Your Majesties, Your Royal Highnesses, distinguished members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, citizens of America, and citizens of the world: 各位陛下、各位殿下、挪威诺贝尔委员会的各位委员、美国同胞们、世界公民们：
I receive this honor with deep gratitude and great humility. It's an award that speaks to our highest aspirations -- that for all the cruelty and hardship of our world, we are not mere prisoners of fate. Our actions matter, and can bend history in the direction of justice. 我怀着深深的感激和极大的谦卑接受这一荣誉。这是一个诉说着我们最高理想的奖项——它告诉我们，尽管我们的世界充满残酷和苦难，我们并非命运的囚徒。我们的行动至关重要，能够将历史引向正义的方向。
And yet, I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge the considerable controversy that your generous decision has generated. In part, this is because I am at the beginning, and not the end, of my labors on the world stage. Compared to some of the giants of history who've received this prize -- Schweitzer and King, Marshall and Mandela -- my accomplishments are slight. 然而，如果我不承认你们慷慨的决定所引发的相当大的争议，那就是我的失职。在某种程度上，这是因为我正处于世界舞台上工作的开始，而非结束。与一些获得过此奖的历史巨人——施韦泽和马丁·路德·金、马歇尔和曼德拉——相比，我的成就微不足道。
And then there are the men and women around the world who've been jailed and beaten in the pursuit of justice; those who toil in humanitarian organizations to relieve suffering; the unrecognized millions whose quiet acts of courage and compassion inspire even the most hardened cynics. I cannot argue with those who find these men and women -- some known, some obscure to all but those they help -- to be far more deserving of this honor than I. 还有世界上那些为追求正义而遭监禁和殴打的人们；那些在人道主义组织中辛勤劳作以减轻苦难的人们；那些默默行善、以勇气和同情心感动最顽固愤世嫉俗者的数以百万计的无名英雄。对于那些认为这些人——有些知名，有些除了他们所帮助的人之外无人知晓——比我更有资格获得此荣誉的人，我无法与他们争辩。
But perhaps the most profound issue surrounding my receipt of this prize is the fact that I am the Commander-in-Chief of the military of a nation in the midst of two wars. One of these wars is winding down. The other is a conflict that America did not seek, one in which we are joined by 42 other countries -- including Norway -- in an effort to defend ourselves and all nations from further attacks. 然而，围绕我获得此奖的最深刻问题，或许在于这样一个事实：我是一支正处于两场战争之中的国家的军队总司令。其中一场战争正在收尾。另一场则是美国并未寻求的冲突，在这场冲突中，有包括挪威在内的42个国家与我们并肩努力，捍卫我们自己以及所有国家免受进一步攻击。
Still, we are at war. And I am responsible for the deployment of thousands of young Americans to battle in a distant land. Some will kill; and some will be killed. And so I come here with an acute sense of the costs of armed conflict -- filled with difficult questions about the relationship between war and peace, and our effort to replace one with the other. 尽管如此，我们仍在战争中。我负责将数以千计的美国青年部署到遥远的土地上战斗。有些人会杀人；有些人会被杀。因此，我带着对武装冲突代价的敏锐意识来到这里——心中充满了关于战争与和平之间关系、以及我们用一种取代另一种的努力的艰难问题。
Now these questions are not new. War, in one form or another, appeared with the first man. At the dawn of history, its morality was not questioned; it was simply a fact, like drought or disease -- the manner in which tribes and then civilizations sought power and settled their differences. 这些问题并非新问题。战争，以这样或那样的形式，与第一个人同时出现。在历史的黎明，它的道德性并未受到质疑；它只是一个事实，就像干旱或疾病一样——是部落以及后来的文明寻求权力和解决分歧的方式。
And over time, as codes of law sought to control violence within groups, so did philosophers and clerics and statesmen seek to regulate the destructive power of war. The concept of a "just war" emerged, suggesting that war is justified only when certain conditions were met: if it is waged as a last resort or in self-defense; if the force used is proportional; and if, whenever possible, civilians are spared from violence. 随着时间的推移，正如法典试图控制群体内部的暴力，哲学家、教士和政治家们也试图规范战争的破坏力。"正义战争"的概念由此产生，它认为战争只有在满足某些条件时才是正当的：作为最后手段或出于自卫；使用的武力是相称的；以及在可能的情况下，平民免受暴力之害。
Of course, we know that for most of history, this concept of "just war" was rarely observed. The capacity of human beings to think up new ways to kill one another proved inexhaustible, as did our capacity to exempt from mercy those who look different or pray to a different God. Wars between armies gave way to wars between nations -- total wars in which the distinction between combatant and civilian became blurred. In the span of 30 years, such carnage would twice engulf this continent. 当然，我们知道在历史的大部分时间里，"正义战争"这一概念很少被遵循。人类想出新的互相杀戮方式的能力证明是无穷无尽的，正如我们免除对那些外貌不同或信仰不同神明之人的怜悯的能力一样。军队之间的战争让位于国家之间的战争——全面战争，战斗人员与平民之间的界限变得模糊。
