Name: 英國安全專家 Edward Lucas：『我們不能依賴美國』| DW 新聞 (British security expert Edward Lucas: 'We can't rely on the United States' | DW News)
Uploaded: 2026-01-24T17:15:35.000Z
Duration: 19 min 38 s

Our guest is Edward Lucas, British security expert.

我們的來賓是英國安全專家 Edward Lucas。

The Economist magazine has a picture of Donald Trump on its cover riding a polar bear, bare chested, Vladimir Putin style.

《經濟學人》雜誌的封面有一張唐納·川普光著上半身，模仿普丁的樣子，騎在北極熊身上的圖片。

The Economist urges Europeans to get ready for a day when NATO, I quote, is no more.

《經濟學人》敦促歐洲人，要為「北大西洋公約組織（NATO）不再存在」的那一天做好準備。

So is NATO already dead or just damaged after Trump's speech in Davos?

所以，川普在達沃斯演講後，NATO 是已經死了，還是隻是受傷了？

I think it's a bit like a marriage where you have one of the partners in the marriage using threats of violence and mocking the other partner for being trusting and idealistic.

我覺得這有點像一段婚姻，其中一方總是威脅對方動用暴力，還嘲笑對方太過信任和理想化。

And the marriage may survive in the sense of a sort of transactional arrangement where you share bills and combine to deal with some obligations.

這段婚姻或許還能以一種交易式的關係維繫下去，你們分攤帳單，共同處理一些義務。

But the emotional heart of it has gone, and I think that's what Trump's done to NATO.

但是，婚姻的情感核心已經消失了，我認為這就是川普對北約造成的影響。

So we are now really in a new era where we regard the United States as sometimes a partner that we can work with, but

所以，我們現在真的進入了一個新時代，我們視美國有時是我們可以合作的夥伴，但

And we are faced in Europe with the very grave difficulty of trying to create a new security alliance at very high speed.

而我們歐洲面臨著一個非常嚴峻的挑戰，必須在極短的時間內建立一個新的安全聯盟。

What could that security alliance look like?

這個安全聯盟會是什麼樣子呢？

Well, I think that the first thing is to look at the political cohesion.

嗯，我認為首先要看的是政治上的凝聚力。

歐洲非常富裕，而且幅員廣大。

We know that Russia has an economy the size of Italy, so this is not the sort of problem we would face if we were dealing with China.

我們知道俄羅斯的經濟規模跟義大利差不多，所以如果我們面對的是中國，問題就不會這麼嚴重。

But there are many gaps, particularly on the military side.

但有很多地方有落差，尤其是在軍事方面。

The United States provides the high tech capabilities, it provides, supplies a lot of the intelligence, it supplies the nuclear umbrella, it supplies the logistics, the so called enablers.

美國提供高科技能力，提供、供應很多情報，提供核子保護傘，提供後勤支援，也就是所謂的「賦能者」。

And it is also very important when it comes to reinforcement and to stockpiles.

而且在增援和物資儲備方面也很重要。

And so Europe will have to work extremely hard and spend a lot of money to fill the gap left by the United States.

所以歐洲必須非常努力，花很多錢來填補美國留下的缺口。

The best we can hope for, I think, is an orderly United States withdrawal from Europe over a period of a few years where the Europeans can fill the gap.

我認為我們最好的希望是美國在幾年內有序地從歐洲撤軍，讓歐洲國家能夠填補這個缺口。

The danger is that it's a disorderly withdra withdrawal, and then we're left with very severe vulnerabilities.

危險在於撤軍過程混亂無序，那我們就會面臨非常嚴重的脆弱性。

So you think that the United States will pull out of Europe?

所以你認為美國會從歐洲撤軍嗎？

Especially it is important for Germany, where about 50,000 U.S. troops are stationed.

對德國來說尤其重要，因為大約有五萬名美軍駐紮在那裡。

The United States may want to rely on Europe, and that will be a matter for bargaining.

美國可能會想依賴歐洲，這將是討價還價的籌碼。

So I imagine that Ramstein, for example, will remain because it's very important for the United States.

所以我猜像拉姆施泰因（Ramstein）基地應該會保留，因為它對美國非常重要。

But if you ask yourself, if the Kremlin attacked a NATO member, would Donald Trump funnel American combat power into Europe in order to resist that attack.

