Выступление Евгения Примакова перед Генеральной Ассамблеей ООН (1997)
Выступление Евгения Примакова перед Генеральной Ассамблеей ООН (1997)
Уважаемый господин Председатель!
Разрешите искренне поздравить Вас, представителя дружественной Украины, с избранием на этот ответственный и почетный пост. Уверены, что под Вашим председательством Генеральная Ассамблея сумеет достичь значительных результатов.
До вступления человечества в XXI век остается чуть более 800 дней. С исторической точки зрения это — поистине спринтерский отрезок, и поэтому вполне естественной выглядит потребность посмотреть, что нас ждет впереди.
Год назад, выступая с этой трибуны, я говорил о начавшемся процессе перехода к многополярному мироустройству. События истекшего года подтверждают это. Растет многообразие политического, экономического, культурного развития стран. Идет поиск на национальном и региональном уровне их новой самобытности. Складываются новые центры экономического и политического влияния в мире, и одновременно усиливается взаимопереплетение интересов различных государств и народов.
Горизонты, открывающиеся перед мировым сообществом, выдвигают новые требования. Это:
— утверждение идеалов взаимозависимости и партнерства в
межгосударственных отношениях;
- предотвращение возникновения новых разделительных
линий, блоковых образований закрытого характера; - неукоснительное соблюдение всеми принципов и норм
международного права.
И я бы отдельно назвал проблему не только создания условий для экономического и социального прогресса всех стран, но и поддержания экологического равновесия.
Нужно сразу же сказать, что переход от конфронтационного двухполюсного мира к многополярной системе сам по себе не решает этих проблем. Более того, реалисты отдают себе отчет в том, что хотя мы все дальше уходим от устойчивых стереотипов эпохи идеологической конфронтации, количество рисков и угроз в мире не становится меньше.
Многонациональных государств в мире достаточно много. Мы
решительно поддерживаем инициативы, направленные на предотвращение их насильственной дезинтеграции Формулой
решения подобных конфликтов в современном мире и, конечно же, в XXI веке может и должно стать сочетание необходимости сохранения территориальной целостности таких государств с наделением максимальными правами национальных меньшинств. Отступление от любого из этих принципов «двуединой формулы» чревато не просто продолжением, но и опасным развитием таких конфликтных ситуаций.
Хочу также обратить особое внимание на такую опасную черту
региональных конфликтов, как их способность порождать террористическую волну и выплескивать ее подчас далеко за пределы самой конфликтной зоны. Например, многие боевики, обрушившие кровавый террор на целый ряд стран, возросли на почве продолжительного и все еще полыхающего вооруженного конфликта в Афганистане.
Мы решительно выступаем за борьбу против терроризма, в какую бы личину — будь-то в Ирландии или в Израиле — он ни облекался. Сегодня успеха в этой борьбе не добиться без объединения сил всех государств для противодействия этому величайшему злу. Мы за то, чтобы нигде и ни в какой форме не было государственной поддержки терроризму. Вместе с тем нельзя навечно зачислять некоторые государства — члены ООН в изгоев международного сообщества вне зависимости от перемен в их политике или просто как заподозренных в связях с террористами.
В современном мире не может быть монополии какого бы то ни было государства на разрешение любого конфликта. Это в полной мере относится и к самому застарелому конфликту на Ближнем Востоке, где создалась тупиковая ситуация в урегулировании. Как говорится, «одной рукой в ладоши не хлопнешь». Для того, чтобы развязать тугой ближневосточный узел, нужны широкие международные усилия.
Через объединение усилий пролегает самый прямой путь к разрешению не только застарелых, но и сравнительно новых конфликтов. Хочу в этой связи привлечь внимание к миротворческим усилиям России в регионе СНГ. Тем не менее, мы не тянем одеяло на себя.
Миротворческая роль России не замыкается на урегулировании конфликтов вокруг ее границ, а носит более широкий характер. Наша страна отправила своих миротворцев в различные «горячие точки» под флагом ООН, участвуя в 9 из 17 ооновских операций по поддержанию мира. В этой связи хотел бы остановиться на действиях по принуждению к миру. Особенно в условиях определенной децентрализации ОПМ к этому должны относиться
чрезвычайно осторожно. Мы твердо стоим на том, что акции силового характера могут осуществляться исключительно по решению Совета безопасности ООН и под его непосредственным контролем, как это и предусмотрено в Уставе Организации.
