的事情吗？叶利钦受到了大量赞扬。一旦南斯拉夫出现问题，他就公开支持塞尔维亚人，而我们也无法不为保护塞尔维亚人而发声。
I understand that there were complex processes underway there. I do. But Russia could not help raising his voice in support of Serbs because Serbs are also a special and close to his nation with Orthodox culture and so on. It's a nation that has suffered so much for generations. Well, regardless, what is important is that Yeltsin expressed his support, what did the United States do? In violation of international law and the UN Charter, it started bombing the Great. It was the United States that led the genie out of the bottom. Moreover, when Russia protested and expressed its resentment, what was said? The UN Charter and International Law have become obsolete. Now, everyone invokes international law, but at that time they started saying that everything was outdated. Everything had to be changed.
我知道那里的情况非常复杂，我明白。但是俄罗斯无法不为塞族高声支持，因为塞族也是一个与他们有着特殊关系、有着东正教文化的民族。这个民族已经遭受了如此多的苦难，已经是几代人了。不管怎样，重要的是叶利钦表达了他的支持，美国又做了什么？违反国际法和联合国宪章，它开始轰炸大城市。是美国引发了混乱的局面。而且，当俄罗斯抗议并表示愤怒时，有人说了什么？联合国宪章和国际法已经过时了。现在，每个人都倚重国际法，但在那个时候，他们开始说一切都过时了，一切都必须改变。
Indeed, some things need to be changed as the balance of power has changed. It's true. But not in this manner. Yeltsin was immediately dragged through the mud accused of alcoholism, of understanding nothing, of knowing nothing. He understood everything, I assure you. Well, I became president in 2000. I thought, OK, the Yugoslav issue is over, but we should try to restore relations. Let's reopen the door that Russia had tried to go through. And moreover, I said it publicly, I can't reiterate. At a meeting here in the Kremlin with the outgoing president Bill Clinton, right here in the next room, I said to him, I asked him, Bill, do you think if Russia asked to join NATO, do you think it would happen? Suddenly he said, you know, it's interesting. I think so. But in the evening, when we met for dinner, he said, you know, I've talked to my team. No, no, it's not possible now. You can ask him. I think he will watch our interview, he'll confirm it. I wouldn't have said anything like that if it hadn't happened.
确实，随着权力的平衡发生了变化，一些事情需要改变。这是真的。但不是以这种方式。叶利钦立即被批评得体无完肤，被指责酗酒，一无所知。他什么都明白，我向您保证。嗯，2000年，我成为了总统。我以为，好了，南斯拉夫问题已经结束了，但我们应该尝试恢复关系。让我们重新打开俄罗斯曾试图通过的大门。而且，我公开说过，我不能再重复了。在克里姆林宫与即将离任的比尔·克林顿总统开的这里的下一间房里的一次会议上，我对他说：“比尔，你认为如果俄罗斯要求加入北约，会发生什么？”突然他说：“你知道，很有趣。我认为可能会。”但晚上，当我们一起吃晚餐时，他说：“你知道吗，我跟我的团队交谈过了。不，不可能现在。”你可以问他。我认为他会看我们的采访，他会证实这一点。如果这件事没有发生，我是绝不会说这种话的。
OK, where are you since here? Possible now. Would you have joined NATO? Look, I asked the question, is it possible or not? And the answer I got was no. If I was insincere in my desire to find out what the leadership position was. But if he had said yes, would you have joined NATO? If he had said yes, the process of reproachment would have commenced. And eventually it might have happened if we had seen some sincere wish on the other side of our partners.
好的，你在这里附近吗？现在应该可以。你会加入北约吗？看吧，我问了这个问题，是可能还是不可能呢？我得到的答复是不可能。如果我对了解领导地位的愿望不真诚的话。但是如果他说是，你会加入北约吗？如果他说是，追求和解的进程就会开始。如果我们看到对方的合作伙伴方面有一些真诚的愿望，最终可能会发生。
But it didn't happen. Well, no means no. OK. Fine. Why do you think that is? Just to get to motive, I know you're clearly bitter about it. I understand. But why do you think the West rebuffed you then? Why the hostility? Why did the end of the Cold War not fix the relationship? What motivates this from your point of view? You said I was bitter about the answer. No, it's not bitterness. It's just a statement of fact. We're not bright in room, bitterness, resentment. It's not about those kind of matters in such circumstances. We just realized we weren't welcome there. That's all. OK, fine. But let's build relations in another manner. Let's work for common ground elsewhere. Why we received such a negative response, you should ask your leaders. I can only guess why to big a country with its own opinion and so on. And the United States, I have seen how issues are being resolved in NATO.
但事情并没有发生。好吧，不就是不嘛。好吧。你为什么认为会这样呢？我知道你对此很怨恨。我理解。但你认为为什么西方对你们进行了回击呢？为什么存在敌意？为什么冷战结束后双边关系没有得到修复？从你的角度来看，是什么驱使了这一切？你说我对答案感到怨恨。不，这不是怨恨。这只是陈述事实。我们并没有在意怨恨、怨念之类的情绪。只是意识到我们在那里不受欢迎罢了。好吧，那么让我们以另一种方式建立关系。让我们在其他地方寻求共同点。为什么我们得到了如此负面的回应，你应该问问你们的领导。我只能猜测，对于一个有着自己观点的大国来说，问题解决的方式肯定也不相同。而且，我见识过北约如何解决问题。
I will give you another example now concerning Ukraine. The US leadership exerts pressure and all NATO members obediently vote, even if they do not like something. Now, I'll tell you what happened in this regard with Ukraine in 2008, although it's being discussed. I'm not going to open a secret to you, say anything new. Nevertheless, after that we tried to build relations in different ways. For example, the events in the Middle East in Iraq, we were building relations with the United States in a very soft, prudent, cautious manner.
现在，我将给你另一个关于乌克兰的例子。美国领导层施加压力，所有北约成员必须服从投票，即使他们不喜欢某些事情。现在，我将告诉你发生在2008年与乌克兰有关的事情，尽管这个问题正在被讨论。我不会向你透露任何秘密，也不会说任何新的事情。然而，在那之后，我们尝试以不同的方式建立关系。例如，在中东伊拉克的事件中，我们以非常温和、谨慎的方式与美国建立关系。
I repeatedly raised the issue that the United States should not support separatism or terrorism in the North Caucasus. But they continue to do it anyway. And political support, information support, financial support, even military support, even military support came from the United States and its satellites for terrorist groups in the Caucasus. I once raised this issue with my colleague, also the president of the United States. He says, it's impossible. Do you have proof? I said, yes. I was prepared for this conversation and I gave him that proof. He looked at it and you know what he said? I apologize, but that's what happened. I'll quote. He says, well, I'm going to kick their ass.
我反复提出，美国不应该支持北高加索地区的分裂主义或恐怖主义，但他们还是继续这样做。从美国及其盟国那里向高加索恐怖组织提供政治支持、信息支持、财政支持，甚至包括军事支持。我曾经和我的同事以及美国总统提起过这个问题。他说，这是不可能的。你有证据吗？我说，有。我准备好了这次对话，我向他提供了证据。他看了，你知道他说了什么吗？他道歉了，说这确实发生了。我引用他的话，他说，我要狠狠地揍他们。
We waited and waited for some response. There was no reply. I said to death as a B director, right to the CIA, what is the result of the conversation with president? He wrote once, twice, and then we got a reply. We have the answer in the archive. The CIA replied, we have been working with the opposition in Russia, we believe that this is the right thing to do and we will keep on doing it. Just ridiculous. Well, okay. We realized that it was out of the question.
我们等待着回应，但却没有得到回复。作为B导演，我对CIA表示不解，和总统的对话有什么结果？他写了一次又一次，然后我们收到了回复。我们在档案中找到了答案。CIA回复说，他们一直在与俄罗斯的反对派合作，他们认为这是正确的做法，也会继续这样做。真是荒谬。好吧，我们意识到这是不可能的事情。
Forces in opposition to you. So you're saying the CIA is trying to overthrow your government? No, I'm not going to do it. Of course, they meant in that particular case, the separatists, the terrorists who fought with us in the Caucasus. That's who they called the opposition. This is the second point.
与您对立的势力。所以你是说CIA想要推翻你的政府？不，我不会这么做。当然，他们在那种特殊情况下是指那些在高加索地区与我们作战的分离主义者、恐怖分子。他们称之为反对派。这是第二个要点。
The third moment is a very important one is the moment when the US missile defense system was created, the beginning. We persuaded for a long time not to do it in the United States, moreover, after was invited by Bush Jr's father, Bush Sr, to visit his place on the ocean. I had a very serious conversation with President Bush and his team. I proposed that the United States, Russia, and Europe jointly create a missile defense system that we believe, if created unilaterally, threatens our security despite the fact that the United States officially said that it was being created against missile threats from Iran. That was the justification for the deployment of the missile defense system.
第三个时刻是非常重要的，这是美国导弹防御系统创建的时刻，也是开始的时刻。我们劝说了很久，不要在美国建立它，此外，还接到了布什小布什(小布什的父亲)的邀请，去他在海洋上的地方访问。我和布什总统及其团队进行了非常严肃的对话。我提议美国、俄罗斯和欧洲共同创建一个导弹防御系统，我们认为，如果单方面创建，尽管美国官方表示该系统是为了应对伊朗的导弹威胁而建立的，但却会威胁到我们的安全。这就是部署导弹防御系统的正当理由。
I suggested working together, Russia, the United States, and Europe. They said it was very interesting. They asked me, are you serious? I said, absolutely. I don't remember. It is easy to find out on the internet when I was in the USA at the invitation of Bush Sr. It is even easier to learn from someone I'm going to tell you about. I was told it was very interesting. I said, just imagine if we could tackle such a global strategic security challenge together. The world will change. We'll probably have disputes, probably economic and even political ones, but we could drastically change the situation in the world. He says, yes. And asks, are you serious? I said, of course, we need to think about it. I'm so.
我建议俄罗斯、美国和欧洲共同合作。他们说这个主意非常有趣。他们问我，你是认真的吗？我说，当然。我不记得了。在我受到布什老爷爷邀请时，很容易在互联网上找到。甚至更容易从我要告诉你的人那里得知。有人告诉我这是非常有趣的。我说，想象一下如果我们能共同应对这样一个全球战略安全挑战，世界将会改变。我们可能会有争议，可能是经济的，甚至是政治的，但我们可以彻底改变世界局势。他说，是的。并问，你是认真的吗？我说，当然，我们需要好好考虑一下。我很认真。
I said, go ahead, please. Then Secretary of Defense Gates, former Director of CIA and Secretary of State Rice came in here in this cabinet, right here at this table. They sat on this table. Me, the Foreign Minister, the Russian Defense Minister on that side, they said to me, yes, we have thought about it. We agree. I said, thank God, great, but with some exceptions.
我说了，走吧，请吧。然后国防部长盖茨、前中央情报局局长兼国务卿赖斯进来了，就在这个橱柜里，就在这张桌子旁边。他们坐在这张桌子上。我和外交部长、俄罗斯国防部长坐在那边，他们对我说，是的，我们已经考虑过了。我们同意。我说，谢天谢地，太好了，但是有一些例外。
So twice you've described US presidents making decisions and then being undercut by their agency heads. So it sounds like you're describing a system that's not run by the people who are elected in your telling. That's right. That's right. In the end, they just told us to get lost. I'm not going to tell you the details because I think it's incorrect. After all, it was confidential conversation. But our proposal was declined. That's a fact. It was right then when I said, look, but then we will be forced to take countermeasures. We will create such strike systems that will certainly overcome missile defense systems. The answer was, we are not doing this against you and you do what you want, assuming that it is not against us, not against the United States. I said, okay, very well. That's the way it went. And we created hypersonic systems with intercontinental range, and we continue to develop them. We are now ahead of everyone, the United States and the other countries in terms of the development of hypersonic strike systems, and we are improving them every day. But it wasn't us. We proposed to go the other way and we were pushed back.
在你的描述中，你已经两次提到美国总统做出决策，然后被他们的机构负责人削弱。所以你描述的似乎是一个不由被选举的人来管理的系统。没错，没错。最后，他们就告诉我们滚开。我不会告诉你具体细节，因为我认为这是不正确的。毕竟，这是一次机密对话。但我们的提议被拒绝了。这是事实。那时我说，看吧，那我们将被迫采取反制措施。我们将创建能够克服导弹防御系统的打击系统。回答是，我们不是针对你们，你们爱做什么就做什么，只要不针对我们，不针对美国。我说，好的，非常好。事情就是这样。我们开发了具有洲际射程的高超音速系统，并且我们在发展中持续改进它们。在高超音速打击系统的开发上，我们已经超过了美国和其他国家，而且我们每天都在提升它们。但这不是我们的本意。我们提出了另一种方式，却被推了回去。
Now, about NATO's expansion to the east. Well, we were promised no NATO to the east, not an inch to the east, as we were told. And then what? They said, well, it's not enshrined on paper, so we'll expand. So there were five waves of expansion, the Baltic states, the whole of Eastern Europe, and so on. And now I come to the main thing. They have come to the Ukraine ultimately. In 2008, at the summit in Bucharest, they declared that the doors for Ukraine and Georgia to join NATO were open.
现在，关于北约向东扩张的问题。嗯，我们被承诺北约不会向东扩张，不会一寸一寸地向东扩张，就像他们告诉我们的那样。然后呢？他们说，好吧，这没有被明文规定，所以我们会扩张。所以，就有了五轮扩张，包括波罗的海国家，整个东欧等等。现在我来到了主要事情。他们最终来到了乌克兰。在2008年布加勒斯特峰会上，他们宣布乌克兰和格鲁吉亚加入北约的大门是敞开的。
Now about how decisions are made there. Germany, France, seem to be against it as well as some other European countries. But then, as it turned out later, President Bush and he is such a tough guy, a tough politician, as I was told later, he exerted pressure on us and we had to agree. It's ridiculous. It's like kindergarten. Where are the guarantees? What kindergarten is this? What kind of people are these? Who are they? You see, they were pressed, they agree. And then they say, Ukraine won't be in the NATO, you know? I say, I don't know. I know you agreed in 2008. Why won't you agree in the future? Well, they pressed us then. I say, why won't they press you tomorrow? And you'll agree again. Well, it's nonsensical. Who's there to talk to? I just don't understand.
