《泰晤士报》：美国敦促英国减少对美国武器的依赖
The Times: US Urges UK To Reduce Its Dependence On American Weapons
译文简介
“让我们更进一步——减少对一切美国产品的依赖。”——《泰晤士报》报道。
正文翻译
The Times: US Urges UK To Reduce Its Dependence On American Weapons
《泰晤士报》：美国敦促英国减少对美国武器的依赖
《泰晤士报》：美国敦促英国减少对美国武器的依赖
(A Royal Air Force F-35B fighter jet. November 2022. Britain.)
（英国皇家空军的F-35B战斗机。摄于2022年11月，英国。）
新闻：
The representatives of the United States government have warned the British military about the importance of reducing dependence on American weapons under the new administration.
美国政府的代表已经警告英国军方，在新政府的领导下，减少对美国武器的依赖非常重要。
美国政府的代表已经警告英国军方，在新政府的领导下，减少对美国武器的依赖非常重要。
The Times reported on this.
《泰晤士报》对此进行了报道。
《泰晤士报》对此进行了报道。
According to the publication, a senior British military officer who is not part of the government received a private warning from American officials that London should “recalibrate” its defense policy.
据该报称，一名非政府官员的英国高级军官私下收到了美国官员的警告，称伦敦应该“重新调整”其国防政策。
据该报称，一名非政府官员的英国高级军官私下收到了美国官员的警告，称伦敦应该“重新调整”其国防政策。
This happened after the Trump administration allegedly made statements that the UK was receiving military equipment too cheaply.
此前，特朗普政府发表声明称，英国接收军事装备的价格过低。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
此前，特朗普政府发表声明称，英国接收军事装备的价格过低。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
“They said we shouldn’t have bought American equipment, and there was a feeling in the US administration that they should’ve billed the UK for getting defense equipment on the cheap,” the source told The Times.
“他们说我们不应该购买美国装备，美国政府有一种感觉，他们应该向英国收取廉价购买国防设备的费用，”该消息人士告诉《泰晤士报》。
“他们说我们不应该购买美国装备，美国政府有一种感觉，他们应该向英国收取廉价购买国防设备的费用，”该消息人士告诉《泰晤士报》。
In particular, it is believed that London had signed an unfairly cheap deal for the purchase of Trident intercontinental ballistic missiles.
特别是，据信伦敦签署了购买三叉戟洲际弹道导弹的不公平廉价协议。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
特别是，据信伦敦签署了购买三叉戟洲际弹道导弹的不公平廉价协议。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
“We’ve been trying to tell people to readjust. The old confidence is gone,” The Times writes, citing American officials.
“我们一直试图告诉人们要重新适应。昔日的信心已经荡然无存，” 《泰晤士报》援引美国官员的话写道。
“我们一直试图告诉人们要重新适应。昔日的信心已经荡然无存，” 《泰晤士报》援引美国官员的话写道。
It is reported that the US administration might impose restrictions on the supply of equipment from the US because “missiles and planes won’t fly if you don’t do what you’re told.”
据报道，美国政府可能会对美国的装备供应实施限制，因为“如果你不按我说的做，导弹和飞机就飞不起来”。
据报道，美国政府可能会对美国的装备供应实施限制，因为“如果你不按我说的做，导弹和飞机就飞不起来”。
It is worth noting that the UK remains a top-level ally for the US, and their defense systems are closely integrated.
值得注意的是，英国仍然是美国的顶级盟友，两国防务体系紧密结合。
值得注意的是，英国仍然是美国的顶级盟友，两国防务体系紧密结合。
However, a deterioration in relations could threaten the implementation of strategic programs, including the procurement of F-35 fighters.
然而，两国关系的恶化可能会威胁到战略项目的实施，包括采购F-35战斗机。
然而，两国关系的恶化可能会威胁到战略项目的实施，包括采购F-35战斗机。
The UK increases defense spending
英国增加国防开支
英国增加国防开支
On February 25th, it was reported that Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced the largest increase in UK defense spending since the Cold War.