При переходе к многополярному миру в XXI веке огромное значение имеет создание таких условий, которые сделают стабильным новое мироустройство. Для этого необходимо завершить разборку завалов прошлого, прежде всего наследия десятилетий массированной гонки вооружений.
Мы проходим здесь свою часть пути и полны решимости идти дальше. Вместе с США ритмично осуществляем сокращение стратегических вооружений. Между президентами России и США Б.Н.Ельциным и Б.Клинтоном достигнуто понимание относительно основных параметров договоренностей в этой области.
Однако уже сегодня жизни уносят обычные вооружения. Уносят в локальных конфликтах, а зачастую и там, где бои уже закончены. В этой связи мы полностью отдаем себе отчет в отношении гуманитарного измерения минной проблемы. Считаем, что ликвидация минной угрозы для людей, прежде всего гражданского населения — задача назревшая. Мы — за энергичные, поэтапные усилия по ее решению.
Благотворное влияние на улучшение европейского климата уже оказывает рожденный, можно сказать, в мучительных поисках компромисса Основополагающий Акт об отношениях России с НАТО.
Это — документ высокого международного звучания, и ему, несомненно, надлежит сыграть существенную роль в европейской политике. Подписание этого документа, естественно, не снимает нашего негативного отношения к расширению НАТО, которое, с одной стороны, абсолютно не исходит из существующей реальности, а с другой — чревато созданием новых разделительных линий.
Считаю абсолютно необходимым упомянуть о еще одном вкладе в укрепление добрососедства в Европе. Речь идет о подписанных не так давно договорах России с Украиной и Белоруссией, позволивших нашим государствам сделать важные шаги вперед в плане развития взаимовыгодных равноправных отношений, укрепивших стабильность в регионе.
Свое выступление я начал призывом спроецировать возможности мирового сообщества на проблемы сегодняшнего дня и перспективы грядущего века. А закончить хочу известной мудростью: «Пессимисты являются лишь сторонними наблюдателями — мир
меняют оптимисты». Мы — оптимисты и верим, что ООН сумеет сыграть положительную роль в поступательном развитии мирового сообщества.
* * *
Mr. President,
Allow me to most sincerely congratulate you/to express my most sincere congratulations to you, a representative of Ukraine, with which we have friendly relations, on your election to this important and distinguished post. We are convinced/sure/certain that under your presidency/leadership the General Assembly will be able to achieve significant results/make significant progress.
In a little more than 800 days mankind will enter upon the 21st century/Until mankind enters upon the 21st century there remain little more than 800 days. From a historical point of view/From the point of view of history this is really no more than/merely/just a single sprinter’s lap, and it is quite natural that there is a need to/and the need to look at what lies ahead of us is therefore quite natural.
A year ago, speaking from/in my speech from this same rostrum, I spoke about/to/referred to the beginning of/emerging of/start of/the process of a transition to a multipolar world order. The events/ developments of the past year have confirmed/reaffirmed this. There has been a growth of diversity in the political, economic and cultural development of countries. There is a search (underway)/A search is taking place at the national and regional levels for new identities. There is/a forming/an emergence/growth of new centers of economic and political influence in the world together/along/coupled with/ in parallel with/and simultaneously/an increase in the/ intermeshing/ interweaving/reciprocal involvement of the interests of various states and peoples.
The horizons opening up to the international community are giving rise to/producing/setting/posing new/challenges/demands/ needs. These are:
— assertion of the ideals of interdependence and partnership in
interstate relations;
— prevention of the emergence/appearance of new dividing/
demarcation lines and closed/exclusive blocs;
— strict/unswerving compliance with/adherence to/by all to the
principles and norms of international law.
I would cite as a separate issue/problem not only the creation/ establishment of conditions for the economic and social progress of all countries, but also the maintenance of the environmental/ecological balance.
It should be made clear at the outset/I wish to stress/that the transition from a confrontational bipolar world to a multipolar system cannot by itself/alone/resolve these problems. Furthermore/moreover, realists are well aware that although we are moving farther away from oversimplified stereotypes of the era of ideological confrontation, the number of (existing) risks and threats in the/in today’s/world has not decreased.