现在谈谈决策是如何做出的。德国、法国似乎也反对，以及一些其他欧洲国家。但后来事实证明，布什总统是个强硬的家伙，一位强硬的政治家，我后来听说他对我们施加了压力，我们不得不同意。这太荒唐了，就像幼儿园一样。这里有什么保证吗？这是什么幼儿园？这是什么人？他们是谁？你知道，他们受到了压力，他们同意了。然后他们说，乌克兰不会加入北约，你知道吗？我说，我不知道。我知道你们在2008年同意了。为什么未来不同意？嗯，他们那时候逼迫我们。我说，为什么明天他们就不再逼迫你们？而你们又会再次同意。嗯，这没有道理。还有谁可以跟他们谈？我就是不明白。
We're ready to talk. But with whom? Where are the guarantees? None. So they started to develop the territory of Ukraine. Whatever is there, I have told you, the background, how this territory developed, what kind of relations they were with Russia. Every second or third person there has always had some ties with Russia. And during the elections, in already independent sovereign Ukraine, which gained its independence as a result of the declaration of independence. And by the way, it says that Ukraine is a neutral state. And in 2008, suddenly the doors are gates to NATO were open to it. Oh, come on. This is not how we agreed.
我们已经准备好进行谈话了。但是和谁谈？这里有什么保证吗？没有。所以他们开始开发乌克兰的领土。无论那里有什么，我都告诉过你，这个领土的背景，它是如何发展的，与俄罗斯之间有什么样的关系。每个第二个或第三个人在那里都与俄罗斯有一些联系。而且在已经独立的主权乌克兰举行选举时，作为独立宣言的结果，乌克兰获得了独立。顺便说一句，它说乌克兰是一个中立国家。然而在2008年，北约的大门突然向它敞开了。哦，拜托。这不是我们约定的方式。
Now all the presidents that have come to power in Ukraine, they relied on electorate with a good attitude to Russia in one way or the other. This is the southeast of Ukraine. This is a large number of people. And it was very difficult to dissuade this electorate, which had a positive attitude towards Russia. Victoria and Kovich came to power and how? The first time he won after President Kuchma, they organized a third round, which is not provided for in the Constitution of Ukraine. This is a coup d'etat. Just imagine someone in the United States wouldn't like the outcome. In 2014. Before that. No, this was before that after President Kuchma, Victoria and Kovich won the elections. However, his opponents did not recognize that victory. The US supported the opposition and the third round was scheduled. What is this? This is a coup. The US supported it and the winner of the third round came to power. Imagine if in the US something was not to someone's liking and the third round of election, which the US Constitution does not provide for, was organized. Nonetheless, it was done in Ukraine.
现在，乌克兰上任的所有总统，无论如何都依赖于对俄罗斯抱有良好态度的选民。这些选民主要分布在乌克兰东南部，他们人数众多。而且，要说服这些对俄罗斯持积极态度的选民转变立场非常困难。维克多·亚努科维奇又如何上位的呢？他第一次获胜是在库奇马总统任期之后，他们举行了一次不符合乌克兰宪法规定的第三轮选举。这是一次政变。想象一下，如果在美国有人对选举结果不满意，然后组织了一个美国宪法并未规定的第三轮选举。然而，在乌克兰，这样的事情确实发生了。
在2014年之前，也就是在库奇马总统任期结束后，维克多·亚努科维奇赢得了选举，但他的对手不承认他的胜利。美国支持了反对派，并安排了第三轮选举。这又是什么情况呢？这是一次政变。美国支持它，并使第三轮选举的获胜者上台。想象一下，如果在美国有什么事情不符合某人的意愿，然后安排了一次宪法未规定的第三轮选举会是怎样的情况。然而，在乌克兰，这种情况确实发生了。
Okay, Victoria Yuxchenko, who was considered a pro-Western politician, came to power. Fine, we have built relations with him as well. He came to Moscow with visits. We visited Kiev. I visited too. We met in an informal setting. If he is pro-Western, so be it. It's fine. Let people do their job. The situation should have developed inside the independent Ukraine itself. As a result of Kuchma's leadership, things got worse and Victoria and Kovich came to power after all. Maybe he wasn't the best president and politician. I don't know. I don't want to give assessments. However, the issue of the association with the EU came up. We have always been lenient to this, suit yourself. But when we read through the 3D of association, it turned out to be a problem for us, since we had the free trade zone and open customs borders with Ukraine, which under this association had to open its borders for Europe, which would have led to flooding of our markets. We said, no, this is not going to work. We shall close our borders with Ukraine then.
好的，维多利亚·尤克琴科被认为是亲西方的政治家，他上台了。好吧，我们也与他建立了关系。他来莫斯科访问过，我们也去过基辅，我也去过。我们在非正式的场合见过面。如果他是亲西方的，那就这样吧，没关系。让人们做好自己的工作。这种情况应该在独立的乌克兰内部发展。在库奇玛的领导下，情况变得更糟，维多利亚和科维奇最终上台了。也许他不是最好的总统和政治家，我不知道。我不想做评估。然而，与欧盟的关联问题出现了。我们一直对此很宽容，随你们的意。但当我们阅读了关联协议的内容时，我们发现这对我们是个问题，因为我们与乌克兰有自由贸易区和开放的海关边界，而根据这个协议，乌克兰必须为欧洲开放边界，这将导致我们市场的涌入。我们说，不行，这行不通。那我们就关闭与乌克兰的边界吧。
The customs borders, that is. Yennukovich started to calculate how much Ukraine was going to gain, how much to lose, and said to his European partners, I need more time to think before signing. The moment he said that, the opposition began to take destructive steps, which were supported by the West. It all came down to Maidan and Akhoo in Ukraine.
海关边境，也就是那个。亚努科维奇开始计算乌克兰能够获得多少、失去多少，并对他的欧洲伙伴说，我需要更多时间来思考才能签署协议。他一说出这句话，反对派就开始采取破坏性的行动，而西方国家对此予以支持。最终导致了乌克兰的马丹广场和阿教事件。
So he did more trade with Russia than with the EU. Ukraine did. Of course, it's not even the matter of trade value, although for the most part it is. It is the matter of cooperation size, which the entire Ukrainian economy was based on. The cooperation size between the enterprises were very close since the times of the Soviet Union. One enterprise there used to produce components to be assembled both in Russia and Ukraine and vice versa. They used to be very close ties.
因此，乌克兰与俄罗斯的贸易比与欧盟更多。当然，这甚至不仅仅是贸易价值的问题，尽管在很大程度上是如此。这是合作规模的问题，整个乌克兰经济是建立在此基础上的。自苏联时期以来，企业之间的合作规模非常紧密。其中一家企业曾经在俄罗斯和乌克兰分别生产组件并进行装配。它们曾经有非常紧密的联系。
Akhoo de Tal was committed, although I shall not delve into details now, as I find doing it inappropriate, the US told us, calm Yennukovich down and we will calm the opposition. Let the situation unfold in the scenario of a political settlement. We said, all right, agreed. Let's do it this way. As the Americans requested, Yennukovich did use neither the armed forces nor the police, yet the armed opposition committed Akhoo in Kiev. What is that supposed to mean? Who do you think you are? I wanted to ask the then US leadership.
阿霍·德·塔尔已经承诺，虽然我现在不打算深入细节，因为我认为这样做是不合适的，但美国告诉我们，让叶努科维奇冷静下来，我们会平息反对派。让情况在政治解决的框架下发展。我们说，好的，同意了。就按照这种方式做吧。正如美国人所要求的那样，叶努科维奇既没有使用武装部队也没有使用警察，但是武装反对派在基辅犯下了阿霍。那意味着什么？我想问当时的美国领导人，你们认为你们是谁？
With the backing of whom. With the backing of CIA, of course, the organization you wanted to join back in the day as I understand. We should thank God they didn't let you in, although it is a serious organization. I understand. My former vis-a-vis in the sense that I served in the first main directorate, Soviet Union's intelligence service. They have always been our opponents. A job is a job. Technically, they did everything right. They achieved their goal of changing the government. However, from political standpoint, it was a colossal mistake. Surely it was political leadership's miscalculation. They should have seen what it would evolve into.
在“有谁的支持”下。当然是有中央情报局（CIA）的支持，我理解你当时想加入的组织。我们应该感谢上帝他们没有让你进去，尽管这是一个严肃的组织。我明白了，我们过去曾是对手，因为我在苏联的情报机构一主要总局任职。工作就是工作。从技术上讲，他们做得一切都是对的。他们成功实现了改变政府的目标。然而，从政治角度来看，这是一个巨大的错误。毫无疑问，这是政治领导层的错误判断。他们应该看到它将会演变成什么样子。
So in 2008, the doors of NATO were opened for Ukraine. In 2014, there was Akhoo. They started persecuting those who did not accept Akhoo, and it was indeed Akhoo. They created a threat to Crimea, which we had to take under our protection. They launched the war in Donbas in 2014 with the use of aircraft and artillery against civilians. This is when it all started. There is a video of aircraft attacking donuts from above. They launched a large-scale military operation than another one. When they failed, they started to prepare the next door. All this against the background of military development of this territory and opening of NATO's doors.
所以在2008年，北约的大门向乌克兰开放了。在2014年，出现了阿赫。他们开始迫害那些不接受阿赫的人，而且确实是阿赫。他们对克里米亚构成了威胁，我们必须将其纳入保护范围。他们在2014年对顿巴斯发动了一场利用飞机和炮火对平民的战争。从那时起，这一切就开始了。有一段视频显示了飞机从空中攻击顿巴斯。他们发动了一次又一次的大规模军事行动。当他们失败后，他们开始准备下一步行动。所有这一切都发生在这个地区的军事发展和北约开放大门的背景下。
How could we not express concern over what was happening? From our side, this would have been a culpable negligence. That's what it would have been. It's just that the US political leadership pushed us to the line we could not cross, because doing so could have ruined Russia itself. Besides, we could not leave our brothers in faith, in fact, a part of Russian people in the face of this war machine. That was eight years before the current conflict started.
我们怎么能不对所发生的事情表达关切呢？从我们这方面来说，那将是一种可责怪的疏忽。那就是它的实际情况。只是美国的政治领导人将我们推到了我们无法超越的界线，因为这样做可能会毁了俄罗斯本身。此外，我们不能抛弃我们的信仰兄弟，事实上，他们是俄罗斯人民的一部分，面对着这个战争机器。那是发生在当前冲突开始前的八年。
So what was the trigger for you? What was the moment where you decided you had to do this? It was the coup in Ukraine that provoked the conflict. By the way, back then, the representatives of three European countries, Germany, Poland, and France arrived. They were the guarantors of the signed agreement between the government of Yanukovych and the opposition. They signed it as guarantors. Despite that, the opposition committed a coup, and all these countries pretended that they didn't remember that they were guarantors of the peaceful settlement. They just threw it in the snow right away, and nobody recalls that. I don't know if the US know anything about the agreement between the opposition and the authorities, and its three guarantors who, instead of bringing this whole situation back in the political field, supported the coup. Although it was meaningless, believe me, because President Yanukovych agreed to all conditions. He was ready to hold an early election, which he had no chance of winning, frankly speaking. Everyone knew that. Then why the coup? Why the victims? Why threatening Crimea? Why launching an operation in Donbas? This, I do not understand. That is exactly what the miscalculation is. CIA did its job to complete the coup. I think one of the deputy secretaries of states said that they caused a large sum of money, almost five billion, but the political mistake was colossal.
那么，你的触发点是什么？你是在什么时刻决定要做这件事的？是乌克兰的政变引发了冲突。顺便提一下，那时候来了三个欧洲国家的代表，分别是德国、波兰和法国。他们是乌克兰亚努科维奇政府和反对派签署协议的保证人。他们签署了这个协议作为保证人。尽管如此，反对派还是发动了政变，而这些国家都假装忘记了他们作为和平解决的保证人，第一时间就扔到了一边，没人再提起。我不知道美国是否了解反对派和政府之间的协议，以及它们三个担保国家。这三个国家没有帮助将整个局势重新纳入政治领域，反而支持了政变，虽然这是毫无意义的，相信我，因为亚努科维奇总统同意了所有条件。他愿意举行提前选举，而实话告诉你，他毫无胜算。每个人都知道。那么为什么还要发生政变？为什么要有受害者？为什么要威胁克里米亚？为什么要在顿巴斯发动军事行动？我不明白这一切。这正是错误的估计。中央情报局完成了他们的任务，完成了政变。我想副国务卿中的一位曾经说过，他们投入了巨额资金，近五十亿美元，但政治失误是巨大的。
Why would they have to do that? All this could have been done legally without victims, without military action, without losing Crimea. We would have never considered to even lift a finger if it hadn't been for the bloody developments on Maidan.
为什么他们要这么做呢？所有这些事情本来可以在合法的情况下完成，不需要伤害任何人，不需要军事行动，也不需要失去克里米亚。如果不是因为在麦田发生的那些血腥事件，我们甚至都不会考虑动一根手指。
Because we agreed with the fact that after the collapse of the Soviet Union, our border should be along the borders of former unions republics. We agreed to that, but we never agreed to NATO's expansion, and moreover, we never agreed that Ukraine would be in NATO. We did not agree to NATO bases there without any discussion with us. For decades, we kept asking, don't do this, don't do that.
因为我们同意在苏联解体后，我们的边界应沿着旧联盟共和国的边界线。我们同意了这一点，但我们从未同意北约的扩张，而且我们从未同意乌克兰加入北约。我们不同意在那里设立北约基地，且未经与我们讨论。几十年来，我们一直在要求他们不要这样做，不要那样做。
And what triggered the latest demands? Firstly, the Ukrainian leadership declared that it would not implement the Minsk agreements, which had been signed, as you know, after the events of 2014 in Minsk, where the plan of peaceful settlement in Donbas was set forth. But no, the Ukrainian leadership foreign minister, all other officials and then president himself said that they don't like anything about the Minsk agreements. In other words, they were not going to implement it.
而是什么引发了最近的要求呢？首先，乌克兰领导层宣布他们将不会执行明斯克协议，正如你所知，这是在2014年明斯克事件之后签署的，明斯克协议中阐明了解决顿巴斯地区和平的计划。但是没有，乌克兰领导层的外交部长、其他官员甚至总统本人都表示他们对明斯克协议一无所喜欢。换句话说，他们不打算执行它。
A year or a year and a half ago, former leaders of Germany and France said openly to the whole world that they indeed signed the Minsk agreements, but they never intended to implement them. They simply led us by the nose.
