季辛吉的解方：只看現在，缺乏脈絡　Kissinger's prescription: now without then

【雙魚之論】
Despite being considered a godfather of international relations in the superpower era, Henry Kissinger has a fondness for the international relations of 19th century Europe, or the Concert of Europe, where no single dominant player existed, and everything was possible through negotiation and compromise. He became the first "panda," a China advocate, after his historic ice-breaking journey in 1972.
He, in the interview by the Economist, provides advice on the ongoing and protracted war in Ukraine. He suggests that Ukraine join NATO in exchange for the legalization of Russia's annexation of Donbas and Crimea. Kissinger's reference to the situation as "status quo" may be a misinterpretation or an attempt to save face for Putin to make the deal easier. The actual situation can be described as a "fait accompli" or "what has been done now," rather than a legal status quo.
For Ukraine, joining NATO is mandated by the Constitution, while losing territories is not. How does Kissinger propose reconciling these two aspects?
Regarding China, Kissinger comments that China and the US pose threats to world peace. While this may be true, it was Kissinger himself, plus President Clinton, who played a significant role in opening up China. The US has an obligation to check China's expansion, as Kissinger states, but he does mention what responsibility China should bear? Kissinger is offering his “unique remedy” for this situation.
儘管亨利·季辛吉被視為超級大國時代國際關係的教父，他卻偏好19世紀歐洲的國際關係，或稱為「歐洲協調」，當時不存在單一主導者，一切都是透過談判和妥協而達成的。他在1972年的歷史性破冰之旅後成為第一位「熊貓」。
他在接受經濟學人專訪中，就烏克蘭持續而拖延的戰爭提供了建議。他建議烏克蘭加入北約，以換取俄羅斯對頓巴斯和克里米亞吞併的合法化。季辛吉將此情況稱為「現狀」可能是一種誤解，或為了讓普京更容易接受這項交易而保全面子。實際情況可被描述為「既成事實」（fait accompli）或「已經完成的事情」，而不是法律上的「現狀」（status quo）。
對於烏克蘭來說，加入北約是憲法所規定的，而失去領土則不是。季辛吉如何提議調和這兩個面向？
關於中國，季辛吉評論說中國和美國對世界和平構成威脅。儘管如此，正是季辛吉（加上柯林頓）自己開放中國，成為現在這樣。季辛吉也提到美國有責任遏制中國的擴張，但他並未提及中國應承擔何種責任。季辛吉對於這一情況提出了他「獨特的解方」。

European leaders are wrong not to adopt a firm position on Ukraine's NATO membership. He told the weekly "The Economist" Henry Kissinger, former US secretary of state and national security adviser. "What the Europeans are saying now is, in my opinion, insanely dangerous", as they claim they do not want Kiev in the Atlantic Alliance, as such a scenario would be "too risky". “And then we will arm them to death and give them the most advanced weapons. And how could that work? We shouldn't end (war) the wrong way. Assuming that the most likely outcome should lead us to the status quo” existing before February 24, 2022, the goal “should be that Ukraine remains protected by Europe and does not become a solitary state that looks out only for itself”. 歐洲領導人不對烏克蘭加入北約採取堅定立場是錯誤的。他告訴《經濟學人》周刊美國前國務卿兼國家安全顧問亨利·季辛吉。「在我看來，歐洲人現在所說的「非常危險」，因為他們聲稱他們不希望基輔加入大西洋聯盟，因為這種情況“風險太大」。「然後我們將武裝他們到極致，提供他們最先進的武器。這樣會起作用嗎？我們不應該以錯誤的方式結束（戰爭）。假設的最可能結果應該將我們帶回到2022年2月24日之前的現狀，目標應該是烏克蘭仍然受到歐洲的保護，而不成為一個只顧自身的孤立國家。」

