英語(yǔ)資源頻道為大家整理的china daily 雙語(yǔ)新聞：美國(guó)應(yīng)該干預(yù)英國(guó)事務(wù)，供大家學(xué)習(xí)參考:)
Britain’s debate about the EU is not just about Europe – it is also about the US. For the fiercest eurosceptics – who want Britain to leave the EU – the US is the promised land across the ocean. They have long insisted that it is a mistake for Britain to tie itself to a sclerotic Europe with an alien political culture. Instead the UK should look to the English-speaking world and, above all, to its “special relationship” with America.
英國(guó)關(guān)于同歐盟關(guān)系的辯論不僅是關(guān)于歐洲的，也是關(guān)于美國(guó)的。對(duì)于最堅(jiān)決的歐洲懷疑論者（希望英國(guó)退出歐盟的人）而言，美國(guó)是大洋彼岸的樂(lè)土。他們?cè)缇椭鲝垼?guó)將自己與一個(gè)政治文化迥異、僵硬的歐洲聯(lián)系在一起是一個(gè)錯(cuò)誤。相反，英國(guó)應(yīng)該寄希望于與英語(yǔ)國(guó)家保持關(guān)系，最重要的是保持英美“特殊關(guān)系”。
The anti-Europeans’ heroine is Margaret Thatcher. It was Lady Thatcher who said “no, no, no” to ever-closer union in Europe – but “yes, yes, yes” to the US of President Ronald Reagan. The picture of Ronnie and Maggie, tootling around together in a golf buggy, is a powerful, nostalgia-filled image of the “special relationship” at its warmest.
歐洲懷疑論者的英雄人物是瑪格麗特·撒切爾(Margaret Thatcher)。正是撒切爾夫人對(duì)歐洲建立一個(gè)日益緊密的聯(lián)盟連聲說(shuō)不，而對(duì)當(dāng)時(shí)羅納德·里根(Ronald Reagan)主政的美國(guó)連聲稱是。當(dāng)年里根與撒切爾坐在高爾夫球車上聊天的場(chǎng)景，是展現(xiàn)“特殊關(guān)系”最熱烈時(shí)期的充滿懷舊情調(diào)的畫面。
The sceptics have always hoped that, if and when Britain chooses to leave the EU, it could hop back into the American golf-buggy and drive off into the sunset. So for the US government to say that, on the contrary, it is desperate for Britain to stay inside the EU is more than a setback for the eurosceptics – it is a humiliation.
歐洲懷疑論者總是希望，一旦英國(guó)選擇脫離歐盟，就可能重新跳上美國(guó)的高爾夫球車，兩國(guó)共同駛向美麗的夕陽(yáng)。因此，如果美國(guó)政府反而說(shuō)渴望英國(guó)留在歐盟，那對(duì)歐洲懷疑論者而言不僅是個(gè)挫折，而簡(jiǎn)直是一種恥辱。
Yet, this week, that is precisely what happened. America’s intervention was low-key but crystal-clear. Speaking to a handful of journalists, in the unprepossessing surroundings of a basement conference room at the US Embassy in London, Philip Gordon, assistant secretary of state for Europe, stated bluntly that America regards Britain’s membership of the EU as “essential and critical to the United States”.
然而，上周恰恰發(fā)生了這樣的事情。美國(guó)低調(diào)而明確地進(jìn)行了干預(yù)。在美國(guó)駐倫敦大使館一個(gè)簡(jiǎn)樸的地下會(huì)議室里，美國(guó)負(fù)責(zé)歐洲事務(wù)的助理國(guó)務(wù)卿菲利普·戈登(Philip Gordon)向記者們坦率表示，美國(guó)認(rèn)為英國(guó)保留歐盟成員國(guó)身份“對(duì)美國(guó)是不可或缺而關(guān)鍵的”。
Even though Mr Gordon’s remarks were made in response to a question, they had been carefully premeditated. The Americans had decided that, with Britain’s debate on Europe reaching boiling point, even silence from Washington was a form of intervention – since it could be interpreted as meaning that the US did not care either way. It was important to squash that idea.
