突发新闻：俄罗斯战斗机进入爱沙尼亚领空，爱沙尼亚已请求北约进行第四条磋商

the_real_lucia
The first time that Article 4 was invoked twice in one month.

这是第一次在同一个月内两次启动北约第四条。

TeaOk9685
Article 4 has been invoked 9 times. The first was in 2003 because of the Iraq War, another was in 2015 because of ISIS, and all of the other 7 are because of Russia in some way: their backing of Assad, the 2014 annexation of Crimea, the 2022 full-scale invasion, or these 2 incursions. They are happening with increasing frequency.
This is the stuff that will be alongside the Rhineland and the Sudetenland in the part of history books where they explain how the allies let it get that bad.

第四条一共被启动过9次。第一次是2003年伊拉克战争，2015年因为ISIS，其他7次都与俄罗斯有关：支持阿萨德、2014年吞并克里米亚、2022年全面入侵、还有这两次侵犯。频率在越来越高。这些事会像莱茵兰和苏台德区一样，成为历史书里解释盟国如何纵容局势恶化的例子。

restform
Well nato quite literally exist because of the threat from moscow so its not so surprising.

北约的存在本来就是因为来自莫斯科的威胁，所以也没啥奇怪的。

TeaOk9685
And I'd say it's been quite successful, as when it started the "front" was a lot farther west. We got most of Europe without firing a shot.

我觉得算挺成功的，因为北约建立时“前线”在更西边。我们没开一枪就让大部分欧洲加入了。

restform
Kind of a weird way to phrase it imo, no one was ever going to fire a shot for those countries and im not sure who "we" is. Nato is an alliance that countries can ask to join if they want, not an imperialist movement.

这种说法有点怪吧，其实没人会为了那些国家开火，而且我也不知道你说的“我们”是谁。北约是个国家可以申请加入的联盟，不是帝国扩张。

TeaOk9685
Yes, weird way to phrase it, but I'd define "we" as the liberal democracies of the West. The Cold War was very much a war of ideologies and the liberal democracies of the West largely won; their socio-economic ideology, for better or worse, has come to dominate the world. And at times, there absolutely was the threat of shots being fired over some of these countries. Nuclear shots, possibly.
NATO certainly is not an empire, I didn't mean to imply that. But it was formed to prevent the domination of Europe by Russia, and Russia has lost most of its non-Russian dominions in Europe since then, while those newly independent states often turn around and join NATO as fast as they can. NATO is not a 3rd party, but it is a well-defined collective that represents something.

是的，说法有点怪。我说的“我们”指的是西方自由民主国家。冷战就是意识形态战争，而西方自由民主总体上赢了，它的社会经济意识形态主导了世界。有时确实存在为了某些国家而爆发战争的风险，甚至可能是核战。北约当然不是帝国，我也不是那个意思。但它的成立就是为了阻止俄罗斯统治欧洲。自那以后，俄罗斯在欧洲失去了大部分非俄属领地，而这些新独立的国家反而纷纷急着加入北约。北约不是第三方，它是一个明确的集体，代表一种立场。

Artistic-South-7319
So they are testing our defenses. And to the people who say "we are not at war with Russia" maybe we are not but they are at war with us.

所以他们是在测试我们的防御。对那些说“我们没和俄罗斯交战”的人来说，也许我们没主动打，但他们早就在和我们打了。

Piltonbadger
We've been in a cold War with Russia since the early 2000's.

自2000年代初以来，我们就已经和俄罗斯处于冷战状态。

TeaOk9685
Since 2008, I'd say. In the early 2000s, Bush was quite happy to work with Putin to combat Islamists, since Russia also has problems with them in its southern regions, and many in Europe were happy to buy their oil instead of Middle Eastern. But once they invaded Georgia, that ended, and Obama, despite his pivot to Asia, was no friend of Putin at all.

我会说是从2008年开始。2000年代初，布什还乐意和普京合作打击伊斯兰极端分子，因为俄罗斯南部也有类似问题，欧洲很多国家也乐意买俄国石油而不是中东的。但他们入侵格鲁吉亚后，一切结束了。奥巴马虽然把重心转向亚洲，但他对普京也毫不友好。

itskelena
Later on there also have been certain democratic events in Ukraine in Georgia that led him to feel threatened because he couldn’t allow more successful democratic and independent neighbors. The russian propaganda has started brainwashing around that time too.
I think pootin realized he’d rather stay filthy rich autocrat than allow its country and the neighbors to develop.