大约一年或一年半前，德国和法国的前领导人公开向全世界表示，他们确实签署了明斯克协议，但他们从未打算执行。他们只是在耍我们。
Was there anyone free to talk to? Did you call a US president's secretary of state and say, if you keep militarizing Ukraine with NATO forces, this is going to get? This is going to be a we're going to act. We talked about this all the time. We addressed the United States and European countries leadership to stop these developments immediately, so implement the Minsk agreements.
有没有人有空可以交谈？你给美国总统国务卿打电话说，如果你继续用北约部队军事化乌克兰，将会发生什么？这将是我们采取行动的时候了。我们一直在讨论这个问题。我们向美国和欧洲国家的领导层提出呼吁，立即停止这些进展，并执行明斯克协议。
Frankly speaking, I didn't know how we were going to do this, but I was ready to implement them. These agreements were complicated for Ukraine. They included lots of elements of those Donbas territories independence. That's true. However, I was absolutely confident and I'm saying this to you now. I honestly believe that if we managed to convince the residents of Donbas, and we had to work hard to convince them to return to the Ukrainian statehood, then gradually the ones would start to heal. When this part of territory reintegrated itself into common social environment, when the pensions and social benefits were paid again, all the pieces would gradually fall into place. Nobody wanted that. Everybody wanted to resolve the issue by military force only. But we could not let that happen.
坦率地讲，我不知道我们该如何做到这一点，但我已经准备好去实施了。对乌克兰来说，这些协议非常复杂。它们包含了顿巴斯地区独立的许多要素。这是真的。然而，我完全有信心，我现在对你们说出来。我真诚地相信，如果我们能够说服顿巴斯居民，我们不得不努力说服他们回归乌克兰的领土，那么渐渐地，一切都会开始恢复。当这个领土部分重新融入社会环境，当养老金和社会福利再次支付时，所有的问题都会逐渐解决。没有人希望发生这种情况。每个人都希望通过军事力量解决问题。但我们不能让这种情况发生。
And the situation got to the point when the Ukrainian side announced no, we will not do anything. They also started preparing for military action. It was they who started the war in 2014. Our goal is to stop this war. And we did not start this war in 2022. This is an attempt to stop it.
并且情况已经达到了乌克兰方面宣布不会采取任何行动的地步。他们还开始准备军事行动。正是他们在2014年发动了这场战争。我们的目标是停止这场战争。而我们并不是在2022年发动这场战争，这是为了试图停止它的一次尝试。
Do you think you've stopped it now? I mean, have you achieved your aims? No, we haven't achieved our aims yet because one of them is the notification. This means the prohibition of all kinds of neo-Nazi movements. This is one of the problems that we discuss during the negotiation process, which ended in Istanbul early this year.
你认为现在你已经停止了吗？我的意思是，你已经实现了你的目标吗？不，我们还没有实现我们的目标，因为其中一个目标是通知。这意味着禁止各种新纳粹运动。这是我们在谈判过程中讨论的问题之一，该谈判于今年年初在伊斯坦布尔结束。
And it was not our initiative because we were told by the Europeans in particular that it was necessary to create conditions for the final signing of the documents. My counterparts in France and Germany said, how can you imagine them signing a treaty with they gone to their heads? The troops should be pulled back from Kiev. I said, all right, we withdrew the troops from Kiev. As soon as we pulled back our troops from Kiev, our Ukrainian negotiators immediately threw all our agreements reached the Istanbul into the bin. And got prepared for a longstanding armed confrontation with the help of the United States and its satellites in Europe.
这并不是我们的主动行动，因为特别是欧洲人告诉我们，必须创造条件来最终签署文件。我的法国和德国谈判对手说，你怎么能想象他们会在他们头脑发热时签署条约呢？部队应该从基辅撤出。我说，好吧，我们从基辅撤军。我们一撤军，我们的乌克兰谈判代表立即把我们在伊斯坦布尔达成的所有协议丢进了垃圾桶，并准备与美国及其在欧洲的卫星国进行长期的武装对抗。
That is how the situation has developed. And that is how it looks now. But what is part of my interest? What is denotsification? What would that mean? That is what I want to talk about right now. It is a very important issue.
这就是事态的发展情况，也是现在的状况。但是我关心的部分是什么呢？什么是去通知化？那意味着什么呢？这就是我现在想要谈论的内容。这是一个非常重要的问题。
Denotsification. After gaining independence, Ukraine began to search, as some Western analysts say, its identity. And it came up with nothing better than to build this identity upon some false heroes who collaborated with Hitler. I have already said that in the early 19th century, when the theorists of independence and sovereignty of Ukraine appeared, they assumed that an independent Ukraine should have very good relations with Russia. But due to the historical development, those territories were part of the Polish, Lithuanian commonwealth, Poland, where Ukrainians were persecuted and treated quite brutally as well as were subject to cruel behavior. There were also attempts to destroy their identity. All this remained in the memory of the people.
去损。在独立后，乌克兰开始寻找，正如一些西方分析师所说的那样，它的身份。而它找不到比依靠与希特勒合作的一些虚假英雄来建立身份更好的方式。我已经说过，在19世纪初，当乌克兰独立和主权理论家出现时，他们认为独立的乌克兰应该与俄罗斯保持非常好的关系。但由于历史发展，那些领土是波兰，立陶宛联邦和波兰的一部分，乌克兰人受到迫害和残暴对待，并受到残酷行为的摧毁。也有试图销毁他们的身份的企图。所有这些都留在人们的记忆中。
When World War II broke out, part of this extremely nationalist elite collaborated with Hitler, believing that he would bring them freedom.
当第二次世界大战爆发时，这个极度民族主义的精英阶层中的一部分与希特勒合作，他们相信希特勒会给他们带来自由。
The German troops, even the SS troops, made Hitler's collaborators do the dirtiest work of exterminating the Polish and Jewish population. Hence this brutal massacre of the Polish and Jewish population as well as the Russian population too.
德国军队，甚至包括党卫队部队，让希特勒的合作者去执行消灭波兰和犹太人口的最卑劣工作。因此，波兰和犹太人口以及俄罗斯人口也遭遇了这场残酷的大屠杀。
This was led by the persons who are well known, Bandera, Shukiewicz. It was those people who were made national heroes. That is the problem. And we are constantly told that nationalism and neo-nazism exist in other countries as well. Yes, they are seedlings, but we approved them. Other countries fight against them. But Ukraine is not the case. These people have been made into national heroes in Ukraine.
这一切都是由一些众所周知的人领导的，比如邦代拉、舒基耶维奇。正是这些人成为了全国英雄。这就是问题所在。而我们不断被告知，民族主义和新纳粹主义在其他国家也存在。是的，它们只是小苗，但我们却批准了它们的存在。其他国家都在与这些思潮进行斗争，但乌克兰不是这样。这些人已经成为乌克兰的民族英雄。
Monuments to those people have been erected. They are displayed on flags. Their names are shouted by crowds that walk with torches as it was in Nazi Germany. These were people who exterminated Poles, Jews and Russians. It is necessary to stop this practice and prevent the dissemination of this concept.
为那些人建造了纪念碑。它们被展示在旗帜上。人群手持火炬高呼他们的名字，恰如纳粹德国时期那样。这些人是屠杀波兰人、犹太人和俄罗斯人的人。我们有必要制止这种做法并阻止这个概念的传播。
I say that Ukrainians are part of the one Russian people. They say, no, we are a separate people. Okay, fine. If they consider themselves a separate people, they have the right to do so. But not on the basis of Nazism, the Nazi ideology.
我说乌克兰人是俄罗斯人民的一部分。他们说，不，我们是一个独立的民族。好吧，没问题。如果他们认为自己是独立的民族，那么他们有权这么做。但不能以纳粹主义、纳粹意识形态为基础。
Would you be satisfied with the territory that you have now? We'll finish answering the question. You just asked a question about neo-nazism and the notification. Look, the president of Ukraine visited Canada. The story is well known, but being silenced in the western countries.
你对现在的领土满意吗？我们将回答完这个问题。你刚刚问了一个关于新纳粹主义和通知的问题。瞧，乌克兰总统访问了加拿大。这个故事广为人知，但在西方国家却被压制。
The Canadian Parliament introduced a man who, as the Speaker of the Parliament said, fought against the Russians during the World War II. Well, who fought against the Russians during the World War II? Hitler and his accomplices. It turned out that this man served in the SS troops.
加拿大议会介绍了一位在二战期间与俄罗斯对抗的人，议会议长称赞他的战斗。那么，到底是谁在二战期间与俄罗斯对抗呢？是希特勒及其同伙。结果证明，这个人曾在武装党卫队服役。
He personally killed Russian Poles and Jews. The SS troops consisted of Ukrainian nationalists who did this dirty work. The president of Ukraine stood up with the entire Parliament of Canada and applauded this man. How can this be imagined? The president of Ukraine himself, by the way, is a Jew by nationality.
他亲手杀死了俄罗斯人、波兰人和犹太人。纳粹卫队是由乌克兰民族主义者组成，他们进行了这些肮脏的行为。乌克兰总统与整个加拿大议会起立并为这个人鼓掌。这是如何想象得到的呢？顺便说一下，乌克兰总统本人是犹太人。
Really, my question is, what do you do about it? Hitler's been dead for 80 years. Nazi Germany no longer exists. And so true. And so I think what you're saying is you want to extinguish or at least control Ukrainian nationalism. But how? How do you do that?
真的，我的问题是，你会怎么处理这个问题呢？希特勒已经去世80年了。纳粹德国已经不存在了。这都是事实。所以我猜你想要消除或者至少控制乌克兰民族主义，但是怎么做呢？你会怎么做呢？
What do you do? Listen to me. Your question is very subtle and I can tell you what I think. Do not take offense. Of course. This question appears to be subtle. It is quite pesky.
你做什么工作？听我说。你的问题很微妙，我可以告诉你我的想法。请不要生气。当然。这个问题看起来很微妙，很烦人。
You say Hitler has been dead for so many years. 80 years. But his example lives on. People who exterminated Jews, Russians and Poles are alive. And the president, the current president of today's Ukraine, applauds him in the Canadian Parliament, gives a standing ovation. Can we say that we have completely uprooted this ideology if what we see is happening today? That is what the notification is in our understanding.
你说希特勒已经死了那么多年，80年了。但他的榜样仍然存在。那些屠杀犹太人、俄罗斯人和波兰人的人还活着。而今天的乌克兰总统在加拿大议会为他鼓掌，并起立致敬。如果我们今天所看到的情况仍然发生，我们能说我们已经完全根除了这种意识形态吗？这就是我们的通知所要表达的意思。
We have to get rid of those people who maintain this concept and support this practice and try to preserve it. That is what the notification is. That is what we mean.
我们必须摒弃那些维持这种理念、支持这种做法并试图保留它的人。这就是通知的意义，也是我们的意思。
Right. My question was no more specific. It was, of course, not a defense of Nazis, new or otherwise. It was a practical question. You don't control the entire country. You don't control care if you don't seem like you want to.
没错。我的问题并没有更加具体。 当然，并不是在为纳粹分子（不论新旧）辩护。这是一个实际问题。你无法控制整个国家。如果你不表现出对此事的关心，你就不能掌控它们。
So how do you eliminate a culture or an ideology or feelings or a view of history in a country that you don't control? What do you do about that?
那么，对于你无法控制的国家中的文化、意识形态、情感或历史观，你该如何消除它们呢？你应该怎么办呢？
You know, as strange as it may seem to you during the negotiations at Istanbul, we did agree that we have it all in writing. Neo-Nazis would not be cultivated in Ukraine, including that it would be prohibited at the legislative level. Mr. Carson, we agreed on that. This, it turns out, can be done during the negotiation process. And there's nothing humiliating for Ukraine as a modern civilized state.
你知道，在伊斯坦布尔的谈判中，我们确实同意将所有内容都写下来，尽管对你来说可能有点奇怪。乌克兰不会培养新纳粹分子，包括在立法层面上将其禁止。卡森先生，我们在这个问题上达成了共识。事实证明，在谈判过程中可以做到这一点，并且对于乌克兰作为一个现代文明国家来说，并不具有羞辱意义。
Is any state allowed to promote Nazism? It is not, is it? That is it. I'm making a problem.
任何国家都可以宣扬纳粹主义吗？显然不可以，是吧？没错，我正在制造问题。
Will there be talks and why haven't there been talks about resolving the conflict in Ukraine? Peace talks. There have been.
在乌克兰冲突的解决方面，会有谈判吗？为什么还没有进行谈判？和平谈判。已经有了。
请注意，为了使翻译尽量易读，翻译结果可能不会与原文一一对应。
They reached a very high stage of coordination of positions in a complex process. But still they were almost finalized. But after we withdrew out troops from Kiev, as I have already said, the other side threw away all these agreements and obeyed the instructions of Western countries, European countries and the United States to fight Russia to the bitter end.
他们在一个复杂的过程中达到了非常高的岗位协调水平。但他们几乎已经达成最终协议。但是在我们从基辅撤回部队之后，正如我之前所说的，对方抛弃了所有这些协议，听从西方国家、欧洲国家和美国的指示，与俄罗斯进行到底的战斗。
Moreover, the President of Ukraine has legislated a ban on negotiating with Russia. He signed a decree forbidding everyone to negotiate with Russia. But how are we going to negotiate if he forbade himself and everyone to do this? We know that he is putting forward some ideas about this settlement. But in order to agree on something, we need to have a dialogue. Is that not right?
此外，乌克兰总统颁布了一项禁止与俄罗斯进行谈判的法令。他签署了一项禁止任何人与俄罗斯进行谈判的法令。但是，如果他禁止自己和其他人这样做，我们将如何进行谈判呢？我们知道他提出了一些解决方案的想法。但是为了达成一致，我们需要进行对话，这不是正确的吗？
Well, but you wouldn't be speaking to the Ukrainian President, you'd be speaking to the American President. When was the last time you spoke to Joe Biden? I cannot remember when I talked to him. I do not remember. We can look it up. You don't remember? No. Why? Do I have to remember everything? I have my own things to do. We have domestic political affairs.