即便戈登當(dāng)時(shí)是在回答記者的提問(wèn)，但此言是經(jīng)過(guò)事先精心準(zhǔn)備才發(fā)表的。美方認(rèn)定，隨著英國(guó)關(guān)于歐洲的辯論達(dá)到沸點(diǎn)，美國(guó)即使保持沉默也是一種干預(yù)，因?yàn)檫@可能被解讀成：無(wú)論英國(guó)退出歐盟與否，美國(guó)都無(wú)所謂。打消這種念頭非常重要。
But while the intervention by Mr Gordon was quite deliberate, its impact took even the Americans aback. Within hours, his remarks were leading the news on BBC television and in the major British newspapers – and had attracted a storm of online comment. The Americans were forcibly reminded that it is one thing reading about the British debate from Washington. It is quite another to experience its ferocity, first hand, in London.
但是，盡管戈登的干預(yù)是有意為之，但它的影響還是讓美國(guó)方面意外。戈登的言論在幾小時(shí)內(nèi)成了英國(guó)廣播公司(BBC)電視臺(tái)以及英國(guó)各大報(bào)紙的頭條新聞，并在網(wǎng)上引發(fā)熱評(píng)。這有力地提醒了美國(guó)人，從華盛頓關(guān)注英國(guó)辯論是一回事，在倫敦親身感受其熱度則完全是另一回事。
The American reasoning is, nonetheless, clear and pragmatic.
即便如此，美國(guó)干預(yù)的邏輯仍清晰而務(wù)實(shí)。
A strong EU is potentially a vital partner for the US in dealing with an array of global issues – from Iran to China to trade. However, the EU is likely to be weaker if Britain leaves and Europe is also less likely to see eye-to-eye with America – since a British presence in Brussels is seen as promoting economic openness and a more robust and Atlanticist foreign policy.
從伊朗到中國(guó)，再到貿(mào)易，一個(gè)強(qiáng)大的歐盟可能是美國(guó)處理一系列全球事務(wù)的關(guān)鍵合作伙伴。然而，如果英國(guó)退出，歐盟可能變得虛弱，同時(shí)歐洲也不那么可能與美國(guó)坦誠(chéng)相見(jiàn)——因?yàn)橛?guó)在歐盟的成員國(guó)資格，被視為有利于促進(jìn)經(jīng)濟(jì)開放和更有力的大西洋主義外交政策。
The Americans also worry that the eurozone crisis has made the EU even more inward-looking. So even a British debate about quitting is unwelcome, since it means that the EU is going to spend even more time staring at its own navel – and less time looking at the outside world.
美國(guó)方面還擔(dān)心，歐元區(qū)危機(jī)已經(jīng)讓歐盟的視野更加內(nèi)向。因此，就連英國(guó)圍繞退出歐盟的利弊展開辯論也不是一件好事，因?yàn)檫@意味著，歐盟將花費(fèi)更多時(shí)間緊盯內(nèi)部事務(wù)，減少對(duì)外部世界的關(guān)注。
David Cameron would agree with almost all of that. Nonetheless, for the British prime minister, this week’s American intervention was a mixed blessing. Some British officials winced at Mr Gordon’s suggestion that EU referendums can be an unwelcome distraction from global engagement. That is an awkward view to deal with – just weeks before the prime minister is due to give a major and long-awaited speech, in which he is likely to promise just such a referendum.
戴維·卡梅倫(David Cameron)會(huì)幾乎完全同意上述觀點(diǎn)。即便如此，對(duì)這位英國(guó)首相而言，上周美國(guó)的干預(yù)既有利也有弊。某些英國(guó)官員感到不快，因?yàn)楦甑前凳?，歐盟的公投可能分散其對(duì)全球事務(wù)的注意力，不是一件好事。要應(yīng)對(duì)這種觀點(diǎn)令人頭疼——幾周后，卡梅倫就將發(fā)表各方期待已久的一個(gè)重要講話，屆時(shí)他可能承諾舉行這樣的公投。
But, more broadly, Mr Cameron should welcome the US intervention because it makes life more difficult for some of his most dangerous opponents – who unfortunately reside within his own party and in the fast-rising UK Independence party. Their preferred exit route out of the EU now looks to be cut off.
但是從更廣泛的角度而言，卡梅倫應(yīng)該歡迎美國(guó)的干預(yù)，原因是這會(huì)讓他的某些最危險(xiǎn)的對(duì)手日子更加難過(guò)——不幸的是，這些對(duì)手來(lái)自保守黨內(nèi)部以及快速崛起的英國(guó)獨(dú)立黨(UK Independence party)。他們青睞的退出歐盟的路線現(xiàn)在看來(lái)已被切斷。
As Lady Thatcher once put it, in a rather different context, “there is no alternative”.