And while it's hard to conceive of a cause more just than the defeat of the Third Reich and the Axis powers, World War II was a conflict in which the total number of civilians who died exceeded the number of soldiers who perished. 在30年间，这样的杀戮两次吞噬了这个大陆。虽然很难想象有比击败第三帝国和轴心国更正义的事业，但第二次世界大战是一场平民死亡总数超过阵亡士兵总数的冲突。
In the wake of such destruction, and with the advent of the nuclear age, it became clear to victor and vanquished alike that the world needed institutions to prevent another world war. And so a quarter century after the United States Senate rejected the League of Nations -- an idea for which Woodrow Wilson received this prize -- America led the world in constructing an architecture to keep the peace: a Marshall Plan, and a United Nations; mechanisms to govern the waging of war, treaties to protect human rights, prevent genocide, restrict the most dangerous weapons. 在如此毁灭性的破坏之后，随着核时代的到来，胜利者和失败者都清楚地认识到，世界需要机构来防止另一场世界大战。因此，在美国参议院拒绝国际联盟——一个让伍德罗·威尔逊获得此奖的设想——四分之一世纪之后，美国引领世界构建了维护和平的架构：马歇尔计划和联合国；规范战争进行的机制，保护人权、防止种族灭绝、限制最危险武器的条约。
In many ways, these efforts succeeded. Yes, terrible wars have been fought, and atrocities committed. But there has been no Third World War. The Cold War ended with jubilant crowds dismantling a wall. Commerce has stitched much of the world together. Billions have been lifted from poverty. The ideals of liberty and self-determination, equality, and the rule of law have haltingly advanced. We are the heirs of the fortitude and foresight of generations past, and it is a legacy for which my own country is rightfully proud. 在许多方面，这些努力取得了成功。是的，可怕的战争曾经发生，暴行也曾被犯下。但没有爆发第三次世界大战。冷战以欢呼的人群拆除一堵墙而结束。商业将世界大部分地区连接在一起。数十亿人摆脱了贫困。自由、自决、平等和法治的理想蹒跚前进。我们是先辈们坚韧和远见的继承人，这是一份我自己的国家理应为之自豪的遗产。
And yet, a decade into a new century, this old architecture is buckling under the weight of new threats. The world may no longer shudder at the prospect of war between two nuclear superpowers, but proliferation may increase the risk of catastrophe. Terrorism has long been a tactic, but modern technology allows a few small men with outsized rage to murder innocents on a horrific scale. 然而，进入新世纪才十年，这座旧架构就在新威胁的重压下摇摇欲坠。世界可能不再因两个核超级大国之间战争的前景而战栗，但核扩散可能增加灾难的风险。恐怖主义长期以来一直是一种战术，但现代技术使少数心怀巨大愤怒的小人物能够以骇人的规模屠杀无辜者。
Moreover, wars between nations have increasingly given way to wars within nations. The resurgence of ethnic or sectarian conflicts; the growth of secessionist movements, insurgencies, and failed states -- all these things have increasingly trapped civilians in unending chaos. In today's wars, many more civilians are killed than soldiers; the seeds of future conflict are sown, economies are wrecked, civil societies torn asunder, refugees amassed, children scarred. 此外，国家间的战争日益让位于国家内部的战争。种族或教派冲突的复苏；分离主义运动、叛乱和失败国家的增长——所有这些都日益将平民困于无休止的混乱之中。在当今的战争中，被杀的平民远多于士兵；未来冲突的种子被播下，经济被摧毁，公民社会被撕裂，难民聚集，儿童留下创伤。
I do not bring with me today a definitive solution to the problems of war. What I do know is that meeting these challenges will require the same vision, hard work, and persistence of those men and women who acted so boldly decades ago. And it will require us to think in new ways about the notions of "just war" and the imperatives of a just peace. 今天我并未带来解决战争问题的明确方案。我所知道的是，应对这些挑战将需要数十年前那些勇敢行动的男女同样的远见、辛勤工作和坚持不懈。这也要求我们以新的方式思考"正义战争"的概念和正义和平的迫切要求。
We must begin by acknowledging a hard truth: We will not eradicate violent conflict in our lifetimes. There will be times when nations, acting individually or in concert, will find the use of force not only necessary but morally justified. 我们必须首先承认一个残酷的事实：在我们有生之年，我们无法消除暴力冲突。会有这样的时候：国家，无论是单独行动还是共同行动，都会发现使用武力不仅必要，而且在道德上是正当的。