后来乌克兰和格鲁吉亚也出现了一些民主事件，让普京感到威胁，因为他不能容忍有更成功的民主独立邻国。从那时起俄罗斯宣传机器就开始给人们洗脑。我认为普京意识到他宁愿当个肮脏富有的独裁者，也不愿让自己的国家和邻国发展。

LTCM_15
Bush tried like hell to get Ukraine into NATO but Western Europe vetoed them getting an invite. 

布什曾拼命想让乌克兰加入北约，但西欧国家否决了邀请。

Powerful-Public-9973
They are testing NATO reactions to the nonviolent incursions. How long does it take to invoke article 4. How quickly do the members react. What the exact distance and force is needed to create the reaction. Who responded quickest. Who responded slowest. See why they responded at those speeds and see if there’s a way to draw a wedge there. 
Also contributes to the overall strategy of making NATO desensitized to Russian nonviolent incursions. So when they do pull real shit they’ll have an advantage because they made NATO numb to these actions. 
There’s a lot of data they are mining from this 

俄罗斯他们在测试北约对非武力侵犯的反应。要多久才会启动第四条？各国反应有多快？需要什么距离和力度才能触发？谁最快，谁最慢？为什么这些差异？能不能从中挑拨？另外，这也是让北约对俄国的非武力侵犯逐渐麻木的策略。等他们真动手时就占优势，因为北约已经被这些小动作磨钝了。这里面有大量情报可收集。

jackofslayers
Non-lethal incursions. They are still violent incursions if they are crashing kamikaze drones

说是非致命侵犯，其实也很暴力。如果是撞上来送死的无人机，那就是暴力侵犯。

Serious-Feedback-700
"NATO doesn't give a shit and we can do whatever we want lMao" probably

“北约根本不在乎，我们想干啥就干啥哈哈”大概就是俄罗斯他们的想法吧。

Quite-hairyman33
the rest of NATO does not want to join the war

北约的其他成员国都不想加入战争。

Serious-Feedback-700
I don't think anyone WANTS to join a war.

我觉得没有人想参战吧。

jackofslayers
The result is there are no defenses

结果就是北约根本没有防御。

lemfaoo
LMao the complete lack of a response says it all.
These armchair generals talk all the shit but have zero knowledge whatsoever.

笑死，北约完全没有反应就说明了一切。 这些键盘将军光说不练，啥都不懂。

grumpsaboy
They can test response time of aircraft before scrambles start, speed to intercept after takeoff, typical weapon loadouts.
If done enough they can work out percentage of each aircraft type or nationality in operation.
It also tests political will, whether Europe is willing to do more than say "Naughty Putin very bad" or whether he can intrude with no poor effect.

他们可以测试战机在起飞拦截前的反应时间、起飞后拦截所需速度、常见的武器挂载。
如果做得足够多，还能推算出各型号或不同国籍飞机的运作比例。
这同时也测试政治意愿——欧洲是只会说一句“坏普京不可以”还是会真正采取行动。

Nigilij
They aren’t testing waters. They know there will be no strong response as EU are gutless, US are RU comrades and Türkiye is busy with Syria and Israel. Instead, RU is creating new reality where EU will consider such news no big deal. So that next step could be implemented. Frog boiling is what it is.
Poland had several events of RU drones coming into PL airspace and PL didn’t react. Until instead of 1 drone, 20 arrived.

他们不是在试探，而是知道不会有强烈反应。欧盟胆小如鼠，美国和俄罗斯暗中称兄道弟，土耳其忙着对付叙利亚和以色列。俄罗斯实际上是在创造一种新常态，让欧洲觉得这种新闻没什么大不了。这样下一步才能实施。这就是温水煮青蛙。波兰就有过几次俄国无人机闯入领空的事件，但波兰没反应，直到有一次不是1架，而是来了20架。

lastchancesaloon29
Until instead of 1 drone, 20 arrived.
But then they reacted. Look, the thing is there will be a NATO response at some stage because Russia simply won't stop this and as a natural course they will keep escalating. Eventually NATO will have no choice but to react. When that happens we're all fucked though.

来了不是1架，而是20架无人机。
不过那时候他们还是有反应的。问题是，迟早会有一次北约必须作出回应，因为俄罗斯根本不会停下，他们会不断升级。到时候北约别无选择只能回应。而一旦那发生，我们所有人都完了。

Nigilij
They reacted too poorly. Setting up meeting in two days is bad. Not having anti drone weaponry in place of previous drone incursions is bad. They should have prepared for such case before (I know Rheinmetall and Brits have anti-drone cannons - have NATO deploy those on the Baltics, Poland and Romania year ago after first dron crossing happened.) The problem is continuously postponing “will react”.
After those 20 drones, there were 2 days wait for a meeting. This is military invasion and response is “ah, I see in Outlook calendar a free spot in 2 days - let’s have a call at that time”. Everyone who is responsible for military safety of PL and NATO and did not react with immediate meeting must be fired. RU planned UA conquest in 3 days. With such poor NATO response they would be having free rein of the battlefield for 2 out of 3 days if they attack any NATO country.