好吧，但你将不会与乌克兰总统交谈，而是与美国总统交谈。你最后一次和乔·拜登说话是什么时候？我记不清我和他说话的时间。我不记得了。我们可以查一下。你不记得吗？不记得。为什么？我必须记得所有事情吗？我有自己的事情要做。我们还有国内的政治事务。
Well, he's funding the war that you're fighting, so I would think that would be memorable. Well, yes, he funds. But I talked to him before the Special Military Operation, of course. And I said to him then, by the way, I will not go into details I never do, but I said to him then, I believe that you are making a huge mistake of historic proportions by supporting everything that is happening there in Ukraine by pushing Russia away.
嗯，他在资助你所参与的战争，所以我认为这应该是难以忘记的事情。嗯，是的，他提供资金。但在特殊军事行动之前，我当然与他进行了谈话。当时我对他说了些话，我不会透露细节，但我告诉他，我认为你在支持乌克兰发生的一切，并将俄罗斯推开的行为上犯下了一个历史性的巨大错误。
I told him, told him repeatedly, by the way, I think that would be correct if I stop here. What did he say? I asked him, please, it is easier for you, you are a citizen of the United States. Go and ask him, it is not appropriate for me to comment on our conversation. But you haven't spoken to him since before February of 2022? No, we haven't spoken. Certain contexts are being maintained, though, speaking of which.
我告诉了他，反复地告诉他，顺便说一句，我认为如果我在这里停下来就是正确的。他说了什么？我问他，拜托，对你来说更容易，你是美国公民。去问问他，我对我们的对话发表评论是不合适的。但你自2022年2月以前就没和他说过话了吗？是的，我们没有说过话。不过还是有一些特定的背景被保留下来，说起来。
Do you remember what I told you about my proposal to work together on a missile defense system? Yes. You can ask all of them. All of them are safe and sound. Thank God. The former president, Condoleeza is safe and sound. And I think Mr. Gates and the current director of the intelligence agency, Mr. Burns, the then ambassador to Russia, in my opinion, are very successful ambassador. They were all witnesses to these conversations. Ask them. Same here, if you are interested in what Mr. President Biden responded to me, ask him.
你还记得我跟你谈过关于一起合作开展导弹防御系统的提议吗？是的，你可以问他们所有的人。他们都平安无事，感谢上帝。前总统康多莉扎也平安无事。我认为盖茨先生和现任情报机构主管伯恩斯先生，以及当时驻俄罗斯大使，都是非常成功的大使。他们都是这些对话的见证人。如果你对拜登总统对我所做回应感兴趣，也请问他。
At any rate, I talk to him about it. I'm definitely interested, but from the outside, it seems like this could devolve or evolve into something that brings the entire world into conflict and could initiate a nuclear launch. And so why don't you just call Biden and say, let's work this out? What's there to work out? It's very simple. I repeat. We have contacts through various agencies. I will tell you what we are saying on this matter and what we are conveying to the U.S. leadership. If you really want to stop fighting, you need to stop supplying weapons. It will be over within a few weeks. That's it. And then we can agree on some terms. Before you do that, stop.
无论如何，我和他谈过这件事。我肯定很感兴趣，但从外部来看，这似乎可能演变成一场将整个世界卷入冲突并可能引发核弹发射的事件。那么，你为什么不给拜登打个电话，说我们来协商解决一下呢？要解决什么问题呢？很简单。我们通过各种机构有联系。我会告诉你我们在这个问题上说了什么，以及我们向美国领导层传达了什么。如果你真的想停止战斗，你需要停止供应武器。几周之内就会结束。就是这样。然后我们可以就一些条款达成协议。在你这样做之前，停下来。
What's easier? Why would I call him? What should I talk to him about or beg him for what? And what message do you get back? You're going to deliver such and such weapons to Ukraine. Oh, I'm afraid. I'm afraid. Please don't. What is there to talk about?
什么更容易？为什么我要打电话给他？我应该和他谈什么或者请求他什么？而且得到什么回复呢？你要向乌克兰提供某些武器。哦，我很害怕。请不要这样做。有什么可谈的呢？
Do you think NATO is worried about this becoming a global war or a nuclear conflict? At least that's what they're talking about. And they're trying to intimidate their own population with an imaginary Russian threat. This is an obvious fact. And thinking people, not Philistines, but thinking people, analysts, those who are engaged in real politics, just smart people understand perfectly well that this is a faith. They're trying to fuel the Russian threat.
你认为北约是否担心这可能演变成全球战争或核冲突？至少他们正在谈论这个问题。他们试图用一个虚构的俄罗斯威胁来恐吓自己的民众。这是一个明显的事实。而有思考力的人，不是庸人，而是有思考力的人、分析师、真正从事政治的人，聪明的人都很清楚这只是一种无根据的信念。他们试图煽动对俄罗斯的威胁。
The threat I think you're referring to is a Russian invasion of Poland, Latvia, expansionist behavior. Can you imagine a scenario where you sent Russian troops to Poland? Only in one case, if Poland attacks Russia. Why? Because we have no interest in Poland, Latvia, or anywhere else. Why would we do that? We simply don't have any interest. It's just threat mongering.
我认为你所指的威胁是俄罗斯入侵波兰、拉脱维亚或表现出扩张行为。你能想象一种情况，即俄罗斯向波兰派遣军队吗？只有在波兰攻击俄罗斯的情况下才可能。为什么？因为我们对波兰、拉脱维亚或其他任何地方都没有兴趣。我们为什么要那么做呢？我们就是对此不感兴趣，这只不过是在制造威胁罢了。
Well, the argument I know you know this is that while he invaded Ukraine, he has territorial aims across the continent. And you're saying unequivocally you don't. It is absolutely out of the question. You just don't have to be any kind of analyst. It goes against common sense to get involved in some kind of a global war. And a global war will bring all humanity to the brink of destruction. It's obvious.
嗯，我知道你也知道这个争论，就在于他入侵乌克兰的同时，对整个欧洲大陆都有领土野心。而你则明确表示你没有这样的野心。这是绝对绝对不可能的。你不需要成为任何分析师，这违背了常识，卷入到某种全球战争是毫无意义的。全球战争将把全人类推向毁灭的边缘，这是显而易见的。
There are certainly means of deterrence. They have been scaring everyone with us all along. Tomorrow Russia will use tactical nuclear weapons. Tomorrow Russia will use that. No, the day after tomorrow. So what? In order to extort additional money from US taxpayers and European taxpayers in the confrontation with Russia in the Ukrainian theater war, the goal is to weaken Russia as much as possible.
肯定有威慑手段。他们一直在用这些手段吓唬我们所有人。明天俄罗斯将使用战术核武器。明天俄罗斯会这样做。不，后天才会。那又怎样呢？为了在乌克兰战争中与俄罗斯对抗，从美国纳税人和欧洲纳税人那里勒索额外的资金，以削弱俄罗斯为目标。
One of our senior United States senators from the state of New York Chuck Schumer said yesterday, I believe, that we have to continue to fund the Ukrainian effort or US soldier citizens could wind up fighting there. How do you assess that? This is a provocation and a cheap provocation at that. I do not understand why American soldiers should fight in Ukraine. There are mercenaries from the United States there. The bigger number of mercenaries comes from Poland, with mercenaries from the United States in second place and mercenaries from Georgia in third place.
我们来自纽约州的资深美国参议员查克·舒默昨天说，我相信，我们必须继续资助乌克兰的努力，否则美国士兵公民可能最终会在那里打仗。你对此如何评估？这是一种挑衅，而且是非常廉价的挑衅。我不明白为什么美国士兵应该在乌克兰战斗。那里有来自美国的雇佣兵。雇佣兵中最多来自波兰，其次是来自美国，第三名是来自格鲁吉亚的雇佣兵。
Well, if somebody has the desire to send regular troops, that would certainly bring humanity to the brink of very serious global conflict. This is obvious. Do the United States need this? What for? Thousands of miles away from your national territory. Don't you have anything better to do? You have issues on the border, issues with migration, issues with the national debt, more than $33 trillion. You have nothing better to do so you should fight in Ukraine. Wouldn't it be better to negotiate with Russia, make an agreement already understanding the situation that is developing today, realizing that Russia will fight for its interest to the end. And realizing this actually returned to common sense, start respecting our country and its interests and look for certain solutions. It seems to me that this is much smarter and more rational.
如果有人有意愿派遣正规军，那肯定会把人类推向非常严重的全球冲突的边缘。这是显而易见的。美国需要吗？为了什么？离你的国土几千英里远。难道你们没有更重要的事情要做吗？你们有边界问题，移民问题，还有超过33万亿美元的国债问题。你们没有更重要的事情要做，所以你们应该在乌克兰战斗。与其这样，不如与俄罗斯谈判，已经了解到正在发展的情况，意识到俄罗斯将到底为其利益而战。并且意识到这一点后，回归常识，开始尊重我们的国家和其利益，并寻找某些解决方案。我认为这样更明智、更理性。
Who blew up Nord Stream? You for sure. I was busy that day. I did not blow up Nord Stream. Thank you though. You personally may have an alibi, but the CIA has no such alibi. Did you have evidence that NATO or the CIA did it? You know, I won't get into details, but people always say in such cases, look for someone who is interested. But in this case, we should not only look for someone who is interested, but also for someone who has capabilities. Because there may be many people interested, but not all of them are capable of sinking to the bottom of the Baltic Sea and carrying out this explosion. These two components should be connected. Who is interested and who is capable of doing it?
是谁炸毁了北溪天然气管道？肯定不是你。那天我很忙，没有炸毁北溪天然气管道。不过还是谢谢你。你个人可能有不在场证明，但CIA没有这样的不在场证明。你有证据证明北约或CIA是幕后黑手吗？你知道，在这种情况下，人们总是说要找一个有兴趣的人。但在这个案件中，我们不仅需要找一个有兴趣的人，还需要找一个有能力的人。因为可能有很多人对此感兴趣，但并不是所有人都有能力沉入波罗的海底并执行这次爆炸。这两个要素应该联系在一起。谁有兴趣，谁有能力去做这件事？
But I'm confused. I mean, that's the biggest act of industrial terrorism ever. And it's the largest emission of CO2 in history. Okay, so if you had evidence and presumably given your security services or intel services, you would that NATO, the USCIA, the West did this. Why wouldn't you present it and win a propaganda victory? In the War of Propaganda, it is very difficult to defeat the United States because the United States controls all the world's media and many European media. The ultimate beneficiary of the biggest European media are American financial institutions. Don't you know that? So it is possible to get involved in this work, but it is cost prohibitive, so to speak. We can simply shine the spotlight on our sources of information, and we will not achieve results. It is clear to the whole world what happened, and even American analysts talk about it directly.
但是我很困惑。我的意思是，这是工业恐怖主义史上最大的行动。而且这也是史上排放最多二氧化碳的事件。好吧，假如你有证据，并且按照你的说法，给定你的安全机构或情报机构，你会指责北约、美国中央情报局、西方国家是幕后主使。为什么你不拿出证据赢得宣传战呢？在宣传战中，要击败美国是非常困难的，因为美国控制着全世界的媒体，包括许多欧洲媒体。最大的欧洲媒体的最终受益者是美国的金融机构。难道你不知道这一点吗？所以要参与这项工作是很难承担成本的。我们只能把信息来源公之于众，但是我们不会取得任何成果。整个世界都清楚发生了什么，甚至美国的分析师都直接谈论这一点。
Here's a question you may be able to answer. You worked in Germany famously. The Germans clearly know that their NATO partner did this, and it damaged their economy greatly, it may never recover. Why are they being silent about it? That's very confusing to me. Why wouldn't the Germans say something about it? This also confuses me, but today's German leadership is guided by the interests of the collective West, rather than its national interests. Otherwise, it is difficult to explain the logic of their action or inaction. After all, it is not only about Nord Stream 1, which was blown up, and the Nord Stream 2 was damaged, but one pipe is safe and sound and gas can be supplied to Europe through it. But Germany does not open it. We are ready, please. There's another route through Poland, called Yamael Europe, which also allows for large flow. Poland has closed it, but Poland pecs from the German hand. It receives money from the Pan-European funds, and Germany is the main donor to these Pan-European funds. Germany feeds Poland to a certain extent, and they close their route to Germany. Why? I don't understand. Ukraine, to which the Germans supply weapons and give money. Germany is the second sponsor of the United States in terms of financial aid to Ukraine. There are two gas routes through Ukraine. They simply closed one route to Ukrainians. Open the second route, and please get gas from Russia. They do not open it. Why don't the Germans say? Look, guys, we give you money and weapons. Open up the vault, please. Let the gas from Russia pass through for us. We are buying liquefied gas at exorbitant prices in Europe, which brings the level of our competitiveness and economy in general down to zero. Do you want us to give you money? Let us have the decent existence. Make money for our economy, because this is where the money we give you comes from. They refuse to do so. Why? Ask them. That is what is like in their heads. Those are highly incompetent people.
这是一个你可能能够回答的问题。你在德国工作过，这是众所周知的。德国人显然知道他们的北约伙伴这样做了，而且这给他们的经济造成了巨大的损害，可能永远无法完全恢复。他们为什么对此保持沉默？这让我非常困惑。为什么德国人不说点什么？这也让我困惑，但现在的德国领导层是以西方集体利益为导向，而不是本国利益。否则，很难解释他们的行动或不作为背后的逻辑。毕竟，这不仅仅是关于第一条北溪输气管道，它已经被炸毁，还有第二条北溪2号管道也受到了破坏，但有一条管道是安全的，可以通过它向欧洲供应天然气。但德国不开放它。我们已经准备好了，请了。还有另一条通过波兰的路径，叫做亚麦尔欧洲，它也能够支持大流量。波兰已经封闭了它，但波兰仰赖德国的资金援助。他们从波兰手中得到钱。德国在某种程度上养活着波兰，但他们关闭了通往德国的路线。为什么？我不明白。乌克兰，德国供应武器并提供财政援助。德国在向乌克兰提供财政援助方面是美国的第二大赞助商。通过乌克兰有两条输气管道。他们只是关闭了其中一条对乌克兰人开放的路线。开放第二条路线，让我们从俄罗斯购买天然气。他们不开放。德国人为什么不说？看，在这里，伙计们，我们给了你们钱和武器。请打开金库，让俄罗斯的天然气通过。我们在欧洲以极高的价格购买液化天然气，这使得我们的竞争力和整个经济水平降至零。难道你们想要我们给你们钱吗？让我们有一个体面的生活。为我们的经济赚钱，因为我们给你们的钱就是来自这里的。他们拒绝这样做。为什么？去问问他们。这就是他们脑子里所想的。这些人非常无能。
Well, maybe the world is breaking into two hemispheres, one with cheap energy, the other without, and I want to ask you that if we're now a multi-polar world, obviously, we are. Can you describe the blocks of alliances? Who is in each side, do you think?