There are quite a few/quite a number of multinational states in the world. We strongly/firmly support the initiatives intended/designed to prevent their forced disintegration. The formula for the resolution of such conflicts in today’s/the contemporary/our modern world, and, of course, in the XXI century, can and must be a combination of the need to preserve the territorial integrity of such states with the granting of the broadest/maximum possible rights to national minorities. Abandonment of/digressing from/dropping any of the principles of the “two-track formula” would be fraught with/risk/ entail both a continuation and a dangerous escalation/intensification of such conflict situations.
I also would like to call to your attention/draw your attention to/a dangerous aspect/feature/characteristic of regional conflicts — their ability/capacity to trigger/cause/give rise to/spark/unleash a wave of terrorism and to spread/extend it far beyond the borders of the actual conflict zone. For example, many fighters/militants who launched/ started/caused bloody campaigns of terror in a great number/wide range of countries began/started with/emerged from/originated in/ grew out of the continuing and still raging armed conflict in Afghanistan.
We firmly/strongly support the campaign against terrorism, in
whatever form/guise/trappings/in all forms (it may take). Today success in this struggle/campaign is impossible without/can only be achieved by all states pooling/uniting their efforts to counteract/ combat this vicious/horrendous scourge/evil. We are opposed to government backing of terrorism in any place and in any form/We believe, that in no place and in no form whatsoever should there be government support for terrorism. At the same time certain/some/ individual UN member states should not be forever/once and for all written off/stigmatized/labeled as/placed in the category of outlaws/ rogue states/pariahs within the international community regardless/ irrespective of changes in their policies or simply due to/because of their suspected links to terrorists.
In today’s/the present-day world there can be no monopolies of any state (whatsoever) on efforts at resolving any and all conflicts/ conflict resolution. This is certainly fully applicable/this can certainly
be applied to/this also goes for the longest-standing/oldest/most drawn-out conflict in the Middle East, where there is a stalemate/ deadlock/impasse in the settlement process/the settlement process is deadlocked. As the saying goes, “it takes two hands to clap/one hand won’t create applause.” Untangling the tough/tight Middle East knot/resolving the knotty/difficult Middle East conflict will require broad international efforts/Wide-ranging international efforts are needed to break the Middle East stalemate.
A pooling/uniting of efforts can/will provide the best solution/most direct means/most effective way to resolve both long-standing and relatively new conflicts. Here/in this regard I would like to draw to your attention/call your attention to the peacekeeping efforts of Russia in the CIS region. Nevertheless, we are not trying to take advantage of the situation/get more than our fair share here.
Russia’s peacekeeping role is not limited/confined to conflict settlement efforts around its borders, but is broader/than that/in nature. Our country has sent its peacekeepers to various hot spots/flash points under the UN flag, and they are participating/taking part in 9 of 17 UN peacekeeping operations. Here/in this connection/ I would like to comment/dwell on/refer to peace enforcement actions. In particular, in the decentralized conditions of/given the decentralization of some peacekeeping operations/PKOs great caution/prudence must be used/exercised/demonstrated. We firmly believe that actions offeree can only/be taken/carried out/solely upon authorization by the UN Security Council and under its direct supervision/control, as provided for in the Charter of the Organization/the UN Charter.
As we move/make the transition towards a multipolar world in the XXI century it is of the greatest/enormous/critical importance to create conditions conducive to/which will bring about/stability/of the new world order/which will make the new world order stable. For that purpose/to that end/to do so there is a need to finish off with/ demolish/overcome/put an end to the hurdles/obstacles of the past and above all the legacy of decades of the massive arms race.
We have been doing our part here and are determined to continue. Together with the US we have been steadily carrying out reductions of/reducing strategic weapons. The presidents of Russia and the US, Boris Yeltsin and Bill Clinton/Presidents Yeltsin and Clinton/ have reached an understanding regarding the basic parameters of/for the agreements in this field/area.
However, at this time/today (it is) conventional weapons (which) are killing people/causing casualties/claiming victims in local conflicts,
and often in situations in which the fighting has/the hostilities have stopped/ceased. Here we are fully aware of the humanitarian aspect of the problem of mines. We believe/consider that the elimination of the mine threat, above all to the civilian population, is long overdue/is urgent. We favor/advocate energetic/active and phased efforts to resolve this problem.
