標題: Only Venezuela can solve its problems –
meddling by outsiders isn’t the solution
(只有委內瑞拉自己能解決問題，外部介入不是解藥)
新聞來源: 原文 https://goo.gl/D9wLX4
(括弧內為我的翻譯)
All crises are global, all solutions are local – and Venezuela is the latest
case in point. No sooner had the young pretender, Juan Guaido, declared
himself interim president last month, ostensibly supplanting the corrupt old
revolutionary, Nicolas Maduro, than the world piled in. The Trump
administration insisted all countries must “pick a side” and back the “
forces of freedom”. Russia denounced a US-backed “coup”. China, Latin
American neighbours, Britain and the EU all scrambled for position, in
accordance with their particular interests and prejudices.
(所有危機都是全球性的，所有解決方案都是在地的 。委內瑞拉就是最新的實例。就在上
個月，這位年輕的篡位者 Juan Guaido宣布自己為臨時總統，在表面上取代了腐敗的老革
命家Nicolas Maduro 後，全世界就介入了。川普政府堅持所有國家必須“選邊站”並支
持“代表自由的力量”。俄羅斯譴責美國支持的“政變”。中國，拉丁美洲的鄰國，英國
和歐盟都根據自己的特殊利益和偏見爭奪立場。)
In the past week, this international tug-of-war over Venezuela’s future has
grown increasingly dangerous – and unhelpful – as protesters and security
forces face off on the streets and the political impasse deepens.
(在過去的一周裡，這場關於委內瑞拉未來的國際拉鋸戰變得越來越危險 ，並且無益 。
抗議者和安全部隊在街頭對峙，政治僵局也在加深。)
John Bolton, the US national security adviser, is threatening “serious
consequences” (meaning military intervention) should Guaido be harmed or
opposition supporters attacked. Maduro warns that the US could face a second
Vietnam.
(美國國家安全顧問John Bolton正在威脅若Guaido受到傷害或反對派支持者遭到襲擊的“
嚴重後果”（意味著軍事干預）。而Maduro警告美國可能將面對第二個越戰。)
Bolton, along with Mike Pence, the US vice-president, and Marco Rubio, a
rightwing Republican senator from Florida, are the prime movers in Washington
’s latest regime-change adventure. An Iraq war hawk and leading
neoconservative, Bolton has an ideological axe to grind. His updated “axis
of evil”, now Iraq and North Korea have supposedly been sorted, comprises
Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela (but he is still gunning for Iran).
(Bolton以及美國副總統Mike Pence和來自佛羅里達州的右翼共和黨參議員Marco Rubio，
是華盛頓政權顛覆行動的主要推動者。作為一名伊拉克戰爭鷹派和新保守主義領導者，
Bolton有一種極強的、自私的自我意識形態。他最新的“邪惡軸心”納入了 古巴，尼加
拉瓜和委內瑞拉。(也許伊拉克和朝鮮已被他重新歸類，但他仍槍指伊朗。) )
Rubio speaks for rightwing Cuban-Americans who abhor the Caracas-Havana
alliance and hold sway in southern Florida, a key 2020 election battleground.
As for Trump, he is on record since 2017 as favouring a “military option”
in Venezuela. For him, this sudden ramping up is a welcome distraction from
his Mexico border wall defeat.
(Rubio代表右翼古巴裔美國人，他們憎惡卡拉卡斯 -哈瓦那聯盟。他們在佛羅里達州南部
佔據主導地位，而這是2020年的重要選舉戰場。至於川普，他自2017年以來一直偏好對委
內瑞拉的“軍事選項”。對他來說，這場突發事件很好地分散了對他墨西哥邊境建牆受挫
的注意力。)
Whatever Bolton says, Trump will not necessarily escalate. He has a record of
backing off when the going gets tough – witness his Syria troop withdrawal
plan. Foreign interventions are not Trump’s thing. And the fierce opposition
of his sinister chum, Vladimir Putin, will give him pause. Moscow is offering
to mediate, which, if it happened, would dent US prestige in its own “
backyard”. For Putin, Venezuela is Washington’s Ukraine. He would dearly
like to turn the tables and mete out a reciprocal humiliation.
(無論Bolton說什麼，川普不必然會將事態升級。當事情變得艱難時，他有退縮的記錄 –
請看他的敘利亞撤軍計劃。外部干預並不是川普的風格。來自他“陰險的好朋友”普京的
強烈反對將讓他停下來。如果由莫斯科提出的斡旋發生的話，它將削弱美國在自己“後院
”的威望。對於普京來說，委內瑞拉是華盛頓的烏克蘭。他非常樂意將情勢反轉為互相羞
辱的局面。)
Maduro says Trump covets Venezuela’s oil – and given last week’s US bid to
siphon off the state oil company’s revenues in the name of democracy, that
sounds plausible – but so, too, does Russia, whose extensive Venezuelan
interests also include arms sales.
(Maduro說，川普貪圖委內瑞拉的石油。上周美國試圖以民主的名義沒收委國國有石油公
司的收入。這指責聽起來似乎有道理 ，但俄羅斯也是如此，在委內瑞拉擁有廣泛利益，
其中也包括軍售。)
China’s sole concern is commercial stability, not regime legitimacy. A
parallel is Zimbabwe in 2017, where Beijing, its investments at stake,
straddled the fence until Robert Mugabe fell off.