2月25日，据报道，英国首相基尔·斯塔默宣布了自冷战以来英国国防开支的最大增幅。
2月25日，据报道，英国首相基尔·斯塔默宣布了自冷战以来英国国防开支的最大增幅。
It is planned that the British government would increase the defense budget to 2.5% of GDP starting in April 2027, and then to 3%.
英国政府计划从2027年4月开始将国防预算增加到GDP的2.5%，然后再增加到3%。
英国政府计划从2027年4月开始将国防预算增加到GDP的2.5%，然后再增加到3%。
This step is part of a strategy aimed at strengthening national security, stimulating economic growth, and protecting British interests in the face of growing global instability.
这一步骤是一项战略的一部分，旨在加强国家安全，刺激经济增长，并在全球日益不稳定的情况下保护英国的利益。
这一步骤是一项战略的一部分，旨在加强国家安全，刺激经济增长，并在全球日益不稳定的情况下保护英国的利益。
The British government plans to allocate funds for the development of artificial intelligence, quantum computing and space technologies.
英国政府计划为人工智能、量子计算和空间技术的发展拨款。
英国政府计划为人工智能、量子计算和空间技术的发展拨款。
评论翻译
很赞 ( 2 )
收藏
Good. We need to wean ourselves off everything American and rely on more dependable relationships
Hopefully in 5-10 years we will have solid, European alternatives to everything ranging from military equipment, to computer software, food, clothing, and more
很好。我们需要摆脱美国的一切，转而依赖更可靠的关系
希望在5-10年内，我们将有坚实的欧洲替代品，从军事装备到计算机软件、食品、衣服等等
How about British alternatives? Why do they need to be continental?
英国的替代方案在哪呢？为什么他们需要欧洲大陆？
Britain is involved in almost all NATO arms projects to some degree.
However an individual European nation is generally too small to put in the development to make a cutting edge aircraft, if we use Sweden for an example they made the Gripen which is a really good cost effective aircraft but when compared to a typhoon it's physically worse than every way. Individual European Nations also cannot afford to put in large orders which prevents mass production of equipment increasing the cost per unit, one of the reasons the F-35 is currently so cheap is because everyone is buying it and so despite it being a stealth aircraft that is effectively a flying supercomputer it is cheaper at the moment than buying a Typhoon which is non stealth.
Some things you can afford to solo make or are just required to like we build all of our own warships, other things you just have different doctrines to other countries like our tank doctrine but relatively speaking compared to aircraft tanks are pretty cheap
英国在某种程度上参与了北约几乎所有的武器项目。
然而，单个欧洲国家通常太小，无法投入开发制造尖端飞机，如果我们以瑞典为例，他们制造了鹰狮，这是一种非常划算的飞机，但与台风相比，它的物理性能各方面都差。单个欧洲国家也无法承担大量订单，这阻碍了装备的大规模生产，增加了单位成本，F-35目前如此便宜的原因之一是因为每个国家都在购买它，所以尽管它是一架隐形飞机，实际上是一个飞行的超级计算机，但目前比购买非隐形的台风便宜。
有些东西你可以负担得起独自制造，或者只是需要我们自己独自建造，比如所有的军舰，其他东西你只是有不同的学说，比如我们的坦克学说，但相对而言，与飞机相比，坦克相当便宜
Because military equipment is very expensive and so no countries apart from the US/China have big enough economies that they can afford not to specialise and import what they don't specialise in.
因为军事装备非常昂贵，所以除了美国和中国，没有哪个国家的经济体量足够大，大到能负担得起不专业化和进口他们不专业的东西。（就是说美中可以搞全工业体系，不用像小国只能选择主攻某个专业分支，其他的靠进口）
Fortunately we are on the trajectory of closer European military integration if we are to maintain peace on the continent of Europe. Russia has lost in Ukraine in so much that it has failed to achieve anywhere near its obxtive, it will not be a threat to the rest of Europe for 5-10 years “if” Europe stands still and does not rearm. If Europe acts, Russia will be no where near to threaten Europe.the main issue for military independence from the US if China make a move on Taiwan. A massive shortage of microchips to Europe would make production of modern weaponry impossible and we would be right at the back of the queue. That is where Europe needs to quickly get independence and dutifully of supply .