也许世界正在分裂成两个半球，一个拥有廉价能源，另一个则没有。我想问你，如果我们现在是一个多极世界，显然我们是的。你能描述一下各个联盟的阵营吗？你认为谁属于哪一边？
Listen, you have said that the world is breaking into two hemispheres. A human brain is divided into two hemispheres. One is responsible for one type of activities, the other one is more about creativity and so on, but it is still one in the same head. The world should be a single whole, security should be shared rather than a meant for the golden billion. That is the only scenario where the world could be stable, sustainable, and predictable. Until then, while the head is split in two parts, it is an illness, a serious adverse condition. It is a period of severe disease that the world is going through now. But I think that thanks to honest journalism, this work is akin to work of the doctors. This could somehow be remedied.
听着，你说过世界正在分裂成两个半球。人脑分为两个半球，一个负责某种活动，另一个更多地涉及创造力等方面，但它们仍然在同一颗脑袋里。世界应该是一个整体，安全应该是共享的，而不仅仅是为了黄金亿万富翁。只有在这种情况下，世界才能保持稳定、可持续和可预测。在那之前，当头部分裂成两个部分时，这是一种疾病，一种严重的不利状况。现在世界正在经历一段严重的疾病时期。但我认为，多亏了诚实的新闻报道，这项工作类似于医生的工作，也可以在一定程度上得到解决。
Well, let's just give one example. The US dollar, which has kind of united the world in a lot of ways, maybe not to your advantage, but certainly ours, is that going away as the reserve currency that comes, the university accepted currency, how have sanctions, do you think, changed the dollar's place in the world? You know, to use the dollar as a tool of foreign policy struggle is one of the biggest strategic mistakes made by the US political leadership. The dollar is the cornerstone of the United States power. I think everyone understands very well that no matter how many dollars are printed, they are quickly dispersed all over the world. Inflation in the United States is minimal. It's about 3 or 3.4%, which is, I think, totally acceptable for the US. But they won't stop printing. What does the debt of $33 trillion tell us about? It is about the emission. Nevertheless, it is the main weapon used by the United States to preserve its power across the world. As soon as the political leadership decided to use the US dollar as a tool of political struggle, a blow was dealt to this American power. I would not like to use any strong language, but it is a stupid thing to do and a grave mistake. Look at what is going on in the world. Even the United States allies are now downsizing their dollar reserves, seeing this everyone starts looking for ways to protect themselves. But the fact that the United States applies restrictive measures to certain countries, such as placing restrictions on transactions, freezing assets, etc., causes grave concern and sends a signal to the whole world. What did we have here? Until 2022, about 80% of Russian foreign trade transactions were made in US dollars and euros. US dollars accounted for approximately 50% of our transactions with third countries. While currently it is down to 13%. It was an us who banned the use of the US dollar. We had no such intention. It was decision of the United States to restrict our transactions in US dollars. I think it is complete foolishness from the point of view of the interest of the United States itself and its taxpayers as it damages the US economy undermines the power of the United States across the world. By the way, our transactions in yuan accounted for about 3%. Today, 34% of our transactions are made in rubles and about as much a little over 34% in yuan. Why did the United States do this? My only guess is self-conceit. They probably thought it would lead to full collapse but nothing collapsed. Moreover, other countries including oil producers are thinking of and already accepting payments for oil in yuan. Do you even realize what is going on or not? Does anyone in the United States realize this? What are you doing? You are cutting yourself off. All experts say this. Ask any intelligent and thinking person in the United States what the dollar means for the US. You are killing it with your own hands. I think that is a fair assessment. The question is what comes next and maybe you trade one colonial power for another much less sentimental and forgiving colonial power.
好吧，我们来举一个例子吧。美元在很多方面凝聚了全世界的一致，也许对你们不利，但对我们来说肯定是有利的。那么，作为储备货币和被广泛接受的货币，美元正在消失吗？你认为制裁对美元在世界上的地位产生了什么影响？你知道，将美元作为外交斗争的工具是美国政治领导层犯下的最重大的战略错误之一。美元是美国权力的基石。我想每个人都非常清楚，无论打印多少美元，它们都会迅速分散到世界各地。美国的通胀率很低，大约是3%或3.4%，我认为这对美国来说完全可以接受。但他们却不停地印刷。这33000亿美元的债务告诉我们什么？这是关于货币发行的。尽管如此，这是美国用来保持其全球霸权的主要武器。当政治领导层决定将美元用作政治斗争的工具时，对美国的这种力量造成了打击。我不想使用任何激烈的措辞，但这是一种愚蠢的举动和严重的错误。看看世界上正在发生的事情。即使是美国的盟友也在减少他们持有的美元储备，看到这一点，每个人开始寻找保护自己的方法。然而，美国对某些国家采取限制措施，比如限制交易、冻结资产等，引起了严重的担忧，并向全世界发出了一个信号。这意味着什么呢？直到2022年，约80%的俄罗斯对外贸易交易是以美元和欧元进行的。美元占我们与第三国的交易约50%。而目前这个比例已经下降到13%。不是我们禁止使用美元，而是美国决定限制我们使用美元的交易。我认为从美国自身和纳税人的利益来看，这完全是愚蠢的行为，因为它损害了美国经济，削弱了美国在世界上的影响力。顺便说一下，我们以人民币的交易约占3%。而现在，约34%的交易使用卢布进行，还有略高于34%的交易使用人民币。美国为什么要这么做呢？我的猜想是他们自负。他们可能认为这会导致彻底崩溃，但事实证明并没有崩溃。而且，包括石油生产国在内的其他国家正考虑并已经接受以人民币支付石油。你们真的意识到正在发生的事情了吗？美国有人意识到这一点吗？你们在干什么？你们正在自我断绝。所有的专家都这么说。问问美国任何聪明和思考的人，美元对美国意味着什么。你们正在用自己的双手摧毁它。我认为这是一个公正的评估。问题是接下来会发生什么，也许你们会把一个殖民权力换成另一个更少感情和宽容的殖民权力。
The bricks, for example, in danger of being completely dominated by the Chinese economy in a way that is not good for their sovereignty. Do you worry about that?
例如，波茨瓦纳、印度、巴西、俄罗斯和南非这些国家面临的一个问题是，它们的砖石产业可能被中国经济完全主导，从而对它们的主权构成不利影响。您是否担心这一点？
We have heard those boo-geem-en stories before. It is a boo-geem-en story. We are neighbors with China. You cannot choose neighbors just as you cannot choose close relatives. We share a border of 1000 kilometers with them. This is number one. Second, we have a centuries-long history of coexistence. We are used to it. Third, China's foreign policy philosophy is not aggressive. Its idea is to always look for compromise and we can see that. The next point is as follows.
我们以前听过那些吓人的故事。这只是一个吓人的故事。我们是中国的邻国。选择邻居就像选择亲戚一样并不是我们可以做的。我们与中国有1000公里的接壤边界，这是第一点。第二，我们有着几个世纪的共存历史，我们已经习惯了这一点。第三，中国的外交政策不具有侵略性，它的理念是始终寻求妥协，我们可以看到这一点。下一点是：
We are always told the same boo-geem-en story and here it goes again through an euphemistic form but it is still the same boo-geem-en story. The cooperation with China keeps increasing. The pace at which China's cooperation with Europe is growing is higher and greater than that of the growth of Chinese-Russian cooperation. Ask Europeans, aren't they afraid? They might be. I don't know. But they are still trying to access China's market at all costs, especially now that they are facing economic problems. Chinese businesses are also exploring the European market. Do Chinese businesses have small presence in the United States? Yes, the political decisions are such that they are trying to limit their cooperation with China. It is to your own detriment, Mr. Tucker, that you are limiting cooperation with China. You are hurting yourself.
我们经常听到同样的布吉姆恩故事，现在又用委婉的方式再次出现，但这仍然是同样的故事。中国与欧洲的合作不断增加。中国与欧洲合作的增长速度比中国与俄罗斯合作的增长速度更高、更快。问问欧洲人，他们会不会害怕？他们可能会。我不知道。但他们仍然努力以任何代价进入中国市场，特别是现在他们面临经济问题时。中国企业也正在开拓欧洲市场。中国企业在美国市场存在吗？是的，政治决策使得他们试图限制与中国的合作。限制与中国的合作对你自己有害，塔克先生。你在伤害自己。
It is a delicate matter and there are no silver bullet solutions just as it is with the dollar. So before introducing any illegitimate sanctions, illegitimate in terms of the Charter of the United Nations, one should think very carefully for decision makers disappears to be a problem. So you said a moment ago that the world would be a lot better if it weren't broken into competing alliances if there was cooperation globally. One of the reasons you don't have that is because the current American administration is dead set against you. Do you think if there were a new administration after Joe Biden that you would be able to re-establish communication with the U.S. government? Or does it not matter who the president is? I will tell you, but let me finish the previous thought.
这是一个微妙的问题，与美元一样，没有一劳永逸的解决方案。因此，在引入任何违反《联合国宪章》的非法制裁之前，决策者应该非常仔细地考虑，以避免问题进一步恶化。所以你刚才说过，如果世界没有分裂成对立的联盟，而是全球合作，世界会变得更好。你没有得到这样的合作是因为现任美国政府坚决反对你。您认为如果乔·拜登之后有一个新的政府，您能够与美国政府重新建立沟通吗？或者无论总统是谁都无关紧要？我会告诉你，不过让我先完成之前的思路。
We together with my colleague and friend President Xi Jinping said that goal to reach $200 billion of mutual trade with China this year. We have exceeded this level. According to our figures, our bilateral trade with China totals already $230 billion and the Chinese statistics says it is $240 billion. One more important thing, our trade is well balanced, mutually complimentary in high-tech energy scientific research and development. It is very balanced.
我和我的同事、朋友习近平主席共同表示，我们今年希望实现与中国的双边贸易额达到2000亿美元的目标。我们已超过了这个水平。据我们的数据显示，我们与中国的双边贸易总额已经达到2300亿美元，而中国的统计数据显示为2400亿美元。还有一件重要的事情是，我们的贸易是非常平衡的，相互补充的，涵盖了高科技、能源、科研和开发等领域。这是非常平衡的。
As for BRICS, where Russia took over the presidency this year, the BRICS countries are by and large developing very rapidly. Look, if memory serves me right, back in 1992, the share of the G7 countries in the world economy amounted to 47 percent. Whereas in 2022, it was down to, I think, a little over 30 percent. The BRICS countries accounted for only 16 percent in 1992, but now their share is greater than that of the G7. It has nothing to do with the events in Ukraine. This is due to the trends of global development and world economy, as I mentioned just now. And this is inevitable. This will keep happening. It is like the rise of the sun. You cannot prevent the sun from rising. You have to adapt to it.
就金砖国家而言，俄罗斯在今年接占主席之职，金砖国家整体上正在快速发展。回想一下，据我记得，1992年时，G7国家在世界经济中所占份额为47%。而到2022年，这个比例已经下降到30%左右。而金砖国家在1992年仅占16%，但现在他们的份额已经超过G7的份额。这与乌克兰事件无关，是由全球发展和世界经济趋势所导致的，就如我刚刚提到的。这是不可避免的，会持续发生，就像太阳的升起一样，你无法阻止太阳的升起，只能去适应它。
How do the United States adapt with the help of force, sanctions, pressure, bombings, and use of armed forces? This is about self-conceit. Your political establishment does not understand that the world is changing under objective circumstances. And in order to preserve your level, even if someone aspires, pardon me, to the level of dominance, you have to make the right decisions in a competent and timely manner. Such brutal actions, including with regard to Russia and, say, other countries are counterproductive. This is an obvious fact. It has already become evident.
美国如何通过武力、制裁、压力、轰炸和使用军队来进行适应？这涉及到自负问题。你们的政治机构没有意识到在客观情况下世界正在发生变化。为了保持你们的地位，即使有人渴望（请原谅我的话）达到主导地位，你们必须在有能力和及时的情况下做出正确的决策。对俄罗斯和其他国家采取如此残酷的行动是适得其反的。这是一个明显的事实，已经显而易见。
You just ask me if another leader comes and changes something. It is not about the leader. It is not about the personality of a particular person. I had a very good relationship with, say, Bush. I know that in the United States, he was portrayed as some kind of a country boy who does not understand much. I assure you that this is not the case. I think he made a lot of mistakes with regard to Russia, too. I told you about 2008 and the decision in Bucharest to open the NATO's doors to for Ukraine and so on. That happened during his presidency. He actually exercised pressure on the Europeans.
你刚刚问我，如果另一位领导人来改变一些事情，我觉得这不仅仅是关于领导者本身，也不仅仅关乎某个人的个性。比如说，我与布什有着非常良好的关系。我知道在美国，他被描绘成一个不懂太多事情的乡下人。但我向你保证这不是这样的。我认为在对待俄罗斯的问题上，他也犯了很多错误。我和你提到过2008年和布加勒斯特决定为乌克兰开放北约大门等事情。那发生在他担任总统期间。他实际上对欧洲人施加了压力。
But in general, on a personal human level, I had a very good relationship with him. He was no worse than any other American or Russian or European politician. I assure you, he understood what he was doing as well as others. I had such a personal relationship with Trump as well. It is not about the personality of the leader. It is about the elite's mindset. If the idea of domination at any cost based on forceful actions dominates the American society, nothing will change. It will only get worse. But if in the end one comes to the awareness that the world has been changing due to the objective circumstances and that one should be able to adapt to them in time using the advantages that the US still has today, then perhaps something may change.