A beneficial/favorable/positive impact/influence on improving the European climate/atmosphere has already been exerted/demonstrated by a thing/something which was born of/produced by a painful/arduous quest/search for compromise, namely/that is/the Founding Act on relations between Russia and NATO. This is a document of great international importance/significance/resonance, and it undoubtedly/ unquestionably/indisputably will play an essential/pivotal/substantive role in European politics. The signing of this document, of course/ naturally/however, has not changed our negative view of/attitude towards the expansion of NATO, which, on the one hand, totally ignores current realities/has nothing to do with the present state of affairs/is not based on today’s realities and on the other is fraught with the risk/danger of/is likely to create new dividing lines.
It is my duty to/I am (duty) bound to/I cannot fail to/I find it imperative to mention/yet another contribution to strengthening good-neighborly relations in Europe. I am referring to/I have in mind/ the recently signed agreements between Russia, Ukraine and Belarus, which have enabled/allowed/made it possible for our states to make real progress/take major steps forward/in developing mutually beneficial/advantageous and equitable relations/relations on an equal footing, which have strengthened stability in the region.
I began my statement/intervention with an appeal to encourage/ call for the international community to (use its potential) resolve current/today’s problems and to look forward to the coming century. And I would like to conclude with the well-known saying/maxim/ adage, “Pessimists are only passive observers/bystanders; the world is changed by optimists/it is optimists who change the world.” We are optimists, and believe that the UN will be able to play a positive role in the development/evolution of the international community.
Комментарии:
1) дружественнойУкраины— “friendly Ukraine” is possible, and may be the only solution if the interpreter is rushing, but it does not sound good in English. “With which we have friendly relations” is much longer but also much more idiomatic.
- спринтерскийотрезок— the Russian text does not say “a single” or
“one,” but the image is unexpected, and adding the adjective will make
the meaning clearer to the listener. - начавшемсяпроцессе— In this sentence the past active participle
needs to be rendered as a noun. “The having been begun” process will not
work in English. - идетпоискна… — this can be rendered as “There is a search
underway/going on” rather than saying “A search is going on” which
sounds rather awkward. - нетолькосоздания… ноиподдержания— when there is time this
construction can be translated as “not only… but also;” to save time,
“both… and” can often be used.<em/> - многонациональныхгосударстввмиредостаточномного— “there
are quite a few/quite a number of/multinational states in the world” is fine
if the interpreter has a text. Otherwise, if the interpreter has jumped in
and started with “Multinational states” before hearing the rest of the
sentence, he will have to wriggle out of this syntactic bind. “Multinational
states in today’s world… are many/exist everywhere/abound” would be
possible solutions. - хочутакжеобратитьособоевниманиенатакуюопаснуючертуре
гиональныхконфликтов, как… — in such a construction the interpreter
is better off rendering “такую” as “a” (dangerous feature) rather than as
“such,” which will require a “such… as” construction and may
unnecessarily complicate the sentence. - возросли на почве… конфликта в Афганистане — “на почве” does
not need literal translation. “In the soil of has agricultural connotations
which are not all to the point. “Originated in” or any of the other variants
given sound more idiomatic. - мырешительновыступаемзаборьбупротивтерроризма— “We
firmly support/back” will do for the initial phrase.
- борьбупротивтерроризма— it bears repeating that in many political
contexts “campaign” sounds better than the old war-horse “struggle.”
Борьбаis best translated as here as “campaign” rather than “struggle” or
“fight.” - мызато, чтобынигдеинивкакойформенебылогосударствен
нойподдержкитерроризму— if the interpreter has no text and starts in
immediately after Мызато, чтобынигдеhe will have to do some fancy
syntactic footwork to get out of this one. “We are in favor” could then be
followed by “never and in any form whatever (having/allowing for)” —
since a verb will have to be inserted here — “any state support of
terrorism.” This sentence is an excellent example of why it is sometimes
better to wait a few extra seconds to see where a sentence is going rather
than starting in immediately and creating a syntactic jungle.<strong/>
- зачислять… визгоев— takes some reworking. The idea is that these
countries are being permanently labeled or branded as being beyond the
pale of civilized behavior. “Rogue state” is becoming increasingly
accepted in political parlance as a translation of изгойin this sense. - однойрукойвладошинехлопнешь— if the interpreter has a text or
time for reflection, “one hand can’t clap” is shorter and more idiomatic. - черезобъединениеусилийпролегаетсамыйпрямойпуть… — this is
a good example of the basic principle “Think nominative.” Starting the
sentence as “Through the uniting of will lead to a very awkward
construction. By making the accusative noun the nominative subject, i.e.