幸运的是，如果我们要维持欧洲大陆的和平，我们正走在欧洲更紧密军事一体化的轨道上。俄罗斯在乌克兰的损失太大了，以至于它无法实现自己的目标，“如果”欧洲停滞不前，不重新武装起来，俄罗斯在今后5-10年内也不会对欧洲其他国家构成威胁。如果欧洲采取行动，俄罗斯将无法威胁欧洲。摆脱美国追求军事独立的主要问题在于如果中国对某岛采取行动。对欧洲来说，微芯片的严重短缺将使现代武器的生产变得不可能，我们将被排在队伍的最后。这正是欧洲需要迅速获得独立并尽职尽责地提供的地方。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
This, we need to get Chips and tech to be made here.
确实，我们需要在本地生产芯片和技术。
Reduce dependence should happen as America retreats from Europe. But let's be blunt, it would take everything we have and a timescale of a decade at minimal.
UK is currently ineffective and slow so likely 3 decades at current rates. We would need a massive start up like mindset which is challenging due to mindsets and cultural attitudes. And then there's the money where its a country is decline going bankrupt.
随着美国从欧洲撤出，对美国的依赖应该会减少。但坦率地说，这将花费我们所有的一切，至少需要十年的时间。
英国目前效率低下，速度缓慢，按目前的速度可能需要30年。我们需要一种大规模的创业心态，由于心态和文化态度，这是具有挑战性的。然后，当一个国家衰落到破产的时候，钱从何来。
Defence spending is probably only secondary to welfare (paid to the poorest) when it comes to economic stimulus, mainly because it requires massive infrastructural investment.
当涉及到经济刺激时，国防开支可能仅次于（支付给最贫穷的人的）福利，主要是因为它需要大规模的基础设施投资。
Surely some MOD boffins have raised this already and started to think of plan B.. Could always start Harrier production again.
当然，一些国防部的科学家已经提出了这个问题，并开始考虑B计划。随时可以重新开始生产鹞式战机。
We are a tier 1 member of the F-35 project we build enough stuff that if the US ever pulls supplies from us then we can pull an awful lot of stuff from there aircraft including the seat itself and all of the electronics warfare which is a significant part of keeping the F-35 a stealth aircraft.
Other countries that only made a few small things are more at risk although even then the US wouldn't do it because it would destroy their international arms market but technically they can do it to us but it will also cripple their own aircraft so completely pointless
我们是F-35项目的一级成员，我们建造了足够多的东西，如果美国从我们那里撤走生产线，那么我们也可以从他们的飞机上拆下很多东西，包括弹射座椅本身和所有电子战设备，这是保持F-35隐形飞机的重要组成部分。
其他只制造一些小东西的国家面临的风险更大，尽管美国不会这么做，因为这会摧毁他们的国际武器市场，但从技术上讲，他们可以对我们这样做，但这也会使他们自己的飞机完全失去意义
As necessary as this might be, this feels very much like previous arms build up that led to war. I'd rather not be involved in a major war, especially if nuclear weapons are a possibility.
It'd be preferable to pull everyone back to sanity.
尽管这可能是必要的，但这感觉很像以前导致战争的军备建设。我宁愿不卷入一场大战，特别是如果核武器是可能参战的。
最好能让所有人都恢复理智。
The problem is if a dictatorship is hellbent on attacking you regardless of whether you have weapons or no weapons at all they will still attack and so the only way of convincing them not to attack is by being so comically powerful that they will lose in a few days so they won't bother attacking in the first place because they know it's completely hopeless.