北约的反应太差。两天后才开会，这很糟糕。之前就有无人机入侵事件，却没提前部署反无人机武器，这也很糟糕。（我知道莱茵金属和英国有反无人机炮——北约早该在波罗的海国家、波兰和罗马尼亚部署这些了，在第一架无人机越境时就该做。）问题在于不断拖延“回应时间”。20架无人机之后，还得等两天才开会。这就是军事入侵，而反应却是“哦，我看Outlook日历里两天后有空档，我们那时开个会吧”。所有负责波兰和北约军事安全的人，如果没立即召开会议，都该被解雇。俄罗斯计划3天攻下乌克兰。以北约这种糟糕的反应速度，如果他们攻击任何一个北约国家，3天里有2天俄军都会在战场上畅通无阻。

ABoutDeSouffle
I will never understand why in 2022/23, no one except Ukraine ordered the Rheinmetall SPAAG. Later on, Germany bought a couple, but it would have made sense if European NATO had ordered like 1000 of those or similar systems at the time.
Hell, it could have been a simpler system if that was easy to develop. But there was a missed opportunity to stop Russian drones at the borders.

我永远不理解为什么在2022和23年，除了乌克兰，没有其他国家订购莱茵金属的自行高射炮。后来德国才买了几辆。但如果当时欧洲的北约国家订购个1000辆或类似系统，就很合理。哪怕是更简单的系统也行，容易研发的话。这是一个阻止俄国无人机在边境的机会，可惜被错过了。

Nigilij
That’s what I’m about. Makes no sense how all the writings on the wall are ignored with all the time for proper preparation.
I get now why France and Britain were happy to sell Czechoslovakia to Hitler. You read history and wonder why dumb decisions. You live history and understand why.

这就是我说的。明明所有迹象都摆在眼前，北约却完全无视，错过了充分准备的时间。
我现在明白为什么法国和英国当年愿意把捷克斯洛伐克卖给希特勒。读历史时觉得那些决定蠢，等你亲身经历，才明白为什么会有那样的愚蠢。

ABoutDeSouffle
The thing is, if Russia actually attacks one of you guys, and NATO does not react, NATO is dead, and the credibility of the major NATO powers (USA, UK, France, Germany, Italy, Poland) as well.
Granted, if I lived in one of the Baltic states or Finland, I would not be as certain, but looking from here it seems impossible that NATO chickens out when the one think happens that NATO was build to react to.

问题在于，如果俄罗斯真的攻击你们其中一个，而北约没有回应，那北约就彻底死了，主要北约大国（美国、英国、法国、德国、意大利、波兰）的信誉也没了。
当然，如果我住在波罗的海国家或芬兰，我不会那么确定。但以旁观视角来看，当北约成立之初旨在应对的情况真正发生时，这个联盟绝无可能临阵退缩。

vjmdhzgr
I think it isn't a test of defenses, but an intentional light provocation to weaken the alliance. I still doubt they plan to actually attack, though it isn't impossible. But I think just keep bothering their neighbors with things that are like "Oh are you really going to declare war on Russia over that?" And they make it so ignoring article 4 is normal, and maybe they get countries no longer wanting to be in it, maybe they get Trump to abandon it altogether, and some time in the future they're able to attack.
So I think it is build up to a war, but one that is likely years into the future. If things go disastrously maybe it's sooner, but it's likely just build up to eventually being able to go to war.

我觉得这不是在测试防御，而是有意的小动作挑衅，目的是削弱联盟。我仍然怀疑他们真的计划发动攻击，虽然也不能说不可能。但我认为，他们就是不断骚扰邻国，让事情变成“噢，你们真的要因为这个就对俄罗斯宣战吗？” 结果就是忽视第四条变得正常，最后也许能让一些国家不想再留在北约，或者让特朗普干脆放弃北约。这样未来某个时候他们就能攻击。
所以我觉得这是在为战争做铺垫，但很可能是几年后的事。如果情况糟糕，也许更快，但大概率只是长期积累，为未来能开战做准备。

Tiny_Past1805
Too bad NATO won't do anything because it's Estonia and Poland
If it were a bigger, more western, more... influential country than yeah, sure.

