Name: 川普想買格陵蘭的威脅是假的，但卻有害？ Bolton 怎麼說 | NewsNation Prime (Trump’s Greenland threats aren't real, but they're harmful: John Bolton | NewsNation Prime)
Uploaded: 2026-01-22T23:55:04.000Z
Duration: 5 min 25 s

基礎被動語態

For more tonight, we are joined live by Ambassador John Bolton, former National Security Adviser under President Trump, as well as former ambassador to the UN Ambassador, I appreciate your time and your perspective on this.

今晚更多內容，我們現場請到前總統川普的國家安全顧問、前駐聯合國大使 John Bolton 大使，感謝您撥冗分享您的看法。

我們今晚先從格陵蘭開始談起。

程度副詞

President Trump has been very aggressive in his rhetoric here.

川普總統在此的言論非常強硬。

He says he will take it by force if necessary.

他說必要時會用軍事力量奪取。

You actually penned an op ed in the Telegraph about this.

您其實在電訊報上針對這件事寫了一篇評論文章。

You say that this Greenland grab is Trump's worst move yet, also claiming nothing America needs in the country requires sovereignty or military force.

您說這次奪取格陵蘭是川普至今最糟糕的舉動，並聲稱美國在這個國家不需要任何東西需要主權或軍事力量。

Well, the damage that Donald Trump is doing to America's reputation, to the belief, trust and good faith and reliance our European allies and friends around the world have on us is just impossible to state.

嗯，唐納川普正在對美國的名譽，以及歐洲盟友和世界各地的朋友對我們的信念、信任、誠信和依賴造成的損害，簡直無法言喻。

To threaten the invasion of a NATO ally, to seize by force territory from a democracy.

威脅入侵一個北約盟友，並以武力奪取一個民主國家的領土。

You cannot calculate how bad this is for us.

There is nothing that we need at the moment in terms of security in Greenland that's not amply Provided In a 1951 treaty with Denmark called the Defense of Greenland Treaty.

在1951年與丹麥簽訂的《格陵蘭防禦條約》中，我們在格陵蘭的安全需求已經得到了充分的保障。

And, you know, if we could get this out of the spotlight, I think diplomats between the two countries and with other NATO allies could resolve this very quickly.

而且，你知道的，如果我們能讓這件事淡出公眾視線，我認為兩國之間以及與其他北約盟友的外交官們可以非常迅速地解決這個問題。

This is a tragedy, and that just unfolds day by day, causing us more and more harm.

這是一場悲劇，而且每天都在上演，給我們帶來越來越多的損害。

I mean, so let me take the counterpoint then.

我的意思是，那麼我來提出反對意見。

The President has said that if we don't take action, Russia or China will.

總統說，如果我們不採取行動，俄羅斯或中國就會這麼做。

Tell me why you believe that reason alone is not enough to do something.

請告訴我，為什麼你認為僅憑理性就不足以採取行動。

Well, the question is, when are Russia and China going to do something?

那個問題是，俄羅斯和中國什麼時候會採取行動？

They are clearly a threat in the Arctic Circle.

我們幾十年前就知道這件事了。

The US has been just as lax in not taking steps against it as any other NATO ally.

美國在不採取行動對抗這件事上，和其他北約盟友一樣鬆懈。

And there's nothing that we wouldn't do to protect our interest from threats by Russia and China in Greenland, in northern Canada, or in Alaska.

我們為了保護我們的利益，免受俄羅斯和中國在格陵蘭、加拿大北部或阿拉斯加的威脅，什麼都願意做。

The defense of these NATO territories is all critical to us, and that's why you have alliances.

這些北約領土的防禦對我們來說都至關重要，這就是為什麼我們有聯盟。

So this idea that somehow we alone can defend.

所以這種認為我們單獨就能防禦的想法。

It's not a question of defending Greenland.

The President said Chinese and Russian ships are all over it.