The last truly major arms race that led to a war as the Dreadnought arms race between Germany and the UK. As it turns out Germany was too scared to use their ships for most of the war only engaging in one major battle and the actual cause of the war was really complicated interlixed alliances that meant that it looked like both sides had a decent shot at winning.
Wars occur if both sides think they can win or one side thinks they can win. If one side knows they will win but doesn't care about starting it and the other wants to start one but knows they will lose there won't be a war.
问题在于，如果一个专制政权执意要攻击你，不管你是否有武器，他们仍然会攻击你，所以说服他们不要攻击的唯一方法就是让自己变得如此强大，以至于他们在几天内就会失败，所以他们一开始就不会攻击你，因为他们知道这是完全无望的。
最后一次真正导致战争的重大军备竞赛是德国和英国之间的无畏舰军备竞赛。事实证明，德国太害怕了，不敢在战争的大部分时间里使用他们的船只，只参加了一场主要的战役，而这场战争的真正原因是非常复杂的相互联系的联盟，这意味着双方看起来都有很好的机会获胜。
如果双方都认为自己能赢，或者一方认为自己能赢，战争就会发生。如果一方知道自己会赢，但不愿意开战，而另一方想开战，但知道自己会输，那么就不会有战争。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
If America wants us to have less reliance on their kit, then they shouldn't have spent literally decades having the MoD over a barrel with contracts and false promises specifically designed to get us to use their equipment at the complete detriment to our own weapons manufacturers. And prior governments shouldn't have been so gullible time and time again when it comes to trusting other world powers regarding defence.
如果美国想让我们减少对他们装备的依赖，那么他们就不应该花几十年的时间用合同和虚假的承诺来控制国防部，专门设计让我们使用他们的装备，而完全损害我们自己的武器制造商。在国防方面，以前的政府不应该一次又一次地轻信其他世界大国。
The US is gearing up for a clash of superpowers and have been for the last 15-20 years. China is their primary adversary and they view Russia as Europe's problem, only the EU refuses to get its shit in order and are no longer seen as a credible defensive partner. All to happy to sit behind the shield of the US while undermining them and their own national interests at every turn by cosying up to Russia and China while weakening Europe's position as a whole. (This will be the legacy of the German Green Party)
China is on the edge of viable force projection capacity and will start pressing their claims along their borders and in the South China Sea in a very real way. They will have the capability to do so within this presidency and, with the current geopolitical landscape, might just go for it. This is why the US is pushing so hard for domestic chip manufacturing capacity and why they are doing anything they can to secure access to rare earth minerals.
Trump's rhetoric seems pretty unhinged because he lacks the tact or patience for normal politics and believes he can strong arm everyone into doing what he wants but it would be naive to think its not a reflection of the underlying US position. The lumbering bureaucracy of institutes like NATO and the EU are tolerable during peace times but good for little more than toothless virtue signalling on the world stage.
This leaves the UK in a very weird position of being a major partner in both ends of the conflict. Tied to Europe's defensive needs by geography and capacity to contribute. But also part of AUKUS so tied to the Pacific where the conflict that actually matters will take place.
The reality is that the US are expecting to be in an existential conflict and their commitments to other countries will always come second to their own if this happens.
