美国政要第14课
Information Edge & information umbrella
--Interview with Former Vice Chairman of Joint Chief of Staffs, Gen. (Re.) William A. Owens 访美国参联会原副主席威廉•欧文斯上将(退役)
MR. CHEN BOJIANG: I am very glad to have the opportunity to interview you. When I was looking for interviewees on military revolution, future warfare and national defense development, you were strongly recommended to me as one of the major RMA advocators and contributors whose work had a significant influence on this field. I really appreciate that you are able to meet with me given your busy schedule1. I have read several of your articles on military revolution and U. S. National defense development. I would like to begin our interview by asking you some questions about issues dealt with in your articles.
After your article “America’s Information Edge2” was published in 1996, “Information Edge” became a hot topic. In the Information Age, what are the changes in the concept of force and the balance of force? How can this new framework3 be used to assess force and the balance of force?
GEN. OWENS: It is trying to say you can replace an existing military force, in our case an Army of 9,000 tanks, and a navy of 340 ships and an Air Force of 20 tactical fighter wings. You can replace all of that, replace the force capability from the existing force of these 20 tactical fighter wings, and these 340 ships, for example, with fewer forces but with the same force capability. Now, we're talking about force capability, what you can do with the forces. An example of what I mean might be satellite systems. They have been present for some time but we never thought much about them as supplements4 or trade-offs5 for combat forces.
The same has been true about UAVs6, or commercial satellites. All these types of things can multiply the capability of the "good enough" platforms7. You can replace and multiply the capability of the force without replacing or adding new weapon system. That's the new idea, because we always thought that if you decommissioned8 a ship, you had to get a new ship, but I think not any longer. You replace force capability with a new force, that looks different and is based on information. I think that's in our mindset9.
MR. CHEN: In the future development of national defense, which kinds of advanced technologies will be a priority10 for the U.S.? How will these kinds of advanced technologies influence American military capability?
GEN. OWENS: The easiest way of thinking about it is to list the kinds of technologies that are most important, those technologies that allow you to see, sensors, the technologies that allow you to tell, the communications, and the tech¬nologies that allow you to guide the preci¬sion guided munitions11. And those are the technologies that are of main interest to a military that wants to become modern. These tend to be in the area of information technology, and telecommunications, and in systems integration. Remember the is¬sue of "system-of-systems"12 What this all means is that this will be central to mili¬taries and the future, not tanks and air¬planes.
MR. CHEN: Some have argued that the speed in the development of technolo¬gies has exceeded that of the development of military doctrine. Therefore, the em¬phasis of military revolution should be fo¬cused on the military doctrine, structure and organization so as to adapt to the de¬velopment of technology. In your opinion, what is the emphasis of the RMA?
GEN. OWENS: I completely agree. It is the biggest challenge of the Revolu¬tion in Military Affairs to change the doc¬trine and the concepts and the culture. We have in the U.S., 1.5 million soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines who have all been raised in the stereotypes'3 of the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines. We teach them about ships and tanks and air¬planes and the tradition of the military and remember what I said about history and tradition. I think it is interesting, but not very. It is the future that matters most. So culturally, we have to get ourselves in this mindset of new functions and not stay in the mindset of the culture of the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines. We have to change the culture into how to see the battlefield, and how do you apply force through dominant maneuver14 armies and marines in strategic ways in the battlefield, not in force-on-force confrontation, and how you put precision weapons on targets without platforms, and finally how you support those things. That's a big change. I think it will take years and I think it will have to be top-down. That's the only way you can do it, by taking the senior people and convincing them that they have to have a revolution and drive the revolution down, because you can't start from the bottom up.
MR. CHEN: Can the information technology driving America's emerging15 military capabilities change classic deter¬rence16 theory? What is the information umbrella? What is the difference between the information umbrella and the nuclear umbrella? Can the information umbrella replace the nuclear umbrella?