正如撒切爾曾經(jīng)在一個(gè)頗為不同的場(chǎng)合所說(shuō)的，“別無(wú)選擇”。
Some anti-Europeans have tried to deal with rejection by the Obama administration by suggesting that it does not represent the real America. This is a line they have borrowed from the Republican party. But it is much harder to maintain now that Mr Obama has won re-election.
某些反歐人士曾試圖對(duì)奧巴馬政府的拒絕輕描淡寫，稱其并不代表真正的美國(guó)。這是他們向美國(guó)共和黨學(xué)到的臺(tái)詞。但是，既然奧巴馬已成功連任總統(tǒng)，他們堅(jiān)持這種說(shuō)法的難度大得多。
For precisely this reason, some of those closest to Mr Cameron were quietly hoping for an Obama victory in November. They had feared that a Republican win could incite a rightwing rebellion in the Tory party – perhaps led by Liam Fox, the former defence secretary and influential backbench MP, who yearns for much more Thatcherite policies. Mr Fox is close to American paleoconservatives in Washington, such as John Bolton, US ambassador to the UN under President George W. Bush, who share his loathing of the EU.
正是出于這個(gè)原因，部分最接近卡梅倫的人士私下希望，奧巴馬在去年11月的大選中獲勝。他們擔(dān)心，如果共和黨獲勝，可能刺激英國(guó)保守黨的右翼反叛——或許是在英國(guó)前國(guó)防大臣、頗具影響力的后座議員利亞姆·福克斯(Liam Fox)的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)下。福克斯強(qiáng)烈呼吁實(shí)施更多撒切爾風(fēng)格的政策。他與華盛頓的傳統(tǒng)保守派關(guān)系密切，比如在喬治·W·布什(George W. Bush)政府時(shí)期擔(dān)任美國(guó)駐聯(lián)合國(guó)大使的約翰·博爾頓(John Bolton)，后者同樣不喜歡歐盟。
As defence secretary, Mr Fox had to swallow his objections when Obama officials told him that they favoured the EU playing a stronger role in defence. He and his ideological allies would have leapt on the return of the Republicans to the White House. Instead, they have to put up with four more years of Mr Obama, a man Daniel Hannan, a leading Tory eurosceptic and member of the European parliament, insists is the “most anti-British president for nearly 200 years”.
當(dāng)奧巴馬政府的官員們表示，美國(guó)支持歐盟在防務(wù)上扮演更強(qiáng)大的角色時(shí)，身為英國(guó)國(guó)防大臣的?？怂乖坏貌蝗虤馔搪?。他和他的意識(shí)形態(tài)盟友本來(lái)會(huì)為共和黨人重返白宮歡呼，但現(xiàn)在他們不得不接受奧巴馬將再次執(zhí)政4年的現(xiàn)實(shí)。英國(guó)保守黨內(nèi)的重量級(jí)歐洲懷疑論者、歐洲議會(huì)成員丹尼爾·漢南(Daniel Hannan)堅(jiān)稱，奧巴馬是“近200年來(lái)對(duì)英國(guó)最不友好的總統(tǒng)”。
Obama-bashing is a feeble and petulant response for the eurosceptics. They are on much surer ground when they argue that, ultimately, Britain’s European future is for Britain – not America – to decide. The Obama administration does not dispute that, however. As Mr Gordon said this week, it is “for the British people and the British government to decide” what is in the nation’s interests.
對(duì)歐洲懷疑論者而言，抨擊奧巴馬是一種軟弱而無(wú)理的回應(yīng)。他們倒是有更充足的理由辯稱，英國(guó)在歐洲的未來(lái)最終將由英國(guó)、而非美國(guó)來(lái)決定。不過(guò)，奧巴馬政府并沒(méi)有爭(zhēng)議這一點(diǎn)。正如戈登上周所言，英國(guó)的利益要由“英國(guó)人和英國(guó)政府來(lái)決定”。
So why should the Americans say anything at all? Because, as Britain debates its national interest on Europe, it is important that there is a clear understanding of where America stands. It may still be that the British ultimately decide they want to leave the EU. But if such a fateful choice is made, it should be done without illusions. By stripping away some of these illusions, the Obama administration has done Britain a favour.