I make this statement mindful of what Martin Luther King Jr. said in this same ceremony years ago: "Violence never brings permanent peace. It solves no social problem. It merely creates new and more complicated ones." As someone who stands here as a direct consequence of Dr. King's life work, I am living testimony to the moral force of non-violence. I know there's nothing weak, nothing passive, nothing naïve in the creed and lives of Gandhi and King. 我说这番话时，铭记着马丁·路德·金多年前在同一仪式上所说的话："暴力永远不会带来持久的和平。它解决不了任何社会问题。它只是制造新的、更复杂的问题。"作为因金博士毕生工作而得以站在这里的人，我是非暴力道德力量的活见证。我知道甘地和金的信条与生命中没有任何软弱、任何被动、任何天真。
But as a head of state sworn to protect and defend my nation, I cannot be guided by their examples alone. I face the world as it is and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the American people. For make no mistake: Evil does exist in the world. A non-violent movement could not have halted Hitler's armies. Negotiations cannot convince al Qaeda's leaders to lay down their arms. To say that force may sometimes be necessary is not a call to cynicism. It is a recognition of history, the imperfections of man, and the limits of reason. 但作为宣誓保护和捍卫国家的国家元首，我不能仅以他们的榜样为指引。我面对世界的现状，面对对美国人民的威胁不能袖手旁观。因为不要弄错：世界上确实存在邪恶。非暴力运动无法阻止希特勒的军队。谈判无法说服基地组织的领导人放下武器。说武力有时可能是必要的，并不是号召愤世嫉俗。这是对历史、人的不完美以及理性局限的认识。
I raise this point, I begin with this point because in many countries there is a deep ambivalence about military action today -- no matter what the cause. And at times, this is joined by a reflexive suspicion of America, the world's sole military superpower. 我提出这一点，首先提出这一点，是因为在许多国家，今天无论出于何种原因，人们对军事行动都存在深深的矛盾心理。有时，这还伴随着对美国这个世界上唯一军事超级大国的本能怀疑。
Yet, the world must remember that it was not simply international institutions -- not just treaties and declarations -- that brought stability to a post-World War II world. Whatever mistakes we have made, the plain fact is this: The United States of America has helped underwrite global security for more than six decades with the blood of our citizens and the strength of our arms. The service and sacrifice of our men and women in uniform has promoted peace and prosperity from Germany to Korea, and enabled democracy to take hold in places like the Balkans. 然而，世界必须记住，给二战后的世界带来稳定的，不仅仅是国际机构——不仅仅是条约和宣言。无论我们犯过什么错误，明显的事实是：美利坚合众国六十多年来一直以我国公民的鲜血和我们的武力帮助维系全球安全。我国男女军人的奉献和牺牲促进了从德国到朝鲜的和平与繁荣，并使民主得以在巴尔干等地扎根。
We have borne this burden not because we seek to impose our will. We have done so out of enlightened self-interest -- because we seek a better future for our children and grandchildren, and we believe that their lives will be better if others' children and grandchildren can live in freedom and prosperity. 我们承担这一负担并非因为我们要强加自己的意志。我们这样做是出于开明的自身利益——因为我们寻求为子孙后代创造更美好的未来，我们相信如果别人的子孙后代能够生活在自由和繁荣之中，他们的生活也会更好。
So yes, the instruments of war do have a role to play in preserving the peace. And yet this truth must coexist with another: that no matter how justified, war promises human tragedy. The soldier's courage and sacrifice is full of glory -- expressing devotion to country, to cause, to comrades in arms. But war itself is never glorious; and we must never trumpet it as such. 所以是的，战争工具确实在维护和平中发挥着作用。然而，这一事实必须与另一事实共存：无论多么正当，战争都意味着人类悲剧。士兵的勇气和牺牲充满荣耀——表达了对国家、对事业、对战友的忠诚。但战争本身从不荣耀；我们绝不可如此宣扬。
So part of our challenge is reconciling these two seemingly irreconcilable truths: that war is sometimes necessary; and war at some level is an expression of human folly. Concretely, we must direct our effort to the task that President Kennedy called for long ago. "Let us focus," he said, "on a more practical, more attainable peace, based not on a sudden revolution in human nature but on a gradual evolution in human institutions." 因此，我们面临的部分挑战是调和这两个看似不可调和的事实：战争有时是必要的；而在某种程度上，战争是人类愚蠢的表达。具体而言，我们必须将努力转向肯尼迪总统很久以前提出的任务。"让我们关注，"他说，"一种更实际、更可实现的和平，它不基于人性的突然变革，而是基于人类制度的渐进演进。"
A gradual evolution of human institutions. 人类制度的渐进演进。
What might this evolution look like? 这种演进会是什么样子？
What might these practical steps be? 这些实际步骤可能是什么？