GEN. OWENS: I think that it is ab¬solutely true that you can change the deter¬rence theory with the revolution in military affairs. It means that our nation can influ¬ence other nations with an information um¬brella, if I say to Saddam Hussein, I have the ability to put an information umbrella over Iraq. I can see everything you do. I am able to do that, and I will do that, if you don't comply17 with the United Na¬tions resolutions. I will be able to show, if I desire, on CNN18 what I saw from my information umbrella and then be able to inform the world, or I may be able to put bombs on specific targets if you persist in not doing what the UN19 wants you to do. It is because of the very strong element of deterrence theory that you are able to say, our country is so smart we will be able to take this information umbrella over your country and it has enormous ramifications20 for your country. It's not the size of my carriers or the size of my air force. It' s the size of my smarts, it' s my ability to think about and use the information um¬brella. The answer to your question is yes, the information umbrella can replace the nuclear umbrella. I believe we need to reduce our nuclear weapons radically, not just slowly. We need to rid the world, to the extent we can, of nuclear weapons. You can continue to maintain a deterrence strategy with an information umbrella, and I believe that the nuclear umbrella that we have used with our allies in the past is overcome by events. We have an ability now to put that information umbrella in its place. And it's a much more peaceful um¬brella. It's not that dire threat, but I be¬lieve it's equally effective in terms of21 aggressors like Saddam Hussein22. We have a much bigger potential23 to use the information umbrella than to use a nuclear weapon. People said that they don’t think we’ll really use nuclear weapons, and they’re right. But the information umbrella, we’ll use it, and that’s good. So all of us who want to see peace in the world, and security, and I personally believe that’s the kind of thing we should start to think about and do with our allies24. I gave a speech yesterday where I talked about the cooperation between our nations, and we should be able to talk about these kinds of issues, and how we can do these things together, especially as a part of a group of nations, and forming a security blanket around the Pacific.
Practice Listening to words词汇听力练习：
1.schedule [] n. 时间表
2.information edge 信息优势
3.framework [] n.（理论）框架
4.supplement [] n.补充
5.trade-off交换，替换
6.UAV:Unmanned Aerial Vehicle 无人驾驶航空器
7.platform [] n.平台
8.decommission [] vt. 使退役
9.mindset [] n. 思维模式
10.priority [] n. 优先
11.precision guided munition精确制导武器（弹药）
12.system-of-systems系统（体系）集成
13.stereotype []ｎ．铅版、陈规，此处意为：模式、熔炉
14.dominant maneuver主导性机动
15.emerge [] vi. 显现，形成
16.deterrence [] n. 威慑
17.comply [] vi. 顺从
18.CNN:Cable News Network美国有线新闻网
19.UN:United Nations联合国
20.ramification [] n.衍生物，此处意为：影响
21.in terms of 在……，从……（来说）
22.Saddam Hussein萨达姆•侯赛因
23.potential [] adj. 潜在的
24.ally [] n. 同盟者
【参考译文】
信息优势与信息伞
陈伯江：我很高兴有机会采访你。在我寻找有关军事革命、未来战争和国防发展问题的访谈对象时，不少人向我极力推荐你，认为你是美国军事革命的主要倡导者和贡献者之一，你所你的工作在这一具有重大影响。你在百忙之中接受我的访谈，我确实非常感谢。我已经读过你写的关于军事革命和美国国防发展的文章，我想就你文章中所谈到的问题开始我们的访谈。
你的题为“美国的信息优势”的文章于1996年发表之后，“信息优势”开始成为美国的热门话题。在信息时代，力量和力量平稳的概念发生了哪些变化?如何运用这些新的认识去进行力量和力量平衡的评估?
欧文斯:在那篇文章中，我试图说明你可以用更少的部队取代现有的军队，但是部队的作战能力不变。从我们的情况来说，就是一个有9000辆坦克的陆军、340艘军舰的海军和20个战术战斗机联队的空军，你可以取代所有这些力量。现在，我们谈论的是部队的能力，即用这些部队能做什么?说明我的观点的一个例子可能是卫星系统，它们己经存在较长时间了，但我们从未把它们作为作战部队的补充和替换。无人驾驶飞行器或商业卫星的情况也是这样。
所有这类东西也能取代部队的能力，可以使那些“足够好”的作战平台能力倍增。你可以不替换和增加新的武器系统而使能力倍增。这是一种新观点。因为我们总是认为，如果你让一只军舰退役，你必须要有一艘新军舰，而我认为不该再是这样。你可以用一种看起来不同的以信息为基础的新部队，来取代原有部队的能力。我认为这就是我们的思维模式。
陈:在美国未来的国防发展中，最优先发展的先进技术是什么?这些先进技术会给美国的军事能力带来什么影响?