那么為何美國(guó)應(yīng)該有所表示呢？原因是，在英國(guó)國(guó)內(nèi)就其與歐洲有關(guān)的國(guó)家利益展開辯論之際，有必要清晰理解美國(guó)的立常英國(guó)人最終仍可能決定他們希望退出歐盟。但如果英國(guó)做出此類重大抉擇，那應(yīng)該是不抱任何幻想的選擇。通過(guò)粉碎其中一部分幻想，奧巴馬政府為英國(guó)做了一件好事。
Britain’s debate about the EU is not just about Europe – it is also about the US. For the fiercest eurosceptics – who want Britain to leave the EU – the US is the promised land across the ocean. They have long insisted that it is a mistake for Britain to tie itself to a sclerotic Europe with an alien political culture. Instead the UK should look to the English-speaking world and, above all, to its “special relationship” with America.
英國(guó)關(guān)于同歐盟關(guān)系的辯論不僅是關(guān)于歐洲的，也是關(guān)于美國(guó)的。對(duì)于最堅(jiān)決的歐洲懷疑論者（希望英國(guó)退出歐盟的人）而言，美國(guó)是大洋彼岸的樂(lè)土。他們?cè)缇椭鲝垼?guó)將自己與一個(gè)政治文化迥異、僵硬的歐洲聯(lián)系在一起是一個(gè)錯(cuò)誤。相反，英國(guó)應(yīng)該寄希望于與英語(yǔ)國(guó)家保持關(guān)系，最重要的是保持英美“特殊關(guān)系”。
The anti-Europeans’ heroine is Margaret Thatcher. It was Lady Thatcher who said “no, no, no” to ever-closer union in Europe – but “yes, yes, yes” to the US of President Ronald Reagan. The picture of Ronnie and Maggie, tootling around together in a golf buggy, is a powerful, nostalgia-filled image of the “special relationship” at its warmest.
歐洲懷疑論者的英雄人物是瑪格麗特·撒切爾(Margaret Thatcher)。正是撒切爾夫人對(duì)歐洲建立一個(gè)日益緊密的聯(lián)盟連聲說(shuō)不，而對(duì)當(dāng)時(shí)羅納德·里根(Ronald Reagan)主政的美國(guó)連聲稱是。當(dāng)年里根與撒切爾坐在高爾夫球車上聊天的場(chǎng)景，是展現(xiàn)“特殊關(guān)系”最熱烈時(shí)期的充滿懷舊情調(diào)的畫面。
The sceptics have always hoped that, if and when Britain chooses to leave the EU, it could hop back into the American golf-buggy and drive off into the sunset. So for the US government to say that, on the contrary, it is desperate for Britain to stay inside the EU is more than a setback for the eurosceptics – it is a humiliation.
歐洲懷疑論者總是希望，一旦英國(guó)選擇脫離歐盟，就可能重新跳上美國(guó)的高爾夫球車，兩國(guó)共同駛向美麗的夕陽(yáng)。因此，如果美國(guó)政府反而說(shuō)渴望英國(guó)留在歐盟，那對(duì)歐洲懷疑論者而言不僅是個(gè)挫折，而簡(jiǎn)直是一種恥辱。
Yet, this week, that is precisely what happened. America’s intervention was low-key but crystal-clear. Speaking to a handful of journalists, in the unprepossessing surroundings of a basement conference room at the US Embassy in London, Philip Gordon, assistant secretary of state for Europe, stated bluntly that America regards Britain’s membership of the EU as “essential and critical to the United States”.
然而，上周恰恰發(fā)生了這樣的事情。美國(guó)低調(diào)而明確地進(jìn)行了干預(yù)。在美國(guó)駐倫敦大使館一個(gè)簡(jiǎn)樸的地下會(huì)議室里，美國(guó)負(fù)責(zé)歐洲事務(wù)的助理國(guó)務(wù)卿菲利普·戈登(Philip Gordon)向記者們坦率表示，美國(guó)認(rèn)為英國(guó)保留歐盟成員國(guó)身份“對(duì)美國(guó)是不可或缺而關(guān)鍵的”。
Even though Mr Gordon’s remarks were made in response to a question, they had been carefully premeditated. The Americans had decided that, with Britain’s debate on Europe reaching boiling point, even silence from Washington was a form of intervention – since it could be interpreted as meaning that the US did not care either way. It was important to squash that idea.
即便戈登當(dāng)時(shí)是在回答記者的提問(wèn)，但此言是經(jīng)過(guò)事先精心準(zhǔn)備才發(fā)表的。美方認(rèn)定，隨著英國(guó)關(guān)于歐洲的辯論達(dá)到沸點(diǎn)，美國(guó)即使保持沉默也是一種干預(yù)，因?yàn)檫@可能被解讀成：無(wú)論英國(guó)退出歐盟與否，美國(guó)都無(wú)所謂。打消這種念頭非常重要。
But while the intervention by Mr Gordon was quite deliberate, its impact took even the Americans aback. Within hours, his remarks were leading the news on BBC television and in the major British newspapers – and had attracted a storm of online comment. The Americans were forcibly reminded that it is one thing reading about the British debate from Washington. It is quite another to experience its ferocity, first hand, in London.
