It is time to take stock of where we stand

九一一事件幾乎是 二十年前的事了。

and stop and think.

此刻我們應該要評估一下 我們現在所處的狀況，

It is time to ask ourselves,

停下來做些思考。

have the assumptions and policies

此刻我們應該問問自己，

we developed in the wake of those tragic events

在那些悲劇事件之後，

truly made us more secure?

我們所發展出來的假設和政策

Have they made our societies, both in Europe and in the United States,

真的有讓我們更安全嗎？

more resilient?

它們有讓我們的社會， 包括在歐洲和美國的社會，

I've worked all my life in the field of security and defense,

更有恢復力嗎？

and I am convinced that now, more than ever,

我一生都在安全與防衛的領域工作，

we need to radically reframe the way we think and act about security,

我深信，我們現今比以往更需要

and especially about international security.

徹底地重新構造我們針對安全 所用的思考和行動方式，

By international security, I actually mean what we do,

特別是針對國際安全。

how we prepare our countries

我所謂的國際安全 指的是我們的作為，

to better respond and prevent external threats,

我們如何讓我們的國家

and how we protect our citizens.

有更好的準備來應變 和預防外在威脅，

The key to both

以及我們如何保護我們的公民。

is to focus on protecting civilians,

這兩者的關鍵

both in our own countries

都在於把焦點放在保護平民百姓，

and in those where we are present in the name of security.

包括在我們自己國內的，

Now, this idea goes against the fixed narrative

及我們以安全之名 前往的國家中的平民百姓。

that we developed over the past 20 years

這個想法其實並不符合

over what security is and how to get it,

我們在過去二十年 所發展出來的不變說法，

but that narrative is flawed, and worse, it is counterproductive.

關於安全應該是什麼 及如何得到安全的說法，

Over the past 20 years,

但那說法有瑕疵，更糟糕的是， 它還會產生不良的後果。

both in the United States and in Europe,

在過去二十年間，

we've come to accept that we must talk about security in zero sum terms,

在美國和在歐洲，

as if the only way to gain more security is by compromising on values and rights:

我們漸漸接受了必須要用 零和的方式來談論安全性，

security versus human rights,

彷彿能夠更安全的唯一方式

safety versus freedom and development.

就是在價值觀和權利上做妥協：

This is a false opposition.

安全性 vs. 人權，

It just doesn't work like that.

安全 vs. 自由和發展。

We need to recognize

這是種錯誤的對立。

that security and human rights are not opposite values,

實際上不是這樣運作的。

they are intrinsically related.

我們得要了解到

After all, the most basic human right

安全性和人權 並不是對立的價值觀，

is the right to live and to be free from violence,

它們在內在其實是相關的。

and a state's most basic responsibility

畢竟，最基本的人權

is to guarantee that right for its citizens.

就是生存和免於暴力的權利，

Conversely, if we think about communities all over the world

而一個國家最基本的責任

affected by war and conflict,

就是要保障其公民的權利。

it is insecurity and violence

反過來說，如果我們 想想全世界受到

that stops them from achieving their full freedom and development.

戰爭和衝突影響的社區，

Now, they need basic security just as much as we do

正是不安全感和暴力

and they need it so they can live a normal life

讓他們無法達到 完全的自由和發展。

and so that they can enjoy their human rights.

他們和我們一樣需要基本的安全，

This is why we need to shift.

他們需要基本的安全， 才能夠過正常的生活，

We need to acknowledge that sustainable security

才能享受他們的人權。

builds on a foundation of human rights,

這就是為什麼我們需要轉變。

builds on promoting and respecting human rights.

我們必須要承認，永續的安全性

Also, over the past two decades,

應該要立基在人權的基礎之上，

we have accepted that the best way to guarantee our own security

立基在推動和尊重人權之上。

is by defeating our enemies,

此外，在過去二十年間，

and to do that, we need to rely almost exclusively on the military.

我們也已經接受了 保障我們安全最好的方式

Again, this clashes with my work, with my research,

就是打敗我們的敵人，

with what I see in the field.

若要打敗敵人，我們 幾乎就完全要仰賴軍隊。

What I see is that building sustainable security

同樣的，這也抵觸我的工作、研究

has a lot less to do with crushing enemies,

和我在這領域的所見所聞。

has a lot less to do with winning on the battlefield,

我看到的是：建立永續的安全性

and has a lot more to do with protecting victims

和摧毀敵人並沒有很大的關係，

and building stability.

和在戰場上獲勝沒有很大的關係，

And to do that, well, the military alone

比較有關係的是保護受害者

is simply insufficient.

以及建立穩定性。

This is why I believe we need to shelve the never-ending War on Terror,

如果要做到這些，光用軍隊

and we need to replace it with a security agenda

是不足夠的。

that is driven by the principle of protecting civilians,

這就是為什麼我相信 我們需要把反恐戰爭擺到一邊去，

no matter where they are from, what passport they hold,

我們需要將它換成一種安全議程，

or where they live:

由保護平民百姓的原則 所驅使的議程，

Vancouver, New York,

且不去區分平民百姓是來自何方、 持有哪一國的護照，

Kabul, Mosul, Aleppo or Douma.