To begin with, I believe that all nations, strong and weak alike, must adhere to standards that govern the use of force. I, like any head of state, reserve the right to act unilaterally if necessary to defend my nation. Nevertheless, I am convinced that adhering to standards, international standards, strengthens those who do and isolates and weakens those who don't. 首先，我相信所有国家，无论强弱，都必须遵守规范武力使用的标准。和任何国家元首一样，我保留在必要时单方面行动以保卫我国家的权利。然而，我坚信，遵守标准——国际标准——会增强遵守者，孤立和削弱不遵守者。
The world rallied around America after the 9/11 attacks and continues to support our efforts in Afghanistan, because of the horror of those senseless attacks and the recognized principle of self-defense. Likewise, the world recognized the need to confront Saddam Hussein when he invaded Kuwait -- a consensus that sent a clear message to all about the cost of aggression. 9·11袭击后，世界团结在美国周围，并继续支持我们在阿富汗的行动，因为那些无意义袭击的恐怖和公认的自卫原则。同样，世界认识到当萨达姆·侯赛因入侵科威特时需要对抗他——这一共识向所有人发出了关于侵略代价的明确信息。
Furthermore, America -- in fact, no nation -- can insist that others follow the rules of the road if we refuse to follow them ourselves. For when we don't, our actions appear arbitrary and undercut the legitimacy of future interventions, no matter how justified. 此外，美国——事实上，任何国家——如果我们自己拒绝遵守规则，就不能坚持要求别人遵守规则。因为当我们不遵守时，我们的行动显得武断，并削弱了未来干预的合法性，无论多么正当。
And this becomes particularly important when the purpose of military action extends beyond self-defense or the defense of one nation against an aggressor. More and more, we all confront difficult questions about how to prevent the slaughter of civilians by their own government, or to stop a civil war whose violence and suffering can engulf an entire region. 当军事行动的目的超出自卫或一国抵御侵略者时，这一点变得尤为重要。我们越来越多地面临艰难的问题：如何阻止本国政府屠杀平民，或如何停止一场其暴力和苦难可能吞噬整个地区的内战。
I believe that force can be justified on humanitarian grounds, as it was in the Balkans, or in other places that have been scarred by war. Inaction tears at our conscience and can lead to more costly intervention later. That's why all responsible nations must embrace the role that militaries with a clear mandate can play to keep the peace. 我相信武力可以基于人道主义理由而正当化，正如在巴尔干地区那样，或在其他被战争蹂躏过的地方。不作为会撕裂我们的良知，并可能导致日后代价更高的干预。这就是为什么所有负责任的国家都必须接受带有明确授权的军队在维护和平方面所能发挥的作用。
America's commitment to global security will never waver. But in a world in which threats are more diffuse and missions more complex America cannot act alone. America alone cannot secure the peace. This is true in Afghanistan. This is true in failed states like Somalia, where terrorism and piracy is joined by famine and human suffering. And sadly, it will continue to be true in unstable regions for years to come. 美国对全球安全的承诺永远不会动摇。但在一个威胁更加分散、任务更加复杂的世界中，美国无法独自行动。美国独自无法维护和平。在阿富汗如此。在索马里等失败国家也是如此，那里恐怖主义和海盗与饥荒和人类苦难并存。令人遗憾的是，在未来多年里，不稳定地区仍将如此。
The leaders and soldiers of NATO countries, and other friends and allies, demonstrate this truth through the capacity and courage they've shown in Afghanistan. But in many countries, there is a disconnect between the efforts of those who serve and the ambivalence of the broader public. I understand why war is not popular, but I also know this: The belief that peace is desirable is rarely enough to achieve it. 北约国家的领导人和士兵，以及其他朋友和盟友，通过他们在阿富汗展现的能力和勇气证明了这一事实。但在许多国家，服役人员的努力与广大公众的矛盾心理之间存在脱节。我理解为什么战争不受欢迎，但我也知道这一点：相信和平是可取的，这很少足以实现和平。
Peace requires responsibility. 和平需要责任。
Peace entails sacrifice. 和平需要牺牲。
That's why NATO continues to be indispensable. That's why we must strengthen U.N. and regional peacekeeping, and not leave the task to a few countries. That's why we honor those who return home from peacekeeping and training abroad to Oslo and Rome, to Ottawa and Sydney, to Dhaka and Kigali. We honor them not as makers of war, but as -- of wagers -- but as wagers of peace. 这就是为什么北约继续不可或缺。这就是为什么我们必须加强联合国和区域维和，而不是将任务留给少数国家。这就是为什么我们致敬那些从海外维和和训练归国的人，他们回到奥斯陆和罗马，回到渥太华和悉尼，回到达卡和基加利。我们致敬他们，不是把他们当作战争的制造者，而是——作为——作为和平的缔造者。
Let me make one final point about the use of force. Even as we make difficult decisions about going to war, we must also think clearly about how we fight it. The Nobel Committee recognized this truth in awarding its first prize for peace to Henry Dunant -- the founder of the Red Cross, and a driving force behind the Geneva Conventions. 让我最后谈一点关于武力使用的问题。即使我们做出开战的艰难决定，我们也必须清楚地思考如何进行战争。诺贝尔委员会在将首届和平奖授予亨利·杜南——红十字会创始人以及《日内瓦公约》的推动者——时就认识到了这一真理。