但总体而言，在个人层面上，我和他有着非常好的关系。他不比任何其他美国人、俄罗斯人或欧洲政治家更糟糕。我向你保证，他和其他人一样清楚自己在做什么。我和特朗普也有这样的个人关系。这不是关于领导人的个性，而是关于精英思维。如果以任何代价基于强制行动来主导美国社会的想法占据主导地位，那么什么也不会改变，只会变得更糟。但是，如果最终有人意识到世界已经由客观情况而发生变化，应该及时适应并利用美国今天仍然拥有的优势，那么或许会有一些改变。
Look, China's economy has become the first economy in the world in purchasing power parity. In terms of volume, it overtook the US a long time ago. The USA comes second, then India, one and a half billion people, and then Japan, with Russia in the fifth place. Russia was the first economy in Europe last year, despite all the sanctions and restrictions. Is it normal from your point of view, sanctions, restrictions, impossibility of payments and dollars being cut off from swift services, sanctions against our ships carrying oil, sanctions against airplanes, sanctions in everything, everywhere. The largest number of sanctions in the world which are applied are applied against Russia. And we have become Europe's first economy during this time. The tools that US uses don't work. Well, one has to think about what to do.
看，中国的经济在购买力平价方面已经成为全球第一大经济体。从规模上来看，它在很久以前就超过了美国。美国排名第二，然后是拥有十五亿人口的印度，接下来是日本，俄罗斯位居第五。尽管面对所有制裁和限制，俄罗斯去年成为了欧洲第一大经济体。从你们的角度来看，这样的情况是否正常呢？制裁、限制、支付困难和无法使用美元进行跨境支付，对我们运输石油的船只实施制裁，对飞机实施制裁，无处不在的制裁。全球应用的制裁中，针对俄罗斯的数量最多。然而，在这个过程中，我们已经成为了欧洲第一大经济体。美国使用的工具是行不通的。嗯，我们必须思考该怎么办。
If this realization comes to the ruling elites, then yes, then the first person of the state will act in anticipation of what the voters and the people who make decisions at various levels expect from this person. Then maybe something will change. But you're describing two different systems. You say that the leader acts in the interest of the voters, but you also say these decisions are not made by the leader, they're made by the ruling classes. You've run this country for so long, you've known all these American presidents. What are those power centers in the United States? Do you think?
如果这一认识传达给统治精英，是的，那么国家的领导人将会提前采取行动，以符合选民和各级决策者对其期望的预期。然后或许会有一些改变。但你在描述两个不同的系统。你说领导者行动符合选民的利益，但你又说这些决策并非由领导者做出，而是由统治阶级决定。你长期统治这个国家，也了解所有这些美国总统。在美国，有哪些权力中心？你怎么看呢？
Like who actually makes the decisions? I don't know. America is a complex country, conservative, on one hand, rapidly changing on the other. It's not easy for us to sort it all out. Who makes decisions in the elections? Is it possible to understand this when each state has its own legislation? Each state regulates itself? Someone can be excluded from elections at the state level. It is a two-stage electoral system. It is very difficult for us to understand it. Certainly there are two parties that are dominant, the Republicans and the Democrats. And within this party system, the centers that make decisions, that prepare decisions.
谁实际上做出决策？我不知道。美国是一个复杂的国家，一方面保守，另一方面又快速变化。我们很难把这一切都理顺。选举中由谁做出决策？每个州都有自己的立法，这一点是否可以理解？每个州都有自己的规定？某人可能会在州一级的选举中被排除在外。这是一个两阶段的选举制度。我们很难理解。当然，有两个主导的政党，共和党和民主党。在这个党派体系中，有一些决策中心，制定决策。
Then, look, why in my opinion after the collapse of the Soviet Union such a erroneous crude, completely unjustified policy of pressure was pursued against Russia? After all, this is a policy of pressure. NATO expansion, support for the separatists and caucuses, creation of a missile defense system. These are all elements of pressure. Pressure, pressure, pressure. Then, dragging Ukraine into NATO is all about pressure, pressure, pressure. Why?
然后，你看，在我看来，苏联解体后，为什么对俄罗斯实施如此错误粗暴、完全不合理的压力政策呢？毕竟，这是一种压力政策。北约扩张、支持分离主义和高加索地区事务、建立导弹防御系统，这些都是压力的元素。压力、压力、压力。然后，将乌克兰拖进北约，这就是压力、压力、压力。为什么呢？
I think among other things, because excessive production capacities were created. During the confrontation with the Soviet Union, there were many centers created and specialists on the Soviet Union who could not do anything else. They convinced the political leadership that it is necessary to continue chiseling Russia to try to break it up, to create on this territory several quasi-state entities and to subdue them in undivided form, to use their combined potential for the future struggle with China. This is a mistake including the excessive potential of those who worked for the confrontation with the Soviet Union. It is necessary to get rid of this. There should be new, fresh forces, people who look into the future and understand what is happening in the world.
我认为，其中一个原因是由于过度的产能而产生的。在与苏联的对抗中，创造了许多研究苏联的中心和专家，他们无法从事其他工作。他们说服政治领导层，有必要继续刻意打压俄罗斯，试图分裂它，在这个领土上建立几个准国家实体并将它们完全控制，利用它们的合力来未来与中国抗衡。这是一种错误，其中包括了过高的潜力，即那些为与苏联对抗工作的人。必须摆脱这种情况。应该有新的、富有活力的力量，那些能够展望未来并理解世界正在发生的事情的人。
Look at how Indonesia is developing. 600 million people. Where can we get away from that? Nowhere. We just have to assume that Indonesia will enter. It is already in the club of the world's leading economies, no matter who likes it or dislikes it.
看看印度尼西亚的发展吧。有6亿人口，我们从哪里可以逃避呢？没有地方。我们只能假设印度尼西亚将会进入。无论喜欢与否，它已经是世界领先经济体的成员之一了。
Yes, we understand and are aware that in the United States, despite all the economic problems, the situation is still normal with the economy growing decently. The GDP is growing by 2.5% if I'm not mistaken. But if we want to ensure the future, then we need to change our approach to what is changing. As I already said, the world would never do less change, regardless of how the developments in Ukraine end. The world is changing. And the United States themselves, experts are writing that the United States are nonetheless gradually changing their position in the world. It is your experts who write that. I just read them. The only question is how this would happen, painfully and quickly or gently and gradually. And this is written by people who are not anti-American. They simply follow global development trends. That's it.
是的，我们理解并知道，在美国，尽管存在着经济问题，但经济状况仍然正常，还有相当的增长。如果我没记错，国内生产总值正在以2.5%的速度增长。但如果我们想确保未来，我们就需要改变我们对正在发生的变化的态度。就像我已经说过的，无论乌克兰的局势如何发展，世界都不会停止变化。世界正在发生变化。甚至美国自身的专家都在写美国正在逐渐改变其在世界上的地位。这是你们的专家写的，我只是读到了。唯一的问题是这将以何种方式发生，是痛苦而迅速，还是缓和而渐进。这是由不反美的人写的，他们只是关注全球发展趋势而已。就是这样。
And in order to assess them and change policies, we need people who think look forward, can analyze and recommend certain decisions at the level of political leaders. I just have to ask you've said clearly that NATO expansion eastward is a violation of the promise you all made in 1990. It's a threat to your country. Right before you sent troops into Ukraine, the vice president of the United States went from an security conference and encouraged the president of Ukraine to join NATO. Do you think that was an effort to provoke you into military action?
为了评估这些决策并改变政策，我们需要那些具有前瞻思维、能够分析并在政治领导层面推荐特定决策的人。我只是想问一下，你明确表示北约向东扩张违反了你们在1990年所作出的承诺，对你们国家构成了威胁。就在你们派兵进入乌克兰之前，美国副总统从一个安全会议上走出来，鼓励乌克兰总统加入北约。你认为这是一种挑衅你们进行军事行动的努力吗？
I repeat once again, we have repeatedly, repeatedly proposed to seek a solution to the problems that arose in Ukraine after 2014. Good to talk through peaceful means. But no one listened to us. And moreover, the Ukrainian leaders who were under the complete U.S. control suddenly declared that they would not comply with the Minsk agreements. They disliked everything there and continued military activity in that territory. And in parallel, that territory was being exploited by NATO military structures under the guise of various personnel training and retraining centers. They essentially began to create bases there. That's all.
我再重复一次，我们反复、反复提出寻求解决2014年后乌克兰出现的问题的方案。最好通过和平手段进行对话。但是没有人听我们的。而且，那些完全受美国控制的乌克兰领导人突然宣布他们将不遵守明斯克协议。他们对那里的一切都不满，并继续在那个地区进行军事活动。与此同时，北约军事机构以不同人员培训和再培训中心的名义在那个地区开展活动。实际上，他们开始在那里建立基地。就是这样。
Ukraine announced that the Russians were a non-titular nationality, while passing the laws that limit the rights of non-titular nationalities in Ukraine. Ukraine, having received all these southeastern territories as a gift from the Russian people, suddenly announced that the Russians were a non-titular nationality in that territory. Is that normal? All this put together led to the decision to end the war that neo-Nazis started in Ukraine in 2014.
乌克兰宣布俄罗斯人不是土著民族，并通过限制乌克兰非土著民族权利的法律。乌克兰从俄罗斯人民那里接收了所有这些东南领土作为礼物，突然宣布俄罗斯人在该领土上不是土著民族。这是正常的吗？所有这一切导致结束2014年在乌克兰由新纳粹分子发动的战争的决定。
Do you think Zelensky has the freedom to negotiate a settlement to this conflict? I don't know the details. Of course, it's difficult for me to judge. But I believe he has, in any case, he used to have his father fought against the fascists, Nazis during World War II. I once talked to him about this. I said, oh, yeah, what are you doing? Why are you supporting neo-Nazis in Ukraine today, while your father fought against fascism? He was a frontline soldier. I will not tell you what he answered. This is a separate topic, and I think it's incorrect for me to do so.
你认为泽连斯基有自由来谈判解决这场冲突吗？对于细节我不了解，所以很难对此做出判断。但无论如何，我相信他确实有这样的自由，因为他的父亲曾经在二战期间与法西斯分子、纳粹作战。我曾经与他谈过这个问题。我说，哦，是吗，那你现在为什么支持乌克兰的新纳粹呢，而你的父亲曾与法西斯作战？他是一名前线士兵。我不会告诉你他是如何回答的。这是一个独立的话题，我认为对我而言插手此事是不正确的。
But as to the freedom of choice, why not? He came to power on the expectations of Ukrainian people that he would lead Ukraine to peace. He talked about this. It was thanks to this that he won the elections overwhelmingly. But then when he came to power, in my opinion, he realized two things. Firstly, it is better not to clash with neo-Nazis and nationalists, because they are aggressive and very active. You can expect anything from them. And secondly, the US led west supports them and will always support those who antagonize with Russia. It is beneficial and safe. So he took the relevant position despite promising his people to end the war in Ukraine. He deceived his voters.
在自由选择问题上，为什么不呢？他上台时期待乌克兰人民能够通过他的领导将乌克兰带向和平。他曾经谈论过这个问题。也正是因为这一点，他才以压倒性的优势赢得了选举。但是当他上台后，我认为他意识到了两件事情。第一，最好不要与新纳粹分子和民族主义者发生冲突，因为他们具有攻击性并且非常活跃。你从他们身上可以预料到任何事情。第二，美国领导的西方支持他们并且将始终支持那些与俄罗斯对抗的人。这对他来说是有利可图并且安全的。因此，尽管他曾经承诺要结束乌克兰的战争，但他却采取了与此相反的立场。他欺骗了他的选民。
But do you think at this point, as of February 2024, he has the latitude, the freedom to speak with you, your government, directly about putting an end to this, which clearly isn't helping his country or the world. Can he do that, do you think? Why not? He considers himself head of state. He won the elections. Although we believe in Russia, that the coup d'etat is the primary source of power for everything that happened after 2014. And in this sense, even today, government is flawed. But he considers himself the president and he is recognized by the United States, all of Europe, and practically the rest of the world in such a capacity. Why not? Can we negotiate it with Ukraine in Istanbul? We agreed he was aware of this.
你认为在2024年2月的这个时刻，他是否有权力、自由与您、您的政府直接对话，以结束这一切？显然，这对他的国家和世界都没有好处。你认为他能做到吗？为什么不行？他自认为是国家元首。他赢得了选举。虽然我们在俄罗斯认为政变是2014年之后发生的一切问题的根源，从这个意义上说，即使在今天，政府也是有缺陷的。但他自视为总统，并得到了美国、整个欧洲和几乎全世界对此的承认。为什么不可以呢？我们能在伊斯坦布尔与乌克兰进行谈判吗？我们都同意他对此有所了解。
Moreover, the negotiation group leader Mr. Ahameez, his last name, I believe still has the faction of the ruling party, the party of the president in the Radha. He still has the presidential faction in the Radha, the country's parliament. He still sits there. He even put his preliminary signature on the document, I am telling you about. But then he publicly stated to the whole world, we were ready to sign this document. But Mr. Johnson, then the prime minister of the Ukraine, came and dissuaded us from doing this, saying it was better to fight Russia. They would give everything needed for us to return what was lost during the clashes with Russia. And we agreed with this proposal. Look, his statement has been published, he said it publicly. Can they return to this or not? The question is, do they want it or not? Further on, President Ukraine issued a decree prohibiting negotiations with us. Let him cancel that decree. And that's it. We have never refused negotiations indeed. We hear all the time, is Russia ready? Yes, we have not refused. It was them who publicly refused. Well, let him cancel his decree and enter into negotiations. We have never refused. And the fact that they obeyed the demand or persuasion of Mr. Johnson, the former prime minister of Great Britain seems ridiculous and very sad to me because as Mr. Arrakamiya put it, we could have stopped those hostilities with war a year and a half ago already. But the British persuaded us and we refuse this. Where is Mr. Johnson now? And that war continues. That's a good question. Where do you think he is and why did he do that?