但如果你問自己，如果克里姆林宮攻擊北約成員國，唐納·川普（Donald Trump）會不會將美軍投入歐洲來抵抗這次攻擊。

Would he willing to risk nuclear war to defend Europe?

他是否願意冒著核戰的風險來保衛歐洲？

And if you cannot depend on the United States, then you have to substitute for the United States.

如果你不能依賴美國，那麼你就必須取而代之。

So will Trump support Europe if Russia attacks?

所以如果俄羅斯攻擊，川普會支持歐洲嗎？

I think this is going to be the big test of European diplomacy.

我認為這將是歐洲外交的一大考驗。

So in the answer to your question, I think we can't be sure.

所以針對你的問題，我覺得我們無法確定。

And if you can't be sure, then you have to make plans accordingly.

而如果你無法確定，那就必須做好相對應的計畫。

The big test of European diplomacy is whether we can manage the American withdrawal.

歐洲外交的一大考驗，就是我們能不能處理好美國的撤離。

We need to show that we're useful to the Americans on things that they care about.

我們需要展現，在美國關心的事務上，我們對他們是有幫助的。

We need to work out what gaps need to be plugged most urgently and how to substitute for this American security blanket which we have been keeping ourselves warm under for the last nearly 80 years.

我們需要弄清楚哪些地方最急需補足，以及如何取代這張近八十年來讓我們感到溫暖的美國安全毯。

Do you think the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, might be tempted now to test NATO after the Greenland crisis?

你認為俄羅斯總統普丁，在經歷格陵蘭危機後，會不會想試探北約？

I think Putin is already testing NATO and we see systematic sub threshold provocations inside NATO countries.

我認為普丁其實已經在試探北約了，我們也看到北約國家內部有系統性的低於門檻的挑釁。

And also the war in Ukraine, which is really a big test of NATO's credibility and we are flunking those tests.

還有烏克蘭的戰爭，這真的是對北約可信度的一大考驗，而我們正在這些考驗中不及格。

We've shown that we are scared of Putin's nuclear blackmail.

我們已經展現出我們害怕普丁的核武威脅。

So we didn't really put pressure on Russia.

所以我們並沒有真正對俄羅斯施加壓力。

We didn't really give Ukraine the weapons it needed to win when it had a chance of winning at the start of the war.

我們在戰爭初期，烏克蘭有機會獲勝時，並沒有真正給予他們所需的武器。

We don't have defense to deal with these attacks on the seabed and in our airspace and elsewhere.

我們沒有足夠的防禦來應對這些在海底、領空及其他地方的攻擊。

We don't have something that we can do that makes the Russians really scared.

我們沒有任何能讓俄羅斯真正感到害怕的手段。

We do have these things, but Russians know we won't use them.

我們確實擁有這些東西，但俄羅斯知道我們不會使用它們。

所以我們正在這次考驗中不及格。

And the result is the provocations from Russia are increasing in scope and in intensity and in frequency.

結果就是來自俄羅斯的挑釁，在範圍、強度和頻率上都在增加。

But do you think that the probability of a Russian test on the eastern flank of NATO has grown and something could happen this year 2026?

但你認為俄羅斯在北約東翼進行試探的可能性是否增加了，而且今年 2026 年可能會發生什麼事？

I would question your use of the word eastern flank.

我會質疑你對「東翼」這個詞的使用。

That would imply that we are being attacked from the north.

那樣聽起來像是我們正從北方遭到攻擊。

I mean, I would say that the countries bordering Russia are the ones that are really vigilant, have excellent readiness, strong social cohesion, and

我是說，我會說那些與俄羅斯接壤的國家，才是真正警惕、準備充分、社會凝聚力強的國家，而且

I think it's highly unlikely that Russia would try something in Finland, the Baltic states or Poland.

我認為俄羅斯不太可能在芬蘭、波羅的海國家或波蘭試探。

I'm much more worried about countries, further worried about Germany.

I think this is where Russia is more likely to continue to escalate its provocations.

我認為這才是俄羅斯更可能繼續升級挑釁的地方。

But as I stress Russia is already testing us and we are already failing.

但正如我強調的，俄羅斯已經在考驗我們了，而我們已經不及格了。

Coming back to Davos, what do you think made Donald Trump change his mind on tariffs against eight European countries, including the UK And Germany, who have sent soldiers to Greenland as a gesture of solidarity?