Where force is necessary, we have a moral and strategic interest in binding ourselves to certain rules of conduct. And even as we confront a vicious adversary that abides by no rules, I believe the United States of America must remain a standard bearer in the conduct of war. That is what makes us different from those whom we fight. That is a source of our strength. That is why I prohibited torture. That is why I ordered the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed. And that is why I have reaffirmed America's commitment to abide by the Geneva Conventions. 在武力必要之处，我们有道德和战略利益将自己约束于某些行为准则。即使我们面对不遵守任何规则的凶残敌人，我也相信美利坚合众国必须在战争行为中保持标准旗手。这正是我们与敌人的不同之处。这是我们力量的源泉。这就是为什么我禁止酷刑。这就是为什么我下令关闭关塔那摩湾监狱。这也是为什么我重申美国遵守《日内瓦公约》的承诺。
We lose ourselves when we compromise the very ideals that we fight to defend. And we honor -- we honor those ideals by upholding them not when it's easy, but when it is hard. 当我们妥协我们为之战斗捍卫的理想时，我们就迷失了自己。我们致敬这些理想——是在困难时而非容易时坚持它们。
I've spoken at some length to the question that must weigh on our minds and our hearts as we choose to wage war. But let me now turn to our effort to avoid such tragic choices, and speak of three ways that we can build a just and lasting peace. 我已经较为详细地谈到了我们选择开战时必须压在心头的问题。但让我现在转向我们为避免此类悲剧性选择所做的努力，谈谈我们可以建立公正持久和平的三种方式。
First, in dealing with those nations that break rules and laws, I believe that we must develop alternatives to violence that are tough enough to actually change behavior. For if we want a lasting peace, then the words of the international community must mean something. Those regimes that break the rules must be held accountable. Sanctions must exact a real price. Intransigence must be met with increased pressure -- and such pressure exists only when the world stands together as one. 第一，在应对那些违反规则和法律的国家时，我相信我们必须发展足够强硬的暴力替代方案，以真正改变行为。因为如果我们想要持久和平，那么国际社会的话就必须有分量。那些违反规则的政权必须被追究责任。制裁必须造成实际的代价。顽固不化必须以增加压力来应对——而这种压力只有当世界团结一致时才存在。
One urgent example is the effort to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons, and to seek a world without them. In the middle of the last century, nations agreed to be bound by a treaty whose bargain is clear: All will have access to peaceful nuclear power; those without nuclear weapons will forsake them; and those with nuclear weapons will work towards disarmament. I am committed to upholding this treaty. It is a centerpiece of my foreign policy. And I'm working with President Medvedev to reduce America and Russia's nuclear stockpiles. 一个紧迫的例子是防止核武器扩散和寻求无核武器世界的努力。在上世纪中叶，各国同意受一项条约约束，其交易很明确：所有国家都将获得和平核能；没有核武器的国家将放弃它们；拥有核武器的国家将致力于裁军。我致力于维护这一条约。它是我外交政策的中心。我正与梅德韦杰夫总统合作，减少美国和俄罗斯的核库存。
But it is also incumbent upon all of us to insist that nations like Iran and North Korea do not game the system. Those who claim to respect international law cannot avert their eyes when those laws are flouted. Those who care for their own security cannot ignore the danger of an arms race in the Middle East or East Asia. Those who seek peace cannot stand idly by as nations arm themselves for nuclear war. 但我们所有人也有责任坚持要求伊朗和朝鲜等国不要钻制度的空子。那些声称尊重国际法的人在法律被公然违反时不能视而不见。那些关心自身安全的人不能忽视中东或东亚军备竞赛的危险。那些寻求和平的人不能在国家为核战争武装自己时袖手旁观。
The same principle applies to those who violate international laws by brutalizing their own people. When there is genocide in Darfur, systematic rape in Congo, repression in Burma -- there must be consequences. Yes, there will be engagement. Yes, there will be diplomacy. But there must be consequences when those things fail. And the closer we stand together, the less likely we will be faced with the choice between armed intervention and complicity in oppression. 同样的原则也适用于那些通过残酷对待自己的人民而违反国际法的人。当达尔富尔发生种族灭绝、刚果发生系统性强奸、缅甸发生压迫时——必须有后果。是的，会有接触。是的，会有外交。但当这些失败时，必须有后果。我们站得越近，就越不可能面临在武装干预与共谋压迫之间做出选择。