“A pooling/uniting of efforts will provide…,” the interpreter starts off down
a logical instead of a zigzag path towards completing a normal English
sentence. - темнеменее, мынетянемодеялонасебя— of course, the
interpreter can say “We’re not pulling the whole blanket over to our side,”
but this will sound very odd and stylistically out of place. The idea is that
of only taking a fair share, asking for what is legitimately ours. - подфлагомООН, участвуя… — English requires an explanatory
phrase before the gerund: “and they are participating.”
17) поддержаниемира, принуждениемира— this relatively new
peacekeeping vocabulary is sometimes translated in different ways, but the
distinctions between the types of operations are important. Поддержание
мираin an ordinary sentence can be the “maintenance of peace” but an
ОПМ (PKO) is an операцияпоподдержаниюмира(peacekeeping
operation). “Peacebuilding” is миростроительство, and the odd-sounding
принуждениекмируis “peace enforcement.”
- огромноезначениеимеетсозданиетакихусловий… — starting the
sentence with “It is” — “It is of the greatest importance to create such
conditions/that such conditions be created” is a lot easier than trying to
work around “Of great significance is the creation of such conditions,”
etc. “It is” and “There is” are two of the most useful tools in the
interpreter’s verbal kit. - между президентами России и США Б.Н.Ельциным и Б.Клинтоном
достигнуто понимание — there are two problems here. First of all, the
interpreter should once again think nominative. Starting the sentence with
“The Presidents of Russia and the US… have reached an understanding”
will make for a much smoother sentence than the clumsy “Between the
presidents of Russia and the US…an understanding has been achieved.”
In interpretation into English initials should not be used, as this is not
accepted practice. Either “President Boris Yeltsin and President Bill
Clinton” or “President Yeltsin and President Clinton” will do.
20) жизниуносят— “lives are swept away” is extremely awkward.
“People arc being killed” or “victims are claimed” or “casualties are being
caused” are possibilities. And here a continuous present tense — i.e. “are being killed” is absolutely necessary, since a continuing process is being described. Обычные вооружения are always translated as “conventional” weapons or arms.
- задачаназревшая— this can be a task or problem which is long
standing, to which a solution is long overdue, or simply an “urgent
problem.” - Благотворноевлияниенаулучшениеевропейскогоклиматаужеока
зываетрожденный, можносказать, вмучительныхпоискахкомпромис
саОсновополагающийАктоботношенияхРоссиисНАТО. —This is a
good example of how Russian syntax demands transformation and
restructuring to produce an idiomatic English sentence. “A positive impact
on improving the European climate has already been exerted by…” and here
comes a passive participle. The best immediate solution for the interpreter
is to insert right before the participle a word such as “something,” “a thing,”
or even “that,” and continue: “exerted by something/a thing/that which was
born of/produced by an arduous quest for compromise”—and right before
the noun which finally makes its appearance “Основополагающий Акт об
отношениях России с НАТО” — insert a phrase such as “namely,” “I am
referring to, “I mean,” — e.g. “exerted by something which was produced
by an arduous quest for compromise, namely the Founding Act on relations
between Russia and NATO.” This question of how to move ahead following
a past passive participle while waiting for the noun is one of the most
common and most difficult problems which Russian-English interpreters
constantly encounter. - чреватосозданием— While the standard translation of чревато is
“fraught with,” often “risks,” “runs the risk of,” “is likely to” or even
simply “may,” аз in “may create” are equally good or even better
solutions. - речьидетоподписанныхнетакдавнодоговорах—the expression
Речьидетposes constant problems for interpreters. In this context it has
the sense of “I am referring to” or “I mean;” in other contexts “Речьидет
отом, что” often means “The point is.”
- равноправныхотношений— “equal relations” does not work.
“Equitable relations” will do in a hurry, but “relations on an equal
footing” or “as equal partners” is much more idiomatic. - своевыступлениеяначалпризывом… —clearly, “I began my
statement/intervention” is the most logical choice. But if the interpreter
has rushed in with “My statement” he can get out of this one by
continuing “My statement began with an appeal to…,”omitting the “I”
and still producing an idiomatic sentence.