回到達沃斯，你認為是什麼讓唐納·川普改變了他對八個歐洲國家（包括英國和德國）的關稅立場，這些國家已派遣阿兵哥到格陵蘭以示團結？

I think if you read the Art of the Deal, you'll see that Trump says you always start a negotiation with a lot of threats and bombast.

我認為如果你讀過《交易的藝術》，你會看到川普說，你總是從很多威脅和誇誇其談開始談判。

You try and frame the negotiation in a way that the result you want seems like a very moderate concession from the other side compared with all the things that might have happened.

你會試著這樣佈局談判，讓對方覺得你想要的結果，跟可能發生的其他事情比起來，只是個很小的讓步。

And I think this is classic art of the deal that he came in with threats of military action, he came with threats of tariffs.

我覺得這就是經典的《交易的藝術》，他一開始就威脅要採取軍事行動，威脅要課徵關稅。

He said he wanted the whole of Greenland and it had to be basically American.

他說他想要整個格陵蘭，而且基本上必須是美國的。

And it's looked like he's settling for some sovereign bases on Greenland.

而現在看起來，他似乎滿足於在格陵蘭獲得一些主權基地。

And that's fine if you're on a real estate negotiation, but the result is very bruising.

如果是在談房地產交易，這樣做也沒關係，但結果卻非常傷人。

Your countries are left feeling that they can't trust the United States.

你的國家會覺得再也無法信任美國了。

It's, as I said at the beginning, like the threats of domestic violence in a marriage.

這就像我一開始說的，像是婚姻裡威脅家暴一樣。

But I would say it's at a very high cost in terms of American credibility and American likability.

但我認為，這對美國的信譽和受歡迎程度付出了非常高昂的代價。

And in terms of the America is something that we can believe in.

還有，美國這件事，是我們可以信任的。

I don't know what it means now to be pro American.

我不知道現在「親美」到底是什麼意思。

All my life I've known that America was the sort of citadel of Western values, and

我這輩子一直都知道，美國是西方價值觀的堡壘，而且

I was a true believer in the Atlantic alliance, and

我曾經是北大西洋公約組織的忠實信徒，而且

I can't be a true believer now because I don't know what it means to believe in America.

我現在無法再當忠實信徒了，因為我不知道「相信美國」是什麼意思。

Does it mean belie believing in Donald Trump's schemes to get rich quick?

是不是代表相信唐納·川普那些快速致富的陰謀詭計？

Does it mean believing in the Monroe Doctrine that the old America, the American of the Truman Doctrine, who was the bastion of European freedom against communist tyranny that's gone by threatening several, but

是不是代表相信舊美國，相信杜魯門主義時期的美國，那個對抗共產主義暴政、歐洲自由的堡壘，現在已經消失了，威脅了幾個，但

not all, European countries with tariffs, President Trump seems to have tried to divide and weaken Europe.

並非所有歐洲國家，川普總統似乎試圖分化和削弱歐洲。

川普一直在玩分而治之的策略。

I mean, it's notable that he absolutely won't talk to the European Union.

我的意思是，值得注意的是，他絕對不會跟歐盟談。

Kai Callas Von der Leyen the other European leaders don't get any hearing in Washington.

凱．卡拉斯．馮德萊恩，還有其他歐洲領袖，在華盛頓根本沒人聽。

And it actually says in the national Security strategy they don't like the European Union.

而且國安戰略裡其實就寫了，他們不喜歡歐盟。

So the European Union is the expression of European unity.

所以歐盟就是歐洲團結的體現。

Trump's against that, but absolutely he wants to deal with individual countries.

川普反對這點，但他絕對想跟個別國家打交道。

He doesn't really understand that There's a customs union, single market.

他不太懂，歐洲有的是關稅同盟、單一市場。

He thinks he can do one deal with Italy and another one with Germany and, and so on.

他以為他可以跟義大利談一筆，再跟德國談一筆，以此類推。

And there's an odd kind of symmetry that both Putin is playing divide and rule in Europe and Xi Jinping is playing divide and rule in Europe and Trump is playing divide and rule in Europe.

而且有個奇怪的巧合，普丁在歐洲玩分而治之，習近平在歐洲玩分而治之，川普也在歐洲玩分而治之。

And the result is that Europe is much weaker than it should be.

結果就是，歐洲比應有的狀態弱太多了。

字幕列表影片播放

英國安全專家 Edward Lucas：『我們不能依賴美國』| DW 新聞 (British security expert Edward Lucas: 'We can't rely on the United States' | DW News)

sort

basically

improve

crisis