或現居地是哪裡：

Sustainable security tells us that we're more likely

溫哥華、紐約、

to have long-term security at home for ourselves

喀布爾、摩蘇爾、 阿勒坡，或杜馬。

if we focus our engagements abroad on protecting civilians

永續安全性告訴我們，

and on ensuring their lives are lived in dignity and free from violence.

如果我們想要自己在家鄉 能夠擁有長期的安全，

For example, we all know that defeating ISIS

我們就必須要把我們對國外的 干涉，著重在保護平民百姓，

is a security achievement.

著重在確保他們能有尊嚴地過生活，

Absolutely.

免受暴力威脅。

But rebuilding destroyed homes,

比如，我們都知道打敗伊斯蘭國

restoring order,

是安全上的一項成就。

ensuring a representative political system,

當然。

these are just as, if not more important,

但重建被摧毀的家園、

and not just for the security of civilians in Iraq and in Syria,

重新恢復秩序、

but for our own security and for global stability.

確保能有代議的政治體制，

More fundamentally,

這些都同等重要，甚至更重要，

ISIS's danger should not just be counted in the number of weapons it holds

且不只是為了伊拉克 和敘利亞平民百姓的安全，

but also in the number of children it has kept out of school

也是為了我們自己的安全 以及全球的穩定性。

or indoctrinated.

更重要的，

This is from a security perspective.

伊斯蘭國的危險性

From a security perspective,

不應該只用它所持有的 武器數目來計算，

the long-term generational impact of having millions of children in Syria

還要考量它讓多少孩子無法上學，

growing up knowing only war and out of school,

或被灌輸信仰。

this is a far more dangerous threat to stability

這是從安全性的角度來看。

than all of ISIS's weapons combined,

從安全性的角度，

and we should spend just as much time and just as much energy to counter this

如果讓數百萬的敘利亞孩子

as what we spend when countering ISIS militarily.

在成長過程中 只知道戰爭和不上學，

Over the past two decades, our security policy has been short-term.

就長期的世代衝擊來看，

It has focused on the here and now.

對穩定性所產生的威脅，

It has systematically downplayed the link between what we do today

會比所有伊斯蘭國的武器 加起來都還要危險，

in the name of security

我們花在這上面的時間和精力，

and the long-term impact of those choices.

應該要跟反擊

In the years after 9/11,

伊斯蘭軍隊所花的 時間和精力一樣。

some of the choices,

在過去二十年間， 我們的安全政策都是短期的。

some of the policies we've implemented

安全政策的焦點都放在此時此刻。

have probably made us less, not more secure in the long term.

它很有計畫性地將我們現今 以安全之名所做的行為

Sustainable, civilian-centered security

與那些選擇的長期影響

needs to look at what happens in the long term.

之間的連結給輕描淡寫過去。

Again, for example,

在九一一事件後的這些年，

relying on drones to target enemies in faraway countries may be a tool.

我們所做的一些選擇，

It may be a tool to make sure or to lessen the threat

我們導入的一些政策，

of an imminent attack on the United States.

在長期來看可能並沒有讓我們 更安全，反而是更不安全。

But what about the long-term impact?

若要做到以平民百姓 為中心的永續安全性，

If civilians are killed,

就得要去看長期會發生的狀況。

if communities are targeted,

再舉個例子，

this will feed a vicious circle

靠無人機來鎖定遠方國家的 敵人可能是一種工具。

of war, conflict, trauma and radicalization,

這種工具可能可以確保或減少

and that vicious circle is at the center of so many of the security challenges

即將對美國進行之攻擊的威脅性。

we face today.

但長期的影響呢？

This will not make us safer in the long term.

如果平民百姓被殺害，

We need civilian security,

如果社區成為目標，

we need sustainable civilian-centered security,

這會促成惡性循環，

and we need it now.

戰爭、衝突、傷害， 以及極端化的惡性循環，

We need to encourage thinking and research around this concept,

而現今我們所面臨的安全性難題當中，

and to implement it.

中心議題常常就是那惡性循環。

We live in a dangerous world.

長期來看，這樣做 不會讓我們更安全。

We have many threats to peace and conflict.

我們需要平民百姓的安全性，

Much like in the days after 9/11,

我們需要以平民百姓 為中心的永續安全性，

we simply cannot afford not to think about international security.

且我們現在就需要。

But we have to learn the lessons of the past 20 years.

我們需要鼓勵關於 這個概念的思想和研究，

To get it right, to get security right,

並付諸實行。

we need to focus on the long term.

我們住在一個危險的世界上。

We need to focus on protecting civilians.

我們的和平會受到很多威脅， 會有許多突衝。

And we need to respect and acknowledge the fact

就很像在九一一事件之後的日子，

that sustainable security builds on a foundation of human rights.

我們實在無法承擔 不去思考國際安全的後果。

Otherwise, in the name of security,

但我們得要從過去 二十年學到教訓。

we risk leaving the world

要把它做對，要把安全性做對，

a far more dangerous and unstable place

我們就得要把焦點放在長期。

than what we already found it in.

我們得要把焦點放在 保護平民百姓。

Thank you.

我們得要尊重及承認一項事實：

(Applause)

永續的安全性是立基在人權上的。