过去15-20年来，美国一直在为超级大国的冲突做准备。中国是他们的主要对手，他们认为俄罗斯是欧洲的问题，只有欧盟拒绝把它的玩意整理好，然后不再被视为一个可靠的防御伙伴。所有人都乐于坐在美国的盾牌后面，通过讨好俄罗斯和中国，每时每刻损害美国和自己的国家利益，同时削弱欧洲作为一个整体的地位。（这将是德国绿党的遗产）
中国正处于可行的兵力投送能力的边缘，并将开始以一种非常真实的方式在边界和南中国海推进他们的主张。在本届总统任期内，他们将有能力这样做，而且在当前的地缘政治形势下，他们可能会这么做。这就是为什么美国如此努力地推动国内芯片制造能力，以及为什么他们正在尽一切努力确保获得稀土矿。
特朗普的言论看起来相当疯狂，因为他缺乏正常政治的机智和耐心，他认为他可以强迫每个人做他想做的事，但如果认为这不是美国潜在立场的反映，那就太天真了。北约和欧盟等机构笨拙的官僚作风在和平时期是可以容忍的，但除了在世界舞台上发出没有实权的美德信号之外，它们没什么用处。
这让英国处于一个非常奇怪的位置，在冲突的两端都是一个主要的合作伙伴。由于地理位置和贡献能力，与欧洲的防御需求联系在一起。但也有一部分澳哭死部分与（真正重要的冲突将发生的）太平洋紧密相连。
现实情况是，美国希望卷入一场事关存亡的冲突，如果发生这种情况，他们对其他国家的承诺将永远排在自己的之后。
But also part of AUKUS so tied to the Pacific where the conflict that actually matters will take place.
Wrong and wrong.The pacific doesn't matter to Britain or Europe one bit and we sure as shit won't be sending our navy there to fight china for the mutts.I don't think you septics realise how unimportant and lack of bearing anywhere past the western Indian Ocean is to Europe.Fck the pacific, not our problem.
“但也有一部分澳哭死部分与（真正重要的冲突将发生的）太平洋紧密相连”
大错特错。太平洋对英国或欧洲一点都不重要，我们肯定不会派海军去那里和中国打仗。我不认为你们这些怀疑论者意识到西印度洋以外的任何地方对欧洲来说是多么的不重要和缺乏联系。去他妈的太平洋，那不是我们的问题。
Unimaginably stupid take.
Our lives revolve entirely around exports from the region. And what happens to the US matters to us. Ceding it to China puts an end to US dominance as a super power, and an end to the near unparalleled peace and prosperity western hegemony has brought us.
You can't possibly believe Europe will step into that role? Its taken us 3 years to start have serious discussions about rearming while there is literal armed conflict happening on European soil. We don't even have the capacity to provide enough arms to Ukraine to hold back a meme-tier super power that can barely project past a tiny strip of its own land border.
Not to mention our cultural and political ties to the region, or the fact that we (all of Europe) don't have the resources or manufacturing base to come even close to replacing what we would lose if there was ever meaningful conflict there.
难以想象的愚蠢。
我们的生活完全围绕着该地区的出口。并且美国遭遇的事情对我们很重要。把它让给中国将结束美国作为超级大国的统治地位，也将结束西方霸权给我们带来的近乎无与伦比的和平与繁荣。
你不可能相信欧洲会扮演这个角色？我们花了3年时间才开始认真讨论重新武装，而欧洲的土地上却发生了真正的武装冲突。我们甚至没有能力向乌克兰提供足够的武器，以阻止一个几乎无法越过自己陆地边界的小地带的表情包级超级大国。
更不用说我们与该地区的文化和政治联系，或者我们（整个欧洲）没有资源或制造业基地来弥补我们在那里发生重大冲突时所失去的东西。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Just wait - “US signs huge weapons export deal with Russia”
等着吧——“美国与俄罗斯签署巨额武器出口协议”
Except Russia has no money. Maybe they'll exchange weapons for rare Earth minerals extracted from occupied Ukraine.
除了俄罗斯没钱。也许他们会用从被占领的乌克兰开采的稀土矿交换武器。
At which point in this unholy mess does China pop it’s head up and seize the opportunity to become the global power that backs the rest of the world against Putin and Trump?
在这场邪恶的混乱中，中国会在什么时候抬起头来，抓住机会成为支持世界其他国家对抗普京和特朗普的全球大国？
It is blindingly obvious that Trump is leaving Europe to fend for itself because the US is pivoting to Asia to counter the threat from China.
显而易见的是，特朗普正在让欧洲自生自灭，因为美国正将重心转向亚洲，以应对来自中国的威胁。
Let's go further - reduce dependence on everything American.
让我们更进一步——减少对一切美国产品的依赖。