總統說中國和俄羅斯的船隻到處都是。

This threat comes because of the melting polar ice cap.

這個威脅來自於極地冰帽融化。

We need surveillance capabilities up there.

We need to protect against Chinese efforts through belt and road initiative style financing to get it, minerals in Greenland.

我們需要提防中國透過一帶一路式的融資來取得格陵蘭的礦產。

It has nothing to do with the need for American military force.

這跟美國軍事力量的需求一點關係都沒有。

If you want to rip up the NATO alliance and if you want to convince every other American ally around the world, Japan South Korea, Australia, that we can't be trusted.

如果你想撕毀北約聯盟，如果你想說服世界上所有其他美國盟友，像是日本、南韓、澳洲，讓他們覺得我們不可信。

Go ahead and use military force against Denmark in Greenland.

那就儘管對丹麥在格陵蘭動用軍事力量。

Go ahead and threaten your best friends and allies with retaliatory tariffs because they just won't give in.

那就儘管威脅你最好的朋友和盟友，用報復性關稅來對付他們，因為他們就是不肯屈服。

This is so counterproductive for the United States that it's going to take years to repair the damage that Donald Trump is doing.

這對美國來說太適得其反了，唐納·川普造成的損害需要好幾年才能修復。

Will do anything for the security of Greenland or the NATO alliance.

為了格陵蘭或北約聯盟的安全，他們什麼都做得出來。

嗯，跟我說說這裡的利害關係是什麼。

Do you think this could lead to the breaking up of NATO?

Well, consider what it means for the United States to invade an ally like Denmark.

嗯，想想美國入侵像丹麥這樣的盟友意味著什麼。

I mean, what is it that that gives Trump the idea that the only way to deal with one of the friendliest countries in the world toward America for 250 years is to threaten military force?

我的意思是，川普為什麼會覺得，跟一個對美國友善了250年的國家打交道的唯一方法就是威脅動用軍事力量？

Now people say, oh, well, that's just the way Trump is.

現在有人說，哦，這就是川普的風格。

And overseas people take what he says seriously and they think that the risk of military force is real.

在海外，人們會認真看待他說的話，他們認為動用軍事力量的風險是真實存在的。

I don't think it is, but other people could be forgiven if they do.

我不這麼認為，但如果別人這麼想，也是可以原諒的。

And then to compound it by threatening a trade war after we've agreed with Europe last year on Trump's April tariffs on Liberation Day.

然後，在我們去年與歐洲就川普在解放日的關稅達成協議後，又透過威脅發動貿易戰來加劇問題。

You know, this says no deal with Trump is ever final.

你知道，這說明與川普達成的任何協議都不是最終的。

Is that really the way you want other countries to look at us?

這真的是我們希望其他國家如何看待我們的嗎？

That our word is never longer is never going to last long?

Ambassador, I hear you and we're almost out of time, but

大使，我聽到了，我們時間差不多了，但是

I have to ask you, this is your former boss.

大使，我必須問您，這是您以前的老闆。

Well, he said the other day, we need Greenland.

嗯，他前幾天說，我們需要格陵蘭。

Psychologically, the United States does not need Greenland.

從心理上來說，美國並不需要格陵蘭。

從心理上來說，唐納·川普需要。

This is not about American national security.

Ambassador John Bolton, appreciate the analysis and the time.

大使約翰·博爾頓，謝謝您的分析和時間。

Subscribe below and download our NewsNation app right now on your phone and you will get fact based, unbiased news for all Americans.

請在下方訂閱，並立即在手機上下載我們的 NewsNation App，您將獲得所有美國人都能信賴、基於事實且不帶偏見的新聞。

字幕列表影片播放

川普想買格陵蘭的威脅是假的，但卻有害？ Bolton 怎麼說 | NewsNation Prime (Trump’s Greenland threats aren't real, but they're harmful: John Bolton | NewsNation Prime)

extraordinary

grab

initiative

aggressive