此外，谈判组的组长，阿哈米兹先生，我相信他的姓氏应该仍然与统治党派系有关，这个党派是总统的党派在Radha（一个国家的议会）。他仍然在那里坐着。他甚至在我所说的文件上做出了初步签名。但是后来他公开对全世界说，我们准备签署这个文件。但是当时的乌克兰总理约翰逊先生来劝阻我们这样做，说最好是与俄罗斯作战。他们将提供我们所需要的一切，以便我们能够收回在与俄罗斯的冲突中失去的东西。我们同意了这个提议。看，他的声明已经公开发表了，他公开说的。他们能否回到这个立场？问题是，他们是否愿意？进一步地，乌克兰总统发布了一项禁止与我们进行谈判的法令。让他撤销那个法令，然后就可以重新进行谈判。我们实际上从未拒绝过谈判。我们一直听到的问题是，俄罗斯准备好了吗？是的，我们并没有拒绝。是他们公开拒绝了。好吧，让他取消他的法令并进入谈判吧。我们从未拒绝过。而且，他们服从了英国前总理约翰逊先生的要求或劝说，对我来说这似乎是荒唐和非常悲哀的，因为正如阿拉卡米亚所说，我们一年半前就本可以用战争停止那些敌对行动了。但是英国人劝说我们，我们拒绝了这个意见。约翰逊先生现在在哪里？那场战争还在继续。这是一个好问题。你认为他在哪里，他为什么那样做？
Well, I don't understand it myself. There was a general starting point. For some reason, everyone had the illusion that Russia could be defeated on the battlefield. Because of arrogance, because of a pure heart, but not because of a great mind. You've described the connection between Russia and Ukraine. You've described Russia itself a couple of times as Orthodox. That's central to your understanding of Russia. You've said you're Orthodox. What does that mean for you? You're a Christian leader by your own description. So what effect does that have on you?
嗯，我自己也不理解。开始的时候有一个普遍的观点。由于某种原因，每个人都有一种幻觉，认为俄罗斯可以在战场上被击败。因为傲慢，因为纯洁的心灵，但并不是由于聪明才智。你已经描述了俄罗斯和乌克兰之间的联系。你几次将俄罗斯本身描述为东正教国家。这对你理解俄罗斯至关重要。你说你是一个东正教徒。那对你来说意味着什么？根据你自己的描述，你是一个基督教领袖。那对你有什么影响？
You know, as I already mentioned in 988, Prince Vladimir himself was baptized following the example of his grandmother, Prince Olga. Then he baptized his squad and then gradually over the course of several years, he baptized all the Rus. It was a lengthy process from pagan secretions. It took many years. But in the end, this Orthodoxy, Eastern Christianity deeply rooted itself in the consciousness of the Russian people. When Russia expanded and absorbed other nations who profess Islam, Buddhism, and Judaism, Russia has always been very loyal to those people who profess other religions. This is her strength. This is absolutely clear. And the fact is that the main postulates, main values are very similar, not to say the same in all world religions I've just mentioned, which are the traditional religions of the Russian Federation, Russia. By the way, Russian authorities were always very careful about the culture and religion of those people who came into the Russian Empire. This, in my opinion, forms the basis of both security and stability of the Russian statehood. All the peoples inhabiting Russia basically consider it their motherhood. If say people move over to Europe from Latin America and even clearer and more understandable example, people come, but yet they have come to you or to European countries from the historical homeland.
你知道，在988年，弗拉基米尔亲王就已经像他的祖母奥尔加亲王一样受洗了。然后他洗礼了他的队伍，然后在几年的时间里逐渐洗礼了整个俄罗斯。这是一个漫长的过程，从异教转变而来，花费了很多年时间。但最终，正统东方基督教深深植根于俄罗斯人的意识中。当俄罗斯扩张并吸纳了信奉伊斯兰教、佛教和犹太教的其他民族时，俄罗斯一直对信仰其他宗教的人民非常忠诚。这就是她的力量。这一点毫无疑问。事实上，我刚提到的所有世界传统宗教（也就是俄罗斯联邦和俄罗斯的传统宗教）的主要信条和主要价值观非常相似，甚至可以说是一样的。顺便说一下，俄罗斯当局一直非常重视那些进入俄罗斯帝国的人的文化和宗教。这，依我看来，构成了俄罗斯国家安全和稳定的基础。居住在俄罗斯的所有民族基本上都把它视为自己的母国。比如说，如果人们从拉丁美洲移居欧洲，更明显、更易理解的例子是，人们来自历史故乡，但他们已经来到了你的国家或欧洲国家。
And people who profess different religions in Russia, consider Russia their motherland. They have no other motherland. We are together. This is one big family and our traditional values are very similar.
在俄罗斯，不同宗教信仰的人都认为俄罗斯是他们的祖国，没有其他祖国。我们是一家人。这是一个大家庭，我们的传统价值观非常相似。
I've just mentioned one big family, but everyone has his, her own family. And this is the basis of our society. And if we say that the motherland and the family are specifically connected with each other, it is indeed the case since it is impossible to ensure a normal future for our children and our families unless we ensure a normal sustainable future for the entire country, for the motherland.
我刚刚提到了一个大家庭，但每个人都有自己的家庭。这是我们社会的基础。如果说祖国和家庭与彼此紧密相连，确实是这样的，因为只有确保整个国家、祖国的正常可持续发展，我们才能为我们的孩子和家庭确保一个正常的未来。
That is why patriotic sentiment is so strong in Russian. But can I say that the one way in which the religions are different is that Christianity is specifically a non-violent religion. Jesus says turn the other cheek, don't kill. How can a leader who has to kill of any country, how can a leader be a Christian, how do you reconcile that to yourself? It is very easy when it comes to protecting oneself and one's family, one's homeland. We won't attack anyone.
这就是为什么俄罗斯人的爱国情感如此强烈。但我可以说，这些宗教之间一个不同的方面是基督教特别强调非暴力。耶稣说过要回击别人轻打你的脸，不要杀戮。一个领导者如何能够在必要时杀戮他的国民，一个基督徒如何能对此与自己和解呢？当涉及到保护自己、家人和祖国时，这变得非常容易。我们不会主动攻击任何人。
When did the developments Ukraine start? Since the coup d'etat and the hostilities in Donbass began, that's when they started. And we're protecting our people, ourselves, our homeland and our future.
乌克兰的发展是从什么时候开始的？从政变和顿巴斯地区的敌对行动开始，那时候它们就开始了。我们正在保护我们的人民、我们自己、我们的家园以及我们的未来。
As for religion in general, you know, it's not about external manifestations. It's not about going to church every day or banging your head on the floor. It is in the heart and our culture is so human-oriented. Dostoyevsky, who was very well known in the West, and the genius of Russian culture, Russian literature, spoke a lot about this, about the Russian soul.
至于宗教的普遍意义，你知道，它并非体现在外在的表现上。它不是每天去教堂或在地上跪拜时撞头的行为。宗教存在于人的内心中，而我们的文化非常人性化。陀思妥耶夫斯基在西方非常著名，也是俄罗斯文化和俄罗斯文学的天才，他对此有很多深入的探讨，尤其是关于俄罗斯灵魂的讨论。
After all, Western society is more pragmatic. Russian people think more about the eternal, about moral values. I don't know, maybe you won't agree with me, but Western culture is more pragmatic after all. I'm not saying this is bad. It makes it possible for today's golden billion to achieve good success in production, even in science and so on. There's nothing wrong with that. I'm just saying that we kind of look the same.
毕竟，西方社会更为务实。俄罗斯人更多地考虑永恒的事物，道德价值观等等。我不知道，也许你不会同意我的观点，但毕竟西方文化更加务实。我并不是说这是坏事。这使得今天的黄金十亿人群在生产、科学等方面能够取得较好的成功。这并没有错。我只是说我们在某种程度上相似。
Do you see the supernatural at work as you look out across what's happening in the world now? Do you see God at work? Do you ever think to yourself, these are forces that are not human? No, to be honest. I don't think so. My opinion is that the development of the world community is in accordance with inherent laws, and those laws are what they are. It's always been this way in the history of mankind. Some nations and countries rose, became stronger and more numerous, and then left the international stage losing the status they had accustomed to. There's probably no need for me to give examples, but we could start with the King Ghishan and Horde conquerors, the Golden Horde, and then end with the Roman Empire. It seems that there has never been anything like the Roman Empire in the history of mankind.
当你看着当前世界上所发生的事情时，你是否看到了超自然现象？你是否看到上帝在工作？你是否曾经想过，这些力量不是人类所能及的？实话实说，我不这么认为。我认为世界社会的发展是符合固有法则的，而那些法则就是它们本身的状态。在人类历史上一直都是这样的。一些国家和地区崛起，变得更强大和更庞大，然后在国际舞台上失去了他们习惯的地位。我可能没必要举例，但我们可以从金帐汗国和蒙古帝国征服者开始，再以罗马帝国结束。似乎在人类历史上从来没有过像罗马帝国这样的存在。
Nevertheless, the potential of the barbarians gradually grew as did their population. In general, the barbarians were getting stronger and began to develop economically, as we would say today. This eventually led to the digital lapse of the Roman Empire and the regime imposed by the Romans. However, it took five centuries for the Roman Empire to fall apart. The difference with what is happening now is that all the processes of change are happening at the much faster pace than in Roman times.
然而，与他们的人口一样，野蛮人的潜力逐渐增长。总体而言，野蛮人变得越来越强大，并开始在经济上得到发展，就像我们今天所说的那样。最终，这导致了罗马帝国的数字崩溃和罗马人强加的政权。然而，罗马帝国的崩溃花费了五个世纪的时间。与现在发生的情况不同的是，所有的变革过程都比罗马时期发生得快得多。
So when does the AI Empire start, do you think? You're asking increasingly more complicated questions. To answer them, you need to be an expert in big numbers, big data, and AI.
你认为人工智能帝国会在何时开始呢？你的问题越来越复杂了。要回答这些问题，你需要成为一个大数字、大数据和人工智能方面的专家。
Menka in this currently facing many threats due to the genetic research, it is now possible to create a superhuman, a specialized human being, a genetically engineered athlete, scientist, military man. There are reports that Elon Musk had already had a chip implanted in the human brain in the USA. What do you think of that? Well, I think there's no stopping Elon Musk. He will do as he sees fit. Nevertheless, you need to find some common ground with him, search for ways to persuade him. I think he's a smart person, I truly believe he is. So you need to reach an agreement with him because this process needs to be formalized and subjected to certain rules.
由于基因研究的存在，目前梦卡正面临许多威胁，现在已经有可能创造一个超级人类，一个专业化的人类，一个经过基因改造的运动员、科学家或军人。有报道称埃隆·马斯克已经在美国人类脑部植入了芯片。你对此有何看法？嗯，我认为无法阻止埃隆·马斯克。他会按照他认为正确的方式行事。然而，你需要与他寻找一些共同点，尝试说服他。我认为他是一个聪明的人，我真心相信他是。因此，你需要与他达成一致，因为这个过程需要形式化，并受到一定的规定约束。
Humanity has to consider what is going to happen due to the newest development in genetics or in AI. One can make an approximate prediction of what will happen. Once Menka in felt an existential threat coming from nuclear weapons, all nuclear nations began to come to terms with one another since they realized the negligent use of nuclear weaponry could drive humanity to extension. It is impossible to stop researching genetics or AI today, just as it was impossible to stop the use of gunpowder back in the day. But as soon as we realize that the threat comes from unbridled and uncontrolled development of AI or genetics or any other field, the time will come to reach an international agreement on how to regulate these things.
人类必须考虑因基因学或人工智能的最新发展所带来的后果。我们可以对未来发生的事情做出大致预测。曾经，当孟加弗尔特感受到来自核武器的存在威胁时，所有核国家开始互相妥协，因为他们意识到不负责任地使用核武器可能会导致人类灭绝。今天，停止对基因学或人工智能的研究是不可能的，就像当年无法停止使用火药一样。但是，一旦我们意识到威胁来自于无拘束和无控制的人工智能、基因学或其他任何领域的发展，我们就需要达成国际协议来规范这些事物的发展。
I appreciate all the time you've given us. I just want to ask you one last question, and that's about someone who's very famous in the United States, probably not here. Evan Gerstovich, who's the Wall Street Journal reporter, he's 32, and he's been in prison for almost a year. This is a huge story in the United States, and I just want to ask you directly without getting into the tales of it or your version of what happened, if as a sign of your decency, you will be willing to release him to us and we'll bring him back to the United States.
我非常感激您所提供给我们的所有时间。我只想问您最后一个问题，关于一个在美国非常有名，但可能在这里并不出名的人，埃文·格斯蒂维奇。他是《华尔街日报》的记者，现年32岁，已经在监狱里待了将近一年了。这在美国是一个巨大的新闻，我希望直接问您，不涉及具体细节或事件的版本，作为您品性的体现，您是否愿意将他释放给我们，让我们把他带回美国。
We have done so many gestures of what goodwill out of decency that I think we have run out of them. No, we have never seen anyone reciprocate to us in a similar manner. However, in theory, we can say that we do not rule out that we can do that. If our partners take reciprocal steps. When I talk about the partners, I first of all refer to special services. Special services are in contact with one another. They are talking about the matter in question. There is no taboo to settle this issue. We are willing to solve it. But there are certain terms being discussed via special services channels. I believe an agreement can be reached.
我们已经做了很多善意的举动，出于正直的原因，我认为我们已经耗尽了它们。不，我们从来没有看到过有人以类似的方式回报我们。然而，理论上来说，我们可以说并不排除我们可以这样做。只要我们的合作伙伴采取相应的行动。当我说到合作伙伴时，首先我指的是特殊部门。特殊部门之间保持着联系。他们正在讨论这个问题。没有任何禁忌来解决这个问题。我们愿意解决它。但是有一些特殊部门渠道正在讨论一些具体条款。我相信可以达成一致。
So typically, I mean, this stuff has happened for obviously centuries. One country catches another spy within its borders. It trades it for one of its own intel guys in another country. I think what makes it, it's not my business, but what makes this difference is the guy is obviously not a spy. He's a kid and maybe he was breaking your law in some way, but he's not a super spy and everybody knows that and he's being held hostage in exchange, which is true. With respect, it's true. Everyone knows it's true. So maybe he's in a different category. Maybe it's not fair to ask for somebody else in exchange for letting him out. Maybe it's to grades Russia to do that. You know, you can give different interpretations to what constitutes a spy.
通常来说，我是说，这种事情显然已经发生了几个世纪了。一个国家在其领土内捉到了另一个国家的间谍。它将其交换为另一个国家的自己的情报人员。我认为使得这种情况有所不同的是，这个人显然不是间谍。他只是一个孩子，也许在某种程度上违反了你们的法律，但他不是一个超级间谍，每个人都知道这一点，而他却被扣押作为交换物，这是真实的，恕我直言，是真的。大家都知道是真的。也许他属于一种不同的类别。也许要求换人放他出来并不公平。也许这是考验俄罗斯的机会。你知道的，对于什么构成间谍可以有不同的解释。
But there are certain things provided by law. If a person gets secret information and does that in conspiratorial manner, then this is qualified as espionage. And that is exactly what he was doing. He was receiving classified confidential information and he did it covertly. Maybe he did that out of carelessness or his own initiative. Considering the sheer fact that this is qualified as espionage, the fact has been proven as he was caught red-handed when he was receiving this information. If it had been some far-fetched excuse of fabrication, something not proven, it would have been a different story then. But he was caught red-handed when he was secretly getting confidential information.