欧文斯:思考这一问题的最简单的办法，是列出各种最重要的技术。这些技术包括:让你观察战场情况的传感器技术;使你能传递信息的通讯技术;以及使你能引导你的精确制导武器的技术。这些就是一个想要变成现代化的军队所应感兴趣的技术。这些技术属于信息技术、电信技术和系统一体化技术等领域。也就是上面谈到的"系统集成"。所有这些意味着它们而非坦克和飞机对军队和未来至关重要。
陈:有人认为，技术发展的速度已经超过军事理论的发展。因此，当前这场军事革命的重点应当放在军事思想、军队结构和编制上，以适应技术的发展。在你看来，这场军事革命的重点是什么?
欧文斯:我完全同意你所说的那种看法，变革军事理论、作战概念及文化是军事革命所面临的最大挑战。在美国，我们有150万士兵、水手、飞行员和海军陆战队员。他们都是在陆军、海军、空军和海军陆战队的熔炉里成长起来的。我们教给他们有关军舰、坦克和飞机的知识以及军队的传统。不记得我怎么谈论传统和历史吗?我认为它们是重要的，但不是非常重要的。未来才是最重要的。所以从文化上来说，我们必须使自己具备新的功能，而不是停留在陆军、海军、空军和海军陆战队文化的思维模式中。我们必须改变传统文化，考虑如何观察掌握战场情况;如何通过陆军和海军陆战队的主导性机动在战场上以战略方式运用兵力，而不是兵力与兵力的对抗;如何在没有作战平台的情况下将精确武器投向目标;最后是如何保障这些作战行动。那将是非常大的变化。我认为实现这一一变化将需要若干年的时间，并且我认为需要自上而下地推行变革。这是我们能够变革的惟一方式。从高层人员开始，说服他们，使他们认识到必须要有一一场革命，并且向下推动这场革命。因为这场革命不可能自下而上开始。
陈：推动美国新军事能力发展的信息技术能否导致传统的威慑理论发生变化?什么是信息伞?信息伞与核武器伞有什么不同?信息伞是否能代替核武器伞?
欧文斯：我认为军事革命能够导致威慑理论的变化，这是完全正确的。这意味着我们的国家可以通过信息伞来影响其它的国家。我可以对萨达姆•侯赛因说，我们有能力在伊拉克上空撑开一把信息伞，我能看到你所做的一切。如果你不遵守联合国决议，我们能够做到，而且也将这样做。只要我愿意，我就可以在美国有线电视网上播出我通过信息伞看到的一切，这样我就能告诉全世界。或者，如果你坚持不按联合国的要求去做，我也可以轰炸一些特定目标。正是由于威慑理论的强制要素，你才敢说话。我们的国家很先进，可以在你的国家上撑开一把信息伞，这对你的国家的影响非同小可。因此，重要的不是航空母舰的大小、空军的多少，重要的是我拥有智慧的多少，是我思考和运用信息伞的能力的大小。所以，对你的问题的答案应该是肯定的。信息伞可以代替核武器伞。我认为我们必须尽快地而不只是慢慢地减少核武器，我们必须尽可能使世界摆脱核武器的危险。你可以继续用信息伞保持威慑战略。我认为我们以往用于盟国的核武器伞并非万无一失，现在我们有能力以信息伞取而代之。这是一个要好得多的“和平伞”。虽然它没有可怕的威胁，但我相信它在对付像萨达姆•侯赛因那样的侵略者时会同样有效。对于我们来说，使用信息伞比使用核武器伞有更大的潜力。过去人们认为我们不会真的使用核武器，这是对的。但对于信息伞来说，我们将会用它，耐用效果不错。所有想看到世界和平和安全的人和我个人都相信，我们应当开始考虑这种信息伞，并且与我们的盟国一起做这件事。昨天我曾作过一次有关国家间合作问题的演说。我们应当能够谈论这问题。尤其是作为国际家族的一个组成部分，我们怎样才能共同地做这事情，以建立起环太平洋的安全屏障。
- 频道推荐
- |
- 全站推荐
- 推荐下载
- 网站推荐