This brings me to a second point: the nature of the peace that we seek. For peace is not merely the absence of visible conflict. Only a just peace based on the inherent rights and dignity of every individual can truly be lasting. It was this insight that drove drafters of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights after the Second World War. In the wake of devastation, they recognized that if human rights are not protected, peace is a hollow promise. 这引出我的第二点：我们所寻求的和平的本质。因为和平不仅仅是可见冲突的缺失。只有基于每个个人固有权利和尊严的公正和平，才能真正持久。正是这一洞见推动着《世界人权宣言》的起草者在第二次世界大战后起草了该宣言。在毁灭的废墟中，他们认识到，如果人权得不到保护，和平就是空洞的承诺。
And yet, too often these words are ignored. For some countries, the failure to uphold human rights is excused by the false suggestion that these are somehow Western principles, foreign to local cultures or stages of a nation's development. And within America, there's long been a tension between those who describe themselves as realists or idealists -- a tension that suggests a stark choice between the narrow pursuit of interests or an endless campaign to impose our values around the world. 然而，这些话常常被忽视。对一些国家来说，不维护人权被一种错误的说法所开脱，即这些在某种程度上是西方原则，与当地文化或国家发展阶段格格不入。而在美国国内，自称为现实主义者或理想主义者的人之间长期存在一种张力——这种张力暗示在狭隘追求利益或无休止地向世界推行我们价值观的活动之间做出明确选择。
I reject these choices. I believe that peace is unstable where citizens are denied the right to speak freely or worship as they please; choose their own leaders or assemble without fear. Pent-up grievances fester, and the suppression of tribal and religious identity can lead to violence. We also know that the opposite is true. Only when Europe became free did it finally find peace. 我拒绝这些选择。我相信，当公民被剥夺言论自由或按自己意愿礼拜的权利、选择自己领导人的权利或无所恐惧地集会的权利时，和平就是不稳定的。积压的怨气会发酵，对部落和宗教认同的压制可能导致暴力。我们也知道相反的情况也是如此。只有当欧洲获得自由时，它才最终找到和平。
America has never fought a war against a democracy, and our closest friends are governments that protect the rights of their citizens. No matter how callously defined, neither America's interests -- nor the world's -- are served by the denial of human aspirations. 美国从未与一个民主国家打过仗，我们最亲密的朋友是保护其公民权利的政府。无论如何冷酷地定义，否认人类向往都不能服务于美国的利益——也不能服务于世界的利益。
So even as we respect the unique culture and traditions of different countries, America will always be a voice for those aspirations that are universal. We will bear witness to the quiet dignity of reformers like Aung Sang Suu Kyi, to the bravery of Zimbabweans who cast their ballots in the face of beatings, to the hundreds of thousands who have marched silently through the streets of Iran. 因此，即使我们尊重不同国家独特的文化和传统，美国将永远为那些普世的向往发声。我们将为像昂山素季这样的改革者的默默尊严作证，为津巴布韦人在殴打面前仍去投票的勇气作证，为数十万人在伊朗街头默默行进作证。值得注意的是，这些政府的领导人对自己人民的向往的恐惧，超过了对任何其他国家力量的恐惧。
It is telling that the leaders of these governments fear the aspirations of their own people more than the power of any other nation. And it is the responsibility of all free people and free nations to make clear that these movements -- these movements of hope and history -- they have us on their side. 所有自由的人民和自由的国家都有责任明确表示，这些运动——这些希望与历史的运动——他们有我们站在他们一边。
Let me also say this: The promotion of human rights cannot be about exhortation alone. At times, it must be coupled with painstaking diplomacy. I know that engagement with repressive regimes lacks the satisfying purity of indignation. But I also know that sanctions without outreach -- condemnation without discussion -- can carry forward only a crippling status quo. No repressive regime can move down a new path unless it has the choice of an open door. 我还要说这一点：促进人权不能仅靠劝说。有时，它必须与艰苦的外交相结合。我知道与压制性政权接触缺乏愤怒的令人满足的纯洁性。但我也知道，没有外联的制裁——没有对话的谴责——只能延续令人瘫痪的现状。除非有一扇敞开的门可供选择，否则任何压制性政权都无法走上新的道路。
In light of the Cultural Revolution's horrors, Nixon's meeting with Mao appeared inexcusable -- and yet it surely helped set China on a path where millions of its citizens have been lifted from poverty and connected to open societies. Pope John Paul's engagement with Poland created space not just for the Catholic Church, but for labor leaders like Lech Walesa. Ronald Reagan's efforts on arms control and embrace of perestroika not only improved relations with the Soviet Union, but empowered dissidents throughout Eastern Europe. 鉴于文化大革命的恐怖，尼克松与毛泽东的会面似乎是不可原谅的——然而它确实帮助中国走上了使数以百万计的公民摆脱贫困并与开放社会相连的道路。教皇约翰·保罗与波兰的接触不仅为天主教会创造了空间，也为像列赫·瓦文萨这样的劳工领袖创造了空间。罗纳德·里根在军控方面的努力和对改革的支持不仅改善了与苏联的关系，而且赋予了东欧各地的异见人士力量。