但是，盡管戈登的干預(yù)是有意為之，但它的影響還是讓美國(guó)方面意外。戈登的言論在幾小時(shí)內(nèi)成了英國(guó)廣播公司(BBC)電視臺(tái)以及英國(guó)各大報(bào)紙的頭條新聞，并在網(wǎng)上引發(fā)熱評(píng)。這有力地提醒了美國(guó)人，從華盛頓關(guān)注英國(guó)辯論是一回事，在倫敦親身感受其熱度則完全是另一回事。
The American reasoning is, nonetheless, clear and pragmatic.
即便如此，美國(guó)干預(yù)的邏輯仍清晰而務(wù)實(shí)。
A strong EU is potentially a vital partner for the US in dealing with an array of global issues – from Iran to China to trade. However, the EU is likely to be weaker if Britain leaves and Europe is also less likely to see eye-to-eye with America – since a British presence in Brussels is seen as promoting economic openness and a more robust and Atlanticist foreign policy.
從伊朗到中國(guó)，再到貿(mào)易，一個(gè)強(qiáng)大的歐盟可能是美國(guó)處理一系列全球事務(wù)的關(guān)鍵合作伙伴。然而，如果英國(guó)退出，歐盟可能變得虛弱，同時(shí)歐洲也不那么可能與美國(guó)坦誠(chéng)相見(jiàn)——因?yàn)橛?guó)在歐盟的成員國(guó)資格，被視為有利于促進(jìn)經(jīng)濟(jì)開放和更有力的大西洋主義外交政策。
The Americans also worry that the eurozone crisis has made the EU even more inward-looking. So even a British debate about quitting is unwelcome, since it means that the EU is going to spend even more time staring at its own navel – and less time looking at the outside world.
美國(guó)方面還擔(dān)心，歐元區(qū)危機(jī)已經(jīng)讓歐盟的視野更加內(nèi)向。因此，就連英國(guó)圍繞退出歐盟的利弊展開辯論也不是一件好事，因?yàn)檫@意味著，歐盟將花費(fèi)更多時(shí)間緊盯內(nèi)部事務(wù)，減少對(duì)外部世界的關(guān)注。
David Cameron would agree with almost all of that. Nonetheless, for the British prime minister, this week’s American intervention was a mixed blessing. Some British officials winced at Mr Gordon’s suggestion that EU referendums can be an unwelcome distraction from global engagement. That is an awkward view to deal with – just weeks before the prime minister is due to give a major and long-awaited speech, in which he is likely to promise just such a referendum.
戴維·卡梅倫(David Cameron)會(huì)幾乎完全同意上述觀點(diǎn)。即便如此，對(duì)這位英國(guó)首相而言，上周美國(guó)的干預(yù)既有利也有弊。某些英國(guó)官員感到不快，因?yàn)楦甑前凳?，歐盟的公投可能分散其對(duì)全球事務(wù)的注意力，不是一件好事。要應(yīng)對(duì)這種觀點(diǎn)令人頭疼——幾周后，卡梅倫就將發(fā)表各方期待已久的一個(gè)重要講話，屆時(shí)他可能承諾舉行這樣的公投。
But, more broadly, Mr Cameron should welcome the US intervention because it makes life more difficult for some of his most dangerous opponents – who unfortunately reside within his own party and in the fast-rising UK Independence party. Their preferred exit route out of the EU now looks to be cut off.
但是從更廣泛的角度而言，卡梅倫應(yīng)該歡迎美國(guó)的干預(yù)，原因是這會(huì)讓他的某些最危險(xiǎn)的對(duì)手日子更加難過(guò)——不幸的是，這些對(duì)手來(lái)自保守黨內(nèi)部以及快速崛起的英國(guó)獨(dú)立黨(UK Independence party)。他們青睞的退出歐盟的路線現(xiàn)在看來(lái)已被切斷。
As Lady Thatcher once put it, in a rather different context, “there is no alternative”.
正如撒切爾曾經(jīng)在一個(gè)頗為不同的場(chǎng)合所說(shuō)的，“別無(wú)選擇”。
Some anti-Europeans have tried to deal with rejection by the Obama administration by suggesting that it does not represent the real America. This is a line they have borrowed from the Republican party. But it is much harder to maintain now that Mr Obama has won re-election.