但是根据法律规定，有一些事情是被法律允许的。如果一个人获取了秘密信息，并以密谋方式行事，那么这就属于间谍活动。而这正是他所做的。他正在接收分类的机密信息，并以隐秘方式进行。或许他是出于粗心大意或自己的主动行为。考虑到这被视为间谍活动的事实，这一事实已被证明，因为他在接收这些信息时被当场抓住。如果他只是编造了一个牵强的借口，证据不足，那就会是另外一回事了。但是他在秘密获取机密信息时被当场抓住了。
What is it? Are you suggesting he was working for the US government or NATO or he was just a reporter who was given material he wasn't supposed to have? Those seem like very different, very different things. I don't know who he was working for. But I would like to reiterate that getting classified information in secret is called espionage. And he was working for the US Special Services, some other agencies. I don't think he was working for Monaco as Monaco is hardly interested in getting that information. It is up to Special Services to come to an agreement. Some groundwork has been laid. There are people who in our review are not connected with Special Services.
这是什么？你是在暗指他是在为美国政府或北约工作，还是只是一个收到了不应该拥有的材料的记者？这些看起来是非常不同的事情，非常不同。我不知道他为谁工作。但我想再次强调，秘密获取机密信息被称为间谍行为。他曾为美国特务机构、其他一些机构工作。我不认为他为摩纳哥工作，因为摩纳哥对获取那些信息几乎没有兴趣。解决这个问题要看特务机构之间的协议。已经打下了一些基础。我们评审中有些人与特务机构无关。
Let me tell you a story about a person serving a sentence in an allied country of the US. The person, due to patriotic sentiments, eliminated the bandit in one of the European capitals.
让我来给你讲一个关于一个人在美国的盟国坐牢的故事。这个人出于爱国情怀，在欧洲的一个首都消灭了一个土匪。
During the events in the Caucasus, do you know what he was doing? I don't want to say that, but I will do it anyway. He was laying our soldiers, taking prisoner on the road and then drove his car over their heads. What kind of person is that? Can he even be called human? But there was a patriot who eliminated him in one of the European capitals. Whether he did it off his own volition or not, that is a different question.
在高加索地区的事件中，你知道他在做什么吗？我不想说这个，但我还是要说。他在路上俘虏了我们的士兵，然后开车碾压他们的头。这是什么样的人？他还能被称为人吗？不过，有一个爱国者在欧洲的一个首都消灭了他。他是不是出于自愿这是另一个问题。
At first, he committed something different. He is not just a journalist. I reiterate, he is a journalist who was secretly getting confidential information. Yes, it is different, but still, I am talking about other people who are essentially controlled by the US authorities, wherever they are serving a sentence. There is an ongoing dialogue between the Special Services. This has to be resolved in a calm, responsible and professional manner. They are keeping in touch, so let them do their work.
起初，他做了一些不同寻常的事情。他不仅仅是一名记者。我再次强调，他是一名秘密获取机密信息的记者。是的，这有所不同，但我仍在谈论其他被美国当局实质上控制的人，无论他们在哪里服刑。特殊部门之间正在进行对话。这必须以冷静、负责任和专业的方式加以解决。他们一直保持联系，所以让他们去做他们的工作。
I do not rule out that the person you refer to, Mr. Gerstkovetz, may return to his motherland. By the end of the day, it does not make any sense to keep him in prison in Russia. We want the US Special Services to think about how they can contribute to achieving the goals our Special Services are pursuing. We are ready to talk, moreover, the talks are on their way. And there have been many successful examples of these talks crowned with success. Probably this is going to be crowned with success as well. But we have to come to an agreement. I hope you let them out. Mr. President, thank you. I also want him to return to his homeland at last. I am absolutely sincere. But let me say once again that dialogue continues. The more public we render things of this nature, the more difficult it becomes to resolve them. Everything has to be done in calm manner.
我并不排除你所提到的人，格尔斯特科维兹先生，可能回到他的祖国。到了今天结束时，把他关在俄罗斯的监狱里就没有任何意义了。我们希望美国特工能思考一下他们如何可以为我们特工部门追求的目标作出贡献。我们已经准备好进行谈判，而且谈判正在进行中。这样的谈判已经有很多成功的例子了。可能这次也会成功。但我们必须达成一致。我希望您能让他们出来。总统先生，谢谢您。我也希望他最终能回到他的祖国。我是真心实意的。但请让我再次说一遍，对话还在继续。我们公开这类事情，越难解决它们。一切都必须以冷静的方式来处理。
I wonder if that's true with the war, though, also. I guess I want to ask one more question, which is, and maybe you don't want to say so for strategic reasons, but are you worried that what's happening in Ukraine could lead to something much larger and much more horrible, and how motivated are you just to call the US government and say, let's come to terms?
我不知道战争方面是否也是真的。我想再问一个问题，也许出于战略原因你可能不想说，但你是否担心乌克兰正在发生的事情会导致更大规模和更可怕的后果，你有多大动力打电话给美国政府并说，让我们妥协一下呢？
I already said that we did not refuse to talk. We are willing to negotiate. It is the western side, and Ukraine is obviously a satellite state of the US. It is evident. I do not want you to take it as if I am looking for a strong word or an insult, but we both understand what is happening. The financial support, 72 billion US dollars, was provided. Germany ranks second, then other European countries come. Dozens of billions of US dollars are going to Ukraine. There is a huge influx of weapons. In this case, you should tell the current Ukrainian leadership to stop and come to negotiating table. Resin this absurd decree. We did not refuse.
我已经说过，我们没有拒绝谈话。我们愿意进行谈判。明显是西方方面和乌克兰显然是美国的附属国。这是显而易见的事实。我不希望你把它看作是我在寻求强词夺理或侮辱，但我们都明白发生了什么。财政援助，720亿美元已经提供了。德国排在第二位，然后是其他欧洲国家。数十亿美元正在流向乌克兰。有大量的武器涌入。在这种情况下，你应该告诉乌克兰现任领导人停止行动并来谈判桌前。撤销这个荒谬的法令。我们没有拒绝。
Sure, but you already said it. I didn't think you meant it as an insult, because you already said correctly. It has been reported that Ukraine was prevented from negotiating a peace settlement by the former British Prime Minister, acting on behalf of the Biden administration. So, of course, there is a satellite. Big countries control small countries. That's not new. And that's why I asked about dealing directly with the Biden administration, which is making these decisions, not President Zelensky of Ukraine. If the Zelensky administration in Ukraine refused to negotiate, I assume they did it under the instruction from Washington. Washington believes it to be the wrong decision, let it abandon it. Let it find a delicate excuse so that no one is insulted. Let it come up with a way out. It was not us who made this decision. It was them. So, let them go back on it. However, they made the wrong decision, and now we have to look for a way out of the situation to correct their mistakes. They did it, so let them correct themselves. We support this.
当然，但是你已经说过了。我并不认为你是在侮辱，因为你已经表述得很正确。据报道，乌克兰由于前英国首相代表拜登政府的意愿而无法进行和平谈判。所以，当然会有卫星。大国控制小国，这并不新鲜。这也是我问到直接与制定这些决策的拜登政府打交道的原因，而不是乌克兰总统泽连斯基。如果乌克兰泽连斯基政府拒绝谈判，我认为他们是在遵循华盛顿的指示。华盛顿认为这是错误的决定，让他们放弃它。让他们找一个委婉的借口，以免冒犯任何人。让他们想办法解决。这个决定不是我们做出的，而是他们做出的。所以，让他们撤回决定。然而，他们作出了错误的决定，现在我们必须寻找出路来纠正他们的错误。他们做了，让他们自己纠正。我们支持这一点。
So, I just want to make sure I'm not misunderstanding what you're saying. I don't think that I am. I think you're saying you want a negotiated settlement to what's happening in Ukraine.
所以，我只是想确认一下我没有误解你的话。我觉得我没有误解。我觉得你是说你希望对乌克兰发生的事情进行谈判解决。
Right. And we made it. We prepared a huge document in Istanbul that was initialed by the head of the Ukrainian delegation. He affixed his signature to some of the provisions. Not to all of it. He put his signature and then he himself said, we were ready to sign it and the war would have been over long ago, 18 months ago. However, Prime Minister Johnson came, talked us out of it, and we missed a chance. Well, you missed it, you made a mistake. Let them get back to that, that is all. Why do we have to bother ourselves and correct somebody else's mistakes?
是的。我们做到了。我们在伊斯坦布尔准备了一份庞大的文件，由乌克兰代表团团长签字确认。他在其中的一些条款上签了字，但并非全部。他签完字后自己说，我们已经准备好签字了，战争本可以在18个月前就结束了。然而，约翰逊首相来了，劝说我们不要签字，我们错过了一个机会。好吧，你们错过了，犯了一个错误。就让他们回去处理那个问题吧，这就是全部。为什么我们要自找麻烦去纠正别人的错误呢？
I know one can say it is our mistake. It was us who intensified the situation and decided to put an end to the war that started in 2014 in Dunbas. As I have already said by means of weapons, let me get back to furthering history. I already told you this.
我知道有人可能会说这是我们的错误。是我们使情况恶化并决定结束2014年在顿巴斯地区爆发的战争。正如我已经通过武装手段所说，让我回到推进历史的事情上。我已经告诉过你这一点了。
We were just discussing. Let us go back to 1991 when we were promised that NATO would not expand. To 2008 when the Dors- It is pointless though, isn't it? We may go back and forth endlessly, but they stop negotiations. Is it a mistake? Yes. Correct it. We are ready. What else is needed? Do you think it's too humiliating at this point for NATO to accept Russian control of what was two years ago Ukrainian territory? I said let them think how to do it with dignity. There are options if there is a will. Up until now there has been the uproar and screaming about inflicting a strategic defeat on Russia on the battlefield.
我们只是在讨论而已。让我们回到1991年，当时有人承诺北约不会扩张。再到2008年，当时发生了东南欧安全对话（Dors）- 不过，这一切都没有意义，对吧？我们可以不断回来回去地讨论，但他们停止了谈判。这是个错误吗？是的。改正它。我们已经准备好了。还需要什么？您认为现在北约接受俄罗斯对两年前属于乌克兰领土的控制会太丢脸吗？我说让他们思考如何以体面的方式解决。只要有意愿，还是有选择的。到目前为止，一直有人喧嚣地大喊大叫要在战场上给俄罗斯以战略性打击。
Now they are apparently coming to realize that it is difficult to achieve. If possible at all. In my opinion it is impossible by definition it is never going to happen. It seems to me that now those who are in power in the West have come to realize this as well. If so, if the realization has set in they have the thing what to do next. We are ready for this dialogue. Would you be willing to say congratulations NATO you won and just keep the situation where it is now?
现在他们显然开始意识到这很难实现，即使可能性存在。在我看来，从定义上来说，这是不可能的，永远不会发生。我觉得现在西方的权力人士也已经意识到了这一点。如果是这样，如果他们已经认识到这一点，那他们需要考虑下一步该怎么做。我们已经准备好进行对话了。你们是否愿意说声祝贺北约获胜，并并维持现在的局势呢？
You know it is a subject matter for the negotiations. No one is willing to conduct or to put it more accurately. They are willing but do not know how to do it. I know they want it. It is not just I see it but I know they do want it but they are struggling to understand how to do it. They have driven the situation to the point where we are at. It is not us who have done that. It is our partners, opponents who have done that. Well now let them think how to reverse the situation. We're not against it.
你知道这是谈判的议题。没有人愿意去执行，或者更准确地说，他们愿意但不知道如何去做。我知道他们想要这个。这不仅仅是我看到了，我知道他们确实想要这个，但他们在努力理解如何做到。他们把情况推到了我们现在所处的地步。这不是我们做的。是我们的合作伙伴、对手做的。现在让他们去考虑如何扭转局势吧。我们并不反对。
It would be funny if it were not so sad. This endless mobilization in Ukraine, the hysteria, the domestic problems. Sooner or later it will result in agreement. You know this probably sounds strange given the current situation. But the relations between the two peoples will be rebuilt anyway. It will take a lot of time but they will heal. I'll give you very unusual examples. There is a combat encounter on the battlefield. Here is a specific example. Ukrainian soldiers got encircled. This is an example from real life. Our soldiers were shouting to them. There is no chance surrender yourselves. Come out and you will be alive. Suddenly the Ukrainian soldiers were squeaking from there in Russian. Perfect Russian saying Russians do not surrender and all of them perish. They still identify themselves as Russian.
如果不是这么悲伤，那真有点好笑。乌克兰的这场无休止的动员，歇斯底里般的情绪，以及国内问题，早晚会导致一致意见的达成。也许在当前的形势下，这听起来有些奇怪。但两国人民的关系无论如何都会得到重建。这需要很长时间，但他们会痊愈的。我给你一个非常不寻常的例子。战场上存在着战斗相遇。这里有一个具体的例子，乌克兰士兵被包围了。这是一个实际生活中的例子。我们的士兵对他们喊道：没有投降的机会，投降吧，你们就能活着出来。突然，乌克兰士兵用俄语回应了他们，说俄国人不投降，而他们全都死去了。他们仍然将自己视为俄国人。
What is happening is to a certain extent an element of a civil war. Everyone in the West thinks that the Russian people have been split by hostilities forever. No they will be reunited. The unity is still there. Why are the Ukrainian authorities dismantling the Ukrainian Orthodox Church? Because it brings together not only the territory. It brings together our souls. No one will be able to separate the soul. Shall we end here or is there anything else?
正在发生的在某种程度上是内战的一部分。西方人都认为俄罗斯人民被敌意永远分裂。不，他们将会再次团结在一起。团结仍然存在。为什么乌克兰当局要解散乌克兰东正教会？因为它不仅团结了领土，也团结了我们的灵魂。没有人可以分开灵魂。我们要在这里结束吗，还是还有其他事情要讨论？
No I think that's great. I assume. Thank you Mr. President.
不，我认为那真是太好了。我猜测是这样。谢谢您，总统先生。