There's no simple formula here. But we must try as best we can to balance isolation and engagement, pressure and incentives, so that human rights and dignity are advanced over time. 这里没有简单的公式。但我们必须尽力平衡孤立与接触、压力与激励，以便人权和尊严随着时间的推移得到推进。
Third, a just peace includes not only civil and political rights -- it must encompass economic security and opportunity. For true -- true peace is not just freedom from fear, but freedom from want. It is undoubtedly true that development rarely takes root without security; it is also true that security does not exist where human beings do not have access to enough food, or clean water, or the medicine and shelter they need to survive. It does not exist where children can't aspire to a decent education or a job that supports a family. The absence of hope can rot a society from within. 第三，公正的和平不仅包括公民权利和政治权利——它必须包括经济安全和机会。因为真正的——真正的和平不仅是免于恐惧，而且是免于匮乏。无疑，没有安全，发展很少扎根；同样，当人类无法获得足够的食物、清洁水、或他们生存所需的药物和住所时，安全也不存在。当孩子们无法期望获得体面的教育或一份能养家的工作时，安全也不存在。希望的缺失会从内部腐蚀一个社会。
And that's why helping farmers feed their own people, or nations educate their children and care for the sick, is not mere charity. It's also why the world must come together to confront climate change. There is little scientific dispute that if we do nothing, we will face more drought, more famine, more mass displacement -- all of which will fuel more conflict for decades. For this reason, it is not merely scientists and environmental activists who call for swift and forceful action. It's military leaders in my own country and others who understand our common security hangs in the balance. 这就是为什么帮助农民养活自己的人民，或国家教育其儿童、照顾病患，不仅仅是慈善。这也是为什么世界必须共同应对气候变化。几乎没有科学争议的是，如果我们什么都不做，我们将面临更多的干旱、更多的饥荒、更多的大规模流离失所——所有这些都将在数十年间引发更多冲突。因此，呼吁迅速而有力行动的不仅是科学家和环保活动家。我国的军事领导人和其他国家的军事领导人理解我们的共同安全岌岌可危。
Agreements among nations. Strong institutions. Support for human rights. Investments in development. All these are vital ingredients in bringing about the evolution that President Kennedy spoke about. And yet, I do not believe that we will have the will, the determination, the staying power, to complete this work without something more; and that's the continued expansion of our moral imagination -- an insistence that there's something irreducible that we all share. 国家间的协议。强有力的机构。对人权的支持。对发展的投资。所有这些都是促成肯尼迪总统所说演进的重要要素。然而，我不相信没有更多的东西，我们就会有意志、决心和耐力来完成这项工作；那就是我们道德想象力的持续扩展——一种坚持，即我们都有某种不可还原的共性。
As the world grows smaller, you might think it would be easier for human beings to recognize how similar we are -- to understand that we're all basically seeking the same things, that we all hope for the chance to live out our lives with some measure of happiness and fulfillment for ourselves and our families. 随着世界变小，你可能会认为人类更容易认识到我们有多么相似——理解我们基本上都在追求同样的东西，我们都希望有机会带着一定程度的幸福和满足度过自己和我们家人的生活。
And yet, somehow, given the dizzying pace of globalization, the cultural leveling of modernity, it perhaps comes as no surprise that people fear the loss of what they cherish in their particular identities -- their -- their race, their tribe, and perhaps most powerfully their religion. In some places, this fear has led to conflict. At times, it even feels like we're moving backwards. We see it in the Middle East, as the conflict between Arabs and Jews seems to harden. We see it in nations that are torn asunder by tribal lines. 然而，不知怎的，鉴于全球化令人眼花缭乱的步伐，现代性的文化扁平化，人们害怕失去他们所珍惜的特定身份——他们的——他们的种族、他们的部落，或许最有力地，他们的宗教——这或许并不令人惊讶。在某些地方，这种恐惧导致了冲突。有时，甚至感觉我们在倒退。我们在中东看到这一点，阿拉伯人和犹太人之间的冲突似乎在加剧。我们在被部落界线撕裂的国家中看到这一点。
And most dangerously, we see it in the way that religion is used to justify the murder of innocents by those who have distorted and defiled the great religion of Islam, and who attacked my country from Afghanistan. These extremists are not the first to kill in the name of God. The cruelties of the Crusades are amply recorded. 最危险的是，我们在宗教被用来为那些歪曲和亵渎伟大伊斯兰教、并从阿富汗袭击我国的人屠杀无辜者辩护的方式中看到了这一点。这些极端分子不是第一批以上帝之名杀人的人。十字军的残酷有充分的记录。