Kissinger praised Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky as an "extraordinary leader", explaining the importance of Ukraine joining NATO. “If I spoke to (Russian President Vladimir) Putin, I would tell him that he too is safer with Ukraine in NATO,” Kissinger said. “We have now armed Ukraine to the point where it will be the best armed and strategically least experienced leadership country in Europe. If the war ends as it likely will, with Russia losing many of its battle successes, but retaining control of Sevastopol (in Crimea), we may have a dissatisfied Russia, but also a dissatisfied Ukraine: in other words, a balance of dissatisfaction”. Therefore, Kissinger affirms "for the security of Europe, it is better to have Ukraine in NATO, where it cannot make national decisions on territorial claims". 季辛吉稱讚烏克蘭總統澤倫斯基是一位「非凡的領導人」，並解釋了烏克蘭加入北約的重要性。季辛吉說：「如果我與（俄羅斯總統弗拉基米爾）普丁交談，我會告訴他，他在北約與烏克蘭在一起也更安全。」「我們現在已經將烏克蘭武裝到了歐洲武裝最精良、戰略經驗最少的領導國家的地步。如果戰爭如願以償結束，俄羅斯失去許多戰鬥勝利，但保留對塞瓦斯托波爾（克里米亞）的控制，我們可能有一個不滿意的俄羅斯，也可能有一個不滿意的烏克蘭：換句話說，是不滿的平衡。」因此，季辛吉肯定「為了歐洲的安全，最好讓烏克蘭加入北約，烏克蘭不能就領土主張做出國家決定」。

Henry Kissinger, the former US Secretary of State and National Security Advisor, in an interview ( https://www.economist.com/briefing/2023/05/17/henry-kissinger-explains-how-to-avoid-world-war-three ) with The Economist, called the US and China the main threat to the existence of the world and humanity because they are pursuing a policy of conflict against each other. 美國前國務卿兼國家安全顧問亨利·季辛吉接受與經濟學人採訪時稱，美國和中國是世界和人類生存的主要威脅，因為它們奉行相互衝突的政策。

Kissinger expressed hope that if the leaders of the US and China meet, rather than listing all their grievances, the American president would say to his Chinese counterpart, “Mr. President, the two greatest dangers to peace right now are us two. In the sense that we have the capacity to destroy humanity.” China and America, without formally announcing anything, would aim to practice restraint. 季辛吉表示希望，如果美中領導人會面，美國總統不會羅列他們所有的不滿，而是對中國領導人說：「總統先生，目前對和平兩個最大威脅是我們兩國。從某種意義上說，我們有能力毀滅人類。」中國和美國在沒有正式宣布任何事情的情況下，將力求保持克制。

In his opinion, the current situation of relations between Washington and Beijing is extremely dangerous and reminds of the situation before the First World War, “where neither side has much margin of political concession and in which any disturbance of the equilibrium can lead to catastrophic consequences.” 在他看來，華盛頓與北京目前的關係形勢極其危險，讓人想起第一次世界大戰前的情況，「雙方都沒有太多的政治讓步餘地，任何對平衡的破壞都可能導致災難性後果。」

According to him, as a result of a possible military conflict over Taiwan, both the island and the world economy will be eliminated, which will be deprived of sources of supply of microprocessors. 季辛吉認為，台灣可能發生軍事衝突的後果是，台灣和世界經濟都將被毀滅，因會切斷微處理器的供應來源。

“Both sides have convinced themselves that the other represents a strategic danger,” Kissinger says. “We are on the path to great-power confrontation.” 「雙方都相信對方代表著戰略危險，」季辛吉說。「我們正走在大國對抗的道路上。」

He advised both sides to try to defuse tensions over Taiwan through more cautious rhetoric and the creation of advisory groups. 他建議雙方透過更謹慎的言辭和成立諮詢小組來緩和台灣問題上的緊張局勢。

Kissinger emphasized that the US is obligated to check whether the current Chinese authorities are more radical than the previous ones, and continue to keep the balance in the world. 季辛吉強調，美國有義務制衡：當前的中國當局是否比以往更激進？從而繼續保持世界平衡。

The White House should start a dialogue with Beijing, but this approach may fail, the US diplomat warned. Therefore, according to him, the US, at least, should be strong enough militarily to overcome the consequences of failure, Kissinger noted. 這位美國外交官警告說，白宮應該與北京展開對話，但這種做法可能會失敗。因此，季辛吉指出，據他說，美國至少應該在軍事上足夠強大以克服失敗的後果。