可惜北约不会做任何事，因为这是爱沙尼亚和波兰。
要是更大、更西方、更……有影响力的国家，那就会不一样了。

DougosaurusRex
For anyone saying Russia will never invade the Baltics, don’t forget that in December 2021 Russia demanded NATO withdrawal from Poland and the Baltics.
You’re deluding yourself if you think appeasing Russia with inaction will bring about an era of peace to NATO or that we’d be provoking Russia. They fucking want war.

对那些说俄罗斯绝不会入侵波罗的海国家的人，不要忘了在2021年12月，俄罗斯要求北约从波兰和波罗的海国家撤出。
如果你以为对俄罗斯的不作为绥靖会带来北约的和平时代，或者担心我们会挑衅俄罗斯，那就是自欺欺人。他们他妈的就是想要战争。

DougosaurusRex
I agree that NATO United would slap down Russia, but NATO is far from United. The Eastern front might be but plenty of countries in Central and Western Europe (as well as my own) are pretty sketchy in whether they’re committed to defense of the East. Germany says they’re stretched thin from 5,000 troops in Lithuania and Spain is openly unwilling to fall in line.
I’m not sold NATO is as united as people think, I hope I’m wrong. But war is coming one way or another.

我同意，如果北约团结一致，肯定能狠狠压制俄罗斯，但北约远没有那么团结。东线或许是，但中欧和西欧的很多国家（包括我所在的国家）对保卫东部的投入是很可疑的。德国说派驻立陶宛的5000人已经让他们捉襟见肘，西班牙则公开表示不愿配合。
我不觉得北约像大家想的那么团结，我希望我是错的。但不管怎样，战争总会到来。

michael0n
"War" is already happening. They are "fighting" 60+ countries giving materials and supply for over three years. Russia has zero resources left to wage conventional war. Another year or two of non moving front lines, and Russia is finally bankrupt. We can speculate why Vlad wants to force the matter now. Maybe the facts on the ground and with cash is much worse then everybody thinks. There is no conventional "long" war. European military has air superiority, within two days half of their energy grid will be down for a decade. Remove power from a decent country and it descents into chaos when people drop like flies because of the cold.

“战争”已经在进行。他们在和60多个提供物资和供应的国家“交战”，已经超过三年。俄罗斯完全没有资源去打常规战争了。再来一两年没有变化的前线，俄罗斯就彻底破产了。我们可以猜测为什么普京现在要强行挑起事端，也许实际情况和现金流比大家想象的还要糟糕。不会有那种长期的常规战争。欧洲军队掌握制空权，两天之内他们一半的能源电网就会被摧毁十年。剥夺一个中等国家的电力，它就会陷入混乱，人们在寒冷中大批倒下。

KCPR13
West is buying russian oil through the India and other countries. Western corporations are doing business in Russia under rebranded logos. Western banks are scared of taking away billions of frozen assets from Russia. Even Ukraine is buying oil and gas from European countries but said oil and gas comes from Russia - it's just resold. They are never going to bankrupt and it's sad to look at.

西方通过印度和其他国家购买俄罗斯石油。西方企业在俄罗斯换个标志照样做生意。西方银行害怕动用被冻结的数十亿俄罗斯资产。甚至乌克兰都在从欧洲国家买油气，但那些油气本质上来自俄罗斯——只是被转卖了。他们永远不会真的破产，这真是让人难过。

Sea-Standard-1879
Not only should NATO respond to incursions by shooting down anything that enters its airspace. They should coordinate retaliatory strikes against Russian forces in Ukraine in one major show of force to demonstrate the severity of consequences from Russian aggression.

北约不仅应该对空域入侵直接击落任何目标，还应该协调对乌克兰境内俄军的报复性打击，用一次重大武力展示来说明俄国侵略会带来的严重后果。

awood20
When does NATO start shooting these jets down?

北约什么时候才会开始击落这些战机？

Axxemax
As a person who suffers from the strikes of those jets, 12 minutes is enough for them to launch their weapons and for them to hit their targets. NATO was VERY slow in their response and would've suffered damage if Russia wanted so. If NATO was serious about it, it should've had jets ready to fly out in a much lesser time, especially considering there's equipment to track aviation in almost every military. We In Ukraine know when their jets start up like thousand km away from our borders so we know when to seek shelter well in advance, instead of reacting when they're already within the proximity. EU's level of response is pathetic, I'm sorry. If this truth hurts you, you should wake up then.