(中國唯一關心的是商業穩定，而非政權合法性。如同2017年的辛巴威，北京在面對投資
處於危險時，選擇兩邊押寶直到Robert Mugabe垮台為止。)
Guaido’s big splash has caused widening ripples that relate only obliquely
to Venezuelans’ suffering. Britain normally follows the sensible practice of
recognising states, not particular governments. So the decision by Jeremy
Hunt, the foreign secretary, to recognise Guaido as Venezuela’s legitimate
leader, when he has neither control of the state nor an alternative
government in place, looks rash.
( Guaido濺起了洶湧的漣漪，但這只造成了委內瑞拉人的苦難。英國通常遵循一種實用的
做法，認可國家而不是特定政府。因此，外交大臣 Jeremy Hunt決定將瓜伊多（Guaido）
視為委內瑞拉的合法領導人。當時他既沒有控制國家，也沒有替代政府。這個決定看起來
很輕率。)
Hunt’s decision can be explained by Brexit Britain’s pathetic hope to stay
in Trump’s good books. Likewise the EU, which set up a novel mechanism last
week to circumvent US sanctions on Iran, would rather support regime change
at arm’s length in Venezuela than risk further provoking Trump closer to
home. Europe, with its high-minded views on democracy and human rights, thus
finds itself in bed with some low-life partners, such as Brazil’s Jair
Bolsonaro.
(Hunt的決定可以解釋為正在退歐英國將可憐的希望押注在川普上。同樣，歐盟在上周建
立了一個新的機制，以規避美國對伊朗的製裁，因此寧願支持委內瑞拉政變，而不是進一
步激怒川普對付歐洲。因此，對民主和人權有高尚看法的歐洲，卻與巴西Jair Bolsonaro
等一些水平低下的同伴攪在一起。)
For the European left, including Britain’s Jeremy Corbyn, the “Bolivarian
socialist revolution” led by Maduro’s predecessor, the late Hugo Chavez,
and its close ties to Castro-era Cuba, remains a totemic cause celebre. The
apparent attempt to overturn it by a Yanqui-picked, middle-class political
neophyte has produced a viscerally negative reaction, with little thought for
the revolution’s failings.
(對於歐洲左翼，包括英國的Jeremy Corbyn而言，由Maduro的前任，已故的Hugo Chavez
所領導的“玻利瓦爾社會主義革命”，以及其與Castro時代古巴的密切關係，仍然是一個
圖騰般的著名事件。對左派而言，這種不計後果，藉中產階級政治新手來政變的明顯企圖
，內心是十分反感的。)
Likewise, Guaido’s usurpation of Maduro “the usurper” has been hailed as a
new dawn on the neoliberal, interventionist American right, buoyed last week
by the return of Elliott Abrams, a notorious 1980s cold warrior and
self-described “counter-revolutionary”, as Trump’s Venezuela envoy. This
meddling is further confusing a confused situation.
(同樣，“篡位者”Guaido從Maduro奪權的事件被稱為新自由主義、干涉主義的美國右翼
的新曙光。也由於80年代臭名昭著的冷戰士和自稱為“反革命”的Elliott Abrams在上週
作為川普的委內瑞拉特使回歸，而使右翼受到鼓舞。這種干涉進一步混淆了已被混淆的情
況。)
Yet all last week’s international manoeuvring and geopolitical jockeying
have not changed the four basic alternatives facing Venezuelans, namely:
stick with Maduro and hope things somehow improve; risk an indigenous
military takeover of indefinite duration; negotiate an agreed, democratic
transition leading to free elections, as advocated by Guaido; or face
possible civil war and foreign intervention.
(然而，上週的國際謀略和地緣政治競爭，並沒有改變委內瑞拉人民面臨的四種基本選擇
，即：(1) 繼續支持Maduro，希望事情有所改善; (2)冒險讓本國軍隊無限期接管政府;
(3)談判達成一致的民主過渡，實施由Guaido所倡導的自由選舉; (4)面臨可能的內戰和外
國干預。)
The choice seems obvious, but that does not mean it will happen. One thing is
certain. Any lasting solution, if and when it comes, will be local – as
history shows. In 1913, Woodrow Wilson grandly declared: “I am going to
teach the South American republics to elect good men.” Needless to say, he
didn’t, nor was it his business to try. Yet more than a century later, the
lesson must be re-learned: imposing solutions from outside does not work.
(選項似乎很明顯，但這並不意味著它就是結局。有一點是肯定的。任何持久的
解決方案，無論何時何地，都將是在地的 。 正如歷史所示。 1913年，美國總統
Woodrow Wilson高調地宣稱：“我將教導南美的共和國們選出好人。”結果不用說，他沒
有做到，也不干他的事。一個多世紀以後，我們必須重新吸取教訓：從外部強加解決方案
是行不通的。)
※每日每人發文、上限量為十篇，超過會劣文請注意
⊕標題選用"新聞"，請確切在標題與新聞來源處填入，否則可無條件移除(本行可移除)