But they remind us that no Holy War can ever be a just war. For if you truly believe that you are carrying out divine will, then there is no need for restraint -- no need to spare the pregnant mother, or the medic, or the Red Cross worker, or even a person of one own's [sic] faith. 但他们提醒我们，没有圣战可以是一场正义战争。因为如果你真的相信你在执行神的旨意，那么就没有必要克制——没有必要放过孕妇、医护人员、红十字会工作人员，甚至同一信仰的人。
Such a warped view of religion is not just incompatible with the concept of peace, but I believe it's incompatible with the very purpose of faith: For the one rule that lies at the heart of every major religion is that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. Adhering to this law of love has always been the core struggle of human nature. For we are fallible. We make mistakes, and fall victim to the temptations of pride, and power, and sometimes evil. Even those of us with the best of intentions will at time[s] fail to right the wrongs before us. 如此扭曲的宗教观不仅与和平的概念不相容，而且我相信它与信仰的真正目的不相容：因为每一主要宗教核心的一条规则是我们愿意他人怎样对待我们，我们就怎样对待他人。遵循这一爱的法则一直是人类本性的核心斗争。因为我们是易犯错误的。我们会犯错误，并成为骄傲、权力、有时是邪恶的诱惑的牺牲品。即使是我们中怀有最美好意图的人有时也无法纠正面前的错误。
But we do not have to think that human nature is perfect for us to still believe that the human condition can be perfected. We do not have to live in an idealized world to still reach for those ideals that will make it a better place. The non-violence practiced by men like Gandhi and King may not have been practical or possible in every circumstance, but the love that they preached -- their fundamental faith in human progress -- that must always be the North Star that guides us on our journey. 但我们不必认为人性完美才能相信人类境况可以被完善。我们不必生活在一个理想化的世界中才能追求那些会使世界更美好的理想。像甘地和金那样的人所实践的非暴力，可能并非在每种情况下都实际或可能，但他们所宣扬的爱——他们对人类进步的基本信念——必须永远是我们旅途中的北极星。
For if we lose that faith -- if we dismiss it as silly or naïve; if we divorce it from the decisions that we make on issues of war and peace -- then we lose what's best about humanity. We lose our sense of possibility. We lose our moral compass. 因为如果我们失去那种信念——如果我们把它视为愚蠢或天真而不予理睬；如果我们把它与我们在战争与和平问题上所做的决定分开——那么我们就失去了人性中最好的东西。我们失去了可能性的感觉。我们失去了道德指南针。
Like generations have before us, we must reject that future. As Dr. King said at this occasion so many years ago, "I refuse to accept despair as the final response to the ambiguities of history. I refuse to accept the idea that the 'isness' of man's present condition makes him morally incapable of reaching up for the eternal 'oughtness' that forever confronts him." Let us reach for the world that ought to be -- that spark of the divine that still st[i]rs within each of our souls. 像我们之前的几代人一样，我们必须拒绝那样的未来。正如金博士多年前在这一场合所说："我拒绝接受绝望作为对历史模糊性的最终回应。我拒绝接受人类现状的'实然'使其在道德上无力达到永远面对他的永恒'应然'的想法。"让我们追求那个应有的世界——那仍在每个人灵魂中跳动的神圣火花。
Somewhere today, in the here and now, in the world as it is, a soldier sees he's outgunned, but stands firm to keep the peace. Somewhere today, in this world, a young protestor awaits the brutality of her government, but has the courage to march on. Somewhere today, a mother facing punishing poverty still takes the time to teach her child, scrapes together what few coins she has to send that child to school -- because she believes that a cruel world still has a place for that child's dreams. 今天某处，此时此地，在世界现状中，一名士兵发现自己火力处于劣势，但为维护和平仍坚守阵地。今天某处，在这个世界上，一名年轻的抗议者等待着政府的暴行，但有勇气继续前进。今天某处，一位面临极度贫困的母亲仍抽出时间教导她的孩子，凑集仅有的一点硬币送孩子上学——因为她相信即使残酷的世界仍有那个孩子梦想的一席之地。
Let us live by their example. We can acknowledge that oppression will always be with us, and still strive for justice. We can admit the intractability of depravation, and still strive for dignity. Clear-eyed, we can understand that there will be war, and still strive for peace. We can do that -- for that is the story of human progress; that's the hope of all the world; and at this moment of challenge, that must be our work here on Earth. 让我们以他们为榜样。我们可以承认压迫将永远伴随着我们，同时仍为正义而奋斗。我们可以承认贫困的顽固，同时仍为尊严而奋斗。我们以清醒的目光，可以理解将会有战争，同时仍为和平而奋斗。我们可以做到——因为那是人类进步的故事；那是全世界的希望；在这个挑战的时刻，那必须是我们在地球上的工作。
Thank you very much. 非常感谢大家。