某些反歐人士曾試圖對(duì)奧巴馬政府的拒絕輕描淡寫，稱其并不代表真正的美國(guó)。這是他們向美國(guó)共和黨學(xué)到的臺(tái)詞。但是，既然奧巴馬已成功連任總統(tǒng)，他們堅(jiān)持這種說(shuō)法的難度大得多。
For precisely this reason, some of those closest to Mr Cameron were quietly hoping for an Obama victory in November. They had feared that a Republican win could incite a rightwing rebellion in the Tory party – perhaps led by Liam Fox, the former defence secretary and influential backbench MP, who yearns for much more Thatcherite policies. Mr Fox is close to American paleoconservatives in Washington, such as John Bolton, US ambassador to the UN under President George W. Bush, who share his loathing of the EU.
正是出于這個(gè)原因，部分最接近卡梅倫的人士私下希望，奧巴馬在去年11月的大選中獲勝。他們擔(dān)心，如果共和黨獲勝，可能刺激英國(guó)保守黨的右翼反叛——或許是在英國(guó)前國(guó)防大臣、頗具影響力的后座議員利亞姆·福克斯(Liam Fox)的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)下。福克斯強(qiáng)烈呼吁實(shí)施更多撒切爾風(fēng)格的政策。他與華盛頓的傳統(tǒng)保守派關(guān)系密切，比如在喬治·W·布什(George W. Bush)政府時(shí)期擔(dān)任美國(guó)駐聯(lián)合國(guó)大使的約翰·博爾頓(John Bolton)，后者同樣不喜歡歐盟。
As defence secretary, Mr Fox had to swallow his objections when Obama officials told him that they favoured the EU playing a stronger role in defence. He and his ideological allies would have leapt on the return of the Republicans to the White House. Instead, they have to put up with four more years of Mr Obama, a man Daniel Hannan, a leading Tory eurosceptic and member of the European parliament, insists is the “most anti-British president for nearly 200 years”.
當(dāng)奧巴馬政府的官員們表示，美國(guó)支持歐盟在防務(wù)上扮演更強(qiáng)大的角色時(shí)，身為英國(guó)國(guó)防大臣的?？怂乖坏貌蝗虤馔搪?。他和他的意識(shí)形態(tài)盟友本來(lái)會(huì)為共和黨人重返白宮歡呼，但現(xiàn)在他們不得不接受奧巴馬將再次執(zhí)政4年的現(xiàn)實(shí)。英國(guó)保守黨內(nèi)的重量級(jí)歐洲懷疑論者、歐洲議會(huì)成員丹尼爾·漢南(Daniel Hannan)堅(jiān)稱，奧巴馬是“近200年來(lái)對(duì)英國(guó)最不友好的總統(tǒng)”。
Obama-bashing is a feeble and petulant response for the eurosceptics. They are on much surer ground when they argue that, ultimately, Britain’s European future is for Britain – not America – to decide. The Obama administration does not dispute that, however. As Mr Gordon said this week, it is “for the British people and the British government to decide” what is in the nation’s interests.
對(duì)歐洲懷疑論者而言，抨擊奧巴馬是一種軟弱而無(wú)理的回應(yīng)。他們倒是有更充足的理由辯稱，英國(guó)在歐洲的未來(lái)最終將由英國(guó)、而非美國(guó)來(lái)決定。不過(guò)，奧巴馬政府并沒(méi)有爭(zhēng)議這一點(diǎn)。正如戈登上周所言，英國(guó)的利益要由“英國(guó)人和英國(guó)政府來(lái)決定”。
So why should the Americans say anything at all? Because, as Britain debates its national interest on Europe, it is important that there is a clear understanding of where America stands. It may still be that the British ultimately decide they want to leave the EU. But if such a fateful choice is made, it should be done without illusions. By stripping away some of these illusions, the Obama administration has done Britain a favour.
那么為何美國(guó)應(yīng)該有所表示呢？原因是，在英國(guó)國(guó)內(nèi)就其與歐洲有關(guān)的國(guó)家利益展開辯論之際，有必要清晰理解美國(guó)的立常英國(guó)人最終仍可能決定他們希望退出歐盟。但如果英國(guó)做出此類重大抉擇，那應(yīng)該是不抱任何幻想的選擇。通過(guò)粉碎其中一部分幻想，奧巴馬政府為英國(guó)做了一件好事。