作为一个亲身遭受这些战机打击的人，我告诉你，12分钟足够它们发射武器并击中目标。北约的反应极其缓慢，如果俄罗斯真想攻击，早就造成破坏了。如果北约是认真的，就应该让战机随时待命，用更短时间升空，尤其是几乎每个军队都有追踪航空器的装备。我们在乌克兰甚至能在他们的战机在距离边境几千公里启动时就知道，所以能提前去避难，而不是等他们飞到近处才反应。欧盟的反应水平太可悲了，对不起。如果这让你难受，那就该清醒过来。

ABoutDeSouffle
You aren't wrong, but NATO will not fire first. They will restrain their forces until Russia opens fire.

你说得没错，但北约绝不会先开火。他们会克制，直到俄罗斯先开火。

West-History-4919
exactly if russia wanted damage, it would be an attack. if russia doesnt want damage then it wants something else. respectfully as a person who lives in the Baltics, i have no dreams about russia ever disappearing from the face of the planet, as cool as it would be. but believe me we do not want to give any pretext for invasion and for what we built in the 30 years of independence be destroyed because of one drone. if it happens ir happens but why would you wish for someone else experience the suffering that you are experiencing yourself?

没错，如果俄罗斯真想制造破坏，那就会是一次攻击。如果俄罗斯不想制造破坏，那他们想要的是别的东西。作为一个生活在波罗的海国家的人，我没有幻想俄罗斯会从地球上消失，尽管那会很爽。但请相信我们，我们绝不想因为一架无人机就给侵略制造借口，把我们三十年来建立的一切毁掉。如果真的发生，那就是发生了，但你为什么要希望别人也去承受你正在经历的痛苦呢？

Onely_One
It is also a form of restraint to not immediately launch fighters to intercept. That way Russia would gain useful intel on how quick NATO reaction time is. This has been standard protocol for years in the many airspace violations by Russia

不立即派战机拦截，其实也是一种克制。那样俄罗斯就能获得有用的情报，比如北约的反应时间。这在俄罗斯多年多次空域侵犯事件中，一直是标准做法。

DisasterNo1740
No they're trying to get some sort of response out of NATO in the form of European nations because they know under Trump America is unlikely to do anything, in fact America under Trump is more likely to blame Europe for escalating, I don't doubt an article 5 invocation would be heavily disputed by America. Putin wants to de legitimize NATO through this behavior. He's testing hard.

不，他们是想从北约，尤其是欧洲国家那里引出某种回应，因为他们知道在特朗普执政下，美国很可能什么都不做。事实上，在特朗普执政下，美国更可能责怪欧洲“升级局势”。我毫不怀疑，如果真的要启动第五条，美国会大力反对。普京就是要通过这种行为让北约失去合法性。他在拼命试探。

AdminEating_Dragon
At this point Article 4 is becoming a joke, like the EU's "strong condemnation" letters.
We need to shoot down the next thing (drone, plane, anything) Russia sends across the border, manned or unmanned. Adopt a "fuck around and find out" policy.
Of course to do that, European governments need to feel confident that the voters have their backs in an escalation against Russia, and will not scream about inflation and the increased cost of groceries and energy when the escalation triggers exactly that.

到这个地步，北约第4条已经成了笑话，就像欧盟那些“强烈谴责”的表态一样。
我们需要击落下一个越境的东西（无人机、飞机，任何东西），不管是载人的还是无人驾驶的。采取“敢搞事就付出代价”的政策。
当然，要做到这点，欧洲各国政府必须有信心，相信选民会在对俄升级时支持他们，而不会因为通货膨胀、食品和能源价格上涨而大喊大叫，因为升级必然会引发这些问题。

RGB755
A lot of comments about Russia wanting to invade the Baltics, wanting to provoke a NATO attack to save face, etc. 
Here’s an interesting one to throw into the mix: What if Russia wants to provoke a NATO response to claim that they’re under attack and expand their use of conscxtion as a “defensive” measure? Lets them throw more bodies at Ukraine or elsewhere while spinning the domestic narrative into a war of defense. 

很多评论都在说俄罗斯想入侵波罗的海国家，想挑衅北约出手以挽回面子等等。
这里还有个有趣的角度：如果俄罗斯其实是想挑起北约的回应，好声称自己“遭到攻击”，从而扩大征兵作为“防御措施”呢？这样他们就能向乌克兰或其他地方投入更多人力，同时把国内的叙事包装成一场保卫战争。

traumalt
They don’t need to provoke anything to implement full conscxtion really. All the media there is state controlled anyways, so they will just spin up the propaganda machine and implement what they want to implement regardless. 

他们其实根本不需要挑衅什么才能推行全面征兵。反正那里的媒体全是国家控制的，他们只要开动宣传机器，就能随心所欲推行他们想推行的政策。